Anaheim Council Priorities: Tennis Anyone?

From The Liberal OC: 

While the priorities and antics of the current majority on the Anaheim City Council have been both entertaining and disturbing, the latest bit of budget news has us asking WTF? Voice of OC’s Adam Elmahrek reported yesterday that someone on the Council directed staff to resurrect a $6.4 million budget allocation for the renovation of the Anaheim Tennis Center and Wagner House, a city-owned property that is not free to the public. The allocation is the single largest capital improvement allocation in the parks and recreation budget for FY 2013-14.

In a city where there is a dramatic and disproportionate allocation of resources targeted to the more affluent areas of the city, and in the context of the civil unrest of last summer, we can think of no better example of how the elected leadership is out-of-touch and unrepresentative of the population of the city. Elmahrek points out in his article that Mayor Tom Tait claims to have previously had the item pulled from the budget allocations last year characterizing the expenditure as a waist of public funds.

Read the full story here: 

http://www.theliberaloc.com/2013/06/18/anaheim-council-priorities-tennis-anyone/ 


Millions Budgeted for Tennis Center Sparks Outrage in Anaheim

From The Voice of OC: 

On a late Friday afternoon at Little People's Park in Anaheim's heavily Latino central core, a group of residents gathered across the street from the park's urban mural, an aging brick facade emblazoned with cultural images to commemorate a 1978 Latino riot at the park triggered by anger at police mistreatment.

One of the residents, a young Latino man named Sergio, walked over to the park's small grass field, took a swig from his brown paper bag and gazed across the yellowing patches to where the children ran. Sergio wondered aloud when the park is going to get restrooms, which he says are part of the park's “blueprints.”

“Some of the kids piss in the bushes,” he said. “The blueprints say the park has restrooms. Well, where they at?”

Curt Pringle

Curt Pringle

Anaheim leaders said that they are aware of such issues and that next fiscal year's budget, scheduled for a public hearing at Tuesday's City Council meeting is sensitive to the Latino community's frustration over unfair distribution of city resources. A city news release and budget overview highlights scheduled construction plans for parks and community centers in Latino neighborhoods.

But not included in the news release or budget overview is Anaheim's largest planned parks and recreation expenditure for the 2013-2014 fiscal year:  a $6.4-million renovation to the city-owned Anaheim Tennis Center and Wagner House, which is a few miles away from Little People's Park in a wealthier neighborhood.

The pay-to-play tennis club has a "multimillion-dollar look," according to its operator, and features several tennis courts, a lounge area with hardwood floors, large windows and a stone fireplace with an engraved mantle. The $6.4 million will go toward "additional lockers, showers and restrooms...and new historically-themed outdoor garden for social gatherings and weddings,” among other things, according to budget documents.

The planned improvements to the tennis club have not only outraged members of the Latino community, but also Mayor Tom Tait.

“Spending that much money on the [tennis center]? what about Little People's park?” said activist Seferino Garcia. “They need help. They need a lot of help there.”

There is $1.5 million in the budget for various other park improvements, including "restroom improvements," across the city. But it is not clear whether Little People's park is on that list.

'Incredibly Tone Deaf

Tait agrees with Garcia on this issue, which is why he halted the renovation plans to the tennis center when he took office, arguing that it was a waste of public funds that could be used to buy more parkland or for multiple improvements across the city.

How the tennis center made it back into the budget is unclear -- Tait was unaware until a Voice of OC reporter informed him. The mayor was livid when he found out.

“Incredibly tone deaf. You would do that now, after you have civil unrest in two Anaheims, your biggest project is a tennis facility, with banquet facilities, and catering, and so you can have your finger food?” said Tait, who has made bridging the gap between what he calls the "two Anaheims" a goal of his first mayoral term. “Unbelievable.”

Members of the council majority who will be setting priorities for the budget, including council members Jordan Brandman, Lucille Kring and Gail Eastman, did not return phone calls seeking comment. Councilwoman Kris Murray could not be reached for comment.

City spokeswoman Ruth Ruiz pointed out that the budget hasn't been adopted yet, and that the City Council will have the ultimate decision. She said funding for the tennis center improvements (and those for Ponderosa Park) come from the Platinum Triangle development, and are to be specifically used for improvements that are geographically close to the Platinum Triangle.

"These funds cannot be shifted to projects outside the sphere of the Platinum Triangle development area,” Ruiz wrote in an email to Voice of OC. “As with a lot of projects in the CIP their inclusion in the CIP is not an automatic guarantee those projects will be built in a certain budget year.”

Ruiz's words won't placate Latino activists, who cite the budgeted renovations as proof that, despite a downtown riot of mostly Latino youth last year and a contentious battle over Latino representation on the City Council, city officials are not sensitive to the needs of their communities.

“I don't know nobody that goes there and plays tennis,” said Garcia, who is also executive director of Solevar Community Development Corp. “And yet the downtown gymnasium is overcrowded.”

The tennis center is, however, important to one prominent Anaheim resident. Former Mayor Curt Pringle is a "tennis buff" whose children had played at the center while on high school tennis teams, according to Mike Nelson, the center's operator. Pringle was a strong supporter of the center's rehab, which has been in the works for years, Nelson added.

Tennis Center Rehab Comes Amid Tense Time

The budget planning comes during one of the most sensitive times in city history. Latino activists have been pushing to change the city' at-large council election system to election by district, which they believe would yield not only more Latino representatives, but also representatives who cater to their underserved neighborhoods.

“They've been excluding us for quite some time,” Garcia said of city leaders. “They have forgotten about us.”

Fair representation is also at the center of an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit against the city alleging a violation of the California Voting Rights Act, which requires adequate council representation for certain minorities. More than 50 percent of the city is Latino, but none sit on the council.

Yet, the all white, five-member council in a split 3-2 vote last week rejected a ballot measure that could have changed the city's at-large election system to district elections.

Latinos say the planned tennis center spending is a perfect example of why the electoral system needs to be changed.

“I don't know anybody that plays tennis,” said Marisol Ramirez, a 21-year-old resident of West Anaheim. “If they would have approved district elections, then we would have a better sense of our priorities in each of the districts.”

There is some spending slated for improvements in Latino neighborhoods, the budget documents presented so far. Among other expenditures, a half-acre park at Guinida Lane is projected to cost $375,935. And the city is to spend $470,000 on the Miraloma Park and Family Resource Center.

But the tennis center renovation will cost $1.1 million more than the rest of the parks projects combined for next fiscal year. A community center and gymnasium planned at Ponderosa Park is projected to cost $6.1 million. But according to budget documents, the spending for that project won't begin until fiscal year 2015-16.

The tennis center, while a city-owned facility, is a privately run business. Nelson said that the tennis center is a community asset because, while there's no free use of the courts or free rental of the reception area, membership at the club is substantially less expensive than at private clubs.

Nelson acknowledged that there are free tennis courts in the city, but that they aren't safe courts. By providing a safe place to play tennis – at five dollars a session – and a location for cheaper wedding receptions than in swanky Newport Beach, Nelson said he is providing a valuable public service.

“It gives the city a place that's not out of reach for people,” Nelson said. “We're doing a great service for the city.”

 

Anaheim Council Again Rejects Council Districts

From The Voice of OC: 

The Anaheim City Council Tuesday night rejected an advisory committee's recommendation to have voters decide whether to change the city's electoral system so council members are elected by districts.

The council instead proposed a city charter amendment requiring council members to live in the neighborhoods they represent.

Mayor Tom Tait had proposed placing council districts, whereby residents could vote only for the council candidates in their districts, on the ballot and increasing the size of the five-member council to either six council or eight council members and a mayor.

Gail Eastman, Kris Murray, and Supervisor Shawn Nelson.

Gail Eastman, Kris Murray, and Supervisor Shawn Nelson.

Tait's proposal was rejected in a 3-2 vote, with Councilwomen Kris Murray, Gail Eastman and Lucille Kring voting no. Councilman Jordan Brandman joined Tait in voting for the option.

Instead, the council majority by a 4-1 vote with Tait dissenting signed off on Murray's proposal to draft a charter amendment for the June 2014 election that would keep the city's at large council election system but require candidates to live in districts. The charter amendment, which is to go to a council vote at a future meeting, would also increase the council size to six members with a mayor elected at large.

The decision to reject council districts infuriated a group of activists at the council meeting who have been pushing for the change over the past year. They marched out of the council chambers chanting “no fake districts, no more delays” and shouted “We'll be back” outside City Hall.

Read the full story here: 

http://www.voiceofoc.org/oc_north/article_d2d94b44-d39d-11e2-8539-001a4bcf887a.html 

 

Anaheim's feeble democracy

From the LA Times;:

The Anaheim City Council showed its contempt for the principle of representative government again this week, defeating another proposal to let residents vote for council members on a district-by-district basis. The decision means that the voting power of the city's growing Latino population will remain diluted for now. But it's easy to envision a day when demographic change overtakes the city's political elite, and the shoe will be on the other foot.

Kris Murray doesn't represent the people of Anaheim but rather SOAR, The Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, Orange County Business Council, and Bill O'Connell.

The council has previously stiff-armed efforts to change the city charter and end at-large voting, a practice that enables more politically active residents of the wealthier parts of the city — along with entrenched special interests — to dictate the council's membership. The ethnically diverse city, now more than half Latino, has elected only a handful of non-white council members in its history. The five current members are all white. And over the years, few have come from the densely populated, lower-income parts of the city.

With more than 330,000 residents, Anaheim is the largest city in California that still has at-large voting. Proponents of the shift to district voting argue that it would lead to a more equitable distribution of resources for parks, libraries and other city services. Those resources are now concentrated, they complain, in the better-off neighborhoods. Opponents counter that the change would only lead to intra-council feuding. But if there's harmony at the council table today, it's only because the city's majority has no seats there.

Mayor Tom Tait has been trying for months to persuade the council to let the public vote on the issue. Last year his proposed ballot measure was blocked in favor of creating a citizens' commission to study the issue. The commission agreed with Tait that the city should put the issue of district voting on the ballot and urged that the council be expanded by two to four members. But at a raucous meeting Tuesday night, the council rejected the proposal, 3 to 2.

Instead, the council decided to put an alternative on the June 2014 primary ballot that would make the council seem more representative without actually shifting political power. The proposal by Councilwoman Kris Murray would divide the city into districts, and the representative from each district would have to reside there. But the elections would still be decided by at-large voting, just as they are today. As Jose Moreno, a grass-roots activist and proponent of district elections, neatly summarized the situation on the Voice of OC website, "You may get some Latino candidates elected, but it won't be Latinos that elect them."

Is it so hard to understand why that's wrong?

The council may soon find itself without a voice in the process; the American Civil Liberties Union is suing to force the city to abandon at-large voting on the grounds that it violates the California Voting Rights Act by impairing Latinos' ability to influence elections. And even if the city prevails, it's swimming against the demographic tide.

When Latinos hold the majority not just in the census but also among active voters, the interests that rule today may rue the day they refused to share power.

 

 

Kris Murray Majority in Anaheim Rejects Neighborhood Choice in Council Representation

From The Liberal OC:

We are baffled at the decision Tuesday night of the Anaheim City Council to reject district level elections for council members as proposed by the citizen’s advisory committee. The 4-1 vote was led by Kris Murray, who had initially proposed the committee process last year as asolution in response to a voting rights lawsuit challenging the city’s current at-large council elections process. Tuesday’s decision proposes a process like the one used in Santa Ana where members are required to reside in a specific ward (district) but be elected city wide.

Kris Murray

Kris Murray

We applaud Councilman Jordan Brandman for joining Mayor Tom Tait in voting in favor of district-level elections. That said, we are again baffled at his subsequent vote in support of Kris Murray’s proposal which is the antithesis of district-level elections. We wonder if he was so used to voting with Murray that he forgot how he had voted moments before. Maybe he just wanted to be sure he could say he voted the right way no matter who he talks to in the future.

Next up will be the council vote on July 2nd on the actual Charteramendments to be presented to voters at the June 2014 primary election. There will be two amendments. The first will ask voters to decide whether to keep the number of seats on the council at four plus the Mayor, or to increase that number to six. The second measurewould ask if council members should be required to reside in districts while being elected by the city as a whole.

The citizens committee recommended that the council present amendments that would allow the voters to decide whether the council should be expanded to six or eight members, and whether the council members should be elected at the district-level. The recommendation is substantially different from what was adopted Tuesday.

Read the full story here: 

http://www.theliberaloc.com/2013/06/13/kris-murray-majority-in-anaheim-rejects-neighborhood-choice-in-council-representation/ 

 

Lucille Kring - TRAITOR of Anaheim - Part 3

As you know, council member Lucille Kring cannot be trusted. Why do I say that? Because she promised to support districting, civilian oversight, and Mayor Tait's proposal to allow the voters to approve future hotel subsidies and then turned around and:

a. voted against districting over the recommendations of the CAC.

b. remained silent when Mayor Tait asked for a 2nd to move his initiative to allow the voters to approved future hotel subsidies. 

c. voted for the $158 million GardenWalk Hotel giveaway

d. came out against civilian oversight

Then today I discover that she came out AGAINST the outrageous at-large residency based election model that Kris Murray proposed last night and that she subsequently voted in favor of (see video below):

I'm personally concerned that council member Kring may have some form of mental illness.  

 

Kris Murray ignores CAC recommendations

Last night, the Anaheim City Council majority ignored neighborhood voices, shoved aside the recommendations of their own Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), and by a 4-1 vote, took a step toward Santa Ana style elections, which would actually give Anaheim neighborhoods LESS OF A VOICE than they already have!

The Santa Ana style at-large election system does not pass muster under the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA). Compton had such a system before they were sued under the CVRA. Unlike Anaheim, they were wise enough to settle the case, and now they have council districts.

District elections are coming council member Kris Murray whether you like it or not. The people of Anaheim will not be silenced by you.

Lucille Kring - TRAITOR of Anaheim - Part 2

On August 8, 2012, council member Lucille Kring (then candidate) stood in front of the largest crowd to ever attend a city council meeting and said she SUPPORTED districting.

After the election council member Lucille Kring spoke to a packed Los Amigos meeting and said she SUPPORTED districting.

Then the Pringle/Disney machine threw her a fundraiser and she threw the people of Anaheim under the bus. 

Watch her flip from pro to anti districting in the video below:

Lucille Kring - TRAITOR of Anaheim - Part 1

During council members Lucille Kring's campaign she promised residents she would oppose the $158 million GardenWalk Hotel Giveaway

Not only would she oppose it, but she would back Mayor Tait's initiative to Let the People Vote on the issue of hotel subsidies.

Unfortunately, since taking office and attending a SOAR/Disney fundraiser, council member Kring has voted in favor of the $158 million GardenWalk Hotel Giveaway and remained silent when Mayor Tait called for the people to vote on subsidy deals.

Anaheim resident, Larry Larsen (seen in the video below), had this to say about council member Kring's lies: 

 "You lied to me. Just like you lied to countless others prior to last Novembers election. Last October, prior to the election, on a Sunday afternoon. You stood in my driveway for almost an hour. . . .I told you, in this election, I was a one issue voter.  I told you I was against the $158 million money grab. You told me that you also were absolutely against it and that there was no was you'd support it or vote for it. I took you at our word. . . So tonight, I want to tell the citizens of Anaheim that Madam you cannot be trusted or believed. That you will say and do anything for a vote. How much was your integrity worth? Were all of your campaign debts paid off?"

The Truth behind the GardenWalk Hotel Giveaway

Below is an excerpt from a recent Anaheim City Council meeting in which Mayor Tom Tait sets the record straight on the council's decision to Giveaway $158 million to one wealthy out of town developer: 

Anaheim Council Agreed to Another Developer Subsidy

From The Voice of OC:

Anyone who's read the public agenda for tonight's Anaheim City Council meeting knows that a vote on a controversial $158-million room tax subsidy for developer of two planned four-star hotels at the GardenWalk outdoor mall is expected.

But known to only a few is that in recent weeks the City Council quietly approved a legal settlement that in essence grants another large subsidy – this time to the owners of the mall.

The settlement, which the Council voted on in closed session, calls for the mall owners, Anaheim Capital Partners, LLC, to receive up to 50 percent of the city's portion of sales tax revenue generated by the mall for the next 25 years. This fiscal year, the owners get 30 percent, and going forward the subsidy could be worth tens of millions of dollars.

In exchange for the sales tax revenue, Anaheim Capital Partners dropped a claim on the room tax revenue generated by the hotels, effectively clearing the way for that money to be handed over to the developers of the hotel, which include hotelier Bill O'Connell.

Read the full story here:

http://www.voiceofoc.org/oc_north/article_bd149a84-bcaa-11e2-9d5b-0019bb2963f4.html

Tripling Down on Stupid: The Gardenwalk Giveaway

From the OJ Blog:

A developer in Anaheim wants to build two four star hotels on the Gardenwalk parcel near Disneyland in the Anaheim resort district.  The developer claims the market economics makes the project not feasible.  To assist in making the project feasible, the city will provide economic assistance in the form of $158 million in rerouted tax proceeds after construction of the hotel(s).  This equates to roughly $46.6 million in today’s dollars as the total assistance package is expected to run over twenty years (a dollar collected tomorrow isn’t as valuable as a dollar collected today.)

Save Anaheim PAC ran this ad in response to an ad placed by Kris Murray in the OC Register during the last election.

The city’s analysis claims the $46.6 million is roughly 16% of the development cost, which puts the capital required to execute the project at roughly $300 million. That’s quite a bit of money for the private sector to invest in the resort area.  From the $300 million, construction jobs will create permanent hospitality jobs including chefs, housekeepers, waiters, valets, office staff, receptionists, engineers, craft persons, salespersons, and of course—management.  The investment provides clear and demonstrative public benefit, including increased property tax and sales tax collections, which are all very good things.

The construction will also place additional burden on the public electric utility, the water system, create substantial traffic in and out of the resort district, increase pollution, place additional burden on emergency services, and divert land from alternative uses and taxation (i.e. if you build two hotels you can’t build a Walmart.)  All of these items incur a public cost that must be covered by taxes.

Who defines project feasibility and how the term is used is something of an art.  The city’s analysis states the project is $63.1 million (today’s dollars) short.  The package proposed ($46.6MM) still leaves a gap of $16.5 million.  There’s no mention as to how that $16.5 million will be closed.

There’s the first dose of stupidity, right there.  Based on what the public has in front of us, we’re being told that someone wants to pony up almost $300 million for a project, even with public assistance, will return 18% below what’s acceptable.

Bill O'Connell as the "Master of the House" from Les Miserables.

Think about that for a second.

According to the city’s analysis, after construction, the two combined hotels will produce a profit of $27 million a year.  Apparently, that’s not good enough.

Why it’s not good enough is a bit of a complicated question, but it has to do with alternative opportunities for capital.  Based on a bunch of assumptions, the city’s consultant concludes that a reasonable investor would be willing to pony up $220 million to build this project . . . not the near $300 million our current estimate is.  Our public assistance isn’t what’s required to break even . . . it’s what’s required for the investor to get his 13% return.

Read the full story here:

http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/05/tripling-down-on-stupid-the-gardenwalk-giveaway1/

Anaheim residents OPPOSE $158 million GardenWalk GIVEAWAY

Last night council members Kris Murray, Gail Eastman, Lucille Kring, and Jordan Brandman voted to GIVEAWAY $158 million of future Anaheim tax revenue. See highlights from last nights public comments below:

Brandman/Kring appoint Anti-Immigrant CAC member Amanda Edinger

Save Anaheim has found some very revealing info regarding Mrs. Edinger on Facebook. The following are some quotes from posts Mrs. Edinger has commented on with the screenshots following below with additional comments made:

Amanda Edinger

Amanda Edinger

"Illegal immigration is not another civil rights issue. And it's demeaning to those that actually endured that movement."

"Where is the border security promised in 1986?"

"Stop handing out benefits, cut the automatic birthright, cut education and impose heavy fines on employees that hire them."

"They don't have a right to work here."

Do you think Congress should pass laws discontinuing birthright citzenship? "YES"

"No amnesty"

"Affirmative action is nothing short of govt approved racism."

"They want our guns"

"I'm sorry that some people live horribly there, but invest your effort to either fix your country, or immigrate to ours legally."

"I support Sherrif Joe"

-Click images below to enlarge-

Anaheim's Citizens Advisory Committee Recommends Districts

From The OC Weekly:

There were more empty seats and less acrimony inside the Council Chambers of Anaheim City Hall last Thursday evening. Long the scene of political turmoil over the course of last year during council meetings, the mood was lighter as the location played host for the second-to-last gathering of the citizens advisory committee, group established after the former council majority passed a resolution during a special post-riot meeting on August 8, 2012 that tasked it with studying and making recommendations on the city's electoral system. The move countered Mayor Tom Tait's failed proposal at the time to put the question of six council districts on last November's ballot and was seen as a delay tactic by critics

Pettiness reins at Anaheim City Hall

At last nights Anaheim City Council meeting, the council majority and Lucille Kring refused to even consider extending Mayor Tait's council assistant budget. A budget they slashed by $40,000 in retaliation for his positions on the $158 million GardenWalk Hotel giveaway. Now the Mayor of the 10th largest city in CA has no staff.

Lucille Kring's campaign was heavily supported by Mayor Tait with additional support from Save Anaheim. Kring has also recently changed her positions on districting.

Ron and Lucille Kring

Ron and Lucille Kring

Kring supports 6 Council Districts

During a packed Los Amigo meeting, Anaheim councilwoman Lucille Kring stated that 6 council  districts is the best way to assure a strong voice for all communities in Anaheim.

Lucille Kring

Lucille Kring

Lucille Kring joins fellow Republican Mayor Tom Tait in his commitment to Latino civil rights and quite frankly the rights of all those disenfranchised by the council majority.  A majority more concerned with the pocketbooks of wealthy developers and Disney then the residents.