Robinson's Comment Highlights Shameful Behavior

Back when Jim Gardner was a gadfly and not a city councilman, he referred to Dwight Robinson as “Silent Bob,” because he seemed to keep so quiet on the council. But when Peter Herzog resigned, Robinson wasn’t so silent and he became the smooth voice on the council dais.

Except to make a grandstand effort to paint a resident as some sort of threat against him and his children, he kept pretty silent about the recall.

Until recently. He told the Orange County Register his thoughts about the anti-recall campaign that he helped fund with a $5,000 contribution from a company he works for. The Nick is Nuts Committee went on a smear campaign against Nick in which it sent out fliers that were racist and bigoted in nature, told lies and half-truths, mocked and demeaned residents, and suggested that those who were collecting signatures were pedophiles.

According to the Register, Robinson said he didn’t participate in the design or production of the fliers, but that after seeing the content, “I felt like it was over the top.”

Yet Robinson remained silent as additional “over the top” fliers and media were released, slamming Nick and eventually Gardner. And then a couple of fake “newspapers” made their way into the Lake Forest homes Robinson was elected to protect.

It wasn’t until after the recall deadline of April 20 that Robinson had something to say about the smear campaign. Yet, there were many times over the course of the recall effort that Robinson could have condemned the smear campaign and distanced himself from its lie- and hate-filled messages.

But he didn’t.

He kept silent.

He hid.

He took advantage of it until it was safe to poke his head out and say, “I had no involvement” and the material was “over the top.”

He’s either lying, or he’s playing politics. Assume for the moment he’s telling the truth. If that’s the case, he owes the people of Lake Forest an explanation: Why didn’t he distance himself from his smear campaign the first time he got a whiff of the garbage he now admits was “over the top”? He could easily have done this at several City Council meetings in which residents waved these mailers from the podium and asked loudly, “What the hell is this???”

Robinson sat silent. Andrew Hamilton sat silent. Scott Voigts sat silent.

To date, as far as I know, Robinson is the only one among the three to address this campaign, but his comments to the OC Register only shows that he lacks the conviction his elected position demands.

Robinson lacked the leadership to stand up and say he didn’t want his name attached to such “filth,” as it was described by some.

Robinson did not approach the Nick is Nuts Committee and tell them they were going too far over the line, or “over the top,” to use his own words.

He failed to insist material not be released or claims made until the facts became known; instead, he allowed Lake Forest resident Merijoe Axelrod and Josue Vizcay be ridiculed and cast as thugs even though the facts revealed Axelrod was the victim of an attack outside Stater Brothers while gathering recall signatures the day before Easter and Vizcay came to her defense. In fact, Robinson himself used the term "thug" in referring to these residents and to Nick and Gardner.

He failed as an elected representative. Not once did he publicly say, “This is wrong.”

Robinson wasn’t really interested in facts. His social media posts very clearly endorsed the “recall supporters as thugs” position even though the earliest accounts of the attack – which appeared on Patch – eventually proved accurate based on the store surveillance that was made available after the recall deadline ended. Instead, in the immediate aftermath of the attack, Robinson (and Andrew Hamilton) endorsed the edited video promptly posted by Voigts supporter Cindy Hamilton who claimed she was the victim. Yet store surveillance clearly shows that Cindy Hamilton threw the first and only punch.

Robinson’s acknowledgment that the Nick is Nuts campaign was “over the top” is further evidence that the recall campaign was correct to go after Robinson. That he would sit idly by while “over the top” literature painted such unflattering pictures of residents whose trust he is expected to maintain and whose safety he is expected to protect, is appalling. He said he stayed out of the way and his only involvement was to write a check because “I felt like I needed to defend myself in some way.”

Defending his record might have been an honorable start. The recall team claimed corruption, collusion and cronyism, among other reasons, for eyeing Robinson, Hamilton and Voigts for recall. If he needed to defend himself, why didn’t he defend his record?

Because he couldn’t. Neither Robinson, Voigts nor Hamilton can stand by their record. Instead, the councilmen claimed a power grab by Nick, which turned out to be false, too. Almost all of the financial support was provided by Gardner after he became a target. The Gang of 3 councilmen could never come to grips that maybe—just maybe—the recall was less about Nick (or Gardner) making a power play than citizens exercising their Constitutional rights over a malfeasance of public trust.

If Robinson needed to defend himself:

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against government transparency.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against eliminating council members' ability to solicit or receive money from corporations.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for not allowing Meals on Wheels access to unused space at City Hall at no expense to taxpayers.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for not wanting to fix Saddleback Ranch Road.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against pursuing a partnership with Mission Viejo Animal Services when it was a viable alternative to Orange County Animal Care when proposed by Nick and Gardner (Rancho Santa Margarita and Laguna Hills jumped at the chance).

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his vote to commit nearly $1 million to the embattled OCAC for a proposed facility in which Lake Forest will have no ownership—none!

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record of voting for real estate development over the objection of City staff; the developer had made significant contributions to help Robinson get elected.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting for less-qualified friends and acquaintances to city commissions at the exclusion of more qualified candidates.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against an audit of the Orange County Sheriff's Department contract and ascertaining all viable options for law enforcement.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for not allowing Meals On Wheels use of a vacant room at City Hall at no expense to taxpayers.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against requiring council members to disclose private meetings with current and potential City vendors.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting no on an anti-nepotism ban.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against a code of ethics for council members.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against having the mayor elected by residents instead of selected by council majority.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for refusing to consent to have the City not indemnify Council members for their illegal actions.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting no on establishing a traffic commission despite using it as a campaign promise.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting no on establishing a nonprofit community foundation.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting no on providing tax relief for residents and businesses.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting no on reducing administrative fees at City Hall for residents.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting to change the zoning for Meritage Homes and approve development.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting to change the zoning for Baker Ranch and approve development.
  

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against creating an ad hoc public safety committee.

• Maybe Robinson could have defended his record for voting against requiring a traffic impact study by developers.
  

But no, during the recall period there was no defense of the record by Robinson, by Hamilton or by Voigts—because there is no defense for voting the way they have. Do they really believe their constituents don’t want transparency in government? That their constituents don’t want them to fix a dangerous road? That their constituents don't want unused space at City Hall made available so volunteers can prepare meals for senior citizens? And so on ... and on and on?

On the very petition that thousands signed, Robinson's statement was: "The claims on this petition are utter lies and the petitioners know it. Councilman Adam Nick is using this as a political vendetta against me." Actually, Robinson's wrong on both counts, plain and simple. Just look at the laundry list above. As to Nick's "vendetta," he didn't give a dime of direct contribution to the recall committee. Unlike Robinson, who spent thousands against Nick. Even the OC GOP got involved, further illustrating the cronyism involved in Lake Forest government.

You can see Robinson's voting record at Nick's website.

It’s just politics, and Robinson is taking advantage of it. His comments now are just part of his political gamesmanship in which he’s trying to salvage some support—Hey, I’m a victim because I thought it was over the top, too. He may have thought the anti-recall message was “over the top,” but it was a message he supported with his money and endorsed with his silence.

For four months, he kept quiet until the recall deadline passed.

That was no accident.