Assault on Cagley and Nick Begins 2018 City Council Election Race

A new poster has taken to Patch in an apparent attempt to discredit newly elected councilman Tom Cagley and continue the years-long assault on Adam Nick.

The premise of the blogs written by Nick Wilson is that Cagley doesn't plan to run in November. This is based, according to the first sentence of a Feb. 7 debut post, on a “rumor” that Wilson characterized as “reports." That Wilson would begin his blogging career on such a note draws immediate suspicion of motive; plenty of good has come from the new-look Lake Forest City Council to touch on if one's looking to inform residents of what's happening at City Hall.

Whether Cagley runs in November is irrelevant, residents should be grateful they have him for this transition; more than 50 percent of engaged voters supported him to do exactly that when they voted on Jan. 2. The terms of the recall election was to complete Andrew Hamilton's term, plain and simple, and the author's first two articles seem an attempt to make something out of nothing. If Cagley chooses to run in November – and it's my expectation that he will – then Wilson unjustly sullied him and Adam Nick with these blogs for no reason. Unfortunately, you can't un-ring the bell, so I'm sure Wilson's conjecture will gain some traction, certainly among those who want to believe what he's writing. Shades of OC GOP chairman Fred Whitaker.

Cagley never campaigned on the promise of running in November, so it's not as if he made a campaign promise he isn't keeping. This is in contrast to someone such as Robinson, who failed to bring any of his 2012 campaign promises before the Council, or Scott Voigts, the well-documented liar on the council who was similarly forgetful and unsuccessful in fulfilling his documented campaign promises.

But as it relates to completing terms for replaced councilmen, Cagley is not anything like David Bass, who said during his interview to replace Peter Herzog (after his resignation) that he would not run at the completion of Herzog's term; Adam Nick agreed to provide the necessary third vote to bring Bass onto the Council, but only after it was made clear by Bass that he would not seek reelection with the power of incumbency. If I recall correctly, Bass even wrote on his application he had no intention of seeking reelection. A couple months later, Bass pulled papers and sought reelection with the endorsement of Robinson and Voigts.

CAGLEY'S EARLY DAYS

The anti-recall legion claimed Cagley was going to be a pawn of councilman Jim Gardner's (and Adam Nick, who's not even on the council), but Cagley voted opposite of Gardner twice in his first meeting, which is as many times as Hamilton voted opposite of Robinson and Voigts in Hamilton's first two years. There is a reason why collusion was such a prevalent part of the recall discussion -- because the votes of Hamilton, Robinson and Voigts were practically inseparable.

The City Council meeting of February 6 was an ambitious one set by new mayor Jim Gardner, and the council adopted several things that would be interesting and encouraging to most voters, such as campaign contribution reform, an examination of the Council's code of ethics, and a reworking of commission appointments so that a simple majority of three can't control all five members of the commission (as has been the case in the past). You can bet term limits and the ridiculous "24 years out of 26" supported by Robinson and Voigts will be a thing of the past before November.

In fact, several of the ideas that are appearing before the council these days are ideas that were proposed years ago by Adam Nick, but he either couldn't get the consent to have them appear on the agenda, or couldn't get the support necessary to pass once the Council actually voted. That reasonable people such as Cagley, a retired Army colonel, and Leah Basile – neither of whom fall under the “politician” header - would sign off on such concepts actually vindicates Adam Nick. Keep in mind, Cagley got more than 50 percent of the votes on Jan. 2, and Basile won by nearly 4,000 votes in November 2016 with a political ideology that was similar to Adam Nick's. If people want proper representation, it is only after the recall of Hamilton that they seem to be getting it.

Blogger Wilson, who had an email exchange with Cagley, even makes an apparent attempt to call Cagley's senility into question: “Notedly, Cagley seemed to be confused about why I and other voters have a negative opinion of disgraced former councilman Adam Nick, who was caught stealing competitors campaign signs. … As a seeming defense of his ignorance of the history surrounding Adam Nick and the recall attempts, Cagley asserted that he has 'not lived my life in the sheltered world of Lake Forest.' I am not sure why our newly elected Councilman does not believe that Lake Forest indeed is part of and exists in the real world, but his continued alliance with Adam Nick and Jim Gardner make some sense in light of this revelation.”

Yet it would seem that Wilson is the one who needs a history lesson.

THE NICK SCAPEGOAT

Adam Nick was ahead of the curve on many issues in Lake Forest, including pension liability, districting, the OCSD contract, etc., and has been at the forefront of establishing transparency and accountability in government and within the city administration; therefore, count me along with Cagley and almost 9,900 other voters as being confused why there are those who have a “negative opinion” of Adam Nick, who lost reelection by a mere 99 votes after a 1-1/2 year smear campaign by everyone from the sheriff's union, the OC GOP, and his own council colleagues. Turned out that Adam Nick's not really a terrorist as they would have you believe.

Instead, Adam Nick is a convenient target for those who have no aspiration for a more transparent and responsible government that's accountable to residents, not special interests. The sheriff's union didn't want anyone looking too closely at its contract, the OC GOP didn't want anyone standing up to developers who fund their partisan games, and other council members didn't want to lose their power to appease those special interests.

Wilson has done nothing more than perpetuate the strategy employed by the “Nick is Nuts” campaign from a couple years ago when Basile tried to recall Hamilton, Robinson and Voigts: If you don't have a case, if you don't have a defense, if the allegations against you are true, blame Adam Nick.

So obsessed is Wilson that Adam Nick isn't even named in Wilson's post of Feb. 7, but a photo of Adam Nick pilfered online from the Orange County Register accompanies the story. Wilson clearly hasn't figured out copyright law yet because he used a photo of mine in his story of Feb. 8 which was removed only after I complained.

Wilson relied on the standard go-to, reminding his readers that Adam Nick was “stealing competitors signs.”

Here's more history that Wilson ignores. Charges against Adam Nick were dropped, the D.A.'s office issued an apology to him, and yet the blogger Wilson has nevertheless convicted him of “stealing competitors campaign signs” even though Adam Nick was not even a “competitor” in the 2014 election. Meanwhile Voigts got away with placing many illegal signs in Lake Forest (on light standards, for example), as did those who posted anti-Adam Nick “Don't steal me” signs in the 2016 election. All those signs that were 10 feet in the air ? They were in violation of City code, yet Lake Forest's code enforcement officers failed the community by allowing an unfair advantage.

So three weeks and two meetings into Cagley's term, the anti-Adam Nick brigade is already casting aspersions toward Cagley. Question is, are the crosshairs aimed specifically at Tom Cagley, Adam Nick, or both? I'm pretty sure it's both. I think Mr. Wilson has just dropped the green flag on the 2018 city council race.

About the author: Martin Henderson won several Los Angeles and Orange County press club awards while an editor at Patch in 2012-13.