City Council Candidate Preview: Frank Wagoner

There are six candidates lined up to replace Andrew Hamilton on City Council should voters in Lake Forest choose to recall him on Jan. 2, 2018. The primary reasons for the recall of Hamilton are his commitment to development in Lake Forest, his commitment to the high-kill Orange County animal shelter that locked the City into a 10-year contract that will cost millions extra, his decision to ignore the dangers of Saddleback Ranch Road until he faced a recall, and several instances of unethical and just plain rude behavior.

Candidates vying for the available council seat are Tom Cagley (click here), David Glick (click here), Neeki Moatazedi (click here), Mark Tettemer (click here), Frank Wagoner and Stan Yombo.

Fifth in the series: Frank Wagoner

Let's be clear about one thing: “Wagoner for City Council” does not mean former state assemblyman Don Wagner. There is, at the very least, anecdotal evidence that some people voted for Frank Wagoner in November 2016 because they thought Lake Forest had a chance to get a councilman with assemblyman experience.

Don Wagner (the former assemblyman) was elected mayor of Irvine while Frank Wagoner somehow managed to win more than 6,800 votes without a Candidate Statement, without a clear vision and, frankly, without a clue. The night he participated in the candidate forum, he didn't know the name of the city manager, the name of the police chief, or how the city government was organized.

He had never been to a Council meeting, a Planning Commission meeting, or a Parks and Rec meeting.

In the year since, he may have attended one or two Council meetings (I've been to all of them and I know what he looks like), but anytime he talks about the “council meetings I've attended” he is not talking from a position of experience.

Wagoner has not attended the City's Leadership Academy. Just like last year, he didn't provide a Candidate Statement either (neither did Glick nor Yombo).

As I recall, apart from the candidate forum, he has not spoken publicly on any major issue, doesn't attend City events, and hasn't added much to the dialogue in social media (that I can find) except to trash Adam Nick – with one recent exception. He is opposed to the recall that could potentially put him in office.

Either using a ghostwriter or the pseudonym Jake Walsh, Wagoner is in the middle of a three-part (or maybe more, who knows) series on the credibility of the special election to recall Andrew Hamilton on Jan. 2, 2018. Based on his writings, it's clear Wagoner is opposed to the recall because A) he fails to understand the issues of why the recall is taking place; B) he fails to see that dozens of singular reasons for the recall paint a much larger picture of apparent collusion and ethical misconduct; C) he fails to understand the financial implications of Hamilton's previous votes and that the cost to the City could be recovered with any number of decisions made by a Council that didn't begin with three members in cahoots with each other who want to protect special interests.

Some people thought that Wagoner was a “stalking horse” for Robinson in the 2016 election. Wagoner was (and continues to be) critical of Nick, and it was thought by some that Wagoner would siphon off votes from Nick, which would help Robinson if the race was close. The race was close; Robinson beat Nick by a mere 99 votes.

Wagoner came in fifth among six candidates in the race for two seats, and in the year since, Wagoner’s profile in the City hasn’t changed. He is still uninvolved. He missed the meetings to plan the new civic center or the new senior center. He missed all of the meetings to remodel 10 of the City's parks. He missed the meetings to re-task Veterans Park (formerly Village Pond Park). He had nothing to say about the transition to district elections.

But here he is again, wanting to be on the city council.

To his credit, Wagoner does have a website. But on his “Staff” page, he lists his “Staff recommendations” such as Turner Luce for Animal Control Officer, Pat McCann for Sexual Harassment Intervention Counselor, and Hassen Ben Sober for Alcohol Licenses. Wagoner may have a sense of humor, but he doesn't have sense for the job. That much is clear in his description of the OC Animal Care situation that Councilman Jim Gardner tried to avoid by creating an alternative to the high-kill shelter that will cost the City millions over the length of the 10-year contract -- a contract Lake Forest was locked into by Hamilton, Dwight Robinson and Scott Voigts.

Wagoner is a walking pile of contradictions; for example, he disparages candidates for being so willing to spend other people's money (candidate Hamilton being a prime example but excluded in his rant) and then criticizing former councilman Nick for spending his own money.

Instead, Wagoner wants to learn on the job. His primary selling point is that he's unaffiliated with any other Council member – and if that's truly the case, it disproves that he was a stalking horse for Robinson to take away votes from Nick. But he is clearly in the camp opposed to Gardner and Leah Basile, who he derides as “Team Puppet” while avoiding criticism of the “Gang of 3” of Hamilton, Robinson and Voigts who have routinely voted in lockstep since the night Hamilton took office until the night in March when he was informed of the recall against him when, suddenly, his voting pattern changed.

Wagoner wants to provide direction and govern the City without ever having shown any civic contribution to the City otherwise. He doesn't see the value in a Traffic/Parking Commission. He claims he is for fiscal responsibility, but doesn't acknowledge – or maybe doesn't understand – Hamilton's role in past financial decisions that put the City in a position of fiscal vulnerability.

His attention to detail is horrific. In one of his posts on the recall, Wagoner (or Walsh) blogged, “Jim Gardner and his friend Martin Henderson have been posting articles mentioning me alluding that I accept 'special interest' money. They should be fully aware I do NOT accept money from anyone. Maybe they are suffering from memory loss.” Neither Gardner nor I have written such a thing about Wagoner. I may occasionally forget things, but I am not delusional. However, Wagoner (and Tettemer and Moatazedi) did not respond to a questionnaire by Gardner to all candidates to make clear their stance on whether they would accept special interest money in an election or going forward; that is simply a fact: Wagoner did not respond.

Even though Wagoner dislikes Gardner, the councilman's request still provided a free vehicle that Wagoner's zero-dollar campaign could have used to extend his message to Gardner's readers. And for the record, Wagoner's position is not a declaration that he supports an ordinance that would ban special interest money from future elections.

Wagoner is without commitment and he is without knowledge, but as 6,862 votes from a year ago show, he is not without a chance.

Scary as that may be.

Next: Stan Yombo

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