City Council Summary for Jan 3

Without Andrew Hamilton at the helm the City Council meeting Tuesday night went very smoothly. No resident was threatened with time out, or police arrest, or cut off in mid-sentence. No resident was told to be quiet and no one was told they were wrong. Newly appointed Mayor Scott Voigts listened courteously, allowed people to finish their statements, and otherwise ran a good meeting that resulted in unanimous votes on all the issues. Here is some of what happened.

PARKS COMMISSION

Incumbent Victor Scherr was re-elected and new-comer Lisa Porter was appointed.

VILLAGE POND PARK

Newly elected Council member Leah Basile asked the staff to move forward more aggressively with Village Pond Park, including better enforcement of the anti-feeding prohibition that in more than a year has resulted in only 3 fines. Staff estimates that it will take 10 to 12 weeks before new bids will be in, which means construction is still 6 months away at the best.

Bear in mind that we are in this predicament because the previous Council refused to move forward on Village Pond Park, claiming it was involved somehow in a legal dispute with the City, which it turns out, was not true.

MEETING DECORUM

I asked that the “rules of decorum” be placed on the agenda, and after input from residents and a discussion by Council, it was decided to bring back the old rules and reconsider them in the light of how contentious last year was under Andrew Hamilton.

ELECTION OF MAYOR

Several people commented on the fact that Councilman Adam Nick never served a term as Mayor. Nick was the top vote getter in 2012 when he ran and surely deserved his chance to be Mayor. But during his 4 years, Robinson, Voigts, and Hamilton traded the position and Nick never got his chance at the gavel. To my knowledge this is the first time an elected official was refused the opportunity to be Mayor. Even when previous Councils had their personal differences (e.g., Kathryn McCullough threatened Peter Herzog with a restraining order) no one was denied their chance to be Mayor.

I asked my colleagues to pass an ordinance that requires that during their term, every elected official be given the chance to be Mayor, if he or she desires to hold the position.

There is an alternative to this ordinance that would allow voters to elect a Mayor directly, something that is done in several other cities (e.g., Irvine, Garden Grove, Santa Ana, Westminster). I have no firm position on this and would like staff to explore this option as well. I know that many residents support this idea.

DISTRICT ELECTIONS

Also related to this issue is the idea of electing officials by district instead of city-wide. Several cities do this (e.g., Newport Beach, Seal Beach, San Juan Capistrano, Anaheim, Buena Park, Garden Grove). Costa Mesa just voted on this issue and said “Yes” with 65% of the vote. Fullerton also voted and said “Yes” with 54%. I’d also like to consider this idea at the same time that we talk about the Mayor. If we decided to change to a district system I think the idea of a city-wide vote for Mayor is a good idea.

Staff are working on this and will report back to us.

REPLACING A COUNCIL MEMBER

Since we’re on the subject of the Council, I brought up the idea that the process in which we replace a Council member (death, resignation, illness, or promotion to a new position) be formally initiated to say that the person who received the most votes in the most recent election be given the replacement position. If you recall, when Peter Herzog resigned, I was the person who received the most votes in the election that Herzog won. The Council decided I wasn’t the right person to appoint so they selected someone else, who ran in 2014 against me, and lost to me by a considerable margin even though he spent much more. IOW – the people’s choice should be respected.

I’ll ask for an ordinance that the next highest vote getter automatically assumes the vacant position, subject to some obvious limitations (e.g., no arrests for a felony, etc.). In addition to being the fairest action, this will remove contentious politicking from the equation. The City Attorney is looking into this and will report back.

COUNCIL COMPENSATION

In 2011 The OC Grand Jury did a survey of city council compensation in Orange County. At the low end were cities like Villa Park ($0), Laguna Woods ($3,600), and La Palma ($4,575). At the high end were Irvine ($48,000), Anaheim ($46,459), Laguna Hills ($38,712) and Tustin ($37,693). The average was $20,719 and 61% of that came from benefits. Lake Forest was $11,205 and contrary to the trend, only 16% came from benefits. Today we average even less than we did in 2011.

• In Irvine, salary is $10,560 but benefits vary a lot. Some Council members take more than $10,000 per year in “insurance premiums” and hence get total compensation in excess of $30,000 per year.
• In Mission Viejo the salary is $12,000 and the benefit package brings total compensation to about $20,000 per year.
• In Costa Mesa the salary is $10,852.02 but with benefits the total compensation is in excess of $30,000.
• In Laguna Hills the base salary is $7,484 but the benefits package produces total compensation in excess of $25,000.

In Lake Forest Council members receive $8,448 annually or $704 per month. That figure was raised from $659 per month in 2008. From 1991 to 2006 it was $600 per month. (Click Here).

I got minority consensus to review the salary and compensation package for City Council members.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr. Jim Gardner is on the City Council for Lake Forest. You can check him out on LinkedIn and/or Facebook and you can share your thoughts about the City at Lake Forest Town Square on Facebook. His comments are not meant to reflect official City Policy.

Dr. Gardner has office hours every Tuesday from 4 pm to 6 pm at the City Hall. In addition, he holds a Town Hall meeting every quarter. The next meeting will be in February at the Foothill Ranch Public Library.