"The Gang" Strikes Back

A few weeks ago I pointed out some of the “dirty tricks” the “Gang of 3” were engaged in. They focused on lies about me, including

• · being behind the recall,
• · financially supporting the recall,
• · handing out recall information,
• · circulating petitions to get signatures,
• · being kicked out of Bagels and Brew for trying to hand out recall literature

I explained then that I was sympathetic to the concerns of the recall petitioners and would assist them just as I assist hundreds of Lake Forest residents who ask for my help. I also indicated that I would try to stay out of the “politics”, avoid commenting on the recall from the dais, and not take any public position. More or less I’ve managed to stick to that plan, even though the lies being told about me have only escalated, and supporters of the “Gang of 3” (a term I coined long before the recall) have stolen my identity and falsely blogged using my name on The Patch.

In recent weeks the Recall efforts picked up and I reported on that last week as a news story and I believe I managed to report the events without any editorializing. Click Here to judge for yourself. Since that time, the recall opponents (i.e., supporters of “the Gang of 3”) have staged their own offensive.

Intimidation

Saturday night my wife and I stopped at the 99 Cents Store (one of her favorite places) and on the way out we were approached by signature gatherers who had a handful of petitions. I asked to see the recall petition and they told me they weren’t circulating the recall petition because the man standing next to them (a large disheveled man) was intimidating anyone who wanted to sign the recall petition, and the gatherers didn’t want any hassles. They told me they had called the Police.

Subsequently I heard that other people had been up to similar actions elsewhere, including the Mayor, Andy Hamilton.

I don’t see why the supporters of the Gang of 3 don’t start their own campaign. If they think Councilman Nick is so troublesome, perhaps they should recall him. If they’re unhappy with my votes and especially my articles (which I know they are), perhaps they should include me too. That would be the American way of doing things. But hanging around, interfering with others, and trying to intimidate voters surely doesn’t belong here and now.

Denials

Over the weekend I was told that Mayor Hamilton was showing up at places where the petition gatherers were operating and trying to dissuade people from signing. I was told he claimed that the recall was started and being controlled by Councilman Nick because Nick wanted to take over the Council. I was also told that Mayor Hamilton claimed he never took any money from developers, and hence he denied one of the major claims of the recall supporters.

Let’s deal with these one at a time.

Is Nick in Control?

The people behind the recall include dozens of Lake Forest residents. They are mature adults involved in their communities, and I doubt seriously that anyone is “pulling their strings.” It’s an insult to their integrity to imply that they are anyone’s puppets, but it is pretty much SOP (standard operating procedure) for the Gang of 3 to lash out and personally attack their opponents. They have been down right savage with Councilman Nick and I’ve come in for my share of personal abuse too (e.g., “moron”, “imbecile”, “vengeance seeker”).

Councilman Nick has come out in public supporting the recall, as has former Mayor McCullough who lamented “what have you done to my City” when addressing the Gang of 3 a few weeks ago. Many people prefer to remain silent because they say they are afraid of retaliation by the Gang.

But I’m not sure how a recall is going to get Nick control of the Council. He and I agree about 50% of the time. That’s chance. The Gang of 3 agrees with each other 80%+ of the time, so you can see that with their 3 votes they control how the votes go. But Councilman Nick and I are not a “team” and with a change in the Council make-up I don’t see how anyone could “control” the Council. Personally I don’t think any group should control the Council. Decisions should be based on the issues, not alliances.

The issue is not whether or not Councilman Nick is in favor of or behind the recall: the issues are (1) whether or not what the recall supporters allege is true and (2) is that sufficient to warrant a recall.

Is It True?

From what I’ve read, all the allegations being made about the Gang of 3 are true. I have personally criticized them for all of these actions, and what the recall supporters have done is to go beyond my individual complaints and create a great summary of all the mis-deeds of the Gang of 3. No one in their right mind could deny that

• · They take money from vested interests, including developers who want zoning changes and companies vying for City contracts. In turn, they vote to give the developers and the companies what they ask for.
• · They appoint their friends and campaign contributors and supporters to Commission and Committee positions even when there are better qualified people applying for the same post.
• · They act in crude and disrespectful ways toward residents, yelling at them, verbally abusing them, cutting them off in mid-sentence, ordering them not to laugh and even speak, interrupting them, etc.
• · They vote as a bloc and keep important issues from even being discussed.
• · They break many of the promises that they made to people in order to be elected, and sometimes do the opposite of what they said they were going to do. (Voigts and Robinson)

Does it Warrant Recall?

If this is true and well-documented, which I believe it is, the remaining question is whether or not this constitutes enough of an offense to warrant recall. People have been recalled for less, but the question each voter must ask is whether or not this is just “politics as usual” or whether the Gang of 3 has gone beyond what we normally expect politicians to do.

Chances are that broken promises and bloc voting are things that most people expect to happen even if they wish it didn’t happen. It’s probably not enough, by itself, to warrant a successful recall.

Cronyism (i.e., Appointing ones campaign supporters to positions) probably goes under the category of “spoils of war” and while it is abhorrent, it probably isn’t unexpected, and by itself, may not be cause enough for a successful recall.

How about corruption? When cornered with the evidence, The Gang of 3 freely admits that they take money from developers and companies with contracts with the City. They justify it by saying that it’s not illegal and claim that it doesn’t influence their vote. When it’s pointed out to them that they vote 100% in favor of the money, they shrug their shoulders, as if such a high correlation has no meaning. When it’s pointed out to them that their behavior violates the City’s code of ethics that demands that they avoid even “the appearance” of impropriety, they rely on the City Attorney who assures them that ethics is defined by the Council itself. Given their 3 person majority and the tendency to vote as a bloc, it’s unlikely they will find themselves to be unethical.

In fact, not so long ago, Mayor Hamilton voted that Councilman Robinson was not acting unethically when he called a fellow Councilman a “moron”, an “imbecile” a “vengeance seeker”, and “a liar”. On the other hand, that same Mayor Hamilton voted to censure Councilman Nick because Councilman Robinson claimed he heard Nick use a racial slur for which Robinson offered no evidence and for which the people to whom the slur was supposedly made, denied that it happened. Like Mel Brooks said, “It’s Good to be King”.

Some people are very disturbed by the corruption charges, although a small minority think it’s politics as usual. Among those who think it’s politics as usual, most find the practice undesirable, but don’t know how to stop it (It seems too simple to say that you can stop it by not voting for someone who does it). Nevertheless, corruption has often been at the core for the reasons for a recall (e.g., Moreno Valley, Modesto)

But what everyone seems to agree upon is that the crude and disrespectful behavior toward residents is completely unwarranted and unacceptable. It’s earned the City a poor reputation, and probably cost us the ability to team up with neighboring cities on projects, including the alternative to the County animal shelter. It was the main reason behind the successful Dunsmuir recall in 2014 along with San Marino and Sunnyvale.

At the end of the day, each voter must decide whether or not the conduct of the Gang of 3 warrants a recall or not.

Tomorrow I’ll discuss Mayor Hamilton’s claim that he’s taken no money from developers.

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 on Jan 30 at 2 pm at the Foothill Ranch Public Library