Republican Party Letter Raises Cronyism Suspicion

The Republican Party of Orange County stuck its nose where it didn’t belong when Chairman Fred Whitaker a few weeks ago sent out a lie-filled email and flier urging Lake Forest Republicans to not support the recall of Mayor Andrew Hamilton, Mayor Pro Tem Scott Voigts, and Councilman Dwight Robinson.

On behalf of the Republican Party, Whitaker endorsed the alleged corruption, cronyism, collusion, and everything else that Hamilton, Voigts and Robinson have come to represent in the eyes of thousands of Lake Forest residents who have signed recall petitions being circulated throughout the city. I use the word alleged because it hasn’t been legally proven, but a reasonable person could draw reasonable conclusions.

Yet there's a twist in this message from Whitaker: At the very least, it appears he’s part of the very cronyism that has residents angry with its officials. Understand that Robinson, Voigts and Hamilton are active in the Republican Party, unlike the other two councilmen, Adam Nick and Jim Gardner. Robinson was elected to the governing board of the South Coast Air Quality Management District in November, giving Republicans a valuable majority. In January, Whitaker presented Robinson with a Local Elected Official of the Year for 2015 from the Orange County GOP even though city council is a non-partisan position. And yet, what did Robinson do that was so special in 2015? He admitted to writing campaign literature for the council colleagues he's being recalled with, failed to provide consent to fix a dangerous Lake Forest road that prompted his own recall, and said it was "too much trouble" to provide unused space at City Hall for Meals on Wheels for seniors.

Meanwhile, Whitaker's law firm has earned tens of thousands of dollars from Lake Forest for legal services.

Let me connect the dots while explaining Nick's oft-cited suit against the City.

Before he was elected to city council in 2012, Nick owned an Arco AM/PM gas station/convenience store in Lake Forest which he purchased in 2002. One of his required business transactions was to obtain a liquor license. However, the census tract where the store was located was already saturated as defined by state law; the Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) allows a limited number of alcohol retailers in any given neighborhood based on one license per 2,500 population per tract. Nick had to buy a pre-existing license and paid fair market value for it, more than $200,000.

Jump forward eight years and 7-Eleven wants to fill a storefront across the street from Nick’s, next to the Carl’s Jr., on Lake Forest Drive (1.8 miles from an existing 7-Eleven at the corner of Trabuco Road). Though the population hadn't changed in the tract, according to the census bureau, 7-Eleven asked for a Public Needs and Convenience (PNC) waiver from the City, which was granted by a City staffer without any public input or even awareness; that meant the City was allowing more alcohol retailers in a particular tract than was permitted by the ABC. With the waiver, 7-Eleven was granted a new alcohol license for a mere $100.

Nick petitioned ("sued") to have the council's decision to uphold the secretly-issued waiver reexamined in court; he did not seek money in his petition.

Nick’s lawsuit was the impetus for his run for city council—he vowed to change the municipal law and prevent the same thing from happening to someone else—and he received more votes than any of the seven candidates vying for two seats in 2012. To his credit, businesses in Lake Forest can no longer obtain a waiver in secret; waivers can now only be issued publicly by the planning commission and only after duly noticed public hearings are conducted securing the public's input.

After his election, Nick offered to drop the petition against the City so long as the City stopped defending 7-Eleven Inc., the multi-million dollar conglomerate. To the disbelief of he and his attorneys, the council rejected his offer after a closed session from which he had been excluded. Nick offered to waive his rights as a plaintiff so that the city attorney could continue with the case because turning the case over to an outside firm would have been more expensive than continuing to handle it in-house.

However, the four council members—which included Robinson and Voigts—in another closed session in which Nick was again excluded, voted to turn the case over to a different law firm, Cummins and White, LLP.

And who is the managing partner of Cummins and White? It’s Fred Whitaker, the chairman of the Republican Party of Orange County.

Whitaker gave $500 to Robinson's campaign in 2012 (right before the change in attorneys), and $500 to Voigts in 2014.

Whitaker’s firm made over $60,000 on the deal with Lake Forest. A few weeks ago, Whitaker was able to repay the favor with an anti-recall endorsement whose accuracy would be ripped to shreds in court.

In his letter, Whitaker:

• Exaggerated the cost of a special election by thousands of dollars, quoting the $250,000 that the anti-recall campaign has used rather than the most recent figure provided by the city clerk; the recall could cost as little as $187,000, less than what Hamilton makes annually as a chief financial officer of the Mesa Water District.
• Incorrectly identified the recall as a “power struggle” with “one faction improperly using the recall” to control the city’s budget. The recall was initiated by residents of Portola Hills after their pleas for a safer street leading into their neighborhood fell on deaf ears in an October meeting.
• Without proof, incorrectly describes “liberal interests” as those “paying non-residents $9 for each recall signature." Many of the core people behind the recall are republicans, just like Whitaker (and all members of the council), but with a clue about what’s actually taking place in Lake Forest.
• Accuses petition gatherers of saying the three councilmen want to raise taxes but offers no proof it ever happened.
• Calls Lake Forest “a well-run city” with "Republican values."

Yet those “Republican values” that Hamilton, Voigts and Robinson represent from their positions as elected officials and endorsed by Whitaker, include (either by vote or failure to consent):

• Voted against increased transparency (Robinson, Voigts; Hamilton not yet in office).
• Voted against a robust code of ethics (Robinson, Voigts; Hamilton not in office).
• Voted against reducing fees at city hall for residents (Robinson, Voigts; Hamilton not in office).
• Voted against real term limits, settled on serving 24 out of 26 years (Robinson, Voigts; Hamilton not in office).
• Voted against campaign finance regulations.
• Voted against providing already unused space at City Hall for Meals on Wheels for local senior citizens.
• Voted against pursuing lower costs for emergency services.
• Voted against pursuing an animal shelter with a much lower kill-rate than Orange County Animal Care.
• Voted for friends and acquaintances to fill commission seats at the expense of more qualified residents.
• Voted in every instance in favor of developers after receiving financial benefit to election campaigns, and provided special dispensation at the expense of benefit to taxpayers.
• Hamilton secretly videotaped petition-gatherers, then edited their comments to create the most embarrassing or inciteful video possible, and posted it to YouTube without their consent.
• Voigts’ myriad of mistruths, including his comment from the dais saying “I didn’t wear a wire” to entrap Nick into saying he stole Voigts’ campaign signs; Voigts' failed to get an admission of guilt and charges were dropped against Nick, who had removed illegally placed signs by Voigts and Hamilton. Voigts perpetuated the lie that Nick was arrested and fined for stealing signs.
• Robinson kept silent for almost a year before admitting it was he who wrote developer-backed campaign literature on behalf of Hamilton and Voigts that trashed their opponents, including Gardner, a Republican councilman who was elected with more votes than any candidate other than the incumbent Voigts in 2014.
• Engaged in a current smear campaign against Nick, rather than try to account for their own record, once the recall gathering process began. The campaign includes fliers, emails and a fake newspaper filled with lies and half-truths, no sourcing, public domain images representing people of Lake Forest, and bigoted if not racist material; the fake newspaper also suggests that those seeking signatures for recall are pedophiles.
• Fostered the toxic culture leading to an alleged attack on a signature gatherer at Easter.

By taking an anti-recall stance, those are the actions Whitaker and the Orange County GOP are condoning. Even if the price of the recall is $250,000—which it isn't—what price do you put on good government?

Additionally, the law prohibits three members of a five-person council discussing privately any action coming before the council, yet Hamilton, Voigts and Robinson on the weekend before the Dec. 1, 2015 meeting, went door-to-door urging residents to attend the meeting and oppose using City land near their homes for an animal shelter.

The anti-recall endorsement by Whitaker and the Orange County GOP is worthless and, given the non-partisan office of city council, an unwelcome intrusion to attempt to influence constituents with falsehoods and omission of facts. They are part of the problem, not the solution. Whitaker should know better for another reason: He's a city councilman in Orange.

But the OCGOP letter to residents, and the relationship Whitaker's law firm has with Lake Forest, also leads a reasonable person to conclude cronyism continues among the most active republicans on the city council and the head of the Orange County GOP.

It represents the worst in government.

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