Could City Council's Arizona support influence election?

Now that the dust has settled a bit, let’s examine the impact of the City Council proclamation supporting the new Arizona law enabling that state’s police officers to enforce federal immigration law on the upcoming election for two council positions.

The 338-word proclamation, signed June 2 by Mayor John Anderson and supported by Nancy Rikel and Mark Schwing, says the city “stands with the people of Arizona” and “applauds” the state for “action to protect and defend” citizens, country and sovereignty.

The proclamation also “supports the proposition that the individual states of this country should be able to defend themselves” consistent with the Constitution “when it comes to matters of defending its citizens, our country and the sovereignty” of the United States.

Yorba Linda voters will fill two council seats on the Nov. 2 ballot now held by Anderson and Jan Horton. They hold strikingly different views regarding the Arizona proclamation.

Horton, who left the June 1 session before the matter was discussed due to a family emergency, told 15 attendees at a June 5 Java Joe’s meet-up “the issue is emotional,” “isn’t city business” and “I would have abstained on the vote.”

Proponents argue illegal immigration is city business because the state took $5.7 million in Redevelopment Agency cash for a Supplemental Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, with another $1.2 million due next year, noting schools educate children regardless of legal status.

But Horton would have stayed for the vote, unlike Jim Winder, who left after speaking against Anderson’s suggested proclamation. Winder also said the matter, and others on the “other business” section of the agenda, were “political” in nature and walked out.

Of course, Winder, whose term ends in 2012, can’t seek re-election under a 1996 three-term limit law. Rikel’s first and Schwing’s fourth term also expire in 2012. (Schwing was elected to three terms before the law took effect.)

So far, Horton is the only announced candidate for November. She’s already paid $500 each for endorsements on the COPS and California Vote by Mail voter guides and held her first fund-raiser.

Anderson has yet to say if he’s in or out of the race, but he told me nearly three years ago, as I reported in an Oct. 11, 2007 column, “I have no intention of running for re-election.”

He stated, “My personality, belief that people should say what they mean and mean what they say and expectations of others to be true to their word are incongruent with politics.”

Mark Aalders, assistant to the city manager, said the city has received 841 e-mails, faxes or letters as of June 15, “with more coming in on a fairly consistent basis.” He noted 207 from residents in support and 24 opposed, with an out-of-state count of 501-9 in favor.

One resident brought cookies to City Hall in support of the proclamation.

Readers ask about benefits and turnover

Readers often e-mail me questions about city government or politics, and I try to respond with useful information. Here are the answers to two recent questions of general interest:

First, a 38-year resident asked about pension and health benefits collected for serving on the City Council and wanted to know how and when the benefits were established.

Back in 1995, council members quietly slipped themselves into an annual resolution that sets compensation for management employees. The words “city council” were added to two sections, one detailing retirement benefits and the other medical and dental benefits.

The resolution passed 3-2, with then council members Barbara Kiley, Mark Schwing and Gene Wisner in favor and John Gullixson and Dan Welch opposed, and the benefits have continued every year since.

Pension benefits include an annual $1,500 payment to the Public Employees Retirement System for each of four council members: John Anderson, Jan Horton, Nancy Rikel and Mark Schwing. Jim Winder already receives a PERS retirement for Brea police service.

The highest PERS allowance, based on the $500 monthly council salary and a usual $60 per month Redevelopment Agency payment, would be $162 each month, with an annual cost-of-living adjustment, for life, beginning at age 63 after three terms. Lower payments could start at age 50 after five council years.

Health insurance is provided under a “cafeteria” option that allows council members to put all or part of the city’s $833 monthly payment in a retirement plan similar to a 401k.

Anderson, Horton, Schwing and Winder put $833 into their plans, totaling $9,996 each per year, and Rikel receives $459 for health insurance and $374 for her retirement plan.

The city provides “self-insured” dental and vision insurance, and council members take a $36 monthly phone stipend.

Second, a newer resident asks about recent turnover among top-level city employees: “Is Yorba Linda a toxic city?”

No, not any more than other places in this economic climate. Former City Manager Tammy Letourneau was properly dismissed 5-0 in 2008, and a skilled new manager, Dave Adams, is adeptly leading the city through the tougher times without such past resources as plentiful developer fees.

Some employees, facing lower earnings and furlough days, took an early retirement incentive in 2009, similar to one taken this year by 92 Placentia-Yorba Linda school district teachers.

City Attorney Sonia Carvalho’s resignation was accepted 5-0. She was replaced by Assistant City Attorney Jamie Raymond, with no loss of “institutional knowledge.”

A motion to ask qualified firms for bids on city legal work merited a 5-0 vote, but Horton and Winder were opposed. The city should seek lower contract costs in today’s economic environment, and bidding the legal business for the first time in 10 years is a good idea

Full mailbox for high propensity voters

Has your mailbox been stuffed with an unending supply of expensive-looking campaign flyers and brochures the past few weeks? If so, you are in a very select group of voting-age citizens that well-paid political consultants call “high propensity” voters.

High propensity voters are deemed more likely to cast ballots based on the number of times they’ve voted in past elections, and, since campaigning is expensive, candidates often ignore low propensity and occasional voters to focus on those most apt to vote.

Candidates buy the names of high propensity voters and then aim mailers and recorded phone calls to those so identified. The number of these likely voters varies according to the type of election: presidential, mid-term and partisan primary.

In Yorba Linda, likely voters in a presidential contest now number more than 30,000 and in a mid-term election more than 20,000, out of some 40,000 registered voters. But for a primary election like this June’s contest, far fewer voters are considered high propensity.

In the June 2008 primary, 6,823 of 24,737 Yorba Linda Republicans cast ballots, but only 6,267 voted in a local contest at the end of the ballot. For Democrats, 2,353 of 9,474 cast ballots, but only 1,703 marked the down-ballot race. Surely, more occasional GOP voters turned out this year, due to lively battles for governor, senator and Congress nominations.

Again this election cycle, the most disheartening election-mail tactic involved candidates using paid endorsements on so-called “voter guides” or “slate mailers” to fool voters into thinking they’ve earned support from organizations with important-sounding names.

As a high propensity voter, I received 15 such mailers this year, from groups with names designed to associate candidates willing to pay hefty fees with lower-tax, small business, pro-law enforcement, conservative Republican and various patriotic principles.

Actually, they’re for-profit enterprises that give the impression they’ve vetted candidates against a set of values as reflected by key words in the mailer’s name—COPS, Taxpayer Protection, Save Prop 13, Tax Limitation, Republican Leadership and similar language.

They make money by charging candidates more for endorsements than the cost to print and mail the material. And the only vetting involves making sure the checks are signed.

Sadly, voters will see a similar onslaught of these phony guides in the November election that includes two City Council seats. Local candidates already are paying in advance-- $800 to $1,200 per mailer—for the pictures and wording each selects for the “guides.”

But contenders who value honesty and transparency in politics should stop buying these spurious endorsements and avoid becoming complicit with the snake-oil merchants who sell space on these flag-waving flyers to the first or, in some cases, the highest bidder.

A role for a police advisory committee

Some of the most interesting responses from Brea police to recommendations made by an independent consultant hired by Yorba Linda to examine law enforcement service provided by Brea deal with a proposed Community Policing Advisory Committee.

The advisory committee is the subject of five of 47 recommendations Anderson and Associates, a firm experienced in analyzing police operations, presented at a Jan. 19 council meeting. Brea police Capt. Jack Conklin responded at the May 18 session.

Yorba Linda first signed a contract with Brea in 1970, replacing an agreement with the county sheriff. Deputies also policed the area prior to cityhood in 1967 and still handle Country Club and Fairlynn county island calls.

Police services now cost about $11 million each year, 38 percent of the city’s budget, so implementing fiscally sound recommendations is important. The current pact with Brea expires in 2012.

A community advisory committee of key stakeholders to provide input on enhancing police services “has merit,” according to Conklin, who said the group “should remain advisory in nature” and report to the City Council.

But, Conklin advised, the committee should “be activated whenever a contract renewal is being considered by the city,” which, based on past practice, is once every five years.

And, Conklin stated, “The mission of this group must be very clear. They should not consider themselves a police commission that makes policy, but rather conducts research, provides perspective and makes suggestions.”

Conklin did agree the committee should “represent as many of the city’s stakeholders as possible as to best periodically examine public safety issues….”

The Anderson report recommended the group include representatives from Brea police, the Chamber of Commerce, the faith community, community-based organizations, non-profit organizations, neighborhood associations and “key Yorba Linda city officials.”

Among “key” city officials suggested for membership: City Council, Traffic Commission, management, code enforcement, fire district, public works and planning.

Conklin viewed other Anderson recommendations as unneeded. He stated the group’s duty should be to “make suggestions, not develop policies, procedures or vision statements. It is the responsibility of the police department, as the subject matter experts, to develop these items after receiving the committee’s suggestions.”

According to the Anderson report, the committee “needs to meet periodically to discuss and acknowledge where successes are occurring and where more progress needs to be made” and “should make periodic reports…regarding the progress being made….”

Conklin’s response: “unnecessary, since the advisory committee’s role is to provide input and suggestions, not to monitor the police department’s progress or make reports analyzing whether the department is accomplishing our stated goals.”