CM PRESS # 519

SNEEN QUESTIONS AN ENTRY ON MONAHAN'S CAMPAIGN STATEMENT

According to the almost daily Daily Pilot today, City Council candidate Bill Sneen spotted a "contribution" of seven big ones on Gary Monahan's campaign finance disclosure statement that raised a question in Sneen's mind. LINK

The issue is apparently whether it's a campaign contribution or a payment for services that were provided by Monahan. Be sure to read the whole article in the ADDP for all the details.

The Pilot reports the relevant part this way:

Competing candidate Bill Sneen noticed the contribution on Monahan’s forms and confronted Monahan and Singh. After getting what he considered to be conflicting explanations from them, he said, he will most likely file a complaint with the state agency within the next few days.

“Gary Monahan has run for many public offices and has been on many city councils,” Sneen said. “He knows better than this.”

# # #

MR. SNEEN AND THE COSTA MESA HIGH SCHOOL FOUNDATION

In Issue # 506 of the CM PRESS, published on October 9, 2008, we wrote about Mr. Sneen and the Costa Mesa High School Foundation.

Mr. Sneen has apparently been with the CMHSF since its start in 2003 (approximately six years).

In brief, the CM PRESS wanted to know why the CMHSF hasn't filed tax returns for 2006 and 2007 and why the CMHSF has never filed the required annual reports and audits.

Here's the relevant part of CM PRESS # 506 about this:

The CM PRESS attended the Costa Mesa High School Foundation's monthly meeting this past Tuesday, October 7.

One of those in attendance was CMHSF board member William Sneen, who is also a candidate for the Costa Mesa City Council this year.

In his campaign literature, Mr. Sneen states that he is a "Founding Board Member of the Costa Mesa High Schools (sic) Foundation." [That apparently means he's been there from the start.]

During the public comments section of the meeting, the CM PRESS asked a number of questions including the following:

CM PRESS: Where are the CMHSF's tax forms (990's) for the years 2006 and 2007? These are public documents, but the only ones the CM PRESS has been able to find are from 2004 and 2005.

CMHSF: We're working on them.

CM PRESS: Section 5.7 of your By-Laws requires that the CMHSF furnish an Annual Report and Audit to the Costa Mesa City Attorney.

Here's the relevant part of that section:

"Section 5.7 Annual Report and Audit. The board shall cause an annual report to be furnished to the directors and the City Attorney of the City (the "City Attorney") not later than one hundred twenty (120) days after the close of the corporation's fiscal year. The annual report shall be accompanied by an audit thereon of independent certified public accountants which shall be made available to the public. The annual report shall be in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America...." (emphasis added).

CM PRESS: Where can the CM PRESS see the Annual Reports and Audits?

CMHSF: We've never done such reports or audits.

CM PRESS: Why not?

CMHSF: Because it would be too expensive to do them. Possibly around $5,000.

[Snip]

He's insulted

After we asked a few more questions, board member and City Council candidate Sneen said that he was insulted by our questions.

Insulted?

This is the public's money and the public has a right to know what's being done with it. The questions we asked were all intended to get succinct, straight answers for the citizens of Costa Mesa.

[Snip]

The new officers of the CMHSF voted in on Tuesday, are: Tom Wagner, President; William Sneen, Vice-President; Ann Bray, Secretary; Janet Krochman, Treasurer; Julia Lawson, Assistant Treasurer.

[Snip]

POSTSCRIPT: We have now been told informally that the CMHSF is trying to get pro bono Annual Reports and Audits as required by the CMHSF's by-laws, and we've now received an email saying that we can review the last grant request book.

****************

[NB 1: The CMHSF was set up by the Costa Mesa City Council at their meeting of October 20, 2003. The first full year of the CMHSF was 2004. So, it seems to us that there should be annual reports and audits for the years 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007. ]

[NB 2: The word "shall," in legal parlance means "you must" do this.]

# # #
UH OH, SOMETHING BAD IS LURKING IN THE SMALL PRINT FOR THE WESTSIDE

At the next no-Planning Commission meeting on October 27, the Commission will vote on some changes to plans for SOBECA and also for the Westside. LINK

Buried in Table A is Amendment No. 1, which reads: "Clarify that minimum one-acre lot size requirements applies to Westside Urban Plan Projects."

If approved, this Amendment No. 1 may effectively stop any revitalization of the Westside.

Why? Because many of the lots in the 103 Acres of the 19West Urban Plan Area and the 277 Acre Mesa West Bluffs Urban Plan Area are much less than an acre in size and some are less than 5,000 square feet (remember, an acre is 43,560 square feet).

This is especially true along West 19th Street, which is dotted with small lots.

So, say you want to revitalize West 19th Street by putting in a small live-work building.

To do that, you'll have to assemble lots by buying them from individual property owners.

Assume, just because the number is round, that all the lots up and down that street are 5,000 square feet in size.

To get to an acre, you'll have to be able to buy nine contiguous lots, probably from nine different owners.

And, you just know that once the word gets out, that you'll have some owners who will suddenly raise their prices because they know what you're doing. And, you also know that some owners simply won't want to sell.

The bottom line: If the no-Planning Commision doesn't take out the one-acre requirement, much of the Westside will remain just as it is today. No revitalization.

What will some say to try to pass this onerous requirement? They'll say that developers can still ask for changes to the Master Plan, so this won't stop revitalization. Folks, that's a weak argument and just sets up additional hurdles to revitalization.

Hopefully, the no-Planners on the no-Planning Commission will drop this one-acre requirement.

# # #

DID WE SAY THAT?

In its DP 103 Special Section today, the almost daily Daily Pilot says that I've made it clear that I'm voting for Eric Bever, Gary Monahan and Jim Righeimer this year.

The paper continues: "But some residents, he writes, might want to give their 'lefty-I-like-illegal-aliens-and-more-crime-and-lousier-school vote,' to one of the other six candidates.

Did I write that? You bet I did.

And, I'll write it again: If you're a lefty-I-like-illegal-aliens-and-more-crime-and-lousier-schools-voter, you've got six candidates who you will probably find to your liking.

But, if you're a responsible-citizen-and-you-understand-the-illegal-alien-connection-to-our-high-crime-rate-and-lousy-school-statistics, then you should probably vote for Eric Bever, Gary Monahan and Jim Righeimer.
# # #

TRUTH

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” - Schopenhauer

************************************************

Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end, there it is. -Sir Winston Churchill

************************************************

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former. - Albert Einstein.

# # #

Those are our opinions. Thanks for reading them.