Ultra liberal Katrina Foley then tried to badger the City Attorney into releasing more information, but the Council voted that the report was not to be released because it is an investigative report [it's also attorney work product] and the Council has apparently never released such reports.
# # #
WE ACCIDENTALLY HEAR A FUTURE TELEPHONE CALL FROM THE EAST COAST TO A HOTEL IN COSTA MESA (IF THE TOT IS RAISED)
"Hello, Costa Mesa hotel? We want to cancel our reservations to bring our (Fill in the blank: football team, convention, etc.) there next year.
"We just heard you've raised the TOT tax and now your rates are about as high as hotels in Newport Beach and Anaheim.
"What's wrong with you people? Don't you understand that Costa Mesa isn't a destination location and that you don't have a Disneyland and you don't even have any famous California beaches? The only thing you had going for you were lower hotel rates. Now, you don't even have those.
"What? Oh, you say you have a big shopping center? Are you nuts? Do you think this is 1890? We have the same stores where we live. You think we're going to fly across country because you have a shopping center?"
# # #
DUI DRIVER GETS 20 YEARS TO LIFE FOR KILLING
Link
Drinking or using drugs and then driving is serious. It is not something to be cavalier about.
# # #
WELL THERE IT IS...DAILY PILOT REPORTS ON MCEVOY'S DUI ARREST BUT BURIES IT W
AY DOWN IN THE ARTICLE
Link
The CM PRESS has had this information for some time, but we didn't want to be the first to report it.
Here are a few more details. On August 10, 2006, McEvoy was arrested for 23152(a) VC--Driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs. This was pled down to 23103(a) VC--Reckless driving.
So, McEvoy is the alternative to Jim Righeimer, a family man who wants Costa Mesa to be a nicer place in which to raise his young kids and a guy who had some financial problems back in the '90's?
Will we see some political police show up at the city council meeting tonight and go to the podium to tell voters not to vote for McEvoy because he was arrested for DUI? Of course not.
But let a good, decent citizen like Jim Righeimer try to avoid injuries by questioning a misplaced DUI checkpoint and these political police tell you about how dangerous DUIs are.
What a bunch of crap.
# # #
FATHER SAYS STATE SNATCHED HIS BABY BECAUSE HE IS AN OATH KEEPER--A GROUP THAT WANTS TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION
Link
LINK to Oath Keepers.
# # #
WHEN YO
U SLING MUD, YOU GET IT ALL OVER YOURSELF
Some Costa Mesa cops don't want conservative Jim Righeimer elected to the Costa Mesa city council.
They know that Righeimer can't be bullied or romanced into doing their bidding and they know that he'll try to help get Costa Mesa out of the tank of red ink it's in and will work to improve Costa Mesa for the folks who live here.
But these cops who want to run Costa Mesa have a real problem this year. There are two seats to be filled on the council. And, the two top vote-getters are going to get those seats, no matter what.
Here's where the problem for the cop union gets even worse. There are only five candidates in the race.
Wendy Leece--The incumbent, should win easily. So that just leaves one seat to fill and there are four candidates seeking that seat.
Jim Righeimer--Conservative businessman, raising his kids in the city. Involved in civic matters, and working to make Costa Mesa a nicer place to live. Considered the front runner for the second seat...unless he can be smeared with mud.
And then you have the other three choices. To stop Righeimer, the cops have to convince you to give one of these candidates more votes than Righeimer.
Sue Lester--Relatively new in town, runs a medical marijuana non-profit.
Chad Petschl--Very new in town, doesn't appear to have any campaign at all. Hasn't even bought a statement in the Voter Information Pamphlet. In search of a vowel.
Chris McEvoy--Well, we suspect you'll be reading more about him this week.
We'll get back to Lester, Petschl and McEvoy in a moment. But first, here's where the cops who want to defeat Righeimer did something that wasn't very smart.
In order to make Righeimer look bad, the cops recently flooded city council chambers with union members.
A couple of these union members then went to the podium and emoted about how dangerous DUI's are and how they want to keep drunk drivers off the road. One cop even told the council about how when he was younger, his car had been hit by a drunk driver and it killed his girlfriend and unborn child.
In other words, you were to understand from the emotional arguments that Righeimer was keeping the cops from taking falling down drunks off the road simply because Righeimer had questioned the wisdom of one particular dangerous checkpoint.
Most of us understand that drunk or stoned drivers are bad. We also want them off the road. There's no argument from any reasonable citizen on this score. And, we all empathize with the officer for his tremendous and heart breaking loss.
But even more, we applaud the police when they remove drunk drivers. And, the CM PRESS has been in the forefront of those who do this applauding.
When we praised the police for a very well run DUI checkpoint a few years ago, that we actually observed for a couple of hours with our young son, we got heat from some lefties in Costa Mesa who said we were calling for a police state. One even said that we were giving our son a bad example by letting him see the police remove drunks from the road.
You will note that the CM PRESS always prints the results of DUI checkpoints. That's because we want drunks and stoned drivers off the road. It's also personal with us. We've been hit by a drunk driver. The guy who hit us was falling down drunk, literally. He also had no driver's license, no insurance, no registration. And, he was an illegal alien.
So, we say to the CMPD: PLEASE KEEP IT UP. GET THE DRUNK AND STONED DRIVERS OFF THE ROAD. BUT DO IT WITH PROPERLY PLACED DUI CHECKPOINTS THAT MAKE SENSE.
Notwithstanding the above, the issue relating to Righeimer has never been about removing or not removing drunk drivers.
The issue is whether putting a DUI checkpoint at that location at that time was prudent and safe. It seems to most of us that it was an unsafe location for such a checkpoint and one that yielded very few results: the CMPD only got one DUI driver. That's not much bang for the buck.
Now, to our major point. Because the cop union made such a big deal about how dangerous DUI drivers are--and this includes stoned as well as drunk drivers--wouldn't it be difficult for the union to support a candidate who runs a medical marijuana non-profit, or one who has a DUI?
So, who can the cop union support to stop Righeimer? No one.
That's why they're going negative on Righeimer and are looking silly and childish as well as mean spirited and unprofessional for doing so.
If what we see and hear is any clue, the public perception is increasing that the CMPD isn't on the side of the citizens of this city. Some are suggesting that the CMPD has become like an invading force of carpetbaggers occupying Costa Mesa and forcing citizens to serve the department instead of the other way around.
And, that's why more and more people are talking about disbanding the CMPD and having the OC Sheriff do our police work.
A few years ago in Compton there was a problem with the police department, so the City Council disbanded the department and contracted with the LA Sheriff's Department to do the policing in that city. And, the crime rate went down.
# # #
Those are our opinions. Thanks for reading them.
Agree with you on the police agenda for Righeimer. But checkpoints are an ineffective way of catching drunk drivers. The most effective way is field observance. Not even close. By the way, if MADD was upset at Righeimer for questioning the checkpoint, where is their condemnation of McEvoy for his DUI/Reckless?
ReplyDelete