• Tall Talk

    you can’t have it both ways, either you are a public figure or you are not.

  • Sonja Morgan

    I am a resident of San Clemente. I have been so for a dozen years. My husband and his family have been prominent in San Clemente since the 1940s. Our “Gramps” was Superintendent of Capo Unified, a City Councilman and a mayor of San Clemente. I am prodistricts, and completely opposed to sober living houses.I believe VRBO’S type business should be regulated and taxed. The allegations being made that outside interests are out for “revenge” on our city council is ridiculous. One of your readers commented that SLH’s, Vrbo’s and Memorial Medical are funding this campaigns. Where is the evidence behind that? Are there campaign donations to link them? Are sober living houses writing letters in support of districts? Memorial Care has a 45 million dollar lawsuit against the city because the city unilaterally rezoned their property making it useless for them and unable to sell their property. Memorial Care will get their due when they they win their lawsuit aND financially cripple the City. The sober living homes are thumbing their noses at recently passed city ordinances. They continue to rake in millions of dollars at the 100 + and growing daily sober living houses in our city. The Vrbo’s are already suing the city for a recently enacted ordinances. And if other court cases throughout the state by vrbo’s are any indication, the city will lose that lwas it too. I don’t seeing them wasting their time plotting revenge. But what is clear is that in a city of 65,000 plus residents are represented by 5 city council members that live within blocks of each other. And that is not new. Southwest San Clemente has always held the power. The people of Forster Ranch, The Coast, Talega, Marblehead and Rancho San Clemente want a say in city goverment. So far that had proved to be exceptionally difficult and has divided us into a “us vs. them” mentality. You hear repeatedly how Talega and Forester Ranch etc are the “newcomers” or they aren’t part of the real San Clemente. Only one of our city council members has even asked to dicuss the proposal in session. The other councilmen shut her down. Why be afraid to discuss it? Could it be the fear of losing power? If the proposal were to pass, 4 of them would be out of a job – they would all live in the same district. Common sense will tell you why 4 of the council people are fighting this tooth and nail.

  • Enrique Romero

    This article seems to go against the fabric of what this organization claims to be about. There was no real homework or research done at all. Instead, they just took queues from the special interests trying to exploit San Clemente for their own personal gain.

    Here is the missing context for those who are not aware. San Clemente is a primarily residential community in the southernmost part of Orange County.

    Districting in the case of San Clemente is about a false narrative dreamed up by a bully who moved into San Clemente to exploit our town for his own personal gain. Others which stand to gain from it financially or politically have jumped on the bandwagon. Here is a link to the video going around where you can hear directly from the originator of the districting false narrative – https://youtu.be/kH6s4_fHZnY

    This bully, who is a professional political operative / hitman, had planned for VRBOs to be part of his retirement income in the future. When the residents complained about how problematic and disruptive STLUs (aka VRBOs) are becoming the City Council took steps to address this for the residents.

    It began with a moratorium, which this bully took exception too, and was addressed permanently with an ordinance that designates certain parts of town for STLUs.

    Unlike other cities which have completely banned VRBOs, San Clemente designated specific parts of town for them. The pier bowl and parts of North Beach and El Camino Real.

    Unfortunately, if you follow who stands to potentially benefit from districting you will see it is the VRBOs, SLHs, MemorialCare, among others seeking to further commercialize and exploit San Clemente.

    Static Districting takes away our representation. It reduces the people we can vote in or out from 5 today to just 1 every four years.

    Worse is it would give smaller areas the same representation as larger ones without regard to the current number of registered voters. It is simply not equitable.

    Conveniently, the people behind the rhetoric run really loose with the facts and present only one perspective, much like this article. It helps their efforts to prey on fears of low acumen voters.

    The people behind the districting initiative never provide real answers and offer no strategy. Instead, they focus on trying to create angst towards local leaders about statewide issues.

    The special interests behind districting are seeking to trick people. They will claim an x-files like conspiracy is going on. They do this to deflect. This enables them to trick low acumen voters by preying on fears. That is their entire strategy.

    The reality is that districting at the city level is much like what we have painfully observed with the school board. It reduces our representation from all trustee / council member to only one. That’s right just one person that is accountable to our vote which we can vote in or out every f-o-u-r years. Whereas today we vote people in or out every two years.

    Remember when the school board was doing stuff we didn’t want and we had some recalls? Have you noticed how that has not happened since districting was implemented? It is not because the school board started doing an awesome job overnight — it is because it is virtually impossible to do nowadays.

    Static districting is also not equitable. Here is an example using some made up numbers to illustrate this point. Let’s say that Talega has 5,000 registered voters and Forster Ranch has 2,500. But each has one representative. That is not equitable representation.

    Furthermore, let’s say that a sewage treatment plant development is underway behind where you live. Not a good aroma or good for property values. Most likely your one elected council member will be supportive. None of the others need / will be since they are not accountable to your vote, and surely do not want it in their neighborhoods either. This is a clear example of why districting is bad.

    The reality with static districitng is it diminishes our representation. It will pit neighborhoods against each other and create a very adversarial us versus them mindset citywide forever. It will make solving issues about me first instead of the greater good for San Clemente.

    Fortunately, the special interests behind all of this are easily spotted. They show up with anecdotal data without context and when people point out holes in their reasoning such as I have, they then revert to trying to tear me down with personal attacks. So remember their names and steer clear of the angst they seek to create.

    • Tall Talk

      we need more of what you are doing here, calling out those who benefit by manipulating the public. thank you.

  • David Zenger

    Why doesn’t Bieber run for the city council? Of course he might get tagged with some of the same hit pieces he likes to peddle.