I’m concerned that the common issues being used to figure out where candidates stand may be clouding the much larger, central issues driving the 2014 election.
Vertical issues are important.
I’m not diminishing the significance of continued discussion about unfunded pension liabilities, balancing the budget, senior services, affordable housing or public safety. These are always on the agenda. Other perennial hot topics include staff salaries, traffic congestion and a robust business environment. And, these emerging major issues demand revisiting – transparency in government, the drought tolerant garden, water conservation and fracking.
These are pressing matters that will only be properly dealt with if Operation Clean Sweep is successful and we’re able to seat three new Council members. Not just anybody but the pool boy… but skilled, experienced, imaginative people who clearly make our best interests their priority.
The broader issue of electing a healthy Council.
Roy Moore introduced Operation Clean Sweep, describing Council as a dysfunctional environment. Recent examples of childish conduct include the fracking discussion and demonstration garden project. Both issues became contentious because Council provided no meaningful opportunity for public engagement.
Dysfunctional might be an understatement. Murdock, Marick and Garcia, during Matters From The Audience, fiddle with their phones and couldn’t look more uninterested. Council members make no eye contact with each other, cast the royal stink eye at each other whenever possible and there is no civil discussion.
Oh we’ve had our advocates. Both Moore and Simonoff, repeatedly, have attempted to convince Murdock, Marick and Garcia to seek public input.
But because MM&G fear their pet projects might be challenged, ridiculed or attacked, they always deny the requests. Their mantra seems to be, “Better safe than sorry.”
So, what is ground zero in this election?
A complete reboot of Council by replacing all three incumbents. With Moore retiring and Garcia scared off, Operation Clean Sweep boils down to denying Murdock a second term. He’s done nothing to deserve it.
My complete disdain for Murdock and the unbroken string of poor choices he’s made for four years is no secret. Go give Brea Clean Sweep a quick read. It will give you an idea of what many of your friends and neighbors have come to believe.
You would see a larger number of “No Murdock” signs all over town if someone wasn’t intimidating business owners to remove them and systematically taking them down at night. Wonder who that might be?
Where do I stand on the candidates?
It’s time to put ink to paper and get my absentee ballot in the mail. After lengthy, detailed and balanced consideration I am absolutely comfortable and confident in making the following endorsements.
Steve Vargas – Mellowed and matured since he last held office, Steve has always supported the issues and choices that would have helped bring Brea to a better place today. His military service, including three tours in the War on Terror, have molded him into the team player we need on Council.
Steve is the only candidate to publish firm stands on today’s issues, in his campaign literature and on his website. As a grandfather of 5+, including an energetic set of triplets, serving others has become a way of life. Steve has earned my respect and my vote.
Cecilia Hupp – A Brea resident and small business owner for nearly three decades, Cecilia knows this town inside and out. This may be her first foray into local politics but she brings proven business and leadership skills to the table. Even a quick chat with her, over coffee or during halftime, confirms she has the personality and management assets we need to reboot Council.
Her campaign has centered around the issues of community engagement, financial stability, economic development and quality of life for all Breans, from this summer’s beautiful baby to cranky ol’ geezers like me. Cecilia has won my heart and my vote.
Glenn Parker – Okay, this one was hard for me. I’ll be honest, I’d labeled Glenn one of the old guard and unfairly dismissed him as a viable candidate.
Then I listened to him.
Glenn has remained continually involved in local government since exiting Council in 1998. Glenn hasn’t missed a beat.
You’d be hard pressed to find an issue he doesn’t clearly understand or for which he hasn’t found a practical solution. He’s a numbers and no nonsense guy who’s reputation has been built upon public engagement and sound fiscal practices. I believe in Glenn and he has my vote.
Now it’s your turn.
Like Dennis Miller always said, “That’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.” The ball is in your court. Do your homework, understand the issues. Only then, when you have come to an equally considered and committed position on the candidates of your choice, fill out your ballot.
Nothing has the power to wreak havoc on Brea’s future and our quality of life more than an uneducated vote.
Pick a team because you love the school. Pick a horse because you like the jockey’s colors.
Pick Council members because they will listen to the people, strive to be a team player and will make personal agendas and legacy building things of the past.
As someone with no dog in the hunt, I now live outside Brea, my thoughts:
Glenn is very intelligent; I think he can do well by Brea in a second Council iteration. Cecilia; while I don’t know her, I recognize the name and have never heard anything negative. Steve; on the fence, if he has matured and willing to consider other opinions (e.g., positive consensus on decisions), he could be a positive addition.
Boadicea… I hold a more enthusiastic view of the same scene. Appreciate the confirmation.
The thing is, Steve Vargas was right in 2001 when he was one of the very few council members in any city in the county that opposed the generous pension giveaways that today sees this city approaching $75 million in unfunded pension liability; and in the meantime has already crippled cities like Costa Mesa and Santa Ana.
Rick,
While I agree with your first two choices for City Council, your number three pick, for the reasons you stated, couldn’t be farther from the truth.
With Glenn you will get the same disdain for public opinion. He sounds good but in reality not so much. Mr. Parker campaigned for Measure E, and did not support Measures T&U.
Aren’t we looking for a fiscal conservative? “Clean Sweep” includes Mr. Parker. He has been city treasurer since 2004. Sounds like the “old guard” to me.
Glenn talks the talk but can he walk the walk?
Connie… the reasons I stated are the truth, as I’ve deduced from doing my homework. Glenn walks the walk. If they’re not your truth, so be it.
My bottem line here was to encourage folks to come to their own considered decision. Who I endorse, who I vote for, is my business, who you vote for is yours.
You’re not one who walks into the polling both and flips a coin. We need more like you.
The bitterness and name calling has gone way too far. When you refer to Mr. Murdock as “the pool boy” that was truly awful. Even for those who don’t support Mr. Murdock, there ought to be a limit to how far these attacks will go, and they ought to immediately condemn you for your statements.
I thought in America we took pride in those who start from humble beginnings and become successful. I guess in his day Abraham Lincoln’s enemies did refer to him as a “log splitter”.
It has been truly educational to see how even local politics can be highjacked by a few people and become a cesspool. You all ought to be ashamed.
Randy… Apparently you’re new to Brea Matters and it’s acerbic style. Your accusation of bitterness is untrue and unprovable. Your condemnation is childish and your weak attempt at circular logic is appalling.
Ask yourself, who benefits from intimidating local businesses to remove the oppositions signs and sneaks around late at night stealing yard signs?
Those whining about dirty politics today had no compunction about playing dirty themselves in 2010 and 2012. Who was fined $2,000 by the FPPC for failure to disclose that he lead the committee, Breans Against Measures T and U?
The big difference is they based their rough and tumble tactics on lies and innuendo. The broad public disillusionment with the pool boy’s track record is that there is none.
Ashamed? Anything but.
Comparing Brett Murdock to Abraham Lincoln gets the award for funniest comment ever posted on Brea Matters. Congratulations.
“Pool Boy” is by far too generous in my opinion. Rick is being too nice.
I prefer to call him… never mind. Who lives in a pineapple under the sea?
What are your thoughts on the other candidates?
Mike… Thanks for joining in and for a great question.
My purpose with this thread was to publicly endorse those candidates I felt were best suited to tackle the changes needed at city hall today and to guide the business of the city in the years ahead.
I also felt compelled to reinforce my disappointment with how (sorry Randy) the pool boy has squandered an opportunity to do good in this community.
Describing the lesser qualities of the remaining candidates seemed inappropriate. I would be happy to discuss the greater details over a cup of coffee but won’t do that here.
I’m voting for Steve Vargas and Cecelia Hupp.
I know Steve Vargas can stand on his own two feet for what he believes in. I’m hoping the same is true for Cecelia Hupp too. Her alliance with Parker is bothersome to me though.
But what other choices do I have? I’m not going to vote for the other unmentioned candidate handpicked by Ron Garcia.
Stephen… Many are facing the same choices you are and are coming to similar conclusions. Anyone seeing last night’s candidate’s forum should agree, frontrunners Hupp, Vargas and Parker know their stuff and are team builders.
Kim has been called, by Garcia, his handpicked successor… and recently distributed door hangers have him teamed up with Murdock. I’m not sure how to characterize this other than a strategic faux pas of the first order.
Watched a replay of the recent Candidate’s Forum; Murdoch came across in many responses as “poor me” and at least somewhat flippant in others. Impressed w/Ms. Hupp and Parker, less so with Vargas, definitely less so with Harris and Kim.
I think the range of constituents’ questions was a good one to identify how candidates would respond to issues important to constituents. I also liked how some questions were directed to specific candidates.
The moderator did an excellent job of keeping the forum under control. The question as to the Mayor’s “grade” was a hoot, frankly – greatly enjoyed the answers.
Zhani… there is a lot to learn/confirm watching the forum, particularly in person. I watched from home, getting texts from folks in the room. Their’s was a more intense experience. They could see, first hand, the frustration and anger in Murdock and his camp. We’ll know in a couple of weeks.