| |
| CONTACT US |
 |
10 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Tele: 714.834.3440
Fax:714.834.2045 |
|
| |
| NORBY TEAM |
 |
Eric Norby
Chief of Staff
Jessica O’Hare
Deputy Chief of Staff
Eileen DePuy
Executive Assistant
Bruce Whitaker
Executive Assistant
Elise Lampe
Executive Assistant
Kara Lozano
Executive Secretary |
|
| |
| COMMUNITY LIAISONS |
 |
|
ANAHEIM
Paul Bostwick
Frank & Sally Feldhaus
BUENA PARK
Jack D. Armstrong
Franki Berry
FULLERTON
Marilyn Davenport
Allan & Joanne Olson
Freydel Bushala
LA HABRA
Don Marshall
Doug Cox
PLACENTIA
Erica Rios
Joanne Sowards
Ed Alvarez
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Raise on Hold—for Now |
|
The proposed 4.75% raise for county employees has been put on indefinite hold. The agreement was approved by the Orange County Employees Association subject to a final public vote by the Board. That vote had been scheduled for August 1 but was delayed to address a number of Supervisorial concerns including the unknown future cost of medical insurance for retirees and how that impacts the 2.7% at 55 pension costs.
|
| |
|
| Supes Direct Registrar Probe |
|
The Board of Supervisors has directed an investigation of certain activities of the OC Registrar of Voters relating to the Capistrano Valley recall election attempt. Two outside experts, Ernest Hawkins, former Registrar of Sacramento County and Ingrid Gonzales, former Registrar of San Bernardino County will conduct the probe, in cooperation with OC Internal Auditor Peter Hughes.
Certain irregularities were alleged by the Capistrano Unified School District Recall Committee against Registrar Neal Kelley. Though the recall effort failed to qualify, it has gathered renewed energy with revelations that Capo Valley Superintendent James Fleming kept an “enemies list” of recall backers, which included teachers and parents. Activists charged that Kelley cooperated too closely with Fleming, beyond what the law allows.
Among the issues to be addressed are: 1) Why were Capo District personnel allowed to see the signatures of recall supporters when, by state law, those signatures are held in confidence; 2) Did Registrar personnel cooperate too closely with Capo District personnel in providing regular updates of the recall’s progress; and 3) Did the Registrar’s office in any way help Capo District Superintendent Fleming in exaggerating the costs of the potential recall election?
The investigation is expected to be completed by August 31, with a report to the Supervisors at our September 12 meeting.
|
| |
|
| Sheriff’s Poll Extended for 3 Years |
|
At our August 8 meeting, the Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 to approve $396,000 to Scott Bryant & Associates to conduct polling for the Sheriff for an additional 3 years. This is in addition to the $409,000 previously spent for polling from 2000-2006.
I had expressed concerns about the value of much of the information provided by the poll. Supervisor Correa was open to a 1-year extension with closer cooperation with the CEO. Both of us voted “no” to the 3-year extension.
|
| |
|
| M & N Placed on Ballot |
|
Measure “M” will extend the transportation half cent sales tax for an additional 30 years, raising a projected additional $11.9 billion for local transportation improvements. According to the formula presented to the voters, 41% would be spent on freeways, 31% on surface streets, 24% on transit and 2% on environmental cleanup.
Measure “N” would place a lifetime limit of three terms on the Board of Supervisors (there currently is no limit) but allows the three terms to be served consecutively. Similar term limits have been approved by voters in Los Angeles, Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties and are being considered in other jurisdictions this November.
|
| |
|
| |
| $1 Lot Sale to Newport Questioned |
|
Tomorrow’s agenda includes a proposal that the Board sell a county-owned vacant lot above the Newport Back Bay for $1 to the City of Newport Beach for a “passive park.” That’s right—one dollar.
The lot is about 2/3 of an acre and sits at the entrance of the Santa Ana Heights neighborhood, whose spacious luxury view estates are appraised into the tens of millions. The area was recently annexed into the City of Newport Beach, having long been an unincorporated island.
The County negotiated a $395,000 price for the parcel in 1999, but the buyer had health problems and the deal fell through. Now, eight years later, we could get substantially more for it, if sold on the open market. I see no reason for county taxpayers to subsidize additional parkland in Newport Beach, when Central and North Orange County continue to lag far behind South and Coastal OC in open space and park land.
|
|