Tue. Mar 21st, 2023

Why should Santa Ana Occupy care about affordable housing?  

Their leader is a wealthy lawyer who lives in Brea!

About 40 members of Santa Ana Occupy showed up at Santa Ana’s City Council last night.  Thanks to them the meeting went on until midnight.  In the end the City Council rejected their demand to camp out at night on city property.

That much you know by now – but did you know that the Occupy members also completely failed last night – when they were given an opportunity to help the “99%?”

That’s right.  The City Council finally voted on an ordinance that would force developers to include affordable housing in their residential developments.

My friend Sean Mill was asked by the Santa Ana Planning Agency to speak on behalf of the affordable housing measure.  Unlike the Occupiers, who sat on their hands, Mill got up and gave an impassioned speech – pointing out how far the City Council has come since the old days, when Republicans dominated the Council and you weren’t allowed to say “affordable housing” at City Hall.

Mill then pointed out the obvious – that the building industry must be OK with the measure since no one from the BIA – the Building Industry Association – was there to oppose the proposed ordinance.

At NO TIME did the Occupiers speak up even when Santa Ana Mayor Pro Tem Claudia Alvarez went nuts and denounced the ordinance, saying that since the BIA was not there, the Council could not proceed.  Luckily Council Members Vince Sarmiento, David Benavides and Sal Tinajero, as well as Michele Martinez, all pounced on Alvarez.  Sarmiento in particular completely destroyed her lame argument.

In the end the only ding dong who voted against the ordinance was disgraced Councilman Carlos Bustamante – who apparently will continue to stick to his Republican playbook as he finishes what will surely be his final term on the City Council.

The Occupiers had a chance to stand up for working families.  They had a chance to say that they too support affordable housing.  They had a chance to rip the developers.  Instead they sat on their hands and SAID NOTHING.

As I have said from the start, these folks might have their hearts in the right place, but they don’t know the issues in my city, they have no clue about much of anything, and their revolution is actually pretty lame.

By Editor

The New Santa Ana blog has been covering news, events and politics in Santa Ana since 2009.

56 thoughts on “Why did Santa Ana Occupy fail to support affordable housing last night?”
  1. Diamond is bound to stop by to say he isn’t wealthy. So how about some facts:

    Median household income in Brea in 2009:

    Brea: $77,253
    State: $58,931

    Read more: http://www.city-data.com/income/income-Brea-California.html#ixzz1dBDxBEwc

    And here is Santa Ana’s income data:

    Estimated median household income in 2009: $53,211 (it was $43,412 in 2000)

    Santa Ana: $53,211
    California: $58,931

    Read more: http://www.city-data.com/city/Santa-Ana-California.html#ixzz1dBEFrhA2

  2. This post is retarded. not that there is anything wrong with admin being Retarded. Dude, you are making up phooey like somebody caught in a bunch of sexual harassment charges. Stop bashing the Occupiers because of your tiff with Greg Diamond.

    1. You guys failed to speak up for affordable housing. You let down the 99%. Why are you stooping to maligning the mentally disabled when you ought to be apologizing for dropping the ball last night?

      As for Diamond, he is your problem, not mine.

  3. I said, there is nothing wrong with you being Retarded! The Occupiers did support Sarmiento and Mill on that issue. In the crowd with cheers and hand signs,(the official language of the Occupy General Assembly.) They were saving their speech moments for their agenda item because that is all that they had time to prepare for.

  4. We did not have two votes going in. And you know it! We had two politicians acting like politicians. Stop playing dumb. Is that word taboo? Dummy?

    1. Then you had NO votes going in – which makes the attempt all the more lame.

      And yes, using the word “retard” is akin to using the “n” word or calling someone a “fag.” It only serves to weaken whatever point it is you are trying to make.

      I am not playing dumb. If you people want to be political activists try reading the City Council agenda BEFORE you show up to a meeting. I also wrote an entire post about the affordable housing ordinance – before the meeting. Occupy had no excuse.

      BTW, hooting and hollering and waving around your upper extremities is what I would expect from the monkeys at the Santa Ana Zoo. Failing to speak up in defense of the affordable housing ordinance was inexcusably pathetic.

      You may as well give up on your ridiculous camping bid. It isn’t going to happen. We all know that allowing Occupy campouts only leads to more crime and vandalism, and that is something we can ill afford here in Santa Ana.

  5. I think they should have postponed the vote.

    The mayor pro tem had an issue with it, I did not understand the problem she was talking about and I could tell the other council members could/t either. Waiting a week for her to hash out her concerns shouldn’t have been a problem.

  6. So now you are calling us monkeys? that is more fun than you saying that somebody is “lame” like you just did on the other article. Hypocrite Retard.

    1. Your revolution appears to be rude, angry and poorly informed. I can only imagine what mischief you people would have unleashed at night. Thank God our City Council rejected your camping demand.

  7. The Affordable Housing Opportunity Ordinance in Santa Ana is a scam designed to allow developers the “opportunity” to place there redevelopment required affordable housing outside of their upscale developments in Santa Ana. That is why the BIA did not oppose this ordinance.

  8. The Affordable Housing Opportunity Ordinance in Santa Ana is misleading!

    In 2006 Mayoral debate the question of affordable housing was presented to me. (See 2006 video tape)

    At that time I have stated that if the house price is $400K and city will sell it for $200K what will keep the owner not to resale it for full value on the spot?

    If there are restrictions then you are not an owner but a partner with the City.

    I have also stated that property value is cyclical and that soon price will drop like lead ball. I have urged people to try save as much as possible for down payment and wait for down cycle.

    Two years later bubble burst and $400K house went down to less than $200K.

    So why do you need affordable housing?

    Stupid people will never own house and stupid people will never listen to smart peoples advise or will vote for smart people.

    Stupid people love to hear lies from the government. It does reinforce stupid people’s dream.

    Not the American dream.

  9. “Why did Santa Ana Occupy fail to support affordable housing last night?”

    Possibly because the Council has the public speakers format rigged so that you may speak on only one item. If the campers had spoken on Afffordable Housing they would not have been able to speak on their item.

  10. Mike,

    That simply is not true. If you request to speak during a public hearing, which is exactly what the Housing Opportunity Ordinance was, you must be allowed to speak.

    You can speak on each agendized item as long as you stick to the topic of the item. You can only address the council once on non-agendized items during public comments.

    Mayor Pulido called on the speakers to speak under the agendized items and called on the public comments for non-agendized items seperately.

    Had someone chosen to speak on item 75B and 85B they could have chosen to speak on both.

  11. “he is the new Emanuel Goldstein! (see 1984)”……. Hmmmm

    In dead, putz took over your blog, Nelson!

    Here in Santa Ana he is sticking his schnozzle where it does not belong.

    Kudos to Alvarez — shmegege lost!

  12. You’re a joke. You are whats wrong with this city and country. Must be nice to sit at home behind your TV and watch the meeting- join it , speak up, do something about it rather than judging the people who are actually doing something.

    1. Another surly Occupier. What a surprise.

      I was home cooking dinner for my family. And live blogging. IMHO I accomplish more with this blog than the lot of you do with your silly actions.

  13. I’m not going to confirm or deny being wealthy, Art. Instead, let me just ask you about your standards as a blogger, reporter, or journalist.

    Did you really just portray me as “wealthy” based on the nothing but my profession and information about the annual income of households in Brea?

    For the benefit of your readers, would you tell us if other of your assertions here are based on this sort of “research”? If so, would you tell us why you think that that’s OK?

    I’ll address the inaccuracies in your story you-know-where.

    1. Are you denying that compared to residents of my city you are “wealthy?”

      This is a blog. We are not a newspaper. What we offer is Op-Ed. It is my OPINION that you are indeed better off than most folks in my city. You don’t, at least, appear to be starving.

      You could put this to rest Greg by letting us know what your household income is.

  14. Vern, as I think you know (though Art has never asked me), the only Occupy Santa Ana event I’ve ever attended is that city council meeting (and some discussion over a midnight snack afterwards in Orange.)

    I’m not “the leader” of Occupy Irvine, let alone of Occupy Santa Ana. I was just there (and will be there) to offer constructive help where I can. Occupy Santa Ana belongs to its own activists.

  15. Art, why do you fling fat jokes at me but not Sean Mill — or into a mirror? I’ll try not to rise to the bait.

    My income is a matter of fact, not of opinion. You made a factual assertion, you did not offer an opinion. Had it been defamatory — which this isn’t — you would not be able to hide behind its being an “opinion.”

    I have no responsibility to divulge my income to you or to the public, but I’ll tell you what: I’ll post an item on OJB and find out what private information from you and Sean Mill people would like to see divulged. Then maybe we can work out a voluntary agreement to make public all sorts of things that the public has no right to know. Sound good to you?

    (You really didn’t expect unilateral concessions, did you?)

    1. No, we’re not starving either. Sean has to make financial reports as a public official.

      My household income is under $150 K.

      How about yours Greg?

  16. “That simply is not true. If you request to speak during a public hearing, which is exactly what the Housing Opportunity Ordinance was, you must be allowed to speak.”

    You are correct about that Mill – but the procedure is not spelled out like that on the speaker cards. The occupy crowd would not be aware that they could speak on 2 different agenda items if one of those was a public hearing.

  17. Oh, Art — I don’t play Calvinball on other people’s home fields. If you want to spill secrets, I’ll choose the secrets that I will propose we agree to spill.

    I really wish you wouldn’t do that sort of thing, though, because now I really do have to go to OJB and post an invitation for people to ask what information from you and Sean you would like to see divulged. That will probably have a hilarious comments section, mostly at your and Sean’s expense. We might even lure Stanislaw back for this one — a risk I’m willing to take.

    Meanwhile, I am still awaiting your explanation for why you think it is OK to assert — not opine, not question, but assert — that I am wealthy without having the slightest apparent shred of proof. What sort of writer asserts facts about someone else without caring for proof? Who does that?

    That’s the subject at hand, Art.

    P.S. If you’re still moderating my comments because you’re afraid of my posting “that photo,” I promise that I won’t do so … here.

  18. [My income is a matter of fact, not of opinion. You made a factual assertion, you did not offer an opinion. Had it been defamatory — which this isn’t — you would not be able to hide behind its being an “opinion.”]….. Hmmmmm

    Denied on flowing grounds — poppycock.

    1. I think it is a lose-lose proposition for Greg. If he IS wealthy then he loses his street cred with his new artsy friends. If he is poor then he looks like an unsuccessful lawyer. Either way I guess I put him in a bad spot.

      But he could clear this up in a jiffy…

  19. Should add Esq. Diamond that an “income” must be defined in order to be factual the use of the word income is always an opinion.

    [West’s Encyclopedia of American Law:
    The gain derived from capital, from labor or effort, or both combined, including profit or gain through sale or conversion of capital. Income is not a gain accruing to capital or a growth in the value of the investment, but is a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property and being received or drawn by the recipient for separate use, benefit, and disposal. That which comes in or is received from any business, or investment of capital, without reference to outgoing expendi- tures.] Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/income#ixzz1dFvEh4i0

    FYI, Esq. Diamond, my specialty, acting as an attorney in propia persona, is to prosecute lawyers for their moronism.

  20. First of all, what do you define as wealthy?

    And second of all, I don’t see how it’s a lose lose. Obviously this LAWYER spends huges amounts of time doing pro bono and political work that he believes in, which would explain why he is not as wealthy as he could be if he wanted.

  21. Was this article written by a child? ‘ding dong’? Really? I haven’t heard that word used since the fifth grade. Perhaps the author should have been concerned with keeping their ignorance to themselves rather than posting it online for everyone to see.

    1. And yet another surly Occupier. Why are all of you always in such an awful mood?

      You guys blew it on Monday night – and yet NONE of you have apologized.

      Oh well, there may be other opportunities for you to matter in the future…

  22. I would still like to know why the mayor pro tem had a problem with it.

    The planning comm Mill spoke for it and voted for it in his capacity. The council did vote for it 6 to 1 right?

    The taxable income or personnel wealth of the Brea resident has nothing to do with the housing ord.

  23. So let the record show: Art says that he has me in a lose-lose situation — and then he resents that I won’t play his game. Art is odd.

    You didn’t “share” your annual household income, Art, you just said that it is under $150,000. That doesn’t say whether you’re at $149,999/year or on the verge of bankruptcy.

    And that’s fine: unless it’s part of a public record, it’s not the public’s business. You don’t seem to understand how offensive it is to demand private information from a private citizen just because you’re interested — and, in this case, to cover the fact that you recklessly and irresponsibly screwed up.

    I would think that your friends would set you straight.

    1. So I should have called you before I wrote about you – like you called me when you ripped me on the Orange Juice? Oh wait, you didn’t bother calling me did you? You are as big a hypocrite as your pals at the Lib OC.

      Sorry however that your law practice has not been more successful.

  24. “Art is odd.”

    Congratulations Greg – that makes you qualified for the “Understatement of the Year” award! If you are the final winner you receive a certificate and a ham sandwich.

  25. “Sorry however that your law practice has not been more successful”……. Hmmmmm

    What law practice?

    Admin, same as there is veterinary medicine there is also veterinary law whose clients are horses, dogs, chickens and liberals.

    They do not make as much as real lawyers.

  26. Art, you gay-baited someone. No discussion necessary. Unlike asking me about my income, do you think I should have called you up and said: “hey, about this gay-baiting, is this gay-baiting or what?”

    Do you have any basis at all on which to judge the success of my law practice? Or are you just making this up too? You may have talked to someone about it — but how would they know?

    You might want to talk to some wise friend about the meaning and implications of the following phrase: “with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”

    1. So what is it? Are you successful or not? You complain when I write that you’re wealthy then you freak out when I feel bad that your law practice is not successful. So which is it Greg?

      The guy I wrote about voted against including gay history in school textbooks. Did you know that? And he solicited endorsements from Prop. 8 supporters. But he is unmarried and doesn’t appear to have a girlfriend. What’s up with that Greg? Can you explain that?

  27. [You might want to talk to some wise friend about the meaning and implications of the following phrase: “with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”]…. Hmmmmm

    If I would be Art I would ban you forum this forum based on your wanton, willful and capricious violation of the rules of this forum with the actual malice.

    Art do you want to continue in this set up crapola by Diamond?

  28. Bob Emerald, I don’t know who you are, or why you think you think you know what schools my kids attend, but I am going to ignore you. Cheers.

    Art, you seem not to understand or care for personal privacy and dignity at all — except, perhaps, where you are concerned. I’ll bear that in mind.

    I did some research on your assertions against the person in question. “Voted against including gay history in school textbooks” — looks to me like you’re leaving out some context. Did he vote against particular available textbooks on the grounds that they included gay history?

    “He solicited endorsements from Prop. 8 supporters.” Wow. Welcome to politics, Art. Do you think that one only seeks endorsements from those with whom completely agrees? Do you think that your Santa Ana political favorites could (or would want to) pass judgment by such a standard? Want to find out? But wait — if they did so, does that make them hypocrites, or does it actually make them gay?

    “He is unmarried and doesn’t appear to have a girlfriend. What’s up with that Greg? Can you explain that?”

    And there we go. That’s you being you, the Drudge wannabe of OC. So long, Art. Keep reading OJB, Art, but don’t call Vern crying about what you see.

    1. So you’re ok with politicians who are anti-gay and who hang out with gay bashers, even if they might be closeted gays themselves? Wow. I think such politicians are completely reprehensible.

      And you won’t find someone more supportive of gay rights than me. I fully support gay marriage, gay adoption, etc. I don’t however support hypocrites.

  29. So it took Greg a half hour to respond to this critisism, But five days, no TEN days to respond to Dan’s JEW baiting comment.

    Greg, You are either extremely lucky or another Liberal OC LIAR……..

    You expect ANYONE TO BELIEVE that you did not see or read any of the thirteen posts calling you out for your silence on Dan Chmileiwinski’s JEW bashing,but you type a 220+ response in tirty minutes here.

    Thats BULLSHIT, You like your crony Dan and Chris are seeds (like seeds from Monsanto) engineered to help you, not the common good you pretend.


    Another LOC LIAR.

  30. “the guy I wrote about voted against including gay history in school textbooks. Did you know that? And he solicited endorsements from Prop. 8 supporters. But he is unmarried and doesn’t appear to have a girlfriend. What’s up with that Greg? Can you explain that?”

    Yet admin’s own wife was for Prop 8 and his friend Sean Mill is unmarked and doesn’t appear to have a girlfriend either. Can you explain that admin?

    1. Yet I had a No on 8 sign on my lawn that year – I may not be able to change my wife’s mind but I did what I could to defeat that awful measure.

      As for Sean, I can attest that he has no problems with the ladies. He definitely enjoys being single.

  31. So I am just catching up here.

    Is Jordan Brandman gay?

    I don’t know, I don’t care, but I think it’s a fair question, considering he is on a school board and has no kids.

    I don’t think Rob Richard is gay (looks can be decieving!) but, I have long railed on about childless politico’s who are upward mobile serving on school boards.

    So I think someone should flat ask out Jordan if he is Homosexcual.

    End Of Story. Yes or No.

    1. Richardson got married recently.

      As for Brandman, if he is gay it would be great for him to come out. He could be a real role model to young people struggling with their sexuality, particularly as he is a School Board Trustee. But if he comes out, will his gay-bashing Republican friends still invite him to their parties?

  32. Rob’s been married to Vivian for a long time, at least I think he’s still married, back in the nineties my kids went to St. Joe’s and we often saw him pandering for council votes with her there.

    I am pretty sure they started a CFM chapter there.

    I think it’s gross that despite having no kids he runs roughshod over a dysfuntional district.

    If he is gay, Brandman should run with it, but thats his choice as to whether he wants to admit it. But, it’s a fair question. Someone should ask.

    The thing is, nobody’s going to ask that question. Certainly not the LOC, which is truly ironic.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Verified by MonsterInsights