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.
Tilly’s Life Center’s (TLC) recently raised over half a million dollars to support their youth…
On November 25, 2024, at approximately 1:46 PM, Fullerton Fire and Police personnel responded to…
OCFA fire crews responded to two significant vehicle accidents in Garden Grove last Friday, requiring…
On November 24th, 2024, at approximately 1:00 a.m. Newport Beach Fire Department units NE63, NT63,…
‼️UPDATE‼️ Earlier today, our robbery detectives arrested November 20, 2024, #WantedWednesday suspect Izaya Cuellar (35)…
Late Friday night, police officers responded to Balearic Park regarding a vehicle doing “donuts” on…
This website uses cookies.
View Comments
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.
"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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Wow. Now that they got punked you don't want to play anymore?
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?)
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?
"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.
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.
Why don't you just clear thongs up for us. What is your household income? It is a simple question and I already shared mine.
[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.
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...
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:
Income 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.