Many residents can’t figure out why the Orange County sheriff’s deputies union is opposing Rossmoor’s push for cityhood. Others say the union has an ax to grind.

October 21, 2008

When it comes to ‘conspiracy theories’, count me in. I just wouldn’t have expected to find one in the unincorporated, quiet little bedroom community of Rossmoor.

But there’s a good one brewing in the enclave of roughly 10,500 people nestled between Seal Beach and Los Alamitos, where voters will decide in two weeks whether to become a city.

An apparently sizable number of locals favoring cityhood wonder why the union representing the Orange County Sheriff’s Department is so actively opposing them. Why did the association pay for a telephone survey of residents a few months ago and why has it continued to pay for mailers and signs and phone banks urging residents to vote against Measure U on Nov. 4 ?

Isn’t it obvious? The association opposes cityhood because that might end Rossmoor’s reliance on the Sheriff’s Department for patrolling the community. Once it attains cityhood, Rossmoor might decide to join with Seal Beach or Los Alamitos or create its own police force.

Ah, if it were that simple, we wouldn’t have a conspiracy theory.

Pro-incorporation leaders are convinced that the deputies association opposes them as part of a vendetta against Board of Supervisors Chairman John Moorlach, in whose district Rossmoor lies and who has led the fight to rein in the costs of deputies’ pensions.

As the theory goes, whatever the union can do to upset Moorlach, it will do. The theory extends to the rest of the board, a majority of which apparently favors incorporation, as well.

Eric Christensen is co-chairman of the Rossmoor pro-cityhood group and a corporate attorney. He says the deputy association’s dislike of Moorlach and the other supervisors is the only motive that makes sense.

“The union, in my belief, is using us as a pawn in the fight against the board,” Christensen says.

Association president Wayne Quint dismisses that accusation, saying the union has gotten involved several times in the last decade in annexations, incorporation and taxation issues. In Rossmoor’s case, residents will have to approve a utility tax as a condition for cityhood. The ballot will offer either a 7% or 9% option.

“I don’t see this tax being enough to enhance or improve public safety,” Quint says, “and that’s why we oppose it.”

Why not let Rossmoor voters worry about that? Why is that a political issue for deputies? Especially when Quint concedes he’s not saying that Rossmoor will be less safe if it incorporates, only that it won’t be safer.

I couldn’t get Quint to say in simple language that he’s simply worried about losing a steady gig for his members in Rossmoor.

That’s why Christensen thinks Quint is taking out his pique at the supervisors (and especially Moorlach) on Rossmoor. He says Quint knows that Rossmoor leaders on both sides of the cityhood issue have crunched numbers and retaining the Sheriff’s Department as the community’s law enforcement agency makes the most fiscal sense.

So, what’s the union’s beef?

Simple, says Christensen it’s “The vendetta theory”.

The utility tax, while necessary for Rossmoor’s viability as a new city, would be one of several revenue sources. And when Quint says, “We believe to tax someone 7% or 9%, you should see a significant improvement in public safety,” I roll my eyes a bit at his concern over how Rossmoor spends its money.

But is this really about Quint vs. Moorlach? Can I buy that theory?

Not completely, but Christensen knows how to make an argument.

“I know for a fact it’s not about public safety,” he says, “because I know for a fact we’ll be a safer” as a city.

The vendetta theory is the only thing that makes sense, he says. “It’s completely illogical that the deputy sheriffs would not support us incorporating and contracting with them on a full-time contract basis. So the only thing I can assume is this relates in some way with the battle with the board, and the union is thinking somewhere in its mind that if they stick it to the board, it can only help them.”

I asked Moorlach for his take. Talk about your party-poopers: He doubts that Quint’s motive is to sock it to either him or his fellow supervisors. Rather, Moorlach says, association officials are “basically trying to preserve their jobs. That’s what I would conclude. [Quint] is doing what a union head would do.”

That might end things, except for a potentially ironic final act.

The union’s involvement has already alienated some in the community who might be on the first City Council if residents vote for cityhood. Christensen, who says he won’t be a candidate, says, “Nobody in Rossmoor was thinking about using anybody but the Sheriff’s Department on this. Until, of course, the union started funding all of this.”

Dana Parsons’ column appears Tuesdays and Fridays. He can be reached at (714) 966-7821 or at dana.parsons@latimes.com. An archive of his recent columns is at latimes.com/parsons.

A YES on Measure “U” is a ‘win win’ for a Rossmoor City, the OC Deputy Sheriffs, & the B of S of Orange County. Please remove your biased NO lawn signs; read our campaign literature; see the DVD; and, rejoin the YES on “U”.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/orange/la-me-parsons21-2008oct21,0,6692863.column

From the Los Angeles Times

Enviable Measure J Long Beach Press Telegram Article Launched: 10/15/2008 09:49:01 PM PDT

Orange County voters have an enviable opportunity on the ballots Nov. 4 called Measure J. At only 24 words, it is the briefest of the many propositions, and there are no ballot arguments against it. How could there be? This proposition simply says that future increases in retirement benefits for county employees and county officials will have to be approved by voters. Who would possibly disagree? We know who, of course, but they aren’t about to come out against Measure J publicly. That’s because the only reason to oppose it is because it’s a whole lot easier to buy off elected officials in exchange for pension spiffs than to persuade voters. That’s how public-employee pensions in Orange County, as elsewhere, got pumped up to as high as 90 percent of salary after only 30 years of service. Can you imagine voters ever approving a plan like that?

It’s a pity that Measure J comes along after the lavish taxpayer-financed pensions already are in place, and by law can’t be undone. But it establishes a principle, and at the very least there won’t be any more pensions’ spiffs in Orange County unless voters want them. It’s a pity also that voters in L.A. County and elsewhere don’t have a similar opportunity. Taxpayers gradually are becoming more aware that public-employee pensions and retiree health benefits are a huge financial liability. Orange County Board of Supervisors Chairman John Moorlach co-authored the ballot argument in favor of Measure J and for all practical purposes is the author of the measure itself. He points out that Orange County’s pension and retiree health liabilities are $3 billion, and the county’s pension plan is only 73 percent funded. As he says, this is a debt owed by all county taxpayers.

The same burden weighs on other cities and counties and the state as well. A few places, like Long Beach, are better funded than Orange County, but there is only one real exception, which is San Francisco. And that is because in San Francisco, voters have the right to approve or reject all pension increases. It is late in coming, but Orange County voters deserve to have that right, too. On Nov. 4, they can give it to themselves by approving Measure J. Voters everywhere should be so lucky.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So there is a link between the OC measures “J” & “U”!    Vote YES on both!   We in Rossmoor do not have a quarrel with the Orange County Sheriff or the Deputy Sheriffs’. As the 35^th newest Orange County ‘Contract City’, through the contract bid process, our new Councilman will very likely look with favor toward the 50+ years relationship we’ve established with the OC Sheriffs and likely contract for the RCSD’s planned-for-expanded policing services.

A YES on Measure “U” is a ‘win win’ for a Rossmoor City, the OC Deputy Sheriffs, & the B of S of Orange County. Please remove your biased NO lawn signs; read our campaign literature; see the DVD; and, rejoin the YES on “U”.

Vote Yes on U

Dear Neighbor,

The goal of Measure U is to enable all of us as citizens of Rossmoor to take control of our future and preserve our quality of life and property values. We are dedicated to the premise that local government is the most efficient and economic way to do that. We recognize that a utility tax has been imposed as a condition of getting Measure U on the ballot but we believe that $16 per month is a small price to pay to preserve and enhance our quality of life. Moreover, we believe that it can be reduced or eliminated over time, as the conservative Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis (CFA) required a $400,000 contingency and very generous surplus over $900,000/year.

· RISK: The major risk for Rossmoor is remaining dependent on Orange County, which was bankrupt in 1994 and is facing fiscal insolvency again with over $2 billion in unfunded employee pension increases.  State law protects city revenues from being raided by the state, but nothing protects us from County cuts. Cityhood is a low risk choice!

· YES we can stay the same. But an independent Rossmoor will be a temporary condition, since we will remain in the Los Alamitos Sphere of Influence in preparation for future annexation. Ultimately, we will either be annexed and pay even higher utility tax rates or be forced to pay added assessments to cover current and future expenses. Don’t be fooled by the opponents’ fictions. They are living in a make-believe world – the world they would like to exist in, not the one you and we are living in.

· POLICE RESPONSIVENESS: Sheriff Hutchens acknowledges the deputies designated to Rossmoor are here only 55% of the time.  That is not 24/7 coverage no matter what fiction the Deputies’ Union Leaders write. When the police car is in Sunset Beach or Stanton, it is 1-15 minutes away. SHERIFF HUTCHENS CONFIRMS: THE ONLY WAY WE GET TRUE DEDICATED COVERAGE IS BY BECOMING A CITY.

· NEW TAX: The opponents’ claim of a $1,000 utility tax bill is pure fiction. We challenge them to find a home with a gas/water/electricity bill of $1,000/month. The average utility bill in Rossmoor is about $250/ month and a UUT of only $16 per month.

· SERVICES: The County has said it can and will reduce all non-safety related services if we remain unincorporated. The best case scenario is that we are allowed to pay additional fees/assessments to maintain the current level of services. The statement that the County can be forced to maintain the current level of services is pure fiction and wishful thinking.

· NO PLAN: This is absolute fiction and simply shows the opponents have not read the CFA. The plan was used in the CFA and is summarized in the CFA.  The opponents’ claims of inaccuracy in staffing and financial models are completely unsupported and false.

· COST: A new City will not cost more than the RCSD and the County combined currently cost us for the services that will be provided by the single City of Rossmoor. The opponents fail to acknowledge that the City of Rossmoor will assume all the functions now provided by the RCSD and the County.

Most importantly, Rossmoor will control costs, not the County, and we can decide what we want and what we don’t want.

· COST: The $31,000 listed in the CFA for the City Council includes all costs associated with City Council business that includes supplies, memberships, travel and payment of council members. Six of the eight City Council candidates have publicly stated they will limit their “pay” to no more than $100/meeting, just as the RCSD directors now receive, for a total of $6,000 for 12 meetings of the full council per year.

THE OPPOSITIONS’ ASSERTION THAT THIS IS CITY COUNCIL PAY IS A FALSE SCARE TACTIC!

· COST: Rossmoor will not be Los Alamitos. The city of Rossmoor will be a full service contract city like Lakewood and every new city in the state. The RCSD by law provides parks and recreation services and performs limited other functions; they have no jurisdiction or authority to control the many other vital municipal services provided by the county.

· COST: The UUT tax rate cannot rise without an additional separate vote of the people and no serious unbiased person has suggested it will be necessary. The opponents are tricking you. While tax revenues will increase as total expenditure amounts increase – just as property tax revenues will increase as homes are rebuilt or sold – utility tax rates cannot be raised without voter approval.

· VOTING FOR CITYHOOD IS THE ONLY WAY TO KEEP ROSSMOOR THE WAY IT IS NOW.

It provides local control of our tax dollars and gives maximum protection to our way of life and our property values. The alternative is to prostrate ourselves to the whims of the County Red Tape.

Voting against Cityhood is A VOTE TO BECOME LOS

ALAMITOS.

The opponents falsely claim that Rossmoor will have no safety net. But their safety net is relying, hat-in-hand, on a County struggling with over $2 billion in unfunded pensions. Let’s make Rossmoor into the model small city it can be and not continue to be underserved, underrepresented and misgoverned by the county bureaucracy!!!!!

DO YOU REALLY WANT TO VOTE NO ON

CITYHOOD LEAVE ROSSMOOR AT THE MERCY OF

THE COUNTY OR BECOME PART OF LOS

ALAMITOS ?!?!

Information Source:  Committee for Rossmoor Incorporation Now! 10/24/08

*Pro-Side Article*

REVENUES AND EXPENSES FOR CITY OF ROSSMOOR

REVENUES

Property Taxes $1,261,259

Vehicle License Fees 935,202

Utility Taxes (7%) 842,023

Community Development Fees 677,365

Sales Taxes (&Prop. Tax in Lieu) 385,313

Other (St. Light’g,

Franchise Fees, etc.) 825,358

Total $4,926,520

EXPENSES

City Government $887,994

Community Development 876,870

Parks,Facilities,Trees 351,181

Recreation Services 125,399

Animal Control 66,089

Law Enforcement 1,458,955

Transfer to Road Fund 274,315

Street Lighting 84,556

County Repayment 47,395

Total $4,172,753

*Pro-Side Article*

>>>> Concerning your understanding of Measure “U”- for Rossmoor Cityhood <<<<

We on the YES side encourage all of you, who are displaying NO signs, to also GET THE TRUTH “concerning OC services” directly from Supervisor John Moorlach’s Office yourself by Email.

>> The following are two responses from his office to a fellow Rossmoor resident’s request! <<

From: Candy Marshall, Rossmoor resident

Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 6:47 AM
To: Moorlach, John, Chairman, OC Board of Supervisors

Subject: Can you help me educate Rossmoor

Good morning John,

Not sure it you remember me, we meant when I was chairing Rossmoor’s 50^th anniversary parade.

I am voting Yes on U. Many of my friends and neighbors are asking me for proof that that the county is running a deficit for expenses in Rossmoor. If this is true, what are the options if we do not incorporate?

Many Rossmoorians believe that everything will stay exactly as it is today with no changes what so ever if we do not incorporate. It would be very helpful, if you can tell me the facts as you know them, and what happens without incorporation? Kindest regards, Candy Marshall

From: Moorlach, John [mailto:John.Moorlach@ocgov.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 6:02 PM
To: Candy Marshall, Rossmoor resident
Subject: RE: Can you help me educate Rossmoor

Candy,

Let’s just look at one expenditure facing the County — ‘pension and retiree medical costs’ — that would not be facing a fresh, new City of Rossmoor.

The County’s retirement system may have lost up to 25 percent in value the last 12 months (which is the case for CalPERS).  This means our annual contribution of $306 million to our pension fund is destined to increase significantly.  And our retiree medical contribution of $26 million is also going to rise.  Where will the additional funds come from?  We’ll have to cut back in almost every area.

A City of Rossmoor would have no unfunded liabilities to pay.  Therefore, fresh start without the legacy costs.  It’s like starting a new auto company over buying General Motors. This could be the best time for Rossmoor to incorporate in history, from this perspective alone. I hope that helps. John

____________________________________________________________________________________________

From: Francis, Rick [mailto:Rick.Francis@ocgov.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 4:26 PM
To: Candy Marshall, Rossmoor resident
Cc: Moorlach, John
Subject: RE: Can you help me educate Rossmoor

Candy,

The Supervisor asked me to respond to your email. I addressed some of the budget issues the County is facing last night at the RCSD Board Meeting. If you have access to that, I spoke right after Lt. Gallivan from OCSD. In a nutshell, given the dire condition the State is in, there is still not a crystal clear picture of how the County will be impacted. What we know for certain is that due to flattened sales tax revenues, the Sheriff’s Department will undoubtedly ask for additional general fund dollars before this current fiscal year ends. About half of their $700 million budget comes from the sales tax revenues. Once they ask for additional general fund dollars, which they will likely receive because “their core mission is public safety”, all other municipal services will be impacted. This may occur mid-year at the earliest (which is January in our fiscal year).

In addition to that, the County depends heavily upon property tax revenues to fund general operations. With the housing market in the shape it is in, we will see a flattening in those revenues. It would be interesting to see how Rossmoor is faring in comparison to the rest of the county in terms of home values. If it is doing better than most areas, incorporation might really make sense.

For sure, the landscape of our budget will change dramatically at the start of the next fiscal year in July 2009. What that means for Rossmoor, and all other unincorporated islands, is that “non-essential services” like — animal control; street sweeping; non-urgent code enforcement; non-urgent road maintenance and non-urgent tree trimming will all be subject to substantial reductions. We believe it is not a matter of “if” but “when” this will occur. Hope that helps… Rick Francis

Deputy Chief of Staff, Office of John M.W. Moorlach, Chairman, Orange County Board of Supervisors (714) 834-3220 Office (714) 834-6109 Fax

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

——- Candy Marshall, writes ——-

The No’s really need to get informed, that things are changing, and this is Rossmoor’s opportunity to get out! It now makes sense why the OC Sheriffs Union is funding No on “U”, they need our money, to fund their pensions. I encourage everyone to email your questions directly to our Supervisor, Mr. Moorlach.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

—— Ray LeCompte, Rossmoor Resident, Thursday, October 16^th, 2008, writes ——-

Thanks Cindy. This is the TRUTH TRUMP card we’ve really been looking for — Re: the ‘NO’ lawn signs!

We the people, whether leaning toward NO, YES, or NOT SURE, need the unabashed factual truth told to us in order to make a correct vote on Measure “U” + a UTT of 7% or 9%.   The lack of revenue to pay beyond “Core Mission Public Safety” – for Orange County – means that money for the few RCSD ‘non-essential’ SERVICES now being paid to Rossmoor by Orange County — will most definitely be withheld or cutback. {so says R.F., Deputy Chief of Staff for J.M.}

The Deputy Sheriffs Union “Issues Committee” in point of fact has NO ISSUE directly with the Measure “U” outcome on the Cityhood of Rossmoor, per se!    Given the revelations just admitted to in the Emails by the OC B of S, namely John Moorlach’s office, together with the OC Measure “J” Editorial in the Press Telegram today —- apparently, their quarrel has all along been with the fiduciary direction John Moorlach has taken as member of the OC B of S —- specifically in respect to OC pension and retiree health liabilities. One only need read the 10/16/08 Press Telegram Editorial to see the wisdom of a Yes vote on Chairman John Moorlach’s – Nov 4^th – Measure “J” — approved by the Orange County Board of Supervisors.

______________________________________________________________

To Vote Yes on U for Rossmoor to become a city, check your sample ballots that you received in the mail.

Mark     Y   on Measure U

Mark    Y  for the 7% UUT (utility users tax)

Mark    Y  for the 9% UUT (utility users tax)

Sincerely,

Emily S. Knell

Main Street Realtors

562-430-3053 – emilyknell1@yahoo.com

*Pro-Side Article*

Resident’s Q’s & A’s

The following are our answers to the questions raised at the OC LAFCO Townhall on March 12th:  add the attached LAFCO Incorporation Workshop.

LAFCO INCORPORATION WORKSHOP
RPC’s RESPONSES TO ISSUES RAISED
March 16, 2008

The following issues were raised by opponents of incorporation at LAFCO’s Incorporation Workshop on March 12, 2008.  Many of the issues and concerns we feel were based on incomplete or inaccurate information.  For the benefit of our neighbors, we have set forth below each issue our responses to each issue.

Ques:  If Rossmoor City suffers a catastrophic loss, how does it recover?  Won’t the homeowners simply be required to pay the bill?

Response: This question reflects misunderstanding of how cities work.  There are many similar cities in Southern California that are smaller than Rossmoor with less sales tax revenue.  Cities join under umbrella insurance policies spreading the risk of large liability lawsuits so no individual city suffers.  These insurance costs were built into the CFA.  For natural disasters, no small or even medium size cities build reserves for such disasters (earthquake, terrorist attack, etc.) which are largely covered by Federal and State aid.

Information Source:  www.rossmoorcity.org

Sincerely,

Emily S. Knell

Main Street Realtors

562-430-3053 – emilyknell1@yahoo.com

*Pro-Side Article*

Resident’s Q’s & A’s

The following are our answers to the questions raised at the OC LAFCO Townhall on March 12th:  add the attached LAFCO Incorporation Workshop.

LAFCO INCORPORATION WORKSHOP
RPC’s RESPONSES TO ISSUES RAISED
March 16, 2008

The following issues were raised by opponents of incorporation at LAFCO’s Incorporation Workshop on March 12, 2008.  Many of the issues and concerns we feel were based on incomplete or inaccurate information.  For the benefit of our neighbors, we have set forth below each issue our responses to each issue.

Ques: We are incorporating for a single issue, law enforcement, which is fine anyway.

Response: Several commentators mentioned that the only reason proponents wanted to incorporate was to improve law enforcement, which they felt was just fine the way it was.  There are many advantages to incorporation, including better code enforcement, planning, animal control and of course law enforcement.  And law enforcement and traffic enforcement in Rossmoor are still significantly worse than our neighboring cities.  That is because our sheriff patrol also must cover Sunset Beach and because the CHP, with limited resources, has the primary authority for traffic enforcement in Rossmoor.  The latest figures from the Sheriff show an average response time for Priority One calls in 2007 (a total of 18 Priority 1 calls) of 7 minutes, 32 seconds, including four burglaries in process that took 10 minutes, 18 seconds; twelve minutes, 58 seconds; 13 minutes, 20 seconds; and 18 minutes, 47 seconds to respond.

Information Source:  www.rossmoorcity.org

Sincerely,

Emily S. Knell

Main Street Realtors

562-430-3053 – emilyknell1@yahoo.com

]]> http://emilyknell.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/residents-faqs-law-enforcement/feed/ 0 emilyknell http://emilyknell.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/residents-faqs-if-it-aint-broke-dont-fix-it/ http://emilyknell.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/residents-faqs-if-it-aint-broke-dont-fix-it/#comments Wed, 15 Oct 2008 01:11:50 +0000 emilyknell http://emilyknell.wordpress.com/?p=110 ]]>

*Pro-Side Article*

Resident’s Q’s & A’s

The following are our answers to the questions raised at the OC LAFCO Townhall on March 12th:  add the attached LAFCO Incorporation Workshop.

LAFCO INCORPORATION WORKSHOP
RPC’s RESPONSES TO ISSUES RAISED
March 16, 2008

The following issues were raised by opponents of incorporation at LAFCO’s Incorporation Workshop on March 12, 2008.  Many of the issues and concerns we feel were based on incomplete or inaccurate information.  For the benefit of our neighbors, we have set forth below each issue our responses to each issue.

Ques:  Why do we want more bureaucracy?

Response: This is often heard criticism of cityhood is completely misinformed.  A city brings government decisions closer to the resident.  It replaces an existing governmental entity (the RCSD) and eliminates the County bureaucracy (a much larger, more remote governmental agency as a municipal services provider), so the net is a significant reduction in bureaucracy.
Action(s): Education.  Address on the website and in news articles.

Ques: “If it aint broke, don’t fix it.”

Response: Another often heard criticism, based upon incomplete knowledge of the facts.  Rossmoor is a great place to live but is not perfect.  But, we currently are not getting the level or quality of services we are paying for.  We believe that Rossmoor is a great place to live and the best way to protect it is to make it a city and control our future.

Information Source:  www.rossmoorcity.org

Sincerely,

Emily S. Knell

Main Street Realtors

562-430-3053 – emilyknell1@yahoo.com

*Pro-Side Article*

Resident’s Q’s & A’s

The following are our answers to the questions raised at the OC LAFCO Townhall on March 12th:  add the attached LAFCO Incorporation Workshop.

LAFCO INCORPORATION WORKSHOP
RPC’s RESPONSES TO ISSUES RAISED
March 16, 2008

The following issues were raised by opponents of incorporation at LAFCO’s Incorporation Workshop on March 12, 2008.  Many of the issues and concerns we feel were based on incomplete or inaccurate information.  For the benefit of our neighbors, we have set forth below each issue our responses to each issue.

Ques: 7% UUT at $16 per household per month understated.

Response: The amount of Utility Tax per household at 7% depends on each household’s unique factors, including number of residents, square footage, pool or hot tub, and other individual uses of electricity, gas and water. We will conduct studies to determine what the impact would be under various scenarios.

Ques:  UUT will drive people (particularly long term residents on fixed income) out.

Response: This is a difficult issue.  As a general rule, the utility bills for homes without children are smaller.  And given Rossmoor’s upper middle class community, it is hard to believe that an additional $10 to $30 per month (roughly the cost of 3 to 8 gallons of gas) would drive people out of the community.

Information Source:  www.rossmoorcity.org

Sincerely,

Emily S. Knell

Main Street Realtors

562-430-3053 – emilyknell1@yahoo.com