Mission Viejo City Council Didn't Break the Law--This Time

I went to the most recent Mission Viejo City Council Meeting a few days ago to see if they would violate the law. They didn’t. I wasn’t expecting them to. I’ve included some of my notes for you to take a look at (see photos).

Some people in town actually expected the council to violate the law; they seemed totally unaware that bus pulled out of the depot about four decades ago. One of the local blogs had been stirred vigorously until a small handful of people were upset. They were what my grandmother used to call “hopping mad.” The English refer to it as “barking mad.”

The barking mad folks had been led there on a leash by Gail Reavis. Ms. Reavis was on the city council when they voted to “stick it to the man” and not adhere to the state’s mandatory housing requirements. That particularly stupid legal advice came from Brad Morton, an attorney, who was a planning commissioner at the time. Morton sent internal emails suggesting Mission Viejo get sounding communities to take on our low-income housing requirements. He and his group, which include and , Ms. Reavis, and others, have always been opposed to “low-income” housing. At a recent city council meeting Council Member Schlicht said, “We don’t actually have to build that sort of housing. We just have to create the availability for it to be built.” After a few people pointed out the devious callousness of Schlicht’s comment the group changed their tune to “we’re not opposed to low-income or apartments. We object to density.” Will anyone who can’t spot the disingenuousness of that statement please move out of town?

After the council voted to violate the law a few years ago, Mission Viejo was immediately sued and fined; two parcels of land that had not been considered for low-income housing were put into the pool as a part of that lawsuit. That particular council vote made the situation worse for Mission Viejo and put the city on the state’s watch list. Ms. Reavis was also responsible for slanderous comments against the city manager which resulted in a lawsuit and a payout of over a half million dollars to the city manager. Ms. Reavis also filed a lawsuit against the city while she was on the council for $10,020,000; an odd number that was probably her attorney’s way of sending a signal to the judge about the suit’s validity, since it was spelled out in the terms of the suit that the attorney for Ms. Reavis was only charging $20,000 for his efforts on her behalf.

was fully aware of the history behind this issue. So he asked both Council Members Reardon and Schlicht what specifically they objected to in filing their appeal. It took them both quite a while to answer what was a perfectly reasonable and easily expected question. Schlicht finally resorted to “the audience asked for it.” Reardon mumbled something about “density.” 

It was sad to watch so many people vilify renters. The usual “those people” statements were spoken without much thought. To hear them talk, renters live five families to a bedroom, exist solely on crime and dope deals, and the real trouble starts “when those people get bored.” Worst of all was the total ignorance about current trends, and the fact that we’re no longer living in 1958. Young professionals tend to keep a job for five or less years. They move up or down, but if you’re somewhere more than five years these days you’re seen as someone who is going nowhere. Therefore, upscale apartment complexes, like the one that was being discussed, are highly desirable.

“I’m really sorry, Bob, but you’re now obsolete.”

The recent economy is a huge factor in people’s housing choices these days. When the economy tanks and you have a mortgage, you can’t downsize quickly. If you lose your job, like millions did, you go through your savings, and then you lose the house.

One-third of this country’s unemployed have been without work for more than one year. Twenty percent of them have college degrees. The majority of them are between the ages of 40 and 69.

Most have spent their retirement funds, sold their homes, and hope their job application at the local Target store gets smiled upon so they can move into a better apartment complex. Today’s computers can do anything if you give them specific step-by-step instructions. Consider that for a second; today’s computers can do most people’s jobs. They can do most people’s jobs far more quickly, efficiently, and reliably at a huge cost savings to the company. The layoffs and downsizing has only just started, folks.

According to the City Attorney

City governments need to take all these things into consideration. It’s not a case of “Big Brother.” The City Attorney made this very clear at the meeting. The state has said that cities have to adopt a general plan that includes a wide range of housing — single family, condos, apartment complexes — some of which must be low-income. He pointed out that the state grants latitude as far as how much a city needs to build and when it needs to be built, but he also pointed out that a compelling reason to seek that sort of latitude is not because “a bunch of people got mad.”

Currently to qualify for “low-income” in Mission Viejo you can make up to $73,000 a year. To qualify for “very low-income” you can make up to $43,000 a year. In the United States the median income is $46,326 a year. That means half of the employed families in the United States qualifies for “low-income” and they are only $3,000 away from “very-low income.” At least here in Orange County. In most states, with hard work and a tight budget, $46,000 will eventually lead to homeownership. So, according to Reavis, Reardon, Schlicht, and Morton, if they moved into an apartment in Mission Viejo they’d immediately not take pride in their environment, start selling dope, start partying wildly, and drive like manics up and down the city’s streets.

Courage, Class, Honor

did something I’ve never seen an elected official do; she admitted she had been one of the council that had voted that night which resulted in a lawsuit and fines. She talked about her reasoning in terms of “I wasn’t going to let Big Brother tell us what to do…” and from her tone it was clear she had very little regard for that sort of naïve radical law-breaking now. It was a stunning moment. One that took a lot of courage, class, and honor. We need a lot more people like Trish Kelley in government.

The other stunning moment was when 11-year-old Shelby Wong sat down at an upright piano and held the audience spellbound by her talent, beauty and grace. It’s rare to listen to a young person who can put so much emotion into her performance. It was absolutely wonderful and the entire evening would have been far more enlightening and well spent if the council had just dropped item #29 and let Ms. Wong play the piano for the five hours instead. I hope the council continues to showcase the amazing young talent in our community. It’s a positive affirmation!