What’s Motivating Tait Council Majority Push To Oust City Manager?

Anaheim Insider here.

It’s unusual for a City Council to oust a City Manager, especially when the normal indicators of city government health are generally positive. Anaheim’s tax revenues are up, civic improvements are being funded and moving through the pipeline, the city’s convention and tourism economy continue growing, major economic investment is taking place. Other Orange County cities would kill to be in Anaheim’s shoes.

So why is Mayor Tom Tait pushing to fire City Manager Paul Emery? He got City Manager Tom Wood fired in 2011 with no explanation. Will he and his Council majority do that to Emery and the public?

One reason cited by numerous insiders is Emery won’t soft-pedal enforcement of the anti-camping ordinance. The ordinance is overwhelmingly supported by Anaheim residents, who desire more stringent enforcement, if anything.  Tait has always been a reluctant backer who has expressed support for non-enforcement of the anti-camping ordinance during cold weather so the homeless can camp in city parks. Tait’s close ally Councilman Jose F. Moreno has made no secret of his opposition to the anti-camping ordinance, either as a candidate or since his election to City Council. He stacked his homeless policy working group with homeless advocates who support repeal and subscribe to the radical view that the homeless have a constitutional right to sleep on public property.

At the June 20 City Council meeting, Mayor Tait spoke several times of his interest in creating city-sanctioned homeless encampments. He said he specifically wants the homeless policy working group to looking into it, and spoke approvingly of a plan by anti-camping ordinance opponent Nancy West’s “Al Fresco Gardens” plan for a city-sponsored homeless camp on the old Karcher property at Harbor and the 91 Freeway.

It’s becoming apparent the homeless working group is a Trojan Horse f0r accomplishing repeal of the anti-camping ordinance and building a network of city-sanctioned homeless camps around Anaheim like they have in Seattle. Having a compliant City Manager who was a creature of the Tait Majority would simplify things by making such policy changes seem staff instead of Council-driven. The Tait Majority doesn’t see Emery as their creature.

Another motive could be the quiet conflict-of-interest controversy surrounding District 1 Councilmember Denise Barnes. The California Fair Political Practices Commission fined Barnes for failing to disclose reportable income from companies owned by Disney Worldwide Services/ABC Inc.  A complaint has apparently been filed with the OC District Attorney and the state Attorney General claiming she therefore had a conflict of interest prohibiting her from voting on a number of Council items.

Anaheim resident Linda Barnett sent this letter to the city yesterday asking if the City will “nullify each of the council actions where Councilowman Denise Barnes participated illegally.” That would presumably require re-agendizing those votes. Since several were decided on a 4-3 vote, abstentions by Barnes would alter the outcomes.

The character and independence of the City Manager would weigh heavily on whether that happened. And the Tait Council Majority would rather not have those items brought back for a re-vote.

If Emery is terminated, it’s an open question if the public will ever be told why since the council vote will be taken in closed session. If it happens, the Mayor and his allies owe the public an explanation.

24 comments

  1. Stand For Anaheim

    Recall Tait, Barnes, Moreno and Vanderbilt. Goodness. 5 city managers since Tait took the reigns. What other staff/department heads have left since then? Hank Stern, Sheri VanderDussen, John Welter, Natalie Meeks, Marcie Edwards, Terry Lowe….who else? Wake up TAIT and Anaheim….this has GOT to stop!

  2. New South Wales

    Emery has been a target for firing ever since Tait got the less than 300 votes in two districts needed to win control of the city.

    I wonder why they chose July and not the very first City Council meeting? Does anyone know if Emery had some sort of severance agreement that Tait and his team were looking to screw him out of?

    Doesn’t the Orange County Department of Education now own the infamous “Karcher” property? I heard they were going to build a Continuation High School at that location.

    Moreno’s been all over the place on the whole Anti-Camping ordinance thing. He is on video at an October, 2016 candidate forum showing support for allowing homeless camping at the city’s parks. That was his famous “Shame on you, Jordan Brandman” speech. In that same speech, He accused Lucille Kring of having the dog park put in at La Palma park just to push out the homeless.

    He has recently told residents that he doesn’t support camping in the public parks and even posted such a message on Nextdoor.com. (That was the same message thread that included Cynthia Ward’s false accusation that posters in Anaheimblog threatened to kill her dogs.)

    The irony of that tiny dog park is that it is the only somewhat safe area in La Palma park that can be used daily by Anaheim’s 350,000+ taxpaying residents. This is because 50 to 60 transients have taken over every other open area in the park.

    Regarding the “Al Fresco Gardens” concept. I read up a little bit on it in a rival blog. That plan calls for taking up 3 1/2 acres of land to allow almost 500 homeless people to camp there. The city would need two of them. Are there two 3 1/2 acre empty plots of city owned land anywhere in Anaheim that aren’t within a 1/4 mile of a residential area? What business or commercial land owner would allow a near 500 homeless person homeless encampment to be set up next to them without filing an enormous lawsuit against the city? What non-profit organization would be willing to pay the city for use of such parcels of land to create these encampments? What insurance company would be willing to sell the policies necessary to cover every time the non-profit and city are sued by surviving family members whenever a homeless person dies by overdose or criminal activity on those plots of land.

    Nancy West is a well meaning person, but “Al Fresco Gardens” is nothing more than a pipe dream.

    Mike Robbins, on the other hand, will simply dismiss my questions and accuse me of acting like a Nazi SS Death Camp Guard because he believes in the “Law of Love”.

    • I don’t know about you but I’d rather have a place for homeless to live instead of camping in the parks, riverbed, railroad tracks…

      Be part of the solution by giving input at http://www.alfrescogardens.org/

    • New South Wales,
      I hope you took the time to read my other comment. I see you have a lot of unanswered question about Alfresco Gardens. I’m glad you looked into my plan, but It would benefit you to contact me for the answers as opposed to getting pseudo scoop from a “rival blog”. My research that has gone into Alfresco Gardens is all encompassing and, believe it or not, I can succinctly clarify most all of your concerns, including your as listed legal questions.
      Alfresco Gardens is a real estate plan, not a shelter, so liability is significantly lower than that of a shelter. Surviving family members cannot justifiably sue real estate entities for the death of someone arising from their own actions. Real estate liability makes Alfresco Gardens responsible for certain accidents as opposed to the liability of shelters, which deems facilities responsible for everything their clients do and everything that happens to them, including nutrition, medical care, and accidents. That is the second question answered in more detail here:

      https://www.facebook.com/TheNancyWestPlan/posts/437199436665502

      You’re saying “homeless people”, but occupants of Alfresco Gardens would not be “homeless people”.

      Alfresco Gardens’ security and regulation measures affords us with high likelihood of a well managed clean community.
      You have my card, so please don’t hesitate to contact me with questions. I’m happy to give you my time, and thank for looking into my plan.

      • Nancy,

        Your idea is interesting. Progressive and positive. It is far from a plan.

        But, how much study has been done on the feasability? Are you leaving that to taxpayer supported city employees?

        What is your background? Educational, professional experience? Why don’t you reach out to people with REAL LIFE experience in developing real estate?

        I am not oppossed to the “idea” you present, but again, there are a lot of holes, Does alfresco gardens allow drugs and alcohol? what about weapons, given that an estimated 70% of OC’s homeless are wanted by police, what about search and seizure rights.

        Maybe, Jose can help you with some of these issues.

        • Whoiscater,
          Why would you assume that all of those concerns haven’t already been addressed, and why would you assume there’s no research, experience, or expertise behind my plan? By your commentary it’s evident that you haven’t read page one of my report, or even visited the Alfresco Gardens Facebook page. With the chaos that’s going on today, it’s not wise to reject a largely supported and lauded plan for resolution without yourself being fully informed. If you’ll meet with me I’ll tell you everything you want to know about the plan, my background, and I’ll even answer questions about my research, connections, and what’s in the works. What do you say?

  3. This is totally unnecessary. Paul Emery is a professional. He is going to implement the will of the council, regardless of who is in the majority. That’s his job, and that’s what he’ll do. Why toss out a seasoned, experienced administrator who knows how to run Anaheim city government? It’s counterproductive.

    • Why toss out Emery? Because he was not compliant with the majority’s agenda. This is awful and the goings on need to be investigated, Somebody stop them. They are not doing the will of the people. Laugh now but the voters will gat a chance to speak again.

  4. Sounds like Tait is trying to find a way to silence city staff, by firing the City Manager. Tait is getting in way over his head.

    He should be criminally charged for trying to stop city staff from carrying out the law. Denise Barnes has illegally voted on issues, its pretty simple. I hope they both get indicted on the same day.

  5. Anaheim area resident

    What a waste of time as usual. We have SO many important issues they need to focus on. I’m sick of this!!!!

  6. “New South Wales” above queries are challenging and valid, but not insurmountable. What type businesses would want to be across the street for Alfresco Gardens, and what home owners want to be nearby, and where would the insurance to cover liability come from, etc.?

    There are types of businesses that shouldn’t have issue with nearby Alfresco Gardens, presuming homeless are “NOT” allowed to collect outside the walls, on sidewalks, across from buildings as they conduct commerce.

    I agree with your inference; most businesses wouldn’t like it though. However, as mature adults, we don’t always like what we must do when looking for equitable solution to our problems.
    Nancy West’s ideal of Alfresco Gardens has merit. Her webpage’s FAQ, presents reasonable answers for certain concerns, though untested. Given some rules, only certain types of homeless folks will see it as a safe place to live and be willing to adhere to rules.

    I hope I am wrong; but suspect the larger percentage of homeless won’t see its value. It is “that” segment of homeless people that present the greater problem for any community. They want that little independence that comes from living on the streets, doing what they want, when and where they want, and do not care how their behaviors affect those passing by.

    It could, however, be a partial answer. Just don’t see two such facilities equating to more than a finger in an overflowing dyke of Anaheim’s homeless problem; still, we MUST start somewhere, as there is NO perfect answer that will make all citizens and political party opponents happy.

    • Gary G,
      Thank you for your positive input, and for the time you’ve obviously taken to read up on Alfresco Gardens. I am always happy to provide information and fill in the blanks when it comes to AG, as there is so much to know about how it will work. Therefore I’d like to respond to your statement, “I hope I am wrong; but suspect the larger percentage won’t see its value.” I hope you’re wrong about that too because AG was designed with the service resistant in mind. The team and I have interviewed the worst cases of chronic homelessness, found in our years of advocating, some 20 years chronic, and every single case we interviewed and informed is absolutely willing to become a resident of AG. Some interviews were filmed and are on the AG Facebook page. Thank you for learning about AG so you could appreciate its value.

  7. Wow Anaheim Blog is full of missleading news what trump calls fake news, first of all the city mananger was not pushed out he resign on his own, Nancy West is not against the camping odinance, I am because the confiscation of peoples belongings is unconstitutional it infringes on the 4th amedment right which LA got sued for and had to paye $500,000 to the claimant, know that that will happen here in Anaheim if they don’t at least repeal the confiscation part. The dog park was build to get rid of the homeless as stated by Lucille Kring on one of the meetings, which didn’t deter the homeless from going to the main park, the stupidy of some people to think that the homeless are just going to disapear some of you might be next on the homeless list, homelessness sees no color or financial status, the campgrounds and shelters are there to give people a chance to get back on their feet, many homeless would prefer a structure as Alfresco Gardens which would cost less and it wouldn’t be free about $150 a month with just the esentials, we already have the homeless with us and leaving them in the streets will cost all of us millions of tax dollars as we had seen already and without any real resultes, at least with a structure like Alfresco Gardens it would help to keep the homeless out of the parks with their belongings and it could be a good place to getting them back on their feet, not all homeless people are criminals or drugies, all have had a misfurtune in their lifes speacially when the recession of 2007 happen, many lost their homes, business, jobs and many that lost their pentions in the market + many veterans that came back from Iraq lost everything while they were out fighting a usless war, many abused woman out there, most of you are so oblivous and believe whithout looking for the real facts of why we have a problem with homelesness, you all need to reevaluate your thinking. and if you can’t do that I have just waisted my time here. May God help us all.

  8. 1. It’s not a “homeless camp”, and I don’t call it a campground. No, it’s an outdoor living community. Beautiful, managed, landscaped, with security, security cameras, police access, visiting area, outreach services, etc.

    2. I’m not against the anti-camping ordinance. I just think it would make more sense when people have a place to go, and a place to put their things.

    Here’s more info on Alfresco Gardens:
    https://www.facebook.com/TheNancyWestPlan/posts/437199436665502
    You may contact me any time to learn about how Alfresco Gardens works to end homelessness for so many making our community a better place for businesses, homes, schools, etc. By the way, it can be downsized. It doesn’t have to be 3 acres.
    You’re right Gary, there would be no need and no one would be allowed to collect outside the walls. There is a structured area inside for visiting. Just like apartments, there would be nothing to gain by collecting outside the community walls. It’s not a shelter where people gather and wait to get in. Only paying occupants, staff, and police have accesS, and visitors have to sign in, so there should be extremely low NIMBY concerns.

  9. Hi Nancy –

    Thank you for responding to my questions. I am deeply concerned about the plight of the homeless and seek effective ways to help these people. I don’t believe your suggestion is workable.

    However, I also know that I am ignorant about a great many things regarding the homeless issue and am willing to learn more. Who knows, maybe you might be able to prove that your solution has merit.
    Regarding the question on insurance. I have conducted some research to see if any insurance providers would be willing to write a policy to cover your concept. The responses that I’m getting indicate that it would be very difficult for them to insure Al Fresco Gardens.

    You refer to Al Fresco Gardens as a “Real Estate Plan” or an “Outdoor Living Community” and not a shelter or a camp ground. You argue that this is why you only need to purchase “Real Estate” coverage. These descriptions of yours may help create a marketing differentiation between Al Fresco Gardens and what people perceive as homeless shelters and campgrounds, but it doesn’t work that way in the insurance industry.

    The insurance companies will define Al Fresco Gardens by what actually exists on that property and what services are provided by the organization. With the exception that you intend to charge for nightly stays, none of the information you’ve provided convinces me that Al Fresco Gardens is not a privately run homeless shelter.

    You mentioned that you consulted an attorney and it was suggested that you only need ‘Real Estate Insurance’ for your coverage. ‘Real Estate Insurance’ is an extremely vague term. My question is what type of ‘Real Estate’ insurance? Do you need ‘Property Owners’, ‘Landlord’ or some other form of commercial insurance? What type of coverage levels would you need? How about liability coverage?

    I suggest you seek a second opinion from a different attorney, especially if you intend to build such a facility on government owned land. I have learned that local governments allowing other organizations to have long-term usage of government owned land will require those other organizations to purchase specific types of policies with set minimum coverage levels. Those local governments also periodically reassess the levels and types of insurance coverage required to continue usage of that land.

    Also, don’t hope that a release of liability form will protect you from the illegal and harmful actions of your residents. Mental incapacity can be an argument to void that contract and mental illness runs rampant in the homeless populations.

    The issues around insurance and liability will destroy your dream if you can’t properly address them. I find the information on these items from your website and facebook page to be lacking.

  10. Local and state governments also don’t care about your marketing differentiation when deciding what ordinances apply to Al Fresco Gardens. That whole charging for nightly stays thing might require them to define you as a camp ground, short term rental, hostel, hotel or some other enterprise. Have you researched the ordinances, especially here in Anaheim, which legally define your project’s type of enterprise? Are you going to need to increase your nightly rental charge to account for Transient Occupancy Taxes? Are you expecting Anaheim to subsidize your enterprise?

    Speaking of the charging for a nightly stay deal, how are you going to make certain that you are actually attracting the homeless to stay at your facility? What safeguards will you have in place to prevent this facility from becoming a cheap place to stay for tourists visiting Disneyland and Southern California? Young European adults wishing to stretch their travel budgets find the idea of staying at campgrounds or hostels attractive.

  11. You talk of security and regulation measures that “will afford you the high likelihood of a well managed clean community.” So, let’s talk security and safety for a bit.
    You’ll have security cameras. Ok, who will be watching those camera monitors? What are their directives when they observe questionable activity? How many cameras do you think you’ll need? How are you going to overcome the blind spots? Just taking a quick look at your concept blue print reveals to me that the four somewhat open center areas between the trees will become large blind spots if your cameras are just on the perimeter storage sheds. The aisle walk ways may also be blind spots as a result of the all the tents and the trees that you have towards the far left and right sides of the facility.
    The security guards that you have on site. What will be their contracted level of service? Most security guards are hired to simply observe and report. If a fight or a rape happens, security guards at that service level won’t intervene. They’ll just call 911. Then again, they may pretend not to see anything if they deal with these assailants on a daily bases as part of their low wage job and believe their lives are in danger.
    Continuing on the whole security and safety thing, you have a facility with 8 foot high walls that are reinforced by storage sheds. This facility has one small entrance.
    That’s an ambush site for police officers attempting to make entry into your facility. Picture the following scenario:
    A 911 call is received of an individual with a gun inside your facility. A gun shot goes off and now you have an active shooter. The first four police officers arrive at your facility, grab their rifles, line up in a stick to attempt to make entry through the facility’s single opening. They are greeted by a rush of residents trying to exit.
    More gunshots go off. The block walls echo the shots, making it impossible for the police to determine the direction from which the shots are coming. The four officers try their best to quickly determine if any of the individuals coming at them are armed, but there are so many people.
    The police helicopter comes on scene and begins circling overhead. It can’t provide the necessary intelligence to find the gunman because of all of concealment from the tents and the chaos of the hundreds of residents trying to leave.
    Many more police arrive with their rifles and start trying to organize the fleeing residents so that the officers can confirm the gunman is not hiding within those groups. Unlike an active shooter scenario at an office building or school, many of your facility’s residents have had past encounters with the law. Wanting nothing to do with the police, they continue to flee.
    The efforts to create a controlled evacuation of the facility fall apart as the officers have to chase fleeing residents, not knowing if any of those residents are actually the gunman.
    Maybe a cop is shot because the gunman was hiding in one of the many tents or among the fleeing residents and noticed the cop looking the other direction at another group fleeing residents. Maybe a cop shoots and kills an unarmed resident because he thinks he saw the resident reach into his waistband. One thing you can count on is that at the end of this situation many of your residents will have been trampled to death during the chaos.
    You may not think that this is a likely scenario, but keep in mind that there are only about 900 homeless residents in all of Anaheim. Anaheim.net states that in 2016, there were just over 15,500 calls for service that dealt directly with homeless individuals.
    Your suggested Al Fresco Gardens design will house half of Anaheim’s homeless population, so that could result in more than 7,000 service calls a year being concentrated in and around your facility. That translates to 20 calls a day. Numbers like that make the scenario very likely.
    Another danger for this facility is the risk of fire. Mike Robbins accuses those that disagree with your design as taking the ‘Bergen-Belsen’ approach to resolving homelessness. Basically, he’s calling us Nazi’s that think the homeless ‘aren’t dying fast enough’. Actually, a major reason why I don’t support Al Fresco Gardens is that you’ve unintentionally designed a 500 person oven.
    The reason why a large number of people can be safely housed in close proximity with each other in a hotel is because the rooms are surrounded by firewalls. The fire walls prevent a fire’s spread for two hours, allowing time for residents to evacuate and the fire department to respond.
    The Kraemer Place shelter doesn’t separate its residents by firewalls, but they do have sprinklers that will knock down a fire.
    Al Fresco Gardens doesn’t incorporate any of those safety measures. The tents, blankets, clothing and personal belongings will fuel a fire that sweeps through the place.
    Your residents will have only one small entrance to escape. Like the police scenario, this will hamper the fire-fighters efforts to gain entry to the facility.
    If one of the residents trips and falls in that small entrance space, then the mob of residents following will trip over that individual. This will cause a large group of residents to pancake on top of one another and that one escape route quickly becomes blocked with a wall of people. Everyone still stuck inside dies. Do you remember the ‘80’s band ‘Great White’ and the Station Nightclub Fire? You’ll have that, but with far more than 100 deaths.
    Finally, you think you’ve address the NIMBY concerns. In reality, you haven’t. Your website states that you intend not to have a curfew allowing residents to come and go at any time. As mentioned above, you are attempting to house a large portion of the local homeless population at Al Fresco Gardens. This creates a consolidated market zone for illegal substance abuse and prostitution. It may not take place just outside of the walls of your facility, but the nearby parks, businesses areas and neighborhoods will be crawling with drug dealers and prostitutes and Al Fresco Gardens conducting illicit activity.

  12. I really didn’t have time to read all of your comments but I did read all the misconceptions you people have, first Gary G: What type businesses would want to be across the street for Alfresco Gardens, and what home owners want to be nearby. Well the homeless community are already across businesses and nearby home owners like the trails, streets and parks, so it makes perfect sense to have a structure like Alfresco Gardens that would have the essentials like bathrooms, showers, storage and security, unlike where there are now, let’s have some common sense here, am boots on the ground advocate who’s out there were there’s families, woman, and some that are runinig away from abusive homes, people with disabilities and some elderly people who are more in danger of becoming victims then you fearful home owners. All I have to say is stop misconceptions of all the homeless out there, their survivors who might help you if you ever become homeless yourselves. Remember homelessness doesn’t see color or financial status. One tragic misfortune and any you can become homeless from one day to another. May God have mercy on your souls.

  13. New South Wales,
    Thank you for your insight. I’m always glad to receive salient input and hear opinions. Please leave feedback at alfrescogardens.org.
    You say Alfresco Gardens is “far from a plan”. But Alfresco Gardens is exactly a plan. It’s an Action Plan.
    1. Mike Robins does not support my plan, has never spoken on behalf of Alfresco Gardens, and is not an AG representative. The person who commented is not Robins.
    2. You and I have briefly interfaced twice. Both times I asked you to meet with me. If you had, you’d know that my CONCEPT design and pictures are lacking details because they’re conceptual; basic descriptions, not blueprints. You’d also know that many parts of the plan, like the size, are adjustable. The developer I consult with advised against blueprints, architects, and engineers without a parcel. This part of the discussion is semantical. We are focused on a bigger picture.
    3. Alfresco Gardens is a month-to-month space rental, not a “nightly stay thing”, so that part is moot. The rest of the issues in your paragraph have already been worked out.
    4. I sounds like you’re saying 100% of homeless individuals are drug addicted dangerous criminals. Many are addicts and a lot of it results from homelessness. As a domestic violence advocate I can assure you that most of the homeless women are non violent domestic violence survivors. Did you know that in just one day 12,197 DV victims were refused service due to lack of accommodations?https://www.facebook.com/TheNancyWestPlan/posts/436543836731062:0
    The degree of crime you mentioned is far reaching. Do you see your scenario at the Civic Center and at the riverbed? Why then should it happen where people are being monitored and have a better life? I expect crime at AG just like anywhere, but not to your described degree. AG affords many incentives for good behavior and opportunities for better lives. Do you really want this to continue? https://www.facebook.com/TheNancyWestPlan/posts/443086712743441:0
    At moments it appears you visited my page and at other times I don’t know where you get your ideas. That’s why I’ve asked you to speak with me directly. Misconceptions are rampant. My entire plan and report are not online, but I know you have access to them through colleagues. You can also get them by meeting with me. I wonder why you comment as though you think I can’t stand by my work and as if I have implemented no research and have no education. Is it because my bio says I was once homeless? That was 34 years ago. I am 54 with a long history of education and real life successes. Now don’t we both want to see the homeless blight decrease? I’m sure you can see that I’m sincere and motivated, so why not work together?

  14. New South Wales

    Lou –

    I fully realize that the homeless population consists of more than drug addicts, criminals and the mentally ill. I also know full well that the homeless already live in areas across from businesses and nearby homes.
    I’m trying to find EFFECTIVE solutions to the issues of homelessness. Lou, I don’t want the time and resources of our government and concerned citizens being wasted pursuing a mirage.

    So far, Nancy West’s Al Fresco Gardens appears to be only a pipe dream. I’ve read her facebook page and website and I only see puffery.

    I’m not attacking Nancy for this. I truly believe she wants to help the homeless and puffery is an important sales tool to get peoples’ attention. However, she needs to now prove that this idea can work. She’s been talking this idea up for some time and it hasn’t gotten past the puffery stage. That is not a good thing, Lou.

    Time is a resource that we can’t reuse. What if you continue trying to push this Al Fresco Garden’s idea for the next ten years and it never comes to fruition because the concept has been unworkable from the start? How many homeless will have died during those years you piddled away because you never took an objective view of Nancy’s idea?

    Oh and one more thing, stop with the holier than thou self-righteous crap. Take a look at the home owners and long-term renters around Anaheim, Lou. Their pissed. Everytime you spit out the phrase ‘NIMBY’ with contempt, you just piss them off even more. You need to take ownership of your actions and change your approach, Lou. You need to realize that any effort to help the homeless must first be palatable to the voters. They hold all the cards, Lou. They pay the taxes. They buy the property. They pay the mortgages or rents on their homes and apartments. They also vote. The people you advocate for do none of that. If you don’t change your approach, Lou, then you will chase away the remaining people that support you and you’ll become impotent.

    • New South Wales
      First of all I wonder who payes you to go aroundtalkin abou Emirates and pipe dreams, you don’t seem to have a solution How long have you been thinking of an effective solution, when we already know that housing first has been proven to be effective, I support the concept of Alfresco Gardens, because we all know that housing first won’t happen anytime soon in OC, because the county has hired people who are only sucking off the tax dollars for their pay, they know if we solve the homeless problem they won’t be needed any more and there goes their paycheck. The ten year plan has failed and we know by now that doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results is insanity, as Albert Einstein quoted at one time. $300,000,000 spent in one year and certain to double without effective solution.

    • I find ALFRESCO GARDENS to be an impossibility. Land Aqusition costs, permitting and zoning prohibit its sucess.

      In addition I would like to know who is on her team. Mark Daniels? Vern Nelson? Ada Bricino?
      She is about $100k short on a foundation and 10 million bucks. Get a professional board of directors.

  15. Now talking about mirage and pipe dreams, last year people were telling me even the Anaheim police that safe zones ( Pipe dreams)would never happen, but guess what we now have safe zones in the riverbed which are not exactly the concept of Alfresco Gardens which is a well structure concept, but the riverbed is working even when people there have no sanitation or securty, they seem to protect their own, and even make sure their keeping it clean even though there’s others that are trashy, but for what I see they manage, Alfresco Gardens is no mirage is a concept that needs only to be implemented which will be the missing piece of the puzzle to end homelessness. Don’t go around obstructing a concept unless you got a better idea. We don’t get pay for our advocacy because we are concen tax payers that don’t want to keep throwing millions on fail polices that have done nothing but backfire. Time to start having common sense.

  16. Am not here for the fame and glory am here because God commands us to do his will, I even know Atheist that have more compassion then those who claim to be Christian but have no concept of the true Gospel of love, compassion, redemption and understanding.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Skip to toolbar