By Wayne Eggleston
I was on the city council for twelve years, elected three times, so I have a perspective of what qualities make for a good and a dedicated councilmember.
Putting residents first and listening to their concerns is paramount. Over the last few years we have had open space issues and a plan to build a commercial development on our beachfront, on land seized by eminent domain, to be used for public benefit (beachfront park and parking). Any candidate running for elected office must have gone through these issues in order to even be considered a viable candidate. Otherwise, they are “Mikes’ come lately material.”
Chris Hamm, our local hometown man, born and raised in San Clemente, is a firefighter stationed in San Clemente. He knows what village character really means and is on the General Plan Advisory Committee, appointed by city council, guiding our city’s vision. He speaks from his heart and has been through all the above issues. He as fought for our beaches, water quality, open space, and keeping our beachfronts free from commercial development. Chris Hamm is second on the ballot, but first for our residents.
Bob Baker, former Navy pilot and commercial airline pilot, is #1. Forget the other Bob Baker zero, as this was a fraudulent ploy by a developer to confuse voters. Dirty politics in our small town! Bob Baker #1 is a fiscal watchdog for your precious tax dollars and will not put up with government intrusion into your lives. The opposition has placed hit advertisements in newspapers with his voting record. Baker #1 takes this as a badge of honor as it demonstrates the above qualities. Baker #1 has lived through all the above issues and has been with the majority of residents time after time. Bob Baker #1 is last on the ballot, first for San Clemente.
Mike Mortenson, a business lawyer from the East Coast and Los Angeles, moved to San Clemente 2 1/2 years ago and resides in Talega. He seems to have one mantra—local businesses, more businesses. He supports local businesses so much; he bought his campaign signs in Santa Ana. You may have seen his signs on the Marblehead outlet site owned by the same developer who also owns the Citadel Outlet, the one with the monster digital signs along the 5 freeway. It seems reasonable to assume that those who place their signs in this location may be favorably disposed to vote for large monster signs along our freeway. He refuses to answer this issue.
He has stated that he wishes to represent Talega, but we do not have district elections, as city council members represent all residents in every neighborhood. Seems like a recipe for dividing the community. Mortenson is infamous for dancing around issues and doing a two-step depending upon the audience he is speaking to. His stock answer is that he will weigh all sides of the issue, using words like cost-base analysis and mathematics—sounds like “lawyer speak” to me.
Recently he stated that businesses are the anchors of San Clemente. No, Mr. Mortenson, the 68,000 residents are the anchors of this community, along with businesses. Businesses are vitally important and we all need to shop and dine in San Clemente. Mortenson has never lived through the issues like Hamm and Baker, living here 2 1/2 years. Mortenson is a developer’s candidate.
We have a very clear distinction this election. Support those who have lived through the issues and have a vision of protecting, preserving and improving this unique city or destroy what we have with a vision of Huntington Beach South. Vote wisely, as our town depends upon it.
Well done Wayne. Joseph Goebbels has taught you well.
Mr. Hart– Your caustic comments are getting very old. You do a huge dis-service to the folks you support.
Interesting that Eggleston and Mann are funding all the garbage and lies coming out of the Baker/Hamm campaigns.
Eggleston has no integrity or credibility. He uses old issues (i.e. Playa Del Norte/Measure A) to inflame and incite passions, and he argues that Mortenson (who was not on the City Council at the time) and Dahl (who was) “supported” selling land seized by eminent domain.
Well guess what folks, WAYNE VOTED IN FAVOR OF DEVELOPING NORTH BEACH. Yep, the same development he now uses to rally folks against Mortenson/Dahl, is the same one HE VOTED for! And guess what else? Eggleston, VOTED FOR THE LAB to develop North Beach.
The only thing consistent about Baker/Hamm/Eggleston/Mann is that they are unabashed hypocrites. Baker takes credit for Courtney’s Sandcastle, but voted AGAINST a handicap access bathroom there. He chastised mortenson for spending two thousand bucks on signs from a small business in Santa Ana, yet SPENT $20,000 + on a consulting firm in TORRANCE. The list goes on and on and on.
Don’t believe the lies. Stand up for character and integrity. Vote NO for the hypocrites: NO to Baker and Hamm.
Guest “OPINION” is correct. I stopped reading at “From the East Coast and Los Angeles.” At least do some research before taking the time to write this garbage Wayne. SCTimes, you should be ashamed to print such untrue rubbish.
Mortenson did indeed live on the East Coast for a few short years in his adult life. He did so to attend the University of Virginia, to attend and be the president of his law school in Ohio, to work for the Speaker of the House in DC, and to work for the Governor of Virginia. Since you brought up the East Coast- I only thought it was fair to point out why he was there- quite impressive wouldn’t you say??? But, “from the East Coast” HE IS NOT. Baker on the other hand, is. Maybe you got your “facts” mixed up Wayne…
Joseph Goebbels?!?!? Yikes!!! If I were Bob Baker or Chris Hamm, I would run far, far, away from an endorsement from Wayne Eggleston!
Of course Mr. Eggleston is slamming Mortenson and Dahl… He is financially backing Chris Hamm. Chris Hamm’s advertisement in the Sun Post was paid by Wayne Eggleston.
If you look at who endorsed Hamm versus Mortenson, Mortenson has twice as many endorsements! Mortenson has multiple previous mayors who are supporting him. Why doesn’t the paper write an article about that or publish a pro Dahl or Mortenson letter? I find it hard to believe that Baker and Hamm are the only people submitting letters.
I am very disappointed in this paper for allowing repeated pro Baker and pro Hamm letters and ‘opinions’. I know this is a free paper but I still want to cancel its delivery.
Editor’s Note: This is the editor of the SC Times. I can report that we have received more Baker/Hamm letters on the whole than Mortenson/Dahl letters, though we have received both. We published a pro-Mortenson letter this week, as well as one critical of Mr. Baker. Many of the Baker letters we have received have been in reference to the ballot issue with 0 Bob Baker. We will be publishing a response to Mr. Eggleston’s column this week written by Mayor Evert.
Jim- You published “A Pro-Mortenson letter this week” awe shux thanks SCTimes, What about all the letters you have never even responded to? What about Dan Bane’s letter? How is this even journalism? Are Eggleston and Mann giving you money like they are Baker and Hamm?
K.Smith- Couldn’t agree more.
Many “newsworthy” issues in this election have been overlooked, just like many letters sent in that have been overlooked. Everyone loved to print that Mortenson had a few signs printed in Santa Ana, but everyone’s lips are zipped when it comes out that Baker has spent the MAJORITY of his campaign money in Torrance, as well as Orange and Louisiana. It’s eye opening, and quite frankly, from the people I have spoken to, it seems to be backfiring, people see the ridiculous bias, and it is now working in the favor of Dahl and Mortenson…
If there are newsworthy things that need to be reported on, please let me know. I’d be happy to look into anything.
Dear SC Times Editor,
I respectfully disagree with you that you have published a pro-mortenson/dahl letter. You have one on your website from this week only… In the print version of your paper, it has been all anti-mortenson, anti-dahl and pro baker and Hamm. I believe a majority of your readers only read the print version because it is delivered to their homes on a weekly basis. In that regard, your paper has been very one sided.
I am happy to hear that you will be printing a response to Mr. Eggleston’s opinion piece. I still believe your paper is being very pro-baker and pro hamm. If not, please print some of the letters you have received in favor of Mortenson and Dahl. I would be interested to read them. Thank you.
To be honest— it’s getting hard to find pro Mortensen folks because the city understands the guy as super pro bad development. His worst association is that of Mr. Dahl who has a long history of making love to every single bad development idea that has come down the pike!!!! These two guys are not good for the future of SC. Time for a sea change!
Now let me be honest– the only people in this race being financially backed by developers are Baker and Hamm.
You know it, I know it, we all know it. A developer personally paid for Chris Hamm’s yard signs. That same developer has a PAC that has spent 10′s of THOUSANDS of dollars funding anti-dahl, anti-Mortenson mailers on behalf of Baker and Hamm. Why in the world is this out of town developer spending SO much money to try and get Baker and Hamm into office??? Just a friend? Come on Craig…
Knowing all this, who do you think is in bed with the developers now?? Dahl and Mortenson have not received a penny from a developer. We just can’t say the same for Baker and Hamm. If you are a resident of San Clemente and have a Chris Hamm sign in your yard, you need to thank that out of town developer, not Chris Hamm.
sc voter—- EVERYone in this community have watched for decades the Dahl developer show– its infamous. Why tell straight up bold faced lies like this? Running scared?
I just looked at this week’s paper. The letter from Ms. Rojas is in this week and is a pro-Mortenson letter. The one that followed was anti-Baker. I’ve reported that Mr. Baker spent a large portion of his campaign dollars in Torrance. We have had a few more pro-Baker letters. That’s because we received a good number related to the Baker 1 – Baker 0 issue. As we receive more letters I will be happy to print them. I will look for Mr. Bane’s letter. I receive hundreds of emails a week, it may have simply got buried, unintentionally. If so, I will look to remedy that. I have not received money or gifts from either side. I’ve attended three of the forums and spoken with each of the candidates. I don’t harbor ill-will or have remarkably positive feelings for any one of them. My ultimate goal has been to be fair to them in the way I cover them, in terms of news.
I’ve been at the paper less than two months, and I’ve tried to understand some of the divisions in town created by Measure A and previous votes, but perhaps I have not totally understood it. I apologize if this naivete has been mistaken for bias. That’s not how I intended it.
Interesting. Not surprising, but interesting. I would be curious to know if Chris Hamm is aware of this?? Seeing as though Mr. Eggleston is paying for Hamm’s ads in the paper. This is indeed quite disturbing, I would be appalled if Mr. Hamm was aware of this, and still let Wayne Eggleston help fund his campaign.
I was appalled to see Dahl say on You Tube that our traffic problems can be avoided by simply not driving during rush hour? I was appalled by Dahl and Mortensen being obviously pro toll road. I was appalled by Dahl’s and Mortensons love of the lame beach destroying Lab project….and on and on and on……Hamm and B Baker #1 are the change we need—— the developer axis of dull-normal is running scared.,.,.,..
sc voter,
Since you know that Mr. Hamms’ signs were donated by another good citizen who was also SERVING WITH HAMM on the GPAC planning group, why are you continually spreading lies about it?
Are you trying to distance your boys Mortensen and “Urban Sprawl” Dahl from the largest developer in the city and probably San Clemente’s history vis Marblehead? Why is it do you think that the only two candidates that the greedy trash outlet mall operator/developer will allow on his property are your boys? Do you think he expects some future service from your boys should we sadly elect them? Hmmmmm.
When Mr. Dahl was taking 150k cash from the toll road builders into his personal bank account AND voting on related issues on the council at the same time, and supporting the toll road, which master do you think he was serving? The Public or the toll road? Hmmmm. You might find out Nov. 6.
Is that GPAC member’s name Charles Mann, because that’s who paid for Hamm’s signs. A developer. Here you go:
“Chris Hamm has received just less than half of the contributions to his campaign through “non-monetary contributions.” This includes receiving $1,844 worth of signs from Charles Mann and $388 worth of website services from former Mayor Wayne Eggleston. ”
That’s called a QUOTE Craig. Do you know what that is? And it’s from this very website, so if you have a problem with it, take it up with Jim Shilander who wrote the article. Let me know if you need me to define what the word “fact” means for you – always happy to help. Btw Craig, do you live in SC, or do you live in San Juan? Seems many of Hamm and Baker supporters seem to be in San Juan, I am anxious to see how that will work out for them on Nov 6!
And by “serving with Hamm on the GPAC” you mean at only 40% attendance just like Hamm right?
Do I know what the word quote means?
Do I live in SJC?
Certain people are not allowed to exercise their rights as Americans and donate to certain campaigns because of certain sensibilities you have?
Are your mom and dad home? Would you put them on here please? I’d be happy to answer grown up questions.
Seriously man, you said that you refuse to interact with me out here any more, I guess you’re worried. You would serve your boys better if you got some one a bit better to handle this.
And remember the two important questions we still need your team to answer-
1. When Dahl took 150k cash personally from the toll road, and was also voting on our council, which master was he serving, our residents or his road building bosses? Pick one so we can discuss. Waiting.
2. Since the largest developer in SC history, Mr. Marblehaed will ONLY allow signs for Dahl and Mortensen on his land……what do you think the developer wants in return?
2.
Is that GPAC member’s name Charles Mann, because that’s who paid for Hamm’s signs. A developer. Here you go:
“Chris Hamm has received just less than half of the contributions to his campaign through “non-monetary contributions.” This includes receiving $1,844 worth of signs from Charles Mann and $388 worth of website services from former Mayor Wayne Eggleston. ”
That’s called a QUOTE Craig. Do you know what that is? And it’s from this very website, so if you have a problem with it, take it up with Jim Shilander who wrote the article. Let me know if you need me to define what the word “fact” means for you – always happy to help. Btw Craig, do you live in SC, or do you live in San Juan? Seems many of Hamm and Baker supporters seem to be in San Juan, I am anxious to see how that will work out for them on Nov 6!
And by “serving with Hamm on the GPAC” you mean at only 40% attendance just like Hamm right?
SC Voter— Last thing— If Mr. Hamm missed a meeting, try to understand that he was on duty for the OC Fire Authority ready to lay down his life for San Clemente residents. You know with his Non Profit/NGO fundraising, service on the planning GPAC and his crucial public safety role, I hope that’s enough service for you. It’s enough for us.
Allow me to set the truth about my record voting for the Lab.
I initially voted for the Lab as the developer. There were two candidates and the Lab has a initial superior plan. However, when we learned (at the city council meeting the night of the vote) that the land had been seized through eminent domain to be used for public benefit (as a beach park and parking), that was the turning point. Additionally it was a very flawed financial development.Unfortunately we had not been advised about the eminent domain issue from city staff. This issue is huge and even the Orange County Register made this a point in their recommendation to vote against this project. When land is dedicated for public use and then the city attempts to sell it, that is just plain wrong.
I do appreciate the folks who respond with their real names instead of hiding behind fake names
Your reasons behind your vote matter little at this point, just like Bob Baker’s ridiculous reasons behind all his NO votes. Baker claims he wanted to raise rent (in a horrible economy- who does that?!) so that’s why he voted NO to the Farmer’s market. Bob Baker voted against a Sports Wall of Fame for our SC athletes, the reason- we shouldn’t give attention to people like OJ Simpson. Since when is OJ Simpson from SC??? His reasons are laughable, you must admit. He’s SO quick to find the NEGATIVE in EVERYTHING. When people are speaking about honoring our local athletes, what kind of person turns it into a conversation about accused murderers?! His reasons are weak ones, and his vote is what counts, same goes for you. Thank you for trying to justify why you voted yes, and in doing so putting the blame on somebody besides yourself much like how Baker explains all his NO’s. But the facts are the facts- silly reasoning and excuses aside: YOU VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE LAB.
Sorry you don’t appreciate my “fake” name. If fake names bother you so much, you should have your buddy Charles Mann change the name of his PAC to the Charles Mann PAC, instead of “Watchdog” I’m guessing Watchdog is not the name on Mann’s Birth Certificate…
When I initially commented I clicked the “Notify me when new comments are added” checkbox and now each time a comment is added I get four emails
with the same comment. Is there any way you can remove
me from that service? Bless you!