Where I Stand

By Terry Shaw

Current issues: Responsible growth: We ought not to allow over development. We should encourage, where and when possible, single family housing. When multi family housing is called for, we should require the maximum in parking spaces and likewise for commercial projects. Parking, as well as traffic, has become a major problem in this city. Also, many neighborhoods are losing their character due to "super sizing" of new housing and remodels. We should encourage and obtain open space when financially feasible. It may be time to review the general plan since we seem to be changing it piecemeal in it current form.

Fiscal responsibility: We have drawn from reserves for the last three years to meet budget. Obviously this cannot go on forever. The only time it might be warranted is when major capital projects are involved. Also, Orange County just approved an enhanced retirement plan for its employees. This puts pressure on cities to adopt similar plans. We need to be very cautious in our negotiations with the Costa Mesa employees' union. We do not want to join a growing list of bankrupt or near bankrupt cities, including San Diego. Would I raise taxes or fees? Yes, but only after careful consideration. Some of them, such as the business license fees, have not kept up with the times.

Infrastructure: We are making progress with street improvements and other enhancements, but there are still too many that need attention. We must insure repairs continue and at a fair cost.

Senior housing: Where the city has the authority and capacity, it should mandate and encourage such development. After all, we're all going to be old some day if we live long enough.

Mixed use: I find this an interesting concept and am open to further study. While this may not be everyone's idea of mixed use, I have always been intrigued with the Old World shopping center in Huntington Beach.

Centerline: I have spoken out against this. Even though Costa Mesa currently has little at stake financially we should oppose it. This will cost untold millions (billions?) in the future and that money will ultimately come from you, the taxpayer. This project is not viable in its current form and the only way I could entertain it is if private money were invested, i.e. from the businesses that will benefit from it.

Fairview Park: While I realize there are some ecologically sensitive areas, I would like to see it developed beyond a mostly dirt lot with weeds. However, this can be accomplished only as the budget allows.

Bridges: Let's say no to the 19th St. and Gisler bridges as put forth. A city wide referendum may be needed to decide their fate.

Fairgrounds: None of us want to see the fairgrounds sold. Again, just say no.

Small business: I think we do too much micromanaging of small business. At one of the early planning commission meetings I attended, a small shop owner was put through the ringer so she could display a small amount of furniture outdoors in front of her store.

City Attorney office: I requested that the city council keep it in house when it was put a vote. Past issues: Traffic impact fee: In April, the city council approved waiving $660,000.00 in fees related to the Renee and Henry Segerstrom Concert Hall construction. I opposed this at the meeting. This money came from you the taxpayer. All you will get for it is a bigger budget deficit and the city's name on a wall.

Mobile home park closure ordinance: This was one of my bigger disappointments this past year. This ordinance evolved over many months of study and input and would have provided protection to those living in Costa Mesa's 21 mobile home parks when a park owner wants to close it and use it for another purpose. Although it was watered down toward the end I supported it from start to finish. Ultimately it didn't matter, for the city council merely voted to "receive and file" which meant it was all for naught. This ordinance was instigated due to the agonizing closure of two mobile home parks with many senior citizens for a future development. Mobile home parks are a great example of affordable housing.

Fireworks: I supported the changes passed this year to our current ordinances, although I would ultimately like to see fireworks banned altogether. It is impossible to control the illegal ones while we have "safe and sane" ones. I am not so much concerned with the irresponsible person who injures him/herself as I am with the one who injures an innocent party or burns down someone's house. Additionally, there are concerns with the pollution they create. I recognize that many organizations rely on fireworks sales to fund their activities and would encourage the city to help them explore other opportunities.

Hamilton St. community garden: I supported this. Yes it cost about 66 thousand dollars when finished, but of the options put forth this was the best use at the least cost, other than to continue letting it sit vacant and be an eyesore.

Philosophy: I believe in limited government. But I also believe that the primary purpose of government, after providing basic necessary services, is to provide balance in everything that occurs within its sphere of influence. Balance between business and residents, between developers and homeowners, between big and small business, those with and without influence and finally between the city and other government entities. To put it another way, government needs to create a level playing field where everyone is heard and laws are applied evenly. Every story has two sides and I will listen to each side and then make a decision. I will use common sense and if necessary, I will suggest compromise, but not on matters of principle.

Thank you for reading through. I look forward to your vote.