Dave Leckness, the establishment candidate for Mission Viejo City Council, supports the current direction of city hall, which includes cutting street and slope maintenance and preserving lifetime medical benefits for part-time council members who serve three terms. “I love the way things are going,” he said in an SVN interview Jan. 15.
Leckness, if elected, would take Lance MacLean’s seat should MacLean be recalled on Feb. 2. “I want to keep the momentum going in the same direction that it’s headed right now,” he continued. Leckness’ cheerleading for the council majority of MacLean, Frank Ury and Trish Kelley will be put to the test this weekend and next week when a huge rainstorm is expected. With wasteful spending on frivolities like the Rose Parade float, the city scaled back street resurfacing and took slope renovation completely out of this year’s budget, to Leckness’ liking. Road surface cracks will expand with rain, and topsoil on long stretches of barren slopes will likely wash down onto the sidewalks, as they did after even a light rainfall earlier this month.
Instead of infrastructure, Leckness wants to take care of himself. If elected to three terms he will enjoy lifetime medical benefits now paying about $850 per month for 12 years of part-time service.
His opponent, Republican Dale Tyler, takes the conservative approach of eliminating slush council benefits while taking care of infrastructure and amenities that serve everyone, like the library, animal shelter and parks. The animal shelter program includes pickup of stray animals and rabies control, vital public functions. Leckness says conservatives like Tyler want to shut down the animal shelter. Shame on him for saying that Tyler would let dogs and cats run wild in the streets. Leckness is an irresponsible candidate who should be denied a seat on the council.
Allan Pilger
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
The inside lanes of La Paz will be a mess. They already throw my little car around, and I’m expecting the rain to create some actual holes next week.
If Mr. Leckness wants to maintain the status quo we can expect to have a Rose Parade Float every year. The council can increase it’s benefits and we can expect the council to continue to thumb it’s nose at the public during council sessions. His statement tells me all I need to know about him.
Lifetime medical benefits were established by a former council that included John Paul Ledesma (a current council member and recall proponent). Maclean voted to rescind lifetime medical benefits and the council was advised by the city attorney to return to the status quo on threat of a lawsuit by Gail Reavis.
Maclean rescinded and forfeited lifetime medical benefits in an irrevocable written contract with the city.
[Editor's Note: Ms. Sellers mischaracterizes the matter. The Council cancelled the unpopular lifetime medical benefits in May 2008, just prior to Frank Ury's re-election campaign, and that recission was approved by the City Attorney. MacLean, Ury and Kelley reinstated the benefit at the first meeting following Ury's re-election (opposed by Ledesma), although the City Manager's Nov 2008 memo stated "the Council's action was lawful" in rescinding the benefits, citing a concurring opinon of the California Attorney General. MacLean's revocation was not a contract, but rather a unilateral action leaving the door open for him to change his mind if he survives the recall, just like M-U-K revived it after Ury's election. Blaming Reavis was always phony, because Reavis didn't run for re-election in 2008, leaving office after 8 years. The benefit requires 12 years of service to qualify.]
Thank you Dispatch for clarifying the issue.
It would appear that some folks just swallow the hook line and sinker that politicians like to put out there for those who do not do their homework.
What amazing coincidences–drop lifetime medical benefits before a council election campaign, then add them back immediately after the election. And now MacLean leaves the door open if he survives the recall to once again accept the benefits he has renounced before the recall.
I am happy Ms. Sellers raised the point, though. Dog Park supporters delighted with revised plans for a new park can expect MacLean and company to drop the million dollar hot potato quickly if he survives the recall. City Hall doesn’t care about the millions, staff clearly does not want the hassle of operating a dog park and has dawdled with the concept for a decade.
It really is time to send a message to City Hall by voting yes on the recall. Increasingly I feel that elected officials are far out of touch with the average private sector employee. Most folks work their entire lives and don’t get the benefits the council voted for 12 years of a part-time position not to mention their pay raise (many folks have seen their pay cut or haven’t seen a pay increase in 2 or 3 years). On February 2nd lets tell the City Council that being elected to public office is about serving the public not lining your pockets or making special deals for friends or campaign contributors. It is time to be frugal with tax dollars, maintaining the infrastructure we already have in a manner that will save money and protect the citizens; time to be careful about the elements added to the city to ensure that we are not adding any unsustainable cost to future budgets.
Regarding the road surface cracks: drivers beware. So far the biggest hole on La Paz is heading towards the freeway, between Mosquero & Chrisanta. About a foot and a half long by a foot wide. I’m sure there will be more before the week’s end.