When it comes to city councils, there are typically two types of approaches, depending on the location. Some residents want their City Council to tell them what to do, when to do it, how to do it, and who should do it. Others want their City Council to just stay out of their homes and businesses. One camp is typically filled with Democrats, while the other is filled with Republicans. San Francisco = Circumcision ban, Newport Beach = no Circumcision ban, Irvine = no puppy sales in stores, Newport Beach = puppy sales in stores. Get it? San Francisco/Irvine = liberal Democratic City Councils, Newport Beach = Conservative Republican City Council. At least that is how the outside world sees Newport Beach, but how wrong they are…
For the past five years, Newport Beach has been drifting dangerously towards the Nanny State and I see two direct reasons why; 1. The 2006 election of Nancy Gardner and 2. The Newport Beach City Council’s desire to get along for the sake of getting along coupled with and an utter and complete lack of Principles over Politics.
Now before I get into why Mayor Pro-Tem, and future Mayor, Nancy Gardner has been pushing Newport Beach left, let me preface this by saying that I consider Nancy a friend, knowing her since BEFORE getting involved in Politics when she was just the long-suffering Chairwoman of the Surfrider Foundation’s Newport Beach Chapter. She watched as I went through my tough personal times, giving me support along the way, and there was even a time when she saw my triplets more than me as she would cross paths with them on their daily Corona Del Mar walks. So I write this with the utmost admiration and reverence knowing fully that by pointing all this stuff out, Nancy will probably GAIN more supporters…
Back in 2006, when Dick “Mexicans on the Beach” Nichols was up for re-election, the search was frantic for someone to run against him. I finally started hearing Nancy’s name being bandied around towards the end of May, enough that I called her up to confirm. Knowing that she was a registered member of the Green Party, I indicated that a Republican electorate would probably never elect a Greenie and that she needed to re-register. She told me that she’d never register as a Republican, but she eventually did change her registration to “decline to state.”
And I always thought that regardless of how Green she is, the other Six so-called “republicans (small “r” on purpose) would always force the issue back to the Right and out of the Nanny State range. Ohhh…maybe not…
Since Nancy was elected, using the Environment Quality Advisory Committee (EQAC) as her bat, she started in 2008 with the Styrofoam container ban. Because of the inclusion of “a hardship provision (which) allows exceptions if eateries can’t afford different containers” the Newport Beach Restaurant Association backed the ban, so then the other “republican” City Councilmembers decided it was OK to tell Newport Beach restaurants what kind of supplies they must use … except if they can’t afford it …
In 2009, Nancy, again with EQAC’s muscle, proposed an expanded ban on smoking from just the beaches to ALL public places (parks, streets, alleys) as well as on the outside patios of the City’s restaurants. Primarily because of the outside patio part, the idea was sent down for some simmering until, at Nancy’s prodding, it re-appeared in late 2010 coming back up to the City Council in late 2011, this time without the restaurant patio portion … and this time it looks as though will pass into law.
In late 2009, based on the idea that the fire rings at the beach are unsafe and crazy pollutants (they are actually 50 times worse than cigarette smoke) and safety hazards, Nancy pushed to ban them. Even though the residents and the Coastal Commission shut the idea down, Nancy has just recently brought the idea up again, this time letting the Parks Beaches and Recreation Committee try to push it through.
So of course, with the liberal wave of banning plastic bags washing over Conservative Orange County, Nancy, through EQAC, decided that Newport Beach needed to be more like San Francisco and proposed the City study the issue. While she did not speak in favor of the ban back in April 2011, she brought the issue back up again during an October 2011 meeting. Miraculously, the other “republicans” pushed back and have killed the issue for now … but with Nancy’s influence within EQAC, dollars to donuts the issue will probably be brought up again, perhaps during MAYOR Nancy Gardner’s tenure …
So within just one term, Nancy has been successful in pushing and getting more Nanny State restrictions on businesses and individuals than the environmental conscience of Newport Beach had ever seen in its 100 years, all the while sitting on the dais with SIX so-called “republicans,” which means that either she has tremendous influence over them, or perhaps they are not as Republican as they claim to be.
Anyway, congratulations on your triumphs Nancy … and please stop?
I have to disagree with some of your comments Mr. Wu. regarding Council member Gardner. She has been promoting long needed correctiosn to numerous situations that nobody previously had the guts to tackle.
I also take exception to your slur of Dr. Nichols. The fact is “Big Tijuana” has become a problem beach to the residential neighborhood surrounding it. The overwhelming numbers of people from inland in the summer who use our beaches, do not spend money here, require us to rescue and police them, and leave us theri trash and grafitti.
The fire ring issue of anywhere from several hundred to several thousand people using and leaving the beach and surrounding residential area late at night has long needed resolution. Most state beaches close at sunset. The problem isn’t so much the fire rings as the late night beach access. Crystal Cove closes at Sunset, so should Big Corona. There are fire rings in commercial areas by the Balboa and Huntington Beach piers, located in lit, commercial areas which can provide far better public protections without impacting residents. I say leae the fire rings, but close the beach at sunset instead of 10 pm.
Big Tijuana? Really? Perhaps its time for you to try to get a gate around all of Corona Del Mar to keep all of “them” out?
It is nobody’s “right”, to remove half of the healthy genital skin from someone too young to give consent.
It has no bearing on anyone’s political affiliation. It has to do with the civil right of an individual to decide which of their own healthy body parts they want to keep.
Do females have the “right” to keep all their parts?
The Federales say “yes”, with no regard to religion.
So, why the sexism?
What is your problem with people who want to believe that no one should be cutting off healthy genital tissue except possibly the owner?
Why is this so hard to understand?
Freedom is having the most sensitive part of your genitals amputated against your will when you are a baby? Huh?
It’s ironic that those people who oppose “forced circumcision” also forced their children to attend their church. Do they let their children decide whether to get ANY immunization?