No GOP Endorsement of Council Candidates for Now

At the meeting of the OC GOP endorsement committee, residents speak out against Councilman Sam Allevato and Planning Commission Ginny Kerr.

None of the Republican candidates for San Juan Capistrano will get the endorsement of the local party representatives – at least in time to make a huge difference in the November election.

While a City Council seat is nonpartisan, a GOP endorsement can be a handy tool in catching the eye of Republican voters in slate mailers.

Incumbent Sam Allevato and Planning Commissioner Ginny Kerr were on the agenda Tuesday night before the OC GOP endorsement committee, but neither managed to get the nod.

Three local residents spoke out in opposition to Allevato and Kerr getting the Republican endorsement. Kim Lefner was one of them.

“Both candidates have taken actions in their official city posts that contradict the OC GOP’s values and principles,” Lefner said, citing ever-increasing water rates, a once-proposed “head-tax” for private schools, and a disregard of property rights.

The OC GOP Central Committee as a whole will finalize the endorsements on Sept. 17, but because the San Juan Capistrano City Council candidates failed to get a recommendation, the next chance for an endorsement is at the October meeting, when fellow candidates and Republicans Roy Byrnes' and Kim McCarthy’s candidacies will also be considered.

However, that meeting is not scheduled until mid-October, when most mailers have hit residents’ mailboxes and many absentee ballots are already cast.  

Allevato missed Tuesday’s council meeting to attend the GOP meeting. At the end of the council meeting, council members briefly discussed what constitutes an “excused” absence. New City Attorney Hans Van Ligten said he would research the matter and get back to the council.

melissa kaffen September 05, 2012 at 04:46 PM
Hats off to the OC GOP and the 3 local heroes who took the time to make the case for a GOP brand that stands for more than than an insider's club. Tiered utility rates disproportionately harm homeowners and businesses and as such are un-Constitutional.
thejellyfish September 05, 2012 at 07:45 PM
One small step for man. One giant leap for man kind.
sjcnative1 September 07, 2012 at 12:13 AM
It makes you wonder how people who vote to add this head tax to students, who have these moronic tiers in the water rates, which amount to a tax as the city is charging the water user more than it costs the city to produce the water could ever be considered Republicans. RINO is a better name. Didn't they take a Republican pledge to not raise taxes? They both lost my vote.
rachel o September 07, 2012 at 12:50 AM
That makes perfect sense. Now I know why I can't afford private school for my kids. This yahoo taxes the private schools. Please, please Republican Committee don't count these two as Republicans
rachel o September 07, 2012 at 12:50 AM
That makes perfect sense. Now I know why I can't afford private school for my kids. This yahoo taxes the private schools. Please, please Republican Committee don't count these two as Republicans.
Penny Arévalo (Editor) September 07, 2012 at 01:00 AM
The head tax didn't go through. It was just proposed.
Jim Reardon September 07, 2012 at 01:37 AM
Penny, I think you are technically correct in connection with St Margaret's and a direct "head tax". However, in order to build the new Performing Arts Center, the school was required to set aside 80% tuition scholarships each year for six students who reside in the city (so-called "need-based" awards, worth about $100,000 each year, = $90 per student per year), plus pay the city $75000 per year (= $68 per student per year) -- forever (with 2% annual escalation), plus allow for public use of a parking lot constructed on private property, plus provide an offer to dedicate land along La Novia to the City for the construction of an equestrian trail that leads nowhere (it leads to the intersection of La Novia and Ortega Hwy). The cost of all of these concessions certainly amounts to a head-tax, if not in name. Over at Saddleback Christian, something similar went on in connection with the permits for the school's recent expansion. And quite awhile ago now, J Serra Catholic was subject to similar treatment. Are these taxes? I leave it for others to judge. But equestrian trails and scholarships can hardly be treated as "traffic mitigation fees".
rachel o September 07, 2012 at 01:41 AM
This story just gets worse, the more I hear how they have charged more taxes to private schools in one way or another. This looks completely like holdup money to increase taxes and to get their pet projects completed. Traffic mitigation, schmitigation. The only traffic on the streets now are the people running awayfrom these two Maybe if they are gone I could afford to send my kids to private schools.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »