Jubal- can you link a campaign/personal website. I have family who live in MV. Thanks.

Matt. While I will concede that Frank is a "social" conservative that's where the road ends. His voting record tells a different story if you are referring to his being a "fiscal" conservative.

Larry:

I know you have your disagreements with Frank. But that doesn't translate into Frank not being a fiscal conservative.

Matt. Thank you for accepting my comments on this post.
As stated above, his lack of fiscal restraint, as demonstrated by his voting record, can be viewed on line at the city of Mission Viejo's web site.

Two examples. A dozen uncontested CIP Change Orders on the expansion of a community center resulting in a project cost going from $5.5 million to over $15 million. And second his vote in budgeting $300,000 for float in the Rose Parade without justification. Anaheim should participate in the 2009 Rose Parade. Mission Viejo should not. You have seen the long listed reasons.

Matt:

You can't be serious !!

Frank U has done nothing as a Mission Viejo Councilman--period.

He deceived those who supported him and used phony excuses for his lack of action. He was rejected by the council to become the city mayor by his fellow council members.

Frank should just repeated his failures from his school board days.!!

Joe Holtzman:

I am serious. You don't offer any specifics other than hee didn't get a turn as mayor, which had more to do with hurt feelings on the part of other councilmembers than "lack of action" by Frank.

And thank you for bringing up Frank's school board tenure. Frank could have taken the easy road and purchased "success" as a trustee by becoming a toady for the CUSD teachers union like Dore Gilbert, Marcia Whatsername and a third trustee who's name escapes me. Instead, he stood up to the unions and stood up for conservative principles, and they came after him with a vengeance.

As for Larry's charges, I don't know anything about the cost increases for the community center. But, with all due respect, I take your blaming frank for all MV's ills with a boulder of salt. So the city is spending $300K on a 20th anniversary Rose Parade float. Supporting that makes Frank a profligate? Let's get some perspective.

Frank also moved to get rid of lifetime medical benefits for councilmembers, something that never makes it into Larry's diatribes against Frank. But Larry has spilt plenty of pixels posting about the city paying part of the cost of landscaping at an OCFA station serving Mission Viejo, treating it as if it were Watergate.

Good morning Matt.

Your post was about Frank Ury, not the entire city council or city staff as it relates to the fire station. My comments relate solely to your long time colleague's track record in expenditures.

You claim not having knowledge of the dozed Change Orders tripling the cost of a CIP where Frank never challenged the $10 million dollar increase over what the public was told when approving this CIP is major. The good news for Red County readers is that you can verify my allegations by simply watching our city council meeting replays on your computer 24/7.
Matt. Did you ask Frank about my statement or engage in any investigative research or are you taking the quick and easy way out with your statement:

"As for Larry's charges, I don't know anything about the cost increases for the community center."

Matt. With our annual budget of $60 million dollars, a $10 million CIP increase is something worth questioning for those of us who are fiscal conservatives.

As to the Rose Parade. The vast majority of those with whom I have discussed this CIP, perhaps 95 percent, including all of the city council candidates whom I have interviewed, agree that our participation, as a non-destination bedroom community, celebrating our 20th anniversary, is not justified nor desired.

Matt:

Frank U.'s core values are all negotiable !!!

Example his lack of action on the elevated EMF levels in our city parks. He has done zero about getting signs posted in our parks warning children and pregnant mothers about this health and safety issue.

Has one of his major campaign contribuoto9rs told him to sit down and shut up about the issue.???

The lack of endorsement by his fellow council tells the story Matt.

Also the issue of lifetime benefits was a phony issue by Frank U. as none of our present council members were either taking the benefit or in need of it. It was just a way to punch Gail Reavis in the nose--nothing more. Once again a lack of core values drove his actions.