City of Seaside Tests Election Law With “Public Education” Campaign on Fort Ord Ballot Initiatives

Seaside’s latest political dance move has nothing to do with topless women, but it’s proving as controversial as Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” video.

The City Council, in this case, got bold with its unanimous Aug. 1 decision to spend a combined $50,000, plus reimbursable expenses, on two consultants charged with public education.

The agenda item and staff report dodge the subject of that education: dueling countywide ballot initiatives with opposite impacts on the development of the former Fort Ord.

The Fort Ord Access Alliance initiative would make about 540 acres of northwest Fort Ord off-limits to development; the Secure the Promise initiative would allow heavier development than is currently stipulated in the Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan.

The city’s contracts would allot up to $25,000 each to an unspecified economist and Oakland-based The Lew Edwards Group for 90-day contracts – closing within days of the Nov. 5 election – to provide “independent data” and “project management,” respectively, for what city documents vaguely describe as a “public education and outreach program.”

Deputy City Manager Daphne Hodgson says the contracts are for outreach on the economic impacts of “various actions” affecting the city.

“Any kinds of actions,” she says. “It’s not specific to the Fort Ord initiatives.”

But at the Aug. 1 City Council meeting, it was clear the program is indeed specific to the two initiatives.

“What we’re doing is putting together information about impacts to the city of Seaside based on outcomes [of the initiatives] in the upcoming election,” Mayor Ralph Rubio says. “You’re going to be hearing a lot of campaign stuff from both sides, and you’re not going to know what’s real and what’s not real.”

But at the council meeting, after affirming the outreach program will be strictly factual, he hinted at his opinion: “Does everybody know there’s 20,000 acres of dedicated open space [on Fort Ord]? A little bit out of balance.”

The Monterey County Business Council, an organizer of Secure the Promise, maintains the election results will have serious ramifications for the future of Seaside development. “The city was one of the major losers when Fort Ord closed,” Business Council President Mary Ann Leffel says. “An educated community is much better than one that’s spouting off on something they don’t know about.”

But Luana Conley, an organizer of the Access Alliance petition, lambasts the public-outreach spending as biased toward Secure the Promise. “We do feel that this is voter manipulation,” she says. “This is not the way you do city governance, unless you’re a thug.”

City Manager John Dunn says the spending follows the rules. “The city is prohibited from using public funds for advocacy,” he says, “but we can use public funds for education.”

The Lew Edwards Group has contracted with Seaside before, including for Measure R, a successful sales-tax hike, in 2008. Rubio notes a 2009 state Supreme Court ruling that the city of Salinas did not illegally spend taxpayer money disseminating information about Measure O, a failed 2002 initiative to repeal that city’s utility tax.

Seaside Councilman Ian Oglesby said he’s upset the initiatives are subject to a countywide vote. Rubio agrees neither deserves a place on the ballot: “Land-use issues in the city of Seaside are sovereign to the jurisdiction.”

Both initiatives, he adds, would amend the Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan, which was created over years of public collaboration. “To do this is like saying, ‘So what if you had a community process? We’re going to force this on you.’”