Is Foley the right fit for council?

K is for Katrina.

A is for attorney

R is for a run at the City Council

E is for eventually moving onto bigger and better things.

N is for not likely this time around.

In some far away land, where politics are obsolete and decisions

are made simply on common sense, fairness and merit, Planning

Commissioner Katrina Foley would have a great shot at the City

Council seat left empty by former Mayor Karen Robinson.

After all, the two women have so much in common: Both are

attorneys, both are registered Democrats, both are natural-born

leaders with inherent assertive qualities, heck, their names even

start with the same letters.

If Robinson were to be replaced by the person who had most in

common with her, we could usher Foley straight to the dais. Not to

mention, planning commissioners have experience with the inner

workings of City Hall, and she knows a little something about

politics, being that she was at the forefront of the divisive Home

Ranch debate.

Foley seems to fit all the guidelines, but is she “harmonious and

compatible?”

Her knowledge of the political inner workings of this fair city

should remind Foley she is a long shot for the appointment. Not to

say she isn’t qualified, or even deserving, she simply doesn’t seem

to have the political backing required to gain the seat.

The energetic young mother would probably have the support of

Councilwoman Libby Cowan, who appointed Foley to her second term on

the Planning Commission in February. She could woo Councilman Chris

Steel to support her, given his affinity for strong women and

appreciation for hardwork.

Two out of three ain’t bad. It’s that third vote that may prove

the death of her attempt.

Enter Councilmen Gary Monahan and Allan Mansoor.

Being the gentlemen they both are, neither were too quick to

dismiss Foley as a viable candidate. But neither of them gave her a

glowing recommendation, either.

“I don’t really want to comment on that right now,” Mansoor said.

OK. It should be noted that Mansoor took a few good swipes at

Foley during the 2002 campaign season, which is typical in the

political fray. Not to say he is at odds with her, but they may not

see everything eye-to-eye.

With fellow “improvers” such as Eric Bever and Mike Clifford on

the list of candidates, as well as Mansoor’s parks and recreation

appointee, Wendy Leece, Foley most likely falls far on his list of

prospects.

Monahan, who was arguably Foley’s arch nemesis during that same

election season, was unusually quiet on the subject. It is pretty

safe to say Monahan is not a Republican for Foley. Maybe if she

switched parties, he said. Monahan confirmed his reluctance to even

deliberate her appointment, as he offered to except himself from even

voting on her.

“I’d be willing to give her $250,” Monahan said.

Hey, not a bad idea. I’m sure Foley wouldn’t mind some extra

spending cash. That should fund the pizza dinners her family would be

subjected to the first and third Mondays of each month. Not to

mention, an abstention by Monahan could ensure her seat on the

council by a 2-1 margin.

Or maybe Foley should write him a check for $250. That’s about the

only way she has a shot. (sorry Katrina, but you know it’s true.)

Give me that $250 and I would place it on a “vanilla” candidate.

Someone who is active in the community but not considered to be in

anyone’s “camp.”

Councilwoman Libby Cowan agreed, although she would not name

names.

“Whoever is appointed will absolutely be a compromise candidate,”

Cowan said Thursday. “There is no question in my mind. That has been

evident from the very beginning.”

Using that knowledge, we can cross Leece, Bever, Clifford,

Planning Commissioner Dennis Demaio, James Fisler and Ralph Morgan

out because they are too closely tied to either Steel or Mansoor.

Mirna Burciaga, William “Bill Turpit” and former mayor Linda Dixon

will most likely be passed over because of their strong ties to

Cowan. (The council already voted against appointing Dixon, when they

denied to automatically instate her for being the third vote-getter

in the 2002 elections.)

Planning Commissioner Bill Perkins is so closely tied to Monahan,

they shared money during the November election (Monahan giving to

Perkins) -- so we can count him out.

That leaves the “non-campers,” which consist of: sweet Karl Ahlf,

Terri Breer, Julia Cross, former Planning Commissioner Walt

Davenport, Planning Commission Bruce Garlich, Tamar Goldmann,

Jennifer Kuo, former parks and recreation commissioner Robert Love,

Matthew Makin, Frank Michelena (who Monahan cannot vote on because of

campaign contributions), Art Perry, Mike Scheafer, Heather Somers and

Larry Weichman.

(Anyone else notice the entire Planning Commission wants to be on

the City Council? All except Joel Farris, who recognized his conflict

of interest with Mansoor and decided not to apply. So much for the

commission being non-political.)

Some may argue that Somers is a logical replacement considering

she lost to Robinson by a handful of votes in the 2000 election. I

say, if Somers wanted to be a council member, she would have run in

2002. She chose to run for the Sanitary District instead and lost big

time.

So, I’ll go out on a limb and place my bet (Gary can I borrow

$250?) on a sleeper, such as Schaefer. The man is hard-working, nice,

intelligent and well-liked. Who wouldn’t like the guy who has devoted

so much time into keeping the traditional Costa Mesa Fish Fry alive?

He hasn’t been outspoken about anything controversial and,

therefore, hasn’t had the opportunity to make any enemies. He’s never

served on the Planning Commission before and therefore hasn’t angered

anyone with a second-story vote. He seems fair and open-minded and

not likely to cause too much of a stir.

Vanilla, baby. Sweet and simple.

Hey, I could definitely be wrong. Stranger things have happened.

This is Costa Mesa, so anything goes.

* LOLITA HARPER writes columns Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays and

covers culture and the arts. She may be reached at (949) 574-4275 or

by e-mail at [email protected].