The article you’re about to read is from our reporters doing their important work — investigating, researching, and writing their stories. We want to provide informative and inspirational stories that connect you to the people, issues and opportunities within our community. Journalism requires lots of resources. Today, our business model has been interrupted by the pandemic; the vast majority of our advertisers’ businesses have been impacted. That’s why the DP Times is now turning to you for financial support. Learn more about our new Insider’s program here. Thank you.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR POLICY: To submit a letter to the editor for possible inclusion in the paper, e-mail us at or send it to 34932 Calle del Sol, Suite B, Capistrano Beach, CA 92624. Dana Point Times reserves the right to edit reader-submitted letters for length and is not responsible for the claims made or the information written by the writers.

Jim Kelly,  Dana Point resident

Our city has once again been denied “Best Practices Analysis” by voting not to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to see what the market place has to offer for its legal services as recommended by the Financial Review Committee(FRC). The City Council has failed to do this for the last 16 years. To issue an RFP is in no way a negative implication on our current attorney, it is simply the best way to make sure that the citizens of Dana Point are getting the best value for their money.

The FRC was created by unanimous vote by this very same Council last year. It is made up of highly qualified and dedicated people that have functioned very well in its first year of existence while working with the city’s financial staff. They have brought to light problems that needed addressing by the city council that the financial staff would have difficulty doing without the FRC’s oversite. Council people Muller. Viczorek and Tomlinson demonstrated their lack of open market competitive business experience by fearing that to issue an RFP for City Attorney services would be a rejection of our current city attorney. It is not. I fact, in my extensive experience in responding to, and creating RFP’s, the incumbent vendor has an advantage over other bidders because of their knowledge of their client. An RFP simply would have assured that the residents of Dana Point would get the best value for their money at this point in time.

To reject a recommendation by a “blue ribbon” committee that was “hand-picked” by each council member is absurd and outrageous. The three blind mice’ hatred and disrespect for the other members of this Council is both palpable and disconcerting. It is blinding to their thought processes.

Trustworthy, accurate and reliable local news stories are more important now than ever. Support our newsroom by making a contribution and becoming a subscribing member today.

About The Author Dana Point Times

comments (12)

  • The FRC is in better shape after this decision. Fact: The FRC was established to score political points. Fact: They spent over $100,000 on meetings yet accomplished little (they say the found the $1.6 million deficit, yet another lie, because in 2014 it was brought to the attention of the council). Fact, our asst City Manager, had to spend hours teaching two members of the FRC, the difference between Municipal accounting and Private/Public accounting, and they still don’t get it. Fact: All of the projections made up by the Capo Cares army have turned out to be wrong, WRONG! Fact: In September the vice chair even admitted his projections were off and yet again it happened this year too (fact, our budget outlook is way better then Capo Cares tells us), Folks, the whole FRC was developed to go after 3 people who weren’t even elected when we had issue with our budget. And these 3 people are being honest with all of us. Bad part is Save DP and Capo Cares are throwing out false and misleading statements and you all are falling for it. Final fact, Monarch Beach is paying 55-60% of the bills yet only receiving 9% of the budget. Time for change (we need districts), let’s stop supporting those who lie and take true action to get our fiscal house in order (and it’s not as bad as you think).

  • “They spent over $100,000 on meetings yet accomplished little”
    Could you please tell me where I’d find that information?
    Thank you.

  • Brandon Day is not a credible source. Virtually all of the assertions he makes in the comment above are not correct or are misrepresentations of what really happened.

    • Only speak in facts Steve, Facts. Not talking point from Capo Cares. More than willing to show you the 42% document, dated April 2017. If you want facts let me know. Also willing to show you a memo from the Assistant City Manager to council, stating that 67% of the street maintenance also goes to Capo (this email was in response to false information Mr. Hill/Ms. Nelson threw out in the public last year, and BTW, it was a beat down on the false information thrown out there by those two FRC members). Also, have about 10 emails from Hill/Nelson/Lewis trying to hide the 42% number (they added 5 districts from 3, in order to say Doheny Village is it’s own area), that got the number down to 35% Just reality. Anytime you want facts, name a time and place and I would be more than willing to give you copies (it is public information after all). Facts, they sure our tough to beat and they blow the whole narrative of Capo Cares and the past FRC.

    • Steve, anytime you would like to see the documents let me know. I have the April 2017 spending by district document (capital Improvement budget 2007-2017), the memo to council from Assistant Manager Killebrew, where he shows 67% of the street maintenance budget gets spent in Capo, and a few emails from your team leaders (Nelson/Hill/Lewis) showing them in a mad dash to change the way the 42% number came about. Anytime Steve. See facts are facts, not talking points from Capo Cares. Big fact, Monarch Beach provides 55-60% of the revenue yet we receive 9% of the Capital Improvement Budget – 9%. Good thing we are moving to districts soon.

  • Mr. Day should state the source of his allegations or their validity is highly suspect..

    HIs statistic implying excessive expenditures in Capistrano Beach, which he often asserts, has been continuously refuted by the City Manager and the city staff. A considerable amount of city resources, however, have been spent recently on Town Center (over $20 million). Currently an expenditure of $3,3 million is underway for Crown Valley Parkway in Monarch Beach..

    Regarding the cost of the Financial Review Committee (FRC), the committee members donate their time, not only at the meeting, but for all the research time done to prepare for the meetings. It is a valuable resource. The committee has not requested the attendance of city staff, which is under the direction of the City Manager and the Assistant City Manager,

    The Assistant City Manager has agreed with the FRC that the rate of city expenditures is rising faster than its revenue. The FRC had been addressing ways to control costs and increase revenue. If recommended changes are implemented, millions of dollars could be saved.

    For example, user fees for requested city services for developers have not been increased for 19 years with an estimated loss of $2 million per year. Also, the FRC recommended that there be an RFP (competitive bids) for the city attorney contract, a common and responsible business practice. That contract hasn’t been reviewed for 16 years and the city’s legal costs are substantially higher than neighboring cities.

    The FRC, has brought these and other critical issues, neglected for years, to the attention of the public and the city council. The FRC cannot make policy changes but can only make recommendations to the city council. It is understandable that the city staff may not appreciate the “watch dog” designation of the FRC. The financial condition of the city is the city council’s main responsibility and the work of the FRC should be appreciated..

    • Fact checker – more than willing to show you the documents that show the April 2017 document and the emails from the leaders of Capo Cares trying to change the way they came up with the numbers (I didn’t come up with the numbers, the city did). Also, it does include the Town Center, so spending in Capo is far worse than even the city acknowledges

      In regards to the comments about the donation of time – how about staff cost?. Just add up the average time per meeting and review the number of staff at those meetings. Now add an additional cost for all of the time Mr. Killebrew had to teach remedial municipal accounting practices to some of the members of the FRC, and then throw in CalPers (not too mention the cost of lights, air conditioning, paper, research, etc…. ) So it has cost, a lot. I agree, their are some benefits of the FRC, just take the politics out,

  • Day is right, Capo Cares hurts Dana Point.

    • Yacht Man would you care to elaborate? How does caring about an underserved community (have you driven Doheny Village lately? ) hurt Dana Point? Get a grip, man. The area needs all the help it can get. If Capo improves so does Dana Point. Why bash people trying to help? Are you working for the three blind mice? Get on the right side dude. Residents matter.

  • The city website contains a summary of expenditures for each area of the city over the past ten years. Expenditures totaled $71,452,347 out of which city funded costs for Capistrano Beach expenditures totaled $18,165,323 or 25%, according to the chart.

    Mr. Day has claimed percentages from 42% to over 60% at the last city council meeting. The City Manager and the city staff have continuously refuted his claims, apparently to no avail. The following link gives the details of all the citywide expenditures with page 4 containing the summary referred to above.

  • Wherever Brandon Day goes, divisiveness and falsehoods follow. His agenda always seems to come back to pitting his neighborhood against Capo Beach. We don’t need these kinds of constant attacks on fellow residents.

  • Falsehoods Jay, come on. Every single thing the ex Mayor has stated have been falsehoods (comparing our police force with Laguna Woods? Giving us false numbers on the true cost of our city attorney, lying about contacting the GMs at the hotels on the smoking band (she contacted one, not three like she said from the dais, yet to be corrected 5 minutes later when the truth came out), just to list a few. She has issues with truthiness (her words).

    Just look at any city council meeting, who is always up in arms, Capo Cares, on every issue, every time and on everything (yet they are getting a great deal, for every $1 dollar in revenue they generate, they get $3.5-$4.20 back).

    Save DP and Capo Cares have done more harm than anyone. Why does the Capo Cares army come down to every meeting every time their is a building permit pulled?,And you tell me the ex mayor isn’t a political activist? Like you and Steve? (I would say fact checker name, but he/she is too confident in their self to list their name)

    Jay, you, Steve, and the band of no growthers should have the ex mayor tone down her consistent attack on three members of the council (BTW, they only got elected in 2014, and many of our issues are from 2008). It happens everyday, so please! Save DP members, boycotted business, attacked people, go after people on social media, go after council members, etc.. (even Wyatt, who at least thinks about issues, instead of just taking cues from the politburo).

    Last thing; Do you really think I make my numbers up? Again, would be more than willing to give you emails from your leaders, Nelson/Hill/Lewis/Wyatt, the CIP budget numbers, memo from staff, showing facts and showing how far off base Nelson/Hill/Lewis’s projections are and have been and how much staff time they cost us, in their pursuit of hiding the truth from the citizens. . Just let me know your address. You can private message me, if you really want to see facts.

comments (12)

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>