Probolsky On Property Rights In San Clemente

You may have read this "Reader Rebuttal" by San Clemente resident Jim Cogan, published in the OCR Commentary section on Sunday.

Cogan's piece is a caricature of David v. Goliath populism, firing off alarming adjectives like Katyusha rockets.

Citizens opposing the Shorecliffs Height and View Protection Ordinance (which prohibits only certain San Clemente residents -- ones who live in Shorecliffs -- from building second stories on their homes) become "a small faction of Shorecliffs homeowner-builders" decried for "a take-no-prisoners assault" launched outside a...WalMart (eeeewww, that's so north county).

To believe Cogan, it's not really even a campaign by his neighbors (whom he anathematizes as a "well-heeled group") -- it is "the Probolsky campaign" that is causing "the price per signature" to "soar" in his scheme "to force an expensive special election" (ever notice how the only people who outraged at "expensive" special elections are those who stand to lose by them?).

The irony is Cogan weakens his rebuttal with all the overwrought, overheated "fight-the-power" rhetoric. I disagree with him and oppose ordinance he seeks to protect, but Cogan actually makes a reasonable case. However, the "evil campaign consultant" v. "us little people" vituperation distracts from his arguments.

Probolsky posted a response to Cogan yesterday on FR Blog -- and thanked Cogan for the free publicity.

Comments

[One Who Knows]

Cogan's arguments are completely disingenuous. There are no "special election" costs with regard to a referendum unless the City chooses to put the matter before the voters at a special election. Otherwise, the vote will be held in conjunction with the "next regularly scheduled municipal election."

And, why would Cogan, who is opposed to the referendum, fret about the cost of signatures going up? I would think someone opposed to the referendum would be pleased that the proponents costs were rising. What an idiot.

As for blasting Probolsky, my experience is that when your opposition starts attacking your campaign staff, the election is over! You've won.

[David Zenger]

Jubal, I think your first link is to the original editorial, not Cogan's response (which is linked by Probolsky on the Flash Report).

Coincidentally, some of the good folks in the unincorporated North Tustin area are now pushing for a Zone Code Amendment that would limit houses in their neighborhood to 19' - with no part of a window above 8' off the ground. This is being reviewed by the County Planning Commission tomorrow and should prove interesting.

[Jubal]

David:

Fixed -- thanks for the heads up.

You go Adam!!

[Mark]

If Cogan is opposed to people looking at him in his bathroom why did he pose for the picture? Y? Because he likes it... Thats the real story here...

[whatever]

Cogan's "view" deck is a monstrosity and should qualify as a second story. Man it is fugly.