Byron de Arakal -- Between the Lines

You have been reading on these pages in recent weeks about a few

ragtag platoons of Costa Mesa residents who are, shall we say, more than

a little put off by the creeping urban rot that’s feasting on the once

picturesque fabric of their beloved Westside Costa Mesa.

Collectively, these folks are quirky and colorful, often controversial

and sometimes quixotic. They claim allegiance to the flags of various

community factions that are, if united in purpose, not always marching to

the same fife and bugle corps.

Now, in recent years, it has not been unusual to find political

operatives in this city discounting these mercenaries. That’s because

their message has often been unpolished, disjointed or so far outside the

box that they defy practicality, if not reason. And up until last

November, when Councilman Chris Steel swept into office with more votes

than any other candidate, the Westsiders were without a bedrock

sympathizer behind the dais to peddle their causes.

But the tide is shifting. Dramatically, perhaps. And as I read it,

this loose confederation of Westside residents has the potential to drive

the debate and shape the political landscape in this town for the next

couple of election cycles. Why? Mostly because nothing sparks and fans a

political firestorm more than an angry mob of voters weary of being

dismissed with bemusement or disdain, or both, by their elected leaders.

And these folks are ticked.

Given that, the political empowerment of the Westside movement (read:

Steel’s election) virtually guarantees that the marquee issues in the

2002 municipal election will be property values, crime and schools.

They’re the same issues that paved the way for Steel’s victory. Only now

they have teeth in a growing grass-roots following and an unvarnished

council advocate in Steel.

Those behind the Westside movement know it too. That’s why there’s

already chatter going on among the leaders and infantrymen of this

crusade about consolidating its political power. Even with 18 months to

go before the 2002 municipal election -- the political equivalent of

eternity -- there’s talk of searching out City Council candidates to

supplement Steel’s vote by two.

Councilman Gary Monahan -- who technically could seek a third stint on

the council despite the city’s two-term limit -- has more than hinted to

me and others that he’s not interested in a third go-round, wanting

instead to devote more time to his family and his restaurant, Skosh

Monahans. And many in the Westside movement see Councilwoman Linda Dixon

as vulnerable because of her perceived insensitivity to their issues and

her single-minded focus on the arts.

Now the extent to which the Westside tour de force is able to

consolidate and leverage its influence depends nearly exclusively on how

smart it plays its politics. Here, there’s room for improvement.

Rather than drawing its life from any one group, the Westside

improvement juggernaut is really a phenomenon fueled by several

organizations and individuals.

There’s Citizens for the Improvement of Costa Mesa, the largest and

most vocal squad of organized voters. But their battlefield encompasses

citywide improvement, not just on the Westside. Then there’s the Westside

Improvement Assn., a more sedate and deliberate band of residents whose

mission is to move Westside redevelopment off the dime. Both the Latino

Business Council and the Latino Community Network -- which are suspicious

of the motives of certain other city improvement advocates -- are

striving to unite the Latino community with the rest of the city.

Meanwhile, the Wallace Area Improvement Group -- a collection of 44

Westside apartment owners and managers -- is pursuing its own strategy

for purging its neighborhoods of gang activity, graffiti and drug use.

While all of this activity buoys one’s faith that there are pockets of

democratic activism in an otherwise apathetic society, the political

clout of these maverick causes isn’t nearly as impressive as it would be

if they would simply fall in behind a unified front. This doesn’t mean

scuttling their individual platforms.

Rather, it suggests that their political muscle becomes formidable --

and nearly invincible -- if they would simply lash their planks together.

They can do that by agreeing to common policy objectives and by drafting

candidates willing to carry those objectives into battle.

They would do better, too, if some in their ranks would cease

bombarding the city’s charitable organizations as bait for illegal

immigrants, the homeless and otherwise indigent. While Costa Mesa can’t

claim that it doesn’t have its share of these folks, it is not a problem

that is quantifiable to the extent that it can be pinned with the

Westside’s decline.

Booting charitable organizations from the city will not materially

revitalize the Westside. Worse, it will surely be seen as mean-spirited,

which is a poison to sustained political legitimacy. And persistently

laying the ills of the Westside at the feet of an undetermined number of

illegal immigrants (is there or isn’t there a problem?) only serves to

alienate the legitimate Latino community, which represents a strong and

emerging political force crucial to the revitalization of the Westside.

The smartest politics Westside advocates can engage in is the

formation of an alliance to aggressively pursue mutually crafted policies

that promote reduced density, redevelopment and rezoning. To do that is

to dominate the political landscape in Costa Mesa for some time to come.

* Byron de Arakal is a writer and communications consultant. He

resides in Costa Mesa. His column runs Wednesdays. Readers can reach him

with news tips and comments via e-mail at [email protected].