Bromberg earns early support

S.J. CAHN

In an unprecedented show of support, the Newport Beach Firefighters

Assn. has already thrown its support behind City Councilman Steve

Bromberg, who is running for reelection this fall.

“It’s very early, and we recognize that,” Rich Thomas, the

association’s president, told me Tuesday. “It’s the first time we’ve

ever done this [so early].”

The association almost always waits until the filing period

closes, so members know for certain who’s running, Thomas said. But

they could come up with no scenario in which they wouldn’t support

Bromberg, who served as mayor in 2003.

“He’s been a particularly strong supporter of public safety ...

and a strong support of the men and women who provide public safety,”

Thomas said.

The only other time the association made a choice before the full

field was known was when former City Councilwoman Norma Glover was

running for reelection, he said. And then, it was only a week from

the close of the filing period.

Bromberg naturally said he was pleased by the show of support.

“I was surprised to receive an endorsement from any one or any

group this early,” he said. “The firefighters stated to me that they

felt that I was well-rounded and that I am doing a fine job for the

city as a whole. Needless to say, I appreciate their confidence as

well as being somewhat flattered by such an early endorsement. I have

since heard from a number of community leaders who are also letting

me know early on that they are supporting my re-election campaign.”

It will be interesting to see if the firefighters’ support

discourages opposition to Bromberg. (Is there any way it possibly

could encourage it?).

A call to Bromberg’s main opponent in 2000, Pat Beek, to see if

she might run again, possibly under the Greenlight banner, went

unreturned.

Greenlight’s election plans will be of particular note -- even

though the influence irks some in the city. Spokesman Phil Arst said

the group has no comment at this time about what kind of campaign, if

any, it will put together.

My guess, though, is that Newport Beach voters won’t be seeing a

slate of Greenlight candidates. Although seating only Councilman Dick

Nichols was not the knock-out political punch some have spun it as,

Greenlight, as a political movement, needs a solid win this time

around. (Greenlight as the growth-control law is on the city’s books

and is something else entirely.) Talks with people outside

Greenlight’s core group all edge toward a similar conclusion: that

the group will focus all its time and money on one candidate.

I see one core reason for such a strategy rising above all others.

And it’s not exactly what many might think. It’s not just about who

has the most money. After all, Greenlight-backed Rick Taylor (now a

member of the Greenlight Committee), spent $32,000 in his

unsuccessful race against Councilman Gary Adams, who spent $40,000.

It’s about being able to spend it wisely. And in the final days of

the campaign in 2002, Greenlight wasn’t able to combat the late

spending of “Team Newport,” which consisted of Adams, Mayor Tod

Ridgeway, Councilman Don Webb and the team’s only failed candidate,

Bernie Svalstad. That group congealed as an official political group

after the final pre-election filing date, so it was able to spend

$10,000 from each of the four candidates without any opponents

knowing.

It was a mild controversy a year ago when the group’s actions --

largely consisting of sending out a glossy slate mailer -- came to

light.

I’m sure Greenlight leaders won’t forget it, and my guess is that

the best way to ensure they can respond to any late campaigning is to

have all their money on one candidate.

Next question. Whom do they run against?

“Certainly, I’m the most vulnerable,” said the newest member of

the council, Steve Rosansky, who replaced former Councilman Gary

Proctor three months ago.

Rosansky’s honest assessment follows the conventional wisdom: He’s

had less time to earn name recognition and less time to raise money

for a reelection. But judging by all the homeowners’ groups he’s met

with and the near-universal praise for how quickly he’s gotten up to

speed on city issues, Rosansky won’t be a push-over.

Plus, in the next week of two, he told me, he plans to file papers

so he can begin raising money and running his reelection campaign.

And he has early support of his own.

“He has no personal agenda, other than wanting to serve his

community,” Bromberg said. “He has a strong sense of fairness and

clearly does his due diligence on issues before him. He has spent an

incredible amount of time learning the issues and bringing himself

current. I am extremely impressed with his work ethic which is why I

have offered to support him in his up-coming election -- or

reelection -- to whatever extent he wishes.”

Rosansky also sounded open to discussing issues with Greenlight

members, though his opposition to the measure in 2000 may be a

nonstarter.

“I’d like to think I’m open to talk to those folks as well as

everyone else,” he said during a phone conversation in which he

struck me as having a genuine, if not unusual, passion for the

process of being in government. “I don’t see them as the opposition

or the other side.”

He also talked about enjoying the job and sounded, over and over,

really enthusiastic about being on the council. Those qualities can

only serve him well during the campaign.

And it may just be that Greenlight won’t come after him, if one

final wildcard falls a particular direction. It is entirely possible

that Councilman John Heffernan, who has toyed publicly with the idea

of not running again and then somewhat changed his mind, won’t run.

If he doesn’t, his open seat would be a level playing field where

Greenlight could gather.

Of course, there’s an obvious problem with running just one

candidate. If that person loses, it could be a debilitating blow to

Greenlight. The group’s leaders will have to decide if that’s a risk

they are willing to take.

* S.J. CAHN is the managing editor. He may be reached at (949)

574-4233 or by e-mail at [email protected].