NOCCC Meeting Announcement


Below are North Orange County Conservative Coalition’s Voter
Recommendations for the November 4, 2014 General Election.


You are encouraged to do your own research and visit the links at the bottom for more thorough information.




Governor: This is the first time NOCCC is recommending leaving the boxes for Governor of California unchecked.

Why? Neel Kashkari is a Liberal who is a Republican by registration only. He voted for Obama and oversaw TARP under his administration, handing out $3 million in tax-payer funded bonus checks to his bank exec cronies. Kashkari supports gun control amnesty/drivers licenses for illegal immigrants, global warming regulations/cap & trade.

The Republican Party had a great candidate in Tim Donnelly and didn’t support him. Despite Donnelly’s 100% Republican voting record, understanding of the Constitution and ability to reach out to Democrats and the youth on issues like child protection and personal liberties, the Party leaders thought he was too conservative and too independent, so they did the Democrats’ job and sabotaged his campaign at every turn.

We have not forgotten the days of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Sending a message that we want a real Conservative candidate and won’t support a Liberal Republican is a strong reason to vote for neither. Jerry Brown is highly likely to win no matter what.

  • Lieutenant Governor: Ron Nehring
  • Secretary of State: Pete Peterson
  • Controller: Ashley Swearengin
  • Treasurer: Greg Conlon
  • Attorney General: Ronald Gold
  • Insurance Commissioner: Ted Gaines
  • State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Marshall Tuck


Associate Justice of the Supreme Court:

  • Goodwin Liu – NO
  • Mariano-Florentino Cuellar – NO
  • Kathryn Mickle Werdegar – YES




  • Proposition 1, Water Bill: NO
  • Proposition 2, State Budget: YES
  • Proposition 45, Healthcare Insurance: NO
  • Proposition 46, Drug Testing of Doctors (written by trial lawyers): NO
  • Proposition 47, Criminal Sentences: NO
  • Proposition 48, Indian Gaming Contracts: NO




  • Member, State Board of Equalization 4th District: Diane Harkey
  • US Congressman 39th District: Ed Royce
  • State Assembly 55th AD: Ling-Ling Chang
  • State Assembly 65th AD: Young Kim
  • Justice of the Superior Court Office No. 14: Kevin Haskins
  • Placentia-YL School Board: No recommendation
  • Municipal Water District of Orange County: Brett Barbre
  • Fullerton Joint Union High School Board: M J Noor
  • Brea Olinda Unified School Board: Holli Kittleson




Assessor: Claude Parrish

Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 4, Division 1:

  • Alex C. McDonald – YES
  • Gilbert Nares – YES
  • Terry B. O’Rourke – YES
  • James A. McIntyre – YES


Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 4, Division 2:

  • Thomas E. Hollenhorst – YES


Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 4, Division 3:

  • David A. Thompson – YES
  • Richard M. Aronson – YES
  • Richard D. Fybel – NO
  • William F. Rylaarsdam – YES
  • Kathleen E. O’Leary – NO




  • Brea: Steven Vargas and Marc Harris
  • Fullerton: Sean Paden and Greg Sebourn
  • Placentia: Craig Green and Chad Wanke
  • Yorba Linda: Jeff Decker and Judy Murray




  • Measure E, Campaign Finance Reform – YES
  • Measure G, Supervisorial Vacancy – NO
  • Yorba Linda Measure JJ – YES
  • Bond Measure H, Anaheim USD $249 Million Bond Fund – NO
  • Bond Measure I, Fullerton Joint Union High School District $175 Million Bond Fund – NO
  • Bond Measure J, North OC Community College District $574 Million Bond Fund – NO
  • Bond Measure K, Orange USD $296 Million Bond Fund – NO

(NOTE: Scroll down for arguments against bond fund measures.)




  • Anaheim Mayor – Tom Tait
  • Anaheim City Council – James Vanderbilt
  • Buena Park City Council – Baron Knight
  • Costa Mesa City Council – Tony Capitelli
  • Fountain Valley City Council – Mark McCurdy
  • Huntington Beach City Council – Erik Peterson and Lyn Semeta
  • Irvine Mayor – Steven Choi
  • Irvine City Council – Jeff Lalloway and Lynn Schott
  • Mission Viejo City Council – Ed Sachs and Desi Kiss
  • Newport Beach – Scott Peotter and Duffy Duffield
  • Rancho Santa Margarita City Council – Jesse Petrilla
  • San Juan Capistrano City Council – Derek Reeve
  • Villa Park City Council – Bob Collacott







OC Register 10/27/14: Heaping another $249 million in debt on taxpayers is unsupportable. It is hard to say what Anaheim Union High School District’s Measure H, a $249 million bond put to voters on the Nov. 4 ballot, will actually do.

According to full text of the Measure H, the bond would be used for “repairing classrooms and labs, including leaky roofs, decaying walls, deteriorating restrooms and accessibility for disabled students; upgrading basic infrastructure and utilities, including drinking water, sewer and gas’ enhancing safety and security, including fire safety and security systems’ and acquiring, upgrading, and constructing 21st century classrooms, schools, sites and support facilities.”

A laundry list of projects follows, to be spread across what looks like just about every school in the district, in a lengthy and extremely vague way that makes it hard to tell what the voters will actually get for their money, or the feasibility of seeing many of the projects reach completion. That is why we are urging a No vote on Measure H.

Further, the $249 million price tag of the bond, which opponents argue would be more like $535 million after financing, also gives us pause. That level of indebtedness, coupled with a $574 million North Orange County Community College District bond on the same ballot, is simply too much to ask the taxpayers of the area to bear.

While good schools are surely the building block of healthy communities, that means more than just good teachers; it also means sound infrastructure and financial management. Measure H isn’t the right approach for the district.




Fullerton Joint Union High School District Bond Measure I proposes a $175,000,000 bond. A bond is like a government credit card, where your taxes are raised to pay off that credit card.

Measure I asks voters to put $175,000,000 on a credit card. In other words, Measure I is a $175,000,000 tax hike!

The Fullerton Joint Union High School District (FJUHSD) is already projecting a $5,000,000 deficit in its 2014-15 budget.

Seven times in the last four years, FJUHSD held a certification that it “may not meet its financial obligations for the current or two subsequent fiscal years,” according to California’s Department of Education.

In 2002, we approved a $67,940,000 bond for FJUHSD. Measure l is almost twice the size of that bond! We’re still paying for the 2002 bond, and now they want us to approve a bigger one?

Not only that, in 2002, we approved a $239,000,000 bond for the North Orange County Community College District. Now, they have a $574,000,000 bond on this same ballot, Measure J.

How many bonds are we supposed to pay for? Just two years ago, California voters approved Proposition 30. We were promised “billions in new funding for our schools” from Proposition 30. Proposition 30 raised the sales tax and income tax. Measure I raises your property tax. What tax will they raise next?

What does a property tax increase mean for you?

  • Homeowners will pay more taxes.
  • Renters will see higher rent as landlords pass on the costs of higher taxes.
  • Struggling mom and pop businesses will pay higher rent as landlords pass on the costs of higher taxes.
  • Customers will see higher prices as businesses pass on the costs of higher taxes.


Fullerton, La Habra, Buena Park, La Habra Heights, Brea, La Palma, and Anaheim can’t afford another tax increase. Vote “NO” on Measure I, the $175,000,000 tax hike!


The following individuals signed the official arguments in opposition to this measure:

  • Jack Dean, president of the Fullerton Association of Concerned Taxpayers (FACT)
  • Bruce W. Whitaker, Fullerton City Council Member
  • William Hinz, governing board member of the Lowell Joint School District
  • Zonya Townsend, educator and registered nurse






By Sean Paden, Fullerton


In July, the North Orange County Community College District voted to approve a $574 million dollar construction bond measure for the November election. The cost to finance the bond (assuming it’s a 20 year bond at a 5% interest rate) will work out to $45 million per year, or $45 per year for every man, woman and child in the District. Considering that the NOCCD’s entire operating budget in 2012-2013 was $194 million, this is quite a chunk of change.

To be sure, the vote only placed the bond measure on the ballot, where it will be voted on by the public. However, the NOCCCD will likely pull all the stops to attempt to pass the measure: the NOCCCD has already been working behind the scenes urging community leaders to attend and speak out on this matter, and is in a full court PR press to build support for the measure by claiming its purpose is to upgrade the Veteran’s Resource Center.

To read the PR mailers on the project [which many in North OC have been receiving] it would appear that the entire purpose of this bond is to upgrade the Veterans Resource Center. Their early material shamelessly drives this point home – reminding us that “Our Veterans Deserve Better” and that “It’s shameful how the Federal Government Veterans Affairs Department is treating our veterans.”

First of all, let me say that I absolutely agree that it is completely shameful how the VA Department is treating our veterans. You know what else is shameful? Taxpayer funded agencies cynically trading in on the genuine admiration we have for our veterans (and guilt we have for the fact that their sacrifices to this country are so great compared to the rest of us) as a vehicle for ramming through hundreds of millions of dollars in new spending that is not in any way related to veterans affairs.

If the NOCCCD just wanted to upgrade the veteran’s centers at Fullerton and Cypress, they could do it for one percent of the proposed bond amount. What do they plan on doing with the other 99% of that money, and why should our willingness to help veterans cause us to ignore the tremendous blank check the NOCCCD is demanding?

Also, keep in mind that the NOCCCD has a documented history of pushing massive construction bond measures by overt emotional appeals and then not even following through on the promised construction. As noted in THIS article in the LA Times (hardly a hotbed of anti-tax sentiment), the NOCCCD pushed through a $239 million bond measure in 2002 that was to include improvements to child development centers on the campuses that served pre-school children. Then, once the voters (barely) passed the measure, all funds went to other projects, and one of the centers had to close for lack of funding.

In summary, veterans do deserve our respect, our gratitude, and our help whenever they need it. Bloated bureaucracies like the NOCCCD do not.




By Deborah Pauly, Villa Park Councilwoman


Send the message it’s not open season for grabbing money from taxpayers. Vote NO to increased taxes from misleading bond measures and mismanaged bond funds!

If Measure K passes, most of the increased commercial and residential property taxes we will pay for the next 30 to 40-years will go toward paying the interest on this outrageous $296 million school bond scheme.





There is a better way to repair and modernize our schools.

OUSD chooses to take the easy way out by asking voters to “give them a blank check” instead of properly prioritizing the appropriation of limited financial resources.

Do NOT reward poor management. We have a right to expect our Board of Education Trustees to be faithful stewards of our education tax dollars.

By voting NO on Measure K, you’ll send a strong message that OUSD must come up with a better plan. You deserve a plan that is transparent, realistic, honest, economically feasible and includes cost-control measures. Any financing should be with shorter issuance terms that are easier to more accurately project.


Get the facts:



For more information and recommendations on candidates and measures in areas outside of North Orange County, the link below, to the California Family Council (affiliate of Focus on the Family) provides a guide with recommendations by Conservative and Liberal Groups.


The link below provides statewide voting guide for conservative JUDGE recommendations:


For additional State and OC information and recommendations, visit OC Tea Party Blog by Kelly Hubbard:


North Orange County Conservative Coalition

Our Vision:  Ensuring a future of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all Americans by restoring constitutionally limited government.

Our Mission:  NOCCC is a group of concerned citizens in North Orange County dedicated to advancing the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution through education, community outreach, direct grassroots action, media, one-on-one communications, and the empowerment of leaders. We promote constitutionally limited government, the rule of law, individual liberty, free enterprise, private property, personal responsibility, the abolition of corruption, and color-blind equality.