SCAG: "Where Fantasy Meets Absurdity"

Last night Don Watts nailed SCAG once again. "Where fantasy meets absurdity" is how he termed the planning conceits of this bizarre organization. One backed up by the full power of our state and federal governments, of course. Which I guess makes SCAG kind of like the crazy aunt your parents forced you to be nice to when you were a kid. And last night that crazy aunt once again had the full attention of Sierra Madre's elected officials.

One of the most time honored criticisms of authoritarian central planning bureaucracies like SCAG is that they do not have any real insight into what is needed at the local level. Nor do they particularly care. SCAG can certainly crank out mighty proclamations and theories regarding how they think the world ought to be, but after their otherworldly ponderings get boiled down to actual numbers and forced upon local governments, you end up with the kind of thing we saw at last night's City Council meeting. Reasonably intelligent people wasting a whole lot of time creating a document designed merely to placate a bunch effete bureaucrats. Something that has absolutely no real value to anyone whatsoever, but did consume a few weeks worth of time, effort and staff salary to create.

Look at it this way. Left to their own devices would the elected officials of Sierra Madre and our City staff ever willingly sit down and attempt to predict how many more jobs and houses there will be here in 11 years? I don't think so. And why that arbitrary 11 years figure? Why not 14? Or 103? And why houses and jobs? Why not doorknobs? Or fish tanks? Or what about how many fish tanks will have doorknobs in Sierra Madre by the year 2093? If we're going to waste our time and tax money on nonsense, why not go for the gusto?

As if any numbers on jobs and housing City staff cooks up in 2009 are going to have validity for folks in the year 2020. That is, if anyone in 2020 will even know of their existence. Which I doubt.

Of course, trying to explain this to SCAG Commissar Ikhrata could be equally futile. After all, that's probably how they did it when he was a young planner in the Soviet Union. And outside of a famine or two, things there weren't so bad, right? At least until the entire system collapsed under the weight of a similar inherent madness.

So in the spirit of bringing this incident to that full measure of absurdity Don spoke about, we are going to try and summarize what exactly was said by the meeting participants. Because despite the farcical premise of the topic, wise things were said. At least by a few.

Our City Planner Danny Castro, batting leadoff, gave his second (or possibly third) presentation on what housing and jobs projections we should present to SCAG. Unfortunately, in the last three years we have net zero new households. Factual information SCAG would probably wish not to hear because it does not show growth. Showing growth being a priority over actual growth, I suppose. SCAG has demanded that we project 140 new houses by the year 2020, but based on what? Commissar Ikhrata's mood swings? Danny does not speculate in that way. He did offer up the number of 72 houses, I guess in hopes of getting SCAG off our backs. And on jobs SCAG wants us to say we'll have 267 new ones by 2020. Danny only offered up 82. Apparently pizza consumption is down in Sierra Madre.

John Buchanan found Danny's numbers objectionable. And while he did ramble on about the topic (as always), I am not certain he said much that made sense. He did say something about Sierra Madre dropping Howie's as a development site until 2025. Apparently he arrived at this through a process of deductive reasoning. Howie's, if developed in the way John imagines it should be, would apparently create much new housing and jobs if made properly gargantuan. But Danny left that opportunity out according to John. Which he then proclaimed to be a very negative thing to do. John then made the odd statement that "we're telling people that the Howie's lot will sit there dead for 10 or 20 years."

Now I don't know about you, but I find Taylor's to be a delightful store. I shop there often because of the high quality meats and produce they sell. For a City Councilman to proclaim that the site of our city's finest grocery store is "dead" is unfortunate. I'm not sure the business climate in town is such that we can afford to denigrate something like Taylor's in this way.

Then the verbose Councilman Buchanan concluded his sense siesta by inadvertently revealing one of the core problems of government in this state. Staring into his crystal ball, he proclaimed that after 3 years the economy will pick up, and with it the number of jobs in Sierra Madre. And if we assume our jobs number will not grow at the SCAG correct level, we are actually projecting the "decline of this town." With the consequence of "hurting our chances for funding." Which begs this question: if we make up some big fancy employment growth numbers, we'll get more money from Sacramento? If that is how it really works, then it is no wonder the government of California is a fiscal waste site.

Don Watts is always on a roll when the topic of SCAG comes up. "We don't have major growth in this town and it has been that way for years. But we have been mandated to say these things to a dysfunctional government." Don then spoke about how nothing will be built in this town for the next two years because there is nothing of any real size or paradigm changing import in the planning process at this time. He then said the City Council should just approve Danny's numbers because enough time has been wasted on this nonsense already.

Joe Mosca apparently reached deep into his bag of opposable personalities and pulled out his Little Miss Sunshine suit. After offering a particularly chipper and content-free defense of SB 375, he then proclaimed that everyone is on the same page in this SCAG matter, and that perhaps we should all join hands and celebrate ourselves. Which, when you consider John Buchanan's emphatic "no" vote later in the evening, is about as fatuous a statement as any Joe has made to date. Which is saying a lot. Look for a video in a couple of days.

Kurt Zimmerman proclaimed SCAG's numbers to be a nightmare. He noted that staff had put a lot of time and effort into ginning up some numbers of our own, but there wasn't a lot of quality data to base them on. He then looked over at Joey Sunshine and expressed some doubt about "the same page" thing. Kurt voiced the very logical concern that by sending these numbers in we'll be seen as admitting to growth and jobs that probably won't happen. Possibly resulting in SCAG ratcheting up these fantasy numbers even higher. And should we really be all that concerned about maybe losing a bus line? Something few here use anyway? The real concern in Sierra Madre is over dramatic growth. A far more important consideration to the vast majority of people living here than a couple of empty SCAG buses.

Which brings us to Mayor MacGillvray. MaryAnn finds herself in the unfortunate position of having to balance the considerable pressure from those opposed to our even being in SCAG (the author raises his hand), with the rather grim choices offered by the duplicitous Sacramento agendas driving all this. She defended City staff's methodology, claiming there is a reality to these calculations that we can defend to SCAG. We are safer in the long run by being conservative than by being foolishly optimistic, she stated, because if we go that route we could be forced to accept SCAG numbers that "will change the fabric of the community."

Some of which I have a problem with. But then the Mayor offered up this statement:

"This is not so much about projecting future visions as it is an issue of local government maintaining control over where growth occurs."

And that, my friends, is the stone cold truth. These people want to take that control away from cities like ours and place it in the hands of Sacramento. Where it can all be sold to the highest bidder. And they have the guns and money to do it.

In the end, the City Council approved Danny's numbers. Only John Buchanan voted no.

Post # 300

We're coming up on the first anniversary of The Tattler, and finally the real purpose for doing this exercise in extreme typing is coming into view. All this writing just to put in the foundation. Now it is time to start building something a little more.

But since this is our 300th post (and in a little less than eleven months!), I figured it is as good a time as any to share a little hopeful news with you. Three random articles that, to me, show that beneath all the dreary hype and endless propaganda we are forced to endure, somehow the truth does manage to get through. And that we can, and will, win next April. In the process putting to an end once the carpetbagger redevelopment nightmare personified by a City Councilman who claimed four years ago to be "just like us," but turned out to be the personification of everything we never wanted for Sierra Madre. You can only pity the fools being dragooned into running alongside him.

The first article of these three articles is short, but brings along a lot of hope for the future. It comes from the Sacramento Bee's "Capitol Alert" web page. A story not very widely reported, of course, but maybe that doesn't matter so much.

Anti-growth forces emerge on top - This week's election featured the usual array of local ballot measures dealing with commercial and residential development and slow- and no-growth advocates appear to have won more than they lost, according to the California Development and Planning Report, an authoritative newsletter of urban planning issues.

"All in all, voting on November 3 local ballot measures provided the usual mixed bag," the newsletter said. "The slow growth side won 8 of 12 easily classifiable contests..."

Now as we've been discussing lately, the leadership of the "Repair California" claque that believes it somehow has a mandate to give California a new Constitution has a very suspect pedigree. With some of its key leadership being the same folks who engineered the passage of such things as SB 375, the legislative boondoggle for redevelopers absurdly posing as a way of saving the world from global warming. But you know what? It looks like people aren't buying this "New Constitution" sham, either. This from latimes.com:

Backers of an overhaul of California's government, who hope to leverage disgust with Sacramento into support for changing how the state raises taxes and spends money, have a difficult path ahead, according to a new poll of California voters.

Major segments of the electorate see the state's problems as the product of unrestrained lawmakers driven by special interests to waste taxpayer money, and reject arguments that structural issues with the state's Constitution and government institutions are to blame.

This next piece gave me chills. It comes from the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard. Tell me that what it describes here is not all that different from things we've seen here in our little town.

Creating a New Town Square - Tucked between a verdant coastal mountain range and stark Pacific Ocean bluff tops, Half Moon Bay is one of those rare, spectacular natural places. It's also a classic small town, time-warped only by the happy accident of relative geographic inaccessibility to the suburbanized San Francisco-Silicon Valley corridor just 20 minutes "over the hill."

Not everyone here is involved in local politics, but pretty much everyone has an opinion. What it boils down to is development. What's our civic vision? Do we continue to define ourselves fundamentally as a rural fishing and agricultural community, open to sweeping vistas and closed to shopping mall sprawl? Or do we make Faustian bargains, trading bits of historic identity for real estate deals dressed up in the shroud of progress?

These questions lend themselves to endless political soap-opera gyrations among "pro-growthers," "no-growthers," "slow-growthers," "managed growthers" and ... (fill in the blank). Meanwhile, an alienated "silent majority" tunes in to the local cable access channel to watch, and perhaps ruefully to laugh at, the routine Kabuki of another public meeting.

It's a familiar small-town story, for sure. At its heart is the flow of information driving - or distorting - so much of the civic ecosystem. The weekly newspaper amounts to a water cooler, a town square, the proverbial grapevine. Quite a sacred trust - and it comes with unbelievable, often unchecked, power to influence discourse among citizens.

Not unlike major market media, most small newspapers are driven by bottom-line profit. And that pressure is more obvious in some places than others. In the case of our chain-owned local weekly, ad space is dominated by - what else in California?- real estate. The pressure to develop subdivisions and golf courses on every last, highly valuable inch of available coastal property is intense. Environmental law is for some a nuisance to be gotten around. This tension is the subtext of everything, from elections to infrastructure to public school education to which watering-hole people choose to frequent. Take a side. Our local newspaper unquestionably has.

The local paper's version of truth is constantly rebutted for its misrepresentations and insinuations. Starting with city council members who have gone on record with their frustration and refusal even to read the paper, many consider it advocacy rather than journalism. Ask for a correction or clarification and, if one appears, it will likely have a snarky editor's note appended. In any case, once something falsely damaging is out in circulation, it's too late.

That's why it was such a breath of fresh air when an online journalist stepped up to offer a different point of view. More than that, Barry Parr has brought integrity, wit and professionalism to Coastsider.com. Though familiar with newsrooms as a result of his work designing early Web sites for Silicon Valley news outlets such as the San Jose Mercury News, Parr had no professional reporting experience. He's gotten his cub training as a middle-aged, computer-age Thomas Paine - a classic watchdog journalist, with a take-no-prisoners pay scale to match.

To the amusement and relief of devoted readers, Parr has at times posted line-edited-for-accuracy versions of pieces featured in the weekly. He has outed those who would intimidate or suppress opposing points of view. He has created a civilized space for alternative voices - and unsponsored truth.

It might sound overblown, but Coastsider.com provides an unbelievably critical public service. It's a locus for the kind of civic trust and independence on which the idea of journalism, indeed democracy, is based. And he doesn't even own a printing press.

You see? We're not alone after all.

Article # 301 tomorrow. After all, there is a City Council meeting tonight that we'll need to talk about.

Political Robo-Calling Is Illegal In California

Kind of hard to believe I know, but political robo-calling is illegal in the State of California. Considering the vast quantity of the stuff that harshed our collective mellow during last year's presidential dust-up, you wouldn't think that was the case. And if it is, shouldn't half of the political establishment in this state have been convicted by now and be currently enjoying the amenities at Club Arnold?

Of course, the most egregious example of robo-calling here in Sierra Madre was during our most recent City Council elections. The target of this nasty attempt at political smear was MaryAnn McGillivray, who fortunately weathered that storm and now serves as our fine Mayor. The names of the culprits behind this unlawful activity were never revealed, with all the usual suspects vehemently denying any role in the matter. Which makes perfect sense. After all, they had committed a crime.

As an aside, it is interesting to note that almost all the recipients of these calls were Democrats. Now I wonder, who would have had access to that particular data bank? A consideration that in my opinion provides at least anecdotal evidence of a possible source for this malfeasance.

This certainly does give you a good idea of what political desperation will drive these idiots to do sometimes. And considering the amount of people on the "other side" who have now rejected requests from their so-called leadership to run for City Council next April, desperation will likely play a significant role when they consult their arsenal of unwholesome tricks in a few months.

So how do we stop these individuals from firing up the phone banks like they did during the last go 'round? Shaun Dakin is the CEO & Founder of The National Do Not Contact Registry. A pioneer in phone privacy, he has become a key figure in the fight to curb this type of abuse. Additionally his organization also works to make sure that existing laws protecting our privacy in these matters are enforced, and that people like us are fully clued in on just how we can help the cause.

I'm going to post a chunk of his article here. It is not only great information, but also gives us some real options on how to stop these characters in their tracks. Dakin's article was obviously written for the 2008 election season (it was originally posted in June of last year), but the advice is still quite good. And now we know we have somewhere to turn.

Political Robo Calls Are Illegal in California: You Can Help Enforce the Law and Protect Your Privacy by Shaun Dakin

As someone who has been focused on the harm that robo-calls -- those pre-recorded phone messages -- have on all Americans, I was perplexed when I learned that under the existing California Public Utilities Code political robocalls are illegal.

The group that I run, The National Political Do Not Contact Registry (NPDNC), the nation's only political do not call advocacy group, is demanding today that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) enforce the current law, sections 2871-2876 of the Public Utilities Code. The law requires that most automated calls be introduced by a live person, which almost never happens, but the California PUC has not enforced it. With the support of California voters who are willing to make an official complaint to the CPUC, the NPDNC hopes to be able to shut down robo-calls in California ...

The CPUC Code Sections 2871-2876 clearly prohibit any form of auto-dialer calls or robo-calls being made in California unless the call is preceded by a live voice and states: "only after an unrecorded, natural voice announcement has been made to the person called by the person calling."

Shaun Dakin's group is requesting that anyone interested in curbing this illegal practice to register on their site. After your account becomes active, you'll be able to use the site where complaints can be filed. There you will be asked who called you, day and time, plus your contact information so they can follow up and chase down the evil doers.

The law is on our side. Let's make sure we use this resource and shut down Dirt robo-calling.

2009 "There Ought To Be A Law" Contest!

Our State Senator Bob Huff is running a contest. And not just any contest, but one where you get to propose a law and, if it is chosen as the winning idea, he will propose it before the California State Senate for their deliberation and maybe even a vote!

Now something along the lines of a law that would prevent a legislator from voting on a project that he has family financial ties to might be a good idea, but far be it from I to try and put words in your mouth.

So what we'd like to do here is have your ideas posted here. We will then compile them and into one mighty powerhouse of legislative thinkingsend 'em on in to the Senator for his consideration.

The link to the contest is here.

This is how the Senator words it:

2009 "There Ought To Be A Law" Contest

Do you have a common sense idea to cut waste, fraud, and abuse from state government? Are you a small business owner frustrated by bureaucratic red tape? Do you see a sensible solution to a growing problem in the community?

Some of the best ideas for state legislation come from those most affected by the proposal at a local level. If you have an idea for a new law that you'd like me to consider, or if you'd like to legitimately see a particular law abolished, I hope you will participate in my "There Ought To Be A Law" contest.

I hope to select one idea and introduce it as part of my 2010 legislative bill package in February. The person submitting the chosen idea will be invited to join me for lunch in Sacramento at the State Capitol and will receive a California State flag that has been flown over the Capitol.

There is no indication here of who exactly will be paying for the lunch.

Good luck! And may the best Tattler win!

The Joe Mosca Top 10 Video Countdown!

Most people are aware by now of the high regard that we here at The Tattler have for Joe Mosca. Certainly his achievements alone speak volumes about what he has brought to this community. And thanks to the hard work of the fine folks at Neuroblast Films, we now have solid video portrayals of the man, his style, his values, and the inspirational leadership he has provided for us all.

And as a service to the community of Sierra Madre, we are now presenting Joe Mosca's Top 10 Video Hits. A collection of each and every one of his most golden moments reviewed and ranked in the order of their importance to this town.

Come and join in the celebration as we take a trip down the Joe Mosca Pathway to Glory. One remarkable video at a time!

Video #10: "Joe Mosca Supports Glenn Lambdin for Canyon Committee." Now if you were nominating somebody to a community planning committee dedicated to preserving a beloved and historic neighborhood, would you select an individual who has worked his entire adult life to turn it into Anaheim?

Video #9: "Heather Allen Defends Sierra Madre With Eloquence." A favorite with many in the community, this video shows Councilman Mosca being vividly debased by a very angry resident. Special Achievement Award.

Video #8: "Joe Mosca Again Pushing Pro-Development." Joe, who introduced himself to Sierra Madre as a slow growth advocate interested in preserving the community, has pushed more claptrap and bunkum in support of redevelopment than anyone previously serving on our City Council. Watch here as Joe attempts to describe something called "Low Impact Development Standards."

Video #7: "John Buchanan for Joe Mosca" City Council fellow John Buchanan struggles mightily to find a few good reasons why Joe Mosca should become the Mayor of Sierra Madre. And, failing in that, decides to talk about "tradition" instead. Count the number of times John uses the word "criteria."

Video #6: "Joe Mosca Thanks SCAG" At the end of an evening where the stunned leadership of the regional planning organization called SCAG got their heads handed to them by the majority faction on Sierra Madre's City Council, not to mention the many citizens who showed up to express anger at their deceit and dishonesty, an apparently clueless Joe cheerfully thanks them for stopping by.

Video #5: "Joe Mosca Needs A Break." At the end of a City Council vote that allowed the citizens of Sierra Madre to view for the first time a hidden portion of the controversial document that cost a quarter of a million dollars in their tax money to create, Joe Mosca pronounces himself to be "distraught over what just happened" and pleads for a time out. Freedom can do that to some people.

Video #4: "Joe Mosca - That's Why They Voted For Me" Joe wakes up to the fact that the City Council has been deliberately ignoring "seven or eight" of his agenda items, and demands that they be considered, if only out of fairness. As far as we know, most still haven't been heard.

Video #3: "Joe Mosca Flip Flop In 4 Minutes" In one four minute speech Joe Mosca manages to go back on just about every important promise on development he made to the voters of Sierra Madre when runing for office. An astonishing achievement.

Video#2: "Joe Mosca Our Local Deceiver" In perhaps the most famous of all his performances, Joe faces the consequences of his actions as citizens who helped elect him share their disappointment in a televised public forum. Known to many as the "get a life" video, he reacts with schoolyard taunts and belligerence.

Video #1: "Joe Mosca Is Reassigned." We chose this video as our favorite because it truly exposes the pathos of Joe Mosca in political decline. Removed from his position as Sierra Madre's liaison to the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments by the Mayor due to a lack of attendance, Joe asks, "Do you know how embarrassing this is?" The answer being yes, we do.

We here at the Sierra Madre Tattler would like to show respect to our friends Neuroblast Films for their work in making these videos possible. Thank you.

SGVCOG Meets @ Sierra Madre City Hall and Uses the Seats

Perhaps they've grown weary of the Edison owned buildings they usually meet in. Or maybe there was some sort of conflict in Solar Power and government money being discussed at a building owned by a company financially committed to the enterprise? Or maybe it is just a holdover from when a hospitable Joe Mosca would have had something to do with our hosting such a COGgy Confab. But apparently we provided a roof for a San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments meeting yesterday, and I'm not certain we were invited. But thank God for enterprising party crashers.

The topic, according to a handout provided to me via the magic of e-mail, was AB 811, which is apparently a consequence of AB 32, the greenhouse gas measure passed by Sacramento. You know, the one that doesn't remove CEQA review rights from the purview of California's cities. More of a carrot than a stick, it largely seeks proactive ways of nudging the unwilling towards accepting what are purportedly cleaner energy standards rather than merely turning such municipal decisions over to the Courts as is the case with its more draconian sibling, SB 375.

Here is how AB 811 is described on a site that calls itself California Green Solutions:

California passed AB 811 in September 2008 to assist municipalities with retrofitting residential and commercial properties by providing low interest loans for energy efficient installations that are paid for using tax assessments.

Rather succinct. Wikipedia, where those in the know go to write about things they care to share, makes the pithy more profound with this pronouncement:

The passage of AB 811 makes it more imperative to provide an energy efficiency community program. AB 811 states: "This act is an urgency statute..." Cities and counties can now: (1) Make energy-efficiency and renewable energy affordable for California citizens (2) Increase property values (3) Improve the efficiency and indoor air quality of residential & commercial properties (4) Reduce the burning of dirty fuels and hence, pollution (5) Lower greenhouse gas emissions (6) Empower constituents with the fiscal security of of distributed energy.

In other words, Sacramento wants to give you a low interest loan to buy yourself some of that exciting new solar energy technology we've all been hearing so much about. Which I guess is a good enough deal. You get solar panels at a reduced interest rate, your electricity becomes free, and neither the City of Sierra Madre nor their cash collectors at Southern California Edison have yet to figure out a way to tax you on it yet. What a great way to avoid paying the 100% UUT tax increase! Or at least that part dealing with electricity consumption.

Plus won't your crib look positively styling with some of those modernistic solar panels glistening up there on the roof for all to see? You'd be the envy of your block, that's for sure. Sunshine proud, the greenest guy around, a veritable paragon of proprietary virtue personified. All on Uncle Sugar's borrowed dime. I'm asking you, where is the downside here?

And apparently SGVCOG is chill with the concept. Of solar energy, that is. As far as I know nothing was said about utility tax evasion yesterday. Here is how the COGsters worded it in an enthusiastic letter penned to Karen Douglas, Chairman of the California Energy Commission:

Dear Chairman Douglas - The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG) is pleased to submit this letter of support for the County of Los Angeles grant applications to the California Energy Commission under the State Energy Program (SEP) Category #1 - Municipal Financing Program and Category #2 - California Comprehensive residential Building Retrofit Program ... The County of Los Angeles has committed nearly $12 million of its $15.4 million in Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block grant funds to develop and implement a Countywide AB 811 municipal financing program and community-scale building retrofit program. The County will make this program available to property owners in the 88 cities located within the County's boundaries. The SGVCOG intends to support its member cities efforts to join the County's program where it is available.

Well, I guess that was a nice thing for them to do. Of course, if I had $12 million dollars sitting around to buy people solar panels I'd probably get some happy letters, too. So am I reading this correctly? Does this mean that soon we will be able to go down to City Hall and snap up one of these low interest loans? And locally this will be a City Staff administered program?

But even if that is the case, I'm thinking that this cash won't last for very long. 88 cities into $12 million dollars comes to around $137,000 per burgh. Which I calculate as roughly the cost of solar panels for 6 buildings. And that doesn't include all those unincorporated spaces out there, which I assume will also have their mitts out. And if it is divvied out proportionally based on population, our cut of the action will be even smaller, I'm afraid.

Isn't that always the way? Just when you think something sounds really good, and you get all excited about it, reality intrudes. But I guess your chances are better than lottery odds. Maybe that's how we should do it. Get one of those clear plastic spinning drums with the numbered balls in it, and bring in Vanna White. With the happy winner getting a low interest loan, courtesy of the City of Sierra Madre, COG, Edison, the County of Los Angeles, Chairman Karen Douglas, and Helios. And if you are a lucky number holder, you'll be literally walking on sunshine.

I have a question. How come when SGVCOG gets together down there at our City Hall nobody ever thinks to invite us? If they are going to be lending out government dough at minimal costs, you'd think some residents might like to attend. It really is an interesting topic if you think about it.

The Upcoming Election For Three City Council Seats

Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber." - Plato

"What we need is a rebirth of satire, of dissent, of irreverence, of an uncompromising insistence that phoniness is phony and platitudes are platitudinous." - Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.

I received the following information in an e-mail from Nancy Shollenberger over the weekend. There have been quite a few questions about the upcoming election schedule and when certain things are due. This pretty much answers everything.

This is a NEWS RELEASE FROM THE CITY CLERK, NANCY SUE SHOLLENBERGER, announcing the upcoming election for three City Council seats.

The General Municipal Election is scheduled for April 13, 2010.

December 7, 2009 City Council adopts Resolutions calling the election

December 14th Last Day to Adopt Regulations for Candidates Statements

Dec. 21 to Jan. 15th Filing Period for Nomination Papers and Candidate's Statement

or January 19th if City Hall is closed on Friday and Monday, Martin Luther King Jr. Day

Jan. 15-19 2010 Last Days to file Nomination Papers

Jan. 20th Last Day to File Nomination Papers - Extended Filing Period

Jan. 21, 2010 Secretary of State to Determine Order of Names on Ballot

Jan. 31, 2010 Last Day to File Campaign Expenditure Statements - Semi Annual Statement

Feb. 11, 2020 Last Day to Submit Precinct Consolidations to County

Feb. 11, 2010 Suggested Last Day to Designate Polling Places

Feb. 15 - March 30 Filing Period for Write-In Candidates

March 4, 2010 Last day to File Campaign Expenditure Statements- 1st Pre-election Statement

March 15, 2010 First Day to Mail Out Permanent Vote-by-Mail Voter Ballots

March 15 - April 6 Voters May Request Vote-by-Mail Ballots with Regular Applications

March 23rd Last Day to Mail Sample Ballots and Polling Place Notices

March 29th Last Day to Register to Vote

April 1 Last day to File Campaign Expenditure Statements - 2nd Pre-election Statement

April 1 Post Notice - Vote-by-Mail Canvass

April 3 Publish Notice of Central Counting Place

April 6 Last Day for Election Official to Publish Notice of Nominees

April 9 Suggested Last Day to Post Notice of Manual Tally

APRIL 13, 2010 ELECTION DAY

No later than May 7th Election official to Canvass the Returns

No later than May 7th Declaration of the Results

April 19 - May 7th Reorganize Council and Choose Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem

May 19 - June 6th Last Day to File Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700)

July 31, 2010 Last Day to File Campaign Expenditure Statements

This will get our residents geared up for the election process. It is an involved process.

City Clerk, Nancy Sue Shollenberger, invites any interested residents who wish to run for City Council to call her at 626/355-3303; fax 626/355-1546; e-mail nnshol@aol.com. All you need to do is make an appointment and the City Clerk will be happy to meet with you at your convenience to receive paperwork necessary to run for City Council. All paperwork MUST BE given to the City Clerk, and not staff at City Hall. Anything that is expected to go into the Sample Ballot MUST BE given personally to the City Clerk, and not staff at City Hall.

The election is the responsibility of the City Clerk in Sierra Madre. Your help in this matter is deeply appreciated.

The City Clerk is looking forward to running another election in Sierra Madre and looks forward to working with the residents. She is available at your convenience. All it takes is a phone call.

The e-mail was sent to the Sierra Madre Tattler and Mountain Views News on November 1, 2009 for publication and public information by the City Clerk.

So Who Exactly Is This Jim Wunderman Guy? And Why Should We Let Him Rewrite California's State Constitution?

"It seems that the only way to keep special interests out of any political activity as critical as a constitutional convention is not to hold one." - Oakland Tribune

So you have a lot of corporate power guys running around lately talking about how California's Constitution needs to be changed. And it all sounds plausible enough. After all, things haven't gone very well in Sacramento lately. The debt is growing at a frightening rate, the economy is shot, our education system is in a constant state of crisis, and our elected officials are hopelessly incapable of solving these or any other problems. So maybe some kind of rearrangement really is in order.

But if California and its voters are going to embark upon the daunting path of rewriting this state's constitution, we should probably at least take a look at the guy who is apparently the great leader in this historic effort. And that would be the expensive suit pictured emoting above, a gentleman with the rather presumptuous name of Jim Wunderman.

In a Contra Costa Times op-ed piece reprinted this week in the Pasadena Star News, columnist Steven Harmon dressed the bird this way:

Hundreds of ordinary residents would band together with a bunch of governmental experts to attempt a major revamping of California's beleaguered capital if voters agree to call for a constitutional convention ... "We will unite the values of everyday Californians with the best expertise our state has to offer," said Jim Wunderman, president and CEO of the Bay Area Council and member of the ballot measure committee, Repair California. "We have the opportunity to transform California from a nearly failed state to a beacon of prosperity for all the world to see."

A little heavy on the bombast, and if properly captured I'm sure this speech could cause a hot air balloon to soar high above the landscape. But this next paragraph from Harmon's column did pique my interest a bit:

The convention would be limited to four areas of reform: the budget; the relationship between local and state government; government efficiency; and campaign finance.

Now that relationship between state and local governments bit is a theme we like to discuss on The Tattler from time to time. Particularly in light of the recent property tax confiscations, plus Sacramento's usurpation of city control over planning and development through SB 375. So would this convention move towards re-establishing the powers that have traditionally been the purview of local government? Or merely the last nail in a coffin currently being crated up and prepared for final shipment to Sacramento.

Wunderman's bio can be found on the Bay Area Council site. And it looks like he is a major dude up there.

Jim Wunderman serves as the president and chief executive officer of the Bay Area Council, a business-backed public policy organization in the San Francisco-Oakland-Silicon Valley Bay Area. Led by its CEO members, the Bay Area Council is the strong, united voice of more than 275 of the largest Bay Area employers, representing more than 500,000 workers.

I'll bet they have nice offices and a large meeting room as well. The catering alone would probably make a trip worth while. Here's some more happening info from Jim's bio:

In addition to his work at the Bay Area Council, Wunderman is an active member of the community and serves on numerous boards and commissions ... He also serves on the board of Bridge Housing Corporation, the Advisory Board of the Keston Institute for Public Finance and Infrastructure Policy, the Advisory Board of the Partnership for America's Economic Success, the Bay Center, the Community Advisory Board for KB Home and the Policy Advisory Board of the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics. Wunderman serves as a member of the SB 375 Regional Targets Advisory Committee ...

Well, that pretty much clears up the mystery. Click on the Bridge Housing Corporation link and check out the kind of crap he builds. DSP all the way. Wunderman, my friends, is a redeveloper. A kind of Bay Area belongs to everything doppelganger of our good friend Bart Doyle. And being a member of the "SB 375 Regional Targets Advisory Committee" has got to be convenient for a gent in the redevelopment game. That way he gets to pick and choose what neighborhoods he wants to build in. And that he also runs the company that will do the building? Naw, no conflict of interest there. All backed up by compliant Courts and with not a CEQA review in sight.

And as you can see by hitting this link, the "SB 375 Regional Targets Advisory Committee" is proudly listed on the SCAG site. As is Jim's name.

On October 1, 2008, the most undemocratic governor in California history held a press conference. The occasion for this celebration of himself was the signing of SB 375. On the dais with Arnold Schwarzenegger were a collection of characters (referred to in planner talk as "stakeholders") who played a key role in bringing SB 375 to fruition. They were:

State Senator Darrell Steinberg: The Godfather of SB 375. The man who gave the redevelopment (BIA) and realty lobbies (CAR) their biggest payoff ever.

Mike McKeever: Mike is the executive director of the Sacramento Area Council of Governments. This would be the equivalent of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, a subset of SCAG and yet another organization that is working hard to enforce SB 375. Until recently Joe Mosca headed the committee there tasked with enforcing this ugly power grab.

Layne Marceau: Layne was representing the California Homebuilder Group. No surprise seeing him there. Layne oversees an umbrella organization of building trades lobbies that worked so hard to win this boondoggle for their, um, stakeholders.

Heather Fargo: Heather is the Mayor of Sacramento, but also serves as the President of the League of California Cities. You might recall that "The League" was instrumental in putting on the ballot last year the measure that sidetracked the passing of a real statewide law banning Eminent Domain. A law like that being the last thing SB 375 advocates would want to see on the books. How else would they get any work done? The irony being that the LCC, which purports to be a kind of union of cities, is a key player in the removal of planning and development control from cities and turning those powers over to Sacramento. Where they can be better used to payoff lobbyists for their kind patronage. BTW: John and Joe are dedicated League guys.

And then the last speaker stepped up. And since this was no ordinary figure in the SB 375 pantheon, he was introduced by the Adonis of the Alps himself.

Governor Schwarzenegger: "And our last speaker, Jim Wunderman, or Wonderman. I call it in German Wunderman. Nice to see you."

Jim Wunderman: "Just call me, Governor. Thank you. Thank you very much. Governor Schwarzenegger, I want to thank you. First of there's a bill but I want to thank you ..."

Obviously apple polishing is something The Governator has no problems with.

The authors of the Oakland Tribune op-ed piece we cited at the beginning of this post apparently has seen right through this Constitutional Convention charade, and spells out their doubts about Wunderman clearly.

Also, we are skeptical that Wunderman will be able to achieve the convention's goal of keeping special-interest groups shut out. After all, his Bay Area Council could be viewed as a special interest for business ... It seems the only way to keep special interests out of any political activity as critical as a constitutional convention is not to hold one.

To put it mildly. SB 375 represents one of the biggest and most undemocratic power grabs in California history, effectively confiscating the control cities have traditionally held over development and planning within their borders. And apparently the agenda of those responsible is now the rewriting of the California State Constitution. Something that would likely make that power grab permanent and beyond challenge.

In other words, they want it all.

Huffing & Puffing

Somebody is VERY upset with The Tattler. But first, let me share this piece of encouraging news with you. This from the blog Orange Punch:

We came across this poll by the Public Policy Institute of California. It's a couple weeks old, but the news it imparts is timeless: Californians don't much like their state government. A whopping 73 percent said state government is run for the benefit of the few. That number increased to 79 percent when pollsters ask people who vote most often. It seems the closer attention paid, the lower the opinion. Only 23 percent said they could trust the government to do what's right. Now that's a number to think about. "To do what's right..." That means three fourths of us think will do the wrong thing. We're pretty sharp, eh? Hey, three out of five Californians said they think government wastes "a lot" of your tax money. Only 5 percent said there's little waste. And just about two-thirds said it'd be a good idea to put a lid on how much those folks in Sacramento can spend. What a concept.

Last Saturday we posted an article about some ethical questions being raised in the press regarding our illustrious State Senator, Bob Huff. In particular his vote that helped developer Ed Roski of Majestic Realty fame gain approval for his football stadium and shopping mall through the gratuitous waiving any possible Sacramento mandated environmental reviews. Something that also put an end to a lawsuit initiated by concerned citizens from the City of Walnut. The possible ethical concerns stemming from the deep financial ties the Huff family has with Mr. Roski. All of which can be read about here.

And at the end of this post, kind of as an afterthought, I added this observation from the blog Orange Juice:

State Legislators have spent over $3 million on luxury cars since 2007: Our state is broke, but we have spent over three million dollars over the past three years providing luxury cars to our state legislators ... Republican State Sen. Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, drives a Cadillac CTS that cost the state $41,300,including $4,226 for upgraded wheels and Bluetooth, according to an L.A. Times report.

Now at the end of the 40 or so comments attached to this post there have now been 5 posts by one very upset Bob Huff fan. Or perhaps even someone very close to Bob himself, you just never know. Two of these comments had to be deleted due to obscenity, but the others are kind of amusing. You see, what is bothering this individual isn't the questions of serious ethical retardation on Bob's part, rather it's all about that Cadillac.

State paid vehicles are provided to legislatures (sic) to conduct government related business - Don't you expect to be reimbursed by your employer for expenses accrued using your personal vehicle to conduct business related matters? Its kinda like the same thing, although most people like yourself are too dumb too realize it. Those wheels were also returned and stock Cadillac wheels were put in place - he also happened to purchase an AMERICAN car, so this money is coming right by to OUR ECONOMY, or are you too dumb to understand that as well? Why don't we stop worry (sic) about a petty $44k and worry more about the $9 BILLION we give to ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS EVERY YEAR?

Obviously this guy has doubts about my intellectual abilities, but I doubt that's the reason I'm not following his line of reasoning here. While I do commend anyone who purchases American products, and I too drive an American made (albeit now defunct) brand of automobile, I'm not exactly sure that sucking up $41K in taxpayer money to purchase a Cadillac CTS constitutes any great act of patriotism on Bob's part. Nor do I quite understand the politics behind an elected official such as Senator Huff setting himself up with a state funded luxury car at a time when Sacramento was sending state employees IOUs in place of tax return checks. It seems rather insensitive. Nor am I too sure about what this has to do with illegal immigration, either. We're not supposed to worry about having to foot the bill for Bob's $41,000 Cadillac CTS because the State Legislature, which Bob is a member of, is shelling out $9 billion a year to people living in this country illegally?

And while it is comforting to know that Bob actually does conduct government related business (after all, that is what we're paying him to do), I'm not clear on why it takes a $41,000 luxury convertible for him to do the job. Judging by the quality of the work coming from our celebrated public servants in Sacramento, I'd say the vehicular equivalency would be more along the lines of a used Dodge Omni. Something that could probably be picked up from most area used car lots for around $38 grand less than that Caddy.

Anyway, after pointing some of these things out to our sorely exercised Huffster, I received the following response:

Eric, yes... we went broke because state legislatures (sic) get vehicles... nevermind all the money we waste each year on people who don't even belong here. We went broke, not ONLY because of the irresponsibility of our government, but ALSO because of dumb***** who can't do simple math and figure out that variable APR is a bad thing. maybe you should spend more time lobbying people to take a finance class rather than bit***** about a Cadillac... WOW - do you get all your news from the LA Times, and whatever isn't printed in that paper must not have happened, huh? Those wheels were returned. Now how about you go b**** about all the other state legislatures (sic) who picked up new rides, too.

Somebody has got to explain to this guy that a legislature is a body of elected officials who deliberate upon the peoples' business. Individual members of a legislature are called legislators. You'd think that someone this uncomfortable with immigrants would be a tad more conversant in the English language.

Anyway, I'm willing to make a deal with our friend here. I'll drop the Cadillac talk if he agrees to discuss Bob Huff's ethical shortcomings. Particularly in regards to the vote cast in favor of the financial interests of a fellow who is paying the salary of Senator Huff's wife.

The City Council Meeting Nobody Saw

Well, still no City Council meetin' airing yet on SMTV Channel 3. But there is a notice up on my TV screen that bespeaks of their great regret, and then blames it on the weather. And judging by the gritty clouds blowing from the One Carter Dust Bowl Tuesday night, maybe they do have an excuse. After all, this meeting was practically run by candlelight. But then again, given past occurrences of SMTV3's phantom broadcasts, is anybody going to buy it?

Now as a public service to the community, the Maundry Institute for Paranormal Studies (MIPS) has been trying to piece together what happened at Tuesday evening's City Council meeting. And maybe it was the strange weather, or the wind driven clouds of ash from the Station Fire. Or perhaps even the lack of lighting properly powered by the soothing electronic coal-fired emanations of Southern California Edison. But there was something unsettling about this meeting. Probably because almost nobody except the actual participants have actually witnessed it. So what you will be reading here is based on phone calls, personal opinions, rumors, and hunches. And until the real thing comes along, I'm afraid that is the best I can do.

It started off innocuously enough. Apparently an Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Policy is all about abrasive toilet paper. In the metaphorical sense, of course. That being, if an item is made with recycled materials of a certain percentage, it then becomes "environmentally preferable," and that should be the reason we buy it. Now the quality might not be as high, and not unlike the toilet paper a now departed Eurasian megastate of note used to proffer, a bit abrasive. But it is kinder to the Earth, or so we've been assured. This passed by a 5 to 0 vote, which means that the next time you need to use public facilities, forgo Memorial Park and make your way on over to Starbucks.

The next item on the agenda had something to do with appointing a new person to the Library Board of Trustees. Now up until recently this was pretty much the place where those disappointed by the outcome of the last few elections went to find solace and renewed purpose in their lives. Which I suppose explains the lack of discussion on exactly who departed to create this opening. The DIC being a most secretive bunch these days. Fortunately 60% of the City Council settled on Lita Bushloper who, unlike some previous Library Board appointees, actually has library management credentials that extend beyond buying wine by the glass at fundraising socials. That plus two Masters degrees and a reputation for being tough on people who don't return books on time. Which is what you need to make a Library work in my opinion. Otherwise people will just never return those Jude Deveraux and Diana Galbaldon novels.

"The Appointment of Youth to the Community Services Commission" thing apparently got a bit heavy. Perhaps John Buchanan promised somebody that he'd give their boy a fine position on the CSC, and then felt he needed to deliver? Whatever the cause, it led to a rhubarb as some on the City Council felt that both of the available candidates were qualified to serve the great cause of Youth. This triggered a question about why one can't have the vote and the other still get to participate. Which is apparently what won out despite the mysterious motivations of Mr. Buchanan. You'd think that with all the important issues facing this City, spending that much time and energy to deny some kid the chance to experience Sierra Madre government up close would seem foolish and a bit ugly. Apparently for John that was not the case.

The Dapper Field tree removal question was approved over the objections of the Tree Commission. Ash trees have apparently been getting rowdy over there at Hal Dapper, tearing up the field and causing some of the walkways to buckle. Now as any fan of the game can tell you, wooden baseball bats are made out of ash. So perhaps after these trees are cut down they can be turned into bats and given out as momentos at the next big Little League bash? Or sold to raise money? We could call them Sierra Madre Sluggers. Or (forgive me) Dapper Whappers. Those trees being removed would be replaced per City law.

Next up was the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan insanity. SCAG, as you know from our previous insightful articles about this organization, seems to think it can predict the future. And so insidious is this mental conceit it has apparently convinced some on City Staff that they can do so as well. And we're not talking about what is going to happen in the next year. No, these enabled seers are talking about employment and population increases in Sierra Madre up through the year 2035! Like anybody 26 years from now is going to give a damn what people all the way back in 2009 thought.

But SCAG apparently is where the mad go to secure government paychecks and power, and since they are backed up by both the Feds along with those jokers in Sacramento, we have to spend a lot of time and money trying to figure out ways to bamboozle them. Because if we don't then they will tell us how many jobs will be created here over the next couple decades, and then how many new housing units we will need to plan for in order to board those people. People who won't actually be here to work jobs that only exist in the mind of some droll Soviet emigre' named Ikhrata. You see, when it comes to SCAG, it is always about demanding new development. And they never let logic or rational thinking get in the way.

Now our City Staff, who apparently seems to take this former Soviet planner and his crackpot organization seriously, went back to the year 2003 to try and deduce some sort of trend that will help them create a picture of what Sierra Madre will look like in the distant future. The old "past is prologue" shuck and jive that keeps so many planners employed. Unfortunately, if you only go back to the year 2003, what will emerge are numbers that are grossly inflated. Why? Because those were the superheated housing boom years, a time when banks apparently lost their minds and lent all their money at below cost. So why didn't City Staff go back a few years earlier than they did to get more realistic numbers? Because then you are into the Shenanigan Era, and that data doesn't exist. So absorbed were our elected officials with enabling stuff like One Carter and the DSP back then that they forgot all about keeping credible records.

The argument that apparently emerged at this City Council meeting was whether or not we should play SCAG's game. One school of thought says they're obviously off their rockers with their numbers, so why should we even entertain taking them seriously? Their outcome is predetermined and their math obviously suspect, so why not call them out on it and give them a realistic answer. Like zero. The other side stating that unless we throw them a statistical bone, they'll be mean to us and we'll end up having to plan for an additional 100 or so housing units instead of, maybe, 89. My take is that since we're talking years into the future, let's just do the right thing and tell SCAG that they're out of their minds and we have no time for their nonsense. Just weather the storm. After all, our population isn't growing, we're actually losing jobs and businesses, nobody is building anything anywhere in this town, and hardly anybody working here can afford to live in this town anyway.

Don Watts had a better solution, of course. We should tell them that we expect 150,000 new jobs here in the next decade or so. That way SCAG would immediately demand that the County of Los Angeles build us a subway. Kurt Zimmerman added that since we will then be larger than Burbank, we should also ask for an airport.

The discussion on Sierra Madre Strategic Plan Goals & Objectives was shelved for another time. Apparently the City Council's need for fantasy having been fulfilled by the previous item.

If you feel the need to check up on my improvisation, may I suggest you call City Hall at 355-7135 and inquire as to the exact time this City Council meeting will finally be broadcast? I recommend that you go straight to the source and ask for the City Manager. That way she'll be able to properly sense your concern. And when you do find out, please let the rest of us know?

Power Outage Afflicts Maundry Compound - Newly Seeded Front Yard Terrorized

Here at the mouth of the mighty Bailey Canyon the winds they a-howled, large pieces of tree flew about, and trash cans (of all three colors and functions) rolled down the hill, spilling their contents as they went. The power went out and, cut off from the modern world, we were left to nothing more than huddling around scented votary candles and talking to each other. No computers, no television, no Fall Ball Little League practice (Go Blue Bellies!), no Wi, it was all so Lincolnesque.

Thankfully we remembered each other's names.

On the Pasadena Star News website our travails were described thusly:

About 3,000 Southern California Edison customers in Arcadia, Monrovia, and South Pasadena lost electricity. Parts of Azusa, Temple City and Sierra Madre were also left in the dark due to outages but it's unknown how many residents were affected ... In Sierra Madre, Sgt. Charles Kamcharmnan said they had a transformer blow up, downed trees and power outages ... Gusts in Northern Los Angeles County hit 70 mph, the weather service said.

Additionally, large clouds of dust were reported being blown from the One Carter disaster.

So the upshot to all of this is I don't know what happened down at City Hall last night. Did the meeting even take place? Did hardier souls than I brave the elements and head on down to witness local governance in action? Did the passion and the fury contained within SCAG's 2012 Regional Transportation Plan Projections match what was going on outside?

This is an open thread. Share what you know, yo.

Miss Susie's Latest News Lapses

Sometimes you just have to watch what you wish for. Last week I complained that the Loony Views News wasn't covering the important stories here in Sierra Madre. And to some extent that hasn't changed as Joe Mosca's recent removal from his SGVCOG duties has yet to grace the pages of our adjudicated paper of record. News suppression being an important priority at the Loony Views, especially when it is something that involves one of the publisher's special pets. But can you believe that there was finally a story about the City Council's recent One Carter and Stonehouse deliberations, and it didn't come with a picture of a stone wall? Yes, it looks like Mount Cliche' has at last been scaled.

There isn't much point in discussing this senseless LVN article as journalism. The paper's publisher, who doubles as the one person there entrusted with the awesome responsibility of writing about Sierra Madre's news, couldn't carry a thought to conclusion in a wheelbarrow. And if the topic heads north of Hello Kitty on the complexity scale, well, you'd better start dropping bread crumbs.

So rather than wading across this mile of muck, I thought we'd pluck out a few fine examples of LVN synaptic dysfunction, and then set the record straight. An absurd exercise, I know. But in the great search for what is truly important in life, sometimes you just have to improvise.

CSF was represented at the council meeting by Susan Hori, an attorney with the high powered law firm of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, and Brian Salsner, Director of the project.

Couple of problems here. The first being that Susan Hori is not an attorney with this firm, she is a partner at the firm. There's a big difference in that. And rather than taking the LVN publisher's word, ask a real lawyer. And Brian "Salsner" actually spells his last name Sosner. And Sosner is hardly the "Director of the project," he is actually a national executive in charge of CapitalSource's financial problem children. Here is how they describe this gent's responsibilities on the CapitalSource site:

As a Portfolio manager within CapitalSource's Structured Finance Group, Mr. Sosner is primarily responsible for managing a portfolio of troubled real estate assets and implementing a special servicing asset management operation for all nonperforming classes of commercial real estate and real estate owned as well as procedures to turnaround, reposition, and/or liquidate such assets.

In other words, he's the guy who deals with the company's toxic investments. If it's a fiscal basket case, then Brian is the guy who has to handle it. And that he flew all the way out here from the company's corporate headquarters in Chevy Chase, Maryland, is saying a lot. I guess that puts One Carter into a very special category of unmitigated disaster.

And you thought this guy was nothing but the smirking fellow we all saw seated behind Lawyer Hori two weeks ago.

Since the original owners of the properties, Dorn Platz, defaulted on their loans, the properties were taken over by Capital Source Funding (CSF).

There is no firm currently owning property in Sierra Madre called "Capital Source Funding." The folks who came by our City Council meeting two weeks ago are from a company called CapitalSource. "Strength You Can Bank On," as they like to say. And with $28 billion in assets to back the claim up.

And I don't want to get too politically correct on you guys, but weren't the original owners of the properties in question Native Americans? The Gabrieleno/Tongva Tribe to be exact? I mean, we all know who Dorn Platz is, and I'm sure the Loony Views News is as enamored of them as they are any other developer. But to suggest that their ownership of One Carter extends back for thousands and thousands of years? Is the publisher claiming the existence of a Dorn Platz Tribe?

And I cannot believe that the LVN's publisher fell for this bit of chump chum:

Hori pointed out to the council that they have made several changes to the original settlement plan including decreasing the number of units on Stonehouse from 35 to 20. Said Hori, "Our desire is to arrive at a point to finalize the Settlement Agreement."

Swallowing and printing Hori's fictitious claim about having reduced the amount of home sites from 35 to 20 at Stonehouse is just terrible journalism. Whether out of ignorance or from rancor, this really is inexcusable. The count at Stonehouse has been 20 houses since November of 2007. Tracy Thomas gives a very clear explanation of this in a video available on the Neuroblastfilms Channel. And since this LVN article quotes Tracy elsewhere, you can only wonder why that particular fact went astray.

Another perplexing item. Can anybody please tell me what the following sentence means?

"However, whether or not residents will ever the developer of the projects is doubtful."

Maybe the LVN's publisher should take the sign's advice and write for free help?

Now this last item is kind of painful for me, because it involves two of my former colleagues from the old Mount Wilson Observer. Yes, we're talking about Rich Johnson and Hail Hamilton. And frankly, as outre' as either of these gentlemen can occasionally be, nobody deserves the fate they are currently suffering. Denied the "privilege" of discussing the affairs of Sierra Madre by their controlling publisher, both have been forced to cast their journalistic nets far and wide to find allowable topics to discuss. And what is it these two are currently fighting about? Something called "the tyranny of capitalism."

I'm telling you, it's like another planet over there.

San Diego Union-Tribune: Sempra Energy Ranked Near Bottom On Global Warming

"With Joe and John it's the rule of opposites. They work for huge polluters, so they're green. They are for preserving Sierra Madre, so they push big developer agendas constantly. They're all about fighting for small cities, so they belong to the big regional organizations that reinforce the power grabbing of Sacramento." - 10/24 Tattler comment.

One of the gaping holes in the logic behind SB 375 is that while it identifies the global warming culprits, it puts them in the wrong order. According to the pie chart supplied by Stuff In The Air.com, it is not cars that are the major contributing factor to greenhouse gas emissions. A player to be sure, but by no means the largest. That honor would belong to power stations, those largely coal burning goliaths that help supply much of the electricity we use to light up our homes. And if you combine power stations plus "residential, commercial, and other uses" of that product, you're talking about nearly a third of all greenhouse gas emissions.

The basic premise behind SB 375 is that if you lay in another swath of high density development into already heavily built-out urban neighborhoods, people will willingly move there, give up their cars, and use public transportation. Thus somehow magically solving the greenhouse gas problem. However, wouldn't these uber-density neighborhoods be consuming a lot more energy in order to maintain the amenities of modern life? Including electricity, the production of which is the recognized leader in greenhouse gas production?

With a new generation of low-emission automobiles on the horizon, would the massive social disruptions and redevelopment being called for by Sacramento through its SB 375 lobby-driven high stakes gamble really be worth it? If the true intent is to cut greenhouse gas emissions, doesn't the sanctioning of vast increases in new housing construction seem just a little bit counterintuitive? Of course, we're assuming here that this is Sacramento's real intent, and they haven't just invented a cynical rationale for permitting some of their favorite (read: lucrative) lobbies to build with carefree abandon wherever they want.

Sierra Madre City Councilmember Joe Mosca is up for re-election this spring, and it is pretty clear where he stands on bringing generous amounts of unwelcome development to Sierra Madre. And that he actually heads the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments committee tasked with enabling SB 375's implementation in places like our quaint little town is of interest. Something that could mean large swaths of generic condominium and mixed-use nonsense throughout our community should this largely rubber stamp organization get its way.

Now you would think that someone engaged in an enterprise such as the one Joe Mosca is running would be as fresh as the driven snow on an issue like Global Warming, right? After all, the harsh sacrifices he is asking small cities such as ours to make are immense, so certainly he would want to live a life that could serve as an example of how it needs to be done.

If you click here you will be taken to something called the Southern California Leadership Network, "Class of 2009." Something cobbled together by the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce. And if you scroll down to the "M" tier you will witness the following:

Joseph Mosca, Public Affairs Manager, Southern California Gas Company: ... Mosca practiced consumer and corporate bankruptcy law from 1999 to 2008 and is now employed by Southern California Gas Company, Sempra Energy Utilities.

Now why someone would go from practicing law to being a "Public Affairs Manager" is something of a mystery. Kind of like accepting a demotion from Colonel to Lieutenant in the Army. But that is not to our point today. What is, though, is that apparently Sempra Energy Utilities was recognized three years back as one of the worst greenhouse gas producers in the country. This from the San Diego Union-Tribune:

Sempra ranked near bottom on global warming

Sempra Energy was ranked near the bottom in dealing with global warming by a national investor coalition ... A national review of how 100 companies are addressing the risks and business opportunities arising from global warming ranked San Diego-based Sempra 18th among 19 companies in the electric industry ... The report, commissioned by Ceres, a Boston-based coalition of investors, environmentalists and public interest groups, ranked corporate response to global warming across five areas: board oversight of the problem, management performance, public discourse, emissions accounting and strategic planning ... The highest-rated company was BP, the British petroleum company, which was also among the five foreign companies that topped nine of the industries surveyed. A spokesman for BP noted that that the oil company has also become the third-largest solar company in the world ... Many experts say there are growing costs - including crop damage and flooding - that should be attributed to climate changes caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Most fear there will be far greater economic damage should global warming continue at its current rate ... In the electric power industry, Sempra ranked last among major California companies with utility operations and outpointed only Constellation Energy among the 19 companies reviewed overall. Sempra is a diversified energy company and parent of both San Diego Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Gas Co. ... On the survey's 100-point scorecard, Sempra received 24 points, while Pacific Gas & Electric got 54 and Edison International 51 ... The study was conducted by the Investor Responsibility Research Center using information from public filings, company reports and direct company contact. The Center, based in Washington D.C., was founded in 1972 and specializes in corporate governance and social responsibility issues ... In contrast with companies highly rated in the assessment, Sempra doesn't have board or executive committees devoted to global warming, and its chief executives have failed to address the issue. The survey also found Sempra had no executive addressing the issue.

Also:

A representative of the Natural Resources Defense Council said Sempra's rating for addressing global warming was appropriately low. He was particularly critical of Sempra's plans to build coal-fired plants in Idaho and Nevada ... "Sempra is out there trying to build more coal-fired plants and that is exactly the wrong thing to do," said David Hawkins, director of the climate center for the Natural Resources Defense Council, a reference to Sempra proposals in Idaho and Nevada ... "The report is cutting-edge information," Hawkins added. "The people who did this report are serious people, and they do their homework."

Anybody surprised? Another example of that "rule of opposites" thing at work, I guess.

Does State Senator Bob Huff Love Ed Roski A Little Too Much?

The celebrated new NFL stadium was signed into existence by Governor Arnold Schwarzenneger this week. So great was his excitement that he flew all the way to City of Industry for the occasion. And we certainly must acknowledge the hard work of many of our finest elected officials that helped bring it into existence. And soon not only will this great stadium rise from the wasteland that is the City of Industry, but a vast new shopping center as well.

Now there has been some discussion about how certain of our august state legislators, for various reasons, might have been just a little too close to the company behind this football mall. And that ties to Ed Roski, both owner of the stadium and the shopping emporium's developer Majestic Realty, were in some cases just a little too close for ethical comfort. And perhaps nobody was any closer to Ed Roski than our very own State Senator, Fightin' Bob Huff.

On its "Leftovers from City Hall" blog, the sgvtribune.com lays it out this way:

I spoke with State Sen. Bob Huff Wednesday, who was less than pleased over allegations he had a conflict of interest when casting a vote in the Senate last week ... The vote in question was a procedural one to help move an environmental bill to the Senate floor. Problem is, that environmental bill -- which passed -- will exempt a proposed NFL stadium in Industry from state environmental laws ... Members of the Citizens for Community Preservation Inc., which has a lawsuit filed against the stadium, said the vote was unethical because Huff and his wife's involvement in Industry and (with) the stadium's developer, Majestic Realty ... Huff called the allegations "about as bogus as the lawsuit," and said he consulted with legal counsel, who told him there was, in fact, no conflict ... Huff said he originally was not going to participate in the vote at all. But then he was asked to step in, and even the Senate President -- along with others -- told him there was no legal conflict ... He didn't vote when the bill finally hit the floor.

So how close are old Bob Huff's connections to Ed Roski and Majestic Realty? Hand in glove, apparently. An article in the SGV Tribune from last August ("Lawmaker, wife both lend support to Majestic's NFL stadium project") shared these insights:

But it wasn't a simple vote of support. Huff's wife, Mei Mei Huff, has worked for Majestic since 2001, Huff said ... As Majestic sought support for its stadium proposal, Mei Mei Huff led the charge in the San Gabriel Valley's vast Asian community.

And then there is this:

Mei Mei Huff is a senior vice president at the Pacific Palms Resort, a 650-acre resort which sits on land owned by Industry. The property and its facilities are master-leased by Majestic, its CEO Roski and the company's Vice President John Semcken under a partnership called Majestic Hills, LLC.

Care for one more?

Last year, Mei Mei Huff's two businesses reported receiving income from Roski's Majestic Realty Co. ... Mei Mei Ho and Associates, her business consulting firm based in Diamond Bar, reported income of $10,000 to $100,000 through late February, with one of the identified clients as Pacific Palms Resort/Majestic Industry Hills, LLC, according to the most recent financial disclosure reports ... The business was "disposed" in February 2008 and replaced with another business consulting firm, Mei Mei Ho Consulting, LLC. The state senator reported the company's income was over $100,000 beginning Feb. 20. Two of its identified clients are Majestic Realty and Pacific Palms Resort/Majestic Industrial Hills, LLC, records how.

My my (or should that be Mei Mei), that sure is one squeaky close tie between Big Ed's operations and the Bob Huff family. Like perhaps a direct financial tie with a stake in future profits? And we certainly can't see any conflict of interest whatsoever in the Huffster voting to further the empire of Ed Roski now, right? Naw, not one little bit. And then there is this:

During his successful senatorial campaign last November, Huff received $28,200 from Majestic Realty and its representatives, according to state campaign records.

Listen, if every state legislator who received money from Roski had recused themselves from voting on Big Ed's stadium and rather large shopping emporium, there wouldn't have been enough folks left over for a hand of bridge.

There was a great comment attached to the original sgvtribune.com cite I quoted from at the beginning of this post. Its author, James I. Flourney, pretty much hits the nail on the head as far as I am concerned. Here is what he had to say:

Legally Huff may get a pass. I understand that the Citizens (for Community Preservation) have filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) ... Ethically Huff failed to live up to community standards. Huff's wife works for Pacific Palms which is owned by Majestic and Roski. California is a "Community Property State." ... Huff said he was conflicted but when faced with the choice of following the rules or suspending the rules, Huff voted to suspend the rules thus bypassing sending the bill to committees which which would have given it the hearings it deserved ... Bob Huff must resign ... "Huff said he was not going to participate in the vote at all." This was the correct choice ... "But then he was asked to step in." By whom? Steinberg? Romero? And why? Because if he had not fallen on his sword for Majestic the vote would have failed ... Senate leadership should re-examine its procedures if the allegations about Huff's vote are even remotely true ... Who's legal counsel did he consult? Majestic's? Getting political cover does not make his vote ethical ... Bob Huff must resign.

Sacramento is just so disgraceful.

Oh, and speaking of disgraceful, here's something from one of my favorite inspirational blogs, Orange Juice. Apparently when you're an elected state official in California, the gifts just keep on a-coming.

State Legislators have spent over $3 million on luxury cars since 2007: Our state is broke, but we have spent over three million dollars over the past three years providing luxury cars to our state legislators ... Republican State Sen. Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, who represents Chino Hills and part of Chino on the western end of our county, drives a Cadillac CTS that cost the state $41,300, including $4,226 for upgraded wheels and Bluetooth, according to an L.A.Times report.

Sacramento issued IOUs to school teachers because there wasn't any dough to be found there, but they still managed to secure a few bucks to keep Fightin' Bob stylin' around the Valley in a top of the line convertible Cadillac with tricked out wheels and a really cool state of the art remote dial cellphone.

Here's a site you just might want to visit ...

Is "Green" Something that Only Applies to the Middle Class?

"We're just a group of local citizens expressing our First Amendment freedom of speech. This is happening because someone with money came out of nowhere and paid off the politicians." - Brijid Bjerke

I'm starting to believe that in the eyes of Sacramento there are two distinct tiers of responsibility on the Green thing. That is, when the changes that are being called for are assigned, it apparently won't be those shelling out the patronage to our fine elected officials in the state capital that will be making any of the sacrifices. No, apparently the honor of saving the world is destined to fall on our sturdy shoulders alone.

Now we have talked about SB 375 a lot on this site. This being the bill, signed into law by the Great Arnold himself, that he believes will long serve has his legacy and gift to the people of California. And what this bill claims to do is reduce the amount of time people spend in their greenhouse gas emitting automobiles by rebuilding our cities in such a way that will put the jobs right there next to the places where people live. The goal would be to end suburban sprawl, move people into vast warrens of condos and town houses closer to the urban core, and get people out of their cars and into public transportation. Which, if you're into science fiction ala The Jetsons, probably seems like a wonderful solution. Because that is pretty much what the notion of building our way out of global warming really is. Science fiction.

But who would the brunt of this massive social engineering scheme fall upon? The middle class, of course. All those people currently living in their single family houses and driving their cars back and forth to work. And what SB 375 means in is massive new development in middle class neighborhoods, with much of the purpose being forcing commuters out of their automobiles and onto such things as the Gold Line or, heaven forbid, buses. That this would mean a drastic decline in the quality of life that we were long told was our right to enjoy goes without question. Life in densely packed neighborhoods with small and noisy apartments along with crowded city commuter conveyances being the kinds of things people fled to the suburbs to escape in the first place.

But apparently these kinds of sacrifices are not something everyone will be called upon to share. Because when burdensome environmental considerations come into play and your name is Ed Roski Jr. of Majestic Realty, you can just call the Adonis of the Alps, the world celebrated Mr. Green Legacy himself, and be absolved of the burden.

As you know, billionaire developer Ed Roski Jr. was facing some inconvenient opposition from the people of the City of Walnut. This small city, not that different from ours, and situated right next to the City of Industry site where Big Ed wants to build a NFL stadium, had some concerns. Environmental concerns. Because in addition to this stadium Big Ed wanted to also build a huge shopping mall along with some other "suburban sprawl" kinds of things. And as anyone living next to such Eisenhower Era meccas can tell you, this would cause a whole lot of new traffic. And with traffic comes bad air, jammed freeways, and a lot of that greenhouse gas stuff. Just like SB 375 says.

So the people of Walnut did the one thing anyone interested in defending their homes and quality of life would do, they turned to laws that our state, in apparently better times, enacted to protect them from just such a thing. In this case that law is the California Environmental Quality Act.

But you see, times have changed. Because in Sacramento Ed Roski's money speaks far louder than any laws designed to protect the environment or middle class enclaves like the City of Walnut. And once Ed started calling in favors, the very people who proposed and enacted SB 375 yanked any possibility of a CEQA environmental review away from those who dared to stand in his way.

The result being this very sad story published by the Pasadena Star News.

INDUSTRY - About 150 of Southern California's most powerful people gathered Thursday on what was once a cow pasture ... Under a bright blue sky and taking in a panoramic view of the San Gabriel mountains, they stood among the sun-dried weeds and witnessed Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger sign legislation paving the way for an NFL stadium ... Separated from the action by a chain-link fence and armed deputies, a group of less than a dozen protesters from nearby Walnut held up signs and decried the action ... The group, led by Walnut resident Brigid Bjerke, consists of eight citizens challenging developer Edward Roski Jr.'s plan to bring the NFL back to Los Angeles ... Earlier this month the group refused to settle its lawsuit against the project ... The State Legislature stepped in and sent a bill to Schwarzenegger exempting the project from the California Environmental Quality Act, nullifying the citizen's lawsuit.

Now I don't know how you feel about bringing the National Football League back to Los Angeles. Honestly I prefer things to stay the way they are now because we get much better games on TV when we don't have some godforsaken loser franchise here in town. And you know that the team that decides to come here will be one of the bad ones. After all, if they weren't why would they need to move? We could be facing a future of having to endlessly hear about something called the "City of Industry Lions."

But the point is a Lion of Patronage like Roski doesn't have to follow California environmental law. Rather, as someone with a lot of money and influence in Sacramento, he called his friends and got the problem fixed. Will we be able to do the same when we try to fight off the environmental damage SB 375 enabled redevelopers could do to our city? Not a chance.

Oh, and get a load of how our fine elected public servants regard those who would attempt to use California environmental law to defend the quality of life in their city.

"These people presented an $800 million wish list of demands that have little to do with the environment," Schwarzenegger said. "I'm here to terminate the frivolous lawsuit and start construction."

And then there is this from a true loudmouthed idiot:

State Assemblyman Isadore Hall III, D-Compton, who authored the legislation, went a step further. He termed the lawsuit "abuse" and "extortion." He went on to say that the state legislature doesn't take CEQA laws lightly, but added these are "extraordinary times."

One other point that needs to be made. Did you know that SB 375 states that when redevelopment is being arranged for some big time building in areas designated as a "transportation corridor," CEQA review rights can also be pulled should the developer so desire? Perhaps a developer just like Ed Roski Jr. of Majestic Realty?

Looks like a trend.