Saturday, March 6, 2010

Debate Weekend Open Thread

Got a short post for you this weekend. I figured since the Candidates Forum (or "debate" to use the vernacular) is Monday night, I should just turn this place over to you guys and make it an open thread. But I would be curious to hear from you about what it is you hope to hear at the debate. What issues concern you most? Which issues do you feel need to be aired out? In a lot of ways the debate is all about what you need to see addressed, and where you hope this city will be going over the next few years. So here is an early opportunity to get in your two cents.

This is my question for you:

If you were one of the 7 candidates for Sierra Madre City Council, what issues would you consider to be the most important and want to discuss?

And here is something you definitely won't be hearing Monday night: Take as much time as you like.

107 comments:

  1. My question is:

    Since the Zimmerman/MacGillivray/Watts majority took over, we have made leaps and bounds and the city is heading in the right direction, even when other neighboring towns are in chaos. Other cities envy us.

    Why would we want to "change" that majority?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Joe Mosca's flip flop on his DSP vote, a direct affront to those who elected him in 2006, was the most devastating single blow to comity here in Sierra Madre. It led to the contentious Measure V election, lawsuits, and an attempted recall. Why is it Councilmember Mosca has steadfastly refused to apologized for his destructive betrayal of the residents of Sierra Madre?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Someone needs to ask Josh Moran, "Is it true you became a legal resident of Sierra Madre one day before you drew papers to run for Sierra Madre City Council?

    He has not voted in any of the recent elections in Sierra Madre because he was not a resident until December 2009. He could not vote in 2007 or the 2008 elections. He has only live in town 2 1/2 months.

    When he was a legal resident of Monrovia, he spoke against Sierra Madre's Smoking Restrictions in Open Air Dining Locations and he also spoke against Measure V, the building regulations in the downtown/ Montecito area.

    Josh needs to move back to Monrovia and take his big building ideas with him.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I suspect many citizens might want to know how the candidates plan on engaging and informing them on important issues facing the City once elected.

    How will they improve access to meetings?
    (especially via the tv/internet)

    Will they sponsor community outreach meetings to discuss neighborhood issues of interest?

    Will they create public forums where the Police and citizens can air their issues?

    Will they represent their interests and views or will they represent the interests of the citizens...if the two are different?

    Will they improve access to public records?

    Will they review the current contract with the City Attorney and work to create a more cost effective agreement....even if it means shopping for a new city attorney?

    Will they work to eliminate the use of outside "consultants" where possible?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Josh and Mosca need to also take down their illegally placed signs on city property!

    I will be taking pictures of all these illegal placements.

    I know it's difficult to play fair if you're Josh or Joe, but you are going to have to do so, this time around.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The issue of our Library needs to be raised. Despite the assurances of our Mayor, plus uninterrupted funding, there remains a deluded minority in town who believe it will be closed.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I want to hear the answer to this question:
    Will you defend Measure V?

    ReplyDelete
  8. the money mattersMarch 6, 2010 at 10:06 AM

    What suggestions do you have to CUT DOWN city staff, and prune administrative costs for this small city? What will you do to STOP HIRING more and more staff?

    ReplyDelete
  9. You're right 8:43, and that minority be milking it too, pumping up fear - "They're going to shut down the library and make the children weeping and wailing illiterates!"
    S i guess it does need to be said once again just like the Mayor said it at the beginning of the last council meeting.

    No one on the council wants to shut down the library.

    ReplyDelete
  10. That closing the library fear was used as a persuasion technique during the Buchanan/Torres/Joffee/Stockly Measure F tax. People in the audience were actually crying.
    How about the UUT?
    What do the candidates think about capping the UUT where it is now at 10% for good (or did the council already do that?) and then swearing that they will enact the sunset clause and balance the budget without the 10%?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Does Josh Moran realize he will have to recuse himself and when??

    What background in leadership does he bring to the City Council?

    Does he represent his mother and all real estate, or all working people in Sierra Madre?

    What is his job? Just to hang out at Mary's Market?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Do they really think we are that stupid?March 6, 2010 at 10:52 AM

    The whole "close the library" is

    KEEP SIERRA MADRE SCARED. It won't work Joe!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. This would get some interesting responses:
    DO YOU THINK MEASURE V WAS A GOOD IDEA?
    Candidate Walsh has already said No, the night she spoke on Buchanan's behalf about opposing the letter to SCAG. You know, the letter that helped get our RHNA numbers reduced? Buchanan opposed it and was 'seconded' by Walsh in the public comment period at the next meeting. Bad decisions by both of them.
    Mosca & Moran fought against Measure V.
    Do you think either of them would say yes it was a good idea?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Attention Joe Mosca!

    Reality check!

    Do you actually think you will get any of the protect and preserve Sierra Madre- against Sacramento and high density votes that you got last election?

    None of us will be voting for you, so do the math Mosca....you have NO CHANCE to win.
    NO CHANCE.

    Joe, you lied and caused tremendous pain to the hundreds and hundreds of people who voted for you, who didn't realize you were really "Sacramento Joe, the sociopath".
    We won't vote for you this time around.

    Vote for
    CRAWFORD, WATTS and ALCORN....who put Sierra Madre first.


    Fire the liar- fire Sacramento Joe, the lobbyist for massive development.
    Moran and Walsh are not qualified to be on the council.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Candidates, a dust ordinance is currently being considered by the council to control 'fugitive dust' from construction sites. Ample photographic evidence exists to prove that there has not been effective dust control, monitoring or enforcement. What is your position on a dust control ordinance that would make it cheaper for developers to comply with, rather than to pay the fines?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Off topic:

    If any of you Tattlers need yard signs for John Crawford, Don Watts and Pat Alcorn?

    Please call and leave a message for Diane or John:
    355-4776 We will see that you get a delivery asp.

    Thanks, and have a great weekend, all.

    ReplyDelete
  17. How about, if it were possible to bring back a version of the DSP that fit within the Measure V guidelines, would you support that?

    ReplyDelete
  18. When Mr. Zimmerman ran for the council, he said that One Carter was a horrible thing, or something like that. What do these candidates think of the development known as One Carter, and or Stonegate, and the impending development at Stonehouse?
    What do they think of the council of 2004's decision to ignore the Planning Commission's decision to deny that configuration of the Carter project?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Any building downtown that meets the Measure V test is fine. Development that is in character with Sierra Madre is fine. Who ever said it wasn't?

    ReplyDelete
  20. What is "Fiscalization of Land Use" about, and how could it have a profound effect on Sierra Madre?

    ReplyDelete
  21. It is a form of regionalism, and therefore another SCAG scam. They pool our taxes and every other area city's taxes and then divvy the dough out to those towns in need. A form of dole for towns that can't meet their bills. Just another step in breaking down the independent authority of individual cities and centralizing it under the Sacramento controlled so-called regional governments.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Is it possible to overturn SB375?

    ReplyDelete
  23. If I were a candidate, I would want to review all costs for administration, and look for ways to cut those expenses. My understanding is that the newly purchased accounting software ( half a million, yes?) will make that review possible. It should be a priority of the next council.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Attended the AIA SB 375 seminar todayMarch 6, 2010 at 4:41 PM

    2:19 You can always start an initiative drive, but that's probably not necessary. The way Mary Ann and Don have approached it works. They gave hard facts to SCAG and got the RHNA assignment reduced to reasonable scale, and every community should be able to do this. Today at the SB 375 presentation at the Congregational Church, SCAG tried to emphasize that the whole thing is voluntary, which it's not because funds are withheld for noncompliance. And of course the right people have to go to SCAG and get the information to them and insist on formal documentation of the result.

    Sierra Madre is the only community that has succeeded in this so far, Santa Barbara and Irvine were not able to get the RHNA assignments down. Quite an accomplishment.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Best possible candidate question.

    SM faces lots of issues, large and small. There will be some in future not yet known.

    Therefore, I would want to know the candidates philosophy of governance.

    I would seek that candidate that most closely follows the Platonic system that informed the inventors of the original Attic Democracy as well as the founding fathers of the American version. They all had his books and used the principals they contained.

    "Do the Most Good For the Greatest Number of People" balance this with "Protect the Rights of the Individual"

    Do this by employing the four virtues of Platonic methodology:
    Knowledge, Equity, Justice, Moderation.

    Find the person that comes the closest to that system, you can't go too wrong. Suggest Rufus Fears, "Life Lessons From the Great Books" Plato's Epistle VII.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Wait, didn't Susan Henderson say that all cities who requested RHNA numbers in the recent go 'round got what they asked for?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Susan Henderson also used to say her name is Harriet Poole!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Asking the candidates if they support Measure V is a waste of time. Since Measure V is the law, all of them (unless they are idiots) will say that they support Measure V.

    The better question is to ask if they supported it (past tense) and if not why not.

    Also, 1:05, anybody who thinks that bringing back the DSP is a good idea is a fool. We need to remember that in addition to proposing four stories, the DSP was a blueprint for cong church expansion. So much for separation of church and state.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Yes, and Susan Henderson said she had multiple university degrees.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Susan's significant other, works for some court in LA, right? I heard the layoffs in the court system locally are going to be massive. Any skinny on that?

    ReplyDelete
  31. 5:04, the post @ 1:05 says 'a version' of the DSP - so using some of that $300,000 plus material in conformity with Measure V.
    What else do you think the DIRTS are planning to do if they can?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Weekend Mtnviewsnews.com watchMarch 6, 2010 at 5:17 PM

    5:15 pm and the Mtnviewsnews.com is still displaying the February 27th edition... Susan probably couldn't pay the printer...

    ReplyDelete
  33. Seminar attendee, can you post more about who attended, how well attended - or was it just another dog & pony show? Were Ihkrata & Edney there?

    ReplyDelete
  34. still read the papers, but not that oneMarch 6, 2010 at 5:23 PM

    Weekend Mtnviewsnews.com watch, the places to really check are under the door at city hall and the Senior Housing.
    And remember, if it's not out, Ms. Henderson is just doing her duty to make the court happy that she's not declaring bankruptcy.....

    ReplyDelete
  35. 5:23, I think she said something more like the court would "appreciate" her decision not to print for a week in January, because otherwise she'd be bankrupt. One of her evasive answers that went awry on her.

    ReplyDelete
  36. She never paid Katina Dunn the money the court awarded her and she never paid her cleaning lady, Anna Ramirez.

    Henderson probably never paid anyone if she could get away with stiffing them.

    And to think there are idiot dirts in this town who actually give her money and help her with the paper!

    Amazing!

    ReplyDelete
  37. I'd like to know if and how Sierra Madre is going to professionalize the Fire Department. Are we going to start paying Bamberger, Burnette and the Lowe's only to maintain the same level of incompetence that has made us the laughing stock of the State, or will we require candidates to go through a proper application & screening process like professional fire departments do.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Pasadena-Foothill chapter of AIA (American Institute of Architects) is a professional organization and not a political arm of another group. Ihkrata and Edney were not there but SCAG was represented on the panel. Others were from Cal Poly Pomona, Rand Institute, and a representative from a non-profit housing equity group. Architects work with laws that are passed on to the pubic just as you and I have to live with them. It is the legislators and legislation that must be the focus of our concern. Los Angeles and all the transportation mess that we have now is a directly result of the freeways that broke up cities into fragments in the 1950's and on. Can Sierra Madre continue to maintain local control in the face of these state and federal pressures? This is a question to ask at the candidates forum.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Attended the AIA SB 375 seminar todayMarch 6, 2010 at 6:42 PM

    The seminar today was, as Mary Ann put it, "SB 375 101", a very academic presentation by academics. Schmooze job, no substance on process, just urbanplannerspeak and factoids that distorted the true picture. Mary Ann gave a pithy critique from the audience, you shoulda been there. I have to say most of the professionals in the audience were visibly unimpressed with the material, and were nodding vigorously when Mary Ann spoke out. Don and Pat were there too. The Moderator must have been moderating.
    ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  40. It's good many members of the Sierra Madre community attended; especially the Mayor and Councilman, and admirable that Mrs. Alcorn was in attendance as well. If we are to mount a defense to this new threat being settled on us by Sacramento legislators and lobbyists it is vital we educate ourselves. Which brings us to the lectures on this site by Professor Moderator on SB375. Not so many months ago virtually no one could cite SB375 except Sir Eric and Laurie Barlow. We are indebted to John Crawford for ringing the bell to rally us.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Now there's a question for the panel on Monday night: Can you explain what the affects of SB375 will be on our small foothill community and Is there any way to mitigate those affects?

    ReplyDelete
  42. My question is:
    which candidates are Mayor MacGillivray and Mayor Pro-tem Don Watts and former Mayor Kurt Zimmerman voting for? They are the ones who have been fighting for fair RHNA numbers for us, fighting successfully for us. They are the councilmembers who have been working for the people instead of Sacramento special interests!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Laurie Barlow was at the seminar yesterday. We could use more analysis from her, don't you think? Also, there were continuing education units for this professional group so the presentation was formulated the way it was for that outcome, too. Many of the Tattler readers are professionals and have been to these sessions and would recognize the format.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I wasn't there, I had Little League stuff going on. But I hear they got a good ration of Sierra Madre independent thinking yesterday.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Laurie Barlow has been a volunteer consultant to this blog on many of these issues, as she is one of the best experts in the State.

    Anyone who hasn't visited her excellent website:
    Greensward: Civitas (mod has the link listed in his websites of interest list at the top of the page, go over and check it out. You'll learn plenty!

    People like Laurie, MaryAnn, Don and John C. are working for all of us.

    Laurie and MaryAnn aren't on the April 13th ballot, but John Crawford and Don Watts are, joined by Pat Alcorn, who is also an expert on this issue, they deserve and need your votes!

    ReplyDelete
  46. These are very interesting questions, and I would like to add one of my own. Why are we voting on the eminent domain, and what will this measure do for us?

    ReplyDelete
  47. The SB 375 presentation yesterday was rather superficial as well as self-contradictory in its premises. This thing is supposedly a form-based code to cut down on commuter driving, for what that's worth. They cite immense future population growth projections (not possible)and use cities like New York as a model of *form* (very large densities on Manhattan Island, dense suburban ring, exurban nearly rural). Los Angeles basin is flat and dense (thanks to Federal highway program that busted the Red Line), and this model is supposedly to be changed by SB 375 to move towards the NYC model.

    Except that these RHNA assigned numbers and large transit-exempt projects will just make our current situation worse under SCAG's idea of "fair share" growth everywhere. The REAL application of this concept would assign all RHNA to LA's city center where there is already transit (light rail/bus)and the ability to develop the "zero energy/water footprint" in the rebuild of large projects that makes this size of population center sustainable.

    The communities outside of Los Angeles would logically not need to accommodate any new growth at all under this "form model", and simply build a few good projects that are sustainable, shrink the built footprint (less building mass - not more), and restore open space and natural environment. Infrastructure improvement to return water to the aquifers is crucial, and isn't exactly rocket science. Neither are fuel-efficient hybrid cars and far lower consumption per person (save on storage locker fees, too).

    So as far as I'm concerned, the whole thing is bogus and an excuse for untrammeled development to make our situation far worse than it is now, given our permanent water shortage and dwindling resources, which diminishes for everyone as population grows.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Thank you, Laurie Barlow, for that very succinct recap of yesterday's AIA presentation (with a bias toward employing its own). Villagers, educate yourself. This issue won't be going away anytime soon. And you can be sure the old enemies of slow growth have not gone anywhere either! Ask each candidate at tomorrow night's forum how they stand on SB375. By now they have had time to educate themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I'd like a better explanation of the delta between the $5 mil + or - General Fund and the $20 mil City budget. Who determines how the $15 mil is spent? Who gets paid out of it? Why do we spend in excess of $200 K a year on a Round-A-Bout to primarily deliver children to the park after school? Grant funding, I'm told; not General Fund. Does that mean we don't have to get the most bang for our buck? Because it's federal taxpayer's money? Oh, wait! Don't we all pay federal taxes? So explain to me who oversees the $15 mil piggy bank...

    ReplyDelete
  50. I didn't see Mosca, Moran or Walsh there, did anybody else spot them?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Dear Fund Watcher, just remember the three quarters of a million spent on the Goldberg Recreation Area that Joe Mosca gave us! Don't worry, be happy! We sold a firehouse to fund that debacle and enrich Enid Joffe's friends the Goldbergs.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Joe was walking east Sierra Madre; not enough sense to come in out of the rain.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Joe read a book once. Is he going to claim he gave us the library?

    ReplyDelete
  54. New issue of the Mountain Views Liar is out. More crap about MaryAnn. Susan's hatred for her is frighteningly obsessive.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Hail has some pretty incisive and eye opening advice for candidates running for City Council in his column this week. He says that it is the votes of those voting in elections that elect candidates.

    This is some of his finest work since he wrote about chasing day laborers from Memorial Park.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Bart Doyle was at the AIA meeting yesterday and spent a good amount of time talking to the representative from SCAG after the presentations were over.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Candidate Walsh was there for a portion of the meeting--left at the first break. No for Candidate Mosca. No for Candidate Moran.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Ms. Walsh need not have bothered herself. John Buchanan will be sure to tell her what to think and say on the topic.

    ReplyDelete
  59. ...but will she remember what he said or will she totally blunder the presentation as she did at the city council meeting? i actually felt sorry for the ol'gal. nancy just doesn't have what it takes to run a city. i hope she doesn't embarrass herself monday night in front of the entire city. first live and replay after replay. yikes! nancy it's not too late to change your mind and save yourself the embarrasement.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Nancy is an indication of just how desperate Bart and Buchanan were to find candidates. Josh Moran is the proof.

    ReplyDelete
  61. at least shes got the balls to put herself out their and get involved, so what if she embarasses herself, she's trying, 1:06, your an embarassment enough!

    ReplyDelete
  62. Anonymous 3:33 pm, you are correct. Mrs. Walsh is very courageous to run for City Council. Tattlers are unlikely to vote for her but that does not in any way diminish her right to seek elected office. We wish her well -- just not too well. After all it's an election!

    ReplyDelete
  63. I have been puzzling over the selection of Josh as a candidate.
    It seems so unlikely that anyone thought he'd have a real chance, so that begs the question, was that the intention all along?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Ms. Walsh voted for and still supports Measure V. She is also an extremely qualified candidate, perhaps more qualified than any of the other candidates. She is not at all into large development as indicated on this blog. She simply would like something done with boarded up buildings (unlike Mr. Crawford who said he sees no problem with empty buildings) in town. I'm surprised that any Sierra Madre resident supports that! We should thank Walsh for assising us in passing Measure V. I believe Ms. Walsh was correct in voicing her disappointment in how it appears that Measure V paralyzed SM in regards to the Skilled Nursing Facility. She supports the small town atmosphere. Don't be fooled here folks. This blog is to rally troops for the Crawford, Watts and Alcorn group. So I think Alcorn as Watts should be asked - What is your opinion of Walsh? I bet they won't have a truly negative thing to say, and THAT is food for thought!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Hilariously misinformed. Don't you even watch our city council meetings? There is a blight law about to be passed by the City Council, one that began right here on this blog. The Skilled Nursing Facility's owners, along with any other fine downtown property owners that don't keep up their property, will soon be faced with stiff fines for allowing their real estate investments to fall into a blighted condition. And that initiative began right here on this blog.

    I'm sure your support for Nancy is sincere. But please, don't lie. It will make your nose grow.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Nancy Walsh is on record as saying Measure V was a mistake.

    She may have signed (reluctantly, I might add) the 2-30-13 original petition, but she did not support Yes on Measure V.

    She is a puppet of Buchanan and not qualified to serve on the council.

    ReplyDelete
  67. That is a very ignorant statement, 10:30. Very ignorant.

    ReplyDelete
  68. 10;30, the blighted condition of the SNF is not the fault of John Crawford, the City Council, or the City. It is a strategy by the LLC that owns the property to force the Council to approve the unwelcome high density project they thought was a done deal under the old Council with its DSP "almost" in the bag. No Councilmember can singlehandedly bring in business or revenue. Don't be misled by campaign promises.

    ReplyDelete
  69. If all Nancy has to run on is an old beat up nursing home, then she really is an empty vessel. The blight law is the solution, not a bunch of meaningless chatter.

    ReplyDelete
  70. 10:30 anon...Is that you Johnny B? It sure sounds like your malarkey. My friend you are the fool incarnate. In person, or in binary, you are full of yourself, and an unmentionable organic material.
    Neuroblast Films

    ReplyDelete
  71. Best of luck to the ONLY THREE qualified candidates for Sierra Madre's City Council:


    Good luck, JOHN CRAWFORD, DON WATTS and PAT ALCORN.

    Thank you, Mayor MacGillivray, Mayor Pro-tem Watts and former Mayor Kurt Zimmerman for finally steering Sierra Madre in the right direction.
    I heard on the radio last night that there are only a handful of cities in California with a balance budget. Sierra Madre is one of them.
    In these troubled economic times, Sierra Madre stands out.
    This is the honest work of MacGillivray, Watts, Zimmerman that has achieved this.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Nancy Walsh spoke out in favor of exaggerated population and job growth figures, which could have saddled us with huge RHNA numbers and more condos if they had been submitted.

    She's also criticized Measure V, which has done more to preserve Sierra Madre, than anything else in the last 25 years.

    You're full of it poster 10:30.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Anon @ 10:30

    You made a lot of assertions but provided no factual information to back up your claims. We've had enough empty rhetoric, and further more, are not interested in another Joe Mosca mischaracterizing and overstating their record.

    Perhaps it would be more productive for you to burden Bill Coburn with your nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Everyone please come to the Candidate's Forum tonight at City Hall at 6:30.

    It will be very infomative. I know all your Tattler readers are well informed, but please come and show your support for our faithful journalist, Crawford/aka Sir Eric Maundry.
    Invite your friends and neighbors.
    Crawford won't disappoint you!
    Added attraction Don Watts and Pat Alcorn!

    oh, yeah, those other people, too.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Perhaps Neuroblast could post the vid of Nancy Walsh defending compliance with SCAG and regret about Measure V at that council appearance, so people can see what happened for themselves without any filters.

    ReplyDelete
  76. JTF: Sounds like some one was impressed by something they heard at a coffee. Sounds like the candidate treated the poor dear like a boob.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Neuroblast you are a fine journalist and a very observant man. Thank you for being there and preserving what is right.

    ReplyDelete
  78. i'm sort of sick of candidates nad those massive ego blowhards that are more concerned about appeasing Sacremento, realtors and developers and quasi government agencies (SCAG)instead of streamling planning and codes, quit the massive permit fees (just to pay for police lawsuits) but my street can't get paved but once very dozen years.

    poor Joe, he's really gonna try to defend his record and boasts of accomphlishments tonight?

    Hopefully the non candidates such as Moran and Mr. Tice will not try to tie up valuable time with rambles or will Mr. Moran once again call everyone else "decisive" as he is?

    ReplyDelete
  79. Josh will proclaim himself the candidate of peace and unity, and then attack everyone like a shark with a mouth filled with somebody's intestines.

    ReplyDelete
  80. myself, I think that the individuals or corporations that bought the Skilled Nursing or Howies Lot...well their problem or profit motives are not my problem or the city's problem. they bought the property to "flip" into condos and figure they can strong arm the city into concessions (ala Joe, John B, Josh Moran and I guess Ms. Walsh) so large condo sprawls with parking garages could be added to our quaint downtown.

    if that group of yahoos (developers, real estate agents and the council dudes) want to add 150 + condos to downtown, I'd like to know why they are so concerned about people who don't even live hear and I don't think we need to add a possible 500 l,000 potential new residents to the city

    Moran, John B, Joe Mosca and Bart Doyle won't be happy until every building down has 3 stories with condos and there are 55 condos at Howies and 65 at the Nursing Facility

    ReplyDelete
  81. It's all about the money, 5:37. And nothing else.

    ReplyDelete
  82. chose not to fileMarch 8, 2010 at 5:51 PM

    9:17.... i believe the candidates aren't chosen, they file, you could have filed and ran, i could have filed and ran, jake the mountain man could have filed and ran.....YOU choose at the ballot box...just wanted to clear up this whole democratic process jazz for ya.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Thanks for your illuminating post 5:51.
    Good to have that cleared up, that no one influences anyone else to run, no one solicits like-minded people to support political agendas, no strategy meetings are held to map out campaigns and complementary candidates. And certainly no weak candidates are coached into joining the struggle for a certain kind of activity in the town, even against their own best interests...

    ReplyDelete
  84. Then please explain Eagle Bill...

    ReplyDelete
  85. Isn't Eagle Bill great?
    But methinks you're an absolutist - ya know, one way to understand things, all this or all that & only one insight, & it just happens to be yours.
    Yes, Bill is as independent as a person can be. Not everyone else who is running is.

    ReplyDelete
  86. no TV at my placeMarch 8, 2010 at 7:10 PM

    Why don't you two take it outside?
    Anyone back from the candidates forum?
    How is it going?

    ReplyDelete
  87. Yes Don we must be vigilant, fight the wretched that want to turn SM into some Mayberrified Glendale, strike them down with all the thunder we can muster and watch the vermin scurry back into the holes the special interests have carved out for them. AMEN!

    ReplyDelete
  88. No, Eagle Bill is not great.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Slow down John, your answers seem a little canned.

    ReplyDelete
  90. pissed off tax payerMarch 8, 2010 at 7:31 PM

    lost me on that one crawford, not one more of my dimes going to schools, do with what you have.

    ReplyDelete
  91. 7:22, sometimes someone so informed as Mr. Crawford, who has studied a subject in great detail, can sound that way. In his case, it's because he knows so much. Could probably talk for hours on the important issues.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Imagine - a well informed candidate who has done the homework.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Who appointed doogie howser as CC prez?

    ReplyDelete
  94. He owns Beantown

    ReplyDelete
  95. and he was against the smoking ban...go figure!

    ReplyDelete
  96. It's a shame that Crawford sounded so rehearsed. He didn't appear to be well versed and able to speak on it for hours at all. It appeared as though when what was written on his paper ran out of things for him to say, so would he. He also lost me on giving the schools more money.

    ReplyDelete
  97. It was the first time I'd ever done something like that, so yeah, I scripted. At least I wrote it. You can read everything I had with me on this evenings post. And on education, I have young kids. What Sacramento has done to education in this state is criminal behavior in my book. It's heartbreaking, and I feel for parents with kids in public school.

    ReplyDelete
  98. channel 3 watcherMarch 9, 2010 at 7:49 AM

    10:13, I'll take over rehearsed (though it didn't strike me that way) and smart over winging it and platituding about being nice, any day.

    ReplyDelete
  99. There was so much whining from the Moscateers I was surprised Bill Coburn didn't bring them some cheese.

    ReplyDelete
  100. My issue with giving the schools more money is that Sacramento is confiscating our property taxes which are to be used for that purpose. So taxing ourselves even more is like feeding the trolls. I vote for turning Sacramento into a PO Box for legal reasons and letting cities run the show, keep our local taxes like we did before Prop 13.

    ReplyDelete
  101. I don't disagree. But kids are the innocents here, and they're being robbed of their education by some of the biggest dirtbags on the planet. And believe me, I agonized over that one.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Do I see a revolution brewing over the school money that Sacramento keeps to feed its labor pension funds and staff raises?

    ReplyDelete
  103. So an incompetent school administration has kidnapped the children and is holding their futures for ransom.

    ReplyDelete
  104. It is a horrible situation.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Right now a reform movement looks pretty good

    http://www.reformcal.com

    ReplyDelete
  106. So was that an accurate percentage a speaker gave last night, that the overhead for the PUSD is 50%?

    ReplyDelete