Wednesday, June 25, 2014

I'm Sorry, But Last Night Was Hardly A Victory

-
After the water worry portion of last night's City Council meeting finally came to a halt, a break period was called. Myself, along with the many people who showed up to talk about their horror at the impending destruction of our community at the hands of greedy developers, saw their chance and started to head for the exits. The prospect of having to stay and listen to City Staff complain about the defeat of Measure UUT yet again being too much for even the strongest of us to take.

Much to my enduring amazement an obviously agitated Mayor Harabedian came rushing into my presence. This being a surprise since usually the guy just ignores me, preferring instead to spend his precious Council Chambers recesses talking to people who share his opinions about the special qualities of This Year's Mayor (TYM). Which is just fine with me. I personally enjoy the quiet. There is so little most people have to say that improves upon it.

However, Mayor Harabedian appeared to have a special concern last night. He apparently needed to know what I was going to write on this blog this morning about his solution to the demand of the many residents present for a building (or is that a water) moratorium. That being favoring Phase III Water Restrictions over a water moratorium. This was surprising since in the past he had expressed the opinion that nobody reads The Tattler. Himself included.

What I told him is that I believe he is merely playing politics with this issue. Phase III Water Use Restrictions are going to be extraordinarily unpopular in this town. They call for additional 30% per property water use reductions on top of those already made, and back that up with stiff fines.

Which, in my humble opinion, is tantamount to yet another water rate increase. Phase III fines, added to the nearly 100% in increases from the last two water rate imbroglios, being a bit excessive. Even for Sierra Madre.

Also, why is it that the first reaction of City Hall is to call upon the residents to make even more sacrifices than they already have? Is the City angry at us because our opposition to three big McMansion developments could possibly cost them millions of dollars in Development Impact Fees? Is this getting in the way of the $36,000 Cadillac health plan benefits they seem to favor?

There is a lot of energy in Sierra Madre right now over McMansion development. Nobody wants to see Sierra Madre sold out like that. Especially when the sole consideration downtown is how much money City Hall will make off of the applicable development impact fees when these 6,000 square foot multi-million dollar nightmares are built.

My take here is that Harabedian, along with The Great Tax Fighter and the hopeless Gene Goss, are all puppy perky over Phase III Water Use Restrictions for the very worst of reasons. Their politically driven hope here being that the people of Sierra Madre will quickly grow tired of both the fines and demanded sacrifices, throw up their hands and decide that even McMansion development would be preferable to having to endure much more of getting phased.

A nice way to kill a movement. At least in their eyes.

Just so you know, a Water Moratorium, which would halt the installation of new water hook ups, doesn't include hitting the townies up for significant fines and punishments when they don't comply with draconian 30% use reductions. In other words, you will not be the one called upon to make all the sacrifices. The whack on the snout with a rolled up newspaper will instead land someplace else.

If you think about it, it is as if you are being punished for opening your mouth about over-development. Or using too much water so development can't happen. Or perhaps even for failing to pass Measure UUT. Something that is so very City Hall these days. Blaming the residents being preferable there to being blamed themselves.

And does a water moratorium really have anything to do with fining residents for not reducing their water consumption by 30%? How do you logically make a connection like that?

My unsolicited advice for Mayor Harabedian? Two points.

1) Serve the people.

2) Always tell the complete truth.

Claiming that Phase III Water Use Restrictions are the solution to Sierra Madre's problems helps accomplish neither of those goals.

It is nice that there would be no more water hook-ups. Make no mistake. But why undo the good in that by then beating up the residents and ratepayers of this town? Haven't they suffered enough with two successive rate increases in just the last few years, while now also having to endure water the color of old false teeth? Now you want to fine them as well?

Et Cetera

- The black suited lawyer for the One Carter developer strutted up to the podium last night and tried his very best to be scary. An effect that was probably lost when the room burst out into laughter more than once. However, the last laugh was probably his. Phase III Water Use Restrictions would be music to his ears. One Carter already has water hook-ups. Suddenly the property there is worth a lot more. Rumor has it he and Adele danced the night away.

- Mayor Harabedian, perhaps fearful that he might not be thought well of, discussed how the previous City Council had carefully considered water hook up moratoriums. Yet none of the knowledgeable City Council watchers that I spoke with after the meeting could remember such a conversation ever happening. Do you?

- Is it just me, or did Terri Highsmith make a 180 degree turnaround last night? Go back and reread her staff report on building moratoriums, and then compare it with what she said at this City Council confab about a Water Moratorium. We've either gotten to her or she caught Phase III mania just as (umm…) spontaneously as those three Councilmen.

- The residents of Sierra Madre made a great showing last night, and deserved much better from their City Council. They will now need to come back and do it all over again. Hopefully that will help our elected officials get this right.

http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

146 comments:

  1. I watched the meeting in disgust.
    Harribedian, Goss and the fraud Cappocia are enemies of the people of Sierra Madre. They are selling us out.
    Keep after them Crawford and Tattler patriots.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So Mayor Johnny seems to have changed his tune. Last time the council discussed the water ordinance in depth, he was adamant that we not go to 30% and that no fines be imposed. What happened? Bruce Inman seems to think that we have 2 years worth of water, so why such draconian measures now ?

      Delete
    2. GOSS SAID AT THE MEETING THAT A WATER HOOKUP MORATORIUM WAS TOO DRACONIAN - EVEN THOUGH THAT WOULD APPLY TO NEW RESIDENTS AND DEVELOPERS. YET HE FAVORED THE PHASE III WATER USE RESTRICTIONS WHICH MAKE EXISTING RESIDENTS REDUCE THEIR WATER USE BY 30% OR FACE STIFF FINES. WHO ARE YOU LOOKING OUT FOR MR. GOSS?

      Delete
    3. Phase 3 punishes the locals. It can also be downgraded at anytime. When it is downgraded the hook-up will come in like a flashflood.

      Delete
    4. duh, u vote for Goss? I didn't, I left my 3rd choice blank.

      stop voting for candidates cause you have to or nobody else is available.

      Goss came in LAST the previous election and this time he came in first cause those that didn't want him had to choose between him and Noah Greene.


      Harabedian seems to be in a rush to be liked and trusted but the fact remains he STARTED with distrust and dishonesty with his election and touted his "lawyer" degree as it that is required to be a Councilmember and with the exception of one "attorney" ever on the Council, all have been miserable failures and agendize development over resident needs pratically 100% of the time.

      Delete
    5. Harabedian is a couple of patches short of a uniform.

      Delete
    6. Let's at least give Capoccia credit for agreeing with Delmar on the need for a moratorium and not just the Phase III Water Use Restriction.

      Delete
    7. a junior college teacher of political science does not need to be using us for his research

      I recognize the title of Professor at the university level, not JC

      Delete
  2. Because of perhaps superior knowledge and intellect, the Tattler may have burst my bubble with its take on the meeting last night. My initial take was that Councilman Del Mar was outstanding as usual, Capoccia, while careful not to upset Developers unduly, seemed to be on the right side of a moratorium. Harabedian said flat out that he would be in favor of a water moratorium if it has more teeth than the Phase 3 conservation plan and Goss, well Goss was very disappointing. . It was obvious to me that Goss knew exactly what he was going to say prior to the meeting. In other words, he did not listen to any of the many residents who spoke up. Goss is dangerous because he follows his own agenda without listening to the people. Overall, I called it a good step in the right directoin but now the Tattler gives me pause. The Tattler raises some interesting issues. Are we being hoodwinked and penalized to boot by embracing the Phase 3? Will our conservation efforts actually lead to more development as we save water as that stuffed shirt lawyer demands we do so that there more water left for future residents and housing projects. I need some further help and understanding on this issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you just got it, 6:41.
      The real estate developers have these council members in their pocket.
      We will likely have to recall them. But wait until summer is over. We will have a better chance.

      Delete
    2. It seems that the main purpose of a Phase III Water Use Restriction is to punish residents with penalties - effectively another tax as the Tattler points out and bludgeon us into conserving more water so that more water is available to the developers. What a disaster!

      Delete
    3. Goss was following directions. His reasons were not based on facts.

      Delete
    4. Goss teaches political science at Long Beach City College and wants to play politician or case study

      he comes prepared but its city college mumbo jumbo blah blah John Buchananese blandless and enlighted observations

      I always questioned his motives and when he was endorsed by the "developer" contention I had no reason to think he actually cared about the city - it's about him and what those in his ear tells him what to do and think

      His students have reason to question his lectures at LBCC if this is how he imagined being a Councilmember and add that to his resume for teaching

      jeez

      Delete
    5. Goss was obviously the biggest disapointment of the night. The crowd did everything but throw rotten tomatoes at him. He needs to listen to the residents.

      Delete
  3. In light of what the Tattler has brought up, we all need to be very careful and how we proceed next. This Phase 3 may be a trick. That's why Delmar was so adamant that it be accompanied by some kind of moratorium. Thank God Delmar does her homework.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Phase III is a trick. That's why Harabedian and Goss are in favor of it.

      Delete
    2. sorry all 4 wanted it

      Delete
    3. In think we need to better understand the implications of the Phase III before passing judgment. Harabedian and Goss may be just misguided and uninformed in not agreeing with a formal building and/or water moratorium.

      Delete
  4. The people who showed up last night and spoke up are representative of the vast majority of Sierra Madre residents. We need to be very careful about what is the next step. I don't mind conserving water and reducing water usage and incurring penalties when I sometimes can't meet the stringent requirments but if the end result of all my efforts to comply with Phase 3 is to simply bring more revenue into City Hall and have more water available for housing projects like Mater Dolorosa then I have to say, wait a minute.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I mind conserving water and incurrinng penalties when the city stops telling us there is no water crisis for developers or laundries but for you and I - we need to get our act together and that's basically what Nancy Walsh told us and she pushed for fines and levies "cause she could" and she did.

      How can we accept penalties and stringent requirements when the city isn't doing the same to itself ?

      what's all with the penalites, can they turn off my water if I challenge them on their double standards?

      I'm sort of sick of the one set of rules for the developers with regards to water and another set of rules for residents.

      and I lump in every single realtor into the "developer" group cause they are all silent on matters of preservation and maintaining SM as we all want and chasing commissions at our expense.

      Delete
    2. I conserved water went they said we were running out. Then we went to, what 10% restriction?...then 20% restriction of that. I'm trying to use MORE, because it is based on past usage, not square footage of yard and house, like it should be Building moratorium NOW!

      Delete
  5. I think I get it now. So if we implement the Phase 3 and all the residents pitch in and reduce their water use and incur the penalties when we don't, there will be more water available for future residents and large housing projects. And the further beauty of this idea is that when we can't restrict our water use enough, we get to pay penalties which brings in more money to City Hall to make up for the money lost when the UUT tax when up in flames. Goss and Harabedian are smarter than I thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think they are so smart, 6:43, just taking orders from the same rotten bunch that have been destroying this town since the early 1990s.
      The developer/political machine runs Sierra Madre and most cities in California. It's all about the money.
      We are the collateral damage.
      I hope Denise Delmar remains strong and fights like MaryAnn MacGillivray did, the big political machine destroyed MacGillivrays chance of being re-elected to the city council, but they did NOT destroy MacGillivray, they slandered her, had her home robbed, tried to discredit this woman any way they could.
      I was so pleased to see her getting up to speak. With all the abuse this woman has endured from these evil people, she survives. I only hope Delmar has the same strength.
      These same evil people tried to destroy John Crawford, as well. They slandered him, they had his home burglarized (in my opinion) just like MaryAnn's home. They want to intimidate and demoralize these fine citizens. John Crawford and MaryAnn MacGillivray are too strong for them! They are also too smart for them!!!
      Thank God we, the people of Sierra Madre have these leaders to fight for us.

      Delete
    2. Nice post 7:31. We owe so much to MacGillivray and Crawford. As far as Crawford goes, ask yourself if Buccanon, Walsh or any of that bunch moved out of Sierra Madre like Mosca did, whether you would ever hear from them again. The answer is we wouldn't. And yet, here's Crawford who now lives fairly far away, still attending City Council meetings till late at night and blogging about our City. What does that tell you about his concern for our city and what kind of person he is. If more actual residents of Sierra Madre cared 1/10 as much for our City as Crawford, now a non-resident does, we wouldn't be in these messses. Thank you John for still caring about Sierra Madre and not forgetting us.

      Delete
    3. Those of you who think Denise is not as strong as MaryAnn or not able to stand the heat, didn't watch the General Plan Update Committee Meetings. Denise stands strong.

      Delete
    4. I'll pitch in when the laundramat NO LONGER receives a flat discount rate on water and unlimited usage

      or when the city stops preaching developer BS

      Delete
    5. why does Denise need to stand up strong?

      she's dealing with developer bullies and the best way to silence them is to banish them

      stop electing lawyers to the Council, it's a good start - they argue for no reason, not productive with real tasks and are always shcmoozing

      Harabedian needs to get his act together fast and stop pandering to the developers

      Delete
  6. Is the City going to put out some kind of notice about what the Phase III Water Use Restrictions means to them. How can we evaluate something or comment intelligently on something we don't know about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. council can first reverse the knuckehead water discount and flat open rate that Walsh, Moran and Harabedian gave away to the laundrymat and other businesses

      if the Starbucks uses 10 times more water than I, they need to pay for exactly like me and with a premium cause they are making profit off the water - same for every other business

      Delete
    2. I agree the pain needs to be spread evenly but I don't want to tighten my belt so that more water is available for housing projects.

      Delete
  7. Imagine a world without the Tattler. While a bit cyncial and jaded perhaps after exposing so much double-talk, lies and corruption at City Hall, the average person would never know the real story if it weren't for the Tattler. Thank you Tattler once again for holding people's feet to the fire and helping us over-optimistic people get an occasional reality check.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I must say that there is something about Crawford walking into the City Council meeting and taking a seat close to the front that brings a smile to my face. Then when he holds up both arms to take a picture of the video screen.....you just have to love it.

      Delete
    2. there were no other seats left he arrived late

      Delete
  8. I wish Arizmendi were there to hear the audience comments and give her take on things. I would trust her to go down the right path. She and Delmar will be as good as we have ever had on the Council. Capaccia is still a bit of a flip-flopper but there hope that he will return to his roots. Harabedian may be too ambitious to make a decision that will benefit the residents rather than the special interests. While I had hope for Goss, that hope evaporated last night. Goss had pre-planned his opposition to a moratorium well before the meeting and the comments from the residents. By the way, I heard that the video conveniently malfunctioned so that no one can see the meeting. Is that true?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I had to stay home last night, and was planning on watching on KGEM. I checked a number of times through the evening, and it never came on.
      There had better be a tape they can replay.

      Delete
    2. 7:52: If the meeting is not re-aired, you can check it out (on DVD) at the library.

      Delete
    3. K-Gem needs to be replaced. And every time there is a "malfunction" the City Manager should demand a refund.

      Delete
    4. The malfunction is not the fault of KGEM but of the city who owns the equipment..

      Delete
    5. Goss thinks we are as simple as his students at Long Beach City College

      He comes prepared but not really, he's just talking and telling us why he's right

      He's the reverse of Nancy Walsh - at least she never was prepared in an advance with with a slick sales message

      yuck on Goss

      Delete
    6. Goss seemed to already know what position he was going to take. He disregarded completely everything that the residents said during the public comment section. Goss is on track to become the earliest city council member in Sierra Madre to face a recall election.

      Delete
  9. We had such a great turnout last night. Can you imaging if everybody brought a friend. The chambers would be overflowing. That's what it takes. We can decide the destiny of this town - we just have to show up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sierra Madre's finest were really protecting the council chambers last night.. It would have been a great time to rob a house or go speeding down Baldwin.

      Delete
  10. Perfect cartoon Tattler. It's happening everywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I would like to remind the citizens of Sierra Madre that the MWD pipe on Grandview, which was absolutely put in for DEVELOPMENT was voted in by the council majority of Joe Mosca, John Buchanan and Enid Joffe.
    Only two residents that night got up to public comment and pleaded with the city council to NOT ALLOW THIS.
    Council members Kurt Zimmerman and Don Watts listened and they voted AGAINST this atrocity.
    The residents who got up and spoke just happened to be the two smartest and bravest women in town.
    Attorney Linda Thornton and MaryAnn MacGillivray, who hadn't been to a council meeting to speak in years, they got it
    Lesson here. Do not believe the lies city hall and their puppets on the council tell us. Listen to people who have years of experience dealing with these sell out people who do not represent us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct me if I'm wrong. But we wouldn't have any water at all right now without that pipe would we?

      Delete
    2. Well, yeah, if you can call that yellow stuff "water."

      Delete
    3. Hey 11:55, the pipe may not be the problem. We've allowed too much development already. That combined with the lack of foresight of prior City Councils made us unprepared to deal with a drought.

      Delete
  12. So nice chess move by the city council last night. They place a moratorium on new water meter installations to forestall development for the time being, thus mollifying the enraged citizenry, yet by doing so, increase the value of the lots up at One Carter that already have meters installed and side step a law suit. They then approve a 30% reduction in water use by the citizens which will be accompanied by fines. So, the good people reduce water use, the city doesn't have to pay for that imported water, but because less water is being used, the UUT revenue will fall and thus the argument will be that the UUT is insufficient to cover costs and therefore must be raised. Thus, the good citizen is once again shafted. Use less orange water, let your yard die, pay more taxes, but we won't have a law suit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is not one court in the country that will rule against a city council/residents zoning laws.
      The threats of law suits (are ya listening John Capoccia) are all BS. Absolute BS.
      Do not be intimidated by this. NO COURT WILL RULE AGAINST US ON THIS ISSUE.

      Delete
    2. Actually, placing a moratorium on new water hook-ups jacks up the value of all the water hook-ups in town, not just the ones in that Stonegate triangle of death up there on Carter.

      Delete
    3. Mayor of RealvilleJune 25, 2014 at 10:21 AM

      Except 1 Carter is already hooked up. No moratorium would apply, the meters are already in. How cool is that?

      Delete
    4. Since we haven't been drawing on our wells, is the water level stabilizing? Can we ever expect to use our wells again?

      Delete
    5. Arcadia's been pumping the E. Raymond basin all the time while SM has not been pumping. I doubt the water level is rising much, if at all.

      Delete
  13. So does the Council really believe that they will avoid developer lawsuits if they punish the townspeople too? Is this akin to : The floggings will continue until morale improves?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Water moratorium, yes. Phase 3 no. Haven't the people of this town suffered enough? Why do the city's solutions always involve taking money from the residents?

    ReplyDelete
  15. No actual action was taken last night. Nothing was approved. It was just a discussion. The Council voting on an actual plan is yet to come.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortuantely, we all need to fire up again for the next meeting. We can leave it to certain members on the City Council to do the right thing. We had a great turnout. Tell your neighbors and lets make it even bigger and more vocal next time. There is alot riding on this.

      Delete
  16. Does anyone know when this item will be discussed again? In all the excitement last night, I missed the date.
    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Susan Henderson who owns the adjudicated newspaper will publish the meeting announcement in this weekends issue. the council will hae it on the agenda for the July 8 meeting. I believe the council is dark for all of August (unless they call a special meeting) so all this craziness may not be in force until the start of September.

      Delete
  17. Like it or not we are out of the fresh,cold,clean,clear water that I grew up on as a child. We need phase 3 and a water hookup moratorium hand in hand if we are ever to replenish our finest resource
    My back lawn is gone,my front lawn will soon die,my Avocado trees are distressed,but you know what? lawns and Avocado trees have no place in a dessert and that is where I was born as was my mother ,her sisters,my brother and sisters. It's time to be responsible and drastically reduce our consumption for future generations.........

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, we need to conserve but not at the cost of developments being approved due to our sacrifice. The idea here is to preserve both water and the town as we know it.

      Delete
    2. That would be a "desert"

      Delete
    3. I agree, lawns and avocado trees have no place in a dessert. Cheesecake? Sure.

      Delete
    4. I agree with everything 8:16 said about conserving water and I'm willing to do my part. But if saves water only to be used for more housing projects, I say no way.

      Delete
    5. ya but before a meteor strike it was not a desert!
      its called control the population and contain global warming!!!

      Delete
  18. Plain and simple! the majority on the City Council are working against the interest of our citizens.The time for conversation is over and a move to recall three councilmen should begin now!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look, I agree they should be recalled. But we can't do it in the summer, have to wait till about Nov. Weather cools down, people aren't on vacation. Recalls are tough but not impossible. They have done it before in this town. It's our only choice , it seems, Harribedian, Capoccia and Goss are in the pocket of the development cartel, they are not going to represent us. We have to get rid of these scoundrel/liar/traitors.

      Delete
    2. The opposition wants us to recall right away, so we'll fail. Don't fall for it. Wait it out, we can come up with a plan they can't win, even with all their financing by political party and development. Kevin Dunn and Kurt Zimmerman did it.....we got Measure V passed, in spite of the massive money against us.
      We have a very good cause, just like they did then. We can win. But we must not form separate groups...we must all band together to stop these people. Monastery people are well meaning, but incredibly naïve. They don't know who and what they are dealing with. We need you people, but you must educate yourselves, please read this blog everyday. Listen to people who have been through these fights before and won.
      Listen to people like Kevin Paschall and MaryAnn MacGillivray and John Crawford, and dozens of the bloggers on this blog who have been on the front lines.
      We can stop all this if we all work together.

      Delete
    3. Recalls cost $10,000 per council member, and an army of foot soldiers.
      Best to try some other strategies, unless you have that money and that army.

      Delete
    4. If it means saving our town we have to do it.

      Delete
    5. o.k. lets take a deep breath and think before we write. There is no basis for a recall just because the council members disagree with you. A recall has to be some illegal act or some blatant moral thing. A recall will never fly and we would be wasting our energy on getting the signatures. Spend your energy on letting the development company know that no way, no how do we, the citizens want a housing development on the top of Sunnyside. Come to the planning commission and urge them not to make a zoning change when asked for. Come to every City Council meeting and speak at public comment and urge them when the time comes, not to make a zoning change. Use water, traffic, and environment for the reason, not just that we don't want a development. Remind Goss that he ran on the promise that he would not want to see the land developed.

      Delete
  19. I can handle a phase 3, but only if they do away with the stupid fining.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I don't think there can much doubt that Harabedian, Capoccia, Goss, Aguilar and Highsmith worked this all out in advance. There is nothing these people won't do to serve the needs of developers. Even break the law.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct...To them this is a done deal! They have the votes!

      Delete
  21. Right on! They are punishing the citizens! Gene goss feels a building moratorium would be draconian. This is only the beginning! We need a big show of support at the next meeting. How do we get that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You get that by making sure you get people to the meeting.
      Were you at the meeting last night?
      How many people did you inspire to get there?
      I was there. Several people showed up because I told them how important this meeting was.
      People will respond, it takes personal contact.
      I hope every Tattler brings at least one new person to the next meeting.
      We can do this.

      Delete
    2. That's right. Start with yourself. Even if you don't want to speak, you can clap and have an impact. We need bodies there. Bring a friend. This is the critical time.

      Delete
  22. Why does Bruce think we only have 2 years of water? We have all the yellow water we want. Not sure why we need a phase 3, If I cut down any more on my use I won't even be able to brush my teeth! But those 90 or so folk at the Kensington will have water, and how much will they reduce their use, how can Bruce figure their usage?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Letter to John Crawford,

    Dear John, I think everyone again has missed the point 1) ARCADIA & SIERRA MADRE draw water from the same east Raymond water reservoir 2) Between the two cities, Sierra Madre has been the only city who drastically (raised water rates and implemented water use age reductions 3) If this is a real concern, why has Arcadia City Hall failed to implemented water rate increase and water use age reduction? 4) Why has Sierra Madre City Hall failed to repair those "300 - BRUCE INMAN FAMOUS WATER LEAKING PIPES"? 5) FACT - Sierra Madre City Hall has been receiving MWD water for Free now for the past 8 months. Why in the "Hell" is City Hall asking residents for another water rate increase - effective July 1, 2014?. City Hall must be swimming in money (CITY HALL HAS NO WATER COSTS - NO ELECTRIC COST TO RUN THE WATER PUMPS) I no longer believe a word city hall has to say... do you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello!!! Does anyone get it.The people are being fleeced again by our shoddy city aided and abetted by our double dealing City Council .

      Delete
    2. That's an interesting point. If we aren't going to use our pumps and our filtration system, then we might as well get rid of our water deparment entirely and join up with Arcadia. The water itself is orange and requires more to be pumped in, but does it? Because we no longer have to pay for the expensive part of our infrastructure or employees. (Do we even need the reservoirs if we are pumping in from Arcadia?)

      All we need is pipe and meter maintenance and repair.

      Delete
    3. Cut out the middle man? Sounds good to me. How about we declare our water company bankrupt and get out from under that $20 million in bond debt Doyle left us?

      Delete
  24. Apparently 90% of the persons commenting here didn't attend or watch the meeting last night,ill informed to say the least............

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mayor Harabedian has unleashed his trolls upon the Tattler by the looks of 9:57 and others. Bring it on!

      Delete
    2. He must be paying them by the bottle.

      Delete
    3. The solutions are complicated. We need to get the facts out so that we are all on the same page and agreeing on the best option. I'm glad the Tattler brought up these issues.

      Delete
    4. I don't believe much of anything that comes out of city hall. All they want is our money.

      Delete
    5. i was out of town, and will be again. i still live here, i still have a voice, and i still pay attention. i am the 90%. so now what, 957? does that somehow make me ill informed? i was somehow home long enough to be pulled over. next time i'll ask the officer to fill me in on the water thingie that i am somehow confused about.

      Delete
  25. 9:57 AM--- Please give some examples of how 90% of these comments are ill informed. Otherwise, you aren't doing anything positive here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The trolls are desperate today. My advice is to make fun of them.They can't stand that.

      Delete
    2. Avec plaisir, mon ami! We'll make sport of them. That's not hard. They're akin to largemouth bass backstroking in a barrel.

      You know, back in the old country, when the people had to rise up against those who oppressed them, they sang songs. Maybe we need some signature melodies for our very own Tyrants and Traitors.

      How about the great Standells classic? A chorus or two of 'Dirty Watah' is the perfect entrance tune for Mayor McDreamy & the Rusty Pipe Gang. We can sing it whenever we see them. On the street, or when they're ducking into secret meetings. Might be a good 4th of July parade sing-along?

      (I was going to say "Or at the salon where they get their palms de-greased before photo-ops" but I don't know if that's civil. )

      Delete
    3. I prefer The Band's classic "Up On Cripple Creek".

      A “drunkard’s dream if I ever did see one.”

      Delete
    4. "The night they tore old Inman down ..."

      Delete
  26. 9:57 I agree with you. My take was that the 70 or so people in attendance really had the underlying agenda of a Building Moratorium as a way around the city zoning and planning codes. The water issue was just a means to get to the this goal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is what Doubletalk Gene Goss said. It was supposed be be taken as a bad thing. But to me it shows that the people of Sierra Madre will do whatever it takes to save their village from predatory developers and a city government that enables them. I am so proud of these people.

      Delete
    2. "a way around the city zoning and planning codes"
      Ridiculous comment.
      A building moratorium would be way to uphold and protect "the city zoning and planning codes"

      Delete
    3. Yes, ridiculous indeed. Looks like the trolls are running on empty today.

      Delete
    4. 10;15 is right, however, the people failed to link development with water use. Therein lies the problem. Development and water usage are, in the long run, the same problem. The Council needs to understand that when we bring up all of the developments, they are linked with the water that these developments will use. Take Kensington for instance. They are approved, almost finished, and already taking reservations. We can't stop Kensington. But, we can link them to the amount of water they will use and reason that future developments like Mater Delorosa and Stonehouse and Stonegate must be planned in such a way and at such time that we won't run the risk of running out of water for the present residents.

      I think Highsmith did her homework prior to the meeting and was able to give the right answers last night. We can do a new water meter ban if there is a future threat, rather than her prior statement that there had to be immediate safety concerns. I'm also thinking that legally, Sierra Madre would have a better chance defending a water meter ban with us going to a level three so the city as a whole would have to conserve rather than a specific development or developments. Not a lawyer, but it makes more sense.

      I for one at the next meeting dealing with this will try to convince the council to back Denise and do both level three AND a building moratorium, since that will stop Carter One as well until we get back to a level where we can use our own water again.

      Delete
    5. My guess is Highsmith cooked up last night's strategy, and then informed Johnny, Goose and Canoodle what they needed to do to make it all happen for the developers. How sad for them that the whole thing has now blown up in their faces.

      Delete
    6. When Goss said review each project on its own merit, I almost puked. One project will not have much impact, it is the cumulative effect that will kill this town. One house at 1 Carter would be no big deal, but 32 houses at 1 Carter, 50 at Mater Dolorosa, and 13 at Stonehouse, plus the 90 folks at the ALF....that will be a huge impact when they flush, shower, and wash.

      Delete
    7. Harabedian said not to bring up Mater Dolorosa or other particular developments but development is inextricably linked to the water shortage. You can't talk about the water shortage without mention the stress that continued development puts on our existing wells and ability to wean ourselves away from the MWD connection.

      Delete
    8. Sorry Johnny, you only get to be mayor not tell the citizens what they can say or not say. Something about the Constitution and the First Amendment.

      Delete
    9. He thought it was uncivil.

      Delete
  27. You know, if city hall doesn't clean up its act, and soon, we're just going to have to take away the rest of their UUT money.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Be careful. Staff may unleash the flying monkeys.

      Delete
    2. Talk about a proper use for water ...

      Delete
  28. Denise agreed to Level 3 and a water moratorium and gave in on no building moratorium. We need both . If you didn't watch the meeting watch a replay or read the minutes. Maryann gave 5 reasons why a building moratorium and water hook-up moratorium should be enacted. She was succinct and to the point and right. That's whatever need to show up and support.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Slight correction here. Denise has asked for both a P3 and a water moratorium. She did not "give in" on a building moratorium, rather she feels that a water moratorium is the better option. Hope that helps.

      Delete
    2. I miss Maryann, she was honest and stood up for this town and American values. This new council is a total joke.

      Delete
    3. Attention potential suckers, oops I mean buyers of homes at One Carter or Stonehouse.
      Are you folks aware that this is a major EARTHQUAKE, FIRE, FLOOD area?
      Are you aware that the Gabrielino-Tongva Indians who inhabited that land for hundreds of years, put a CURSE on that property when it was stolen from them? That place is their sacred burial grounds.
      Lots of interesting energy up there, and none of it is good. Are you aware there have been dead murdered bodies found on the One Carter property?
      You should be aware of this along with all the other serious problems.

      Delete
    4. And that's great for the water problem and additional buildings. The General Plan is needed to prevent mansionization and control density among many other things . So the building moratorium is needed to get the GP finished so that projects will not preempt what is defined in the GP

      Delete
    5. I think Capoccia was right that nobody understood even a year ago what the improving economy is doing to development in this city. Ask the realtors what's going on and who is buying and for what purpose. They are strangely silent in all of this and that silence is defeaning.

      Delete
    6. Capoccia ran as an anti-tax conservative and a slow growth Sierra Madre loyalist. Somehow being seated on the City Council turned him into Joe Mosca. I will never vote for John again.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  29. With the moratorium Council needs to fast track approval of the new General Plan. this needs to be the top priority.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't fast track the approval too fast. The General Plan needs to be tightened up in light of the unforeseen development trends now coming to Sierra Madre. There is a huge demographic change occuring in the entire San Gabriel Valley and let's just say not everybody agrees in preservation efforts.

      Delete
  30. I suggest we be very cautious with our strategy here :
    1. Do not accept a linkage between the Moratorium and P3 restrictions/fines. Why? because the dark side is using the unpopularity of P3 to torpedo the Moratorium.
    2. Vote for both issues separately.
    3. Why must residents make draconian reductions in water usage and pay fines, just to provide out-of-town developers with water for ugly over development
    4.The Kensington will be a water usage disaster .Such places use un godly amounts of water. As such they are legitimate targets for all water saving measures that the residents suffer under.
    5.Perhaps we should reconstruct the dam in the canyon?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re: #5: The whole dam project? That sounds dam expensive.

      Delete
    2. The "dam" in the canyon is a debris basin. Holds back debris...

      Delete
  31. Gawd! Quit picking on the Kensington. Old people hardly ever take showers. If you want to harass a group of people for water useage, make it the teenagers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about the washing machine? Uh huh. Constant cleaning of linens will more than make up for scarce bathing.

      Delete
    2. I believe Kensington is planning to send out most of the laundry, they have a gray water recycling installed. the landscape will be watered with recycled water, and they have many other water saving devises. Kensington is here to stay. Let's focus on stopping Mater Delorosa.

      Delete
    3. 2:12, sounds too good to be true, so you know what that measn.

      Delete
    4. What is the laundry room for?

      Delete
    5. Hokey Pokey contests.

      Delete
  32. You guys can never be pleased.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What pleases you?

      Delete
    2. Please, please me.

      Delete
  33. I wonder what they are talking about at City Hall this afternoon.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I do not see the point of Level 3 and the water hookup ban together. They both accomplish not allowing new meters to be installed. In the long run we all have to find ways to conserve the water we have or find a way to get more water. This mess has been created by the houses we already have so even without new development, the problem will persist till something changes. "The definition of insanity is repeating the same mistakes over and over again and expecting different results"

    ReplyDelete
  35. P3 is a political trick to get us to let the developers have their way, which we will do after we have to pay the fines that will be imposed upon us. The City asked us to reduce our water consumption and we did. We even used less then the limits they put on our water bills. So, our reward for being good conservationists is to further reduce our allotment and fine us if we do not use 30% less then now.

    We are underestimating the mayor, Goss, and the staff. They know what they want and it is not what the people want. We need to be even more vocal then we were last night.

    We need to fill the council room, the lobby, and the patio with so many people that they will have to listen. So far, except for Denise, they have not heard a word.

    Please bring your friends and neighbors to the next city council meeting and ask each one to speak for just a few seconds and say "We do not want P3, we want a water moratorium!"

    Cambria has been doing this for years. The Staff does not have to invent the wheel again, they just have to copy what other cities have been successfully doing.

    When the water supply justifies new construction we should make sure that each new home conforms, blends in, and compliments our community.

    I hope to see all of you and more at the next meeting. Do not let them ware us down.

    Barry Gold



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think we made the 20% reduction called for in Phase 2. It was only 5% as I recall.

      Delete
    2. Thanks Barry We're with you

      Delete
    3. Very well said @ 3pm. I've watched the Mayor's speech after the public comment, several times. I realized that I heard the same spiel delivered the same way when I bought my car and the salesman tried to talk me into getting the rustproof undercoating. But it wasn't just the fast-talking patter that I found offensive. It was the well-rehearsed and self-satisfied way he declared all of a sudden that Phase 3 is the best way to 'protect the city' and that everyone agrees with that.

      He decided that all by himself? Or was there a pre-meeting meeting we don't know about? I have no confidence that this Mayor listened to, or cared about, the heartfelt statements made by the public at the June 24th meeting. He just launched into his sales pitch, right on cue, but it didn't ring true and the condescending smirk didn't help his performance any. Sorry, son. No sale.

      Delete
    4. Harabedian's first loyalty is to govt employee unions. He wants to impress the LA County Dems and have a career in politics. We are being held hostage to Harabedian's ambitions.

      Delete
  36. I am out of town for a couple of weeks but sent three people to the meeting. Here is a question that I think got overlooked: what about water for fire fighting purpose? If the city allows overdevelopment and there is not enough water reserve for fire fighting purposes (think brush fires, our expected natural disaster year after year) then any house lost to a wildfire should/could sue the city for negligence. The "hook-ups" at 1 Carter were for landscaping for brush fire protection and mud flow reduction (the area above there was burned in the 2008 Sierra Madre fire) and maybe the argument could be made that they are not for the houses themselves!?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Seems pretty obvious to me what is happening here. The three stooges want to link city preservation with draconian water use penalties. And then when people complain, which they certainly will, city hall will be able to point their fingers at the preservationists. That is some leadership.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Last night I had to laugh when Nancy (thank god she's gone) Walsh was asking residents to shop local because the local business put money back into the community. I don't disagree with her. But she is the person that pushed the Farmer's Market down our throats to the detriment of Taylor's Market. Anyway the Farmer's Market is gone and so is she.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank Heaven for small blessings

      Delete
    2. Yee haw!!!!

      Delete
  39. For those who care about such things, The Tattler just went over the 3,000 hit mark for the last 24 hours. Lotta hits for a little town.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks to you John!!!!
      Your a blessing

      Delete
  40. All I can say after reading all these comments is that there needs to be a coherent strategy. This is complicated stuff and we have to get our facts to make sure that we don't unwittingly choose the wrong option.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Just keep reading John Crawford's Tattler. Along with his research team and informants, none of the city 'treacherous schemes will get by John.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I love the power of TRUTH.

    ReplyDelete