Monday, February 12, 2018

Preserve Sierra Madre: Upcoming City Council Election


Mod: This came through this morning and I thought I should post it here.

Dear Supporters: As many of you know, there is an important City Council election coming up on April 10, 2018.  There are 3 incumbents running for re-election for the 3 seats that will be in play and voters are allowed to vote for 3 candidates.  Those incumbents are Rachelle Arizmendi, Denise Delmar and Gene Goss.  There is one candidate challenging the incumbents, Andy Bencosme.

In the past, Preserve Sierra Madre has not formally endorsed political candidates. However, the stakes are so high in this election, that we do not feel that Preserve Sierra Madre can remain on the sidelines. The present City Council has accomplished some remarkable things when it comes to preservation in Sierra Madre the highlights of which include passing a General Plan that is very protective of Sierra Madre, passing rules to prevent Arcadia-like mansionization, passing a Demolition Ordinance that protects historically significant homes from being torn down and enacting a water meter moratorium to protect our depleted water resources.

For these reasons and many others, we are strongly urging our supporters to re-elect Rachelle Arizmendi, Denise Delmar and Gene Goss and keep the present City Council intact so that they can continue their good work.

We are sure the challenger is a decent and honorable man. But he is a real estate agent who had his fundraising kickoff not in Sierra Madre, but in Arcadia at the Arcadia Association of Realtors.   Based on the over-development that has been allowed to occur in Arcadia over the last 20 years, we suspect that the Arcadia Association of Realtors probably does not share the same goals as Preserve Sierra Madre when it comes to protecting our "Village of the Foothills."

But our efforts will not be against any one but rather for keeping the existing City Council intact as long as possible.  While we have not always agreed with every position of all 3 of the incumbents, the fact remains that all of the many successes of Preserve Sierra Madre happened during their watch.  We can say that in general, all 3 have supported preservation in Sierra Madre and none of what we accomplished could have happened without their support.

The importance of this election is further amplified by two very important issues that may come up within the next couple of years: Efforts to develop the Monastery seem to be rearing its head again and the City Council may take up the issue of whether to do an historic survey of the City's properties. This makes the election and the re-election of the 3 incumbent candidates of vital importance. There may also be outside money and influence in this election from those having a different agenda for this city than preservation.

Here's how our supporters can help:

1. You will be allowed 3 votes. Vote for Rachelle Arizmendi, Denise Delmar and Gene Goss.

2. Forward this email to 5-10 friends and urge them to vote.

3. Email us back and let us know if you can volunteer by walking or making phone calls in support of these 3 candidates.

We have appreciated your support in the past and we try to refrain from asking for your help unless it is really important.  This is one of those times.  Much has been accomplished but more remains to be done.  What has already been done can also be undone if we are not vigilant.

As always, we appreciate your help and support.

Steering Committee

sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

57 comments:

  1. Keep the three. Let's not go back to the bad old days.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Please consider this 'The league of California Cities' is where the power is so you voters are just spraying in the wind when it comes to reform, GET RID OF THEM ALL. Leaving one city council person on their seat is like leaving HIV alone and well for others to be infected with.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If that is what a pro-development advocate sounds like, I want nothing to do with that.

      Delete
    2. A lot of them are a little nutty.

      Delete
    3. The League of California Cities has nothing to do with our local City Council election. Our Council make local decisions about development. So if you want to "preserve Sierra Madre" vote for Arizmendi, Delmar and Goss. If you want to throw them all out so the council can change ordinances for big development, both residential and businesses, then go with the Arcadia Model. Remember, you want to retain our best council in years and vote for the incumbents. Arizmendi, Delmar and Goss.

      Delete
  3. You must be joking. What a sham. The President of Preserve Sierra Madre is a Realtor in Sierra Madre, that is the only reason why he protested so hard against the Monastery's private property being developed, he lives next door! He and the Realtors on Baldwin ave were not included in the development plans, in retaliation they fought against PRIVATE PROPERTY development.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem with folks like you is you are all about the property rights of developers, but completely against the property rights of people who actually live here. Double standards don't work.

      Delete
    2. There are ethical people everywhere, even in the development industry.
      Not a whole lot in that particular group, but they are there.

      Delete
    3. 9:00, you're criticizing a man for defending his neighborhood from predatory, destructive over-development.

      Delete
    4. Nearly two hundred forty two years ago, brave people proclaimed freedom from the tyranny of wealthy aristocratic foreigners, declaring, in part, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

      But once the hard-fought victory was attained, the local wealthy, no doubt including more than a fair share of land dealers, in one of the greatest bamboozles of all time, transmogrified "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to "No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property...."

      The new aristocrats thus ensured that they and their progeny would, with their tiresome, ad nauseam bleating about "private property rights" always seek to elevate their individual interests above the happiness of all.

      Delete
    5. 9:00 must be from the Monastery. Control your anger. It's not being very spiritual.

      Delete
  4. 9:18am. You give a great example of Preserve Sierra Madre group, it is all about YOU.
    Property owners have rights.
    This is why the Courts of Law exist.
    Your Preserve group should be renamed anti development.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And who are you about? Those who would tear up neighborhoods and kill property values? Why do you hate your neighbors so much

      Delete
    2. 9:42 seems to forget that everyone has rights.

      Delete
    3. I think he believes Sierra Madre is a dictatorship of the developers. You, the mere homeowner, have no rights whatsoever.

      Delete
  5. That image depicts a tiny street in the canyon originally called ‘Holly Tree Path’, now morphed into ‘Holly Trail Path’. Have seen all sorts of wildlife there. Animals too.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 10:08am. One day when you own property maybe you will understand, until then you can jump up and down till the cows come home, private property owners have a right to develope their property.
    Along that line, the fees that are paid into the city keep the front doors open and the lights on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you're speaking of the Monastery,Institutional Property owners do not have a right to rezone to R1 and develop their property as housing.

      Delete
    2. Where does God stand on this issue?

      Delete
  7. 9:51am. Welfare was not existing two hundred and forty years ago.
    If you chose not to harvest your crops you would seal your fate.
    No one would be happy on your demise but no one would have understood why you thought you were owed a free lunch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There’s a purple haze floating around nd the tattler today.

      Delete
    2. No it’s Prince. Expect Purple Rain in Sierra Madre.

      Delete
    3. 10:39 I'd say you missed the point entirely, but you'd miss that point entirely, too.

      Delete
  8. I guess it would not be so bad if the new construction added value to the neighborhood. We have Sacramento breathing down our necks to increase density at the same time we are not sustainable anymore. How about a change of attitude where everyone was working to maintaining a harmonious way of life that was sustainable. I think Preserve Sierra Madre is working to that.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I hate to see people using guilt by association. It is fallacious and unfair to Jose Andres "Andy" Bencosme. Why don't you ask him what his position is on Mater Dolorosa, development in general, the building moratorium and mansionization? He does seem to be avoiding the subjects so far in his campaign material.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does it really matter what he says? Can't we go on current and past associations? That is what a court of law would do if this was a criminal matter.

      Delete
    2. Mr. Bencosme lost me when he courted money from Arcadia. I am still wondering what the heck is going on with that.

      Delete
    3. Current and past associations are not allowed in court in a criminal matter. We have right of free association.

      Delete
    4. What country are you from again? The People's Republic of Arcadia?

      Delete
    5. So we are not allowed to discuss Andy's executive level position with the Arcadia Assoc of Realtors? Or how that organization tried to put stack and pack development in our downtown area? So what are we allowed to talk about? The weather?

      Delete
    6. You are allowed to discuss how much you love Sierra Madre.

      Delete
    7. If Andy is so smart (I believe he is a member of MENSA), then why have his kick-off outside of the City of Sierra Madre, and why court Arcadia businesses? I understand he is a realtor but couldn't he have found somewhere in Sierra Madre to start a campaign for Sierra Madre City Council?

      Delete
    8. He doesn't have many friends here.

      Delete
    9. Uh yeah, 12:09. That's why prosecutors never raise mobsters' current and past associations with other mobsters, or gangbangers' associations with gangs. Uh, yeah ... sure. (Please don't sit on a jury.)

      Delete
  10. 11:36, maybe no one has asked him, but why bother? We already have a council that we know what they will do. As has been demonstrated by the highest in the land, it matters not what people say, it's what they do that matters. One must worry about that saying "Do as I say, not as I do". Seems that in this day and age it's OK to lie to the tax payers.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The current council? Why only one new application to serve the public?
    The sitting council members received outside money for their campaign, so that argument is null and void.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can you name a campaign contribution to a current city council member that came from an organization favoring mansionization in Sierra Madre?

      Delete
  12. If you are talking about the Planning Commission and City Hall up zoning and making changes to the Generl Plan to fit their narratives, you are correct.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 2:20 pm. You are good with assumptions.
    In Biblical times we would know you as Judas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nowadays you are known as "Mr. Makes No-Sense."

      Delete
  14. I think we have someone from Andy's campaign monitoring and commenting on the Tattler. If Andy had any presence of mind he would not have had his kick-off campaign in Arcadia at an organization that spent thousands to campaign against Measure V. Big mistake.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe not a big mistake. He’s showing his true colors!

      Delete
    2. If true, Andy does not attract very nice people.

      Delete
    3. I agree, 3:32. Kind of like Bart Doyle, Building Industry attorney, winning an office and then putting out the word in the development community that Sierra Madre was open for business.

      Delete
  15. 3:13pm. So much for Measure V. The town voted against it and the developer proceeded to build the expensive Alzheimer home in the downtown business district known as the Kenniston.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Voting to go forward with a project is not voting against Measure V. What Measure V provides is an opportunity for residents to approve or reject a project. Understand?

      Delete
    2. The ‘Kenniston’ was a reasonable compromise. Attractive improvement over the disused eyesore it replaces, yet not as ambitious at first intended.

      Delete
    3. The Kennsington is an example of how well Measure V worked, though I wish it were a foot shorter.
      It is a nice rejoinder to the pro-over-development crowd who repeatedly call preservation "No growth."

      Delete
  16. Bottom line is we need to re-elect the 3 incumbents. We know what we will get and it will be better than a candidate who is supported by outsiders who hope to make tons of money destroying our special town.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I didn’t vote for the three candidates last time and you can bet I, for sure , won’t vote for any of them this time. How can you call them Preservationists? Need I remind you of the Darling House? How about the fact that they were willing to give away the Library at 10:15 pm at a Council Meeting. These candidates are the lesser of two evils. The problem is that we don’t have any True Preservationists running for Council. Also don’t forget Madam Mayor promised no new taxes and at the first opportunity she had, she voted for the UUT increase with NO Sunset clause! She was so “pissed” (her words) at the water meeting yet she voted in favor of the rate hikes. She’s just using Sierra Madre as a steppingstone. Photo Op anyone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you equate preservationist with incompetent ideologue?

      Delete
  18. 5:27pm so it is true, Sierra Madre really is a bedroom community.
    No, it was not ok to put a residential large home in the ever disappearing downtown business district. But then again you support the forever UUT tax no matter what percentage of your paycheck will be demanded from the City Council
    If you wish to live here you must pay the highest tax in the state.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What? make a sensible discussion please.

      Delete

The Tattler is a moderated blog. Annoying delays when posting comments can happen. Thank you for your patience and understanding.