August 30, 2011 – Daily Brief

Lori: You forgot the even larger lie. Mayor McLean (aka Gail Ortiz) asserts that Santa Clarita “got rid” of the special library assessment tax. Those engaged will recall the progression: 1. Santa Clarita is entitled to it; and 2. Santa Clartia is not entitled to it but wants to place on the ballot a referendum to reinstate part of it; to 3. Look at our fiscal responsibility.

I was so upset reading this commentary, that I did not even register the lies at the end of the piece. So, very, newly disappointed in our city government. They think that they can just say whatever they want, and not be held accountable for *lying*?

Lori: They would be held accountable if a challenger could figure a way to depress voter turnout an additional 25% by either science or magic.

Funny story. Marsha was first elected to the Council in some part due to an aggressive mailer/phone banking operation which “reliable sources” with the initials HB told me was BuckPAC. Marsha (as SCOPE’s candidate) was on a “ticket” with Democrat Jan Heidt and Republican Frank Ferry, each of whom endorsed the other for the mailers. So if you’re unhappy with Marsha as a City Council person, blame Buck and Frank.

CS: I thought it was Waste Management money that funded Marsha’s big push. Remember, only she and Ferry consistently voted to keep Blue Barrel without an open bid process.

Not according to people who were inside the campaign, and according to other very well connected Republican people who know how BuckPAC operates.

I hesitate to bring it up again, but some calling out is definitely warranted for the lies in that piece.

Yet nobody has pointed to a specific comment that is a lie. Why is that?

Really, Phil? Have you read the article? And you find it completely honest and forthcoming? No half-truths, or manipulations of facts, no scrambling of time-lines?

Listening and agreeing are different and distinct. There were several hundred comment card submitted in favor but that is rarely mentioned. It seems like Lori and Jeff and some others will forever be injured over the fact that the City Council did not agree with them. However, in a representative democracy we elect our officials to make their best informed decision. If our government responded the way you wish (simply bending to whatever crowd organizes and descends upon city hall) then Santa Clarita would have declared itself a “Non Sanctuary City” and ordered staff to array all aspects of city government to the eradication locally of the plague of “illegals” and their “anchor babies”. Should this happen you both would be among the first to say our city council should think independently, display leadership and make the best/right decision for the community as a whole rather than bow to the demands of an angry mob. The city council heard you and everyone else (including the 10,003 “petitioners”). They made the decision they felt was in the best overall interest of the community. You disagree. It was a year ago. Curl up and have one last cry, and then move on.

“Curl up and have one last cry, and then move on.” Heh. Thanks for the chuckle. There were 557 comments cards submitted that night. The City Council minutes don’t say the ratio of support/oppose. Speaking in favor of the move was Phil Ellis, Berta, Dennis Verner. Three people. Speaking in opposition were 38 individuals. Four were neutral. I’ll grant you that our elected leaders have to lead and do unpopular things at times. That’s the way things should be. But you can’t deny that the City conceived and birthed this egg within the space of a few months, held only one public meeting on it, decided the matter, did all the outreach after the fact and managed the consequences of their poor planning (CC library shutdown, special library tax etc) That’s in contrast to the years the City (rightly) spent deciding the fate of Mayo expansion and even hyper-local neighborhood issues, like the Benz Road cut through. This wasn’t leadership; far from it. It was an aggressive takeover done without any consensus-building or buy-in from much of the community. They own this lock, stock and barrel and they shouldn’t be so damned thin-skinned when we call them out.

Right. And any time the issue of “Illegals” is on the agenda the ratio of speakers is similar. So should the majority on council then also act like proud racists and take all actions requested by the Minutemen who will stand before them at the mic? Should all decisions at all times be in accordance with the wishes of the crowd, or only when you desire council to do so?

Is it the number we value – or the content? But if you want to go by numbers please add those that Dennis and I represeneted.

Agree with every word, Jeff.

Lori, you lost the argument by trying to puttwords in my mouth. Whether I read the article or not (whihc I did), all I said was “Yet nobody has pointed to a specific comment that is a lie. Why is that?” And you still haven’t. Why haven’t you done so. Can you can craft a decent argument. Show us what you think is untrue and verify that it is so. Easy – no need to draft snotty posts.

I was not putting words into your mouth — I was genuinely asking you those questions. And, if you read the commentary, then you read my objections, as posted comments, on the website. However, IHeartSCV did a much better job of outlining the lies and manipulations of McLean’s commentary, here on SCVTalk. Snotty. My goodness. Way to be patriarchal.

Lori, you lost the argument by trying to puttwords in my mouth. Whether I read the article or not (whihc I did), all I said was “Yet nobody has pointed to a specific comment that is a lie. Why is that?” And you still haven’t. Why haven’t you done so. Can you can craft a decent argument. Show us what you think is untrue and verify that it is so. Easy – no need to draft snooty posts.

I appreciate Jeff and Lori’s reluctance to beat the dead horse, but I have less restraint. Specific lies to satisfy your unconvincing skepticism, Phil: 1. “We determined, after extensive research and due diligence, and community outreach, that contracting for day-to-day services with a professional library management company made sense.” Community outreach involved a sloppy, one-sided website and a single City Council meeting at the end of which the decision was made–hardly extensive. 2. The sequence of events is grotesquely fictitious. McLean claims it was a linear process: vote to privatize libraries, go out to bid, hire LSSI (2nd paragraph). In reality, LSSI was involved the whole time and were part and parcel of the entire withdrawing action. People forget it was withdraw from LA County and meet LSSI all in the same night. 3. “The changes in library management resulted in increased hours of operation, the addition of $900,000 in new materials…” No, the $900,000 in new materials was approved as part of a special, add-on spending measure to make sure shelves were well stocked for opening day. It was not at all part of the original withdrawal, being discussed almost a year later. 4. “The $28 per year special library tax that Santa Clarita residents had been paying for library operations was eliminated, due to the fiscally responsible actions of the locally elected Santa Clarita City Council.” This is Tim’s point. The Santa Clarita City Council didn’t eliminate the tax because of fiscal responsibility–CA state law dictated that the tax be eliminated. It was money that could only be legally collected by the County. I really wonder at the motivation for the letter–did LSSI request City Hall write it?

Points three and 4 are just ridiculous. You may have some disagreements on how or why something happened but it is not a lie to say that they did.

Pay attention to the syntax: “…the $28 per year special library tax that Santa Clarita residents had been paying for library operations was eliminated, due to the fiscally responsible actions of the locally elected Santa Clarita City Council.” McLean is saying the tax was eliminated “due to” the actions of the CC. That’s a lie, plain and simple. The law and LA County’s lawyers said the City couldn’t collect the tax even if it wanted to. This would be like the City Council taking credit for federal tax cuts.

The city could not collect the tax. Plain and simple. Any claim to the contrary by the city is a lie. A big fat one too. Here was my letter to the editor on the matter: http://www.the-signal.com/archives/39909/

Phil, the comment is so lenghthy that I could not make it past point #2. Bully for you for being able to stay away to read points 3 & 4!

Never forget that Gail Ortiz trained at the hands of a master manipulator and b.s. artist, former City Manager George Caravalho. Gail definitely operates in the way George taught her to. Gail so greatly cars about Santa Clarita that not too long ago she moved fairly far away, like Acton. Why should she continue to work for the city, spinning b.s. left and right?

CS Gail has lived in Action since the late 90′s.

Tim, perhaps you’re right. I went back and found the West Ranch Beacon attack on Gail’s credibility, because she’s the spokesperson for the City of Santa Clarita, but doesn’t live in Santa Clarita. The impression that she recently moved to Acton may have come from the website blockshopper.com which made this post concerning her real estate in Acton. Sales History (1992-present) N/A on Sept. 9, 2010 B: Gail R Ortiz S: Joseph E Ortiz N/A on Dec. 12, 2005 B: Gail R Ortiz (Trustee), Joseph E, Gail R Ortiz (Trustee) (Revocable Trust), Joseph E Ortiz S: Gail Ortiz, Joseph E Ortiz

I actually wrote an e-mail to Marsha and got the following response (along with Gail Ortiz’s comments…At least she responded… RE: Library CommentaryTuesday, August 30, 2011 3:47 PMFrom: “Gail Ortiz” Add sender to ContactsTo: “Marsha McLean” , YOU ROCK MARSHA…! From: Marsha McLean Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 3:20 PM To: XXXXX Subject: RE: Library Commentary Hi XXXXXX, I stand by my comments. I personally contacted members of our community, residents, educators and others over the summer to let them know what was going to be discussed at our Council Meeting last August. I received positive feedback. There was extensive study over the years to determine the financial impact and to see if it made sense to take over the libraries. As you know, I served for over two years as a Los Angeles County Library Commissioner. No one can deny the fact that the county libraries are in deep financial trouble. This is not the fault of the librarians in any way shape or form. County librarians did and continue to do the best they can with less and less money. The $28.00 fee was not needed so it made sense to just let it go without a legal fight. I am committed as I have been from the beginning to do the best job possible for all of our residents. Not all decisions will please everyone. We live in a great City and I will continue to strive to keep it that way. Sincerely, Marsha ——————————————————————————– From: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 12:14 PM To: Marsha McLean Subject: Library Commentary http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_18783597 I just read this. Are you serious? This editorial is shameful in how it slants the reality of what happened. I especially liked the part where you said there was a lot of study and community input (and forgot to mention the 50 people opposed and 2 supporters) and how the City had a bid process (rushed with only one responsive bidder – that is not a bid process, it is a sole source award). The part about the 28 fee reduction is likewise very misleading.

Okay, but here’s the thing: the independent financial studies said that it was NOT feasible to contract out our library services. And since when does one person contacting community members equal “extensive community outreach?” McLean’s response is almost a non-response, sent without serious thought to your concerns, NFIC. Someone certainly needs to hit her commentary, break it apart, piece by piece, and make the reveal public. Thanks for sharing this exchange, NFIC.

Get over it finally please god – they made a decision you didnt agree with. Whining over “extensive community research” and what you definite it as versus the people who actually did it is really a waste of time. Use that time to forward some other cause in our community that isn’t already decided and done.

This isn’t whining, it’s showing the poor stewardship of elected officials on this issue. It is relevant today because of the state bill coming up for a vote to require public approval of such takeovers.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, I have a real problem with them re-writing history. At least if the city were honest about it, I would respect them for that. How about saying this: “In spite of significant opposition, we still felt in the long run this would be best for our city. We have made the decision and are working with LSSI to deliver services that will exceed those the county offered.” If they said that, I would let it all go and adopt more of a wait and see attitude. The city continues to be in denial about any problems that exist.

You hit the nail on the head. I get tired of the City (Gail “You Rock Marsha” Ortiz) PR spin on things. I was almost wondering if the Awesometown website would be posting the locations of heroin dealers in their Entertainment section….

Seems like a bargain to me when you consider the billions we hand out in subsidies to oil and natural gas companies http://www.forbes.com/2011/05/02/eliminate-oil-subsidies.html

Preach it Jim ! There is also no cost of capital attached to the “investment” since it was Obama money. The subsidy by Edison is also suspect on it’s face. Were the panels built in China or one of the US plants that just declared bankruptcy ?

Interestingly enough, that dirty-stinking-socialist-jobs killing-jobs-crushing-jobs destroying-”Obama money” was sought by over 114 Republican lawmakers including the likes of John Boehner, Paul Ryan and Eric “We won’t give disaster relief funds to help my constituents unless we balance the budget somewhere else” Cantor. Oh, let’s not forget Michelle Bachmann who requested stimulus money on at least 16 occasions, and Rick Perry who used stimulus funds to balance his state’s budget and increase public sector jobs by almost 7% (and private sector jobs by a whopping .6%). Run n tell DAT, homeboy!

$4M is hardly “fleecing” the American public. Actually, with the rebates from SCE totaling nearly $1M over 5 years combined with the $137K energy bill savings cuts your original 35 year payback “math” down more than 2/3.

The Edision rebates are collected from all ratepayers (edison customers) to pay for this project. There are no free lunches, and 4 million is a lot of money no matter how you count it.

And where do the rebates from SCE come from? Answer – all the other rate payers in the state at the direction of the CPUC. This is not free money to the citizens of the SCV. Somebody is paying for it. Even if you reduce the payback period how long do you think these panels will actually be productive? 15 years, 20 years? While I’m no expert on the life expectancy of solar panels something tells me they won’t produce for 30 years with no further expense. The federal funding combined with a CPUC mandate for rebates for the purchase of solar panels at the transit facility in the city of Santa Clarita is a textbook example of how large government, far removed from the local level, simply wastes money on projects that they think will make us better, but won’t. If those solar panels on the transit facility give you a warm feeling enjoy that feeling. If you feel we are all better off overall because of them you are delusional.

“If you feel we are all better off overall because of them you are delusional.” Do you believe global warming is real and man is its cause?

Oh Jeff! You and your silly green dragon!

I believe global warming is real. If we think man is the cause we are giving ourselves way too much credit. “Climate change” has existed since the planet began. We are always in a period of warming or cooling. What is the ideal temperature for planet earth? The fact that the polar ice caps on Mars are receding is strong evidence that the current warming is due more to solar activity, not man made activity. That being said – we still have to care for our environment. Republicans hate smog, etc, just as much as Democrats. While we should always be looking at reducing pollution, we should not trash our economy by making our current, cheapest, form of energy cost prohibitive.

Well said. This was a big massive waste of government money. Have they factored in maintenance of the system as well? The $134k they save a year will never pay for this system. But they got to have a big ceremony about it all. They got to talk about job creation and green building and protecting the planet. It does not matter if any of it is true, it sounds good and made them all feel better. And that is a good thing. Perhaps we should all drink the Kool Aid too.

I can’t really answer that. It must be something deep within the core of my reptilian brain. Oh my God – do I need therapy?

CS In addition to the “angry person” you reference there were also a lot of Anarchists who flock from all over the nation and perhaps the world to jump in and comment (favorably) when someone from law enforcement is killed. The Signal staff could not keep up with ripping these virulent comments down so they just gave up and turned off the switch.

What you say may be true, but I doubt that ‘anarchists from all over the world’ were the guy with the obviously inside information who kept getting posted again and again despite The Signal’s editorial efforts. I will always be left to wonder whether the guy who did all of the posting, with the inside information on the incident, had a Federals/locals beef or a labor/management beef within the LA Co Fire Dept or Sheriffs Department or an inter-agency LA County beef. Regardless, that one guy’s commentary was very creepy because it pretty much said Deputy Jake was killed because of law enforcement or fire services incompetence. The comments are haunting 10 years later because they were being made during the same time as Deputy Jake’s wake and funeral. Sadly, there was no follow-up by the L.A. press because they were quickly consumed by writing about 9/11.