SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
September 19, 2011· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

September 19, 2011 – Daily Brief

By Jeff — Jeff Wilson

  • Constitution Day event well attended and well reviewed. Congrats to the organizers SIGNAL
  • Hundreds of River Rally participants  removed debris from the Santa Clara River on Saturday near Wiley Canyon SIGNAL
  • 400 firefighters and personnel and eight aircraft attacked a 640 acre fire in Mint Canyon north of Santa Clarita over the weekend. By Sunday night they had achieved 80% containment KHTS
  • Castaic residents could get a swimming pool facility similar to the City’s aquatic center if the Board of Supervisors approves a nearly $10 million design-build contract this week SCVNEWS
  • A project to turn waste into renewable energy at Chiquita Landfill is showing some success and promise. The landfill is producing six megawatts of power now, “enough electricity to become totally self-sufficient and generating a surplus of energy tha tit sells to supplement the state’s power grid.” SIGNAL
  • Housing crisis from 2007 till today has cost the LA region $80 billion in property values according to a new report DAILY NEWS
  • More intrigue in the hot R-on-R action following Scott Wilk’s endorsement list last week. The old guard establishment GOP in town has blanketed every Republican inbox with a claim that the local Tea Party isn’t sufficiently conservative.  SCV PATRIOTS
  • The City may create a Movie Ranch Overlay Zone for two movie ranches on land south of Placerita Canyon that might be annexed. The overlay zone allows ranches to conduct filming operations 24/7 indoors and 24/7 outdoors as long as it doesn’t interfere with neighbors. Interesting pictures of the ranches at SCVNEWS
  • The Signal tackles Agenda 21 and the brave locals who are fighting the good fight against UN black helicopters, world government, one currency and the City which was apparently ready to hand over sovereignty to UN Shock Troops last week. SIGNAL
  • THe Hart Board spent nearly $24,000 investigating Board Member Gloria Mercado-Fortine’s alleged conflict of interest between her elected position and her day job working for a charter school system. Joe Messina, who pushed the allegations, says Mercado-Fortine could have resolved it all early on. Fortine says “enough is enough.” SIGNAL
  • The Signal is considering outsourcing the printing of the  paper. That would mean no longer using venerable decades-old printing press currently housed on Creekside. If you haven’t seen that beast, you should. It’s a gigantic, oily, smelly, marvelous piece of technology and I’ve been privileged to see it a few times. I wonder if the Signal has a nickname for it, like Old Bessy or something. Read the last comment on the Signal’s story about this SIGNAL
  • Myers pens a good column on the whole ballot-weighting controversy over the new LMD for Newhall. But someone copy/pastes in state law proving that the law requires the City to conduct elections in that way SIGNAL
  • Really? LTE writer says SCV’s response to 9/11 anniversary was disgraceful. LTE

Comments (40)

  1. MikeSeptember 19, 2011 at 8:36 am
    Congratulations Al Ferdman, you have flushed the last ounce of credibility you had down the toilet.
  2. IHeartSCVSeptember 19, 2011 at 9:35 am
    I always knew you were one of them. (But really, spare the histrionics; we can all get a little overly worked up over weird things.)
  3. Alan FerdmanSeptember 19, 2011 at 10:15 am
    Mike Sorry you feel that way, but sometimes the truth is not what you want it to be. All I would ask is that you read the Los Angeles Regional Collaborative For Climate Action & Sustainability (LARC) charter. It is linked on the City’s web site. The charter starts off; “The United Nations World Council on the Environment and Development defines sustainability as the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Climate Change poses the greatest challenge for our generation in achieving sustainability.” Then down the page it goes further. “scientific consensus states that in order to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of climate change, an 80% reduction below 1990 levels is necessary”. 80% below 1990 levels is a pretty drastic position. At a time where the number 1 issue in the United States is how to create jobs and grow our economy, the last thing we need to do is enact more unrealistic restrictions on industry and force additional manufacturing off shore.
  4. JeffSeptember 19, 2011 at 10:30 am
    So you aren’t actually saying that global warming is a hoax? You’re just saying that the cost of addressing the problem is too high and therefore, we should not do it? A whole bunch of people said the sky was falling the last time we passed major revisions to the Clean Air Act to address SO2 emissions, resulting acid rain, and to address ozone depleting chemicals. None of those predictions came true…indeed, some utilities profited from the cap and trade scheme signed into law by President Bush 41. And more importantly, we don’t get nearly as many incidents of acid rain anymore.
  5. Alan FerdmanSeptember 19, 2011 at 11:30 am
    I never said climate change is a hoax. My main concerns are; determining what extent it is caused by natural phenomenon and what extent by human behavior. Then it comes down to; how can we mitigate the problem while at the same time providing for an ever increasing population by growing our economy? I am open to any meaningful discussion about how those goals can be achieved.
  6. Jim FarleySeptember 19, 2011 at 9:39 am
    Hey Tim – thanks for the mention in your article and helping to move the ball further downfield. Everything we’ve talked about up to now has been theory. I can’t wait to see how this election actually turns out and how the voting breaks down by zone. Regarding ballot weighting. Ballot wieighting in and of itself is not a problem. Property tax assessments for things that provide a “Special Benefit” to the property, such as landscaping, are always weighted based on what the owner will pay (and rightly so). The big problem with this election is the number of properties given a nominal decrease relative to their assessment in an apparent attempt to secure a “Yes” vote. My Northbridge vote is weighted at $778.86. That is more than 10 times the vote wieght in Newhall of $71.57. If those who get a slight decrease vote their pocketbooks Newhall will esentially be given a new tax voted on them by people in other communities. That’s just not Democracy. I voted “No” by the way so I’ve at least offset one Northbridge “Yes” vote.
  7. Timothy Myers SRSeptember 19, 2011 at 9:53 am
    I think I voted “No” as well, but like I said in the column I honestly can’t remember. I did smell a rat!
  8. Timothy Myers SRSeptember 19, 2011 at 9:57 am
    To Angelo Candelabra and Saugus Splasher: So the City is “required” to weight the votes. Fine. Are they also “required” to have a vote combining all the zones at one time so that the people with new assessments are overwhelmed by the folks getting a small (and useless decrease).
  9. Coffee KlatchSeptember 19, 2011 at 1:11 pm
    We live in the Cheyenne condos and our yearly assessment is going down by over $200! That may not be much to a high roller like you, but it is a substantial and “useful” decrease to us!
  10. Jim FarleySeptember 19, 2011 at 8:32 pm
    Coffee, $200 is indeed a substantial decrease. Even though you are in the Northbridge zone you are showing a larger decrease because the methodology of assessments has changed with this proposal. As a condo you’re EBU (Equivalent Benefit Unit) is .75 as opposed to single family residents (like myself) that have an EBU of 1.0. Currently you and I pay the same rate as we are both considered one parcel. If I had received your ballot showing a $200 decrease in the assessment I would have checked the “Yes” box and sent it in immediately. Your circumstances reveal the real problems with this balloting. With the Cheyenne Condos in Northbridge showing a $200 decrease they will be even more inclined to vote “Yes” and effectively impose a new tax on Newhall residents. This shows the complexity in trying to analyze this. Within the LMD district everyone gets a different ballot depending first on the zone they are in and second on the type of property. Some go up, some go down. The final analysis will be the actual vote count. We should know that by the end of this week.
  11. CCSeptember 19, 2011 at 12:51 pm
    Yarrrrr, it be ‘Talk Like a Pirate Day’ ye scurvy bilge rats!
  12. NateSeptember 19, 2011 at 8:43 pm
    HAHA
  13. ToddSeptember 19, 2011 at 2:46 pm
    One of those ranches off Sand Canyon in the overlay is where the wildly popular show Wipeout is produced. Kinda neat to drive through when they’re filming at night… what a light show! But I’m curious… how can we annex property within the National Forest???? Also, using landfill generation is a smart move. We’re making methane gas anyway, which has to be burned by law… so why not use it to make power. Seems like a no brainer!
  14. AlpinerSeptember 19, 2011 at 3:08 pm
    I thought they filmed Wipeout at the Disney Ranch?
  15. ToddSeptember 19, 2011 at 3:16 pm
    One would assume…. since its a Disney show on a Disney Network… but nay nay. Take a look: View Larger Map Driving Directions
  16. PackfanSeptember 19, 2011 at 8:01 pm
    12 Midnight. DADT is now history! Don’t cry, Buck!
  17. PetzSeptember 20, 2011 at 5:00 am
    Petz will not go on record as calling Global Warming a hoax since other planets in the solar system are experiencing the same phnomenon. The crucial difference is that to the best of our ability to know, there are no homo sapiens inhabiting them. In the scientific method-this is known as a control. petz wishes Lori Rivas would spend as much time worried about what they do teach in achools rather than rail on David Barton. Are you kidding me-the Hart District is going to pave our schools with solar panels made in China, and this writer is worried about David Barton. It never ceases to amaze Petz what animates other people. A real waste of ink and paper for The Signal this morning.
  18. Santa ClaritanSeptember 20, 2011 at 6:23 am
    This Santa Claritan would like to know to scientific bona fides of the Petz that would lead us to value his opinion over the stated positions of almost all national academies and societies of sciences and virtual all climate researchers. Since other planets are mentioned in the writings of the Petz, this writer will note that the American Astronomical Society does not share the view of the Petz and endorsed human-caused climate change in 2004. This Santa Claritan stands amazed (and deeply saddened) at the willful ignorance that certain members of our society will openly demonstrate and stand proud of!
  19. JeffSeptember 20, 2011 at 12:12 pm
    “This Santa Claritan would like to know to scientific bona fides of the Petz that would lead us to value his opinion over the stated positions of almost all national academies and societies of sciences and virtual all climate researchers.” Petz and his kind view education as part of the problem. He said that just the other day. If the schools are godless, elitist liberal training grounds, then what else do you expect them to produce but elitist, godless liberals? The more letters behind your name, the more suspicion is generated. Indeed, if you’re of that mindset, the person with less education is more valued.
  20. PetzSeptember 20, 2011 at 5:01 pm
    Jeff has it correct-he encourages you to study at Prageru.com Give Dennis five minutes and save thousands of dollars.
  21. VenturanSeptember 20, 2011 at 9:20 pm
    I’m currently deciding between Glenn Beck University and Dennis Prager University. It’s such a hard choice! BeckU is a total party school but PragerU has more hot chicks.
  22. NateSeptember 20, 2011 at 9:42 pm
    Lol. Well a few beers at BeckU and those 6′s jump quite a bit… Stay away from the jello shots.
  23. ToddSeptember 20, 2011 at 10:06 pm
    No beers at BeckU. No caffinated sodas either. Enjoy your 7Up.
  24. CCSeptember 20, 2011 at 7:55 am
    This coming from the guy who went on a light bulb crusade.
  25. Lori RivasSeptember 20, 2011 at 12:22 pm
    Petz, for the record, I am concerned about both the content, and how it is taught, in public schools, hence one of the reasons I homeschool. Barton is a significant influence in the homeschool community (WallBuilders publishes very popular hs materials), and is, essentially, a ghost writer for public school text books. His shoddy history, and his broad influence, are a danger to schools, society, politics and evangelical Christians. This is certainly a topic worth discussing.
  26. PetzSeptember 21, 2011 at 4:08 am
    Lori Rivas is sly as a fox. She writes her opinion piece implying that the founders intended there to be a “Separation of Church and State” , when in fact she knows that this is false. So thank you David Barton for educating our children. The Bible is the most important book written in the world and our society is Bible illiterate. “godly Principles” – a rather interesting choice of words-politically correct but more accurately described as Judeo Christian. Lastly, Rivas know that this piece could have been placed on Righonscv.com where Rick Green is a contributor. She is undoubtedly afraid that Barton/or Green would have commented so she put it in The Signal. I will grant that she did not throw the Tea Party into hetr vitriolic rant, but she stains the Democrat Party which she claims to represent with her half truths and language manipulation.
  27. PetzSeptember 21, 2011 at 4:16 am
    Here is a primer for Rivas and her children. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html
  28. ScottESeptember 21, 2011 at 4:25 am
    Nice cherry-pickin that was..
  29. Lori RivasSeptember 21, 2011 at 7:54 am
    Petz, I am not arguing for separation of church and state. I never said my opinion on separation of church and state. I wrote that Barton mangels quotes to support his position. I said that Barton’s work is unchecked and full of errors. I said that Barton is wrapping his shoddy research and political views and Christianity. Again, discuss the points in my article. Unless you have a link that shows Barton uses the entire text of the Adams-Rush letter in his presentations?
  30. PetzSeptember 21, 2011 at 4:16 am
    Here is a primer for Rivas and her children. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html
  31. Lori RivasSeptember 21, 2011 at 7:44 am
    Petz, I am in a regular rotation to contribute to The Signal. I know about six weeks in advance when my column is due to the paper. And I am certainly not scared of anyone reading my piece. What fear should I have? Rather than the personal attacks, why don’t you discuss the points in my piece? The mangled quote? The book filled with errors that is still used, with Barton’s patronizing, “don’t worry…the sky won’t fall,” or something like that. Or, look at the criticisms of Barton’s work, yourself. Paul praised the Bereans for researching what Paul was preaching – why does the suggestion of checking sources create such a negative reaction?
  32. Lori RivasSeptember 21, 2011 at 7:57 am
    What half truths and language manipulation? I quoted Barton, and I quoted a document.
  33. 4eyedsueSeptember 20, 2011 at 1:26 pm
    David Barton is a factually ~and fashionably~ challenged “historian”. Where does he get those crazy-ass red, white and blue shirts? Thank you for your column, Lori Rivas. People need to understand who some of the top GOP ‘ers are looking at to legitimize their bigoted views.
  34. ScottESeptember 20, 2011 at 7:32 am
    Answers you can expect: 1. Climate researcher? What’s that? Name one college that offers a degree in climate research! 2. Ice Age panic of the 20th Century -Nuff sed. 3. Climategate. 4. Three scientists who disagree (and also happen to believe in “Intelligent Design.”
  35. SplashguardSeptember 20, 2011 at 3:38 pm
    Maybe Petz is confused with too many of those facty thingys. They make it hard to reconcile your beliefs with that highly filtered view of reality that you allow yourself, don’t they Petz? The only thing odd about that article is that it appeared in our local paper: http://www.the-signal.com/section/33/article/51367/
  36. PetzSeptember 21, 2011 at 6:10 am
    One odd thing is that it appeared shortly after the Backyard Skeptics tore up pages of the Bible in Huntington Beach. Coincidence ? I hope so. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/calif-atheists-rip-up-bible-verses-during-anti-christian-beach-protest/ The Bible of course predicts and warns believers of these events, but where is the outrage from our secular friends? Just getting what we deserve I guess.
  37. JeffSeptember 21, 2011 at 6:23 am
    I don’t get militant atheists. Leave the pledge alone, leave the WTC cross where it is, and don’t tear up the bible. Just because someone is an atheist doesn’t mean they can’t display the same negative attributes that fundamentalists do
  38. Lori RivasSeptember 21, 2011 at 7:33 am
    First of all, Petz, I am a devout Christian. Second of all, I had been composing that column for about a month. Third of all, I had no knowledge of the Bible ripping thing.
  39. Lori RivasSeptember 21, 2011 at 8:36 am
    Fifth of all, this *exactly* why Barton is dangerous: his followers equate an criticism of Barton with a criticism of God and Christianity. Barton is a man, and he is fallible. The founding fathers were men, not saints, and certainly not above reproach. And if your faith is based on the veracity of either Barton or perceived Godliness of the founding fathers, than your faith is on some shaky legs. Are we talking personal faith here, or are we talking accuracy of American history? Because the two should certainly not be intertwined. I would hope that any Christian would agree.
  40. mikeSeptember 21, 2011 at 9:17 am
    Lori, how could you possibly be a Christian if you aren’t a fan of Denis Prager or Rush Limbaugh? Impossible! You’re going to make Petz’s head explode.

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support