Commission Appointments: Power Plays, Norms, Respect

By IHeartSCV

You know the 4-1 and 3-2 votes predicted after TimBen Boydston’s victory? Tonight, we saw one of each during the typically routine process of appointing commissioners.

In a move that Councilmember Boydston believed to be unprecedented, he could not get the votes to approve two of his nominations. Valerie Thomas was nominated for Arts Commission, and Bob Kellar seconded his motion, but none of the other members would consent to her appointment. Councilmember Laurene Weste originally abstained from voting, but when she learned abstention counted as acquiescing to Thomas’s appointment, she changed her vote to “no” following a motion to reconsider.

When Councilmember Boydston nominated Alan Ferdman for the Parks, Recreation & Community Services Commission, he could not get a single councilmember to second his motion.

Boydston seems to have felt profoundly disrespected. He noted that approval of nominations was usually taken as a given. He wondered why the motion to approve all his appointees as a group was picked apart by Councilmember McLean while she happily voted for Bob Kellar’s appointees as a group. He received no answer. Boydston then went on to ask why Alan Ferdman wasn’t qualified enough to receive support, pointing out his considerable community involvement. Despite words that I thought would have provoked Mayor Ferry, the mayor did not respond. (Boydston pointed out that he won by over 600 votes, not a mere 32, like Ferry; and he said Ferry had nominated his secretary for a seat in the past as opposed to more qualififed candidates.) Despite repeated challenges, no one would explain why they didn’t want Val Thomas and Alan Ferdman to fill commission seats. Some nineteen members of the public had taken time to come to the meeting and speak in favor of candidates (many in favor of Thomas and/or Ferdman), but none of them got an answer as to why the candidates they supported were snubbed. The response, in short, was a big, unexplained “No!” to two of Boydston’s nominees.

City Attorney Joe Montes had to scramble to figure out what to do next. Based on a resolution from 1991, it seems Boydston can wait until the next meeting (August 28th–the CC is going on summer recess) to make appointments from the pool of candidates. Montes believed it would have to be a new nominee, not a new attempt to get support for Thomas and/or Ferdman.

When he realized he was powerless to appoint two of his preferred applicants, Boydston said with dramatic fatalism, “I have but one vote.” Despite his support for Val Thomas, Mayor Pro Tem Bob Kellar told Boydston to “respect the process” when it came to accepting that the other members did not support his nominations.

Tonight was all about respect and adherence to norms–two issues that often go hand in hand. McLean and Ferry, especially, exerted their power by not answering direct questions posed by Boydston as to why they wouldn’t even discuss nominees that many members of the public had come up to support. Boydston has gone to some lengths to set himself apart from the rest of the City Council, and tonight only cemented that role and the consequences he will face for playing it. You can make a case that a perception of disrespect is going in both directions: from longtime councilmembers to Boydston when they snub his nominees, and from Boydston to longtime councilmembers when he nominates candidates that have criticized some of his fellow councilmembers. And through it all, Mayor Pro Tem Bob Kellar occupies some kind of middle ground.

Boydston and others did receive some solace. There was unanimous approval of Diane Trautman and Jim Farley for Planning Commission and Open Space Accountability Panel, respectively, two candidates supported by many speakers tonight and known for their independent, intelligent, and respectful voices.

These are the appointments, with nominating councilmember in parentheses:

Planning Commission

Chuck Heffernan (Kellar)
Diane Trautman (Boydston)

Parks, Recreation & Community Services Commission

Duane Harte (Kellar)
Vacant [The nomination of Alan Ferdman by Boydston not approved because no one would second his nomination]

Arts Commission

John Dow (Kellar)
Vacant [The nomination of Val Thomas by Boydston not approved by Ferry, McLean, Weste]

Open Space Preservation District Financial Accountability and Audit Panel

Spence Leafdale (Kellar)
Susan Orloff (Weste)
Jim Farley (Boydston)

Comments (27)

IHeartSCVJuly 10, 2012 at 2:12 PM PT

An alternative title for this news was going to be: The Commissions Blacklist: Who’s on it?

Coastal SageJuly 10, 2012 at 6:20 PM PT

One category is any person who is a member of an organization which has sued the City for alleged violation of planning, zoning, environmental and endangered species laws. Under a standard established by City Manager Ken Pulskamp and articulated in writing to Lynne Plambeck in essence, Santa Clarita residents are supposed to “look the other way” when the Council and City staff ignore the laws passed the California Legislature, which is the actual legislative body with the power to govern Santa Clarita and all other non-charter cities.

mikeJuly 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM PT

Spectacular drama. I was glued to my iPad for hours tonight. Forgive my ignorance, but who is Val Thomas and why did she get iced out so coldly? Even Kellar’s second seemed hesitant, if not accidental. Allan Cameron was in rare form tonight, and he even worked in a shout out to Jerry Cherrington.

Coastal SageJuly 10, 2012 at 6:04 PM PT

Over the years Councilmembers Weste, Ferry, and McLean have appointed some useless, stupid and ethically corrupt people to various commissions and committees…and the other Council members have not objected. At the same time their puppet-master Ken Pulskamp has vetoed intelligent community activists serving on ad hoc city committees because he is a petty, vindictive scoundrel. His pretext has been to veto representatives selected by the Sierra Club and the Docents of the Placerita Canyon Nature Center because the representatives are members of pther organizations which have sued the City for law breaking. Councilmembers Weste, Ferry and McLean have done nothing to reign in their very nasty, petty City Manager, and instead have now graduated into mimicking him. Councilman Boydston won his election fair and square, and it is only fair that he get to have the people he wants to represent his opinions be confirmed. It was profoundly disrespectful of the VOTERS who elected Councilman Boydston for the other Councilmembers to reject his selections of committee appointees. One can only assume that this insulting conduct TOWARDS THE VOTERS will be redressed when Councilmembers Ferry, Weste and McLean run for re-election, because I suspect their “war” with Councilman Boydston will continue and the VOTERS will get to see more petty, public vindictiveness over the next 20+ months. (Yes Democrats I know that you think that is a good thing.) As to Councilman Boydston’s nominee to the Arts Commission, Valerie Thomas, she was a loyal soldier for the Santa Clarita Republican Party and business community for many years, in her service on the Newhall County Water District Board. Having spoken directly with Mrs. Thomas at the time it was happening, I can recount that about 8 years ago, acting as a good Republican soldier, Mrs. Thomas was maneuvered by the “good old Republican boys” into running in a “risky” contest for a different seat on Newhall County Water District while giving up a safe seat on that same Board. Mrs. Thomas lost and later realized that she was screwed by the good old boys in her own party. And, of course, there’s very bad blood between Mrs. Thomas and Councilwoman Weste all tangled up in distrust by residents of Placerita Canyon in Councilwoman Weste’s SUPPOSED support for a high density apartment project in the open fields at the west end of Placerita Canyon, a project which never even got to the Planning Commission due to the project proponent “Casden” ending up in a financial dispute with its money partner as the real estate economy crashed. As a result, no public evidence of Councilwoman Weste’s SUPPOSED support for the “Casden Project” ever became public. There’s also distrust in Councilwoman Weste by some residents of Placerita Canyon who believe that Councilwoman Weste is in the pocket of developers and the water boys, generally, but specifically Newhall Land, and Councilwoman Weste is said to believe that Mrs. Thomas foments that suspicion. Those sort of allegations sadden me if they are true. It is well known by Councilwoman Weste that Mrs. Thomas’ questions to the Fair Political Practices Commission about what, exactly, Councilwoman Weste can vote on since she owns property in Placerita Canyon, led to the issuance of an FPPC “admonishment” letter to the Councilwoman right before her last election. The written response to Mrs. Thomas’ questions by a lawyer from the FPPC, viewable online, admonished Councilwoman Weste that she could not vote on any matter which would positively or negatively affect the value of her property, even if the expenditure was on a project more that 500′ from Councilwoman Weste’s residence. That left Councilwoman Weste in the unenviable position of having to guess each time she votes on anything, as to whether it will help or hurt the market value of her property. That advice was also inconsistent with the advice of former City Attorney Carl Newton, who opined that Councilwoman Weste could vote on any matter affecting real estate as long as it was more than 500′ from her residence. Mrs. Thomas’ pursuit of the questions to the FPPC, and fostering of distrust of Councilwoman Weste among her neighbors in Placerita Canyon, very clearly angered Councilwoman Weste. When Mrs. Thomas “caught” Councilwoman Weste allegedly violating the FPPC admonition letter AFTER the Councilwoman was re-elected, Mrs. Thomas again complained to the FPPC, but the second times the FPPC staff blew off Mrs. Thomas. In essence, it is said that “someone” who was working for the City got to the FPPC staff and convinced them to ignore Mrs. Thomas complaints’ about Councilwoman Weste’s continued voting on some issues which arguable fit within the admonition letter. Councilwoman Weste and Mrs. Thomas were Republican allies 10 years ago, but their relationship has deteriorated to a point of intense mutual animosity. That makes me very sad because I considered both of them to be my friends. The dispute between the two of them puts many of their friends in the awkward position of having to take sides in a pissing contest…assuming ladies have pissing contests. Having been raised by a Republic mother, who worked as a field deputy for Nelson Rockefeller, I can only say that my mother and other proper Republican ladies would not approve of Councilwoman Weste’s conduct in voting against Mrs. Thomas, nor would they have approved of Mrs. Thomas complaining to the FPPC about Councilwoman Weste’s voting on matters relating to her area of Newhall. However, as my mother would have said “For God’s sake, it’s only the Arts Commission. Have some dignity Laurene.” My mother’s and my advice to the Councilwoman would have been to “Pick your battles”, “Don’t act like a bitch” and “Be a better person than your adversary.” Councilwoman Weste has worked very hard, for many years, on a lot of important Santa Clarita issues, including creating a green belt to surround the city and protect it from hillside sprawl like you see in West Hollywood and Glendale, stopping the Las Lomas project which would have further clogged the 5 and 14 Freeways, and in trying to get the State to do something about the continuing spread of toxic contamination from Bermite throughout the city. Sadly, it is said that Councilman Boydston’s animosity towards City Manager Ken Pulskamp (and vice versa) is allowing Mr. Pulskamp to manipulate Councilwoman Weste into allying with him, whereas several months ago she thought he and his close staff members were intentionally trying to hurt her. My experience with Councilwoman Weste is that she is not petty, yet now it looks like City Manager Ken Pulskamp is manipulating her the same way his mentor, former City Manager George Caravalho, manipulated former Councilwoman Jill Klajic. My prediction is that if Councilwoman Weste does not take the high road, and continues to allow City Manager Pulskamp to manipulate her in his battle with Councilman Boydston, it will be Councilwoman Weste who will lose her seat on the Council in the next election. Personally, if I were Councilman Boydston, I would keep nominating Val Thomas and Alan Ferdman (who I don’t know) to the same positions, again and again, unless City Attorney Joe Montes can cite an actual California statute which says that Councilman Boydston cannot do so. To do otherwise would be to acquiesce in the other Councilmembers’ clear disrespect for the will of the VOTERS as expressed in the last election. While Allan Cameron and other prominent Santa Clarita Democrats may get a charge out of watching Councilmembers Weste, McLean and Ferry deal with fellow Republicans in a public, rude and petty way, I personally do not relish watching Santa Clarita Republicans act like reptiles who eat their young.

SCV Republican SupporterJuly 10, 2012 at 10:35 PM PT

Coastal, I think you got it right about Weste and Thomas. Understand your comments about taking the high road, but tough when somebody makes FPPC complaints for political purposes and Weste is doing what the City Attorney has simply advised. In regards to Ferdman, the interesting thing here is Kellar did not second the motion. This is the message that TimBen should hear. He campaigned telling everybody vote for Kellar and make me your second choice. Now he has already so alienated Kellar that he can not even get his appointed seconded for the Parks Commission? TimBen does not just have a Ferry, McLean and Weste problem. He now has a Kellar problem. If he can’t fix that, the people will choose Kellar over TimBen.

Fed Up N SCVJuly 11, 2012 at 12:40 AM PT

Speak for yourself regarding the people picking Kellar over TimBen. What Kellar did last night was over the line. I have always been in Kellar’s corner, but not anymore. Last night was the first time I have ever been ashamed that I supported Bob Kellar.

mikeJuly 11, 2012 at 2:19 AM PT

I might agree with him half the time, at best, but I do like the idea of Al Ferdman as ever-present contrarian at city council meetings, as absurd as he can be. An unintentional devil’s advocate, maybe. The flip side of that is he has a way of reaching too far when he doesn’t have much to stand on. His kneejerk response is to automatically assume to worst of city staff and members of the council he doesn’t like. You may agree with this approach, and he’s certainly entitled to it, but I don’t see how anyone could be surprised that he wouldn’t get the votes of people that he routinely disparages. He gone from a narowly-focused community advocate to a wide-ranging hyper-partisan malcontent. Not to mention that he’s made his intentions to run in 2014 pretty apparent. He may make a superb Parks commissioner, and he has a history of selfless community service that goes beyond all but a few in this valley. But I would have been far more surprised if Ferry, Weste and McLean would have voted for him. As for Kellar, I see it one of two ways: Kellar either let the motion die because he was upset over the way TBB handled himself in the during and after the previous motion and didn’t want to sit through the same charade, and/or it was a wake up call to TBB and/or Al to treat the rest of the council with greater respect. Kellar way come off like a Tea Party type, and sure, he’s plenty conservative, but he’s an old-school small-c conservative, too. An institutionalist. He doesn’t have much patience for the freewheeling rabble-rousing, and he seems to be able to maintain a basic level of respect for opponents, to the point where he’ll find an ally’s disrespect a greater offense than his opponent’s opposing view. After the first meeting I observed that temperamentally, Kellar and Boydston are like oil and water. Still true, and it was apparent as ever during the appointment dust-up, but I also think Boydston is finding his groove in other respects. I think he handled the library item reasonably well and from what I saw during the consent calendar discussion, he was asking good questions, respectfully.

BertaJuly 11, 2012 at 4:42 AM PT

Mike I strongly support Bob Kellar and strongly do not support TimBen Boydston, for numerous reasons mentioned over a period of several years so I will let that comment stand as is. However, I do take exception to you and TimBen lauding Al Ferdman. Pushing your personal anti city agenda and falsely claiming you represent an entire group of people to give your opinions credibility is not “selfless community service that goes beyond all but a few in this valley.” Al is not interested in diversity, fair and open discussion of the issues, arriving at consensus, etc. He is on a power trip and pushes his personal agenda that is not selfless anything Mike. You will notice that all of those four who spoke on his behalf are members of his Republican group and two do not live within our city. Where were all of the Canyonites that he purports to speak for? I would remind you that the open positions all serve as advisory bodies to the City Council and that those appointed to those positions must have the trust and confidence of those being advised, not just the one Councilperson making the nomination. It also helps if you have not loudly proclaimed your anti city biases and get your facts straight too. If Al Ferdman does not faithfully fulfill his role ethically and fairly in his Canyon Country “Advisory” role, why would anyone expect he would as a City Commissioner? The Council did the correct thing in vetoing folks they do not have confidence in to fulfill the duties involved and represent all of the citizens equally well. The fact that TBB only thoroughly vetted these two particular choices speaks volumes about him. A responsible elected official would vet all eligible candidates, rank them in order of preference, and be ready to present a second, third choice, etc. but not TBB, bad move, smacks of arrogance and unprofessional.

mikeJuly 11, 2012 at 5:07 AM PT

I feel misread :/

BertaJuly 11, 2012 at 5:32 AM PT

Mike, I misread you? You said, “He may make a superb Parks commissioner, and he has a history of selfless community service that goes beyond all but a few in this valley. But I would have been far more surprised if Ferry, Weste and McLean would have voted for him.” Please explain how I misread your comments.

mikeJuly 11, 2012 at 5:39 AM PT

There’s no use.

SCV SageJuly 11, 2012 at 8:29 AM PT

Weste is corrupt and has proven it repeatedly to the Placerita Canyon community before she even got on the City Council. She was on the cusp of being removed from the Placerita Property Owners Board for serious malfeasance when she chose not to run for re-election. So Weste is suspicious/unsupportive of anyone with any memory of her shenanigans — that would include people such a Val Thomas, Ben Curtis, yours truly and many, many others in the Community. She is slicker now, dresses better, but she hasn’t changed — she has her own agenda. She is still completely untrustworthy!

Coastal SageJuly 11, 2012 at 12:46 PM PT

Ouch! Just so it’s clear, the comment above was not written by me.

SCV SageJuly 11, 2012 at 1:01 PM PT

But – it is all true, unfortunately! You ask why the Placerita Canyon Community doesn’t trust her; you suggest it is mere rumor and malcontents — actually it is an over 20 year old history of corrupt malfeasance first publicly instituted on our Canyon Board, as many, many other instances of self dealing and behind the scenes orchestrated shenanigans. Yes, Laurene Weste sometimes votes the right way… but she is not reliable to serve the public interest, has her own agenda, and regularly carries the water for other special interests.

PetzJuly 10, 2012 at 10:19 PM PT

Petz watched the fireworks from home last night. He is disappointed that Alan Ferdman- a citizen soldier, was not affirmed for his parks commission nomination last night. He represents his area of CC like no one else in this community. IMHO, it is not appropriate for a fellow council person to not give a second to Alan for the TBB nomination. He deserved an up/ down vote and that is at least an appropriate courtesy to TBB. Seems to be some bad blood between him and Berta that is hard to fathom since they seem to be birds of a feather on the face of it. Alan should feel liberated this morning to know exactly how the council members feel about him. My opinion, he should announce his candidacy for 2014 and roll up his sleves. There is not a single TBB supporter who would not support him, and with a strong turnout from CC he will have a good shot at winning. Petz does not care about the arts commission- art is just the religion of the secularists and the commission merely approves the clergy, recommends the icons and arranges the services. However, to deny Val Thomas a position after a vote was taken…then rescinded after discussion and a motion to reconsider may not have been legal or appropriate. She was in fact “affirmed” by the tie council vote and Weste got an undeserved “do over” vote. Clarification regarding a 2-2-tie with abstention should have been asked before a vote was recorded. Upon notification that the tie with abstention was “approval”, Ferry should have declared her approved and moved on. Petz advises TBB to fight like hell on this one.

Coastal SageJuly 11, 2012 at 4:42 AM PT

Petz and Coastal Sage agreeing on an issue. As they said in Ghostbusters when dogs and cats sit together in harmony, the end of the world as we know it is coming.

PetzJuly 11, 2012 at 7:12 AM PT

LOL…Petz being happy that Diane Trautman was being added to the Planning Commission…if you live long enough anything can happen.

SCV SageJuly 11, 2012 at 8:35 AM PT

Am also VERY happy that Diane Trautman is on Planning Commission. Someone who is intelligent, does her homework, asks good questions of staff and doesn’t just rubber stamp the project of toe the Staff/City Manager party line. No — I am not related. We don’t share the same religion nor party affiliation either.

PetzJuly 11, 2012 at 7:24 AM PT

Petz was jumping up and down while Ferry tried to undo the results of the vote for arts commission. Very awkward watching him and the city attorney decide how to undo the result. TBB should have called for a point of order and a reading of the council vote by the city clerk. The motion to reconsider should not be allowed after Ferry cast his vote.

IHeartSCVJuly 11, 2012 at 12:16 AM PT

The Signal’s editorial board actually wrote a very strong condemnation of Ferry and Ender for not taking commission appointments seriously enough in 2008: “Councilman Frank Ferry, who is the principal at Bishop Alemany High School, chose his secretary of six years, Janell Cornell, as his top pick for a city of Santa Clarita parks commission seat. Ferry said Cornell was one of several applicants he knows personally. He said one applicant is his neighbor. And his son is best friends with applicant Matthew Halliday’s son, he said. Seconds later, Councilwoman Laurie Ender named Halliday as her choice for the parks commission. “His son is my son’s best friend, Frank. So there,” she said. So there, indeed. We would like to think – and we suspect others in this city would like to think – that a longstanding relationship with a council member is not what gets a person a seat on the critical Planning Commission or Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission. But the childish show of insider-ism and one-upsmanship seen Tuesday night in Council Chambers smacks of small-town cronyism, legitimizing scrutiny and criticism of the City Council. After such a display, council members can hardly be surprised when constituents question their honor.” http://www.the-signal.com/archives/2887/

PetzJuly 11, 2012 at 12:23 AM PT

So San Bernandino is following Stockton and Mammoth Lakes into Chapter 9. Still no mention of the reform movements in San Jose-Costa Mesa-and San Diego in our council chambers. For the moment we have the luxury of celebrating open space in Elsmere , fighting over board appointments and “public ” control of the library. Fiddling around while Rome burns….that’s how Petz sees it.

Timothy Myers SR.July 11, 2012 at 2:58 AM PT

Most disturbing about San Berdu is the allegation of the new City manager that former City employees “falsified” financial reports for sixteen years that hid the coming storm. Say what you will about Stockton and Mammoth Lakes but they were transparent enough that people knew it was bad and this was definitely a possibility. San Berdu calls to mind the OC bankruptcy where it hit like a lightening strike due to hidden investment losses. I think the folks on Valencia Blvd know how to do their sums, but the current crop of elected council members don’t have the background to see if the SC budget numbers are even directionally correct.

Coastal SageJuly 11, 2012 at 5:48 AM PT

Tim I believe that the City of Santa Clarita has sufficient cash to pay its bills. However, as you know I have wanted my friends and acquaintances in Santa Clarita who know how to “read the numbers” to take a careful look at the City’s short term and long term cash flow projections, which we both know do not form part of a city’s formal financial accounting to the public. Your comment above is entirely appropriate. As a lawyer working on “municipal bond deals” I learned long ago that the amount of money a public agency can borrow (issue bonds for) is premised on future cash flow projections which are highly speculative. Public agencies who want to borrow lots of money hire “Financial Consultants” to prepare the favorable cash flow projections, and then the “bond underwriters” (like Stone & Youngberg or Merrill Lynch) are supposed to check the assumptions on which those cash flow projections are based, and do their own analysis of the likelihood of the municipal securities being fully repaid. That analysis is supposed to be done for the benefit of the future bond buyers. There’s a fascinating, “binding on everyone”, U.S. District Court opinion arising out of the Orange County bankruptcy which describes, in detail, how Merrill Lynch and its executive assigned to the Orange County account breached their fiduciary duty to that county’s municipal securities holder/creditors by failing to do that independent analysis. Back when Centre Pointe was just a gleam in Larry Rasmussen’s eye, the city’s municipal securities underwriter determined that the real estate taxes on the undeveloped project would not produce sufficient revenue to allow the city to make payments on muncipal bonds which would have been used to finance the building of infrastructure in Centre Pointe. (Quite obviously that problem solved itself as demand for buildings in Centre Pointe increased.) I’ve seen the City of Tehachapi deal with the effects of a default in payment of special assessments for an entire project whose infrastructure was financed by “muncipal bonds”. I’ve seen the white shoe California municipal bond lawyers from Downtown LA get very upset about the risky bond deals put together by small bond law firms throughout the state, and seen them warn that municipal securities financing was being “abused” in California. We’ve all seen that several years ago Goldman Sachs set up a massive municipal securities deal to secretly refinance the Greek government debt, which many people say was illegal under the then-existing Euro zone treaties. That deal is the one which is now cratering the Greek economy. I’ve seen the same people (“municipal bond industry professionals”) who, historically, have put together Castaic Lake Water Agency’s municipal securities financings, be the people in charge of the Las Vegas Monorail’s bond issuance, which was based on overly optimistic cash flow projections. The Monorail defaulted on its bonds because of poor ridership numbers and high operating costs, (i.e. bad cash flow projections,) and the Monorail filed its own bankruptcy. The consequence of that bond default was to bankrupt the national bond insurer, Ambac, which in turn caused many other localities to have to find replacement bond insurance at great cost, or risk default on their own bonds. When the City of Santa Clarita decided to “privatize” the County libraries, City staff was talking about cash flow from the library portion of ordinary real estate taxes being sufficient to support a borrowing of $X. Cam Noltemeyer, who spent many years as an actuary and who is married to a CPA, understood what that meant, and expressed her concern about the not-very-public, back of the envelope financial projections by the City staff, which none of the Council members would have any ability to understand or evaluate in terms of accuracy or likelihood of those projections being accurate over the long term. Cam tried to get the staff’s calculation worksheets, and she was stonewalled. I used a Federally mandated data base to look for municipal securities prospectuses (“Official Statements”) for Santa Clarita’s borrowings, and there were no filings to be found. The Newhall Land bankruptcy case ended with the old, dead company owing the City of Santa Clarita close to $1 Million in reimbursements for road construction costs which the City “fronted” under Newhall’s land use entitlements which should have been untouchable by Newhall Land’s Delaware Bankruptcy Court judge, under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, in its Chapter 11 Plan supplements, Newhall Land chose to treat the City as an “unsecured creditor” and the City did not aggressively pursue its 10th Amendment rights, in contrast to what the City of Oakland did in the SunCal/Lehman entities bankruptcy. Instead, the simple question of whether the City of Santa Clarita ever got paid 100 Cents on the Dollar for its claim was swept under a rug. In contrast, “normal” public agencies throughout California (e.g. San Clemente, Palmdale, Castaic School District) are screaming to the high heavens about the SunCal/Lehman Chapter 11 Plan’s trying to stiff them out of what they are owed. (California’s Democrat Attorney General is taking a dive on that dispute, but that’s another story being written by a friend of mine who writes for a well known newspaper in New York.) The bottom line is that in Santa Clarita, it pays to have friends in City Hall when money is tight and the City is one’s creditor. The formal written audit reports of the City of Santa Clarita are footnoted by the City’s auditors with a large number of boilerplate statements, in essence saying that they are not in control of the City’s financial planning for the future. My gut instinct tells me that the City of Santa Clarita is not nearing a Chapter 9 bankruptcy filing, as the City of San Bernardino is. However, at most there are probably 3 to 4 people who truly understand the City Santa Clarita’s ever changing finances, and they are Ken Pulskamp and his senior staff…and no one else. The 5 Council members and Santa Clarita’s residents and creditors are at their mercy and the City staff say “Trust us”. In one memorable episode of the Sopranos, Tony’s wife Carmela is haranguing Tony to invest money in publicly traded companies so she will have a reliable income stream if he suddenly dies or goes to jail. Tony utters a nearly unforgettable line in sum and substance that ‘Only the people inside know the real numbers, and they can’t be trusted’.

Timothy Myers SR.July 11, 2012 at 12:24 AM PT

This is off the hook! I could see the other members balking at putting Alan Ferdman on the Planning Commission (some might say the only one that really matters) as a gift of a relatively high profile position to an all but announced candidate to unseat at least one of the incumbents out of pure self interest, but the Parks Commission? Also the process of refusing a second and just sitting there stone faced smacks of some kind of politburo activity. I agree with others that TBB should just keep reappointing Thomas and Ferdman and playing out this continued psychodrama for the next 20 months until the next election, leaving the seats vacant and just accumulating the embarrassment. I would put the over/under at 2 for the number of council meetings that Ferry can resist TBB’s provocations before blowing up.

Fed Up N SCVJuly 11, 2012 at 12:43 AM PT

If the council won’t approve Al Ferdman for Parks Commission, then let’s put him on city council! Ferdman 2014!!

David GaunyJuly 11, 2012 at 2:55 PM PT

Agreed. 20 months of duplicate agendized appointments. The perfectly organized event this sitting council demands with the unabated coaster-throwing (in Tim’s words) it deserves for the unforgivable flaccidity.

BertaJuly 11, 2012 at 4:13 PM PT

Mike, I find your comment of “There’s no use.” in response to my request for clarification dismissive and disrespectful. I am sorry you feel that way and disappointed by your response.

IHeartSCVJuly 10, 2012 at 2:12 PM PT
An alternative title for this news was going to be: The Commissions Blacklist: Who’s on it?
Coastal SageJuly 10, 2012 at 6:20 PM PT
One category is any person who is a member of an organization which has sued the City for alleged violation of planning, zoning, environmental and endangered species laws. Under a standard established by City Manager Ken Pulskamp and articulated in writing to Lynne Plambeck in essence, Santa Clarita residents are supposed to “look the other way” when the Council and City staff ignore the laws passed the California Legislature, which is the actual legislative body with the power to govern Santa Clarita and all other non-charter cities.
mikeJuly 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM PT
Spectacular drama. I was glued to my iPad for hours tonight. Forgive my ignorance, but who is Val Thomas and why did she get iced out so coldly? Even Kellar’s second seemed hesitant, if not accidental. Allan Cameron was in rare form tonight, and he even worked in a shout out to Jerry Cherrington.
Coastal SageJuly 10, 2012 at 6:04 PM PT
Over the years Councilmembers Weste, Ferry, and McLean have appointed some useless, stupid and ethically corrupt people to various commissions and committees…and the other Council members have not objected. At the same time their puppet-master Ken Pulskamp has vetoed intelligent community activists serving on ad hoc city committees because he is a petty, vindictive scoundrel. His pretext has been to veto representatives selected by the Sierra Club and the Docents of the Placerita Canyon Nature Center because the representatives are members of pther organizations which have sued the City for law breaking. Councilmembers Weste, Ferry and McLean have done nothing to reign in their very nasty, petty City Manager, and instead have now graduated into mimicking him. Councilman Boydston won his election fair and square, and it is only fair that he get to have the people he wants to represent his opinions be confirmed. It was profoundly disrespectful of the VOTERS who elected Councilman Boydston for the other Councilmembers to reject his selections of committee appointees. One can only assume that this insulting conduct TOWARDS THE VOTERS will be redressed when Councilmembers Ferry, Weste and McLean run for re-election, because I suspect their “war” with Councilman Boydston will continue and the VOTERS will get to see more petty, public vindictiveness over the next 20+ months. (Yes Democrats I know that you think that is a good thing.) As to Councilman Boydston’s nominee to the Arts Commission, Valerie Thomas, she was a loyal soldier for the Santa Clarita Republican Party and business community for many years, in her service on the Newhall County Water District Board. Having spoken directly with Mrs. Thomas at the time it was happening, I can recount that about 8 years ago, acting as a good Republican soldier, Mrs. Thomas was maneuvered by the “good old Republican boys” into running in a “risky” contest for a different seat on Newhall County Water District while giving up a safe seat on that same Board. Mrs. Thomas lost and later realized that she was screwed by the good old boys in her own party. And, of course, there’s very bad blood between Mrs. Thomas and Councilwoman Weste all tangled up in distrust by residents of Placerita Canyon in Councilwoman Weste’s SUPPOSED support for a high density apartment project in the open fields at the west end of Placerita Canyon, a project which never even got to the Planning Commission due to the project proponent “Casden” ending up in a financial dispute with its money partner as the real estate economy crashed. As a result, no public evidence of Councilwoman Weste’s SUPPOSED support for the “Casden Project” ever became public. There’s also distrust in Councilwoman Weste by some residents of Placerita Canyon who believe that Councilwoman Weste is in the pocket of developers and the water boys, generally, but specifically Newhall Land, and Councilwoman Weste is said to believe that Mrs. Thomas foments that suspicion. Those sort of allegations sadden me if they are true. It is well known by Councilwoman Weste that Mrs. Thomas’ questions to the Fair Political Practices Commission about what, exactly, Councilwoman Weste can vote on since she owns property in Placerita Canyon, led to the issuance of an FPPC “admonishment” letter to the Councilwoman right before her last election. The written response to Mrs. Thomas’ questions by a lawyer from the FPPC, viewable online, admonished Councilwoman Weste that she could not vote on any matter which would positively or negatively affect the value of her property, even if the expenditure was on a project more that 500′ from Councilwoman Weste’s residence. That left Councilwoman Weste in the unenviable position of having to guess each time she votes on anything, as to whether it will help or hurt the market value of her property. That advice was also inconsistent with the advice of former City Attorney Carl Newton, who opined that Councilwoman Weste could vote on any matter affecting real estate as long as it was more than 500′ from her residence. Mrs. Thomas’ pursuit of the questions to the FPPC, and fostering of distrust of Councilwoman Weste among her neighbors in Placerita Canyon, very clearly angered Councilwoman Weste. When Mrs. Thomas “caught” Councilwoman Weste allegedly violating the FPPC admonition letter AFTER the Councilwoman was re-elected, Mrs. Thomas again complained to the FPPC, but the second times the FPPC staff blew off Mrs. Thomas. In essence, it is said that “someone” who was working for the City got to the FPPC staff and convinced them to ignore Mrs. Thomas complaints’ about Councilwoman Weste’s continued voting on some issues which arguable fit within the admonition letter. Councilwoman Weste and Mrs. Thomas were Republican allies 10 years ago, but their relationship has deteriorated to a point of intense mutual animosity. That makes me very sad because I considered both of them to be my friends. The dispute between the two of them puts many of their friends in the awkward position of having to take sides in a pissing contest…assuming ladies have pissing contests. Having been raised by a Republic mother, who worked as a field deputy for Nelson Rockefeller, I can only say that my mother and other proper Republican ladies would not approve of Councilwoman Weste’s conduct in voting against Mrs. Thomas, nor would they have approved of Mrs. Thomas complaining to the FPPC about Councilwoman Weste’s voting on matters relating to her area of Newhall. However, as my mother would have said “For God’s sake, it’s only the Arts Commission. Have some dignity Laurene.” My mother’s and my advice to the Councilwoman would have been to “Pick your battles”, “Don’t act like a bitch” and “Be a better person than your adversary.” Councilwoman Weste has worked very hard, for many years, on a lot of important Santa Clarita issues, including creating a green belt to surround the city and protect it from hillside sprawl like you see in West Hollywood and Glendale, stopping the Las Lomas project which would have further clogged the 5 and 14 Freeways, and in trying to get the State to do something about the continuing spread of toxic contamination from Bermite throughout the city. Sadly, it is said that Councilman Boydston’s animosity towards City Manager Ken Pulskamp (and vice versa) is allowing Mr. Pulskamp to manipulate Councilwoman Weste into allying with him, whereas several months ago she thought he and his close staff members were intentionally trying to hurt her. My experience with Councilwoman Weste is that she is not petty, yet now it looks like City Manager Ken Pulskamp is manipulating her the same way his mentor, former City Manager George Caravalho, manipulated former Councilwoman Jill Klajic. My prediction is that if Councilwoman Weste does not take the high road, and continues to allow City Manager Pulskamp to manipulate her in his battle with Councilman Boydston, it will be Councilwoman Weste who will lose her seat on the Council in the next election. Personally, if I were Councilman Boydston, I would keep nominating Val Thomas and Alan Ferdman (who I don’t know) to the same positions, again and again, unless City Attorney Joe Montes can cite an actual California statute which says that Councilman Boydston cannot do so. To do otherwise would be to acquiesce in the other Councilmembers’ clear disrespect for the will of the VOTERS as expressed in the last election. While Allan Cameron and other prominent Santa Clarita Democrats may get a charge out of watching Councilmembers Weste, McLean and Ferry deal with fellow Republicans in a public, rude and petty way, I personally do not relish watching Santa Clarita Republicans act like reptiles who eat their young.
SCV Republican SupporterJuly 10, 2012 at 10:35 PM PT
Coastal, I think you got it right about Weste and Thomas. Understand your comments about taking the high road, but tough when somebody makes FPPC complaints for political purposes and Weste is doing what the City Attorney has simply advised. In regards to Ferdman, the interesting thing here is Kellar did not second the motion. This is the message that TimBen should hear. He campaigned telling everybody vote for Kellar and make me your second choice. Now he has already so alienated Kellar that he can not even get his appointed seconded for the Parks Commission? TimBen does not just have a Ferry, McLean and Weste problem. He now has a Kellar problem. If he can’t fix that, the people will choose Kellar over TimBen.
Fed Up N SCVJuly 11, 2012 at 12:40 AM PT
Speak for yourself regarding the people picking Kellar over TimBen. What Kellar did last night was over the line. I have always been in Kellar’s corner, but not anymore. Last night was the first time I have ever been ashamed that I supported Bob Kellar.
mikeJuly 11, 2012 at 2:19 AM PT
I might agree with him half the time, at best, but I do like the idea of Al Ferdman as ever-present contrarian at city council meetings, as absurd as he can be. An unintentional devil’s advocate, maybe. The flip side of that is he has a way of reaching too far when he doesn’t have much to stand on. His kneejerk response is to automatically assume to worst of city staff and members of the council he doesn’t like. You may agree with this approach, and he’s certainly entitled to it, but I don’t see how anyone could be surprised that he wouldn’t get the votes of people that he routinely disparages. He gone from a narowly-focused community advocate to a wide-ranging hyper-partisan malcontent. Not to mention that he’s made his intentions to run in 2014 pretty apparent. He may make a superb Parks commissioner, and he has a history of selfless community service that goes beyond all but a few in this valley. But I would have been far more surprised if Ferry, Weste and McLean would have voted for him. As for Kellar, I see it one of two ways: Kellar either let the motion die because he was upset over the way TBB handled himself in the during and after the previous motion and didn’t want to sit through the same charade, and/or it was a wake up call to TBB and/or Al to treat the rest of the council with greater respect. Kellar way come off like a Tea Party type, and sure, he’s plenty conservative, but he’s an old-school small-c conservative, too. An institutionalist. He doesn’t have much patience for the freewheeling rabble-rousing, and he seems to be able to maintain a basic level of respect for opponents, to the point where he’ll find an ally’s disrespect a greater offense than his opponent’s opposing view. After the first meeting I observed that temperamentally, Kellar and Boydston are like oil and water. Still true, and it was apparent as ever during the appointment dust-up, but I also think Boydston is finding his groove in other respects. I think he handled the library item reasonably well and from what I saw during the consent calendar discussion, he was asking good questions, respectfully.
BertaJuly 11, 2012 at 4:42 AM PT
Mike I strongly support Bob Kellar and strongly do not support TimBen Boydston, for numerous reasons mentioned over a period of several years so I will let that comment stand as is. However, I do take exception to you and TimBen lauding Al Ferdman. Pushing your personal anti city agenda and falsely claiming you represent an entire group of people to give your opinions credibility is not “selfless community service that goes beyond all but a few in this valley.” Al is not interested in diversity, fair and open discussion of the issues, arriving at consensus, etc. He is on a power trip and pushes his personal agenda that is not selfless anything Mike. You will notice that all of those four who spoke on his behalf are members of his Republican group and two do not live within our city. Where were all of the Canyonites that he purports to speak for? I would remind you that the open positions all serve as advisory bodies to the City Council and that those appointed to those positions must have the trust and confidence of those being advised, not just the one Councilperson making the nomination. It also helps if you have not loudly proclaimed your anti city biases and get your facts straight too. If Al Ferdman does not faithfully fulfill his role ethically and fairly in his Canyon Country “Advisory” role, why would anyone expect he would as a City Commissioner? The Council did the correct thing in vetoing folks they do not have confidence in to fulfill the duties involved and represent all of the citizens equally well. The fact that TBB only thoroughly vetted these two particular choices speaks volumes about him. A responsible elected official would vet all eligible candidates, rank them in order of preference, and be ready to present a second, third choice, etc. but not TBB, bad move, smacks of arrogance and unprofessional.
mikeJuly 11, 2012 at 5:07 AM PT
I feel misread :/
BertaJuly 11, 2012 at 5:32 AM PT
Mike, I misread you? You said, “He may make a superb Parks commissioner, and he has a history of selfless community service that goes beyond all but a few in this valley. But I would have been far more surprised if Ferry, Weste and McLean would have voted for him.” Please explain how I misread your comments.
mikeJuly 11, 2012 at 5:39 AM PT
There’s no use.
SCV SageJuly 11, 2012 at 8:29 AM PT
Weste is corrupt and has proven it repeatedly to the Placerita Canyon community before she even got on the City Council. She was on the cusp of being removed from the Placerita Property Owners Board for serious malfeasance when she chose not to run for re-election. So Weste is suspicious/unsupportive of anyone with any memory of her shenanigans — that would include people such a Val Thomas, Ben Curtis, yours truly and many, many others in the Community. She is slicker now, dresses better, but she hasn’t changed — she has her own agenda. She is still completely untrustworthy!
Coastal SageJuly 11, 2012 at 12:46 PM PT
Ouch! Just so it’s clear, the comment above was not written by me.
SCV SageJuly 11, 2012 at 1:01 PM PT
But – it is all true, unfortunately! You ask why the Placerita Canyon Community doesn’t trust her; you suggest it is mere rumor and malcontents — actually it is an over 20 year old history of corrupt malfeasance first publicly instituted on our Canyon Board, as many, many other instances of self dealing and behind the scenes orchestrated shenanigans. Yes, Laurene Weste sometimes votes the right way… but she is not reliable to serve the public interest, has her own agenda, and regularly carries the water for other special interests.
PetzJuly 10, 2012 at 10:19 PM PT
Petz watched the fireworks from home last night. He is disappointed that Alan Ferdman- a citizen soldier, was not affirmed for his parks commission nomination last night. He represents his area of CC like no one else in this community. IMHO, it is not appropriate for a fellow council person to not give a second to Alan for the TBB nomination. He deserved an up/ down vote and that is at least an appropriate courtesy to TBB. Seems to be some bad blood between him and Berta that is hard to fathom since they seem to be birds of a feather on the face of it. Alan should feel liberated this morning to know exactly how the council members feel about him. My opinion, he should announce his candidacy for 2014 and roll up his sleves. There is not a single TBB supporter who would not support him, and with a strong turnout from CC he will have a good shot at winning. Petz does not care about the arts commission- art is just the religion of the secularists and the commission merely approves the clergy, recommends the icons and arranges the services. However, to deny Val Thomas a position after a vote was taken…then rescinded after discussion and a motion to reconsider may not have been legal or appropriate. She was in fact “affirmed” by the tie council vote and Weste got an undeserved “do over” vote. Clarification regarding a 2-2-tie with abstention should have been asked before a vote was recorded. Upon notification that the tie with abstention was “approval”, Ferry should have declared her approved and moved on. Petz advises TBB to fight like hell on this one.
Coastal SageJuly 11, 2012 at 4:42 AM PT
Petz and Coastal Sage agreeing on an issue. As they said in Ghostbusters when dogs and cats sit together in harmony, the end of the world as we know it is coming.
PetzJuly 11, 2012 at 7:12 AM PT
LOL…Petz being happy that Diane Trautman was being added to the Planning Commission…if you live long enough anything can happen.
SCV SageJuly 11, 2012 at 8:35 AM PT
Am also VERY happy that Diane Trautman is on Planning Commission. Someone who is intelligent, does her homework, asks good questions of staff and doesn’t just rubber stamp the project of toe the Staff/City Manager party line. No — I am not related. We don’t share the same religion nor party affiliation either.
PetzJuly 11, 2012 at 7:24 AM PT
Petz was jumping up and down while Ferry tried to undo the results of the vote for arts commission. Very awkward watching him and the city attorney decide how to undo the result. TBB should have called for a point of order and a reading of the council vote by the city clerk. The motion to reconsider should not be allowed after Ferry cast his vote.
IHeartSCVJuly 11, 2012 at 12:16 AM PT
The Signal’s editorial board actually wrote a very strong condemnation of Ferry and Ender for not taking commission appointments seriously enough in 2008: “Councilman Frank Ferry, who is the principal at Bishop Alemany High School, chose his secretary of six years, Janell Cornell, as his top pick for a city of Santa Clarita parks commission seat. Ferry said Cornell was one of several applicants he knows personally. He said one applicant is his neighbor. And his son is best friends with applicant Matthew Halliday’s son, he said. Seconds later, Councilwoman Laurie Ender named Halliday as her choice for the parks commission. “His son is my son’s best friend, Frank. So there,” she said. So there, indeed. We would like to think – and we suspect others in this city would like to think – that a longstanding relationship with a council member is not what gets a person a seat on the critical Planning Commission or Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission. But the childish show of insider-ism and one-upsmanship seen Tuesday night in Council Chambers smacks of small-town cronyism, legitimizing scrutiny and criticism of the City Council. After such a display, council members can hardly be surprised when constituents question their honor.” http://www.the-signal.com/archives/2887/
PetzJuly 11, 2012 at 12:23 AM PT
So San Bernandino is following Stockton and Mammoth Lakes into Chapter 9. Still no mention of the reform movements in San Jose-Costa Mesa-and San Diego in our council chambers. For the moment we have the luxury of celebrating open space in Elsmere , fighting over board appointments and “public ” control of the library. Fiddling around while Rome burns….that’s how Petz sees it.
Timothy Myers SR.July 11, 2012 at 2:58 AM PT
Most disturbing about San Berdu is the allegation of the new City manager that former City employees “falsified” financial reports for sixteen years that hid the coming storm. Say what you will about Stockton and Mammoth Lakes but they were transparent enough that people knew it was bad and this was definitely a possibility. San Berdu calls to mind the OC bankruptcy where it hit like a lightening strike due to hidden investment losses. I think the folks on Valencia Blvd know how to do their sums, but the current crop of elected council members don’t have the background to see if the SC budget numbers are even directionally correct.
Coastal SageJuly 11, 2012 at 5:48 AM PT
Tim I believe that the City of Santa Clarita has sufficient cash to pay its bills. However, as you know I have wanted my friends and acquaintances in Santa Clarita who know how to “read the numbers” to take a careful look at the City’s short term and long term cash flow projections, which we both know do not form part of a city’s formal financial accounting to the public. Your comment above is entirely appropriate. As a lawyer working on “municipal bond deals” I learned long ago that the amount of money a public agency can borrow (issue bonds for) is premised on future cash flow projections which are highly speculative. Public agencies who want to borrow lots of money hire “Financial Consultants” to prepare the favorable cash flow projections, and then the “bond underwriters” (like Stone & Youngberg or Merrill Lynch) are supposed to check the assumptions on which those cash flow projections are based, and do their own analysis of the likelihood of the municipal securities being fully repaid. That analysis is supposed to be done for the benefit of the future bond buyers. There’s a fascinating, “binding on everyone”, U.S. District Court opinion arising out of the Orange County bankruptcy which describes, in detail, how Merrill Lynch and its executive assigned to the Orange County account breached their fiduciary duty to that county’s municipal securities holder/creditors by failing to do that independent analysis. Back when Centre Pointe was just a gleam in Larry Rasmussen’s eye, the city’s municipal securities underwriter determined that the real estate taxes on the undeveloped project would not produce sufficient revenue to allow the city to make payments on muncipal bonds which would have been used to finance the building of infrastructure in Centre Pointe. (Quite obviously that problem solved itself as demand for buildings in Centre Pointe increased.) I’ve seen the City of Tehachapi deal with the effects of a default in payment of special assessments for an entire project whose infrastructure was financed by “muncipal bonds”. I’ve seen the white shoe California municipal bond lawyers from Downtown LA get very upset about the risky bond deals put together by small bond law firms throughout the state, and seen them warn that municipal securities financing was being “abused” in California. We’ve all seen that several years ago Goldman Sachs set up a massive municipal securities deal to secretly refinance the Greek government debt, which many people say was illegal under the then-existing Euro zone treaties. That deal is the one which is now cratering the Greek economy. I’ve seen the same people (“municipal bond industry professionals”) who, historically, have put together Castaic Lake Water Agency’s municipal securities financings, be the people in charge of the Las Vegas Monorail’s bond issuance, which was based on overly optimistic cash flow projections. The Monorail defaulted on its bonds because of poor ridership numbers and high operating costs, (i.e. bad cash flow projections,) and the Monorail filed its own bankruptcy. The consequence of that bond default was to bankrupt the national bond insurer, Ambac, which in turn caused many other localities to have to find replacement bond insurance at great cost, or risk default on their own bonds. When the City of Santa Clarita decided to “privatize” the County libraries, City staff was talking about cash flow from the library portion of ordinary real estate taxes being sufficient to support a borrowing of $X. Cam Noltemeyer, who spent many years as an actuary and who is married to a CPA, understood what that meant, and expressed her concern about the not-very-public, back of the envelope financial projections by the City staff, which none of the Council members would have any ability to understand or evaluate in terms of accuracy or likelihood of those projections being accurate over the long term. Cam tried to get the staff’s calculation worksheets, and she was stonewalled. I used a Federally mandated data base to look for municipal securities prospectuses (“Official Statements”) for Santa Clarita’s borrowings, and there were no filings to be found. The Newhall Land bankruptcy case ended with the old, dead company owing the City of Santa Clarita close to $1 Million in reimbursements for road construction costs which the City “fronted” under Newhall’s land use entitlements which should have been untouchable by Newhall Land’s Delaware Bankruptcy Court judge, under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, in its Chapter 11 Plan supplements, Newhall Land chose to treat the City as an “unsecured creditor” and the City did not aggressively pursue its 10th Amendment rights, in contrast to what the City of Oakland did in the SunCal/Lehman entities bankruptcy. Instead, the simple question of whether the City of Santa Clarita ever got paid 100 Cents on the Dollar for its claim was swept under a rug. In contrast, “normal” public agencies throughout California (e.g. San Clemente, Palmdale, Castaic School District) are screaming to the high heavens about the SunCal/Lehman Chapter 11 Plan’s trying to stiff them out of what they are owed. (California’s Democrat Attorney General is taking a dive on that dispute, but that’s another story being written by a friend of mine who writes for a well known newspaper in New York.) The bottom line is that in Santa Clarita, it pays to have friends in City Hall when money is tight and the City is one’s creditor. The formal written audit reports of the City of Santa Clarita are footnoted by the City’s auditors with a large number of boilerplate statements, in essence saying that they are not in control of the City’s financial planning for the future. My gut instinct tells me that the City of Santa Clarita is not nearing a Chapter 9 bankruptcy filing, as the City of San Bernardino is. However, at most there are probably 3 to 4 people who truly understand the City Santa Clarita’s ever changing finances, and they are Ken Pulskamp and his senior staff…and no one else. The 5 Council members and Santa Clarita’s residents and creditors are at their mercy and the City staff say “Trust us”. In one memorable episode of the Sopranos, Tony’s wife Carmela is haranguing Tony to invest money in publicly traded companies so she will have a reliable income stream if he suddenly dies or goes to jail. Tony utters a nearly unforgettable line in sum and substance that ‘Only the people inside know the real numbers, and they can’t be trusted’.
Timothy Myers SR.July 11, 2012 at 12:24 AM PT
This is off the hook! I could see the other members balking at putting Alan Ferdman on the Planning Commission (some might say the only one that really matters) as a gift of a relatively high profile position to an all but announced candidate to unseat at least one of the incumbents out of pure self interest, but the Parks Commission? Also the process of refusing a second and just sitting there stone faced smacks of some kind of politburo activity. I agree with others that TBB should just keep reappointing Thomas and Ferdman and playing out this continued psychodrama for the next 20 months until the next election, leaving the seats vacant and just accumulating the embarrassment. I would put the over/under at 2 for the number of council meetings that Ferry can resist TBB’s provocations before blowing up.
Fed Up N SCVJuly 11, 2012 at 12:43 AM PT
If the council won’t approve Al Ferdman for Parks Commission, then let’s put him on city council! Ferdman 2014!!
David GaunyJuly 11, 2012 at 2:55 PM PT
Agreed. 20 months of duplicate agendized appointments. The perfectly organized event this sitting council demands with the unabated coaster-throwing (in Tim’s words) it deserves for the unforgivable flaccidity.
BertaJuly 11, 2012 at 4:13 PM PT
Mike, I find your comment of “There’s no use.” in response to my request for clarification dismissive and disrespectful. I am sorry you feel that way and disappointed by your response.