This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident. It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.
Prop. 13 - LIMITS ON PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT. SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF EXISTING BUILDINGS. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT - Support. Seems like a good way to encourage building owners to retrofit buildings that are in need of seismic upgrades.
Prop. 14 - ELECTIONS. INCREASES RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN PRIMARY ELECTIONS. Support. Hopefully, this will increase voter participation, which is lacking.
Prop. 15 - CALIFORNIA FAIR ELECTIONS ACT Support. I like the idea of taking politicians out of the constant fundraising cycle. This pilot program might lead to more extensive voluntary public funding, reducing the need for our elected officials to leave their work in Sacramento to hit the fundraising trail.
Prop. 16 - IMPOSES NEW TWO-THIRDS VOTER APPROVAL REQUIREMENT FOR LOCAL PUBLIC ELECTRICITY PROVIDERS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Oppose. Cal Chamber got this one wrong. This is just an attempt at a monopoly grab by PG & E. If a City wants to create its own utility, it should be able to based on the votes of the elected officials, who were put in office by the residents to represent them.
Prop. 17 - ALLOWS AUTO INSURANCE COMPANIES TO BASE THEIR PRICES IN PART ON A DRIVER'S HISTORY OF INSURANCE COVERAGE. INITIATIVE STATUTE Oppose. If the insurance companies are behind it as much as Mercury is behind this one, I'm thinking it's probably in THEIR best interests, not mine.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Post-Election, 2010
Post-Election, 2010
By Bill Coburn
This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident. It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.
Okay, it’s been a couple days. Frankly, I think what I posted on my blog more or less said it all: Yes, Yes and YES! Congratulations to our next Mayor, Joe Mosca, and to new council members Josh Moran and Nancy Walsh. The good people of Sierra Madre have spoken, and I think what they've said is: Enough is Enough!
Thirty-nine words pretty much covered it. But I’ve had people contacting me asking when I was going to put my take on the election up on the website. As I said, I thought I did. But one of the people in particular who contacted me, a long-time resident (for whom I have a great deal of respect) that no longer lives in town, e-mailed me that she was “eager to see your election report.” And the more I thought about it, I realized, if anybody can turn 39 words into 2,000, it’s me, and if that’s what people want, I’m okay with that. Besides, in a year and a half, and then again in three and a half, as the election year campaigns pick up, I may want something a little more detailed to refer back to than the thirty-nine words I’ve already posted.
Add to that the fact that my silence was not matched by the other guy in town that writes more than he should, and I decided to put a couple things down to say what I think about the election.
Obviously, I’m happy with the outcome, having endorsed the three candidates that will be seated on the council a week from this coming Tuesday night. Last Tuesday, when people asked me what I predicted the outcome would be, I told them frankly that I didn’t have a clue. I was concerned, in fact. While I don’t think I told anybody this specifically, I kind of thought that we were going to see Mosca, Crawford and Watts seated, though I did think it possible that I might be underestimating the power of Josh’s having grown up here in town.
But I had another underlying feeling that made me a little more hopeful. I’ve heard the last couple of elections that there’s a silent majority in town, folks who don’t necessarily get out and beat the drums, but a majority that includes people whose opinions are respected and who have some influence with their fellow residents. It was my feeling that those folks had been a little complacent the last couple elections, and I kind of had a feeling that the tone of this campaign had been such that these folks might just have been roused out of their complacency, and that we might just see their influence in the outcome. I think I mentioned this to a couple of people. But I think most people that I talked about it with, I expressed concern, because I really thought there was a good possibility that Maryann, Don and John were going to have a majority for the next two, if not four years, and I frankly thought we’d be better off if that didn’t happen. And even though I had the underlying hope I discussed earlier, I was afraid I’d jinx it by actually expecting it.
In 1974, Garry Trudeau and Doonesbury were at the height of their popularity. During this time frame, there were a series of cartoons in which blocks were being added to a wall in front of the White House, with the block wall eventually completely obscuring the White House. After Nixon resigned, if I remember correctly, the cartoon showed the White House, wall removed, with birds flying by, a rainbow, sun shining, a brand new day. I feel like that’s how many Sierra Madreans felt Wednesday, based on my conversations with people. And before the critics start posting, no, I’m not saying a City Council election was comparable to the President of the most powerful country in the world resigning, I’m saying the feelings some people had Wednesday reminded me of feelings people might have had in 1974, as represented in a comic strip. See the difference?
Why did the election go the way it went?
I think there were a few reasons. First of all, I think the winners deserved to win. I think there are a lot of people in town who have respect for Mosca, Moran and Walsh. Even though Joe pissed some people off in town right after he was elected, there ARE some people in town who have actually gotten over it. They recognize Joe for who he is, a hard working, good guy, who really likes this town and wants to give back. Josh grew up here, and has a lot of family, and that familiarity coupled with the support group that is his family and friends, had a substantial influence. He also has worked for the City, and volunteered for several years on commissions and committees. Nancy is not as well known, but she has been a volunteer in this town for a few years, sitting on and chairing the Senior Community Commission. And while I don’t know if she would have won the seat running individually, she was aligned with a slate that, it turns out, had the most support.
Secondly, I think that people didn’t like seeing people they perceive as good people, as givers, people who volunteer and work hard for the community, being maligned in the manner that they were. The derisive comments on Crawford’s blog were a little too much for some people. Calling Nancy “What’s her name”, turning Josh’s surname into moron instead of Moran, and the out and out verbal attacks on Joe, just weren’t smart moves when you’re trying to get people to support you. And I’m not saying that John Crawford did those things, for the most part it was his supporters that did it. As I said in one of my editorials, you’re judged by the company you keep, and I think (actually I know) people judged John by the things his supporters said. But it wasn’t just people judging John by the company he keeps. I think a lot of people didn’t want to align THEMSELVES with the people that were supporting John in that manner, they didn’t want people judging THEM as people that were willing to act in the manner that some (not all) of John’s supporters were acting.
Which brings me to a tactical mistake that I think was a major contributor to the Crawford/Alcorn/Watts slate losing the election. John should not have campaigned as a blog. I know that if he hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been able to editorialize in the way that I did. First of all, much of the opinion on his site, even in the articles he posts, are actually other people’s opinions, supplemented by his own. A lot of John’s articles cite other blogs, paragraphs at a time of his articles are pulled directly from other websites, blogs or print media, and then he throws in a few lines of why he thinks the people are right (or wrong). Secondly, John’s careful to use implication and conjecture as tools, and that leads to much of what he is criticized for. He doesn’t come out and attack people anywhere near as much as he is accused of doing it. He’ll frequently say things that will incite others to post things. He’s kind of like a shock jock, to a degree. He says things for a reaction, and his supporters are generally willing to oblige. And it was those posts by his supporters, sometimes in reaction to John’s articles, sometimes not, that I think really hurt John with voters.
Another thing that hurt the C/A/W camp was unsubstantiated allegations. To hear that Mosca was in the back pocket of the developers and just dancing at the ends of the strings of Sacramento’s marionettists, that Josh was a puppet of the real estate industry out to enrich his real estate industry family members, that Nancy was handpicked by John Buchanan to further his pro-development agenda, and that all three candidates, were, along with Buchanan, pro-development fiends, without anything anywhere to back it up, I think, left a sour taste in some folks mouth. It just didn’t ring true. All of the candidates made it quite clear that they were against four-story buildings downtown, yet we still kept hearing that that’s what we were going to get if we elected them into office.
I think that the Mayor’s letter asking residents to elect the C/A/W slate to help her stay the course and move forward her agenda, backfired. And while there were some who perceived it as problematic on its own merits, it became a bigger problem after the City Council meeting of March 23rd. There were many people who felt the Mayor bullied Joe to further her own political agenda at that meeting, and who felt that if this was the course that was going to be stayed, it might be better to set sail in another direction. I sent a letter to the editor of the Mountain Views News about that meeting, but never discussed that meeting on my site, I don’t think. So for those who didn’t read my letter, here’s my take: The Mayor has to walk a fine line between allowing people their right to free speech, and ensuring that meetings don’t get out of hand due to personal attacks. It’s a difficult task, and in this case, I think only one person really crossed that line. And I think she REALLY crossed that line. I think Mr. Mosca should have yielded the floor when asked to do so, and the Mayor was right to gavel him down and warn him that he might be removed if he didn’t respond to her requests for order. That said, I think that if I were Mr. Mosca, I’d have done the same thing he did, as I think the Mayor should have been more pro-active in limiting that speaker’s attack, and I think she also should have allowed Mosca to speak with the City Attorney to determine if he had the right to respond, even though Public Comment is generally a one way conversation. If I felt I had a legal right to respond to someone I felt was personally attacking me verbally, and that right was being taken from me, I’d have been vocal about it too.
But that’s just my take. Even though I think the Mayor was within her rights to gavel over Mr. Mosca and to threaten him with removal from the Chambers, there were many people who didn’t feel that way. And I think it’s highly ironic that after numerous calls on the Tattler and at City Council meetings by people that supported Crawford’s candidacy for more regular replays of the Council meetings on Channel 3, it was, to a degree, repeated replays of the Mayor’s actions that contributed to some folks choosing to vote against his slate. And I know that it happened, I’ve had people tell me that it changed their vote. I had one person, a senior, tell me that she would NEVER vote for anyone that Mayor MacGillivray told her she should vote for.
How did John Crawford get 1,000 votes? Well, actually, it’s probably not surprising. I was of the opinion that Crawford “won” the candidate forum sponsored by the Chamber. Why? Because for a lot of people, that was their first exposure to him, and the people who’d heard from his critics how awful he was were most likely favorably impressed when he came off as quite reasonable at that forum. And I think that many of the people that voted for him were people who’s homes he visited during the campaign, and who heard him say that he was responsible for the eminent domain being on the ballot, and who were told that thanks to him, there was an ordinance in place that was going to bring the Skilled Nursing Facility folks to justice for allowing their property to go downhill while it sits empty. Both of these are issues that resonated with folks in town, but many of these people had no idea what was happening on his blog. I think Crawford’s vote tally would have been significantly lower if more people perceived him as the blogger, and fewer as the guy who helped make SNF and ED issues in this campaign. Credit where credit is due, though, he was instrumental on both these issues.
I was glad to see that Pat Alcorn fared well, even though she didn’t win a seat on the Council. She conducted herself with class, was knowledgeable on the issues, and frankly, might have done even better had she not been part of a slate which I believe dragged her down. Of the non-winning candidates, she was behind only Don Watts, the incumbent, and by fewer than 150 votes. Incumbents generally have a distinct advantage due to name recognition, and Pat was right there with him. And I think she did a great job on that mailer we received days before the election. It would be nice to see something like that come out from sitting Council members a couple times a year, as Pat told me she planned to do if she had been elected.
Where do we go from here?
Well, I think Joe’s going to be mayor. I’m curious as to whether the Mayor will nominate him. It would be a good political move for her to say, since she will still have the gavel, that she recognizes the will of the people, that in the spirit of reconciliation, she congratulates him and the new council members on their win, and that in that spirit, she hereby nominates him. Some people with whom I’ve spoken about this just can’t see her doing that, saying they think it would be too much of a backpedal for her. I really don’t know. This would be a smart thing to do politically. She’d be perceived as doing the right thing, even if she actually isn’t doing the right thing because it’s the right thing (who knows her motivation but her?) But she’s a woman of convictions, and it will be interesting to see if she chooses to do the politically smart thing, or if she stands by her convictions. I personally would like to see John Buchanan have the opportunity to nominate his friend. But we’ll find that out in a couple weeks.
Crawford has, after a one day hiatus, brought the Tattler back, and has a “seriously, is there anything left to lose” attitude. He’s continuing to see things in his own unique way. For instance, his first day back, an article that said: “But when it came to the City Council, Sierra Madre voters soundly rejected the Tattler style - snarky, funny, eloquent, nasty - by giving the Tattler's author, John Crawford, the least votes of any major candidate.” generated this headline: “The Pasadena Star News Praises the Tattler.” Not how I think most people would have interpreted those words.
On election night, I heard one of the folks who will be sitting on the Council for the next four years telling someone that the Council’s job now is to bring Mayor MacGillivray back into the fold. In essence, this person said that rather than ostracize or criticize her, the Council needs to be inclusive, because if they can get her working WITH them, the council can only get even more accomplished. Of course, the other side of the coin on that is that if Ms. MacGillivray chooses not to work collaboratively with the other members of the Council when they have attempted to work with her, it will reflect poorly on her.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that four years from now, we’re not going to see 4-story buildings on Sierra Madre Blvd., or Baldwin. There won’t be a Walmart where the Skilled Nursing Facility is, we won’t have a MacDonald’s or a Jack in the Box, and we won’t have a stoplight either, barring a tragic accident that makes the City (and its residents) look at things with a different perspective. In short, I don’t think that the catastrophes predicted to happen if Mosca, Moran and Walsh get elected are going to happen. I think Sierra Madre will be pretty much the same as it is now.
But I hope there’s one change, and it’s going to take a lot of effort from both sides, which frankly, I don’t see happening. But I’ll hope for it anyway. Let’s tone down the rhetoric. Let’s try to stick to the facts. Let’s try to treat each other like we’re ALL worthy of respect (even if you don’t think so, TRY). Let’s be a village.
While there’s a lot of talk about the Tattler and the fact that even after being more or less rebuked by the residents of this town it’s come back out swinging, I’m also a little disappointed in the Weekly. In my opinion, the Sierra Madre Weekly has, in its election coverage, taken some unnecessary potshots. I think some of their election news coverage read like Opinion pieces. News coverage should be fact based coverage, Opinion should be clearly marked as Editorial. It’s one thing if opinion is offered in a columnist’s column, an editorial (marked editorial), or an Op-ed commentary (marked Op-ed). But when it is written into what should be “Just the Facts” news coverage, you’re crossing a line. And much of what I read in the paper this week wasn’t categorized as Opinion or Editorial, and could easily have been perceived as being news reporting, yet it was full of opinion. And frankly, some of the opinions in this week’s paper, to my mind, lacked the civility and respect that the candidates (and the paper itself) have been calling for as we approached the election. So here’s hoping that the Weekly will swing its pendulum back to its pre-election news approach.
Now I know I’m going to take some hits from people who will say that they feel it’s hypocritical for me to call for toning down the rhetoric and treating people with more respect, when, they will say, I was one of the people that was smearing their candidate. All I can say is go back and read my editorials again. The harshest thing I said was that statements that were being made were inaccurate, and that two of the candidates had, in my opinion misled voters. I don’t consider that smearing. You may, but I don’t.
And if you do, you’re entitled to your opinion. But in this case, and I’m not saying I agree with you, your opinion is about something that you perceive to have happened in the past. It’s okay if we disagree, different people perceive things in different ways, that’s life. I’m hoping that, as we move forward, we can try to be a little nicer to each other, even as we disagree. I will try. Will you?
Okay, I was wrong. I can turn thirty-nine words into thirty-two hundred, not two thousand…
By Bill Coburn
This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident. It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.
Okay, it’s been a couple days. Frankly, I think what I posted on my blog more or less said it all: Yes, Yes and YES! Congratulations to our next Mayor, Joe Mosca, and to new council members Josh Moran and Nancy Walsh. The good people of Sierra Madre have spoken, and I think what they've said is: Enough is Enough!
Thirty-nine words pretty much covered it. But I’ve had people contacting me asking when I was going to put my take on the election up on the website. As I said, I thought I did. But one of the people in particular who contacted me, a long-time resident (for whom I have a great deal of respect) that no longer lives in town, e-mailed me that she was “eager to see your election report.” And the more I thought about it, I realized, if anybody can turn 39 words into 2,000, it’s me, and if that’s what people want, I’m okay with that. Besides, in a year and a half, and then again in three and a half, as the election year campaigns pick up, I may want something a little more detailed to refer back to than the thirty-nine words I’ve already posted.
Add to that the fact that my silence was not matched by the other guy in town that writes more than he should, and I decided to put a couple things down to say what I think about the election.
Obviously, I’m happy with the outcome, having endorsed the three candidates that will be seated on the council a week from this coming Tuesday night. Last Tuesday, when people asked me what I predicted the outcome would be, I told them frankly that I didn’t have a clue. I was concerned, in fact. While I don’t think I told anybody this specifically, I kind of thought that we were going to see Mosca, Crawford and Watts seated, though I did think it possible that I might be underestimating the power of Josh’s having grown up here in town.
But I had another underlying feeling that made me a little more hopeful. I’ve heard the last couple of elections that there’s a silent majority in town, folks who don’t necessarily get out and beat the drums, but a majority that includes people whose opinions are respected and who have some influence with their fellow residents. It was my feeling that those folks had been a little complacent the last couple elections, and I kind of had a feeling that the tone of this campaign had been such that these folks might just have been roused out of their complacency, and that we might just see their influence in the outcome. I think I mentioned this to a couple of people. But I think most people that I talked about it with, I expressed concern, because I really thought there was a good possibility that Maryann, Don and John were going to have a majority for the next two, if not four years, and I frankly thought we’d be better off if that didn’t happen. And even though I had the underlying hope I discussed earlier, I was afraid I’d jinx it by actually expecting it.
In 1974, Garry Trudeau and Doonesbury were at the height of their popularity. During this time frame, there were a series of cartoons in which blocks were being added to a wall in front of the White House, with the block wall eventually completely obscuring the White House. After Nixon resigned, if I remember correctly, the cartoon showed the White House, wall removed, with birds flying by, a rainbow, sun shining, a brand new day. I feel like that’s how many Sierra Madreans felt Wednesday, based on my conversations with people. And before the critics start posting, no, I’m not saying a City Council election was comparable to the President of the most powerful country in the world resigning, I’m saying the feelings some people had Wednesday reminded me of feelings people might have had in 1974, as represented in a comic strip. See the difference?
Why did the election go the way it went?
I think there were a few reasons. First of all, I think the winners deserved to win. I think there are a lot of people in town who have respect for Mosca, Moran and Walsh. Even though Joe pissed some people off in town right after he was elected, there ARE some people in town who have actually gotten over it. They recognize Joe for who he is, a hard working, good guy, who really likes this town and wants to give back. Josh grew up here, and has a lot of family, and that familiarity coupled with the support group that is his family and friends, had a substantial influence. He also has worked for the City, and volunteered for several years on commissions and committees. Nancy is not as well known, but she has been a volunteer in this town for a few years, sitting on and chairing the Senior Community Commission. And while I don’t know if she would have won the seat running individually, she was aligned with a slate that, it turns out, had the most support.
Secondly, I think that people didn’t like seeing people they perceive as good people, as givers, people who volunteer and work hard for the community, being maligned in the manner that they were. The derisive comments on Crawford’s blog were a little too much for some people. Calling Nancy “What’s her name”, turning Josh’s surname into moron instead of Moran, and the out and out verbal attacks on Joe, just weren’t smart moves when you’re trying to get people to support you. And I’m not saying that John Crawford did those things, for the most part it was his supporters that did it. As I said in one of my editorials, you’re judged by the company you keep, and I think (actually I know) people judged John by the things his supporters said. But it wasn’t just people judging John by the company he keeps. I think a lot of people didn’t want to align THEMSELVES with the people that were supporting John in that manner, they didn’t want people judging THEM as people that were willing to act in the manner that some (not all) of John’s supporters were acting.
Which brings me to a tactical mistake that I think was a major contributor to the Crawford/Alcorn/Watts slate losing the election. John should not have campaigned as a blog. I know that if he hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been able to editorialize in the way that I did. First of all, much of the opinion on his site, even in the articles he posts, are actually other people’s opinions, supplemented by his own. A lot of John’s articles cite other blogs, paragraphs at a time of his articles are pulled directly from other websites, blogs or print media, and then he throws in a few lines of why he thinks the people are right (or wrong). Secondly, John’s careful to use implication and conjecture as tools, and that leads to much of what he is criticized for. He doesn’t come out and attack people anywhere near as much as he is accused of doing it. He’ll frequently say things that will incite others to post things. He’s kind of like a shock jock, to a degree. He says things for a reaction, and his supporters are generally willing to oblige. And it was those posts by his supporters, sometimes in reaction to John’s articles, sometimes not, that I think really hurt John with voters.
Another thing that hurt the C/A/W camp was unsubstantiated allegations. To hear that Mosca was in the back pocket of the developers and just dancing at the ends of the strings of Sacramento’s marionettists, that Josh was a puppet of the real estate industry out to enrich his real estate industry family members, that Nancy was handpicked by John Buchanan to further his pro-development agenda, and that all three candidates, were, along with Buchanan, pro-development fiends, without anything anywhere to back it up, I think, left a sour taste in some folks mouth. It just didn’t ring true. All of the candidates made it quite clear that they were against four-story buildings downtown, yet we still kept hearing that that’s what we were going to get if we elected them into office.
I think that the Mayor’s letter asking residents to elect the C/A/W slate to help her stay the course and move forward her agenda, backfired. And while there were some who perceived it as problematic on its own merits, it became a bigger problem after the City Council meeting of March 23rd. There were many people who felt the Mayor bullied Joe to further her own political agenda at that meeting, and who felt that if this was the course that was going to be stayed, it might be better to set sail in another direction. I sent a letter to the editor of the Mountain Views News about that meeting, but never discussed that meeting on my site, I don’t think. So for those who didn’t read my letter, here’s my take: The Mayor has to walk a fine line between allowing people their right to free speech, and ensuring that meetings don’t get out of hand due to personal attacks. It’s a difficult task, and in this case, I think only one person really crossed that line. And I think she REALLY crossed that line. I think Mr. Mosca should have yielded the floor when asked to do so, and the Mayor was right to gavel him down and warn him that he might be removed if he didn’t respond to her requests for order. That said, I think that if I were Mr. Mosca, I’d have done the same thing he did, as I think the Mayor should have been more pro-active in limiting that speaker’s attack, and I think she also should have allowed Mosca to speak with the City Attorney to determine if he had the right to respond, even though Public Comment is generally a one way conversation. If I felt I had a legal right to respond to someone I felt was personally attacking me verbally, and that right was being taken from me, I’d have been vocal about it too.
But that’s just my take. Even though I think the Mayor was within her rights to gavel over Mr. Mosca and to threaten him with removal from the Chambers, there were many people who didn’t feel that way. And I think it’s highly ironic that after numerous calls on the Tattler and at City Council meetings by people that supported Crawford’s candidacy for more regular replays of the Council meetings on Channel 3, it was, to a degree, repeated replays of the Mayor’s actions that contributed to some folks choosing to vote against his slate. And I know that it happened, I’ve had people tell me that it changed their vote. I had one person, a senior, tell me that she would NEVER vote for anyone that Mayor MacGillivray told her she should vote for.
How did John Crawford get 1,000 votes? Well, actually, it’s probably not surprising. I was of the opinion that Crawford “won” the candidate forum sponsored by the Chamber. Why? Because for a lot of people, that was their first exposure to him, and the people who’d heard from his critics how awful he was were most likely favorably impressed when he came off as quite reasonable at that forum. And I think that many of the people that voted for him were people who’s homes he visited during the campaign, and who heard him say that he was responsible for the eminent domain being on the ballot, and who were told that thanks to him, there was an ordinance in place that was going to bring the Skilled Nursing Facility folks to justice for allowing their property to go downhill while it sits empty. Both of these are issues that resonated with folks in town, but many of these people had no idea what was happening on his blog. I think Crawford’s vote tally would have been significantly lower if more people perceived him as the blogger, and fewer as the guy who helped make SNF and ED issues in this campaign. Credit where credit is due, though, he was instrumental on both these issues.
I was glad to see that Pat Alcorn fared well, even though she didn’t win a seat on the Council. She conducted herself with class, was knowledgeable on the issues, and frankly, might have done even better had she not been part of a slate which I believe dragged her down. Of the non-winning candidates, she was behind only Don Watts, the incumbent, and by fewer than 150 votes. Incumbents generally have a distinct advantage due to name recognition, and Pat was right there with him. And I think she did a great job on that mailer we received days before the election. It would be nice to see something like that come out from sitting Council members a couple times a year, as Pat told me she planned to do if she had been elected.
Where do we go from here?
Well, I think Joe’s going to be mayor. I’m curious as to whether the Mayor will nominate him. It would be a good political move for her to say, since she will still have the gavel, that she recognizes the will of the people, that in the spirit of reconciliation, she congratulates him and the new council members on their win, and that in that spirit, she hereby nominates him. Some people with whom I’ve spoken about this just can’t see her doing that, saying they think it would be too much of a backpedal for her. I really don’t know. This would be a smart thing to do politically. She’d be perceived as doing the right thing, even if she actually isn’t doing the right thing because it’s the right thing (who knows her motivation but her?) But she’s a woman of convictions, and it will be interesting to see if she chooses to do the politically smart thing, or if she stands by her convictions. I personally would like to see John Buchanan have the opportunity to nominate his friend. But we’ll find that out in a couple weeks.
Crawford has, after a one day hiatus, brought the Tattler back, and has a “seriously, is there anything left to lose” attitude. He’s continuing to see things in his own unique way. For instance, his first day back, an article that said: “But when it came to the City Council, Sierra Madre voters soundly rejected the Tattler style - snarky, funny, eloquent, nasty - by giving the Tattler's author, John Crawford, the least votes of any major candidate.” generated this headline: “The Pasadena Star News Praises the Tattler.” Not how I think most people would have interpreted those words.
On election night, I heard one of the folks who will be sitting on the Council for the next four years telling someone that the Council’s job now is to bring Mayor MacGillivray back into the fold. In essence, this person said that rather than ostracize or criticize her, the Council needs to be inclusive, because if they can get her working WITH them, the council can only get even more accomplished. Of course, the other side of the coin on that is that if Ms. MacGillivray chooses not to work collaboratively with the other members of the Council when they have attempted to work with her, it will reflect poorly on her.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that four years from now, we’re not going to see 4-story buildings on Sierra Madre Blvd., or Baldwin. There won’t be a Walmart where the Skilled Nursing Facility is, we won’t have a MacDonald’s or a Jack in the Box, and we won’t have a stoplight either, barring a tragic accident that makes the City (and its residents) look at things with a different perspective. In short, I don’t think that the catastrophes predicted to happen if Mosca, Moran and Walsh get elected are going to happen. I think Sierra Madre will be pretty much the same as it is now.
But I hope there’s one change, and it’s going to take a lot of effort from both sides, which frankly, I don’t see happening. But I’ll hope for it anyway. Let’s tone down the rhetoric. Let’s try to stick to the facts. Let’s try to treat each other like we’re ALL worthy of respect (even if you don’t think so, TRY). Let’s be a village.
While there’s a lot of talk about the Tattler and the fact that even after being more or less rebuked by the residents of this town it’s come back out swinging, I’m also a little disappointed in the Weekly. In my opinion, the Sierra Madre Weekly has, in its election coverage, taken some unnecessary potshots. I think some of their election news coverage read like Opinion pieces. News coverage should be fact based coverage, Opinion should be clearly marked as Editorial. It’s one thing if opinion is offered in a columnist’s column, an editorial (marked editorial), or an Op-ed commentary (marked Op-ed). But when it is written into what should be “Just the Facts” news coverage, you’re crossing a line. And much of what I read in the paper this week wasn’t categorized as Opinion or Editorial, and could easily have been perceived as being news reporting, yet it was full of opinion. And frankly, some of the opinions in this week’s paper, to my mind, lacked the civility and respect that the candidates (and the paper itself) have been calling for as we approached the election. So here’s hoping that the Weekly will swing its pendulum back to its pre-election news approach.
Now I know I’m going to take some hits from people who will say that they feel it’s hypocritical for me to call for toning down the rhetoric and treating people with more respect, when, they will say, I was one of the people that was smearing their candidate. All I can say is go back and read my editorials again. The harshest thing I said was that statements that were being made were inaccurate, and that two of the candidates had, in my opinion misled voters. I don’t consider that smearing. You may, but I don’t.
And if you do, you’re entitled to your opinion. But in this case, and I’m not saying I agree with you, your opinion is about something that you perceive to have happened in the past. It’s okay if we disagree, different people perceive things in different ways, that’s life. I’m hoping that, as we move forward, we can try to be a little nicer to each other, even as we disagree. I will try. Will you?
Okay, I was wrong. I can turn thirty-nine words into thirty-two hundred, not two thousand…
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Yes, Yes and YES!!
Congratulations to our next Mayor, Joe Mosca, and to new council members Josh Moran and Nancy Walsh. The good people of Sierra Madre have spoken, and I think what they've said is: Enough is Enough!
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Crawford Turns Back on Supporters, Leaves FD Out in the Cold
Editorial by Bill Coburn
This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident. It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.
In a move that is being seen by many as an attempt at damage control, John Crawford yesterday announced that he is considering eliminating the comments section of his blog. He also changed the fundraising statement on his blog, removing the exhortation to “Send this blog to City Council” and replacing it with “Send John Crawford to City Council.”
Crawford posted the following statement on his site: ”Bill Coburn pointed out some comments left on this site regarding certain members of our Fire Department. He was right to do so as they were wrong. With over 12,000 comments having been left on this site, I am sure other unfortunate statements can be found as well. Recently the Pasadena Star News published an editorial lamenting some of the awful statements that get left in their public comments section. As has the Washington Post. Both are now considering doing away with the function altogether. I have always taken a very libertarian position on commenting to The Tattler. I never got into this to be anybody's net nanny, and I have only removed posts for obscenity or trolling. On the other hand, I might now be in a position where I might have to shut commenting down altogether. If you have a personal axe to grind with somebody, that is fine. But please, start a blog of your own and do it there. “
This statement was posted in direct response to an editorial that I wrote which I posted on my site last week and which was published in the Mountain Views News in last week’s edition, in which I posted statements that had appeared on Crawford’s blog that attacked the Sierra Madre Fire Department and the men and women that volunteer to staff the department. This was the second editorial I had written in which I pointed out that Crawford was requesting that voters send his blog to the City Council, which, in my mind, made the entire blog, not just Crawford, part of the election. In the article, I noted that Crawford had failed to say one word to defend our volunteers, and I questioned whether the election of the Crawford, Watts, Alcorn slate might lead to the end of our ninety-year old fire department.
Now Mr. Crawford has taken the unusual step of distancing himself from his supporters. Notable for me in Mr. Crawford’s statement are two things. One, the bulk of the statement deflects all blame for the issue as being standard operating procedure on blogs, by stating that the Tattler is no different than the Pasadena Star News (who Crawford has frequently berated on his site in the past, but with whom he now apparently feels a certain kinship), and the Washington Post, which have both expressed concern about the level of discourse in their comment section. It’s interesting to me that Mr. Crawford has not in the past, to my knowledge, expressed concern about the level of conversation on his blog. But as the election draws near, it appears he is concerned enough that his association with the comments on his site might impact the number of votes he receives, that he is willing to state that he “may” need to remove the comments, essentially turning his back on the views of the people that have supported him thus far in the race.
Of greater concern to me is the almost complete failure by Crawford to address the Fire Dept. issue. He said I was right to point out the comments “as they were wrong.” That’s it.
No apology to our volunteers for the statements that he allowed on his blog. No apology for failing to respond in the department’s/volunteer’s defense. No mention of whether or not he supports our Department, or wants to outsource Fire Suppression, an issue which will be taken up by the new Council within weeks of their being seated. We are still left to wonder whether Mr. Crawford supports our Department or wishes to see it end, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions) in budget expenses so that we will have a “professional” fire department, rather than volunteers.
Candidates Nancy Walsh, Josh Moran and incumbent Council member Joe Mosca have all assured me that A) they support our Fire Dept. in its current model; B) they wish to see the Dept. continue to maintain and improve upon its current level of expertise and professionalism, C) they are in support of doing whatever is necessary to make sure the Fire Department has the necessary equipment to maintain the standard of care now enjoyed by Sierra Madre residents, and D) short of the release of some unanticipated report that the Department is not living up to the public safety needs of the residents of Sierra Madre, they are against outsourcing Fire Suppression.
That (among other things) is why I will be voting for them.
This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident. It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.
In a move that is being seen by many as an attempt at damage control, John Crawford yesterday announced that he is considering eliminating the comments section of his blog. He also changed the fundraising statement on his blog, removing the exhortation to “Send this blog to City Council” and replacing it with “Send John Crawford to City Council.”
Crawford posted the following statement on his site: ”Bill Coburn pointed out some comments left on this site regarding certain members of our Fire Department. He was right to do so as they were wrong. With over 12,000 comments having been left on this site, I am sure other unfortunate statements can be found as well. Recently the Pasadena Star News published an editorial lamenting some of the awful statements that get left in their public comments section. As has the Washington Post. Both are now considering doing away with the function altogether. I have always taken a very libertarian position on commenting to The Tattler. I never got into this to be anybody's net nanny, and I have only removed posts for obscenity or trolling. On the other hand, I might now be in a position where I might have to shut commenting down altogether. If you have a personal axe to grind with somebody, that is fine. But please, start a blog of your own and do it there. “
This statement was posted in direct response to an editorial that I wrote which I posted on my site last week and which was published in the Mountain Views News in last week’s edition, in which I posted statements that had appeared on Crawford’s blog that attacked the Sierra Madre Fire Department and the men and women that volunteer to staff the department. This was the second editorial I had written in which I pointed out that Crawford was requesting that voters send his blog to the City Council, which, in my mind, made the entire blog, not just Crawford, part of the election. In the article, I noted that Crawford had failed to say one word to defend our volunteers, and I questioned whether the election of the Crawford, Watts, Alcorn slate might lead to the end of our ninety-year old fire department.
Now Mr. Crawford has taken the unusual step of distancing himself from his supporters. Notable for me in Mr. Crawford’s statement are two things. One, the bulk of the statement deflects all blame for the issue as being standard operating procedure on blogs, by stating that the Tattler is no different than the Pasadena Star News (who Crawford has frequently berated on his site in the past, but with whom he now apparently feels a certain kinship), and the Washington Post, which have both expressed concern about the level of discourse in their comment section. It’s interesting to me that Mr. Crawford has not in the past, to my knowledge, expressed concern about the level of conversation on his blog. But as the election draws near, it appears he is concerned enough that his association with the comments on his site might impact the number of votes he receives, that he is willing to state that he “may” need to remove the comments, essentially turning his back on the views of the people that have supported him thus far in the race.
Of greater concern to me is the almost complete failure by Crawford to address the Fire Dept. issue. He said I was right to point out the comments “as they were wrong.” That’s it.
No apology to our volunteers for the statements that he allowed on his blog. No apology for failing to respond in the department’s/volunteer’s defense. No mention of whether or not he supports our Department, or wants to outsource Fire Suppression, an issue which will be taken up by the new Council within weeks of their being seated. We are still left to wonder whether Mr. Crawford supports our Department or wishes to see it end, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions) in budget expenses so that we will have a “professional” fire department, rather than volunteers.
Candidates Nancy Walsh, Josh Moran and incumbent Council member Joe Mosca have all assured me that A) they support our Fire Dept. in its current model; B) they wish to see the Dept. continue to maintain and improve upon its current level of expertise and professionalism, C) they are in support of doing whatever is necessary to make sure the Fire Department has the necessary equipment to maintain the standard of care now enjoyed by Sierra Madre residents, and D) short of the release of some unanticipated report that the Department is not living up to the public safety needs of the residents of Sierra Madre, they are against outsourcing Fire Suppression.
That (among other things) is why I will be voting for them.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
SMFD Volunteers – Heroes or Hosers? Where Does Your Candidate Stand?
This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident. It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.
In the days following the Santa Anita Fire in April and May of 2008, the grateful residents of this town made no secret of their gratitude to the heroes who stood along the fire lines and fought back the flames that were destroying much of the hillside behind our village, manning fronts along the fire line, protecting their neighbors, and preventing the loss of even a single home, though the flames came within striking distance at multiple locations. Home made signs sprung up, letters to the editor were written, and Sierra Madreans stood up at local public meetings to express their undying gratitude to the volunteers of the Sierra Madre Fire Department.
Now, just two years later, some members of the community seem to have forgotten that it was these firefighting heroes, along with fire departments from all over California, that saved this town from destruction. Apparently for some, “gratitude” doesn’t have the shelf life it once did.
A few nights ago, bloggers posted comments on Sierra Madre Tattler, the blog operated by City Council candidate John Crawford, calling the Department “the laughing stock of the state.” Naturally, as often happens, the Department’s leader was the lightning rod. One blogger stated that SMFD Chief “Steve Heydorf (sic), who is currently getting paid over $120,000 a year to be our "volunteer" fire Chief does nothing except either sit on his fat butt all day in the Development Services department, or drive around in the shiny, brand new, command vehicle doing his personal errands.” Another poster said the department is “…just an 'elite' club of self-important windbags now, with questionable ability to battle a wastebasket fire.” Apparently, their ability to fight fires has undergone a rapid decline, having gone from a successful defense against walls of flame racing down hillsides toward our homes, to, according to this poster, an inability to extinguish a few burning pieces of paper.
It wasn’t just the Fire Department that took the hits, nearly half of your non-firefighting neighbors were accused of wanting their neighbors’ homes to burn: “I've heard the DIRTS say before, that they wish a huge fire would burn down every house in the canyon. No wonder why they had no problem with Lowe/Heydorf (sic)/Bamberger/Burnett taking Fire Dept. vehicles out of the city for personal use. Who needs a Fire Department when you're waiting for the whole city to burn up in flames.” For the unaware, DIRTS is the term used on Crawford’s blog to describe opponents of Measure V, the controversial ordinance limiting downtown development which in 2007 eked out a victory of fewer than 100 votes out of 3,500 votes cast. I’m not sure how disagreeing with someone over the methods used to limit growth downtown translates to a desire to see our historic canyon burn, but apparently, if this poster is to be believed, that’s what “the dirts” want.
But most of the negativity was directed at the Dept. itself: “For a long, long time they protected the city with a pair of 1950's era Crown fire engines just fine. There were a couple of 2nd or 3rd hand support vehicles. Now they have several late model engines, a ladder truck, ambulances, water tankers, suburbans, Tahoe, etc. etc. etc. All that's missing is a helicopter but I have a hunch they have tried to figure out how to get one!...Why do we give these guys any toy they want, whenever they want???” “The people in charge of the fire department are DIRTS, just like everyone in city Hall. They don't have a problem wasting our money because they would love to see Sierra Madre go bankrupt… If you're wondering why they're able to get away with it, it's because their boss, the city manager, is a died in the wool dirt, just like them.” The logic of that statement escapes me. Does this person really think it’s Elaine Aguilar’s goal to drive the city bankrupt, which would, of course, leave her without a job? But I digress. “Considering the sums of money that have been and are being wasted on that club, I would support contracting out fire services as well. For a few hundred thousand dollars more a year, we can get professional fire fighters, that can actually save lives and property, instead of a bunch of pictures of a burned out building and a death certificate.” Ouch.
The men and women of the Sierra Madre Fire Department spend long hours training WITH NO PAY so that they will be prepared to, WITH NO PAY, get up in the middle of the night to, WITH NO PAY, leave the warmth of their homes and the loving arms of their family and WITH NO PAY rush to your home and WITH NO PAY save our pets, our possessions, our property or in some cases, our lives. And they do this for false alarms and non-emergencies, as well. Did I mention that they do this, without pay? According to Salary.com, the median salary for a firefighter in the U.S. is in excess of $40,000/yr., significantly more than the $0 paid to all but three Sierra Madre firefighters.
One would expect that a City Council candidate in a town that has traditionally taken great pride in its fire department, which is now more than ninety years old, would say a few words in support of these brave men and women, if only to safeguard the votes of the members of the department and the residents who appreciate and support the department. Yet Crawford remained silent, allowing his supporters to denigrate the firefighters without a single word in their defense. Should his silence be interpreted as tacit agreement with the folks who would so willingly dishonor our hometown heroes? And by extension, the other members of the Crawford/Alcorn/Watts slate, since they “have like beliefs and ideas?”
Ordinarily, I wouldn’t feel that a person is responsible for things that other people say. However, in this election, Candidate John Crawford has asked voters to “Send this blog to the City Council” in his request for donations to fund his campaign. As such, I think it’s fair to consider the content of the entire blog, and not just Mr. Crawford’s personal observations on the blog, when considering whether or not to vote for Mr. Crawford, thereby sending “this blog to the City Council.”
Since Mr. Crawford chose to remain silent in the face of this criticism of one of Sierra Madre’s most revered institutions, I can’t say if that silence is agreement with his supporters, but it makes me wonder - should this slate become the majority on the City Council, will the Department survive to celebrate a centennial? A thought I hope Sierra Madre voters will consider when they cast their votes on April 13th. After all, the Council was considering proposals to possibly outsource fire suppression, but it was delayed until after the election, and while I didn’t see the meeting, I’m told that it was at the suggestion of one of the members of the slate, Council Member Don Watts.
In full disclosure, I have a personal stake in this discussion. My brother-in-law, Battalion Chief Bob Burnett, has been on the Department nearly twenty-five years. I also have a brother that is a paramedic and firefighter in another department. So maybe I’m a little overly-sensitive to unwarranted criticism of the people who invest so much of their lives in protecting ours.
I thought that in closing, it might be beneficial to talk a little about the Department. Perhaps the people who were so willing to berate our VOLUNTEERS just don’t know enough about the department, and would not have taken it to task if they knew a little more about it. So here’s a little history, and a few facts about our department.
According to an article written by then Fire Dept. Chief Jim Heasley in the June 9th, 1949 edition of the Sierra Madre News, SMFD was started after a disastrous fire in 1919, in which a bakery burned and “the fire could not be controlled by the local untrained men without proper equipment. Only a hand hose cart was then in use.” Monrovia Fire Dept. was called in, but the local business owners felt that more and better fire protection was needed. At its next meeting, the Board of Trade (precursor to the Chamber of Commerce), appointed two men to investigate the costs of Sierra Madre obtaining a fire engine and other equipment. During a demonstration of an engine, a local boy was “badly crippled by having his leg broken when the high pressure hose escaped the hands of the amateur fire fighters. This proved more than ever the necessity of a trained fire fighting force.” Shortly thereafter, the Sierra Madre Volunteer Fire Department was organized. According to Heasley, “There were so many men who wanted to join the fire department that it was necessary to organize a “Firemen’s Club” made up of men of all trades and businesses of the City.” Today, ninety years later, that tradition continues, with the addition of women to the ranks, and, in 2007, paramedics.
A few facts about Sierra Madre’s Volunteer Fire Department:
The Department currently is fully staffed, with 54 volunteers, three paid personnel and 27 paramedics. The Fire Chief oversees the administrative functions, daily operations, and response capabilities of the Sierra Madre Fire Department. The three Battalion Chiefs oversee fire prevention, training, personnel, and EMS training and quality assurance, as well as rotating the on duty battalion chief responsibilities. The six Fire Captains oversee crew training, station maintenance and equipment, and first in district pre-plans.
The Department currently has an ISO rating of 4, on a scale of 1 through 10. Class 1 generally represents superior property fire protection, and Class 10 indicates that the area's fire-suppression program doesn't meet ISO's minimum criteria. In my opinion, a Class four rating is hardly in the category of a “laughing stock of the state.” This rating is developed according to ISO’s Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS). The schedule measures the major elements of a community's fire-suppression system. Ten percent of the overall grading is based on how well the fire department receives fire alarms and dispatches its fire-fighting resources, i.e., communication center, dispatch, etc. Fifty percent of the overall grading is based on the number of engine companies and the amount of water a community needs to fight a fire. ISO reviews the distribution of fire companies throughout the area and checks that the fire department tests its pumps regularly and inventories each engine company's nozzles, hoses, breathing apparatus, and other equipment. Forty percent of the grading is based on the community's water supply. This part of the survey focuses on whether the community has sufficient water supply for fire suppression beyond daily maximum consumption. ISO surveys all components of the water supply system, including pumps, storage, and filtration.
The Sierra Madre Fire Department has a 1989 Mack Type 1 Engine, soon to be replaced, and a 2000 E-ONE; a 2,800 gallon Water Tender; one Chief’s vehicle; one Command Vehicle; an Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) trailer; a Utility truck; a Brush Patrol Truck; and two Rescue Ambulances. It should be noted that contrary to the blogger’s impression that we “give these guys any toy they want, whenever they want,” our newest engine is ten years old. The Water Tender truck is nearly 35 years old. We are all aware of the explosion that has taken place in technology in the last thirty years, fire suppression technology, too, has changed dramatically since much of the equipment that Sierra Madre’s Fire Department uses was manufactured. Public safety should be a top priority for our City officials – THAT’S why we should give these guys new toys.
Thanks to a generous gift from the Rotary Club last year, the trucks are now outfitted with state of the art radio communication systems. Prior to Rotary’s gift, some of the engines were operating with outdated equipment that did not adhere to the Homeland Security communication standards established after 9/11. Thank you Rotary!
During 2009, the Department responded to 28 fire calls, 590 medical calls (about 480 of which were Advanced Life Support Calls) and 200 service calls. 2009 was the third consecutive year in which the Department responded to more than 800 calls. The Department responds to all first alarm brush responses in the San Gabriel Mountains above the City of Sierra Madre with the Cities of Arcadia, Monrovia, Pasadena, the County of Los Angeles, and the United States Forest Service. The Department also participates in the California State-wide Mutual Aid Program by providing resources for the State of California Office of Emergency Services with the OES Engine.
Property damage in 2009 was less than $160,000, with structure fires at $130,000, vehicle fires at about $24,000, and miscellaneous fires just under $2000. There were 4 major OES calls, including the Station Fire, which totaled about 2,700 man hours. Personnel costs for those responses were just under $100,000, but the Department received more than $215,000 in state reimbursement, so revenue from OES was nearly $120,000. Additionally, the Emergency Medical Service calls generated $285,000. Total revenue from the department was nearly $400,000. Additionally, the department received a FEMA grant of $178,000.
Members of the Department accrued more than 11,000 hours of training in 2009, with more than 7,300 of that being standard training, and 4,200 hours of Academy training (14 shift firefighters undergoing more than 300 hours of Academy training). The average number of training hours per month per firefighter was eighteen. The training undertaken by our Fire Dept. was about a 110% increase from five years ago.
Nearly twenty-five hundred years ago, Euripedes said that you can judge a man by the company he keeps. This timeless axiom holds true today. If the John Crawford supporters who were so quick to disparage the men and women of our fire department are indicative of the kind of company he keeps, I think we’d be better off if he wasn’t on our City Council. That’s why I will show my support of the Fire Department by voting for Mosca, Moran and Walsh, and I urge all Sierra Madre voters to do the same.
In the days following the Santa Anita Fire in April and May of 2008, the grateful residents of this town made no secret of their gratitude to the heroes who stood along the fire lines and fought back the flames that were destroying much of the hillside behind our village, manning fronts along the fire line, protecting their neighbors, and preventing the loss of even a single home, though the flames came within striking distance at multiple locations. Home made signs sprung up, letters to the editor were written, and Sierra Madreans stood up at local public meetings to express their undying gratitude to the volunteers of the Sierra Madre Fire Department.
Now, just two years later, some members of the community seem to have forgotten that it was these firefighting heroes, along with fire departments from all over California, that saved this town from destruction. Apparently for some, “gratitude” doesn’t have the shelf life it once did.
A few nights ago, bloggers posted comments on Sierra Madre Tattler, the blog operated by City Council candidate John Crawford, calling the Department “the laughing stock of the state.” Naturally, as often happens, the Department’s leader was the lightning rod. One blogger stated that SMFD Chief “Steve Heydorf (sic), who is currently getting paid over $120,000 a year to be our "volunteer" fire Chief does nothing except either sit on his fat butt all day in the Development Services department, or drive around in the shiny, brand new, command vehicle doing his personal errands.” Another poster said the department is “…just an 'elite' club of self-important windbags now, with questionable ability to battle a wastebasket fire.” Apparently, their ability to fight fires has undergone a rapid decline, having gone from a successful defense against walls of flame racing down hillsides toward our homes, to, according to this poster, an inability to extinguish a few burning pieces of paper.
It wasn’t just the Fire Department that took the hits, nearly half of your non-firefighting neighbors were accused of wanting their neighbors’ homes to burn: “I've heard the DIRTS say before, that they wish a huge fire would burn down every house in the canyon. No wonder why they had no problem with Lowe/Heydorf (sic)/Bamberger/Burnett taking Fire Dept. vehicles out of the city for personal use. Who needs a Fire Department when you're waiting for the whole city to burn up in flames.” For the unaware, DIRTS is the term used on Crawford’s blog to describe opponents of Measure V, the controversial ordinance limiting downtown development which in 2007 eked out a victory of fewer than 100 votes out of 3,500 votes cast. I’m not sure how disagreeing with someone over the methods used to limit growth downtown translates to a desire to see our historic canyon burn, but apparently, if this poster is to be believed, that’s what “the dirts” want.
But most of the negativity was directed at the Dept. itself: “For a long, long time they protected the city with a pair of 1950's era Crown fire engines just fine. There were a couple of 2nd or 3rd hand support vehicles. Now they have several late model engines, a ladder truck, ambulances, water tankers, suburbans, Tahoe, etc. etc. etc. All that's missing is a helicopter but I have a hunch they have tried to figure out how to get one!...Why do we give these guys any toy they want, whenever they want???” “The people in charge of the fire department are DIRTS, just like everyone in city Hall. They don't have a problem wasting our money because they would love to see Sierra Madre go bankrupt… If you're wondering why they're able to get away with it, it's because their boss, the city manager, is a died in the wool dirt, just like them.” The logic of that statement escapes me. Does this person really think it’s Elaine Aguilar’s goal to drive the city bankrupt, which would, of course, leave her without a job? But I digress. “Considering the sums of money that have been and are being wasted on that club, I would support contracting out fire services as well. For a few hundred thousand dollars more a year, we can get professional fire fighters, that can actually save lives and property, instead of a bunch of pictures of a burned out building and a death certificate.” Ouch.
The men and women of the Sierra Madre Fire Department spend long hours training WITH NO PAY so that they will be prepared to, WITH NO PAY, get up in the middle of the night to, WITH NO PAY, leave the warmth of their homes and the loving arms of their family and WITH NO PAY rush to your home and WITH NO PAY save our pets, our possessions, our property or in some cases, our lives. And they do this for false alarms and non-emergencies, as well. Did I mention that they do this, without pay? According to Salary.com, the median salary for a firefighter in the U.S. is in excess of $40,000/yr., significantly more than the $0 paid to all but three Sierra Madre firefighters.
One would expect that a City Council candidate in a town that has traditionally taken great pride in its fire department, which is now more than ninety years old, would say a few words in support of these brave men and women, if only to safeguard the votes of the members of the department and the residents who appreciate and support the department. Yet Crawford remained silent, allowing his supporters to denigrate the firefighters without a single word in their defense. Should his silence be interpreted as tacit agreement with the folks who would so willingly dishonor our hometown heroes? And by extension, the other members of the Crawford/Alcorn/Watts slate, since they “have like beliefs and ideas?”
Ordinarily, I wouldn’t feel that a person is responsible for things that other people say. However, in this election, Candidate John Crawford has asked voters to “Send this blog to the City Council” in his request for donations to fund his campaign. As such, I think it’s fair to consider the content of the entire blog, and not just Mr. Crawford’s personal observations on the blog, when considering whether or not to vote for Mr. Crawford, thereby sending “this blog to the City Council.”
Since Mr. Crawford chose to remain silent in the face of this criticism of one of Sierra Madre’s most revered institutions, I can’t say if that silence is agreement with his supporters, but it makes me wonder - should this slate become the majority on the City Council, will the Department survive to celebrate a centennial? A thought I hope Sierra Madre voters will consider when they cast their votes on April 13th. After all, the Council was considering proposals to possibly outsource fire suppression, but it was delayed until after the election, and while I didn’t see the meeting, I’m told that it was at the suggestion of one of the members of the slate, Council Member Don Watts.
In full disclosure, I have a personal stake in this discussion. My brother-in-law, Battalion Chief Bob Burnett, has been on the Department nearly twenty-five years. I also have a brother that is a paramedic and firefighter in another department. So maybe I’m a little overly-sensitive to unwarranted criticism of the people who invest so much of their lives in protecting ours.
I thought that in closing, it might be beneficial to talk a little about the Department. Perhaps the people who were so willing to berate our VOLUNTEERS just don’t know enough about the department, and would not have taken it to task if they knew a little more about it. So here’s a little history, and a few facts about our department.
According to an article written by then Fire Dept. Chief Jim Heasley in the June 9th, 1949 edition of the Sierra Madre News, SMFD was started after a disastrous fire in 1919, in which a bakery burned and “the fire could not be controlled by the local untrained men without proper equipment. Only a hand hose cart was then in use.” Monrovia Fire Dept. was called in, but the local business owners felt that more and better fire protection was needed. At its next meeting, the Board of Trade (precursor to the Chamber of Commerce), appointed two men to investigate the costs of Sierra Madre obtaining a fire engine and other equipment. During a demonstration of an engine, a local boy was “badly crippled by having his leg broken when the high pressure hose escaped the hands of the amateur fire fighters. This proved more than ever the necessity of a trained fire fighting force.” Shortly thereafter, the Sierra Madre Volunteer Fire Department was organized. According to Heasley, “There were so many men who wanted to join the fire department that it was necessary to organize a “Firemen’s Club” made up of men of all trades and businesses of the City.” Today, ninety years later, that tradition continues, with the addition of women to the ranks, and, in 2007, paramedics.
A few facts about Sierra Madre’s Volunteer Fire Department:
The Department currently is fully staffed, with 54 volunteers, three paid personnel and 27 paramedics. The Fire Chief oversees the administrative functions, daily operations, and response capabilities of the Sierra Madre Fire Department. The three Battalion Chiefs oversee fire prevention, training, personnel, and EMS training and quality assurance, as well as rotating the on duty battalion chief responsibilities. The six Fire Captains oversee crew training, station maintenance and equipment, and first in district pre-plans.
The Department currently has an ISO rating of 4, on a scale of 1 through 10. Class 1 generally represents superior property fire protection, and Class 10 indicates that the area's fire-suppression program doesn't meet ISO's minimum criteria. In my opinion, a Class four rating is hardly in the category of a “laughing stock of the state.” This rating is developed according to ISO’s Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS). The schedule measures the major elements of a community's fire-suppression system. Ten percent of the overall grading is based on how well the fire department receives fire alarms and dispatches its fire-fighting resources, i.e., communication center, dispatch, etc. Fifty percent of the overall grading is based on the number of engine companies and the amount of water a community needs to fight a fire. ISO reviews the distribution of fire companies throughout the area and checks that the fire department tests its pumps regularly and inventories each engine company's nozzles, hoses, breathing apparatus, and other equipment. Forty percent of the grading is based on the community's water supply. This part of the survey focuses on whether the community has sufficient water supply for fire suppression beyond daily maximum consumption. ISO surveys all components of the water supply system, including pumps, storage, and filtration.
The Sierra Madre Fire Department has a 1989 Mack Type 1 Engine, soon to be replaced, and a 2000 E-ONE; a 2,800 gallon Water Tender; one Chief’s vehicle; one Command Vehicle; an Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) trailer; a Utility truck; a Brush Patrol Truck; and two Rescue Ambulances. It should be noted that contrary to the blogger’s impression that we “give these guys any toy they want, whenever they want,” our newest engine is ten years old. The Water Tender truck is nearly 35 years old. We are all aware of the explosion that has taken place in technology in the last thirty years, fire suppression technology, too, has changed dramatically since much of the equipment that Sierra Madre’s Fire Department uses was manufactured. Public safety should be a top priority for our City officials – THAT’S why we should give these guys new toys.
Thanks to a generous gift from the Rotary Club last year, the trucks are now outfitted with state of the art radio communication systems. Prior to Rotary’s gift, some of the engines were operating with outdated equipment that did not adhere to the Homeland Security communication standards established after 9/11. Thank you Rotary!
During 2009, the Department responded to 28 fire calls, 590 medical calls (about 480 of which were Advanced Life Support Calls) and 200 service calls. 2009 was the third consecutive year in which the Department responded to more than 800 calls. The Department responds to all first alarm brush responses in the San Gabriel Mountains above the City of Sierra Madre with the Cities of Arcadia, Monrovia, Pasadena, the County of Los Angeles, and the United States Forest Service. The Department also participates in the California State-wide Mutual Aid Program by providing resources for the State of California Office of Emergency Services with the OES Engine.
Property damage in 2009 was less than $160,000, with structure fires at $130,000, vehicle fires at about $24,000, and miscellaneous fires just under $2000. There were 4 major OES calls, including the Station Fire, which totaled about 2,700 man hours. Personnel costs for those responses were just under $100,000, but the Department received more than $215,000 in state reimbursement, so revenue from OES was nearly $120,000. Additionally, the Emergency Medical Service calls generated $285,000. Total revenue from the department was nearly $400,000. Additionally, the department received a FEMA grant of $178,000.
Members of the Department accrued more than 11,000 hours of training in 2009, with more than 7,300 of that being standard training, and 4,200 hours of Academy training (14 shift firefighters undergoing more than 300 hours of Academy training). The average number of training hours per month per firefighter was eighteen. The training undertaken by our Fire Dept. was about a 110% increase from five years ago.
Nearly twenty-five hundred years ago, Euripedes said that you can judge a man by the company he keeps. This timeless axiom holds true today. If the John Crawford supporters who were so quick to disparage the men and women of our fire department are indicative of the kind of company he keeps, I think we’d be better off if he wasn’t on our City Council. That’s why I will show my support of the Fire Department by voting for Mosca, Moran and Walsh, and I urge all Sierra Madre voters to do the same.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
2010 Election Candidate Endorsements - Joe Mosca for Mayor!
I doubt anyone is going to be particularly surprised by my endorsements, but you might be surprised to learn that I was inches away from endorsing four candidates for the three spots, or endorsing three with an honorable mention. But then the candidate in question, Pat Alcorn, sent me an e-mail that actually made me realize that the reasoning she was providing to me for endorsing the other members of her slate should actually be the reasoning I used in making my decision, and that cost her my endorsement. More on that a little later.
Okay, no surprise, Mosca, Moran and Walsh.
Joe Mosca should be the highest vote getter in this election, as he was in 2006, and should, based on his record, receive the support of the town’s residents. Unfortunately, a lot of misinformation has been spread, and there have been some very visible personal attacks by his opponents, which will mean Joe won’t generate as many votes this time around. The fact that Joe has chosen to de-emphasize defending himself but instead put the emphasis on the positive that has been done during his time on the Council is evidence of the kind of candidate he is (though he did screw up big time on his postcard mailer, which made it appear he was personally responsible for accomplishments when it was the entire council that accomplished things). You may have noticed at the Candidate Forum that he tried to correct that, by his repeated use (almost overuse) of the word “we” when discussing the council’s accomplishments. Hopefully, if he sends out another mailer, it will also correct that error.
Joe is the hardest working Council member I’ve seen in my 15 years in town. He also is the most knowledgeable candidate, though there have been a couple others that were close, including one current council member, John Buchanan. I’ve asked Joe about a whole bunch of different things relating to City business over the last four years, and he always knew the answer. And if he doesn’t know or understand something, he’s not afraid to ask about it. For example, I was watching the budget meeting from June of 2009 the other night. One PD position had been frozen, and Joe wanted to know whether/where in the budget the funding for that position had been allocated. None of the other council members thought to ask that question.
One more time – Joe didn’t decide not to put the DSP to a vote of the people, he in fact prepared a resolution that called for greater community input in the DSP process, and put in place a timeline for completion of the DSP, eventually putting it on the ballot for voter approval. That resolution was passed by the City Council. But his detractors conveniently forget that, because he didn’t vote to put the issue on the ballot per the time schedule they wanted, in the manner they wanted it on the ballot. Kind of reminds me of the kid in the neighborhood that takes the ball home, ending the game, if the rest of the team doesn’t play the game by his rules. And after all, why let the truth get in the way?
I spend a lot of time attending meetings with various regional organizations, and when Joe’s name has come up, the people that I have spoken with at these meetings all hold Joe in high regard. The same can’t be said for all the candidates, and I think we might be taking a step backwards in relationship building with other cities and other regional organizations if we elect the wrong people and they end up representing us poorly to other communities and regional organizations.
As to the complaint that Joe has brought partisan politics into a local election – it wasn’t Joe that brought up the fact that he received these endorsements, it was his opponents. Yes, he was endorsed, but find me some Mosca campaign literature somewhere that says that, or video from the forums where Joe discussed it. You can’t. The fact is that many of Joe’s biggest supporters are from the other party, and it would be counterproductive for Joe to brag about the endorsement locally. While it makes sense to seek the endorsement, so that the locals that are members of the organizations and who value that endorsement are aware he has received it, Joe never, to my knowledge, brought the endorsements into the campaign. Had his opponents kept their mouths shut, I don’t think there would have been any interjection of partisan politics into this campaign. I find it fascinating that his opponents complain so loudly that he brought partisan politics into the campaign, when in fact it was their complaints that did it.
The truly sad part is, that I’m spending so much time defending Joe, when his record as Council member should make him a lock, when what I should be doing is promoting the other candidates I’m endorsing. So the tactics of his opponents paid off, by drawing attention away from where it deserves to be.
Nancy Walsh worked in County government for nearly thirty years. Thanks to all that experience, she knows how local government works, and she also knows how regional government works. That’s how she managed to obtain some thirty thousand dollars through a recycling donation program that has benefited the City. She has also served this City well for several years, working on the Senior Master Plan, sitting on the Senior Community Commission, including serving as its Chair. I didn’t know Nancy well before this election, though we’d met a time or two. But I thought she acquitted herself well, for the most part, at the City Hall Candidate Forum, and though I was only at the Kiwanis forum for a short time, I thought she did well there, too (though I wasn’t impressed by the “I must be awesome” comment when she was asked about the Tattler’s article about her, seemed a little silly to me).
Anyway, I sat down and talked with Nancy to get to know her a little better, and to ask her about the things that concerned me. After talking with her for about an hour and a half, I came away more impressed than I thought I would. She has an open mind, she has experience, she is pretty sharp at analyzing things, and I trust her. Again, I can’t say that about all the candidates.
Josh Moran has lived in Sierra Madre most of his life. Don’t let his opponents mislead you, Josh didn’t move here two days before the filing deadline. Josh made it pretty clear at the Kiwanis meeting that he had moved back to town a year and a half ago, he just hadn’t updated his voter registration. But they won’t let a little thing like the truth get in the way of them telling you what they want you to believe.
Josh and I were part of the All-America City team that went down and made a presentation in 2007 when Sierra Madre won the award. Josh was enthusiastic, and it was very clear that he both loved and took pride in his home town. So much so, that he spent a lot of time practicing the program and then traveling to Anaheim to be there for the presentation to help this city win the prestigious award, and at the time, he didn’t even live here!
In addition to his time spent on the All-America City delegation, he was on the Mt. Wilson Trail Race committee, and Josh has a lot of experience working with the Community and Personnel Services Commission (though I think it was called the Parks and Rec. Commission most of the time that he was volunteering). He worked on the City’s Youth Master Plan (so by electing Walsh and Moran, we have experience with age groups at each end of the spectrum, with two of the people who created the Master Plan for youth and seniors on the Council, which to me seems like a good thing).
What this election seems to be boiling down to, in my opinion, is planning. The candidates above, whom I endorse, all seem to respect the existing planning processes, even when they disagree with individual aspects of those processes. They trust the system, and are prepared to work both locally and regionally to make sure Sierra Madre residents and Sierra Madre as a City are engaged in the planning process, and that the rights of the people and the City are properly protected.
The candidates below (with the possible exception of Mr. Tice), all seem to have a mistrust of the planning process and/or the regional organizations that are part of or in charge of the processes. While Pat Alcorn has told me that she believes we need to be involved, she also made it clear she is wary of the regional organizations, and both John Crawford and Don Watts have made it quite clear that they do not trust the processes and/or the organizations. Both seem to favor an adversarial approach, rather than a collaborative one. I think it’s in Sierra Madre’s best interests to collaborate, rather than butt heads.
For reasons I have begun spelling out in other editorials, and will spell out in further detail in upcoming editorials, I cannot endorse Watts or Crawford. Suffice to say for now that I don’t think it’s in the town’s best interests to be represented by people who I believe have misled voters, and who only represent their supporters, ignoring the rest of the residents of the town. I also want to endorse people that more closely reflect my positions/opinions, and there are many things on which I disagree with Mr. Watts and Mr. Crawford. Please be sure to check back in the next few days to see those editorials.
Because I don’t think he takes his candidacy seriously, and wouldn’t know what to do if he won, I can’t endorse Bill Tice, though I thank him for running. He does make a boring election a little more enjoyable.
I almost endorsed Pat Alcorn. She has attended most of the Commission meetings in the last couple years, and currently serves on two ad hoc committees. As such, she’s heard both sides of the arguments that have taken place at those meetings, and that awareness, in my opinion, would benefit the City. Unfortunately, there are many issues on which we disagree. I was prepared to overlook that based on my belief that Pat has the best interests of the City at heart. Pat and I sat down and had an extensive talk about my concerns, and I came away from our meeting feeling very conflicted, and not sure how I was going to handle her candidacy, endorsement-wise.
One of the issues we discussed was her desire to be independent of a slate, which she had expressed at the Kiwanis meeting. I appreciated that, and it was another reason I was giving her serious consideration. But after our meeting, I received an e-mail from Pat telling me that after consulting with her campaign manager, and after looking up the word “slate” in the dictionary, “in the strict sense of the word, I am on a "slate" or list of nominees running for an office. I don't want to mislead you, nor do I want to give the impression that I have separated myself from the other two.” She added that she was “endorsing Watts and Crawford because I want to see a majority remain on the council, and we have like beliefs and ideas.” She then stated that though she had enjoyed our meeting, she believed “people would be misled by an endorsement since I do need a majority with MaryAnn to "stay the course".” And so, in accordance with Ms. Alcorn’s reasoning, because I want to change the majority on the council, and because we have like beliefs and ideas, I’m endorsing Mosca, Moran and Walsh.
One last thing. Joe Mosca deserves to be Mayor. He was bypassed the last two times when he should have been elevated to Mayor, and it’s time to right that wrong. I urge Sierra Madre voters to elect Mosca, Moran and Walsh to City Council, so that we can have the best people that have stepped up to sit on the Council serving us. In doing so, we’ll ensure that we have a Mayor that we can respect and be proud of.
Okay, no surprise, Mosca, Moran and Walsh.
Joe Mosca should be the highest vote getter in this election, as he was in 2006, and should, based on his record, receive the support of the town’s residents. Unfortunately, a lot of misinformation has been spread, and there have been some very visible personal attacks by his opponents, which will mean Joe won’t generate as many votes this time around. The fact that Joe has chosen to de-emphasize defending himself but instead put the emphasis on the positive that has been done during his time on the Council is evidence of the kind of candidate he is (though he did screw up big time on his postcard mailer, which made it appear he was personally responsible for accomplishments when it was the entire council that accomplished things). You may have noticed at the Candidate Forum that he tried to correct that, by his repeated use (almost overuse) of the word “we” when discussing the council’s accomplishments. Hopefully, if he sends out another mailer, it will also correct that error.
Joe is the hardest working Council member I’ve seen in my 15 years in town. He also is the most knowledgeable candidate, though there have been a couple others that were close, including one current council member, John Buchanan. I’ve asked Joe about a whole bunch of different things relating to City business over the last four years, and he always knew the answer. And if he doesn’t know or understand something, he’s not afraid to ask about it. For example, I was watching the budget meeting from June of 2009 the other night. One PD position had been frozen, and Joe wanted to know whether/where in the budget the funding for that position had been allocated. None of the other council members thought to ask that question.
One more time – Joe didn’t decide not to put the DSP to a vote of the people, he in fact prepared a resolution that called for greater community input in the DSP process, and put in place a timeline for completion of the DSP, eventually putting it on the ballot for voter approval. That resolution was passed by the City Council. But his detractors conveniently forget that, because he didn’t vote to put the issue on the ballot per the time schedule they wanted, in the manner they wanted it on the ballot. Kind of reminds me of the kid in the neighborhood that takes the ball home, ending the game, if the rest of the team doesn’t play the game by his rules. And after all, why let the truth get in the way?
I spend a lot of time attending meetings with various regional organizations, and when Joe’s name has come up, the people that I have spoken with at these meetings all hold Joe in high regard. The same can’t be said for all the candidates, and I think we might be taking a step backwards in relationship building with other cities and other regional organizations if we elect the wrong people and they end up representing us poorly to other communities and regional organizations.
As to the complaint that Joe has brought partisan politics into a local election – it wasn’t Joe that brought up the fact that he received these endorsements, it was his opponents. Yes, he was endorsed, but find me some Mosca campaign literature somewhere that says that, or video from the forums where Joe discussed it. You can’t. The fact is that many of Joe’s biggest supporters are from the other party, and it would be counterproductive for Joe to brag about the endorsement locally. While it makes sense to seek the endorsement, so that the locals that are members of the organizations and who value that endorsement are aware he has received it, Joe never, to my knowledge, brought the endorsements into the campaign. Had his opponents kept their mouths shut, I don’t think there would have been any interjection of partisan politics into this campaign. I find it fascinating that his opponents complain so loudly that he brought partisan politics into the campaign, when in fact it was their complaints that did it.
The truly sad part is, that I’m spending so much time defending Joe, when his record as Council member should make him a lock, when what I should be doing is promoting the other candidates I’m endorsing. So the tactics of his opponents paid off, by drawing attention away from where it deserves to be.
Nancy Walsh worked in County government for nearly thirty years. Thanks to all that experience, she knows how local government works, and she also knows how regional government works. That’s how she managed to obtain some thirty thousand dollars through a recycling donation program that has benefited the City. She has also served this City well for several years, working on the Senior Master Plan, sitting on the Senior Community Commission, including serving as its Chair. I didn’t know Nancy well before this election, though we’d met a time or two. But I thought she acquitted herself well, for the most part, at the City Hall Candidate Forum, and though I was only at the Kiwanis forum for a short time, I thought she did well there, too (though I wasn’t impressed by the “I must be awesome” comment when she was asked about the Tattler’s article about her, seemed a little silly to me).
Anyway, I sat down and talked with Nancy to get to know her a little better, and to ask her about the things that concerned me. After talking with her for about an hour and a half, I came away more impressed than I thought I would. She has an open mind, she has experience, she is pretty sharp at analyzing things, and I trust her. Again, I can’t say that about all the candidates.
Josh Moran has lived in Sierra Madre most of his life. Don’t let his opponents mislead you, Josh didn’t move here two days before the filing deadline. Josh made it pretty clear at the Kiwanis meeting that he had moved back to town a year and a half ago, he just hadn’t updated his voter registration. But they won’t let a little thing like the truth get in the way of them telling you what they want you to believe.
Josh and I were part of the All-America City team that went down and made a presentation in 2007 when Sierra Madre won the award. Josh was enthusiastic, and it was very clear that he both loved and took pride in his home town. So much so, that he spent a lot of time practicing the program and then traveling to Anaheim to be there for the presentation to help this city win the prestigious award, and at the time, he didn’t even live here!
In addition to his time spent on the All-America City delegation, he was on the Mt. Wilson Trail Race committee, and Josh has a lot of experience working with the Community and Personnel Services Commission (though I think it was called the Parks and Rec. Commission most of the time that he was volunteering). He worked on the City’s Youth Master Plan (so by electing Walsh and Moran, we have experience with age groups at each end of the spectrum, with two of the people who created the Master Plan for youth and seniors on the Council, which to me seems like a good thing).
What this election seems to be boiling down to, in my opinion, is planning. The candidates above, whom I endorse, all seem to respect the existing planning processes, even when they disagree with individual aspects of those processes. They trust the system, and are prepared to work both locally and regionally to make sure Sierra Madre residents and Sierra Madre as a City are engaged in the planning process, and that the rights of the people and the City are properly protected.
The candidates below (with the possible exception of Mr. Tice), all seem to have a mistrust of the planning process and/or the regional organizations that are part of or in charge of the processes. While Pat Alcorn has told me that she believes we need to be involved, she also made it clear she is wary of the regional organizations, and both John Crawford and Don Watts have made it quite clear that they do not trust the processes and/or the organizations. Both seem to favor an adversarial approach, rather than a collaborative one. I think it’s in Sierra Madre’s best interests to collaborate, rather than butt heads.
For reasons I have begun spelling out in other editorials, and will spell out in further detail in upcoming editorials, I cannot endorse Watts or Crawford. Suffice to say for now that I don’t think it’s in the town’s best interests to be represented by people who I believe have misled voters, and who only represent their supporters, ignoring the rest of the residents of the town. I also want to endorse people that more closely reflect my positions/opinions, and there are many things on which I disagree with Mr. Watts and Mr. Crawford. Please be sure to check back in the next few days to see those editorials.
Because I don’t think he takes his candidacy seriously, and wouldn’t know what to do if he won, I can’t endorse Bill Tice, though I thank him for running. He does make a boring election a little more enjoyable.
I almost endorsed Pat Alcorn. She has attended most of the Commission meetings in the last couple years, and currently serves on two ad hoc committees. As such, she’s heard both sides of the arguments that have taken place at those meetings, and that awareness, in my opinion, would benefit the City. Unfortunately, there are many issues on which we disagree. I was prepared to overlook that based on my belief that Pat has the best interests of the City at heart. Pat and I sat down and had an extensive talk about my concerns, and I came away from our meeting feeling very conflicted, and not sure how I was going to handle her candidacy, endorsement-wise.
One of the issues we discussed was her desire to be independent of a slate, which she had expressed at the Kiwanis meeting. I appreciated that, and it was another reason I was giving her serious consideration. But after our meeting, I received an e-mail from Pat telling me that after consulting with her campaign manager, and after looking up the word “slate” in the dictionary, “in the strict sense of the word, I am on a "slate" or list of nominees running for an office. I don't want to mislead you, nor do I want to give the impression that I have separated myself from the other two.” She added that she was “endorsing Watts and Crawford because I want to see a majority remain on the council, and we have like beliefs and ideas.” She then stated that though she had enjoyed our meeting, she believed “people would be misled by an endorsement since I do need a majority with MaryAnn to "stay the course".” And so, in accordance with Ms. Alcorn’s reasoning, because I want to change the majority on the council, and because we have like beliefs and ideas, I’m endorsing Mosca, Moran and Walsh.
One last thing. Joe Mosca deserves to be Mayor. He was bypassed the last two times when he should have been elevated to Mayor, and it’s time to right that wrong. I urge Sierra Madre voters to elect Mosca, Moran and Walsh to City Council, so that we can have the best people that have stepped up to sit on the Council serving us. In doing so, we’ll ensure that we have a Mayor that we can respect and be proud of.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Editorial - These People Walk Among You
Editorial - These People Walk Among You
By Bill Coburn
This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident. It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.
Ordinarily, I wouldn’t feel that a person is responsible for things that other people say. However, in this election, Candidate John Crawford has asked voters to “Send this blog to the City Council” in his request for donations to fund his campaign. As such, I think it’s fair to consider the content of the entire blog, and not just Mr. Crawford’s personal observations on the blog, when considering whether or not to vote for Mr. Crawford, thereby sending “this blog to the City Council.”
At the Kiwanis candidate forum, Mr. Crawford stated that he removes posts from the blog if they contain profanity, or personal attacks. I think perhaps it’s time for him to start paying a little closer attention to the things his readers are posting. Some of the things they write can only be described as personal attacks, yet they remain on the site. Coincidentally (?), these attacks are made against people whom Mr. Crawford has written pieces in opposition to. Perhaps Mr. Crawford should have described the blog’s policy as removing posts that are personal attacks against him or his supporters, because those whom he opposes seem to be fair game. This is just a very small, but representative, sampling of some of the thoughts posted on the blog Mr. Crawford is asking voters to consider sending to the City Council:
I don't know who is worse, (name withheld) or (name withheld). Both are diseases in this town, actually, any town. Bad people. – Anonymous, 1/25/10, 9:24am
(Name withheld) isn’t a disease to this town, she’s a plague. – Jerome Horwitz, 1:25/10, 1:43pm
Susan Henderson is a con artist. She falsifed (sic) expense reports with a previous employer and claims law degrees that she does not posess (sic). She is a brat. If anybody is a "liar" it's (Name withheld). (Name withheld) is a con artist. He claims actions that are not his and then attacks those who has (sic) the audacity to question his own statements. He has been a fraud since he moved into town. (Different name withheld) is a joke. He's a (first name withheld) clone. Anonymous, 2/24/10, 10:48am. It's interesting to note that the claim against Susan Henderson is one that has been made repeatedly by Crawford even though his own articles reference a San Francisco Chronicle news story in which the leader of the party that Henderson is alleged to have falsified reports to states that their audit cleared Henderson of having done so.
(Name withheld) is a grifter, a dishonest con artist who preys on the elderly in this town. She is pure trash. – Anonymous, 3/10/10, 10:51am
To paraphrase a favorite play, there is an unmistakable odor of mendacity in the room: coming from lies and liars, namely council candidates Joe Mosca, Nancy Walsh, Josh Moran and all of their downtown dirt supporters. We lived through and fell for the blatant obfuscation of political leanings during Mosca's original candidacy; I personally am not willing to do it again. Let's call a spade a spade; Walsh, Moran and Mosca are all toadies for the development industry and they should be exposed for what they are often and mercilessly right up to voting date. What a bunch of pricks. – Anonymous, 3/15/10, 12:31pm
Joe Mosca- lobbyist/liar/sociopath. John (sic) Moron (sic) - moral and intellectual deviant. Nancy Walsh-tap dancer puppet of Bart Doyle. – Anonymous, 3/24/10, 8:39am Ironically, this post was just 16 minutes after a post from someone calling themselves Panelist (presumably a blog moderator?) that said: Posts are removed for vulgar language and offensive content, of which there have been many lately. Slanderous attacks and accusations of a felonious nature are also removed. Slurs against family members and children are not tolerated. (emphasis mine).
And while all of the above posts are directed at specific individuals, some of the bloggers are happy to be more general when disparaging their neighbors, intimating that all those who oppose them have a drinking problem: I guess it's true that alcoholics are delusional. And considering their posts recently, also wake up in a bad mood every morning. Maybe they should have a little "hair of the dog" before they get on the internet. – Keep the Punch Lines Coming, 3/24/10, 4:03pm. But the willingness to make unfounded accusation of alcoholism isn’t limited to generalizations. Here’s one that’s specific from regular poster Old Kentucky: News flash.....11:23 dirt.....we don't need YOUR vote. We will win anyway. Go have some coffee, you're probably hungover....hope you feel better, have a great day.
And let’s not forget, that there is a derisive term used at the blog to describe anyone with opposing viewpoints, all of whom are called dirts. There is also a second term used, describing people with opposing viewpoints as members of the Downtown Investors Club (which creates what some would consider an offensive acronym).
I defend the right of everyone quoted above to say the things they said. But I personally don’t think it’s right to treat your neighbors in such a negative manner, nor do I think this is the kind of attitude we want our City Council to reflect. While a couple candidates have said they want to see a return of civility to the council, I have a somewhat less grandiose wish. I’d just be happy to see that the Council’s treatment of each other and others doesn’t spiral downward to the level displayed by Mr. Crawford’s supporters. To do that, I suggest that we encourage our friends and neighbors NOT to “send this blog to City Council.”
By Bill Coburn
This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident. It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.
Ordinarily, I wouldn’t feel that a person is responsible for things that other people say. However, in this election, Candidate John Crawford has asked voters to “Send this blog to the City Council” in his request for donations to fund his campaign. As such, I think it’s fair to consider the content of the entire blog, and not just Mr. Crawford’s personal observations on the blog, when considering whether or not to vote for Mr. Crawford, thereby sending “this blog to the City Council.”
At the Kiwanis candidate forum, Mr. Crawford stated that he removes posts from the blog if they contain profanity, or personal attacks. I think perhaps it’s time for him to start paying a little closer attention to the things his readers are posting. Some of the things they write can only be described as personal attacks, yet they remain on the site. Coincidentally (?), these attacks are made against people whom Mr. Crawford has written pieces in opposition to. Perhaps Mr. Crawford should have described the blog’s policy as removing posts that are personal attacks against him or his supporters, because those whom he opposes seem to be fair game. This is just a very small, but representative, sampling of some of the thoughts posted on the blog Mr. Crawford is asking voters to consider sending to the City Council:
I don't know who is worse, (name withheld) or (name withheld). Both are diseases in this town, actually, any town. Bad people. – Anonymous, 1/25/10, 9:24am
(Name withheld) isn’t a disease to this town, she’s a plague. – Jerome Horwitz, 1:25/10, 1:43pm
Susan Henderson is a con artist. She falsifed (sic) expense reports with a previous employer and claims law degrees that she does not posess (sic). She is a brat. If anybody is a "liar" it's (Name withheld). (Name withheld) is a con artist. He claims actions that are not his and then attacks those who has (sic) the audacity to question his own statements. He has been a fraud since he moved into town. (Different name withheld) is a joke. He's a (first name withheld) clone. Anonymous, 2/24/10, 10:48am. It's interesting to note that the claim against Susan Henderson is one that has been made repeatedly by Crawford even though his own articles reference a San Francisco Chronicle news story in which the leader of the party that Henderson is alleged to have falsified reports to states that their audit cleared Henderson of having done so.
(Name withheld) is a grifter, a dishonest con artist who preys on the elderly in this town. She is pure trash. – Anonymous, 3/10/10, 10:51am
To paraphrase a favorite play, there is an unmistakable odor of mendacity in the room: coming from lies and liars, namely council candidates Joe Mosca, Nancy Walsh, Josh Moran and all of their downtown dirt supporters. We lived through and fell for the blatant obfuscation of political leanings during Mosca's original candidacy; I personally am not willing to do it again. Let's call a spade a spade; Walsh, Moran and Mosca are all toadies for the development industry and they should be exposed for what they are often and mercilessly right up to voting date. What a bunch of pricks. – Anonymous, 3/15/10, 12:31pm
Joe Mosca- lobbyist/liar/sociopath. John (sic) Moron (sic) - moral and intellectual deviant. Nancy Walsh-tap dancer puppet of Bart Doyle. – Anonymous, 3/24/10, 8:39am Ironically, this post was just 16 minutes after a post from someone calling themselves Panelist (presumably a blog moderator?) that said: Posts are removed for vulgar language and offensive content, of which there have been many lately. Slanderous attacks and accusations of a felonious nature are also removed. Slurs against family members and children are not tolerated. (emphasis mine).
And while all of the above posts are directed at specific individuals, some of the bloggers are happy to be more general when disparaging their neighbors, intimating that all those who oppose them have a drinking problem: I guess it's true that alcoholics are delusional. And considering their posts recently, also wake up in a bad mood every morning. Maybe they should have a little "hair of the dog" before they get on the internet. – Keep the Punch Lines Coming, 3/24/10, 4:03pm. But the willingness to make unfounded accusation of alcoholism isn’t limited to generalizations. Here’s one that’s specific from regular poster Old Kentucky: News flash.....11:23 dirt.....we don't need YOUR vote. We will win anyway. Go have some coffee, you're probably hungover....hope you feel better, have a great day.
And let’s not forget, that there is a derisive term used at the blog to describe anyone with opposing viewpoints, all of whom are called dirts. There is also a second term used, describing people with opposing viewpoints as members of the Downtown Investors Club (which creates what some would consider an offensive acronym).
I defend the right of everyone quoted above to say the things they said. But I personally don’t think it’s right to treat your neighbors in such a negative manner, nor do I think this is the kind of attitude we want our City Council to reflect. While a couple candidates have said they want to see a return of civility to the council, I have a somewhat less grandiose wish. I’d just be happy to see that the Council’s treatment of each other and others doesn’t spiral downward to the level displayed by Mr. Crawford’s supporters. To do that, I suggest that we encourage our friends and neighbors NOT to “send this blog to City Council.”
Saturday, February 6, 2010
City Reverts to Green Flag
The City of Sierra Madre has moved to a Green Flag Alert for mudslides and debris flows in the hillside communities.
Mandatory Evacuation orders have been lifted for all areas in the City of Sierra Madre.
City officials are closely watching local rain forecasts. The National Weather Service has posted an 80% chance of rain for this evening (Saturday, 1/6/2010).
A Green Flag Alert is issued when there is an 80% chance or more of precipitation. Affected residents should get ready for potential evacuation and keep close watch on weather forecasts.
There still the possibility of hazards as streets may become flooded or blocked by debris with the intermittent storm cells that may pass over the area this evening. Parking restrictions have been lifted for the Upper and Lower Canyon.
Sandbags are available at the City Yards. Residents must fill and transport their own bags.
Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road will remain closed until further notice.
Mandatory Evacuation orders have been lifted for all areas in the City of Sierra Madre.
City officials are closely watching local rain forecasts. The National Weather Service has posted an 80% chance of rain for this evening (Saturday, 1/6/2010).
A Green Flag Alert is issued when there is an 80% chance or more of precipitation. Affected residents should get ready for potential evacuation and keep close watch on weather forecasts.
There still the possibility of hazards as streets may become flooded or blocked by debris with the intermittent storm cells that may pass over the area this evening. Parking restrictions have been lifted for the Upper and Lower Canyon.
Sandbags are available at the City Yards. Residents must fill and transport their own bags.
Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road will remain closed until further notice.
Mud update, 1:30ish
The City Council will be meeting at 4:30pm to declare a state of emergency, which will make us eligible for additional services and money, especially if the Governor does the same thing. I went and took a look around, it doesn't look as bad as I thought it would. The Public Works folks are doing a good job cleaning up, but we're still on red flag. I tried to upload real time pics from the field, but the text came through without the pictures. I'll be posting a more comprehensive report and some photos at www.SierraMudre.info.
Red Flag Mud Alert Issued
The City of Sierra Madre issued a Red Flag Mud Alert for Sierra Madre residences in potential mud flow areas. The Los Angels County Public Works Department issued a Phase 2 Mud Alert. A Phase 2 Alert indicates moderate debris and mudflows at widespread locations. Phase 3 – the potential exists for significant debris and mudflows to be widespread. Mandatory evacuations are in place.
The following locations are now under a Mandatory Evacuation Order and the streets are closed to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic:
- All streets above Churchill and Canyon Crest
- All streets above Brookside and Sturtevant
- All streets above Lotus Lane at Camillo
- The private sections of Auburn Avenue above Elm Street.
Additional Important Information:
- An evacuations center has been set up at the Community Recreation Center, 611 E. Sierra Madre Blvd.
- A debris deflection structure will be erected at the northern Brookside Lane & Woodland Drive intersection by 1:00 PM.
- Sand and sandbags are available 24 hours a day at the City Maintenance Facility. The address is 621 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. The sand and sandbags are located north of the Sierra Vista Park tennis courts, and next to the Sierra Madre Rose Float building. Residents must fill their own bags and are advised to bring a shovel.
- Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road are all closed until further notice.
The City of Sierra Madre is appreciative of the diligent preparations and friendly cooperation that its residents have demonstrated through all of our recent emergencies.
For updates and future emergency information, please be sure to monitor the City’s Communication tools:
City Website (www.cityofsierramadre.com )
SMTV3, (channel 3 on Time Warner Cable )
Sierra Madre Emergency Blog (www.sierramadrepio.blogspot.com .)
Email Alerts “eBlasts” - To register for email alerts please visit www.cityofsierramadre.com, click on AccessSierraMadre, and then click CommunicationLink to register your email address.
Additional information on how to protect your home can be found on the City’s website, www.cityofsierramadre.com. Mud incident updates can be found at www.sierramadrepio.blogspot.com.
The following locations are now under a Mandatory Evacuation Order and the streets are closed to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic:
- All streets above Churchill and Canyon Crest
- All streets above Brookside and Sturtevant
- All streets above Lotus Lane at Camillo
- The private sections of Auburn Avenue above Elm Street.
Additional Important Information:
- An evacuations center has been set up at the Community Recreation Center, 611 E. Sierra Madre Blvd.
- A debris deflection structure will be erected at the northern Brookside Lane & Woodland Drive intersection by 1:00 PM.
- Sand and sandbags are available 24 hours a day at the City Maintenance Facility. The address is 621 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. The sand and sandbags are located north of the Sierra Vista Park tennis courts, and next to the Sierra Madre Rose Float building. Residents must fill their own bags and are advised to bring a shovel.
- Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road are all closed until further notice.
The City of Sierra Madre is appreciative of the diligent preparations and friendly cooperation that its residents have demonstrated through all of our recent emergencies.
For updates and future emergency information, please be sure to monitor the City’s Communication tools:
City Website (www.cityofsierramadre.com )
SMTV3, (channel 3 on Time Warner Cable )
Sierra Madre Emergency Blog (www.sierramadrepio.blogspot.com .)
Email Alerts “eBlasts” - To register for email alerts please visit www.cityofsierramadre.com, click on AccessSierraMadre, and then click CommunicationLink to register your email address.
Additional information on how to protect your home can be found on the City’s website, www.cityofsierramadre.com. Mud incident updates can be found at www.sierramadrepio.blogspot.com.
Mudflow on Skyland, City Upgrades to Yellow Flag Alert
(Saturday, 2/6/10, 5:05am) Just spoke with SMPD Watch Commander Kamchamnan who informed me that within the last hour there was mud flow at 801 Skyland. Skyland at that location is now closed. Sgt. Kamchamnan also informed me that the City has upgraded to Yellow Flag alert status, and we will be receiving notices from the City to that effect shortly.
For official information about mudslide and debris flow preparations, please visit www.cityofsierramadre.com and click “Emergency Preparedness Links” and “Ready for 7” on the home page. Updates will also be issued on SMTV3 (Time Warner-channel 3) and the City’s Emergency Blog (http://sierramadrepio.blogspot.com/). For additional (unofficial) information, please visit www.SierraMudre.info
For official information about mudslide and debris flow preparations, please visit www.cityofsierramadre.com and click “Emergency Preparedness Links” and “Ready for 7” on the home page. Updates will also be issued on SMTV3 (Time Warner-channel 3) and the City’s Emergency Blog (http://sierramadrepio.blogspot.com/). For additional (unofficial) information, please visit www.SierraMudre.info
Thursday, January 21, 2010
City of Sierra Madre: 5:00PM 1/21/2010 City Returns to Yellow Flag Alert – All Mandatory Evacuation Orders Lifted
The City of Sierra Madre has received a "No Phase" forecast from the L.A. County Public Works Department this afternoon. The Red Flag Alert is rescinded and the City will go to a Yellow Flag Alert. At this time, all Mandatory Evacuation Orders are lifted, and residents are allowed to return to their homes. Voluntary Evacuations are still in effect for the entire "Upper" canyon areas, "Lower" canyon areas, Auburn Ave. (private road areas only), and Lotus Lane (above the Sturtevant Debris Basin).
Immediately after receiving the County’s forecast, Sierra Madre Public Works crews surveyed the streets in the Upper and Lower canyons. It was determined that all roads are sufficiently clear and there were no hazards.
It was determined by City Officials, in conjunction with Public Safety personnel, that going to the Yellow Flag Alert was a prudent measure with the amount of rain that has fallen, and the on-going chance of rain and thunderstorms. All vehicles must be off the streets during a Yellow Flag Alert.
Additional Important Information:
o The City has closed the Community Recreation Center at 611 E. Sierra Madre Blvd as an evacuation location.
o Sand and sandbags will remain available 24 hours a day at the City Maintenance Facility until further notice. The address is 621 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. The sand and sandbags are located north of the Sierra Vista Park tennis courts, and next to the Sierra Madre Rose Float building. Residents must fill their own bags and are advised to bring a shovel.
o Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road will remain closed until further notice.
Immediately after receiving the County’s forecast, Sierra Madre Public Works crews surveyed the streets in the Upper and Lower canyons. It was determined that all roads are sufficiently clear and there were no hazards.
It was determined by City Officials, in conjunction with Public Safety personnel, that going to the Yellow Flag Alert was a prudent measure with the amount of rain that has fallen, and the on-going chance of rain and thunderstorms. All vehicles must be off the streets during a Yellow Flag Alert.
Additional Important Information:
o The City has closed the Community Recreation Center at 611 E. Sierra Madre Blvd as an evacuation location.
o Sand and sandbags will remain available 24 hours a day at the City Maintenance Facility until further notice. The address is 621 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. The sand and sandbags are located north of the Sierra Vista Park tennis courts, and next to the Sierra Madre Rose Float building. Residents must fill their own bags and are advised to bring a shovel.
o Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road will remain closed until further notice.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Mandatory Evacuation Area Expanded
The City of Sierra Madre has expanded the Mandatory Evacuation Order to cover the entire “Upper” canyon areas and the entire “Lower” canyon areas.
Additional locations for Mandatory Evacuation Orders are possible for the next 48 hours.
Road Closures will take effect at various locations leading to the Mandatory Evacuation Order locations. These closures will be strictly enforced by the Sierra Madre Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department. The cooperation of our residents is crucial to the safety and protection of life and property in these areas.
Residents are asked to follow evacuation orders. Residents who prefer to stay in their homes threaten themselves, their neighbors, and emergency personnel.
The City has requested mutual aid from surrounding agencies including the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department.
An emergency meeting of the Sierra Madre City Council will be held this evening at 5:30PM in the City Council Chambers at City Hall. The Council will be considering a Declaration of a Local Emergency at this time. Such a declaration puts the City of Sierra Madre in a better position to recover costs that are associated with the emergency, as well as assisting our efforts in coordinating mutual aid.
Additional Important Information:
o The City has opened the Community Recreation Center at 611 E. Sierra Madre Blvd as an evacuation location. Crated animals will be allowed.
o The City will operate a shuttle to from Mt. Wilson Trail Park (“Turtle Park”) to the Community Recreation /Center from 11:00AM to 1:00PM this afternoon.
o Sand and sandbags are available 24 hours a day at the City Maintenance Facility. The address is 621 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. The sand and sandbags are located north of the Sierra Vista Park tennis courts, and next to the Sierra Madre Rose Float building. Residents must fill their own bags and are advised to bring a shovel.
o Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road are all closed until further notice.
The City of Sierra Madre is appreciative of the diligent preparations and friendly cooperation that its residents have demonstrated through all of our recent emergencies.
Additional locations for Mandatory Evacuation Orders are possible for the next 48 hours.
Road Closures will take effect at various locations leading to the Mandatory Evacuation Order locations. These closures will be strictly enforced by the Sierra Madre Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department. The cooperation of our residents is crucial to the safety and protection of life and property in these areas.
Residents are asked to follow evacuation orders. Residents who prefer to stay in their homes threaten themselves, their neighbors, and emergency personnel.
The City has requested mutual aid from surrounding agencies including the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department.
An emergency meeting of the Sierra Madre City Council will be held this evening at 5:30PM in the City Council Chambers at City Hall. The Council will be considering a Declaration of a Local Emergency at this time. Such a declaration puts the City of Sierra Madre in a better position to recover costs that are associated with the emergency, as well as assisting our efforts in coordinating mutual aid.
Additional Important Information:
o The City has opened the Community Recreation Center at 611 E. Sierra Madre Blvd as an evacuation location. Crated animals will be allowed.
o The City will operate a shuttle to from Mt. Wilson Trail Park (“Turtle Park”) to the Community Recreation /Center from 11:00AM to 1:00PM this afternoon.
o Sand and sandbags are available 24 hours a day at the City Maintenance Facility. The address is 621 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. The sand and sandbags are located north of the Sierra Vista Park tennis courts, and next to the Sierra Madre Rose Float building. Residents must fill their own bags and are advised to bring a shovel.
o Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road are all closed until further notice.
The City of Sierra Madre is appreciative of the diligent preparations and friendly cooperation that its residents have demonstrated through all of our recent emergencies.
City Upgrades to Red Flag, Some Neighborhoods Under Mandatory Evacuation Orders
City of Sierra Madre: Red Flag Alert 1/20/2010, 8:00AM.
Sierra Madre has made it through the first round of this week’s major storm event. There have been no reports of any injuries or major property damage. Skyland Drive has once again experienced the largest amounts of debris flows in the City.
The City would like to advise all residents that we have now issued a Red Flag Alert as a result of a Phase 2 Debris and Mudflow warning from the County of Los Angeles Public Works Department. Weather forecasts are predicting higher concentrations of rainfall in the area.
The following locations are now under a Mandatory Evacuation Order, effective noon today:
o All homes located on Skyland Drive.
o Woodland Drive between Yucca Trail and Sturtevant Drive.
o The upper and lower portions of Brookside Lane.
o Lotus Lane above the debris basin.
o The private sections of Auburn Avenue above Elm Street.
The above locations have been identified as having an increased chance of potentially heavy debris flows. Additionally, the City would like to make sure that all residents that live in the urban/wildlife interface to continue to be “set” to go at a moment’s notice and continue their emergency preparations. Additional locations for Mandatory Evacuation Orders are possible for the next 48 hours.
Additional Important Information:
o The City has opened the Community Recreation Center at 611 E. Sierra Madre Blvd as an evacuation location. Crated animals will be allowed.
o A debris deflection structure will be erected at the northern Brookside Lane & Woodland Drive intersection at approximately 8:00 AM. This will close northern Brookside Lane at the very top of Woodland Drive to all vehicular traffic.
o Sand and sandbags are available 24 hours a day at the City Maintenance Facility. The address is 621 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. The sand and sandbags are located north of the Sierra Vista Park tennis courts, and next to the Sierra Madre Rose Float building. Residents must fill their own bags and are advised to bring a shovel.
o Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road are all closed until further notice.
The City of Sierra Madre is appreciative of the diligent preparations and friendly cooperation that its residents have demonstrated through all of our recent emergencies.
For updates and future emergency information, please be sure to monitor the City’s Communication tools:
City Website (www.cityofsierramadre.com)
SMTV3, (channel 3 on Time Warner Cable)
Sierra Madre Emergency Blog (www.sierramadrepio.blogspot.com.)
Email Alerts “eBlasts” - To register for email alerts please visit www.cityofsierramadre.com, click on AccessSierraMadre, and then click CommunicationLink to register your email address.
Sierra Madre has made it through the first round of this week’s major storm event. There have been no reports of any injuries or major property damage. Skyland Drive has once again experienced the largest amounts of debris flows in the City.
The City would like to advise all residents that we have now issued a Red Flag Alert as a result of a Phase 2 Debris and Mudflow warning from the County of Los Angeles Public Works Department. Weather forecasts are predicting higher concentrations of rainfall in the area.
The following locations are now under a Mandatory Evacuation Order, effective noon today:
o All homes located on Skyland Drive.
o Woodland Drive between Yucca Trail and Sturtevant Drive.
o The upper and lower portions of Brookside Lane.
o Lotus Lane above the debris basin.
o The private sections of Auburn Avenue above Elm Street.
The above locations have been identified as having an increased chance of potentially heavy debris flows. Additionally, the City would like to make sure that all residents that live in the urban/wildlife interface to continue to be “set” to go at a moment’s notice and continue their emergency preparations. Additional locations for Mandatory Evacuation Orders are possible for the next 48 hours.
Additional Important Information:
o The City has opened the Community Recreation Center at 611 E. Sierra Madre Blvd as an evacuation location. Crated animals will be allowed.
o A debris deflection structure will be erected at the northern Brookside Lane & Woodland Drive intersection at approximately 8:00 AM. This will close northern Brookside Lane at the very top of Woodland Drive to all vehicular traffic.
o Sand and sandbags are available 24 hours a day at the City Maintenance Facility. The address is 621 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. The sand and sandbags are located north of the Sierra Vista Park tennis courts, and next to the Sierra Madre Rose Float building. Residents must fill their own bags and are advised to bring a shovel.
o Bailey Canyon Park, Mt. Wilson Trail, and Chantry Road are all closed until further notice.
The City of Sierra Madre is appreciative of the diligent preparations and friendly cooperation that its residents have demonstrated through all of our recent emergencies.
For updates and future emergency information, please be sure to monitor the City’s Communication tools:
City Website (www.cityofsierramadre.com)
SMTV3, (channel 3 on Time Warner Cable)
Sierra Madre Emergency Blog (www.sierramadrepio.blogspot.com.)
Email Alerts “eBlasts” - To register for email alerts please visit www.cityofsierramadre.com, click on AccessSierraMadre, and then click CommunicationLink to register your email address.
Friday, January 1, 2010
SMRFA WINS FIFTH CONSECUTIVE AWARD!!!
Congratulations to the Sierra Madre Rose Float Association, whose float "California Girls" won for the Association its FIFTH CONSECUTIVE AWARD. This year's float won the Governor's Trophy, given for Best Depiction of Life in California. Way to go SMRFA!! Click above photo to see it larger. Click the following link to view video of the final judging of "California Girls." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcUkodxRPps Click here to see more photos of the final judging. Photo Copyright Bill Coburn, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
City Rescinds Yellow Flag, No Alert at This Time
The City of Sierra Madre has rescinded the Yellow Flag alert and is now at a "no flag alert" situation. The Los Angeles County of Public Works has posted a message early this morning that their debris and mudflow potential forecast is not warranted at this time. Crews are working to clean up the mud that has been deposited on city streets.
The City would like to thank everyone for their diligent preparations.
The City would like to thank everyone for their diligent preparations.
800 block of Skyland is closed
Sent from iPhone. For more detail and additional (better) photos, visit www.SierraMudre.info
LACDPW Ends Phase I Watch for Sierra Madre
LACDPW has announced at 6:49am that “WATER RESOURCES DIVISION HAS DETERMINED THAT A DEBRIS AND MUDFLOW POTENTIAL FORECAST IS NOT WARRANTED AT THIS TIME.” In other words, Phase I alert for Sierra Madre has ended. This should also result in the City announcing shortly that Yellow Flag alert has ended.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
