ojai news at The Ojai Post :: blog, newspaper, events in Ojai, California

If chains and elite housing are such stunningly good ideas, presumably they can stand up to any vote of the people.

But if they are ideas to make Ojai as ordinary as any of the cute little, chain laden villages along the coast then they need to be soundly defeated, something we can't do without voting.

Thanks to Mr. Furchtenicht for leading the effort to give Ojai citizens voice. And shame on the city attorney for his bullying effort to take it away.

Thank you for the excellent report Leslie. For those of you interested in reading the actual code on the initiative process, read CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 9200-9226 (Chapter 3, Article 1); it's not very long and it's pretty clear.

Recently, my wife and I left the Ojai Valley and moved to a more affordable location. The majority of our decision to move was because we as a young professional couple couldn't afford to stay in Ojai. We wanted to buy a house but the property listing were not even close to our buget.

What I have just read about the city thwarting Mr. Furchtenicht from his attempt at making changes to affordable housing in Ojai digusts me. You would think at such a time as re-election the city wouldn't purpose such a lawsuit. It seems to me that the city only wants to protect the haves and not the ones who actually give back to the community in which they live. From my new home I am giving a huge War Cry to Mr. Furchtenicht to not stand down from the line he's drawn. You are standing up for what is right in Ojai!

I am in favor of our right to vote on the affordable housing projects and no chain stores or restaraunts in Ojai. I have lived here 53 years and see many changes good for the tourist but not good for local business owners and long time life time resident.

So let me get this straight. Throughout the Day fire emergency, the city council has done nothing - no distribution of information, no special meetings, no coordination of resources, no assistance to residents, nothing on the city Web site. Then if someone merely wants to gather signatures so people can ask the city council to consider doing something, the council sues him? It seems to me this is a do-nothing council ("we do nothing, and you better not try to get us to do anything either") and we should throw the bums out.

When you have achitects who make their living from planning, encouraging growth AND running the city, what do you expect?
It seems to me that there is a conflict of interest within our city government.
David Bury and others in his cozy circle have for years, blamed others for Ojai's problems, while in the background, he keeps drawing plans for his "new Ojai".
No more architects on the council or planning commision would help us all.

Fantastic job on the fire info Tyler.....

The City Attorney is welcome to reply to me: tyler -at- ojaipost dot com. We will be happy to host a dialogue here at The Ojai Post. I am interested in fostering community communication and transparency in government.

I see no reason why the City cannot move forward to put well-intentioned initiatives in front of the citizens of Ojai. The City's actions of late, coupled with the inaction during the fire, make no sense to me.

If Jeff Furchtenicht was told by the Ojai City Attorney that he was going to be sued, why is this information being relayed second hand by Leslie Davis?

Why didn't Jeff post this story himself?

I have a hard time with he said/she said, especially when it involves serious issues.

I'm not an attorney, but I did find this of interest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLAPP
A Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation ("SLAPP") is a form of litigation filed by a large organization or in some cases an individual plaintiff, to intimidate and silence a less powerful critic by so severely burdening them with the cost of a legal defense that they abandon their criticism.

Mark Bowen - thanks for participating. Jeff is not an author on The Ojai Post. Leslie is. Would you rather have let this issue, if it is an issue, be swept completely under the rug, or would you rather have it explored by the community?

Mark - Thank you for your comments. I agree with you on the "he said/she said" point. That is precisely why I wrote this blog entry. People are talking about this around town. Talk generates rumors. I have some accurate information, and as a member of this community I feel passionate about letting people know what is really going on at city hall.

Jeff is also a friend of mine so I have been hearing abotu this since August. I'm disappointed by the actions of our city. (And did I say angry?) It shouldn't be so difficult to get a ballot initiative going. I've been involved in the process in other, larger cities and am shocked by Mr. Widders refusal to do his job.

Jeff is busy being sued, but I'm sure he'd be happy to talk to you.

All best, Leslie Davis

Tyler - At this point in time, and until Jeff Furchtenicht has his say, this issue may well be a Straw Man.

The use of the Straw Man has been well overdone by the GOP and their supporters, and I would hope that such a tactic would never be used at your credible blog.

In no way did I suggest that this issue -- if, as you say, it is an issue -- be swept under the rug; I just suggested that it be reported accurately and truthfully.

While Jeff might not be an author here, I think that he could post here, as has everyone else in this and other threads.

I cannot go back and forth on this with you as I have to work, but I hope that the whole story, whatever it may be, comes to light.

I doubt that you will hear from the City Attorney in this venue, however, in spite of your invitation. In my experience, an elected body would never allow their legal advisor to engage in back-and-forth discourse in an unofficial public forum.

Mark - I think it is important to focus on the issues that are important, a citizen being threatened with litagation, rather than how the information is being communicated on this blog.

I know Jeff, and know first hand what has happened from him. Furthermore, he is quoted in the article by Leslie. Of course, I will encourage him to post his comments here. Another option for everyone is to show up at City Council tonight and hear the issues in person. Let the council hear from the citizens of Ojai.

Since the link to Straw Man did not work in Mark's post, the link above is to a wikipedia article on the topic.

Last I read, the Constitution forbid Congress from passing ANY law that infringed on the People's Right to petition their government and by extension, due to Congress's power to grant statehood, any local attempt to infringe on that Right is a violation of the 1st Amendment.

Someone ought to sue the City and the City Attorney.

Thanks for the Day Fire updates....Your blog was the only place I could get consistant information!

I'm not really surprised by this latest development with our city council. It seems they have very little respect for initiatives specifically and democracy in general. This is the same city council that voted to table an initiative against the war in Iraq that had tremendous public support. Rather than voting yes or no on the resolution that, at the time had been approved by over 160 other cities nation wide including Los Angeles, the city council decided simply to table the whole thing. Not long after this they did the exact same thing with a proposed initiative against the Patriot Act. If anything, the initiate against the Patriot Act had even more support then the one against the war. Their professed objection to those initiatives was that they dealt with national issues outside the purview of the city council of Ojai. This was the excuse promulgated by city attorney Monte Widders. Many other cities didn't see it that way, but okay. Basically, the city council were at best unresponsive to the people of Ojai and at worst cowardly. On these initiatives, they are down right irresponsible. I'd like to know who among the city council authorized Monte to threaten legal action quell Jeff's initiatives. It's not legal for Monte to act alone on this, so there must have been a meeting where they decided to thwart democracy.

When you interviewed Jeff Furchtenicht, did he explain why the City Attorney asked him to withdraw the proposed initiatives? Did he present them in time for the November 1 election (I assume August 21 is timely, I just don't know personally), were they in the proper format, etc.? I'm curious, because I didn't get a sense of what the other side's position was on this issue. I know most think the city is wrong. But I wondered if they gave Mr. Furchtenichtsome sort of argument or explanation, no matter how weak.

I attended the City Council meeting this evening, my first I must confess despite being a long time resident of Ojai. I went as a result of the Ojai Post's story on the blocked initiative, thinking that it had to be a rumor, simple misinformation. Well, it was a crash course in how 'governance' works when people like me don't pay attention. Numerous concerned and articulate citizens took the floor to express their shock that such a basic right could be thwarted by one person and a compliant and interested City Council. As someone walking into this situation for the first time, the obvious question, unasked, was whose interest was served by blocking an initiative to keep franchise stores out of Ojai and build low cost housing. Ah, it's the same only story, and it's not a fight for love and glory, it's a fight for money and development. Developers, builders, banks, and Ojai is changing bit by bit. What kind of Ojai do we the citizens want? A city pushing a green sustainable agenda with affordable housing, or more MacMansions, MacArcades, MacMinimalls, etc. A question that deserves to be discussed openly and voted on. At least tonight free speech reigned in the hall, but was the First Amendment thwarted by manoeuvres designed to prevent the initiative from making the ballot in a timely fashion?

The first topic for tonight's meeting.
Should the new Wall Mart be placed in the Arcade or Libby park.
The second
How long will the strip mall be? 1/8 mile or 1/4 of a mile.
This meeting was conducted in closed doors ,shut windows ,and wide open pockets.

James, the answer is yes, the First Amendment has been thwarted. By permitting Monte Widders to refuse to do his statutory duty, the City Council has prevented us from even gathering signatures to get these initiatives in front of the Council, much less on the ballot. By actually filing suit, the Council has succeeded at the least in keeping these initiatives away from the public through this election cycle.

I am still stunned to learn that the City actually has filed a lawsuit against me.

I've asked Leslie and Tyler to post the entire exchange, from the filing of the initiatives through the lawsuit, so people can see for themselves exactly what their Council is doing. In the meantime, here is the last correspondence from Monte Widders to me, on September 12 (which he copied to the entire City Council):

"Mr. Furchtenicht: ... with respect to your offer of resolution, if you are suggesting that, if the Council were to request that the City Manager place the substance of your initiatives on a future agenda in exchange for you immediately withdrawing the two "Requests", I will communicate that offer to the Council. I would appreciate clarification of you [sic] suggestion."

I responded (also copying the entire Council):

"Dear Mr. Widders: ... [I]f the City Council places the substance of my proposed initiatives on an upcoming meeting agenda, so as a city we can begin to meaningfully engage these issues, of course I would withdraw the proposed initiatives ... I hope one or more council members, and/or Mr. Kersnar, is interested in that, and I look forward to hearing from any of them to make it happen. I don't know that you need to have a role in any of that, but if you do think you can play a constructive role, of course I would welcome that as well."

Not one member of the Council responded to this email or to my direct email to each of them. Widders never contacted me after September 12. I tried to find out what was going on from Jere Kersnar last Wednesday, and as Leslie reports, I was rebuffed.

The City's next move - announced belatedly at tonight's Council meeting - was actually to file suit against me! Something is seriously broken at City Hall. (And couldn't they at least have required their city attorney to have the common decency to tell me first, and perhaps try to find an alternative before filing a suit?)

For anyone else considering participating in city government, be warned.

What do you call it, when you deny the citizens of your city free speech and the right to political participation? The City Council and the City Manager hide behind the City Attorney’s double speak and say ‘Yeah that’s what I mean; it’s kind of a lawsuit.’ Citizens of Ojai who are willing to initiate change call it a SLAPP and an infringement upon our First Amendment Rights. This is political terrorism by in our own back yard. Every citizen of Ojai, if you agree with the ballot initiatives or not, needs to be outraged at what took place tonight in the City Council Chambers and take action at the voting poll come November. That is, unless the City Council, City Manager and City Attorney plan to nullify our votes.

The Ojai City Council, City Manager and City Attorney knew exactly what they were doing tonight, they are responsible individuals and they are denying you and me the ability to participate in our City government. They can call it whatever they want, but they are holding the citizens of Ojai hostage by their irresponsible use of legal maneuvering to stall the ballot initiatives proposed by the CITIZENS OF OJAI and their lawsuit against a fellow citizen of Ojai only demonstrates their intent of citizen non participation. Not one City Council member or the City Manager stepped up and suggested a possibility of a discussion, what does that tell you?

The City Council has made a clear statement that it does not want or appreciate any citizen’s participation. So they are SLAPP’ ing us.

This is what a SLAPP is:

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation—or ‘SLAPPs’—are lawsuits filed with the intent of stifling a defendant’s exercise of his or her First Amendment rights. Typically filed by corporations, real estate developers, or government officials against individuals who oppose them on public issues, SLAPPs have no merit but the suit instead intimidates opponents into silence, and sends a clear message to others that they too risk being sued if they speak out.

This is a campaign issue and any City Council member who endorsed this tactic needs to be voted out of office.

Get out the Vote – Change the voices of the City Council!!!!!

My letter, sent this morning:

Good morning, City Council.

I was caring for a child last night and therefore did not attend the Council meeting, where i understand there were people gathered to express discomfort with the threatened lawsuit by City Attorney Widders against the author of two initiatives filed with the City in proposal for the November ballot.

I would like to add my voice to the concern. As i understand them, the initiatives call for (1) promotion of independent business and discouragement of national chain stores in downtown Ojai, and (2) exploring options for affordable housing in the City of Ojai. Unless my understanding is far too simplified or completely off-base, i’m having a very hard time understanding why there’s opposition to them, much less why their proposal warrants legal action. What kind of democracy are we creating in our community when an informed, concerned local citizen can’t get some initiatives on the ballot? Do we have something to fear by allowing the people of this City to have options and be aware and informed and to express opinion? Let’s please be very careful about the way that we use our resources and whether our actions promote peace, freedom, and democracy or whether they foster fear and suppression.

I hope your meeting last night was productive. I count myself among the MANY who are watching this issue very closely.

Very sincerely,
-evan austin
210 Grand Avenue, Ojai

I appologize for not leaving my name. That being stated, after seeing what transpired at last night's city hall meeting, I fear that I might be sued for speaking my mind here. What the City "Esquire" did is, at this point, irreparable. It is now time to move on to the next step, which is to initiate some transparancy and evaluate his position as it relates to the council, and what kind of sweet, never ending hourly billing situation he has set up for himself over these last two decades! It is equally time to hold the City Council members accountable and to ask them who authorized this suit. Those who speak up and are willing to work this issue out with the public can stay... those who continue to play passive aggressive ego battles with kind-hearted citizens need to go! People, it is time that we mobilize!

I will certainly add my voice to the collective appall...

It is shocking to me that a progressive community like Ojai could be ruled by such apparently unethical council members.

Thankfully, I know we can do something about the current situation: we can act as agents of change. Namely we can work together to elect representatives who are willing to allow the democratic majority to influence the course of Ojai's future.

This place is too unique to allow special interests to have their way with the Ojai land and community.

Some questions I would throw out to the community...

• Can anyone suggest ethical candidates to replace the current Council members?
• Is there a formal campaign yet begun to do so? (Perhaps Mr. Furchtenicht would consider running for city council?)
• Can anyone recommend a legal organization that would consider getting involved pro bono in this case (ACLU, etc)?
• Are there other media outlets we could share the story with?

Let’s hold the city council accountable for this!

I know that I am not the only person in Ojai fed up with our elected government pretending to be a democracy while acting as a plutocracy catering to the interests of big business. And while we may not have immediate success influencing the actions of our citizen representatives in the halls of Congress, I feel confident that we can influence the course of an election here in Ojai.

(Diebold is headquartered in Ohio, not Ojai.)

I for one am ready to use my broader frustration with the course this country is taking under the current administration to fuel action in support of a new generation of ethical city council members here in Ojai.

The City Council is responsible for the legal action against Jeff. They would have had to give Monte Widders the authority to go ahead to sue Jeff. The weak argument that the initiatives don’t give enough direction on how to implement falls short. If there was a problem then their submission needed to serve as a beginning point for a discussion between the City and it’s citizens, you know the “WE THE PEOPLE” part of the Constitution, which the City Council completely ignored. The City Council chose to sue an individual, who represent us, for exercising his right to participate in the political process.

Monte Widders filed paperwork on September 25, 2006. On September 26, 2006, the day of the meeting Monte filed for another legal motion. Notice that the City Council had Monte file it under his name so they can look squeaky clean. You can follow the case by going to the Superior Courts Web site:

http://www.ventura.courts.ca.gov/

Click on Case Inquires, then make your way to the search screen, the case number is CIV243771

So for the City Council to act as if nothing is happening, everything is wonderful in our little town as long as we don not have to deal with the “WE THE PEOPLE” smacks of urban fascism.

Joe Divito and Carol Smith have a lot of explaining to do in any upcoming candidate forum.

Get out the vote – Change the voices of the Ojai City Council.

I send the following to the papers this morning.
In response to Mr. Hammerschmitt's "who is truly on the hook for lawsuit?" in the Ojai Valley News (9/27/06), let me say, "it was not I." What Leland says is my [Dennis Leary's] "Most inane local plitical move, ever," turns out to be my most brilliant tactical stike yet in the battle to save Ojai from her enemies.
A lawsuit was filed in Ventura Court Sept. 25 by the City of Ojai against one of her citizens for exercising his civil rights to petition the city that initiatives be placed on the ballot, regarding affordable housing and chain stores. He received the stunning news for the first time at the council meeting that he was being sued. Get a tape from city hall if you can stomach the shocking cruelty.
Contrary to the city manager's allegation that the suit was not a suit, and the city attorney's claim that he was not asking for a "dime," my fellow citizen and friend received a Summons and Notice that "You are being sued by Plaintiff, Monte L. Widders, an individual, in his official capacity as City Attorney for the City of Ojai." Furthermore, Widders is suing "DOES 1 through 50" as "Defendants" and "co-conspirators" "For costs of suit incurred herein," and "For any further relief the court deems proper."
It appears to me that the City of Ojai is attempting to squash its political opposition with the severest form of intimidation available, a lawsuit, upon Mr. Furchtenicht [and his wife and two young daughters]. Instead of following the standard and accepted practice of processing initiatives, supported by solid and extensive case law, the city has sought out, in my opinion, a few weak and unsustainable cases in an attempt to assert its will and power over citizens it wishes to marginalize and control.
You, dear reader, may be one of the co-conspirators and DOES in its sights, if you have ever dared to challenge the Ojai power structure, particularly by speaking or acting publicly. Another one of your fellow citizens was charged with a crime for not being on good behavior at a recent council meeting, after being escorted out of chambers by a sheriff.
My $10,000,000 lawsuit against the city triumvirate of Council, Widders and Horgan now pales next to the $40,000,000 we've spent defending against fire, and the multimillions in damage that the present leadership is doing and will do to its own infrastructure and citizenry by its special interest and conflict of interest policies.
Money, sex and power is the only language power complexes understand. $10,000,000 is not unreasonable in view of the fire that could burn Ojai down from within if these policies and politics are not effectively challenged now. Four years ago, honest and loyal Ojaians were neutralized as "fringe elements" by the same power structure that is doing the same thing now at election time.
Rest assured, Mr. Hammerschmitt, it will not happen again, and if I do not receive an apology from this power complex, for their libel, slander, defamation, and violation of the Brown Act, for the words "beyond contempt," "crackpot nonsense," and "fringe element," and when, due to their failure the cure the problem, I win a judgement against them, I will forgive the City of Ojai its part. I love Ojai and her people, and would never hurt her or them. Also be assured that you and your loved ones will not receive the same treatment if you end up "on the hook" as DOES 1-50. If the city wins a judgement against you as a co-conspirator, do you think it will not demand you pay?

The Ojai City Council members should be wondering if their seats are going to be pulled out from under them come November! This is a particularly BAD time to be attempting to silence the public as elections approach. Don't you realize that when you squash an ideal or someone's rights, others will stand up and fight to defend that freedom?

Maybe it is time to teach them that "fringe element" is just defensive banter, and in all actuality, the majority of Ojai citizens, once this news begins to filter through, will be appalled, sickened, and pissed off!!

Council Members: And so, I say, good luck to you all. I would begin cleaning up any mess you have made, so that your replacement has a nice transition...

Personally, I believe that if this lawsuit causes these initiatives to not move forward and allow the signatures to be gathered. Come November, seeing incumbent on the ballot will be an automatic non-vote for all city council members.

Our city officials need to be reminded of whom they are working for, the citizens of this City and not anyone else.

The fact of the matter is that according to the Brown Act, the city council must tell us who authorized Monte Widders to file a SLAPP suit against Jeff. It is simply beyond Mr. Widders' purview to have decided this all by himself. Especially because his law firm stands to make money from any legal action initiated by the city or otherwise. I think the citizens of Ojai need to know how the council members voted.

Let this situation be a warning to the citizenry of all small towns in America. Beware of the counter-interests of your civil servants in postions of power, who are appointed and not elected. I do not live in Ojai, but I would recommend that citizens should continue to demand that this frivolous lawsuit be dropped immediately, and that the process for bringing initiatives to ballot in the city of Ojai be made clear to all.

Those following the SLAPP implications may find this article interesting:

http://www.rcfp.org/news/mag/25-2/lib-antislap.html

The good news is that it seems that California is at the forefont of the country in terms of legal precedent in overturning SLAPP cases quickly and granting a redress of attorneys fees to a prevailing defendant.

I am outraged at this frivilous lawsuit wasting Ojai's public funds which could be used to help improve Ojai. The City Council should be ashamed of themselves. I feel like the City Council has violated the residents or Ojai, their constitiuents Civil Liberties. This case should be reported to the Ventura County Special Grand Jury who investigates City Council Members for inappropriate actions as political members sworn to uphold their constituents rights. Maybe even a class action lawsuit should be filed from Does 1 to 50 in return if there is an attorney willing to take on this case. Apparantely, the City Council thinks that they own Ojai and WE THE PEOPLE, are just interfering in them proceeding to turn our Ojai into the town they deem it should be. WE THE PEOPLE OF OJAI, need to start having meetings immediately before election day with the new people running for City Council who will uphold what the majority of people in Ojai feel would best benefit the citizens of Ojai. Let's ban together for this good cause to uphold our civil rights. Don't let the City Council use their scare tactics to silence the majority of the hard working people who can't afford a home for their family, and the local mom and pop shops who are struggling to make ends meet. We need to mobilize NOW!

this is an INCREDIBLE turn of events, and AMAZING coverage! i'm thrilled to see so many voices participating in this way, and i fantasize about seeing this energy manifest itself in a high voter turn-out and local super-democracy.

HOWEVER, i'm becoming increasingly frustrated with some of the language that's being used in this thread. now, i identify with the frustration and even anger that comes with a situation such as this wherein many of our needs are not being met. but i dont believe we're processing that anger in a healthy way when we begin to create new enemy images and refer to the situation in militaristic terms, such as a "battle" or "fight" that must be "won". i suspect a lot of people will look right past my post and not give it much thought, and also believe that that's partly because that's how we're trained to communicate and we don't readily concieve of another option.

i'm worried that this violent language will find its way into City Hall (in fact, i know it's already no stranger to that place), and i suggest that we'd be much better served to identify with our needs and invest some time into seriously considering the needs of those in our city's government. they're people too, and i foresee mutual success if we can connect to them on that level. approaching them in anger and with "might makes right" opposition only engenders defensiveness, and we all know that.

I think citizens are frustrated at the asymetric structure of government, where certain officials have power, and are using it in ways that go beyond what one might expect from locally elected and appointed representatives. My hope is that this democratic forum will realign the balance between Ojai's citizens and Ojai's officials.

In retrospect, outrage was a poor choice of words. I am sadened that the City Council felt it necessary to file a lawsuit against a citizen who was attempting to assist other citizens of Ojai by trying to submit a proposition which would work to provide low cost housing for families of the Ojai Valley. This is a great cause, and it is sad that it cannot be put to vote by the citizens of Ojai on election day. In using the words we must mobilize now, I meant that we need to support candidates that would be more open to the needs and voices of the citizens of Ojai.

I applaud all the brave souls who have been voicing concern about the policies of the Ojai council regarding the initiatives, in view of the possibility that the Ojai Post and its posters will be prime suspects as "co-conspirators" and "DOES 1-50" in the city's lawsuit filed 9/25, and subject to costs, despite the denial that there even was a lawsuit made by the city manager on 9/26, and the related denial by the city attorney that he was not seeking a "dime." Do you really believe this line?
Regarding the military terminology, raised by Evan, it is a concern. Yet, to foreswear the use of strong language, when an opposing power complex has in fact declared war on the "gentle folk" is to let aggressors have their way, and to disempower one's own ideals. Military language, such as "war" is a language and spin strategy for political gain, and I feel must be used without forsaking our gentle ideals. The political and sometime religious right do not hesitate to get down in the mud and wrestle, nor should we if we hope to have success. I tone my rhetoric down, but the opposition often just does not relate to Non Violent Communication (NVC), commendable as it is. At this point in our cultural history, we're talking about survival, and therefore, "all is fair in love and war." I love Ojai and therefore I will not lay down my arms before an implacable enemy. I will be gentle as a dove to the doves, but fierce as a hawk to the hawks. It is not personal. Personally, I like the council and their hired hands. I enjoy smoozing with them. It's their policies that need to be killed, with love. At this point, it is either them or me (and my loved ones). They have sued a fellow citizen and his family because he dared to do something out of love for Ojai, which happened to oppose and expose their hidden agenda. Power complexes by definition are not gentle people. They are in power by aggressive tactics, such as the ones we are now witnessing with the SLAPPed initiatives.
Be assured that there is a political fire burning inside the city, more dangerous than the external fire the Post is so gallantly covering. The Ojai powers that be have shown their true colors, and it is scary, which tends to produce denial and other defense mechanisms. Their general plan is to attack the people's general plan and lifestyle, and hope the people are intimidated and do not resist. They did this same thing four years ago, but now is not then, and we are stronger and more knowledgeable now.
When they see how strong we are, they will retreat to a fallback position of damage control, and will attempt to defuse the situation so they can maintain their power. This is precisely the time for us to keep the pressure on, and go for the metaphorical "kill." (Sorry, Evan. I may be wrong, and making a strategic blunder, but I must follow my heart when it counsels tough love. Remember, our lives and the life of the planet are at stake).
The only way, as I see it, to save the Ojai dream is to face political reality, and elect Leonard Klaif, Pete LaFollette and myself to council, so we can save Ojai's house from being burned to the ground, with the women and children in it. (Is that language appropriate, or over the top?)
Did you know the League of Women Voters is sponsoring a Candidate Forum on Tuesday, Oct. 3, at 7PM at 410 Church Road in the Hitching Post Clubhouse? I have not seen any publicity about it so I'm noticing it here. Spread the word.
Also, Lennie, Pete and I sponsor candidate forums on Sundays at 2 PM at 308 Aliso St., and on Wednesday afternoons at 304 N. Montgomery (the times there vary). These have been advertised in the Ojai Valley News. There is a forum at 308 Aliso tomorrow, Oct. 1.
If you have questions, call me at 302-2431. We need political firefighters, too. I think we can tell which way the wind blows.
Dennis Leary

I understand your sentiment Evan, and I agree with it in many cases. However, I think people are just sick and tired of the totally unresponsive local, state and national governments we have in this, the sixth year of what was supposed to be a new millennium. I seems that many of the politicians in our governments have no qualms about saying all the right things and doing all the wrong things. Whether it be the Bush administration's "Clear Air Initiative" or Jere Kersnar's "quilt" the art of double speak has risen to unparalleled heights. I'll remind you that carbon monoxide is both lethal and totally clear, and quilts can be used to cover things up. I'm aware that all this is not a new development. But does its longevity mean we have to put up with the status quo forever?

While it is enticing to use the metaphors of war here, I'll instead say that it is time for a Massive Sea Change in our Democracy. It's time for us to HAVE a real democracy ON ALL LEVELS; Local (FIRST), County, State and all the way up to Washington DC. I know this sounds a bit over-the-top, and maybe it's a product of the coffee I'm drinking, but I doubt it. One thing I know for absolute sure is that we have to change things in this world before the seas really do start to change. The sheer volume of problems coming at us from global warming to global war, endless empire and the WAL*MARTification of the planet seem overwhelming, and none of it can be fixed without first steps.

Our first step is Ojai. If we can succeed in breaking out of this corporatist, top down model here and WAKE UP, then it might just be possible to turn to even higher goals. We need real Democracy, and yes Evan, real peace. I believe it can be done using peaceful methods, but that doesn't mean that we should expect any peace back in response. This SLAPP suit against Jeff is a kind of violence against democracy. It is the machinery of the city funded by our local taxes, parking enforcement fines (new), fees to rent Libbey Bowl, etc. used to illegally thwart the expression of democracy. It must be changed. Though I agree with you that peaceful actions and the application of Gandhi's Satyagraha should be our primary methods, I also know that a certain amount of politics is called for. Unfortunately, our politics is setup in the mode of competition. There is a winner and a loser and someone beats someone else. Don't get annoyed with people because they choose to use the vernacular of war in these instances. To gain any power to change we will have to engage the system in it's house. That doesn't mean we have to behave like they do, but it does mean we will be in direct opposition. I've got to stop drinking so much of this coffee. Jeez.

--Politics is the are of controlling your environment -- HST.

oops!
Politics is the art not are.

well said, Sean.

i'm resonating with your expression that people are sick and tired of not having their needs met. we're all sick of feeling disconnected from our government, and we're tired of the disconnected responses we get when we DO try to communicate with them.

i'm also really enjoying your choice of language. while i dont want this discussion to sidetrack to that topic, i do merely want to point out that you've been able to say what you mean without the war metaphors - and strongly, at that.

i'm 100% with you when you say that we must enact change on every level, and that it must start here in our own neighborhoods. i'm not so naive as to believe that giving love, respect, and peace ensures getting those things in return. however, neither do i believe that those are weak ways of communicating. (i'm not saying you suggested that they are...i'm just asserting that i believe they're powerful). violence begets violence, so even though we can reasonably expect violence in response, we break that cycle by refusing to participate. i dont believe there's a winner and a loser and that someone gets beaten. all those terms are too loaded for me. some will call it nit-picky or wordsmithing, but it helps me to think that in a true democracy there are those who are chosen to lead and there are those whose work lies elsewhere.

for the record, i'm not annoyed with anyone. i used the word "frustrated", and by that i mean that the war language that i continue to see among peaceful people doesnt match the peaceful culture that i am trying to be in the world.

that sounds awful friggin' fuzzy...perhaps i SHOULD drink some coffee!

I find it interesting that Joe Devito's personal vision in the Voter Information Pamphlet I received states "Be available to all citizens" and to "Preserve the unique qualities of life in Ojai". Interesting? Then why file a SLAPP again a citizen attempting pursue those same beliefs.
Also interesting is that Carol B. Smith states that she pledges to continue her leadership role in "Preserving our stock of low to moderate cost housing, and adding units that local people can afford". Interesting? Then why file a SLAPP again a citizen attempting pursue those same beliefs. They are both serving on the current City Council. I plan to be at the meetings to hear what the other candidates personal vision statements are. Thanks to Dennis Leary for mentioning when the meetings are so that we can attend to learn more about the other candidates.

The manipulations of the city attorney, Monte, and the city manager, Jerald Kersnar, are trying to make OJAI into Santa Barbara by pushing out the poor and inviting in franchised businesses which is contrary to the established attitude of OJAI. If you want Santa Barbara, go there. This is OJAI, not Santa Barbara. The two ballot measures, one: to limit franchise out of town business and, the second: to ensure low income housing are being stalled and blocked by the city manager and town lawyer. Lawyers all over the state are laughing at this.

It's like an attack on the individual citizens and the community as a whole.

A bad move on the part of the City Council. Gerald and Monte are doing the bad stuff and the City Council is getting heat. The city manager and lawyer need to be reined in. The City Council really knows inside themselves that this is headed for trouble and if City Council goes along with them, they will lose stature in the community. It's bound to fail and you,City Council, have lost the respect of fellow citizens for opposing the due process of law in a democratic society and because it's an obvious attempt to stifle dissent.

You put yourself as being against low income housing, against limiting the influx of franchised business coming into OJAI, against the democratic process and against the people of OJAI.

It's like a slap in the face to the people and the result is it's infuriating the citizens and uniting them again the Council. This thing is backfiring on the Council. You cannot possibly win, you are bound to lose. It has blown up in your face and you know you have lost the trust and respect of the people of OJAI.

It is a naked attempt to disenfranchise the voters from having anything to say about the running of OJAI.

I cannot think of anything that would insult and infuriate the public more than to be put out of the picture and not be able to vote on helping the poor and keeping the hometown business we already have in OJAI. This attempt is saying to us, "The public be damned."

I believe that we are in order for a complete house cleaning. A total recall of the whole city government, including dumping the city lawyer and city manager.

Look at what's going on:

The big build out of condos

Franchise restaurant in town

O-Hi Frostie gone

The Mallory Way Cottages low income slated to be condos

Not fulfilling state requirements for low housing

84K changing the fountain at Libbey Park while we have low pay for teachers

Dressing up the crosswalks

And those trees in the street on Matilija

What a hazard that is and the city hasn't got money to repair the roads

What's next? Wal Mart in OJAI, another attempt to put in a freeway? Watch out for cutting down the trees. More laws, restrictions animals?

It's up to you, the citizens of Ojai to put a stop to the reckless and clandistine behavior of City Hall, now before it's all gone. This is the truth. Write them. Call them. Let the avalanche of public outrage fall on them.

Gerald Kersner said he was going to "Finish Ojai". If he has his way, it won't be OJAI anymore.

I find it odd that even after a Grand Jury has notified the City that they are not doing enough to address the affordable housing issue for low-income to very low-come families in this city. The city's response is lacking any real substance and any introspection.

I appears to me (and please let me know if someone has a differing opinion) that the city is not really acknowledging that they need to do more. They are merely passing the buck to the state and/or saying they have already done a lot on this issue.

Below is a link to the city's Response to the Grand Jury Regarding Affordable Housing Recommendations.

http://www.ci.ojai.ca.us/vertical/Sites/{6CAA84A0-9B68-4637-964F-ED4B5D8E7542}/uploads/{9250259E-A2AB-4C15-8727-50D8B904E9D7}.DOC

Why are these matters taken so personally. Seems so cut and dry to if the city commissioner wants to fight these brillant and vital initiative why won't they let democracy follow it natural course and let the good folks of Ojai decide by vote. I have never heard anyone beeing sued for proposing initiatives seems to me like some imitidating tactics from some ill advised city official towards Jeff.

Regarding Tom Nervey's post above, about affordable housing, I have spoken to the council about it twice, to no effect.
Their response to the Grand Jury's report was denial of any problem. Their official letter in response pointed to their own "shining examples."
This is but one example among many of lack of integrity and honesty in government. I asked them to withdraw the letter and rewrite it, but of course they would not.

I am sending the following to Jeff Furchtenicht, but rather than having to type it twice, I am posting it here for general consumption, and will refer him here.
I strongly support your resistance to the city's intimidation, misinformation, and misleading of the public. We need to stand up now for truth and justice.
I have in hand your draft petitions (I don't have your email of the actuals), and the Widders' lawsuit. I would directly attack his concepts that the initiatives are "facially unconstitutional because they do not actually enact legislation," and that they have "fatal flaws." I know there are also subsidiary issues with the suit.
Nowhere does Widders actually quote the constitution which states: "The initiative is the power of the electors to propose statutes and amendments to the Constitution and to adopt or reject them." Your initiatives are "legislative in character" since they "direct the City Council" to "take measures," and they further state "this ORDINANCE [my emphasis] be submitted..." Therefore, the initiatives are "a method of enacting legislation." The initiatives do amend "an existing City ordinance or its General Plan."
The City should have enough intelligence to put 2 and 2 together. They can write your directions into the ordinances and general plan, if they have the will to do so. By their actions, they don't want to, and are excusing their unwillingness to honor the people's rights by a purposeful misinterpretation of legal concepts. The initiatives do "amend" the city's "constitution" which is the ordinances and general plan. Widders is doing what he is accusing you of doing: "misleading the public with inaccurate information."
Widders' claim that the defendant will not be harmed is false. Remember, DOES 1-50 are also defendants. Our first amendment rights have been harmed by not getting our initiatives on the Nov. 7th ballot.
I will avoid military language, so let me say peace, truth, and justice require strong, tough love now to stand up for ourselves and the town we love. Let's support Jeff.
Quotes from California Bar Journal by J. Clark Kelso:
"The Supreme Court's brief docket orders in these two cases send an unmistakable message that pre-election judicial review of initiatives is strongly disfavored, almost to the point of being unavailable."
"...the court's pre-election review cases and cases involving post-election interpretation of initiatives have always focused on the voters' likely intentions and reasonable expectations. Moreover, every effort has been made to give voters the oportunity to exercise the franchise. It is hard to argue with this preference when California's Constitution expressly provides that 'all political power is inherent in the people.' (Cal. Const., Art. II, Section 1)."

There's a citizen's forum cominng up this Tues. 10/3 at 7pm. Look at the latest post for where. I think this would be a very good place for citizens of Ojai to publicly ask the two incumbent city council people how they voted on whether or not to sue Jeff Furchtenicht for trying to excercise direct democracy by submitting two initiatives for the November ballot. Did Joe Devito and Carol Smith vote to thwart democracy?

See http://www.ojaievents.com for details on location of the Candidate Forum

I've just come back from the candidates forum and I'm totally disgusted. The forum was run in such a way that direct questions could not be posited to the candidates. You had to submit a card with your question on it for the moderator to read. Mine was the second question asked: "How did the incumbents vote with regard to authorizing Monte Widders to sue Jeff Furchtenicht for his initiatives?" A simple, straightforward question. Joe Devito answered first that he could not say because the matter was taken up in closed session. He said that he would "really be in trouble under the Brown Act." He added that Mayor Bury would have an editorial about it in tomorrows OVN. Given the previous hatchet job of an article and the unbelievably biased editorial by Mr. Bradigan on this subject, I can't say I'm surprised that the paper is only giving the councils' side. It would seem that ojaipost is the only place to get the real news on this issue.

I'll give Mr. Devito the benefit of the doubt and assume that he's aware that the Brown Act is about OPEN government. Section 54957.1(b),(c) of the Brown Act provides: "All actions taken and all votes in closed session must be publicly reported orally or in writing within 24 hours ... and copies of any contracts or settlements approved must be made available promptly." If Joe knows what he's talking about with regard to the Brown Act, then this would mean he willfully lied to the gathering of forty people put on by the League of Women's Voters when he claimed he couldn't tell his constituents how he voted. Okay, maybe it wasn't out and out lying. Perhaps he just really doesn't know anything about the Brown Act. Unfortunately, that knowledge is something with which a six term council member should be familiar.

Carol Smith promptly seconded Joe's evasion. Incredibly, she added that she couldn't understand the initiatives when she read them. The initiatives are each one page long, written in plain language. Not a word of legalese. A ten year old could understand them. Perhaps this is why Mr. Widders decided they were unworthy in the first place. Again, Ms. Smith should be aware that the question I asked is both legitimate and deserving of an honest answer, not a cynical evasion attempting to use a law about, of all things, Open Government! Like I said, I'm disgusted.

I didn't even get to ask how much Ms. Smith and Mr. Devito and their cohorts on the council authorized the City to spend on this lawsuit. $50,000? $100,000?

Tyler, it is well past time to take up Jeff's suggestion and post the entire exchange, from the text of the initiatives through all the correspondence leading to the lawsuit. This is a serious campaign issue that goes directly to the fitness for office of the incumbents. If the two long time incumbents know nothing of the Brown Act and Open Government it is little wonder they've chosen to sue an Ojai citizen for trying to make things better. People need to be able to see the actual initiatives and correspondence between the City and Monte Widders so they can determine for themselves what is going on here. At least one side in this preceding can be open.

Quotation from one of the founders of this country "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!"--Isn't that what America is supposed to stand for? One of the great things about this town of Ojai that prompted me to become a homeowner here was that I felt "we the people" might mean something here!!

I look forward to seeing the exchange between the City and Jeff. I am also curious to see exactly how Jeff’s affordable housing initiative will work. I know some affordable housing codes mandate that developer’s set aside a specific percentage of building construction or conversions to carefully defined affordable housing standards (I’ve seen 7.5% as a common number). On the other hand, the City of Ventura favors a multi-pronged affordable housing program that works to rehabilitate housing for low-income residents, provides a homebuyer’s assistance program, and pursues grant money as well as other alternative funding sources. Given the Council’s response, we need to make sure that the Council has no “wiggle room” in implementing Jeff’s plan.

As for the “chain store” issue, the Council’s response again illustrates why we need someone like Jeff (who by the way, runs a very cool coffee company that is unique and original and in no sense follows the chain/Starbucks mentality) to put together a legislative program to keep out the chain stores and help retain local ownership. We don’t want this very important issue left to the Council to decide what they want done. Cities throughout the United States have enacted specific legislation that limits the size of storefront chain stores can occupy (for example can't fill more than a 2,500-square-foot storefront), requires chain stores to apply for a special-use permit, requires that they obtain a "certificate of appropriateness" and meet certain appearance standards. I cannot see why the Council will not let Jeff put his initiative on the ballot so we can vote on his plan for keeping the City of Ojai unique and chain-free.

If we do not get Jeff’s initiatives on the ballot, we may end up with a city council that buries these ideas in committees instead of putting in place clear, people-drafted legislation that gets the job done.

Mayor Bury's editorial from today's OVN:

Taking the Initiative
David Bury
Guest editorial

I am writing to set the record straight regarding
two proposed initiatives, one regarding affordable housing and the other regarding chain store operations, which have been submitted to the city of Ojai.

The city has asked for the Superior Court’s help in determining whether these initiatives are in the
proper form to move forward. Some people,
however, whether motivated through a misunderstanding or something else, have tried to characterize this effort as stifling democracy; nothing could be further from the truth.

First, it is important to know what initiatives are.
They are petitions to the government to either enact
a proposed law directly, or to submit the proposed
law for voter approval. In order to reach the decision about whether to consider the law, the
petition for an initiative must be supported by a
required number of signatures and, in order to be circulated for signature, the petition must be placed in proper form. The power of initiative is embedded
in the State Constitution, and the procedures to
follow are contained in state law. One of those
provisions specifies that an initiative must enact a
specific law (ordinance), or make a specific change
to plans, regulations, etc.

The two proposed initiatives submitted by Mr. Jeff Furchtenicht are, in the opinion of the city
attorney, improper in that they do not propose any
specific statute or ordinance and are unclear
regarding the action(s) that must be taken if they
were to be adopted.

These initiatives ask the City Council to “consider
and adopt such measures” as will implement
laudable, but overly general, concepts without
specific ordinances attached. How can informed
citizens approve new laws when they have not been
clearly defined? However, the city attorney
acknowledges the procedures for making this ruling are unclear, and that others may disagree. After considering various courses of action, the council directed the city attorney to request Mr.
Furchtenicht to re-write and re-submit his
initiatives to meet our understanding of state
standards or, if the author declined to re-write the initiatives, obtain the review of the court to determine if these initiatives comply with the law. Subsequently, Mr. Furchtenicht refused to withdraw the proposed initiatives, and the declaratory relief action was filed with the Superior Court on Sept. 25.
This action is being taken to clarify the process, not
obstruct the citizen’s right to petition.

Some might ask, why not let the initiative process
proceed as currently presented, let the people vote and then, depending on the outcome, let the courts determine the constitutionality after the fact? But isn’t it wiser to prepare sound initiatives that meet
the letter of the law, let the people vote, and then if passed, enact this new legislation? And why waste
our citizens’ money on special elections costing tens of thousand of dollars only to have the potentially unconstitutional results thrown out by the courts?
To this council, it seemed wiser to proceed with
clear and legal initiatives from the start, let the people decide and proceed accordingly.

It is important to understand that this matter, as it stands, has nothing to do with the merits of the substance of the proposed initiatives. Most people, including all the City Council members, are concerned about the impacts that a lack of
affordable housing can have on our community, and
about the possible threat to our community character posed by national mass merchandisers. But the proposed initiatives would, we believe, cause
many more problems than they would solve if enacted. Rather than allowing the community to
focus on the very real problems raised in the
proposed petitions, we would instead be distracted
by untangling the legal morass caused by approval of initiatives that are later found to be unconstitutional.

As most people know, the City Council must operate under a comprehensive, strict set of rules for how to conduct the people’s business. But so
must anyone else who wants to become involved in
the people’s business, and the declaratory relief
action sought by the city is an attempt to clarify for everyone what those rules are, and what must be
done to comply with them.

David Bury is the mayor of the city of Ojai.

Anonymous - please see the home page for David Bury's editorial and reader comments. Thanks, Tyler

Please see home page's "Ojai Ballot Initiatives: Letter from the Mayor," for information on my response to the mayor.

When you have achitects who make their living from planning, encouraging growth AND running the city, what do you expect?
It seems to me that there is a conflict of interest within our city government.
David Bury and others in his cozy circle have for years, blamed others for Ojai's problems, while in the background, he keeps drawing plans for his "new Ojai".

David Bury's legacy for his years of (dis)service: Condominiums replace cottages. National chains replace independent institutions downtown like the O-Hi Frostie. Vacant storefronts. Property ownership realigned in the hands of developers. And in his culminating act? He sues a citizen for proposing initiatives. He becomes the public face of this misbegotten lawsuit, and embarasses himself and the city by defending it well past the time when everyone else knows it is a SLAPP, calling people who question it "reality-challenged." He has been a council member, sure, and until recently, he'd even seemed like one of the better ones - but he stands naked now, and it really stretches the term to say he has served Ojai. Time to get back in the private sector, and serve the developers without a conflict.