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

What is going on in this town that discussion and citizen disatisfaction is so intolerable? It sounds like Jones was out of order. In court, it takes an awful lot of "out of order" statements to trigger the forcible removal of an individual from the courtroom. This is almost surreal.

Fresh Baked Cookies and a Near Riot! What more could you ask for on a Monday night?

I saw a woman in gigantic sunglasses pacing the perimter of the room, clearly agitated. Then what I witnessed was that same woman completely out of control and acting inappropriately. She assumed it was "her" question being asked, but there was a huge stack of questions that somehow had to be widdled down into something more digestible and indicative of what the masses wanted to know. For example, my question about affordable housing was not asked verbatim, but perhaps 12 others had similar questions. Ultimately, 10 questions were asked, affordable housing among them, and how the moderators could be expected to ask all of them verbatim would be asking everyone to stay the entire night. I think if Cathy Jones has a pointed question she wants answered in a specific way by a certain candidate, she ought to get on the phone and ask it (then perhaps blog about it). Creating a disturbance at a public meeting, screaming like a b-movie actress, flailing about, kicking in hysterics and beating down the door is probably not the best way to get your point across. But, hey, it's great fodder. And P.S. what was with her gigantic sunglasses?

This was my wife's and my first Ojai candidate forum, and we came away in complete agreement that it was way better than a "Law & Order" rerun.

What is going on in this town that discussion and citizen disatisfaction is so intolerable? It sounds like Jones was out of order. In court, it takes an awful lot of "out of order" statements to trigger the forcible removal of an individual from the courtroom. This is almost surreal.

I'm always amazed at how fast news travels in this town.

This was not about intoleration for discussion. This whole forum was designed as a discussion, but rules for civil and respectful behavior need to be followed at these meetings or no exchange of information is possible.

I was present and only a few rows back from the front and I must dissagree that all this happened in a moment.

Ms. Jones talked with Scott for more than just a minute, there were two separate times that she leaned in to talk to him. She was obviously not happy and would not let it go. Several people sitting by me were whispering "what's wrong with her, what's she so upset about..?". To me she looked obviously agitated and angry, taking her sunglasses off, pushing her hair back and then putting her glasses back on; shaking her head angrily as the candidates were talking.

Capt. Norris approached after Scott was obviously trying to ignore her. The Captain placed his finger to his lips in a "shhhh" motion, which Ms. Jones saw but ignored. She continued to be vocal & challenged the candidates to "answer the question, is it a conflict of interest..." The Captain didn't touch her until she would not stop disrupting the meeting and then he only took hold of one arm in an attempt to lead her out the door. Only when she grabbed for the door jam and started resisting did stronger tacts happen.

Anyone who thinks this is a freedom of speech issue is wrong. No doubt endless posts will be written about this episode, but the truth is she was disrupting a public meeting, was totally out of control and the officers had every obligation to remove her so that the forum could continue.

B - thanks for adding your perspective. Capt. Norris was actually keeping an eye on Cathy Jones earlier in the Forum over on the east side.

And yes, Scott Eicher was trying to ignore her, and she did make a disruption.

One note - I did not say that the whole situation inside took less than a minute - what I said was that Capt. Norris' attempted intervention was no more than about a minute - it happened very quickly from my perspective. I guess we could go to the video tape!

What happened outside afterwards was pretty shocking, but I am not making a judgement as to the actions that the officers deemed necessary to control the situation.

I was there and I'm sickened by the display of force used on a person trying to get a question asked. I don't care what kind of glasses they wore.

Why so anonymous? I was sickened that someone would act in such an extreme, disruptive and contentious manner. Listen, there was a brief moment when I actually felt afraid. Her violent outburst gave me pause to feel a tad vulnerable (in between moments of nervous laughter). I can understand the need for civil disobedience, but this was completely unwarranted. How about the need for civil discourse? If her actions were permitted to continue, what would have kept the rest of the people in the room from acting in a similar uncivilized manner? I doubt that anyone could have given her whatever answer she wanted to hear. It's not just about following the rules of parliamentary procedure, it's about being decent. Kudos to the moderators, candidates and remaining audience members who held it together following her tirade.

You know from my OVN guest editorials and postings on the Post that I have real concerns about our current city government, particularly with respect to its choices regarding litigation. Having said all this, I concur with B's account of what happened. I believe this particular event was a personal issue, not one of free speech.

My observations:

We walked in late but the first thing I noticed was a woman who was loudly talking in the back. I could not hear the candidates so I was annoyed. She was so animated that I thought perhaps she was drunk. Then the "incident." I thought she was complaining that her question has been edited and her meaning mistated. Ok, that would bother me too. But the degree that she escalated her concerns was so dramatic and out of control that it made me uncomfortable and I told my husband I did not want to stay any longer. I too, am concerned about our city government, but that type of behavior does nothing to further any causes...

Laura

An article appears now on the front page of the VC Star's website (free registration required):

http://www.venturacountystar.com/vcs/news/article/0,1375,VCS_121_5072823,00.html

An excerpt:

"She interfered with the public meeting that was in progress," Norris said. "I tried to intervene to quiet her down, and it just didn't work — the meeting wasn't able to continue. Obviously, in that environment, you don't want to arrest anyone, but I felt I had no other choice."

Jones could not be reached for comment this morning.

Norris said he will submit a report on the incident to the District Attorney's Office, which will decide whether to pursue Jones' citation.

Thanks for posting, Lisa - that was a good write-up from the Star. I'm interested to see what the OVN has to say tomorrow...

What happened last night at the Chamber of Commerce/Ojai Valley News forum was appalling. It's part of the wrong that needs to be fixed here in Ojai.

I was there and I saw the whole thing. Ms. Jones' question about Mr Widders was either sanitized or there were multiple questions in the "stack" asking if Mr. Widders would be fired. That IS a possibility, but because the question of conflict of interest with regard to Mr. Widders and his firm is so "wonky" and really more the kind of question an attorney would ask, I kind of doubt there were that many questions in the "stack" on that particular subject. Ms. Jones' real question about the inherent conflict of interest of Mr. Widders when it comes to advising the city on lawsuits where he stands to make money because litigation is initiated is a valid one. If it truly wasn't her question being asked and sanitized by Mr. Eicher, where were all the other questions regarding Widders' contract with the city? I stayed in the building unlike Ms. Snider, and I heard no more questions along that line.

I agree that Ms. Jones was out of order and being disruptive, but the brutality displayed by Captain Norris in dealing with the situation was way out of order. Whatever Ms. Jones' reasons for behaving as she did, I can tell you that as she was being bodily hauled out the door by Norris, we could plainly see surgical dressing on her abdomen. It was at this point that a friend of mine jumped up to stop Norris from accosting the poor woman. I had to tell him that Norris was a police officer, or he would have grabbed him. That's how violent Norris' actions were against a person, probably on medication, who was refusing to sit down and be quiet while her question was being mutilated. I agree with Tyler that Ms. Jones was never physically aggressive, and she did not deserve the ill treatment she received. Despite 'B's post attempting to inoculate his/her point of view from the "No doubt endless posts [that] will be written about this episode," Ms. Jones was not "totally out of control". She became increasingly agitated because Norris was mishandling her rather than attempting to quell the situation through more peaceful means.

After the forum, when asked why he was shuffling and apparently discarding questions, Brett Bradigan the moderator and editor of the OVN, told a disgruntled forum goer : "If people don't like it, they don't have to come." Remember, this was a Chamber of Commerce/Ojai Valley News event. Brett intimated that he could do anything he wanted. That's apparently what passes for democracy in Ojai. Proprietary forums with rules that distance the people's representatives from the people. Moderators who "direct" the questioning from the public to keep things calm (read stifled). If you step out of line, expect to be roughly handled. The most amusing part of the whole grim thing for me came when the police actually locked down the auditorium while they were wrestling Ms. Jones outside. Candidate Pete LaFollette asked that the doors be opened back up to the public, "It's hot in here." Pete's right, it is hot in Ojai politics lately.

As for Ms. Jones, she was first taken to the Ojai jail and then to the hospital because her stitches had been ripped open by Norris. Yikes! Maybe being flip about the size of her sunglasses isn't the most compassionate way to discuss this situation.

Sean, I look forward to attending a forum you host, to seeing how you propose to keep order - I'll hang close to an exit door, though.

Although I was not present at this particular meeting, I know Ms. Elliott Jones to be a champion of the good fight who will wade into even the murkiest of waters where there is injustice. That's all I need to know about her, not petty references to prescription glasses.

What kind of city government do we have (read: fascism) where citizens are threatened with lawsuits for asking questions of the suits? When a studied citizen-mother can be wrestled to the ground, search and injured, all for the comfort and escape of our elected officials from having to satisfy questions of its citizenry?

In a word: tyrannical. We should all be so outraged. Shame! Shame on those who are supposed to be our representatives.

Funny you should mention that, I just got back from the Ojai Unified School District Offices to see if I could rent the Chaparral Auditorium for a "People's Candidate Forum". We're thinking the Saturday before the election. Now we just have to get the incumbents to come and talk directly to the public rather than through a moderator.

How will you maintain order and peace?

Its all in the name...

snide [snahyd] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective, snid_er, snid_est.
derogatory in a nasty, insinuating manner: snide remarks about his boss.

snide (snd) Pronunciation Key
adj. snid·er, snid·est
Derogatory in a malicious, superior way.

snide
adj : expressive of contempt; "curled his/her lip in a supercilious smile"; "spoke in a sneering jeering manner"; "makes many a sharp comparison but never a mean or snide one" [syn:

Heather, It was I knocking at the door outside Chaparral as I left my jacket inside, not Cathy Elliot Jones!

Lisa, I made an error thinking it was Heather's comments. It was I knocking at the door to get back in to pick up my jacket. Not Cathy Elliot Jones. "We have nothing to fear, but fear itself" What are you afraid of Lisa and how long have you lived in Ojai? I admire Cathy's courage. There were many options to handling the incident. Like, the audience participating in the question and answer segment and not sitting there like dolts! A little energy and passion go a long way.

I'm amazed how twisted all this becomes. The rules were clearly defined at the beginning, everyone was invited to submit questions from which representative samples would be asked. Had every question been asked, we would all still be there.

Not one of the candidates, to my knowledge, spoke through a moderator. They were asked a question and each in turn was free (note my use of the word free!) to answer as they saw fit.

There was no filtering of their answers, no spin doctors, it was up to them to impress the public or embarass themselves as they saw fit.

No one was treated unfairly. Each and every candidate at some point was cut short because they used up their reply time, were chastised to address their comments to the audience, not each other, etc. How can you have a meaningful exchange when people are simply yelling out their questions? Didn't we all learn better skills in kindergarden? Of course, that was a hundred years ago for me, so maybe rudeness and shouting out of turn is now the way of the world. How interesting that folks who lament the use of lawsuits are willing to resort to their own ways of stifling free speech.

If the huge round of applause from the audience is any indication, most in attendance concured with Brett Bradigan when he stated that the rules were set down, and if you disagreed, have your own forum. Good for you for doing that. I don't enjoy shouting matches, so don't look for me to be there.

Remember, a discussion is an exchange of intelligence; an argument is an exchange of ignorance.

That said, I'm off the Post! These circular discussions are too time consuming - I have a small business in this town that needs my attention.

Tyler...Thanks for the opportunity to present a more conservative view point to this issue.

B - you are ALWAYS welcome, and I am looking forward to you joining the Post as an author, yourself!

As frustrating as the circular discussions are to me personally, a lot of the time, I feel they are a valuable venue for individuals to express their opinions and share facts. Old-style democracy, when everyone got togehter and hashed things out for days (the way town meeting in my parents' town still works) involved just this. It ain't always pretty but it is the way democracy works.

B, the only things twisted here is your assertion that city sponsored violence against a woman recovering from a major operation is somehow okay. Or how 'bout your above-it-all, condescending attitude in proclaiming that you're done sharing your intellect with the rest of us because of our "circular discussions". Well, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. That said, you're still invited to the peoples candidate forum. If you want to stand and yell and make a scene, we'll wait patiently until you tire yourself out. I promise nobody will try to drag you out any side door.

To “B”: I’m sorry you are off the post but I'm sure you will at least see this comment. There are many circular discussions at all levels of life and government. That's how ideas are born and it's not pretty but that's how it works. I disagree that the moderators were acting fair and I will explain... I watched how they sorted the questions and the problem was that one question was asked from each sub group based on content. The problem is that there were a disproportionate number of questions related to the latest initiative problems and the city attorney. So basically that means that an overwhelming number of people wanted to seek answers related to this but instead the issue was put on equal ground with every other general inquiry, which "balances" the type of questions being asked. That's fine but don't ever tell me that is "fair” assuming your definition includes the representation of the majority.

Regardless I support the people's forum, I think we can come up with some basic guidelines to keep the forum focused but I think we can accomplish alot more than what was seen on Monday with Bradigan's sub-par attempt to operate an egg timer and cut people off by counting down numbers in the microphone. In closing, especially to "B” direct democracy isn't necessarily pretty but at least it's real. Any person who wants to seek truth and reality would never walk out of a meeting or "quit" a blog, even if uncomfortable. I challenge "B” and anyone else to help me come up with a way to have a people's forum the week before the election...

B, Just because others have a different perspective from yours does not mean their views are "twisted Go ahead, please continue to believe YOUR views are ALWAYS superior. It serves your ego well. Bryan

I find it very interesting that nowhere on this blog, our elitist City (mis) Manager is mentioned regarding his recomendations, directives to staff, city council members AND city counsel.
Again, he stays under the radar, while turning our beautiful town into another "cookie-cutter, just off the coast town!"

I wonder if he will enjoy attending Ojai Day this Saturday, and if he attends....how many dollar signs will he see in the out of towners who attend!

The Ojai Valley News read ( Bret ) is so very much on the fence, that it gives the definition of
"neutral" a bad delivery.

Too many newbies in our town deciding whats best for those who have made Ojai a special place. Our city government is not in OUR best interest....election coming or not.... things will continue downhill until we do MORE than type on blogs.

VOTE>>>>VOTE>>>>VOTE....!!

Just as important...speak up let your voice be heard....as we do here. You are never to busy to state your concerns of where you live....Do it in public. Forums, Council meetings, at the Post Office and with your neighbors.

They can't afford to sue all of us for wanting real representation.

Thank you for the vent...
Brad

Tyler,
It is too bad the OVN will not publish these comments in the editorial pages.....just a thought....

The arresting of Cathy Jones clearly shows that there is little room for free speech in Ojai. The arrogance of the candidate forum moderator to say "now let's get back to the forum” is sick. To stand like a deer in the headlights and be so disconnected from what was happening, while a citizen is being manhandled just outside the door, is an act so irresponsible there is no word for it. What was demonstrated was how easily the Chamber of Commerce and the OVN were willing to sell the personnel freedom of a citizen of Ojai. It is difficult to have free exchange, when it is more important to control the content and the environment of the forum, than to allow citizens to ask the tough questions.

Instead of having an awareness that the tensions in the city are running high, the forum sponsors chose to escalate the problem. Instead adjusting to the situation, or let the incident run its course, the choice was to accept physical violence as a solution.

There was an opportunity for the forum to address candidate accountability. There was an opportunity to deal with an issue. Instead, it was easier to remove the critic and silence the discussion. What is that if it is not denying free speech? Is Ojai, such a sanitized community that we can not support the truth, that we can not answer questions about how our city is run and who is running it.

Maybe Cathy Jones asked the question that went to far, or maybe it just was a question that needed to be answered. Don’t just point the finger at the person who asked the question. There is no excuse for the lack of leadership in the handling of this situation. The result of this lack of leadership on the part of the forum sponsors has resulted in only polarizing the city further. After all, the Sheriff’s Department had to be instructed to remove and arrest any person that did not conform to sanitized format of the forum.

I took vidio tape of the arest.copys of it were given to several people.ITspeaks for it,s self.I hope they will share it because seeing what actually took place is the only truth
nathaniel

This woman's behavior was unacceptable. She was warned to stop disturbing the peace by the Chief of Police. She refused and he used the next level of force, taking her by the arm and directing her away from the disturbance. It was after she resisted than force was escalated.

Peace officers have the right to use reasonable force to overcome resistance. The more resistance offered, the more force is needed to be used. This is built into the California Penal Code. This is why seemingly minor traffic violations sometimes turn into deadly encounters, because Police are not supposed to back off enforcement of the law.

Everyone already knows this, so she should have known if you resist the police for a lawful action they are taking, you are probably going to get hurt.

This is not a hollywood movie, this is reality. Nobody owns the police, except, collectively, the people themselves. I hope she is prosecuted for her resistance.

Brad - the OVN doesn't have the legal rights to publish these comments without approval. But yes, your sentiment that this conversation is an important one for the community to have is understood.

Nathaniel - feel free to put it on YouTube, and send me a link.

Hey every one!
Lets get the ball rolling on the people's forum. We can't all sit in front of the computer and vent forever. We need to set the record straight with the incumbents and the candidates. Any thoughts?

I see this entire incident as a reflection of the collective mind, the group consciousness as well as a symptom of our culture which champions individualism in uneaqual proportions to community.

Where there is repressed energy, including thoughts and emotions, within a community, generally some individual in that group will become the expression of that repression. It happens in families as well as communities.

Given that Cathy constitutes herself as a passionate woman, unafraid of speaking her truth and willing to circumvent "rules" or conventions, it seems natural that she would be the one to erupt with the energy that was being held back by probably many people in the audience.

Okay, so her behavior was "out of order" to the agreement of how the meeting would be run, but lets not make her a scapegoat whe, I feel, she was expressing some deep rooted concerns that many in the community have.

Yes, her verbal violence was born from frustration, and that begot more violence towards her. There was a lack of skill all the way around, with all parties involved in how tomdance with the velocity of her energy.

Chaos self organizes itself, within and without, and, though I wasn't at the meeting, I believe if Cathy was allowed to, and if the room could have held the chaos, some very interesting discussion would have ensued.

I don't see this as simply an incident of an individual, but an opportunity for the community to self reflect on the process of change and transforamtion. Can we look at Cathy's actions as a service to the community rather than have her be a sacrificial lamb? Can we allow for messiness, unruliness, chaos, the wild human? Jesus and the money lenders comes to mind. Many seem to accept that behavior.

Good morning, everyone. This is the first opportunity I have had to read the comments, and I appreciate each and everyone. As to B Dawson, please remember not to hire me as an attorney anymore, as you have in the past. As to Ms. Schneider, whom I have never met but who has been described to me as an aspiring journalist anxious to make her mark in town, I'm sorry my passion and energy (thanks, Raymond) scared you, but a journalist should be a personal witness to events before ascribing them to any particular person, i.e., what happened after I was dragged from the room by an unidentified man in a suit. As for my sunglasses, sorry Gucci offends you. Personally, I like them, and since they are prescription, and since it was still light when I stopped by the meeting on my way to picking up dinner for my children to warn Jeff San Marchi that he was being targeted for arrest that night (per an earlier conversation I had with Dale Hanson), I did not have night time glasses with me.
Maybe I'm feeling a bit doomsday these days, but I firecely believe that if we don't stand up for our dwindling civil liberties now -- both on a national and local scope -- they won't be around for our children to enjoy. If that makes me fodder for gossip (I loved the post that I was "drunk"), vendettas, or merely comments from people who diagree with me, so be it. It is extraordinarily heartening, however, to finally read this and see how many people at least understood exactly what I was doing and why I was doing it. And when my fourteen-year-old put his arms around me yesterday and said: "I think this is awesome; I am so proud of you, Mom," let me tell you, that is the only court of approval I am seeking.
-Cathy Elliott Jones

I second the request for the video to be posted in an accessible place like YouTube.

Ms. Jones, I'm glad that people like you do stand up for our rapidly diminishing civil rights. Best of luck fighting the case! I would bet that the case will be dropped, so that the police can say everything is alright, but that does not diminish the intimidation factor for you and everyone else that observed the incident. I would bet that everyone in that room will think twice about speaking out at similar forums in the future, to the detriment of free speech and open civil discourse.

Disclosure: I did not personally see the "incident"...

Dear Peter:

You can call me Cathy.

And thanks for the good thoughts.

-CJ

A reader of the OVN coverage of the recent candidates forum might get the mistaken idea that my campaign is in some way linked to Cathy Elliott Jones, and her actions leading to her arrest for disrupting the forum. I wish to make it clear that Ms. Jones is not a part of my campaign. I had no idea that she was going to be at the candidates forum, let alone act disruptively. Her actions were, in my opinion, inappropriate. To refer to her out of control ranting as a free speech issue is an insult to the first amendment issue, in my never humble opinion.
And I really think it a shame that the OVN devoted most of its coverage of the forum to Ms. Jones's arrest, rather than what the candidates had to say that evening.

I became a candidate because I do not like the direction the City of Ojai has taken. The General Plan, written after numerous public forums at which hundreds of Valley residents participated, calls for development to be village friendly, consistent with small town values, and particularly consistent with maintaining the uniqueness of our wonderful City. Instead, we get projects like Los Arboles, a huge condominium project blocking the view of Libbey Park. We have lost O-Hi Frostie, not only an important place for kids to hang out in a safe environment, but an important symbol of our small town. We are in danger of losing the Mallory Way cottages, affordable housing to be replaced with more oversized condos. Does anyone really think that the pastel condominiums recently built on Matilija and Ventura are consistent with small town Ojai? Have you driven by the construction site on North Montgomery between Ojai and Grand? Still more oversized condos overwhelming the other homes in the area, built out to the property line.

Now that Jersey Mikes is downtown, and Starbucks is coming to the Von's supermarket, does anyone really believe that more chain stores will not be walking through the door to our City left open by a silent City Council?

Developers are, in my opinion, directing the growth and change in Ojai, rather than the City Council taking the lead. Communities throughout California and other states have taken steps to protect themselves from over-development. Ojai has not. The members of the current city council, including candidates Carol Smith and Joe Devito, have not provided the leadership necessary to stand up to the developers. Instead, they sit silently while City Attorney Widders advises them that they are powerless.

At the candidates forum, Steve Olsen and Joe Divito praised Mr. Widders work in stopping the proposed dump at Weldon Canyon. I have no doubt that Mr. Widders played an important role in winning that fight, but that was fifteen years ago. I would also note that fifteen years ago our City Council was led by Jim Loebl and Nina Shelley, strong leaders who directed the City Attorney and staff to do whatever was necessary to stop the dump at Weldon Canyon. Today, we have no leaders on the Council. Instead we have a Council who simply asks staff what can be done and meekly accede to the answer… "nothing." Six months ago, I stood at a Council meeting and asked that we hire a new city attorney, one who would seek to creatively find ways to maneuver in the legal arena. I still believe this action is necessary, but the ultimate responsibility for the direction our City is taking is not with Mr. Widders. Rather, the responsibility is with the City Council.

If you like the direction the City of Ojai is taking, vote for the incumbents and Steve Olsen...you will get more of the same. If you are looking for a leader that will stand up to the developers, who will fight to maintain the attributes that make our town so wonderful and unique, vote for me.

Thank you,

Len Klaif

ljkesq@adelphia.net

640-9659

Len - thanks much for participating - nice to have you aboard. I know the community appreciates direct, grassroots interaction with their representatives.

I have to admit that I am not much of a blogger, but it has been interesting reading the variety of takes on monday's events, and other matters affecting Ojai.

I will try to get into the habit of checking in from time to time and commenting if I have anything to say.

In Peace,

Len Klaif

A question for Len (who once upon a time used to be Lenny):
Is your effort to distance yourself from me, when I don't support your candidacy, and have never supported your numerous candidacies, have anything to do with the vicious lies you have been spreading around town about me, and attributing to Captain Norris?
When I confronted you about this (after receiving multiple reports) you lied through your teeth. Yuck. You may not agree with my interpretation of free speech, to which you are very much entitled, but at least you should have been man enough to own your slander and accept my request for an apology. Some men just don't have the -- what is it? -- cojones to admit when they are wrong. Too bad. You invited me to sue you for slander. Since I am an actual trial lawyer, and you are not, I look forward to our judicial encounter, which will be filed before the election.
-Cathy Elliott JOnes

Len Lenny Leonard all work for me.

As I told you, the last time I spoke with Captain Norris was BEFORE the forum, and I have not claimed otherwise at any time.

I did not invite you to sue me and would rather you didn't. I did acknowledge the obvious fact that you can if you want to. Suing someone is relatively simple. I wont apologize for something I did not do or say. While we have never been friends, I do not know why you want to paint me as your enemy. I am not.

Len Klaif

Four people stand ready to dispute your (I love this word) newly "sanitized" version of events. You know what you said to Michael Crombie. You know what you announced at Ojai House on Tuesday. While you (and Norris) might now deeply regret causing me even more injury, your refusal to own it and apologize does not mean I am making you an enemy; it merely means I am preventing you from slandering me just because you finally have a shot at flexing your muscles on the
council. But Lenny, if you're already not hesitating to lie when you haven't even been elected, what kind of honor will you show if and when you finally reach your elusive goal?

I am sorry for you, and your lack of integrity. Selling one's soul is never worth the price.

-Cathy

Cathy, Len - I highly recommend you contact each other directly and work out an amicable peace offline.

Meanwhile, perhaps you could read my post "On Civility And Respect", and think about how we can all contribute positively to the community, and not make these issues personal.

Len seems to have been quite civil here. A few posts ago Cathy spoke of being, "dragged from the room by an unidentified man in a suit," yet called him by name several minutes before - it's on tape. How come no one here has called her on that?

I think you just did. I'm not real sure this is productive anymore.

As an update on what we're tentatively calling the "People's Candidate Forum", we've booked the Chaparral Auditorium for Saturday Nov. 4th and were going over sponsors and rules of engagement, etc. We're also kicking around the idea of having local bands play and speakers after the Q&A and "Ideas Forum" portion of the event. Sort of turning it into a celebration of democracy and community here in Ojai. If anyone is interested in helping out or has suggestions, please feel free to email me.

Uh...just realized my email is not included with the post. Ooops. spk22@pacbell.net

Dear Susan T:

If you listen to the tape, I invite Capain Norris to take me out, but I only believed he was there because I was told so earlier by Dale Hanson. I had scanned the room for a uniform, but did not see one. Nonetheless, I very much believed he was present somewhere to grab Jeff San Marchi, but personally had no idea who grabbed me until I was outside. In fact, I am told that a member of the audience was as stunned as I, and was running to rescue me from the "unidentified man in a suit," when someone informed him that it was, indeed, Captain Norris.

Honey, you may not like me, or what did, and may even think I deserved the police brutality I endured outside. But don't call me a liar. Even people who don't particularly like me or my politics will grudgingly admit, as many judges have also told me, I am simply incapable of not telling the truth.

B - Didn't you once use Cathy's services in a legal dispute and subsequently praise her to many people for charging a nominal fee (next to nothing, actually)? If memory serves, you sang her praises for championing the "little guy" simply because any form of injustice was anathema to her? Just curious.....

B - Didn't you once use Cathy's services in a legal dispute....

People who once liked their spouses and praised them have changed their minds. People who once liked political candidates have changed their minds. People who once liked each other as friends have changed their minds, and people who once liked each other as business partners and associates have changed their minds.

Things change. People's attitudes change. This is nothing new in the realm of human behavior. Before the year ends, there are people here who will change their opinions and their loyalties, and they are free to do so, aren't they?

I barely know B, but I am fairly certain that she did not sign any contract stating that she would love, honor, and cherish any other person in Ojai in spite of anything that person might do.

You have a right to stop liking B, just as she has a right to feel cool toward Cathy Jones.

Ben, you state the obvious. Of course people and their opinions are ever-changing and evolving. Thank goodness! However, although I don’t know Cathy personally, it is well known that she (like her or not) has been extremely consistent in her passion, tenacity and even ferociousness when it comes to her clients and what she believes in. The point we are trying to make is that it does appear a little disingenuous that such qualities once praised when they benefited B. are know being publicly chastised and ridiculed. Perhaps if she wasn’t striving to “become a player” in town (her words), her posts would be a little less like nails on chalkboard….

I have been out pounding the pavement, have missed the post Chapparral Forum discussion, and had intended to continue going door to door today, when two things interrupted my plans for the day: first, the article in the Star this morning about the forum, and now this blog. It is evident that the Ojai Post is where the juice is, so I must leave the real world of physical doors, and enter this virtual one of mental and emotional doors [real time politics].
I enjoy the vigorous debate. As long as we keep TALKING to each other, we learn, build community, mitigate emotional appeals and ad hominem arguments, and create a data base for informed, free decisions.

I spent many years as a psychiatric nurse with the VA, dealing with vets who were trained killers, so I know something about the dynamics of violence. Back in the mid 70's, husky male nursing assistants controlled violent vets. Over time, medication and "talking down" methods became policy. Nowadays, hands on restraint is used as a last resort, after all other options have been exhausted, due to insurance suits, patient rights regulations, family complaints, employee injuries, and a general change in philosophy. I have been involved in more take downs with leather restraints than I care to recall. A talking resolution is much preferred on psyche wards to a taking down one, but sometimes the hands on technique is the safest course for everyone, before the situation escalates and gets really bad. It's always a judgement call, based on accepted standards.

After a violent episode, everyone is affected emotionally and sometimes physically. Standards call for a debriefing and defusing for those involved, which appears to be taking place on this site. After debriefing, venting, reflection, and emotional processing runs its course, a report and recommendations are made to appropriate authority, so that new policies can be placed, to prevent undesirable reoccurences.

In the case of Cathy Elliott Jones, the acting authority at the time were the moderators, who had called the meeting, and their supervisors, if any. Here we can distingish lines of thought. 1) By calling the meeting, they had the authority to declare the guidelines, 2) If the guidelines were not followed, they had authority to enforce them themselves, or by calling in a higher force, 3) Enforcement could be through the talk down method, adminstering appropriate force, or some other method.

When chaos, confusion and emotional and physical attacks occur, it is often because of a leadership problem. The real leaders are members of the public who assume that role because of natural ability and desire, and then attract a democratic majority. In that sense, the "We the People" are the leaders, who appoint representatives.

In this situation, the Ojai Valley News, Board of Realtors and Chamber of Commerce are the de facto leaders of the Chapparrel Forum of 10/16. Whether they follow through and finish what they started remains to be seen. My sense is that it will be resolved here in this forum, if at all and to the extent possible, by a consensus of reason, if it does not die out first through inertia, and emotional exhaustion. If so, the problem will just resurface sometime down the road.

I see a second Chapparral Forum is planned for Nov. 4, with different guidelines and different authorities. The contrast should prove interesting. It may turn out to be a demonstration of democracy at work, in town hall fashion. It will take strength, patience and good will on the part of participants, and may set a workable precedent as a counterbalance to the more formal council and previous forum meetings. I like the idea of having a "bring the kids" party, celebration atmosphere, and that presumes that the dominant majority will be reasonable adults, determined to maintain order by the power of persuasion, and citizens' arrest powers as a last resort. There is somewhat of a risk that order will break down, which makes the timid fearful, and ready to call upon higher authority. Will the police be standing by, or just on call as usual? Perhaps it would be good to get a dialogue and understanding with them now, and with concerned citizens, as to this different approach. It could be a very long evening, if everyone is given time to voice their opinion. What else do we have to do? Watch TV? Do this blogging in virtual reality? Didn't someone say the medium is the message. The meeting of minds is the medium and the message.

Here we have a meeting of the minds, where we can agree to disagree, or just agree. At Chapparral, we have the same, except there it is real people, with physical bodies, and real danger, and real contact. If I may be allowed a metaphysical reflection, I wonder if the pleasure of meeting real bodies in real time is not why we embodied from virtual mental reality in the first place.

My political quarrel with the council is that they refuse to get real, and hide behind walls of legalism, intimidation, fraud, and fear. The last thing they seem to want is a free and open discussion or debate. When is the last time they participated in this one? The mayor's party line editorial in the OVN was reprinted here, but it doesn't pass the standard of reasonableness. I think I've posted (is threaded the correct term) my response to that propaganda here somewhere.

To learn to reason, and rise above physical emotional attacks, takes time, like millions of years of evolution. In terms of one lifetime, it means spending the time in careful analysis, not in turning on the TV, for the mindless mainstream. Thank the gods of reason for Tyler Suchman, and godsends like the Ojai Post, and to all of us that take the time, sometimes while holding a baby or two, comforting a crying child, making dinner, while at the same time reading stuff like this. It's worth it, since virtual (mental) reality and vital (physical) reality are soulmates. I just heard someone say, all politics is local. I concur.

Regarding Cathy Elliott Jones, I love her physical activity and her mental acuity. If I had been moderator that night, instead of candidate, and had the authority to do so, I would have let her talk, and talk, and talk, until we reached the points she was trying to make. It may have taken to midnight, but I would have enjoyed every second. To hell with the form and the forum when there's a real woman in front of you, speaking her mind and heart. Politics is about people, and when the people speak, politicians should listen. What Cathy was saying was much more important than what we politicians were saying. I would rather listen to someone like her than to someone like myself. I know what I know. I don't know what she knows. If I learned anything in my relations with women, it was that I caused most of the harm by not listening. I don't want to make that mistake in politics, too. [although I do, I do]. We white male authoritarian types need real women like Cathy. As a man, I admire her, as I do my ex-wife, although as Dylan sings: "My woman's so crazy she drives me to tears, makes me not want to touch another one for years." [Probably more his fault than hers]. As a politician, I have to be for law and order, and so must bring that factor in, also, to balance the equation. My heart is really with the woman's point of view while my mind is fearful of her power of mentalism and emotionalism combined. However, my mind has to concede woman is primordial and man is derivative. What went down at the Chapparral was an ancient shoot out at the OK Corral. It is one of those symbolic acts that begs to be decoded. That takes a high degree of intelligence and emotional strength (mental and emotional IQ). No one individual has it because it resides in We the People, as witnessed by a virtual talk like this, and hopefully by a more democratic forum in the flesh, where the demons of violence can be restrained by the daemons of peace. As my wife tells my son: use your words. Words are mightier than swords because they hold more truth. The second edge of that two edged sword is that they can be false as hens' teeth. Telling the truth sets us free, but telling the truth is not that easy. It takes a village. Like Ojai. Like the Ojai Post.

Ben, you state the obvious.

Only because you failed to note it yourself.

Let me start by stating that I was quite surprised, and in some odd way honored I suppose, when informed that I had been mentioned by name (both first and last) in this blog – thank you Cathy. Being one of those “newbies” to Ojai, I thought I was still able to maintain my under the radar profile quite nicely.

Having been mentioned and now being “involved” so to speak, I feel the need to clarify. I was not in attendance at the political forum or witness to the “incident”. Had I been there, I certainly would have tried to do anything possible to come to your defense and assistance, Cathy. I know you to be a person of great passion and tenacity, over issues you feel strongly about, particularly when you perceive injustice. Whether we agree or disagree on specific issues or actions, I can still respect your opinions and the conviction you have to do what you believe to be right and just.

I also don’t really know who said what to whom when (that has always seemed a bit adolescent to me). What I do know is that when Len Klaif (Lenny, Leonard....whatever) walked into my place of business on Tuesday morning, it was only with genuine concern – not malicious intent - that he informed me of the events occurring during the forum the night before. My assumption being that Lenny is well aware that my business associate (who’s name will not be brought into this blog) and myself are good friends with Cathy Elliot Jones and would probably want to know. Len’s concern was not only apparent in his words, but also in his demeanor. This concern was also apparent in the demeanor he displayed during the taping of the forum while this incident was unfolding inside the auditorium. There was absolutely no malicious intent in his comments and definitely no intended slander toward Cathy.

To Lenny – I apologize if any comment you made to me on Tuesday morning was twisted or misinterpreted down the line. I’m sure you may regret having stopped by that morning. I do know that our conversation was only out of concern for Cathy and the events that transpired.

To Cathy – I am truly sorry if word of this conversation was in any way distorted, inaccurate, or misinterpreted by the time it reached your ears. As I mentioned earlier, I was not a witness to the events the night of the forum, and was quite stunned and concerned myself to hear what had transpired.

In my opinion, which I trust I still have as much right to as the next person, both Cathy and Lenny are people of good intent who I respect and consider to be friends. I am sorry to see political differences and misinterpreted actions take such a toll. One of the things I’m learning, and find interesting, about small towns is that despite our vast differences in backgrounds, philosophies and beliefs, we still find a way to form our own community. Friends can remain friends even if at times they don’t agree with one another. Those who are not friends, and especially those who may not even like each other very much, can and must remain civil to one another for the sake of that same community.

Say what?

"What went down at the Chapparral was an ancient shoot out at the OK Corral. It is one of those symbolic acts that begs to be decoded." -D. Leary

Actually, truly ancient "shoot out(s)" involved much, much more. In ancient times, Socrates examined all manner of things while trying to define what the Polis should be. Please review "The Republic." And, of course, the Trojan War was a bit more momentous than any kind of Shoot Out. As for "decoding" recent acts--whatever that might mean--you and even the esteemed Ms. Jones's might review Uncle Remus's tale about the Tar Baby. Just an idea. -Jay Windsor

What I had in mind with the metaphor of a shoot out at the OK Corral was a clash of value systems. Jay is correct, in my opinion, that ancient shoot outs involve much more than the Chapparral incident. However, the confrontation between a single woman and the authorities at the Chapparral has parallels with ancient and modern civilizations, and their wars. I apologize for mixing metaphors, oversimplification, and for using poetic license when it comes to historical accuracy. I do intend to take the suggestion that I read the Republic. The relevancy of the Tar Baby to this discussion escapes me. I can't recall the point of that story. Someone enlighten me. Thanks for the comment. The Chapparral incident was a powerful event in our community, and can be put to good use if carefully debriefed, principally through ongoing rational analysis, without suppressing legitimate and natural emotions. In short, truth heals and sets us free.

The Tar Baby defined, from Random House.com:

The tar baby is a form of a character widespread in African folklore. In various folktales, gum, wax, or other sticky material is used to trap a person.

The folktale achieved currency in the United States in written form in one of Joel Chandler Harris's Uncle Remus stories, a collection of stories based on African-American folklore, narrated by the fictional Uncle Remus, a former slave. In the story "Tar-Baby," the character Brer Fox makes a doll out of tar, which he places by the road to entrap his enemy Brer Rabbit. Brer Rabbit talks to the doll, and when it doesn't answer, he hits it, and gets stuck in the tar. The more he struggles with it, the more he is entangled in it.

This story has led to the figurative use of tar baby in the sense 'an inextricable problem or situation', sometimes with the nuance 'something used to entrap a person'. Both the examples cited in the question show the use of this sense, which appears to be first used in the early twentieth century.

The expression tar baby is also used occasionally as a derogatory term for black people (in the U.S. it refers to African-Americans; in New Zealand it refers to Maoris), or among blacks as a term for a particularly dark-skinned person. As a result, some people suggest avoiding the use of the term in any context.

Here is the actual story, from Joel Chandler Harris:

Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby
One day Brer Fox thought of how Brer Rabbit had been cutting up his capers and bouncing around until he'd come to believe that he was the boss of the whole gang. Brer Fox thought of a way to lay some bait for that uppity Brer Rabbit.

He went to work and got some tar and mixed it with some turpentine. He fixed up a contraption that he called a Tar-Baby. When he finished making her, he put a straw hat on her head and sat the little thing in the middle of the road. Brer Fox, he lay off in the bushes to see what would happen.

Well, he didn't have to wait long either, 'cause by and by Brer Rabbit came pacing down the road--lippity-clippity, clippity-lippity--just as sassy as a jaybird. Brer Fox, he lay low. Brer Rabbit came prancing along until he saw the Tar-Baby and then he sat back on his hind legs like he was astonished. The Tar-Baby just sat there, she did, and Brer Fox, he lay low.

"Good morning!" says Brer Rabbit, says he. "Nice weather we're having this morning," says he.

Tar-Baby didn't say a word, and Brer Fox, he lay low.

"How are you feeling this morning?" says Brer Rabbit, says he.

Brer Fox, he winked his eye real slow and lay low and the Tar-Baby didn't say a thing.

"What is the matter with you then? Are you deaf?" says Brer Rabbit, says he. "Cause if you are, I can holler louder," says he.

The Tar-Baby stayed still and Brer Fox, he lay low.

"You're stuck-up, that's what's wrong with you. You think you're too good to talk to me," says Brer Rabbit, says he. "And I'm going to cure you, that's what I'm going to do," says he.

Brer Fox started to chuckle in his stomach, he did, but Tar-Baby didn't say a word.

"I'm going to teach you how to talk to respectable folks if it's my last act," says Brer Rabbit, says he. "If you don't take off that hat and say howdy, I'm going to bust you wide open," says he.

Tar-Baby stayed still and Brer Fox, he lay low.

Brer Rabbit kept on asking her why she wouldn't talk and the Tar-Baby kept on saying nothing until Brer Rabbit finally drew back his fist, he did, and blip--he hit the Tar-Baby on the jaw. But his fist stuck and he couldn't pull it loose. The tar held him. But Tar-Baby, she stayed still, and Brer Fox, he lay low.

"If you don't let me loose, I'm going to hit you again," says Brer Rabbit, says he, and with that he drew back his other fist and blap--he hit the Tar-Baby with the other hand and that one stuck fast too.

Tar-Baby she stayed still, and Brer Fox, he lay low.

"Turn me loose, before I kick the natural stuffing out of you," says Brer Rabbit, says he, but the Tar-Baby just sat there.

She just held on and then Brer Rabbit jumped her with both his feet. Brer Fox, he lay low. Then Brer Rabbit yelled out that if that Tar-Baby didn't turn him loose, he was going to butt her crank-sided. Then he butted her and his head got stuck.

Brer Fox walked out from behind the bushes and strolled over to Brer Rabbit, looking as innocent as a mockingbird.

"Howdy, Brer Rabbit," says Brer Fox, says he. "You look sort of stuck up this morning," says he. And he rolled on the ground and laughed and laughed until he couldn't laugh anymore.

By and by he said, "Well, I expect I got you this time, Brer Rabbit," says he. "Maybe I don't, but I expect I do. You've been around here sassing after me a mighty long time, but now it's the end.

And then you're always getting into something that's none of your business," says Brer Fox, says he. "Who asked you to come and strike up a conversation with this Tar-Baby? And who stuck you up the way you are? Nobody in the round world. You just jammed yourself into that Tar-Baby without waiting for an invitation," says Brer Fox, says he. "There you are and there you'll stay until I fix up a brushpile and fire it up, "cause I'm going to barbecue you today, for sure," says Brer Fox, says he.

Then Brer Rabbit started talking mighty humble.

"I don't care what you do with me, Brer Fox, says he, "Just so you don't fling me in that briar patch. Roast me, Brer Fox, says he, "But don't fling me in that briar patch."

"It's so much trouble to kindle a fire," says Brer Fox, says he, "that I expect I'd better hang you," says he.

"Hang me just as high as you please, Brer Fox, says Brer Rabbit, says he, "but for the Lord's sake, don't fling me in that briar patch," says he.

"I don't have any string, " says Brer Fox, says he, "Now I expect I had better drown you, " says he.

"Drown me just as deep as you please, Brer Fox," says Brer Rabbit, says he, "But please do not fling me in that briar patch, " says he.

"There's no water near here," says Brer Fox, says he, "And now I reckon I'd better skin you," says he.

"Skin me Brer Fox," says he. "Snatch out my eyeballs, tear out my ears by the roots," says he, "But please, Brer Fox, don't fling me in that briar patch, " says he.

Of course, Brer Fox wanted to get Brer Rabbit as bad as he could, so he caught him by the behind legs and slung him right in the middle of the briar patch. There was a considerable flutter when Brer Rabbit struck the bushes, and Brer Fox hung around to see what was going to happen.

By and by he heard someone call his name and 'way up on the hill he saw Brer Rabbit sitting cross-legged on a chinquapin log combing the tar pitch out of his hair with a chip. Then Brer Fox knew he had been tricked.

Brer Rabbit hollered out, "Born and bred in the briar patch. I was born and bred in the briar patch!" And with that he skipped out just as lively as a cricket in the embers of a fire.

I've met, socialized, even danced (she's fun!) with and talked to Cathy, my "knowing" her is relatively new. I like her. But Cathy, the simple fact is you choose to go out of control. All of this was EXTREMELY avoidable. You could have gotten your question read... indeed, in talking to Scott, who I know fairly well, stated that your actual question was still "coming up". You simply over reacted at the moment and self created an incident that could have been totally avoided.
Now if this gets me dis-unvited to your B-Day party... so be it... (happy upcoming B-day, btw) but the truth is simple: you could have had your question read (later) and at the very least not created an "inconvenience" for yourself. I truly hope it all works itself out... any charges dropped AND YOU DON'T SUE......ANYBODY!!!!!! And life will go on. I DO thank-you for providing a dramatic moment to an otherwise totally bland candidates' forum.
Denis Leary recovered somewhat from his looney-tune letters to the OVN (Are you still going to sue the citizens of Ojai Denis???).
Pete LaFollette clearly demonstrated that he's a sloganizing not-ready-for-prime- time wanna-be: (...LaFollette: "we should have a dialogue"... (URGH!!!) how about some proposed tangible solutions to ANYTHING!!!). LaFollette's lack of depth is a disgrace to any other wannabe "man of the people".

Lenny Klaif has demonstrated his lack of wisdom/judgement by throwing his lot in with Leary and LaFollette. If you like Marx... you'll love this trio. (Sean Keenan, the socialist/anarchist just loves these guys!!!... Hey Sean, your Che t-shirt getting a little ratty and faded???)

The "boring/bland" award goes to Steve Olsen. This life-long resident and life-long bureaucrat has never(or rarely) made a buck in the real world. He represents everything that is wrong with OUSD but lauds the pretense that he actually accomplished anything over at Chaparral except the illussion that ANY of those kids "graduating" had ANY kind of academic achievement. His institutional "expectation by lowered standards" has cheated the kids under his charge. Look "bland" up in the dictionary and I swear you'll see his picture! (not)

While I have a personal fondness for Joe DeVito, he's a close second on the bland-o-meter, His value to the community is that, like him or no, he has seniority at the county level from/of the ten cities. In this way, he DOES serve the community well AND brings home the "bacon" for Ojai, from the county. No small feat. For this he deserves re-election.

Yeah... i already hear the: "well smartass, why did YOU withdraw from running"? I TRULY wish I could run this time. Well, I do have business (I know capitalism makes Sean shudder... Hey Sean, still planning to move to new Zealand because you hate this country so much???) and personal priorities/obligations, but I DO intend to be involved sometime down the road.

At the end of the candidates' forum day, they collectively showed a distinct lack of leadership and ESPECIALLY vision. (More on that later). I thoroughly hope no one votes for the Maxist-three. That said, why vote for Olsen?? Councilmember Smith gets a pass.... mainly for just showing up (but has she ever really talked to a Hispanic day-laborer about just gettin' by????) Mr. DeVito gets a nod because of leverage with the county, which no small city can do without.

Finally, Sean, I'll consider buying your one-way ticket to New Zealand if you sign a contract never to return to the USA (don't think you'll accept). You, as an anarchist, add nothing to political thought or discussion other than disruption... and that.. is a small distinction not worthy of merit! Sean, how about telling everyone how you deceived the organizers of the 2005 4th of July parade organizers to have your narcissist street theater invade the parade under false pretenses?? (He actually BRAGGED/admitted to it, IN ADVANCE, on a Santa Barbara blog/wesite.) Just think Sean, you lied and insulted the longstanding 70+ grandparents, who organized the parade for 2 decades, just for your little prank! What a snivelling lil' putz! Your beneath contempt! (Note to Post community: Yes, I DO know Sean. Even let him borrow/have access to my expensive edit facility when he was in need. Did he even bother a thank-you? No. Be it to much for a marxist gutter-snipe to thank the oppressive capitalist.^o^)

Well, this should give the Post community some fodder to chew. More to come at some future date.
Cheers!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................

If ever we needed a better example that this unfortunate thread, trying in fits and starts to go somewhere, is dead, Leland Hammerrant's "contribution" is it. I don't know the man, but I can tell I don't want to. Let me suggest this thread end here. (Unless better heads than mine can pick up where the prior post (pre-Hammerrant) left off.)

Leland P. Hammerschmidt

Dear Dennis,
Just finished your(the lengthy one) contribution to this blog. I'll assume it is very heart-felt, and I believe I got to know you more in depth. 'Virtually" or no.

How can I say this politely????... Haven't read more PC white-male guilt BS in quite sometime. While trying to be (WAY over-the-top) solicitous to women (women: how condescending is he??? You poor delicate lil' flowers who bruise soooo---easily^o^) he proudly displays his sensitive-self. Note to Dennis: Read some Camille Paglia (my favorite lesbian feminist... REALLY... no joke: She's TOPS!!) sometime and re-grow (or re-attach) some cajones!

Now, I'll TRY and get over my knuckle-dragging neanderthal nature as a white male... but does anyone REALLY admire Dennis' self-description of castrated wimpness? To all the touch-feely denizens/contingent of Ojai, Dennis' blather might ressonate. But from my POV as a male(...yes... I am guilty... I AM of white complexion) who can still ejaculate on occassion(TMI???), Dennis represents the lamest(want to use another term but T.O.U. here restrain me) of males white or no. This over-arching: "I'm so sensitive/in-touch" BS might play well on Oprah and Dr. Phil but... Geez!!! Dennis get thee to a pharmacist and purchase some testosterone quickly!

If it "takes a village"... Dennis' grass huts have just been overrun by the barbarians. In the meantime, I'm sure he had some "quality time" talkin' with Genghis about his inner-child and conflict resolution.

Suffice it to say, I'll posit that Dennis and I see the world through different lenses. (Thankfully)

Now, after a night of having my woman have her way with me... (Honey... HANDCUFFS..... AGAIN!!!... oh well... ^o^) (TMI???) onto Rainbow bridge in the morn' for some freshly mowed wheat grass to detox from the weekend and to infiltrate the birkenstock crowd.
Cheers!

It is just amazing that a group of newcomers to Ojai think that they know anything about what this town is about. How presumptuous!
Several of you have spewed your hatred of public servants and public schools through not only this site, but through the news publications, your lawsuits, and your vile words.
There are rules for public forums and those rules were adhered to. Civility is a virtue which seems absent in public discourse recently, especially among the woefully inept newly arrived reformers who seem to think that they have the answer to all Ojai's problems.
In the 50s and 60s people in Ojai might have disagreed, but they lived and worked together and treated each other with respect. The nastiness we are seeing today serves to illustrate to young people that it is OK to be rude and to use force to convey one's point of view.
Shame should be the operative word here; unfortunately it is arrogance.

Miranda -

If they stay long enough, the day will come when they find themselves defending the town against people who look to them the way they look to you now.

I think I am honored that the worst Leland could say about me was that I was a communist. Better red than a bore, I have always said.

I am at a loss, however, at Leland came up with the conclusion that communism was the economic philosphy to which I subscribe. Perhaps it was meant as a general, all purpose put-down. It has been quite some time since I have seen the use of red-baiting as a political tactic. Way to raise the level of political discourse with meaningful criticism.

Long live Marxism -- as in the movies of Groucho, Chico and Harpo.

Len Klaif

Tyler, is it possible to number in sequential order the comments on this thread. It's getting to be quite a database, and could use some organization, for research and discussion purposes.

I thorougly enjoyed the information on Tar Baby. It brought back pleasant memories of childhood. I laughed and laughed. It nailed what I was trying to say in my long ramblings. Like "Brer" [what's the story on that term?] Rabbit, I am stuck in the Chapparral OK Corral Shootout, trying to get to my briar patch home.

There has been so much fodder dished up here that it will take me some time to chew on it, and digest it, and discard the unnecessaries, a process that would be aided by the aforesaid suggestion of a numbering system.

My theorizing is long, and sometimes incoherent, a sort of in public self education, leading to more specific practical applications, while drawing in comments, to refeed the circular process, and turn it into a more spiralling direction with a purpose and practical goal.

I will be posting here, Tyler willing, and announcing at the Ojai City council meeting Tuesday evening (10/24), my 2020 vision statement of Ojai, and a corresponding specific economic development plan.

More later on the theory. Now for the juicy.

I disagree that this thread is dead; it seems to be overflowing with bread of life. To engage in civil discourse, I need education on some terms used which I do not understand, like PC, ^o^, cajones, POV, TMI, and T.O.U. By the way, the name, Dennis, is mispelled; it has two n's.

"Looney-tune letters" is great poetics, but somewhat prejudicial in reference to my writing. Please see my 10/20/06 Ojai Valley News ad for my public withdrawal of my lawsuit against certain individuals and Ojai City, along with my reasons, in answer to Mr. Hammerschmidt's question. Also, my forthcoming 2020 Ojai Vision Statement, and new economic plan, may counter where I allegedly "showed lack of ESPECIALLY vision."

The argument against my candidacy, that I am new to Ojai, does not hold much water in view of the fact I have been here longer than Mr. Kersnar. We both provide a new perspective, although from apparently opposing political views, that long time residents may lack. As far as "hatred of public servants," if it was directed to me, I deny it. It would involve me in a self contradiction and logical self hatred, since I seek to be a public servant myself. "Newly arrived reformers" are "woefully inept," sometimes, in the minds of non-reformers, but sometimes are quite effective in bringing needed change to a community. And I have never claimed to "answer all of Ojai's problems." I have suggestions for curing some of her problems.

Regarding white male guilt, I must distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate guilt. In my view, white males have been guilty in an appropriate sense, regarding societal matters like war, and in personal matters like preying on women. The remedy for this unjust behavior is acknowledgement, not denial. It is appropriate, therapeutic, and reasonable to feel guilt in such cases. As a white male, I admit my part in this injustice, on a large scale by not speaking up publicly against unjust wars, and on a small scale for hurting individual women. I feel appropriate guilt, and seek appropriate remedies. I admit that this is being "solicitous" to women. I am soliciting their forgiveness, understanding and helpful feedback, so I can grow with their help. Whether this is "WAY over the top," or "condescending," is for individual women to judge. Whether "delicate lil' flowers who bruise soooo-easily ^o^" refers to women, or to myself, I deny the premise. I assert the contrary, and "proudly display my sensitive self." I deny the premise that "castrated wimpiness" is a "self description," and assert the contrary, that I am a man among men. I cannot respond to the terms, "POV, TMI [appears to be linked to ejaculate], and T.O.U," because I don't understand them. I do not need to purchase testosterone since I have plenty of my own, probably the standard amount for a male of 66 years. In male locker room talk [women, close your ears, although in a non sensitive, polically incorrect sidebar, I have heard that women's locker rooms are not all that purist when it comes to down to earth talk], I can still get my Irish up, and will stand up to any mick that wants to challenge me to a swordfight. May the better man win, and I will bet on myself. If that's "arrogant," so be it; it will balance my "sensitiveness." The references to "grass huts run over by barbarians," and "talk with Genghis about inner child and conflict resolution" escapes me. Someone enlighten me. I am in politics to resolve certain conflicts. I have talked to my inner child and she has given me the green light. I didn't think of talking to Genghis until now, but he also is giving me the green light, and a red flay to handle the bulls that are attaching Ojai's china shop.

One further question before I close shop here, and go to Farmers Market to shop. Does "post" refer to a post upon which a "thread" hangs, or is wrapped around; a post-it; or a letter that is mailed, or what?

Leland, honey, of course you are not disinvited to my birthday party. But I think that you -- and whomever else believes that I was "out of control" -- are projecting your own psyches onto me. Those who could not find it in their own flesh and blood to publicly challenge the status quo (and Leland, I don't include you in this group because you know me) reconcile this by assuming I must have been be drunk, on drugs, or mentally ill (this latter rumor compliments of a very bitter Dave Jones, who knows better)