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

On Tuesday, October 3 I spoke with Mayor Bury, Mayor Pro Tem Carol Smith, and Council Member Rae Hanstad individually on the telephone. I do appreciate and thank each of the council members for spending the 20-30 minutes each with me on the telephone. My goal of these calls was to express my dismay with the process, rather than the content of the initiatives. It was based on the information I had available to me. For example, the first response from the City of Ojai was a letter from Mr. Widders that stated Mr. Furchtenicht should re-write or withdraw his proposals or the City would seek declaratory relief (aka – a lawsuit). Why was a threat the first response by the City? Was the threat of litigation truly necessary in this first communication?

In my telephone conversations, I received varying responses from defensive and it’s all Mr. Furchtenicht’s choice to all this legalese is too complicated and I didn’t even read everything. The conflicting information provided by different council members and by Mr. Furchtenicht makes me a very confused person. At this point, it is obvious that mistakes and miscommunication occurred on both sides of the situation. When anything goes before a judge, and this is what I shared with each council member, there is always a loser; it is the nature of the judicial system. Mediation and conversation, on the other hand, often can provide a win-win situation without the expense and animosity that the legal process provides.

I challenge all parties (Mr. Widders, Mr. Furchtenicht, City Council) to sit down at a table and hash out a resolution before going to court on October 25. Can we let our defenses down for just a few minutes and reach for the good inside each of the players? It is obvious that Mayor Bury, and other council members, would like to see action on the content of these initiatives. This seems to be a good place to start.

More beaurocratic doublespeak nonsense I see-
same evasive style used at
the forum when the incumbants were asked how
they voted. Could they possibly be even more
patronizing?

First, let me thank Mr. Bury for responding to this issue in public and in writing.

I had the opportunity to speak with Mr. Jeff Furchtenicht in person recently and I have a few questions for the Mayor. According to everything I have seen in this forum and according to the conversation I had with Jeff, there was no request from Mr. Widders for him to change the format of his initiatives. As I understand it, once the initiatives are submitted by a citizen, the city attorney has 15 days to create a (and this is my wording, not official language) an unbiased title and summary of the initiative to be presented to the voters. Jeff told me that, if Mr. Widders had an issue with the format of the initiatives, he would have expected a phone call or letter during these 15 days suggesting that the format be corrected. He told me he did not receive either. He told me that he contacted several members of our elected government as well as Mr. Widders (whose firm bills the city for each of his actions) office during those 15 days to see what was happening and was not able to speak to any one of the people he tried to contact. If there was a problem with wording or format, it seems to me that any one of these individuals could have taken the time to speak with Jeff and address the problem. Certainly that would be more expedient than filing legal paperwork, certainly less costly and certainly would cause less controversy.

According to Jeff, an attorney himself, filing suit or "declaratory relief action" against a citizen proposing an initiative is essentially unprecedented. The cases cited in Mr. Widders briefs are 25 years old.

If the Council and the City Manager and Mr. Widders are truly interested in encouraging the democratic process with these issues, I believe that a letter detailing the concerns of the attorney should have been presented to Mr. Furchtenicht. I believe that if they respected Mr. Furchtenicht and his initiatives, they could have contacted him privately to let him know that they had filed this legalese, rather than informing him in a public venue two days after the deadline for their response.

I do not understand why the Council or Mr. Widders would act in these ways. It is easy to believe one of the popular opinions, that for some reason, the Council or Mr. Widders wanted to kill these initiatives.

Kenley, I fully agree with your comment and that was one of the first things I considered. If, in fact this was merely a question of how the initiative was written and nothing else. Why wouldn't the City sit down with Mr. Furchtenicht and try to hash things out? I think this is my largest concern. By taking this action directly to the judicial system, the City is telling other residents that they are un-willing to work out these issues. They are scaring the general public from attempting to initiate their own initiative.

Mr. Bury failed to mention that Jeff did not decline to withdraw the initiatives. Jeff said he'd be happy to withdraw them if these topics were put on the city council agenda as a way to open the dialogue on these issues.

Here's Jeff's offer to withdraw them from Sept. 12:

"...to answer your question, if 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 was encouraged by Mr. Kersnar's Frostie presentation, and I think that kind of approach is a very positive step. 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. "

And then, Mr. Widders wrote back that he'd communicate this to the council, and then nothing. Nothing ever happened after this. Mr. Widders never got back to Jeff to confirm if these items could be put on the agenda. A suit was filed and Jeff was served papers at his workplace.

Why couldn't the initiatives just be either valid or invalid? Why was he threastened with a lawsuit in the first palce?

I have just completed a long and detailed analysis from my point of view about the matter being discussed here. Tyler, do you have an email address I could send this to, or connect it directly here by posting? I will retype it here if necessary. I sent my response to Mr. Bury's guest editorial to the Ojai Valley News, Voice, Star, and Ventura County Reporter, and to others on my email list. If anyone on this blog wants to receive my emails directly, send your email address to dennis_j_leary@yahoo.com.
I thought the candidate forum on Tuesday put on by the League of Women Voters went very well, from the feedback I've received. There were excellent questions from the audience. Naturally, it is up to the voters about the direction the city is to take. Our responsibility is to get the information to them so they can make an informed choice. This blog, including Mr. Bury's guest editorial, and any written support he receives here, serve that purpose. Thanks to everyone. This is democracy's finest hour.

Dennis - please send to tyler -at- ojaipost dot com.

Thanks for setting the record straight Mayor Bury? The “Some people” says it all.

“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.” David Bury, Mayor, City of Ojai

You can see Mayor Burry’s point, we either were motivated by misunderstanding that our rights were being stripped away by the City Council, or we were motivated through something else. And, what would that something else be, Mayor Bury? What motivated the City Council to act so irresponsibly towards a citizen? Was it a misunderstanding or something else?

Democracy is government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation. We are exercising our direct representation part of the definition, filing an initiative would be direct representation of the people, and the City Council of Ojai is stifling our direct representation in the democratic process.

Expressing outrage at the City Council’s litigious action seems to be appropriate in the light of the City Council’s decision to litigate instead of mediate. We are expressing our displeasure with the City Council, our elected official’s performance. We are speaking what we feel as citizens. Again when we speak out, we are exercising our direct representation. The City Council members thrive on discounting their constituent’s ability to participate – ‘the ballot was not written right, we are thinking about affordable housing, we just don’t know when we’ll get around to it, our hands are tied on that matter and also on that matter, and we really can’t speak about it, you know the Brown Act.’

If the City Council is so concerned about affordable housing why haven’t they moved forward on the issue? I’ve been going to City Council meetings over that past several years and all I hear when the subject of affordable housing comes up is that they are for it. If we wait for the City Council to take action on affordable housing, it will never happen. NEVER HAPPEN.

It was wonderful of Mayor Bury to approach the subject of litigation, the intricate language of ballot initiatives and the strict set of rules on how to conduct the people’s business with such a patronizing attitude, to adopt an air of condescension toward the citizens of Ojai is really out of place.

When a politician says, “nothing could be further from the truth”, you know what has been said is not even close to the truth. Truth requires sincerity in action, and it requires character, neither of which has been displayed by the City Council of Ojai. What has been displayed and quite emphatically by the City Council of Ojai is the stifling of democracy.

Some people….

i simply want to express how thankful i feel to share my community with all of you. your passion for fairness and justice and democracy is very thrilling to me, and i'm in awe of the intellect that's on display here. THANK YOU to all for participating, and a significant tip o' the free speech hat to Tyler for helping this to be possible.

We have a Brave New Ojai stepping forward.

I'd first like to start by saying that Mr. Bury was politically forced to respond to this issue with the initiatives. Did he have any other option? Could he remain silent forever? No. Therefore, I ask, why should we thank him? It was his duty as Mayor.

Here's the way I see it, and a lot of others that I personally know, see it:

Mr. Bury's article was based on several false precedents that don't address the core issues that we are dealing with here. Instead, his argument hides behind bureaucratic banter. Let's be real here.

Some questions:

Why didn't the city work with Jeff and the citizens of Ojai to find a solution? Aren't they here to help us? What council members are responsible for directing Mr. Widders to proceed with the law suit? Why is the city so afraid of initiatives that "aren't written correctly" if that is really the case? Are its members unwilling to roll their sleeves up and hammer out something that works for everyone?

I have a feeling that these questions can’t be answered without arriving with the simple truth that the council and Mr. Widders chose to squash Jeff’s (and everyone else that would have signed those initiatives) rights with a locked up, hidden, sneaky lawsuit.

It is my opinion that our goal should be to keep this entire matter public so that it won’t stay locked up where they want it. We aren’t going away!

Brian: My comments follow in CAPS...

"Why didn't the city work with Jeff and the citizens of Ojai to find a solution?" PLEASE DEFINE WHAT THE "SOLUTION" SHOULD BE, WHEN POSING SUCH A QUESTION. "Aren't they here to help us?" A CITY COUNCIL, AND ACTUALLY ANY BODY ELECTED BY THE PUBLIC, IS NOT THERE TO "HELP US." RATHER, AT LEAST IN THE LAST THOUSAND YEARS OF DEMOCRACY, THEY ARE THERE TO REPRESENT US. "What council members are responsible for directing Mr. Widders to proceed with the law suit? " WERE YOU TO EXAMINE THE VOTES IN THE PUBLIC RECORD-LET ALONE ATTEND THE MEETING(S) IN QUESTION--YOU WOULD HAVE YOUR ANSWER. "Why is the city so afraid of initiatives that aren't written correctly if that is really the case?" SO THE INITIATIVE IN QUESTION WAS WRITTEN INCORRECTLY, EH? COOL. YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY AN EXPERT AND WILL TAKE THE LEGAL HEAT IF IT--THE INITIATIVE- AIN'T "LEGAL"? FANTASTIC! THANKS! "Are its members unwilling to roll their sleeves up and hammer out something that works for everyone?" HUH? "WORKS FOR EVERYONE?" NICE NOTION. TRY IT SOMETIME WHEN PREPARING A BREAKFAST FOR FOUR. "We aren't going away!" DON'T EXPECT YOU TO. NEVER THOUGHT YOU WOULD! BY ALL MEANS, SHINE YOUR BRIGHT LIGHT ONTO AND INTO THIS WORLD OF DARKNESS!