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

todd - you rock!

Math rocks. But what rocks even more is the interpretation of math. I'm interested in the politics of math. Politics is about power, and the pen is mightier than the sword, so they say. So, how we spin these election results is almost as important as the results themselves. Co-opting the language and defining the terms of the debate are powerful tools. On the previous thread to this "redux", I spoke to some of these points.

I'm missing many of the fine points, but here, in general, is how I interpret the results so far, stated with my particular spin. Lennie, Pete and Dennis got about 37% of the actual votes cast (according to a recent tally). Lennie, Pete, Dennis (LPD) represent the "status pro" (I reject the term, "fringe element" as prejudicial, and co-opt status quo with status pro). For a talking point, I can safely say that over one third of the votes were for progressive change to save Ojai's character, and to prevent overdevelopment. Two thirds of the vote were for the status quo.

One third of the vote is a significant number. However, it is not a majority, and did not succeed in electing one progressive candidate (apparently at this time). Such facts can be demoralizing if we put our faith in math alone, and in quantity above quality. This is where the interpretation of math is vital. One third is a powerful number politically and symbolically. It is too big for a fringe element, and if focused, can have significant effects on the majority. A minority speaks truth to power, and keeps the majority honest. Because of our efforts, I can count several examples already of where the majority status quo is cracking and crumbling, in their policies and desired results. Not being elected can be more advantageous from a strategic view than actually sitting behind that dias, where you've got to spend a lot of energy defending your policies. As a one third, third party, we can work on policy and strategy directly.

See the prior thread, for a short history of what's been going down at city hall Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. The cracks are getting bigger, and the walls are beginning to crumble. I spoke all three nights, but only had a prepared text for the council meeting on Tuesday, which I include here for reference to where I'm going. See prior thread for details.

COUNCIL MEETING 11/14/06

"Last evening at the Historic Preservation Commission meeting, Mr. Kersnar admitted that a property owner's consent is not required in order for a property to be declared a city landmark. This corrects the previous information given at a powerpoint presentation on O-Hi Frostie. What also should be corrected for the record is that the Top Hat in Ventura is on private land, which makes the Top Hat and Frostie situations similar.

"I told the Historic Commission, and I believe they concurred, that you, the council, not they, should make the decision about proceeding with landmark status for Mallory Way and O-Hi Frostie. If you do not act now in the city's interest to preserve these historic and economic resources, it indicates to me that you do have developer bias, conflicts of interest in their favor, and a fear of confronting the power of developers. What are they going to do? Sue you for doing your duty?

"State law, the philosophy directives of our general plan, our ordinances, and fairness and justice require you to protect the city's history, economy, and housing needs. According to Government Code 37104, you even have the power to subpena developers and have them answer questions here. You can negotiate development agreements like Ventura did with the Top Hat business owners and the developer property owner. In the case of Top Hat, the developer agreed to move the business at his expense. In the case of Frostie, there are strong arguments for retaining Frostie in its original site.

"All it requires is political will, integrity, negotiation and reasonableness. Because of the recent election results, you may feel justified in continuing your policy of non-action. However, remember that you also represent minorities, and even among the majority, most support the concept of preserving Ojai's small town character. It is time to square your actions with your words, and support truth and what is right. I ask you to put the question of landmark status for Mallory Way and O-Hi Frostie on an agenda for discussion, and then direct the Historic Commission to proceed with landmark status. This will put Frostie back where he belongs, and restore confidence in Ojai government."
_________________________

The status quo with its massive weight of inertia simply wears down the opposition. But we can play the same game. We have the advantage of mobility and truth. We can keep chipping away at the status quo's dissembling, and eventually win the war, after losing every battle (Dylan).

On another note, I'd like to share a poem here, which I wrote when the results were coming in about Lennie falling behind Joe in the absentee tallies. I entitled it "Sadness" and now see part of it was sadness for Ojai, and for the blindness and selfishness of many of her citizens. Ojai is the real subject of the poem.

SADNESS

Sadness seeps through at my window pane
Dripping clouds of bittersweet rain

I ask her what she's bringing in today
But she can't or doesn't know what to say

I hold the gaze of her soft brown eyes
Keeping back the tears of threatening skies

She tells my heart she misses things that were
When I took more time to talk with her
______________________

I just read todays OVN, and note the front page coverage on my speaking at the Planning Commission meeting on behalf of Frostie. Credit should be given to the commission for forcing Mr. Polito to scale down his plans. On the outside, the project looks quite acceptable to me. However, on the inside, it's another matter. What is going to go into those retail spaces? The door is now open for national franchises, which can move into the approved project, with a sort of Trojan horse ploy. What would protect Ojai's small town character is ordinances, favoring owner operated businesses, such as are advocated by Jeff's initiatives. Now it is apparent why the present leadership would oppose the initiatives. Their developer and high end money policy bias is becoming too evident to be easily dismissed with substance vs. form dissembling. Truth will out.

Right next to the "Last stand for burger stand made at planning" article was the "First Resort, Ojai Valley Inn & Spa joins resort elite" article. Interesting juxtapositioning. Two lifestyles, two classes, two philosophies, two political camps. I'm not saying one is right and the other is wrong. Both can co-exist and nurture the other, if proper distinctions are made and maintained. The present leadership has shown they do not appreciate Ojai's traditional small town character, and are confusing it with the Ojai Valley Inn's. They want to remake Ojai into a suburb of the OVI, rather than the other way around. It's the old story of putting money above people in the systems of value. The lead headline is "Ojai's revenues still climbing." Nothing is said about the eight million dollars it will take to fix our roads now, or the people that are being forced out of town because of unaffordable housing, or of the small business owners who will close because of Politoville and the mini-mall to go up at Gridley and Ojai Avenue. On a scale of reality, that serves real people, Frostie ranks high and the OVI low, no matter what the money numbers are. There is an air of unreality at the OVI, because it represents a tiny minority of mostly white wealthy people in a vast sea a brown skinned poor, low and moderate income people. This minority has value, and play their roles, and are of economic benefit to Ojai. However, the Ojai government leadership should not mistake scales of reality, and of economies of scale. Ojai's future lies with the majority of people. There is an air of reality with them, represented by the Frostie clientele, not by the OVI. The OVI clientele can benefit from their contact with real people in Ojai, but that presupposes that real people will be able to stay in the real town which has been Ojai. Talking about money and politics is not pleasant but necessary for real people in a real town.

I want to acknowledge that OVN published “Math Anxiety” in its November 17 issue. Having been beat up a time or two on Ojai’s blogs, I can appreciate how it feels to take public criticism (or derision). I think it takes a special person to be willing to consider and publish dissenting views. I want to acknowledge that Bret Bradigan is that sort of person, and I am very appreciative of that.

I'll second Todd Miller's remark that Bret considers and publishes dissenting views. My views have been published frequently in the OVN, and the OVN reporters have been generous in their coverage, most recently Friday with the reference to Frostie's front page coverage.

Bret has said publicly a couple of times that he's glad the election is over. Sounds like he was caught in a crossfire. I think he's tired of the fighting.

I was disappointed in his remarks about 9/11 in his Friday editorial. Sounded like his tiredness overwhelmed his usual carefully considered remarks. There is abundant evidence and research that supports the allegation that U.S. agencies carried out 9/11, and blamed it on terrorists. It's certainly not hard to believe in the context of their culture of lying, and makes sense as a strategy decision, to control oil, and build empire. Brett says: "The same people who so incompetently mucked up Iraq are not capable of orchestrating a monumental atrocity like 9/11." This fails to distinguish where the two events took place. In the U.S., the intelligence services had no interference; in Iraq, they have plenty who hate them and resist mightily. Of course, there are conspiracy theorists who jump to conclusions without carefully considering the evidence, but that is also true of the anti-conspiracy theorists. There are parts of "Loose Change" that are irrefutable, and parts that are debatable. I have a video, "9/11 Mysteries" that is even more devastating, concerning the controlled demolition of the towers. Considering the power of the government to destroy evidence, conceal it, and threaten those who whistleblow, the evidence that has surfaced so far is utterly convincing to me. But those convinced against their will, are of the same opinion still. 9/11 is a symbol of massive denial, as well as the opportunity to break free, with the truth about ourselves that can set us free.

Dennis,
Just a thought. What the hell do 9/11 conspiracy theories have to do with the subject matter of this thread?
I can just imagine council meetings if you'd have won....

Joe, Sometimes threads in blogs wander around, sometimes they come back to the topic at hand, sometimes they start a new one. Dennis does ramble on in his posts, true, but he truly, sincerely, cares about Ojai, the town and its people. I don't think he warrants such a sharp, personal attack.

Dennis: Just a suggestion - if you have an aversion to Bret's remarks re: a 9/11 conspiracy, might I suggest that you review what Noam Chomsky has to say on the matter. (If you recall, you off-handedly suggested that I go read his work, to which I replied that I have been reading him since the eighties). He specifically states that not only does he not believe in a conspiracy, but believes that any attention given to the theories has the ability to divert attention from the ACTUAL "crimes of state" perpetrated by our government. Since Chomsky is considered by many to be the leading intellectual dissident of our time, I tend to give a quite bit of credence to what he has to say. And what he bases his opinion on is obvioulsy culled from much more research and cummulative knowledge than one or two books and videos found off the internet.

And though I am sure that you are a very nice guy and your heart is in the right place with regards to our community, I agree with Joe about the prospects of having you sit on the Council - a leader and politician (no matter what the level) needs to be precise and concise in all levels of communication and have a a bit of logic and critical thinking skills in his or her arsenal (especially if one is going to publicly debate the complexities of what actually happened on September 11). Talk (and rhetoric) is cheap - no matter how long-winded and verbose the context.