The Ojai Post

VC Star endorses Sue and Suza...
http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/oct/20/ojai-horgan-and-francina/

Good Luck, Suza!!!

Wow. The Star's appears to be suffering from split-personality disorder I guess. At least they got it half right. Good luck Suza!

From this morning's Star:

She said building a skate park is a priority and a long time coming. Ten years ago, other sites were explored and the location on property leased from the school district was determined to be the best. That sentiment was underscored by the renewal of the lease, she said. "That decisions has already been made." As for proposed development of the school district office on Ojai Avenue, she said a possibility is a developer could "buy the city out of the lease," but that that "would have to happen pretty soon."

Talk about double speak from Horgan. This kind of seemingly two-faced "support" for the skate park is a hallmark of the current city council. Just what is she talking about when she says a developer could buy the city of out of the lease? The only way that could happen is if the city is prepared to throw the skate park under the bus. Just what is the Mayor talking about, is she shopping for potential developers? Sure sounds like that to me.

Regarding the Star's endorsement, this is my reply:

http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/oct/20/ojai-horgan-and-francina/#comments

While I agree wholeheartedly with the Star's endorsement of Suza Francina, I am mystified at its endorsement of Sue Horgan, given her track record on a number of key issues. Chief among these is her decision to vote twice to pursue the SLAPP lawsuit against one of Ojai's citizens. Not only has this been an extraordinary waste of Ojai money (nearly $100K to-date), it has had a chilling effect on citizen participation in democracy in Ojai.

Council members supporting the lawsuit (including Horgan and Hanstad) have repeatedly offered the excuse that, because they felt the proposed initiatives at the heart of the lawsuit were improperly formatted, they had no choice but to sue one of their citizens for the offense of attempting to advance initiatives to address the issues of chain stores and affordable housing in Ojai.

No choice but to sue? Of course they had choices. Horgan and Hanstad's position is tantamount to saying that each of us must sue everyone we disagree with about anything -- there are no other alternatives, such as, say, discussing the issue over a cuppa coffee to see if there's a constructive solution.

Whether or not Horgan and Hanstad are right about their legal position will ultimately cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars to determine. This is money that only benefits the law firm representing the city.

What is lost is the real issue: how does a city government resolve disputes with its citizens? Does it file a lawsuit? Or does it first try less costly and more constructive approaches? In this particular case, the victim of the city's SLAPP suit offered to drop his initiatives if council merely put the topics of chain stores and affordable housing on council's agenda for discussion. Council's reaction? File a lawsuit, then put the topics on the agenda anyway. Mind boggling.

Because of Sue Horgan and Rae Hanstad's wasteful decision to vote to sue one of its conscientious citizens for simply trying to preserve his beloved city, I cannot in good conscience support their reelection to council.

Change begins at home. I support Suza Francina and Betsy Clapp for Ojai City Council.

That is exactly right Todd.

Recently, I was at a dinner party where one of the guests asked: What if Gore, or for that matter Kerry, had been President in 2000 or 2004? Would we be facing the current economic meltdown, the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan, the problems in Korea, with Russia, the loss of influence in Latin America? Would gas have hit over $4/gallon? Would we have lost trillions in our retirement savings and be talking seriously about facing another Great Depression?

Or would we be running surpluses, riding a wave of new green energy and technology development as we tackled global warming? Would we be leading the UN in tackling the genocide in Darfur, celebrating the reunification of the Koreas, partnering through NATO with Russia in setting up new, long term security arrangements for a stable and peaceful eastern Europe, brokering the implementation of a workable two state solution between Israel and Palestine?

Would 9/11 have even happened? If it had, would Osama bin Laden still be free, proclaiming to all who will listen how he brought us to our knees?

Who knows? What we do know is, what a different world it would be.

That's what I think when I consider this upcoming local election. The incumbents have shut out the voice and talent of the majority of the townspeople, rendering us a true "silent majority." They have shut out people, talent and ideas. They made the formula retail ordinance a contentious fight, they are making the skate park a contentious fight, they have sown distrust and suspicion across the board of what they do.

The root of this was their horrendous SLAPP lawsuit.

I like to imagine: What if a new majority had taken over in 2006?

What if Suza, Betsy, Len (or you) had been running, and been elected?

Would Ojai have lost so many of its younger working families? So many of its artists? Would we have so many struggling businesses, so many vacant storefronts for so long? So many families facing foreclosure, barely making ends meet, without any good options? Would the skate park be so contentious, so seemingly incapable of getting done? Would we still have done nothing to protect existing affordable housing, to make more existing housing affordable? Would City Hall still be viewed by the many groups and individuals who think about how to preserve and enhance Ojai into the future as the first obstacle to overcome?

Ojai can be the model green, sustainable, arts-focused city it should be. The way to get there is to bring in the talent we have, to welcome the ideas and efforts of the people who are here, full of energy and ready to do great things. Suza and Betsy have promised to do that. Meanwhile, the incumbents have destroyed any chance of that happening while they are in office.

Sue and Rae should step out of the race, and endorse Suza Francina and Betsy Clapp.

(Now, let me imagine, for a few more hours, them making that announcement, for the good of the City of Ojai, at tonight's forum...)

Ditto to the above comments. Brilliant analysis of Ojai's problem: the leadership and a dumbed down population. Sounds like Washington in minature. I'm no longer an Ojai resident so can't vote but if I could, I'm in agreement with the above remarks (other than the schizo Star). Unlike Washington, Ojai appears to have a welcome choice. Sorry demoncrats, but I will not vote for Obama. I do not like war.

I left the forum after the opening statements and the first round of questions. I just couldn't take it anymore. I had to get out of there. It was so unreal, controlled and out of touch with any type of reality that I prefer, that some force just had to get me out of there. spk was there so he'll probably give a good summary.

Suza and Betsy, in my opinion were the only sane candidates. But I think there were people in the audience who would not vote for them. I was kind of shaken by the reinforcement of the experience that the mainstream is so illusional that it borders on insanity. Yet, this mindset or feeling tone is the standard of reality in our society.

One of my two major careers was in psychiatric nursing so I am familiar with psyche wards. Maybe I'm getting too sensitive, but tonight's venue was worse than the wards because of the pretense of reality.

Betsy and Suza are brave, strong characters to put up with the weird vibes. I wish them luck. If they don't make it, I fear for Ojai and possibly my own sanity.

Maybe the atmosphere changed after I left. Maybe I'm the problem. Who knows? I need to sleep on it. Two years ago I was a candidate and had a front row seat to the excitement Cathy L. J. brought to bear. At least there was some life. I don't remember what I or anyone else said but I do remember Cathy and Captain Norris. I didn't see either of them there tonight.

Can someone please get rid of those stupid, controlled, stifling, pre-prepared questions at the beginning? What is this? Kindergarten? I overheard one of the moderators say they expected it to be calm this year in contrast to last year. Yeah, but not dead.

I'm not strong enough yet but maybe in two years I'll be back to raise hell. I'm waiting for a report from spk. He has a better feel for these things than I do.

Brett shook my hand and said I should be up there. Right. Dropping out was the best decision I ever made, or one of them. He sure is a good looking hunk; seems to have forgotten the time I got drunk while at the same table at the Ojai Land Conservancy moonlight madness. Amazing what politics will do for you your brain cells.

If I had a brain, would I be writing this? Take care. Take care of Ojai.

Betsy and Suza did a fine job. I was somewhat dismayed that the two incumbents didn't seem the least bit embarrassed when it was announced the city had won the appeal of the Slapp lawsuit. And who is that bullet buying Lenehan? He kinda scares me. How many times did Joe Duhvito fall asleep?

Probably the most interesting exchanges of the evening revolved around the SLAPP lawsuit. On many issues the candidates took positions fairly similar to one another, but not on SLAPP. Suza and Betsy strongly denounced the city for filing the suit and wasting many thousands of city dollars on it. Sue Horgan strongly defended it and announced with pride that the city won the appeal.

So this seems to be one of the the clearest issues distinguishing the challengers from the incumbents.

I understand now why I had to leave early and probably why Jeff didn't show. It's so sad about the lawsuit. I have personal experience of the injustice of the Ventura courts, both superior and appeal. Fits with the times; things are out of joint. The system is so, so sick but if there's money in the bank, it's interpreted as a sign of health. The comfort is this: Jeff stood for justice, and there will be a reckoning.

We lost our house and altogether a half million, standing for justice. I could tell you some unbelievable stories about the corruption of the Ventura courts and their business and legal friends but you have better things to do than listen to the garbage. In time it will be recycled. Karma will have his day and Love will have her say. In the meantime, let city hall and their friends enjoy their cocktails and victory. They always make money and the taxpayers pay.

Thanks for the report, and the news, bad as it may be. My condolences, Jeff. You fought the good fight, and perhaps there is another appeal pending. Is there any court not corrupted by money and power? I believe there is: the court of final appeal, Lady Justice herself. She will have the final say.

In that court, Jeff, you have won. I'm proud to know you, and will treasure your memory as one of the real people of Ojai.

I for one was very glad to hear that neither Horgan nor Hanstad are prepared to spend another dime pursuing this issue up to the State Supreme Court. A question was asked, if you are elected, would you vote to spend any more city money should the ACLU decide to pursue the case up to the Supreme Court? Sue Horgan said, unequivocally "NO!" Not to be outdone by her fellow incumbent, Hanstad also said NO forcefully.

Suza Francina asked if the city had any choice in the matter should the ACLU take what looks like a very controversial decision by the appellate court on up to the Supreme Court of California. Betsy Clapp went further to suggest that it's not up to the city council whether this issue continues to the Supreme Court and that we need to know if the prior decisions by the incumbents haven't locked us into a Supreme Court fight.

While it is true that the city council has no say in the ACLU's decision to take this case up to the Supreme Court, it is equally true that the the city council can decide if they are willing to pay the continued court fees required should Mr. Widders decide to continue fighting the issue. There is no reason the City of Ojai needs to continue any funding of this lawsuit that has now changed nearly 100 years of existing constitutional law with regard to our rights to direct democracy here in California. I believe for the worse. I think it is sad that Ojai, of all places, has bankrolled, with citizen's money, a court case that has now jeopardized a citizen's rights to direct democracy.

I was pleased to hear tonight that no matter who wins on Nov. 4th, with the possible exception of Mr. Lenehan who didn't seen interested in the issue, the candidates will not vote to continue spending city funds for this decidedly undemocratic fight.

I'm really confused as to why Horgan and Hanstad would decide to draw the line at this particular juncture on a cause they so emphatically believed in. I gather that Horgan drew great pride and vindication from the appellate court's decision to effectively end California's initiative system. Why not commit hundreds of thousands of dollars of Ojaian's money to continue the fight if it is, in fact, so righteous? Heck, why not bankrupt the city to defend the its right to intimidate and punish citizens who wish to do nothing more than preserve the town they love?

Todd,

The reason Horgan and then Hanstad replied NO to the question listed above is that the evening's one and only applause line occurred when Betsy Clapp responded that she felt the City's decision to sue one of it's citizens was disgusting. The whole auditorium applauded after her statement. Both Clapp and Francina listed the decision to sue a citizen activist as the worst decision by the city council in recent memory.

The decision handed down yesterday by the appellate court does effectively end California's initiative system on the municipal level. It is highly unlikely that anyone on a local level will feel comfortable starting an initiative at that level knowing that an unelected city attorney can block it indefinitely and even drag you into court long before is ever sees the light of day in the signature gathering process. This is especially dreadful and suspect in cities where the city attorney is also the attorney that does the litigation for the city. In those cities, and Ojai is one, any litigation taken up on behalf of the city causes the city attorney to gain financially in the form of fees.

It is for these reasons that I think we have not seen the end of this issue in the courts. As I said above. I am extraordinarily pleased that both incumbent candidates have come out and said they will not vote to spend anymore of the city's money on this matter.

Sean,

I don't see why the court's decision would be restricted to initiatives at the municipal level. Why couldn't this terrible precedent be used as ammo to block all initiatives? Am I missing something?

Todd,

I agree that this decision prompted by Widders' and the city's lawsuit is a terrible precedent and will be used as ammo to block initiatives at all levels throughout California. However, it is uniquely corrosive to public participation on the municipal level because on the state level the initiatives are put through the Secretary of State's office. The Sec. of State's office is an elected position. Further, the Sec. of State does not stand to reap a monetary gain by initiating litigation against any prospective initiative.

By contrast, on the municipal level, often the gate keeper will be a private attorney hired by a city. Now, after this atrocious decision, that city attorney will be the ultimate decision maker and if he/she doesn't like an initiative, they can now simply ignore the initiative or even bring legal proceedings against the initiatives proponents as Widders did to Jeff with city funds. Finally, if as is the case here in Ojai, the city attorney is also the law firm hired to litigate for the city, there is an inherent conflict of interest.

Thanks Sean -- I have never understood why this plainly evident conflict of interest has not generated greater outrage among the citizens of Ojai. The city attorney is able to profit (very handsomely, in this case) from unnecessary litigation he pitches to council. It has always seemed to me that a no-brainer initiative would be to make it illegal for the city attorney, his firm, or affiliates, to profit in any way from city litigation. With the appellate court's ruling, the chances of that kind of initiative getting past this particular city attorney rates somewhere around the "snowball's chance in hell" edge on the probability meter.

With all the money Monte has fleeced off Ojaians on specious litigation, you'd think he could at least throw some kind of "thank you" party for the citizens in appreciation.