Home Search

- search results

If you're not happy with the results, please do another search

Historic Preservation District board meets

0

The local review board of the Idyllwild Historic Preservation District met in its nominally monthly session with little business before it.

At its Thursday, Sept. 29, meeting at the Idyllwild Library Community Room, the board voted to change its scheduled monthly meetings to quarterly — with the next meeting being at noon Thursday, Jan. 26. The board noted that when they have a project before it, they could resume meeting on a monthly basis.

Said Keith Herron, county historic preservation officer, “The level of business we have before us does not warrant monthly meetings.” Herron serves as chief of natural, cultural and historic resources for the county’s Regional Park and Open Space District and in that capacity, oversees the work of Idyllwild’s Historic Preservation District.

In another matter, any local petitioning for Mills Act tax status was taken off the table because of lack of community interest. The Mills Act provides tax relief for owners of historic properties in exchange for their contractual agreement to restore and maintain those properties according to agreed standards.

Board member Ron Kammeyer asked what the board could do to help the community and raise interest about Idyllwild’s historic district. Herron suggested the board solicit historic status nominations for buildings not currently within the district, including private residences, as well as commercial buildings. Herron noted that May 2018 is the 125th anniversary of the Riverside County’s split from San Diego County and that nominating more Idyllwild structures would be a great way to highlight the county’s historic identity. “We could ask the county Historical Commission to meet here with individual nominations for additional Idyllwild structures as the focus,” suggested Herron.

Designation as an historic site carries certain benefits under California law, including “alternative regulations” under the California Historical Building Code, which are designed to “facilitate repair designed to preserve a historic resource’s original or restored architectural features;” federal tax credits, if qualified under National Historic Registers; and tax savings under preservation easements.

Idyllwild Community Fund honors grant recipients

0

icf

The Idyllwild Community Fund Advisory Committee honored its 2016 grant recipients at its annual reception on Thursday, Sept. 29, at the Rainbow Inn.

A capacity audience was on hand to hear ICF officers discuss the fund’s mission and to honor the local nonprofits to which ICF awarded grants this year.

The Idyllwild Community Fund was started in 1995 by a local couple who sought to establish a fund that would benefit the community in perpetuity. Each year ICF awards interest income from the fund to nonprofits it has vetted through site visits to and presentations by grant applicants. The advisory committee’s primary mission is to grow the fund by raising money each year and to raise community awareness about ICF.

A highlight of this year’s reception was a special award and acknowledgement to Hubert Halkin for his longstanding financial assistance to ICF. Halkin dedicates all his advertising income from his Live Mail site to ICF. That assistance helps ICF fund the Idyllwild Youth Grantmakers afterschool program for Idyllwild Middle School students.

ICF board member Holly Guntermann chairs the Youth Grantmakers program and conducts the eight afterschool sessions that teach Middle School students about philanthropy and community service. At the end of their training sessions, students award up to $4,000 in grants to local nonprofits that have young people as part of their mission.

Representatives from a new philanthropic organization in town, the Palms to Pines Foundation’s Pink Prism Fund, presented more awards to grant recipients.

Four Chaplains with Logan Creighton

0

The Friends of the Idyllwild Library will present another in their cultural and informational monthly series at 3 p.m. Wednesday, Oct. 12, in the Idyllwild Library Community Room. Logan Creighton will be performing an historical reenactment of the story of the Four Chaplains.

On Feb. 3, 1943, a German submarine torpedoed the SS Dorchester, an ocean liner converted for military service. She was traveling to Greenland and was attacked in the North Atlantic Ocean.

With 900 military passengers and crew aboard, she sank in the early morning hours resulting in the death of 674 men. Four of the soldiers who perished were First Lieutenants George L. Fox, Alexander D. Goode, John P. Washington and Clark V. Poling, each new military chaplains of different faiths, being transported to their new assignments in the Eastern Theater.

The survivors remember them as heroes. Together they calmed the panicked soldiers and each gave up their own lifejackets when the supply ran out. They helped others into lifeboats and linked arms, singing hymns and saying prayers as the ship when down.

Creighton is a returning presenter whose re-enactments of historical people and events have entertained and educated audiences in Idyllwild. He successfully dramatizes the heroism and patriotism of these four men of conviction and faith as they practiced what they preached and gave their lives to save others.

The event is free and open to the public.

Sports: October 6, 2016

0

sports

Soccer

Town Hall Sports Coordinator Justin Nunn gave this report on Youth Soccer. Below are the scores, standings and players of the game for Town Hall Youth Soccer. For the 4 to 6 year olds we are only doing player of the game.

 

Ages 4-6

Monday, Sept. 19: The Ninja Turtles vs. Slippery Sharks, and The Jedis vs. Team Awesome Sauce.

Players of the game: Ninja Turtles, Fatima Lopez; Slippery Sharks, Chelsea Cerritos; The Jedis, Candice Cook; Team Awesome Sauce, Micah McCaughey.

Thursday, Sept. 22: Team Awesome Sauce vs. Ninja Turtles, and Slippery Sharks vs. The Jedis.

Players of the game: Team Awesome Sauce, Noah McCaughey; Ninja Turtles, Angel Herrera; Slippery Sharks, Chase Potter; The Jedis, Isaiah Mavleus. 

Monday, Sept. 26: The Jedis vs. Ninja Turtles, and Team Awesome Sauce vs. Slippery Sharks.

Players of the game: The Jedis, Zaccary Mason; Ninja Turtles, Diego Rivera, Team Awesome Sauce, Aiden Prichett; Slippery Sharks, Andrea Citrowski.

Town Hall youth soccer continued last week with very exciting and competitive games.Photo by Chandra Lynn
Town Hall youth soccer continued last week with very exciting and competitive games. Photo by Chandra Lynn

Ages 7-9

On Friday, Sept. 23, the Wildcats and the Hurricanes played a hard-fought game. The Wildcats came away with a 3-1 victory despite the attempted comeback from the Hurricanes.

Also that day, Star Blues faced the Dragons with both teams playing hard to the final minute. Star Blues came away with the victory 3-1.

On Tuesday, Sept. 27, the Wildcats faced Star Blues. Both coming off of 3-1 victories looked to remain undefeated. In a close 1-1 match, the Wildcats came away with a victory scoring a goal in the final seconds of the game. Player of the game for the Wildcats was Gavin Vandermoon, with excellent saves as goalie. For Star Blues it was Oliver Gonzalez, also with excellent play at goalie.

Also that day, the Hurricanes faced the Dragons. Both teams looked for their first win of the season and it was a close game all the way down to the final minutes. A late goal by the Hurricanes meant they came away with the victory 1-0. Player of the game for the Hurricanes was Griffin Kretsinger scoring the game-winning goal. For the Daredevils, it was Dominic Esparza with his excellent defense throughout the whole game.

 

 

Standings                              Wins                            Losses

   Wildcats                                      2                                        0

Star Blues                                   1                                         1

Hurricanes                                 1                                         1

Dragons                                      0                                        2

 

Ages 10-14

On Monday, Sept. 19, Blue Thunder faced off against the Dare Devils in the first game of the season. Blue Thunder played hard but the Dare Devils played harder and came away with a victory 3-1.

On Thursday, Sept. 22, the Dare Devils competed against ReaL Idyllwild. After coming off a 3-1 victory, the Dare Devils looked to continue their winning streak. ReaL Idyllwild came in to their first game ready to win and shout out the Dare Devils 2-0.

In a rematch of their first game, Blue Thunder looked to bounce back after the 3-1 loss with the Dare Devils. In a very close game Monday, Sept. 26, which came down to great passing from the Dare Devils, they were able to come away with a 1-0 win against Blue Thunder. Player of the game for the Dare Devils was Cody Fogle with some excellent passes including an assist on the game-winning goal. For Blue Thunder, Manuel Lousman hustled all game long and played excellently.

 

Standings                               Wins                              Losses

    Dare Devils                                 2                                          1

ReaL Idyllwild                            1                                          0

Blue Thunder                             0                                          2

Peyton Priefer of the Idyllwild Middle School girls volleyball team sets the ball for a teammate’s hit during last week’s game against Dartmouth Middle School. Photo by Chandra Lynn
Peyton Priefer of the Idyllwild Middle School girls volleyball team sets the ball for a teammate’s hit during last week’s game against Dartmouth Middle School.
Photo by Chandra Lynn

 

County budget may reduce sheriff’s patrols in all unincorporated areas

0

Approval of the final Riverside County fiscal 2016-17 budget barely passed last week. The board was divided over approving a lean budget, which still needed reserves to balance, versus more funds to maintain the current level of sheriff’s deputies in the unincorporated area.

Since County Executive Office Jay Orr began preparing the budget last winter, he has advised the board of how tight it was and the need to limit increases for the next few years.

Last fall, the board engaged KMPG, an international consulting firm, to study the public safety agencies’ budgets and submit recommendations for savings and improved service. These results are still several months away.

However, Supervisors Chuck Washington (3rd District) and Kevin Jeffries (1st District) were willing to provide more funding to the Sheriff’s Department to maintain staffing in the unincorporated areas.

“The bulk of the budget goes to public protection that leaves us little maneuvering room outside of that,” said Paul McDonnell, finance director. And he shared that the Sheriff’s Department budget for last year ended with a $14 million savings. Also, the District Attorney’s office has found savings to reduce its tentative deficit from $7 million to $4 million.

But Jeffries asked, “Is there no proposal today to promote any additional funding to the DA or to the sheriff for us to consider?”

In response, McDonnell said he and his staff would continue working with both offices and the KPMG report, which may be ready by the end of the year, should recommend some changes to generate savings in both agencies.

Second District Supv. John Tavaglione expressed support for Jeffries idea, but urged the board to wait for the final consultant recommendations. “I understand Supv. Jeffries’ concern to put more deputies back on streets, but that’s a short-term fix to a fix we’re ultimately going to achieve … it’s coming soon.”

Jeffries continued to emphasize, “…[t]hat when we adopt this budget we’re agreeing to reduce patrol levels.” He also argued that the KPMG recommendations would not be implemented until next fiscal year.

While Supv. Marion Ashley (5th District) said he would vote for the budget presented and expected improvements overtime, Washington affirmed his opposition to the proposal.

“I cannot accept a reduction in service for public safety,” he stated. “The East Hemet station is hit day-in and day-out. I need more deputies on patrol, not less.”

The budget, which Orr presented, was adopted 3-2, with Jeffries and Washington voting “no.”

News of Record: October 6, 2016

0

Sheriff’s log

The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department Hemet Station responded to the following calls Sunday to Saturday, Sept. 25 to Oct. 1.

Idyllwild

• Sept. 25 –– Petty theft, N. Circle Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 26 –– Grand theft, Pine Crest Ave. Report taken.

• Sept. 26 –– Civil dispute, Maranatha Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 26 –– Assist other department, Pine Crest Ave. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 27 –– Follow-up, address withheld. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 27 –– Follow-up, address withheld. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 27 –– Alarm call, Seneca Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 28 –– Follow-up, address withheld. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 28 –– Child neglect, address withheld. Unfounded.

• Sept. 29 –– Public disturbance, Maranatha Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 29 –– Public disturbance, N. Circle Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 29 –– 911 call, N. Circle Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 29 –– 911 call from business, N. Circle Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 29 –– Danger to self/other, Village Center Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 29 –– Danger to self/other, address undefined. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 29 –– Alarm call, Tahquitz View Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 29 –– Suspicious person, Middle Ridge Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 30 –– Alarm call, address undefined. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 30 –– Alarm call, Tahquitz View Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 30 –– 911 call from business, Maranatha Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Oct. 1 –– Suspicious circumstance, 26000 block of Hwy. 243. Handled by deputy.

Mountain Center

• Sept. 24 –– Alarm call, 53000 block of Hwy 243. Handled by deputy.

Pine Cove

• Sept. 25 –– Public disturbance, Mountain View Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 27 –– Check the welfare, Marion Ridge Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 27 –– Suspicious circumstance, Walters Dr. Handled by deputy.

• Oct. 1 ––  Follow-up, address withheld. Handled by deputy.

Pine Meadows

• Sept. 25 –– 911 call, Horse Canyon Rd. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 26 –– 911 call, Horse Canyon Rd. Handled by deputy.

• Sept. 30 –– Alarm call, Lion Peak Rd. Handled by deputy.

Poppet Flats

• Sept. 25 –– Public disturbance, 46000 block of Poppet Flats Rd. Handled by deputy.

• Oct. 1 –– Civil dispute, Keyes Rd. Handled by deputy.

San Bernardino National Forest

• Sept. 27 –– Follow-up, address withheld. Handled by deputy.

• Oct. 1 –– Noise complaint, 56000 block of Hwy. 74. Handled by deputy.

Two death penalty ballot propositions with very different outcomes

0

Two 2016 California ballot initiatives seek to amend the death penalty, with very different outcomes.

One, Proposition 62 (Repeal of the Death Penalty), proposes to abolish the death penalty and substitute life sentences without possibility of parole for all first-degree murder convictions. Inmates currently on Death Row would have their sentences changed to life without possibility of parole.

The other, Proposition 66 (the Death Penalty Procedures Initiative) seeks to retain the death penalty and amend current procedures.

For some the choice is clear and primarily a moral one — that legally taking the life of another is wrong.

For others, the system is procedurally flawed — that the chance of mistaken convictions is too great based on recent history of conviction reversals, many based on new DNA evidence; that imposition of justice in death penalty cases is arbitrary, based on adequacy of legal representation, race, politics, geographic location of the trial and plea bargaining.

For others, the argument is a constitutional one — that housing murderers on death row for the decades it takes for appeals to be prosecuted and concluded arguably violates the 8th Amendment of cruel and unusual punishment.

And for some, abolishment of the death penalty is logical given the high costs to the state for multi-year legal appeal processes and for maintenance of two death-row prisons with increased security costs and housing requirements for death-row inmates.

According to the nonpartisan California Legislative Analyst’s office, death-penalty trials and challenges can take several “decades” to complete, with the state spending $55 million annually on legal challenges that follow death sentences. Death-penalty inmate housing requirements also come at significant additional cost. According to a study by the California Commission of the Fair Administration of Justice, “The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California’s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.”

A 2008 Los Angeles Times study found that the death-penalty system costs taxpayers more than $114 million a year more than comparable life-in-prison costs, and that the enhanced costs of trying a death-penalty case is at least $1.25 million more than a comparable murder case resulting in life imprisonment.

Proponents of 62, including Jeanne Woodford, a former death row warden, Donald Heller, the author of California’s current death-penalty law, and Beth Webb, sister of a victim murdered in 2011, argue that the current system has failed — that  taxpayers have spent more than $5 billion since 1978 to carry out 13 executions at a cost of $384 million per execution (higher cost than the older 2008 LA Times study found); and that the death penalty carries the “unavoidable risk of executing an innocent person.”

Supporters include the California Democratic, Libertarian, and Peace and Freedom parties; California NAACP; California ACLU; California League of Women Voters; Amnesty International USA; California Labor Federation; SEIU California; and the California Federation of Teachers.

A different approach to the death penalty, Prop 66, seeks to “mend,” not end, the death penalty. According to the Legislative Analyst, a “yes” vote changes procedures for legal challenges to death sentences, such as time limits on those challenges and revised rules to increase the number of available attorneys for those challenges. Also, condemned inmates could be housed at any state prison.

Under current law, there are two ways to challenge death sentences — “direct” appeals and “habeas corpus” petitions. Death convictions are automatically appealed to the California Supreme Court where questions of violations of state or federal law by the trial court are heard, such as evidence being improperly admitted or excluded at trial. These direct appeals focus on court proceedings that resulted in the death sentence. Under Prop 66, these direct appeals would continue to be heard by the California Supreme Court.

Habeas corpus petitions (at both California Supreme Court and federal levels) consider different factors, such as the ineffectiveness of the defendant’s attorney and other social factors that, had the jury known, would not have resulted in a death penalty. Under Prop 66, habeas corpus petitions would first be heard in the trial courts by the same judge who handled the original murder trial (unless good cause could be shown for another judge to hear the petition). The trial court would be required to explain in writing its decision on each petition which could then be appealed to a Court of Appeal. Court of Appeal decisions could still be appealed to the California Supreme Court.

Legal limits to trial-appeal processes, both direct and habeas corpus appeals, would be fixed at five years maximum from the date of the death sentence. The five-year requirement would apply to new legal challenges, as well as those currently pending in court.

The measure also requires the Judicial Council and the California Supreme Court to change existing procedures for selecting attorneys to represent condemned first-degree-murder inmates — that trial courts rather than the Supreme Court appoint attorneys for habeas corpus petitions; and that the pool of attorneys, currently limited to qualified death-penalty attorneys, be expanded to include attorneys on a list maintained by the Courts of Appeal for non-death penalty cases. The goal is to speed appointment of attorneys in death cases.

The measure allows death-row inmates to be housed in any state prison and exempts the state’s execution procedures from the administrative procedures.

The LAO estimates state-prison costs could be less if inmates are transferred to regular state prisons rather than San Quentin with its security and single-cell housing requirements. “In addition, to the extent the measure resulted in additional executions that reduced the number of condemned inmates, the state would also experience additional savings,” notes the LAO.

Proponents argue speeding up and limiting the appeal process timeframe to five years saves taxpayer money, ensures the worst of killers receives the strongest sentence, and brings closure to victims’ families.

Supporters include the California Republican Party, California Police Chiefs Association, California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California State Sheriffs’ Association, Riverside Sheriffs’ Association and the California District Attorneys Association.

Opponents note that the process of death-penalty cases, even under current law, is open to manipulation and mistake, and that once the appeal process is concluded, miscarriages of justice are hard to correct; that moving habeas corpus petitions from the Supreme Court to the court in which the case was heard adds in a potential level of bias and mistake inherent in the original trial proceedings; and that there are significant doubts the proposed fast-tracking could work and that it might prove more expensive that existing processes.

They also note that one in 10 California death sentences are overturned and for that reason there is too much risk of miscarriage of justice to speed up the current process.

Recent polls have Prop 62 leading 66, 48 percent to 37 percent. A similar measure to end the death penalty failed in 2012, garnering only 48 percent of the vote, the level at which the current measure (Prop 62) is polling. For either to pass it would need to crest the 50-percent mark. If both passed, the one with the most votes would prevail.

IFPD commission adopts final 2016-17 budget: New software delays financial reports

0

At the Tuesday, Sept. 27, Idyllwild Fire Protection District meeting, the commissioners dealt with several budget and financial issues. While they approved the final fiscal year 2016-17 budget, the commission will have to wait until next month to get the first financial reports for the year.

The projected budget is $2.03 million, which is about $7,000 less than projected revenue and about $170,000 more than the 2015-16 budget.

The growth in revenues is largely from two sources — the county’s property taxes and reimbursement from participation in fighting wildfires outside the district.

The budget does not include any more revenue from either enactment of Measure W on the Nov. 8 ballot to increase the unit (or parcel) fee or the partnership with San Jacinto City to operate a joint powers agency.

Salaries and employee benefits, attributed to Cal- PERS retirement payments and health benefits, will increase expenses to about $2.03 million.

Two drivers of this growth are the recently approved agreement with the firefighters association, which provides a 2.3-percent salary increase, and the funding of three captain positions as well as a battalion chief.

Fire Chief Patrick Reitz reported that revenue from the ambulance trips has increased in the first two quarters of 2016-17 compared to a year ago.

IFPD purchased new accounting software during the early summer and its financial consultant, Rob Dennis, is still trying to get current-year data into the system. According to Reitz, Dennis will have up-to-date financial reports for the commission’s October meeting.

“I had a fair amount of discussion with Mr. Dennis for the reports available for today’s meeting,” stated Commissioner and Treasurer Nancy Layton. “For today, we’ll use reports from the old software. The new software has some technical problems and we’re a month behind.”

In other business, the commission deferred re-appointing Calvin Gogerty to its finance committee until it reviews the policy adopted at its March 2016 meeting. But he will assume the chairmanship of the committee, which calls for a citizen chair.

Layton reported that she is actively recruiting two more citizen members for the committee. Commissioner Jeannine Charles-Stigall said the committee was willing to move its meetings to the evening if that would attract more interest, especially for people working during the day.

Commissioner Rhonda Andrewson announced the public meetings planned for Wednesdays, Sept. 28 and Oct. 5, to present and explain Measure W to IFPD constituents. (See accompanying story.) Layton was optimistic about the measure’s prospects based on her conversations with the public, while distributing information for the meetings.

Reitz attended Hospitalers Order of St. Lazarus Ceremony dinner and accepted the donation for the department’s Volunteer Company.

Fire & Forest: October 6, 2016: Fire Prevention Week urges fire awareness year round …

0

fire-forest-chris

Every year in our country since 1922, Fire Prevention Week has been observed during the month of October.

It was established to commemorate the Great Chicago Fire of 1871. Over two days, this fire killed more than 250 people, destroyed more than 17,400 structures and burned more than 2,000 acres.

The cause or blame for this fire is one of legend and myth and has involved everything from Mrs. O’Leary and her cows to meteorites and neighborhood boys. So in 1920, President Woodrow Wilson issued a proclamation declaring National Fire Prevention Day.

Ever since 1922, Fire Prevention Week has been observed every year on the Sunday through Saturday period in which Oct. 9 falls. This annual event is not celebrated with festivities but as a way to keep the public informed about the importance of fire prevention.

Over the years, the theme for this week has had a variety of fire-prevention topics. Some of these came about as a result of the previous years’ statistics related to fire cause, deaths and injuries compiled by the National Fire Protection Association, United States Fire Administration and other reporting organizations.

Safety campaigns  over the years have focused on preventing cooking fires, care with candles, exit drills in the home and, in recent years, smoke detectors.

This years theme is “Don’t Wait — Check the Date! Replace Smoke Alarms Every 10 Years.”  The idea behind this is that smoke alarms don’t last forever and should be replaced at a 10-year interval.

While the audible alarm may sound when you push the test button, the internal mechanical part that detects the smoke particles to activate the alarm in an emergency or presence of smoke may not be reliable many years later.

To check the date, simply remove the detector and look at the label on the back. If you are within the timeframe, remember to change your batteries twice a year when we fall back and spring forward during time changes or sooner, if needed.

Three out of five home fire deaths result from fires in properties without working smoke alarms. They really do save lives.

In addition to the national fire prevention campaign, also remember that this time of year in Southern California our fire season continues with the threat of Santa Ana winds. It is important to remain vigilant and continue to create and maintain your defensible space around the home and be prepared.

Fire season is not over yet, and our area is still vulnerable to wildfires.

Readers Write: October 6, 2016

0


readers-write

TC Putting up barriers

Editor:

A public special meeting was suggested to hear and discuss the opinion of district legal counsel. Directors Kunkle and Rockwell refused.

A public special meeting was called to interview qualified candidates for interim manager but Rockwell could not attend.

Another special public meeting was called and briefly held. It was aborted after the second of seven agenda topics because Rockwell, at the urging of Marge Muir and Jack Clark who had handed her a secret note, grabbed her purse and stormed out of the meeting.

As president of the district board, I thought is there a way to keep the district moving forward for the benefit of all our residents and customers? Political disagreement on whether to elect or appoint new directors should not affect business decisions and goals.

Instead of continuing the stalemate, I suggested to Kunkle and Rockwell that we hold one or more public special meetings. This was very reasonable given the prior refusals to attend District meetings.

The Town Crier published two articles condemning my invitation to gather for public special meetings. The Town Crier called the invitation a secret meeting.

Their condemnation does not square with the Brown Act. In discussing the call for a special meeting under the act, the California Attorney General has opined that “[s]o long as substantive consideration of agenda items does not occur, a majority may meet without providing notice to the public in order to call the meeting and prepare the agenda.”

The district is in a world of hurt, having lost two of its five directors and its manager. Now, instead of urging the board to meet, the Town Crier puts up unreasonable barriers to arranging public meetings to conduct important public business.

John Cook, President, Idyllwild Water District

Response from Jack Clark: 1) I did not hand Director June Rockwell a note, secret or otherwise, or anything else, for that matter, and Mr. Cook’s implication that I in any way even suggested, much less “urged,” her to adjourn or leave the meeting is false. (Also, Rockwell informs that she doesn’t carry a purse.) What else did Mr. Cook see that evening that didn’t happen?

2) Mr. Cook’s implication that by sending Kunkle and Rockwell an email suggesting they have informal meetings he was merely calling a nonpublic meeting in order to call a public meeting and prepare the agenda, is disingenuous. 

In the email, Cook did not suggest “public special meetings.” He suggested that the three directors meet in a “study session” to create a to-do list of things to be “done, studied or changed,” and that they “meet during the day to hear what staff sees as things to be done,” and then in the evening the directors “could see what the public would like on the list.” 

This is not a meeting to merely “prepare an agenda” for a public special meeting. Agendas are required to be formally posted 24 hours ahead of a special meeting, so agendas cannot be discussed and prepared the same day as a public meeting. Government Code section 54952.2 provides that “any congregation” of a majority of the members of a board at the same time and location — whether designated a “study session” or whatever — even to just hear or discuss any item that is within the board’s jurisdiction is a Brown Act meeting requiring notice to the public. 

The “unreasonable barriers” Mr. Cook accuses the Town Crier of raising are in reality California law, with which Mr. Cook sought to dispense. Cook’s emails to Kunkle and Rockwell are available for the public to examine at the Town Crier. 

s2Member®