Sep
7
Agenda, your reporting & comments on tonight’s Los Al City Council Meeting (9/7/10)
Filed Under 2010 Issues, City Council Meetings
(Los Alamitos, 9/7/2010) I’ve already got a couple posts up on key issues on tonight’s Council agenda, & never had time to get to several others, but below you’llfind the complete agenda so you can follow along from home tonight or on a subsequent rebroadcast.
Better yet, you can record tonight’s meeting (or a rebroadcast) & use the agenda to help fast forward to the parts or speakers that most interest you. I set my DVR to record channel 3 for 4 hours tonight. . . hopefully that’ll be enough.
Advertisement:
Here’s the agenda, or you can scroll to the bottom to add your comments & reporting, or to see what others reported and thought (If you speak tonight, you can also post your remarks in full if you wish):
CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS
AGENDA, CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010 – 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Poe
4. INVOCATION Mayor Pro Tem Stephens
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recognition of John Unrath for Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES)
B. Los Alamitos All-Star Girls Softball Team
C. Recognition of Service for Reserve Officer Miguel “Mike” Quesada
6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
At this time, any individual in the audience may come forward to speak on any item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. Please state if you wish to speak on an item on the Agenda. Remarks are to be limited to not more than five minutes.
7. REGISTER OF MAJOR EXPENDITURES September 7, 2010.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
All Consent Calendar items may be acted upon by one motion unless a Council Member requests separate action on a specific item.
A. Warrants
September 7, 2010.
B. Wheels, Wings & Rotors Attachment 1 (Police)
The Los Alamitos Area Chamber of Commerce is requesting the City’s assistance with the Wings, Wheels, Rotors & Expo, to be held on the Los Alamitos Army Airfield at the Joint Forces Training Base on Sunday, October 24.
Recommendation: City Council authorize resources as specified in this report to the Wings, Wheels, Rotors & Expo, hosted by the Los Alamitos Chamber of Commerce.
C. Digital Map Products, for CityGIS Annual Subscription Contract Renewal Attachment 1 2 (Comm. Dev.)
The City Council has budgeted the appropriate funds for the Digital Map Products, Inc., CityGIS annual subscription renewal. Staff is seeking approval for the appropriate agreements to effectuate this service for FY 2010-2011. Section 2.60.130 of the municipal Code requires approval of the City Council when the amount of the Contract exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
Recommendation: City Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Digital Map Products, Inc. in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Municipal Code Amendment for Fee Adoption of Fee Resolution to Establish Pawnbroker Fees Attachment 1 2 3 (Comm. Dev.)
Consideration of an Ordinance to amend the Chapter 5.36 of the Los Alamitos Municipal Code relating to permits and fees for pawnbrokers and secondhand dealer and a Resolution establishing fees relating to pawnbrokers and secondhand dealers. Citywide. (City initiated)
Recommendation:
1. Conduct a Public Hearing on the proposed Application and Regulatory Fees for Pawnbroker and Secondhand Dealers; and,
2. Waive reading in full and authorize reading by title only of Ordinance 10-04, and set for second reading; and,
3. Mayor Poe read the title of Ordinance No. 10-04 entitled, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LOS ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 5.36 OF THE LOS ALAMITOS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PERMITS AND FEES FOR PAWNBROKERS AND SECONDHAND DEALERS. CITYWIDE. (APPLICANT: CITY INITIATED).”
4. Adopt Resolution No. 2010-17, entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS AMENDING RESOLUTION 2008-12 REGARDING FEES FOR CERTAIN USER SERVICES – PAWNBROKER AND SECONDHAND DEALERS.”
10. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Direction to Voting Delegate as to the City’s Position on Resolutions to be Considered at the League of California Cities’ 2010 Annual Conference Attachment 1 (City Clerk)
The League of California Cities Annual Conference will be held in San Diego, September 15-17, 2010. At the meeting of July 19, 2010, the City Council designated Council Member Zarkos as its Voting Delegate to the Annual Business Meeting and Council Member Graham-Mejia as the Voting Alternate. Council Member Zarkos has requested the City Council’s direction as to its position on the proposed resolutions.
Recommendation: Provide direction to Council Member Zarkos, the City’s Voting Delegate for the League of California Cities 2010 Annual Business Meeting, on the City’s position on the following:
1. Resolution Relating to League Bylaws Amendment
2. Resolution Relating to the Let’s Move! Campaign
3. Resolution Opposing the Board of Directors’ Decision to Defer Action on AB 32 and SB 375 and to adopt the Board-Appointed Task Force Recommendations
4. Resolution Relating to Responsible Banking
5. Resolution Relating to State Unfunded Mandates
6. Resolution Related to Enhancing Public Safety While Driving A Motor Vehicle
B. Approval of Master Joint Use Agreement with the Los Alamitos Unified School District Attachment 1 (Comm. Serv.)
Approval is requested of a Master Joint Use Agreement for the use of shared sites with the Los Alamitos Unified School District for a five-year term.
Recommendation: Approve the Master Joint Use Agreement with the Los Alamitos Unified School District for a five year term. The parties may, upon written mutual agreement, extend the term for an additional five years.
C. Downtown Revitalization Project Timing Attachment 1 (Public Works)
Council will be provided a presentation of Downtown Revitalization Project Timing for the City of Los Alamitos. This item outlines a preliminary timeframe and cost estimate for the initial plans of the Downtown Revitalization Project.
Recommendation: Establish a course of action and time frame for the Downtown Revitalization Project and authorize staff to seek available funding opportunities and start public outreach.
D. Consideration of Reducing Animal License Fees (Police)
The City Council requested a review and analysis of animal license fees in cities adjacent to Los Alamitos. This report provides that analysis and projects the fiscal impact of a fee reduction.
Recommendation: In consideration of a loss in revenue and the continued economic uncertainty, City Council authorize staff to maintain the current fee scheduled for Animal Licensing as established by the City of
Los Alamitos Long Beach Animal Care Services.
11. MAYOR AND COUNCIL INITIATED BUSINESS
Council Announcements
At this time, Council Members may also report on items not specifically described on the Agenda that are of interest to the community, provided no action or discussion is taken except to provide staff direction to report back or to place the item on a future Agenda.
12. ITEMS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
13. ADJOURNMENT
The next meeting of the City Council is scheduled for Monday, September 20, 2010, in the City Council Chambers.
Click here for the full Tuesday, 9/7 Council Agenda, with links to all staff reports.
As always, we need your reporting and comments on the meeting. If you are commenting, please first report briefly on the item you’re commenting on–not all of our readers have access to LosAlTV3. Once again, this is reader reporting, open to all who saw the part of the meeting they’re reporting on.
Also, remember to be diplomatic and respectful, and keep the language family friendly. Thanks!
Related posts:
- Agenda & your reporting and comments on tonight’s City Council meeting
- Agenda & your real time reporting & comments on Monday, 9/21 Los Al City Council Meeting
- Agenda & your reporting & comments on 7/20/09 regular City Council Meeting
- Agenda, your comments, & your reporting on Monday’s regular Council meeting
Comments
28 Responses to “Agenda, your reporting & comments on tonight’s Los Al City Council Meeting (9/7/10)”
Leave a Reply
What is going on down there at city hall? Spend money, save money, cant afford, can afford, surplus, revenue neutral, paper signs, hand puppets, crayons, and Dr Seuss? Does anyone have a clue how to navigate through all this mess?
Oh by the way, I read the info put out by the city that said,”6.5 MILLION DOLLARS” difference. I would tend to believe something put out by our city as opposed to put out by a has been council man with his own agenda and dirty money. Mr Silvia, take your simple math and subtract yourself from the picture.
That is addition by subtraction.
While I disagree strongly with Mr. Sylvia on most issues, I respect his passion if not his methods. I also respect his continuing support for several local non-profits including We Care, the Los Al Museum, and his church, all right here in Los Al.
[moved from "Council Set to approve $6,400 subsidy"]
Well, for a moment there during the $6,400 item I thought hell had frozen over.
It was a false alarm. The fact that Zarkos and Stephens were looking like they might vote no, was changed to a yes vote when the puppet masters Poe and Edgar made a motion and a second to give the chamber the $6,400.
Burt and Ernie came to their senses and went with the puppet Dad and Grandma.
What a dog and pony show that was, they really had me going for awhile.
Thanks guys that was very entertaining.
I do have a question for any business owner who is now or in the past been a member of the Los Alamitos Chamber of Commerce. What exactly do you do for the residents of the community?
I have been trying to figure that out for years and have not coming to a good answer as yet.
Thank you
Any man that is a a liar like Sylvia can’t be respected.
The man is a monster for his smear of good families and his law suites. Please stop with the nice-e-nice.
He is a not a good man on any level.
Dave, I know you don’t want any reference to age so I am going to make this as nice as possible.
This is in reference to the “silver tsunami crusaders” at the council meeting tonight.
The engineer made no point, had no data or facts to back up what he said.
The next math wiz had no facts no data, and the last silver…well, I just couldn’t take it any more because life is to short. I had to tune out it was just unbearably.
They were a waste of 15 minutes of time we will never get back.
I do however defend to the death their right to be there and speak and I admire their passion and drive.
I really would like to know when the council is going to take care of Ed’s squirrel problem. Since you talk to city hall, can you please follow up with city manger about this and get back to your readers? I think this deserves a separate post on your site.
As I was told last night, when Brad Sheridan talks to the council as a citizen Zarkos and Edgar can say that he is doing it as the Chairman of the Traffic Commission and he can be terminated, then whenever Chuckie talks, we can say that he is always doing it as CPLA/LATA. So, last night he was there representing CPLA/LATA.
Now, if you read http://www.losaltruth.com you know that the primary goal of LATA is to lie and confuse the voters (and I agree with the above comment from @ToDave, at this point Chuckie has lied his way into the record books here in LosAl hurting many good people along the way. The Almighty might forgive him his trespass, but I certainly can’t.).
So it should come as no surprise that http://www.losaltruth.com has a page up about the failed math that LATA attempts to use to confuse the issue. Rather than repeat it all here, let me just state that the math, with explanations directly from the Sloan-Vasquez report is so simple and clear that even Jeff Stewart should be able to understand “where the number comes from”.
Since Troy reads this site, and since he can’t seem to understand a simple diagram done with sharpie’s I will clarify for him here what I stated.
1) The Fortune 500 Company he likes to think bid on the solid waste contract is called Republic Disposal, it’s a “C” corp.
2) The actual bidder on the solid waste contract was Consolidated Disposal Services LLC, a totally separate corporation.
3) All profits made by Consolidated Disposal Services LLC can be passed to Republic as dividends to shareholders.
4) LLC stands for Limited Liability Corporation. It means that none of the liabilities of Consolidated Disposal Services LLC belong to Republic.
5) Consolidated Disposal Services LLC used Republic’s 10-K in the bid as part of their financial statements.
6) Sloan-Vasquez stated at a public meeting that they considered Republics financials as the financials for Consolidated Disposal Services LLC when they weighted the bids and awarded the top rank of 75 points to Consolidated Disposal Services LLC.
Now, here is the issue, Troy: If Consolidated Disposal Services LLC was going to Farmers and Merchants Bank for a loan and attempted to do it based on Republic’s financials, they would be defrauding the bank because the assets of Republic have no legal bearing on the financial viability of Consolidated Disposal Services LLC (Consolidated Disposal Services LLC’s liabilities do not legally percolate up to Republic).
So, using the assets of Republic to determine the financial quality of Consolidated Disposal Services LLC is fraud since there is no way to legally attach those Republic assets for any liability of Consolidated Disposal Services LLC.
Now one would assume as CEO of a corporation that you started, Troy, that you would have seen the fraud. That you would have said something. That as someone who served as a Director at PWC (PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP) you would understand the limits of legal liabilities and the corporate shield an LLC provides. That someone who holds an MBA from USC would understand all of these intricate details. That you would have stood up after looking at the financials and the Republic 10-K and pointed out that the bid from Consolidated Disposal Services LLC was non-responsive and should have been dropped.
Minimally, one would have hoped that you, Troy would have pointed out to our City Manager that the 75 Points awarded for the financials by Sloan-Vasquez to Consolidated Disposal Services LLC should have been ZERO points since their financials were for Republic not Consolidated Disposal Services LLC. That Mr. Stewart should stop saying that “even if you drop the pricing, Consolidated Disposal Services LLC has the highest rank” since it is clear that the numbers used were not accurate.
Now, without the use of a Glen Beck style chalkboard, or a pad with sharpies, that is what I was talking about at the meeting. For most people this is a complex issue and having it diagrammed out makes it easier to understand. For you, Troy, a self proclaimed “CEO” and MBA from USC to not understand is enough to make one very suspicious of the quality of education at one of the premier private universities in Southern California.
Apparently the comment directly above revolves around a public comment last night by Charles Sylvia regarding the six and a half million dollars the Council Majority cost local ratepayers by going with the second highest bidder on the Trash Contract.
I checked out that page on LosAlTruth.com, & it’s excellent on showing, straight from the consultant’s tables, how the Consolidated Bid costs ratepayers six and a half million dollars more than the Athens bid which the Council rejected.
Go to LosAlTruth.com, then scroll down to the 3rd item on the left, “Chuck’s Math.”
Click “Chuck’s Math,” and it’s all there.
Troy’s Crayon outbust to Mr. Ivler was childish and certainly not worthy of a USC Grad.
I wonder if SC can give Troy a refund?
As a 3rd generation UCLA Alumnus with my son currently enrolled, I am well aware of the deficiencies of the University of Spoiled Children, otherwise known as “Figueroa Tech.”
But I don’t think we should hold these deficiencies against their alumni. After all, not everyone can qualify to attend a UC school.
So please leave Troy alone. With a first name like that, did he really have a choice?
As we used to sing at UCLA:
Fight on!
Fight on, for old SC!
You pay a fee, you get a degree!
You’ll be smarter than me,
Because I went to USC
I went to U S C!
(with apologies to my many USC friends–I just couldn’t resist. . .)
Seriously, the USC-UCLA rivalry is the only truly “cross town” rivalry among Division I schools in the nation, and it’s one more thing we Southern Californians can be proud of:
Two outstanding schools, both academically and athletically, just a bit more than a dozen miles apart in the very same city. One of my best friends in high school ended up at USC, & most local kids have friends who go to both schools.
Over the years, Los Al grads have been a big part of successes at both schools.
Both schools, as well as the many other outstanding colleges and universities in Southern California, are a big part of the economic engine that drives our region, and something we all can be proud of.
Mr Troy Edgar is an embarrassment to all the other USC grads who are not carpetbaggers.
To Dave on September 7th, 2010 9:35 pm said that: “Any man that is a a liar like Sylvia can’t be respected”.
Lets talk about liars. Dave Emerson, J.M. Ivler, Brad Sheridan and others signed a recall petition that said Troy Edgar nominated Dean Grose for Mayor. Yet the official minutes for the 12/1/2008 city council meeting says that Ken Stephens nominated Dean Grose, and Marilynn Poe seconded the nomination. Does that mean that liars like Emerson, Ivler, Sheridan and the others can’t be respected?
Are you kidding me Liar rebuttal man. Ken Stephens doesn’t exist, he’s a puppet and we all know who is up his arse!
You can see that mistakes may be made from any given person at any given time, but when the intent is to hurt and destroy one’s reputation as Chuck did to more than just one person, then he is a true liar in my books.
he purposefully backed a smear campaign and you can reason his actions all you want, but he is what he is: a liar and hurtful old man that should be enjoying his last years with dignity and respect not hurting fellow neighbors and citizens that didn’t deserve it.
Recently I was asked why I spend so much time triple checking everything I say in front of the council (for instance, I was at City Hall before the City Council meeting re-reading the CDS bid before I went to talk about it).
See, if I were to stand in front of the City Council and just make stuff up, I would get called out on it and actually be embarrassed. Much like I was embarrassed by not taking the time to triple check the text in the recall petition before I became the public face of the drive.
And if you will look in the statements I have made here, I actually admitted to the error in the document and took responsibility for not catching it.
As for the other people you mentioned, they had nothing to do with the drafting of the document, review of the document, or anything other than expressing their desire to see that the people had a chance to decide if they wished to recall Mr. Edgar.
You want to vilify me for not doing a decent review and allowing the error to make it’s way into the final document, you got me.I screwed up. I have admitted that screw up more than once on here and will continue to do so.
But saying that any of the other people you mentioned were in any way involved in the creation or the review of that document is exactly the type of lying half-truth bullcrap I have come to expect (and why I now make sure that everything I say is triple checked).
Since I was involved in the review process and saw all seven drafts I can say that the inconsistency was NOT in at least three of the last round of drafts. I have no idea when it was introduced into the final draft but I certainly didn’t catch it in my reviews. Since I was the public face of the recall effort, I take full responsibility for the error making it in.
Now, when will Chuckie dearest or anyone who was involved with CPLA/LATA take full responsibility for ANYTHING that they did that was a lie, half-truth or even an error on their part to get the information correct?
Bueller?… Bueller?… Bueller?…
[sound of crickets...]
Lets be truthful to the prople of Los Al. It is apparent that the CPLA/LATA are supporting Troy Edgar and Dean Zarkos, and that the websites letsfixlosal.com and losaltruth.com are supporting the slate candidates Mejia-Sheridan-Kusumoto, and that the website losaltruth is not an educational channel but is a website in support of slate of Mejia-Sheridan-Kusumoto.
Lets get down to exploring the statements being made by many. I watched the city council meeting and could easily follow Mr. Sylvia’s math presentation in support of his conclusions. I have accessed the losaltruth website thru this website and have only one question pertaining to the Chuck’s Trashy Math (biased introduction?) category. Please show us the mathematical process that was used to arrive at the figures $1,401,591 and $2,000,554 and the figures $15,373,731 and $21,916,343 in comparing Athens to Consolidated.
@watson,
I just went back and read the same page you reference…
Seems the images are copies of of the document created by Sloan-Vasquez and released at a City Council Meeting as “Exhibit B” attachment to the City Mangers report on the Solid Waste Bids. So, I guess that the best thing to do is get a copy of the document since it is a public record (your tax dollars went into producing it’s content) and was a formal report to the City Council as part of the recommendation from the consultant the City Of Los Alamitos hired to help manage the Solid Waste bid.
Are you sure you read the text that accompanied the article? Since the quote above (without the bold emphasis) was a direct copy and paste from there to here.
You wrote:
Since I have admitted to hosting the http://www.losaltruth.com site on my servers I do know who is maintaining it. I do know that the maintainer(s) has/have gone out of his/her(their) way to NOT discuss the candidates, but to act as a response mechanism to CPLA/LATA only. There is NOT ONE reference to Johanna, Warren or Brad on the site. In fact, if you read this…
you can see that the names of the two commission Chairmen are not mentioned to ensure that there was no reference to the one who just happens to be running for City Council at this point.
There are references to Poe and Stephens, Mejia, Edgar, and even Grose in their roles as members of the City Council. And of course Chuckie and George Jr. for their efforts to spend money to lie to the residents of Los Alamitos.
Finally, this site (letsfixlosal) is fully open. It IS an opinion site. Dave runs it and gives his opinion freely (and I can give mine and you can give yours). If you don’t like it here, you can go to Dean Grose’s blog and try his opinion(s) out for a change. I’m here since I generally agree with many of Dave’s opinions (not all of them :-) ). My guess is that Dave considered the candidates and he knows whom he supports, but even then he has made sure that the gives equal time to all the candidates (all their candidate statements were posted here). But, if Dave disagrees with the way the Solid Waste bid was handled (and from his comments on the blog as well as in front of City Council, I would say that he appears to disagree), odds are he won’t be supporting the two candidates that voted for it.
I know that I don’t. Look at the questions I posted in Johanna’s candidate statement thread. On each of these issues the Majority (via a 4-1 vote) voted against what I feel is the correct position. So, if Johanna doesn’t answer the four questions I posed in a way that makes me feel comfortable about supporting her, I know that there are three candidates that do support all four of my concerns. I can assure you that Dean, Dean and Troy are never going to get my vote, or my support. While I am sure that two of the three, if not all three, will get Lisa’s.
Let’s also be truthful and and say like it is:
Grose, Edgar, Zarkos and Schlueter(?) are backed by people that smear and lie about others. They are not backed by me because they are not good people that I can trust.
Mejia, Sheridan, and Kusumoto are three people that have not gone out of their way to hurt people and affiliate themselves with groups and people that smear and lie about others.
I don’t care about websites, what I care about is who these people are and what they represent and it is clear and easy to see both sides based on the actions of all of them.
To Ivler: Are you saying that you just repeated what someone else said without doing the math yourself? I don’y remember Mr. Sylvia just quoting what someone else said without doing the math himself.
@Watson.
I’m confused by your confusion. You wrote:
The figures:
$1,401,591
and
$2,000,554
come from Table 4 – Cost Proposal Competitiveness Rating in the Solid Waste Recommendation created by Sloan-Vasquez the consultants for the City of Los Alamitos. That document was released by the City of Los Alamitos as “Exhibit B” from the City Manager at a City Council Meeting.
The Figures:
$15,373,731
and
$21,916,343
come from Table 5 – Cost Proposal Competitiveness Rating – Phase 2 Evaluation in the Solid Waste Recommendation created by Sloan-Vasquez the consultants for the City of Los Alamitos. That document was released by the City of Los Alamitos as “Exhibit B” from the City Manager at a City Council Meeting.
If you want someone to “show you the process that was used to arrive at…” those figures, I suggest you contact the City Manager for the City of Los Alamitos and request that he set up a meeting for you with Sloan-Vasquez, the consultants that the City of Los Alamitos paid to generate the report that the City released with those figures.
As for the “bias” in the title, considering that the numbers used on that page were the official numbers released by the City of Los Alamitos for the costs, I would say that the page is a great example of explaining why Chuckies math skills were lacking when the data was provided by the City of Los Alamitos and all you had to do was subtract one number from another to get the $6.5 million difference between the two bids.
sorry, I was cut off…
I think quoting the consultants and City Mangers staff report to the City Council should mean that I don’t have to do the math, since this was the same information that the City Council members all based their votes on.
Or are you suggesting the the consultant that was paid with City tax dollars to do the analysis put crap numbers in his tables as information for our City Council to make their decision by?
Here is what a respondent said:
To Watson on September 12th, 2010 4:09 pm
Let’s also be truthful and and say like it is: Grose, Edgar, Zarkos and Schlueter(?) are backed by people that smear and lie about others. They are not backed by me because they are not good people that I can trust.
Mejia, Sheridan, and Kusumoto are three people that have not gone out of their way to hurt people and affiliate themselves with groups and people that smear and lie about others.
Now my comments: How about the lies that these people put forth on the petition to recall Troy Edgar. They said that Edgar nominated Dean Grose for Mayor when it was Ken Stephens that nominated Grose for Mayor. Are you going to vote for the people that lied: to wit, Brad Sheridan and Mejia.
I think this charge has already been responded to once. It was an honest mistake that Mr. Ivler made in preparing the petition, and once it was called to his attention, Mr. Ivler admitted and apologized for the error. It was an insignificant error in that Mr. Edgar still voted for Dean Grose to be Mayor over then Mayor pro tem Mejia.
Contrast Mr. Ivler’s admission of a mistake with Dean Grose’s handling of his infamous watermelon e-mail. From day 1, Grose has maintained he did no wrong.
A simple “oops, so sorry” to the initial e-mail from his African-American colleague on the Youth Center Board would have nipped the controversy in the bud.
Just a few months ago, Grose told OCNews180 that his only mistake was forwarding the e-mail. Pretty much the same thing he told KCBS2′s Michele Gile: “What I learned was not to forward e-mails.”
Michele Gile told me Grose reminded her of Archie Bunker.
Grose’s handling of his own mistake reminds me of Richard Nixon’s handling of the Watergate Coverup. Nixon never admitted any wrongdoing, and he never apologized to the American people for all he put us through. Maybe Dean G.’s reading from Nixon’s script.
But I digress. I think the term “liar” is tossed around a little too freely by both sides on this site. Frequently with the LATA and CPLA flyers it’s been more half truths or exaggerations or clear deception, although I can think of several significant lies in CPLA/LATA flyers in the 2008 election.
Deceitful, inaccurate, only half true are all perhaps better words than “liar,” and less incendiary.
Hey,Larry. It’s not that I’ve been quite on here. There are thousands of my words on this blog. Go hunt down my “lies”. Good luck.
As I made clear that there were multiple revisions of the text for Edgar’s recall petition, and it shows up in the final version, but not in the three (or four, I don’t have them in front of me right now) versions just prior to that.
Since there were at least three editors, I could blame them, but I don’t. I was the public face of the effort, and I take the responsibility for the error. I should have done a comparison check, I didn’t. I just cut and paste and then formatted the text block to fit in the space provided without a comparative review to the prior version.
When was the FIRST time anyone from CPLA/LATA said they were in error, had made a mistake, had taken ANY responsibility for the trash they peddled in the lat election (or in this one). Right. They haven’t. Ever.
Now, let’s talk about lies, half-truths and hurting people. Let’s start with Chuckie. Using money from George Briggeman Jr. Chuckie has spent the last two elections lying his butt off. The CPLA and LATA fliers from two years ago were analyzed on this site, go read about that pack of absolute BS. Or better yet, get his 2010 flier and then go to http://www.lossaltruth.com and compare what he said and insinuated with reality. But you had best sit down as the facts my just shock you.
When you are ready, we can talk about Edgar direct lies. My favorite so far was that he never wanted to change the zoning on the Melting Pot location. That was his claim after the Planning Commission kicked back his request to do just that with no justification. Go back and review the tapes from the St. Isadore’s City Council meeting where he clearly indicates that’s exactly what he wants to do.
How many times has Edgar stated that he wants Los Alamitos to be a “business friendly” city? Compare and contract his statement to his actions, where he pushed for and voted for the second highest Solid Waste bid knowing that the amount charged for commercial bins was 100% HIGHER than taking the low bid.
Have Edgar explain how as a USC grad, a former Director at PriceWaterhouseCoopers, and as CEO of his own corporation he was unable to understand that Consolidated Disposal Services LLC bid using another companies finacials (10-K) was fraudulent and made the bid non-responsive. Edgar should have been the first to call for dropping the non-responsive bid. Where was Mr. CEO and his goddess “Process” then? MIA.
Now I remember why I nicknamed you Larry the Liar two years ago. If you met the truth face-to-face, you would be a stranger.
The lies on the Troy Edgar recall petition were not an honest mistake. They were a flagrant lie that you tried to justify by saying that you were not aware of the circumstances. It was just another case of you getting caught with your hands in the cookie jar.
To: To Dave Emerson
Enough is enough!
I was there, I know what happened, and what you posted is a damnable lie that is typical of the very core of the most despicable campaign in the history of Los Alamitos. . . until this year.
The recall of Troy was born in the midst of our city’s embarrassment over Mayor Grose’s watermelon e-mail and incredibly inept followup (which continues to this day: “I learned not to forward e-mails.”)
I was with several citizens discussing Troy’s wasting thousands of dollars of taxpayer money on a frivolous campaign stunt over a sign Ken Parker’s landlord paid for with city staff and planning commission approval, and Troy’s support for skipping Mayor Pro Tem Mejia to make Dean Grose Mayor.
Someone said, “Wasn’t it Troy that nominated Dean?” We all seemed to recall that it was. I believe it was actually Troy who nominated Marilyn to be Mayor Pro Tem (a second slap in Mejia’s face and another blow against the “Teamwork” the new majority had promised).
I was there, and you were not. You may say I’m a liar, but you can call my boss of 30 years, Clint Row, at Prudential California Realty, 562-809-1331, and ask him if I’m a liar.
While you’re on the line, leave a message for John Spear, former President of the Long Beach Board of Realtors, who’s known me for 20 years, and ask him.
Then Call Bruce Mulhearn at our Cerritos headquarters, and ask him. In fact, call any of the established Realtors in Los Al or Rossmoor or Long Beach or Lakewood, and ask them if I’m a liar. Patty Laird. Granger. Craig or David Chamberlain. Beryl Henry. Joe Sopo. Then call Joe Dyer, Elder & head of the prayer watch at my church. Then ask any one of the 800 buyers and sellers I’ve helped over the past 30 years.
Even if I were a liar, your story makes absolutely no sense. It made no difference whether Troy nominated Dean to be Mayor, seconded the nomination, or simply voted for Dean and against Gerri–the point was that Troy supported skipping tradition to install the most embarrassing Mayor in the history of Los Alamitos. Why would we embarrass ourselves with an obvious mistake to make a point just as easily made by telling the truth.
You make no sense, you hurl lies, and you try to hide under a cloak of anonymous posts.
But a review of the content, style, & M.O. of your post makes it pretty easy to figure out with a high degree of certainty. I’m pretty sure you not only generate hate, but your flyers and half truths are a cancer in our midst. Whomever you are, you are an embarrassment to yourself, and to our community. I’m pretty sure your current actions are nullifying a lifetime of service to our community & worthy local organizations.
Please get over your bitterness, tell Mr. B where he should go with his tens of thousands of dollars and high priced consultants, and take a stand for what I hope you still know in your heart of hearts is right.
I echo the famous words of attorney Joseph Welch in the infamous Army-McCarthy hearings of 1954, which I cited after one of your most notorious hit pieces of 2008 (See “Have you no decency, Mr. Briggeman? Mr. Sylvia?”)
Dave, you slipped up? :-)
[Note that I was a fill-in admin for the site while Dave was in the Mideast and I never once looked to see who Larry the Liar was by his e-mail address. That's the difference between decent human beings and LATA. We have scruples.]
Larry the Liar is Chuckie? WOW! That would explain why Larry the Liar is a liar. It’s Chuckie?
And no, Chuckie has no sense of shame. He has no decency. He’s a cranky old man who has lost whatever shreds a credibility he may have once had.
Now before I get attacked for picking on Chuckie. I was at City Council and had talked my piece and went outside for a cigar and to watch the meeting on the TV there. Chuckie got up and rambled for his five minutes and when he was done he came out of the Council chamber and started screaming at me to the point where Gerri had to ask Todd to come out and see what the ruckus was. Fortunately deep down inside I’m still a “dirty F-ing hippie” so I’m totally non-violent, but I will admit to thinking, while he was screaming in my face, that someone should just slap the old boy back to his senses (visualize a movie scene with someone hysterically raving getting slapped back to their senses here).
JM–
I never said that Larry the Liar was the “To: Dave Emerson” who called me a “flagrant” liar with my hands (plural!) “caught in the cookie jar” again at 8:32 last night.
You came to that conclusion by noting similarities between that comment and other comments by “Larry.”
In accord with our policy, I can’t confirm or deny that “To: Dave Emerson” is also “Larry,” but I can tell you that “Larry” posts under what appears to be an anonymous e-mail.
I may have jumped to a wrong conclusion connecting last night’s poster with a person who has been spewing hatred and lies in this community, but the language and, more significantly the M.O. are identical. We have, however, had other hateful posts here, so I perhaps last night I did jump to an implied conclusion.
I may have gone from attacking one liar to attacking another because of the similarity of their approaches. If I’m wrong, the respective parties can easily contact me through a comment or the “contact us” button at the top of the page, and the three of us can meet and figure out who’s who, and I’ll be happy to clarify any misimpressions, stated or implied.
I have not checked or compared I.P. addresses, and do not intend to at this point.
Whether I’m attacking two people or one, they are two peas in a pod and the criticism is aimed at them both.
So no one lied about Troy Edgar nominating Dean Grose for Mayor. It was just an honest mistake. Then I guess that Chuck Sylvia never lied – it was just honest mistakes on his part.
Yeah right…Chuck along with Edgar and Grose and Poe and the trash man basically assassinated several people for council seats and you are trying to equate that to who nominated the racist.
You people are pathetic