To the Editor:
Re: Sierra Madre Mayor uses Position to Abet Political Attacks on Fellow Councilmember/Candidate for Reelection
I have read the accounts in both local papers of the most recent Sierra Madre Council Meeting and I am appalled. I always thought that one of the duties of a Mayor was to preside at meetings with an even hand to the end of conducting the public business.
About four people took advantage of the public comment period to lambast Councilmember and Candidate for Reelection Mosca. One spoke three to five times the recognized time limit.
Her Honor Mayor MacGillivray refused to enforce the time limits and when Mosca asked for an opportunity to respond she threatened to declare him out of order and have him removed from the meeting saying “You have to sit there and take it” and “I don’t need input from the City Attorney; this is my meeting and I’m the Mayor”.
Her Honor has been actively supporting candidates for Council other than Mosca.
If candidates supported by Her Honor are elected we can look forward to years of the Council’s being used for political attacks and divisiveness rather than uniting to focus on the best interests of the citizenry.

Eric Olson
Sierra Madre

I absolutely concur with your assessment of John Crawford. I don’t know much about John. He’s an enigma. John claims he is an executive at Atlantic Records, although I’ve never been able to confirm the fact. I do know this much, John has a lot of time on his hands. Whether or not he is a busy record executive, he has plenty of time to write a nasty, spiteful political blog that mixes truth with fiction, and run a slanderous city council campaign full of more acrimony and lies. For John there is no common ground-you’re either with him, or you’re against him; he simply doesn’t have the capacity to disagree agreeably. In short, John is an egotistical delusional blowhard-truly a legend in his own mind.

Hail Hamilton, Sierra Madre
via sierramadreweekly.com

Ok, I just read the Sierra Madre Weekly and Terry Miller’s attack on Mr Crawford. I have a few comments. First, I have always liked Terry Miller, thought he took some fantastic photos, and I’ve always admired Mr Crawford for his straight-forward approach to his writing. If memory serves me correctly; the Sierra Madre weekly used Mr Crawford’s aka, Eric Mundry’s articles all the time. Interesting that when it worked for them…they were all for it. Now that Mr Crawford is running for city Council, they don’t want anything to do with him! Politics at BEST! Terry, The cumquat was not a “parody” as you put it, but an obscene, infantile attack on well respected folks. Do you really think Ms. Angus enjoyed the “parody” against her?
Let us not forget that this all about free speech. I voted for Joe Mosca, because I believed he was going to preserve our town. I didn’t know then that he was a gay American and truth be told, I wouldn’t have cared. I still would have voted for him. I can guarantee you that on April 13, Mr Mosca will not have my vote and it’s NOT because he is a gay American, it’s because I think we need someone else who can preserve our town. It’s too bad that Mr. Mosca has decided to throw “homophobic” into the mix, or maybe you did that, Terry. I honestly expected more from both of you.
I’m voting for Crawford, Alcorn and Watts. Thank you all for running.

Sarah, Sierra Madre
via sierramadreweekly.com

Wow…Hail, you admittedly don’t know “much about John Crawford” but you can go on such a personal attack? SHAME ON YOU! Do your homework. Mr Crawford cares about our town. He’s been at every city council meeting. Where were you? Oh, that’s right, you had a column to write.
John has a real, respectable job. I really can’t say the same thing about Mr Josh Moran. He was quoted as being an “Account Executive” of what? I did some investigation. What I discovered is that he either does reverse mortgages or is in some kind of real estate. Either way, they both seem to be quite a conflict of interest for our city council.
It’s AMAZING that you can sit back and “claim that John is the biggest “blowhard” because you don’t agree with him – seems to me it makes you just as much as an “egotistical delusional blowhard” for your own column…funny how that works, isn’t it?
If you dislike the way things are done…I suggest next election you take out papers to run for city council….but I doubt you have what it takes.

Tom, Sierra Madre
via sierramadreweekly.com

Terry Miller-Your article hits John Crawford and the Mayor right where it hurts. I appreciate that you have brought up the negativity, misinformation and fear that Crawford’s blog and his followers feed off. The comments are the highlight that really show the dysfunctional side of these supporters. I wouldn’t allow my children to behave the way that the Mayor and Crawford have.
I have done my research and prefer to elect folks who are level-headed, work well with others, can see all sides, and know how to compromise to meet the needs of ALL Sierra Madre citizens.
While the Mayor and Crawford continue to do whatever it takes to elect certain people to the City Council, our city’s long term plans suffer. Also, with this dysfunction, we are less able to attract good, qualified citizens to volunteer in our City.
Some folks in town don’t want to speak up and tell the truth because Crawford and company can be very vindictive.
By the way, I stopped reading your paper while Sir Eric Maundry aka John Crawford had a column. I couldn’t stand his negative, egotistical tone. I also remember when “Sir” was booted off the now defunct Foothill Cities blog for his negative, harassing comments.

Sierra Madre Native
via sierramadreweekly.com

Mr. Crawford has never pointed out Mr. Mosca’s sexual preferences, and quite frankly they have no place in any campaign.
It’s ironic to me that your would state that Mr. Mosca believes that there is a “homophobic smear campaign” against him. The only time I have read “homophobic” was in an article YOU wrote about Mr. Crawford. If that isn’t inuendo, I don’t know what is.
Politics are not always kind. Take a look at Whitman and Poizner going at it everyday. Obama and McCain weren’t any better. I honestly believe that no one cares about Mr. Mosca’s sexual preferences; we only care about our town and his commitment to it. Plain and simple.
You and Hail and everyone else are no better in regards to the “nasty comments” and mean spirited attacks. Mr. Mosca is on tape telling an elderly citizen to “get a life”. Watch it, it’s on U-Tube. Folks are not voting on Mr Mosca’s sexual preferences; no they are voting on the promises he BROKE four years ago. It’s as simple as that.

Richard De La Mora Sierra Madre
via sierramadreweekly.com

RE: MacGillivary Slams Gavel On Mosca -
Sierra Madre Weekly March 25

Hats off to Terry Miller for so accurately describing our town’s Bully Pulpit! Two generations ago, “bully” was an adjective meaning superb/wonderful. Now it describes some of our elected officials, they’re arrogant bullies on the pulpit that is our City Council!!
Remember when elected officials served as “humble servants” of their constituents? Well, there’s nothing humble about the outrageous behavior exhibited in Council chambers by certain, seated members. Watch some of the meetings!! It’s not difficult to identify the culprits, their demeanor is as embarrassing as it is inappropriate.
Now we have a clear choice in Sierra Madre, and a chance to clear the air the foul behavior that has tainted the civility of our City Council. Voters can reject others of this ilk and elect three candidates who, I know, will put responsibility before rhetoric and character before character assassination.
I’m voting for Moran, Mosca and Walsh. Thank you all for running, and for giving us a chance to save Sierra Madre.

Robert Matheson , Sierra Madre
via sierramadreweekly.com

Bwahaha!!! Joe will do anything to avoid talking about his lousy record in office. Even play the “homophobia” card. The scoundral has no shame whatsoever.

El Kabong , Sierra Madre
via sierra madreweekly.com

It is disappointing that your paper has accused Mr. Mosca of injecting baseless and irrelevant charges of homophobia into a city council election. I am confident you misquoted him.

Richard De La Mora, Sierra Madre
via sierra madreweekly.com

The Mayor allowed Paul Hovsepian to ramble on and on and on. During her term as Mayor, Macgilvray has rarely limited public comment time. No speaker spoke for fifteen minutes. Get you facts straight. Why wasn’t the Mayor interviewed for this article? Our Council members should act as adults and be able to take criticism.
Trevor, Sierra Madre
via sierra madreweekly.com
________________________________________________________________________

Why is it when someone feels they are part of a “minority”( gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc) and they don’t get their way, they play the “card”. ? In this case Joe playing the “gay card”. The people that spoke at the City Council meeting had all voted for him in 2006. People were mad because Mr. Mosca sought the endorcement of the Democratic Party. Candidates in our local election do not and have never sought endorcements from political parties.

Mosca Voter 2006, Sierra Madre
via sierra madreweekly.com

Be prepared for 2-3 more crazies to bombard this website with attacks against Joe like they did on Tuesday night. Joe is a good man and a good councilmember. I voted for him last time, and I plan to vote for him this time. He has worked hard and produced results. Unfortunately, I also voted for Don and Maryann the last times. I will not be voting for them this time or in 2 years. They are an embarassment to Sierra Madre, but more importantly, an embarassment to themselves.

Scott H., Sierra Madre
via sierra madreweekly.com

It would be nice if the city council would stop acting like they can control the whole city. I mean 5 people voting on things 10,000 people have to live with. Pasadena comes up with a smoking ban and Sierra Madre w/ the vote of 3 council people follows suit immediatley to do the same thing? Wheres the review for an actual need at the issues that are going to affect the citizens and not just the 100 people that go out at night or visit the city on Fridays or Saturdays. I mean where did the parking change from 3am to 2am come from? How does that make sense for people who have cars parked in front of friends houses that are coming home from outside the city that are coming from somewhere closing at 2? Of course they will get tickets, thats what the city wants I guess. Don’t fix something if its not broken.
I’ve been a resident for five years and think Joe Mosca has done just as good a job as any council member. And the past five years, I have seen the council do nothing. Thats pretty much what Sierra Madre wants, so I’ll vote for him.

Peter Line Sierra Madre
via Sierramadreweekly.com

1. IMPEACH MACGILLIVRAY!
Boorish, rude, impolite and completely unprofessional behavior should not be tolerated in elected officials, especially in one who deems herself “mayor”. Let’s do away with her.
2. MacGillivray’s unseemly temper tantrum in an official City Council meeting is the perfect reason for all Sierra Madreans to vote for Joe Mosca, Josh Moran and Nancy Walsh.

Cookie and Eric Sierra Madre
via Sierra Madreweekly.com

The video of the last council meeting is up on the KGEM site: http://kgem.tv/2010/03/sierra-madre-city-council-march-23-2010/
This article shines a light on the fact that the Mayor’s primary goal is to get certain people elected to the city council. What happened with governing our city and fulfilling long-term goals?
Cookie and Eric-The Mayor’s behavior has upset a lot of people who were “on the fence” about the election. Instead of helping her, it has hurt her. These folks don’t want to vote for the folks that are associated with her.

Sierra Madre Native
via sierra madreweekly.com

RE: New Blood Blue Blood Square Off
Arcadia Weekly, March 25

Unlike the Star News, thanks for this excellent article on the candidates and the forum, which I attended.
I am most impressed with Paul Cheng for his clear and realistic view of the much deeper issues signified by the lack of compliance with our signage regulations.
If there is still a chance for us to really come together as a community, I feel he is our best bet!
I like to think we welcome everyone to our lovely city, but that does not mean we must stand by while it visually becomes another country or close our eyes to unsavory “businesses” that might be okay in another culture , but hey,…this is America!
Mrs. L. Blocke, Arcadia
via Arcadiaweekly.com

John…thanks for the informative article. I have posted some thoughts on the Arcadia Police Officers’ Association Blog at http://arcadiapoa.blogspot.com/2010/03/our-upcoming-city-council-election.html.
The APOA stands firm in support and endorsement of Sho Tay, Mickey Segal, and Bob Harbicht. These candidates will look to the future of Arcadia and will deliver excellence in service to our Community.

Tom Le Veque, Arcadia
via Arcadiaweekly.com

I agree. Paul Cheng was clearly the winner of this debate.
Go Arcadia
via Arcadiaweekly.com

By Terry Miller

Ah, it’s springtime, that time of the year when everyone is talking about new growth and yes, those dreaded elections rearing their hanging chads in cities near and far. Indeed, this is that special time when all the uncompromising extremists crawl out from under their piles of TEA Party pamphlets to preach and shove their propaganda down your throat and into your mailbox in hopes that they see some ink in the local press. Perhaps even a nice mug shot for the campaign scrapbook.
In Sierra Madre, for instance, there is no shortage of important issues concerning the village atmosphere that the town tattle-tails would like you to believe is in dire jeopardy. Believe what you read, and apparently there’s a master conspiracy afoot to allow such things as Wal-Mart at the old Howie’s site, a Rose Bowl-sized performance center with helipad for rock stars to arrive in style, a Costco in place of Bean Town and of course, turning Kersting Court into a five-story mixed use strip mall to house a massage parlour/gift shoppe/transit center. Oh, and don’t forget parking meters. We’ll need a few hundred thousand of those.

But alas, not one candidate who is running has said they want that kind of escalation in development. In fact, they’ve all come out with the rest of the town against it. But the fear-mongering blogocrats of our fair city need you to believe these changes are not only possible, but plausible, that is, unless you vote them into the corridors of power. Then, and only then, will we be safe from the Rick Caruso and Sam Walton.
What is in short supply here are honest, straightforward solutions to problems the city faces; that and a critical lack of civility amongst a city council that never ceases to one-up their own childishness. I mean seriously Mrs. MacGillivray: “I don’t need input from the City Attorney”??? “This is my meeting and I’m the Mayor!”??? Easy on the gavel, there. We all heard you the first time. We promise we’ll be good.
But back to the blogosphere: Calling one’s opponent “a worm” and alluding to his sexual orientation is juvenile at best and potentially libelous at worse. Take a gander at ‘that blog’ sometime and you’ll see not just one or two derogatory comments but scores of slanderous attacks on many people in Sierra Madre. Prejudice is ugly and ubiquitous on candidate John Crawford’s blog. (www.sierramadretattler.com)
We have observed less than a handful of Candidate forums in Sierra Madre and what we observed was at best not terribly encouraging, and definitely dull as dish water. Neither was even remotely thought provoking – as many had hoped. The real issues seem get buried in interminable vociferous accusations, trivial name-calling, and hackneyed regurgitations from preprinted statements.

Attacks on this newspaper, its staff and the other papers, politicians and personalities in town including the Pasadena Star-News and their staff members have been widespread, consistently cruel, callous and pedestrian.
In fact, courteousness and graciousness has already started to pay off for those candidates who are distinctly more well-bred and erudite. The Pasadena Star-News recently endorsed Joe Mosca, Nancy Walsh and Josh Moran. I concur, in spades.
One look at the “Tattler” in the past year or two shows how clearly the town is alienated thanks in no small part to one particular candidate. Even some intelligent people, who otherwise might be less forthright, provide incessant ramblings and discourteous comments under the guise of anonymity, rightfully embarrassed to have their given name tied to such speech.

Mr. Crawford frequently refers to the late Cumquat blog as “obscene,” yet he somehow refuses to see how offensive he and his “contributors” can be. The Cumquat was parody whose game was lampooning the very essence of Sierra Madre’s insular upper-class. This was the late Jim Snider’s forte. That’s parody, Mr. Crawford, not obscenity. Even a well-respected local priest was a regular reader of the Cumquat as he recognized the entries for what they were. Parody, Mr. Crawfish, plain and simple burlesque, spoofs.
The “In” clique of Sir Eric Maundry (a.k.a. Candidate Crawford) has made personal attacks their passion; leaving once-good neighbors even more alienated than ever before.

Crawford’s less than courageous and gaudy cohorts have not the valor to divulge their true identities: So therefore we offer these quotations in the hope that even Crawford’s cronies might think twice before casting their votes on April 13.
Of all my favorite quotations, the following classics best describe, in my estimation, the Crawford clique and their dirty tricks.- we took poetic license and adjusted some for clarity.
Thank you for sending me a link to your blog; I’ll waste no time reading it.”
- Moses Hadas
“He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know.”
- Abraham Lincoln
“He had delusions of adequacy.”
- Walter Kerr
“He is a self-made man and worships his creator.”
- John Bright
Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go.”
- Oscar Wilde.
“He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts… For support rather than illumination.”
- Andrew Lang
And finally, let us forget about politics and the obviously homophobic rhetoric (and sometimes unadorned repulsive and plain juvenile interpretations of someone’s career or sexual orientation) on certain blogs. Let us not speak ill of those who have moved on to another world; let us love thy neighbor, and respect each other’s differences without vulgarity and even violent thought.

An item on an upcoming Sierra Madre City Council meeting agenda has caught my attention, and I suspect possibly the attention of many of the readers of this newspaper. The Council is being asked to consider whether or not Sierra Madre should continue its membership in the Southern California Association of Governments, (SCAG).

According to SCAG’s website,

“Over the past four decades, the Southern California Association of Governments has evolved as the largest of nearly 700 councils of government in the United States, functioning as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Imperial. The region encompasses a population exceeding 18 million persons in an area of more than 38,000 square miles.
As the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Association of Governments is mandated by the federal government to research and draw up plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. Additional mandates exist at the state level.”

So, assuming they’ve stated who they are accurately (and I have no reason to believe they would misstate this information in such a highly public forum), that means that as a member, Sierra Madre is able to have some say in the “research and drawing up of plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management and air quality” for the Los Angeles metropolitan region. Conversely, I would assume that if we are not members, that means that these decisions will be made without any input from Sierra Madre, and the residents of Sierra Madre will have dictated to them what SCAG has determined will be done, based on its federal mandate.

Also from the SCAG website:

“The fundamental question of why SCAG was created is best answered in the words of Ventura County Supervisor John Montgomery back in 1966, who said, ‘Regional planning is not a matter of if, but rather when and who. Regional planning must come via cooperation and mutual assistance. Regional planning will (either) be accomplished through local governments working together or by big brother mandates from state and national governments.’”

Our neighbors, small and large are all members: Bradbury, Arcadia, Duarte, Monrovia, Pasadena, Azusa, El Monte, La Canada/Flintridge, Rosemead, San Marino, South Pasadena, all have joined the nearly 150 city members of SCAG. The only area city that is not a member of SCAG is Temple City.
So for a nominal membership dues fee, Sierra Madre can participate in planning its future, or it can choose to save that money, and have SCAG dictate to it what it has decided Sierra Madre is going to do (or not do). Seems kind of like a no-brainer, right? Why should we surrender our opportunity to provide input into the future of this region?

But it’s not that simple, because of SCAG’s role in implementing the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) program. According to the SCAG website:

“The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is mandated by State Housing Law as part of the periodic process of updating local housing elements of the General Plan. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The current planning period is January 1, 2006 to June 30, 2014. Communities use the RHNA in land use planning, prioritizing local resource allocation, and in deciding how to address identified existing and future housing needs resulting from population, employment and household growth.The RHNA does not necessarily encourage or promote growth, but rather allows communities to anticipate growth, so that collectively the region and subregion can grow in ways that enhance quality of life, improve access to jobs, promotes transportation mobility, and addresses social equity, fair share housing needs.”

More on RHNA from the SCAG website:

“Every city and county in California must adopt a comprehensive “general plan” to govern its land use and planning decisions. All planning and development actions must be consistent with the general plan. The general plan housing element must be periodically updated using the latest RHNA allocation plan. A housing element must first include an assessment of the locality’s existing and future housing needs. This assessment must include the community’s “fair share” regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) for all income groups (very low, low, moderate and above moderate) as determined by the regional Council of Governments (COG).

The purpose of the Housing Element of the General Plan is to ensure that every jurisdiction establishes policies, procedures and incentives in its land use planning and redevelopment activities that will result in the maintenance and expansion of the housing supply to adequately house households currently living and expected to live in that jurisdiction. When a local government fails to adopt an updated housing element, or adopts an element that does not comply with the law, the general plan is invalid and a local government may not proceed to make land use decisions or approve development until it has adopted a valid housing element.”

For this reason, the City recently conducted a Housing Element Workshop, to get input from the residents. Some folks seem to have the mistaken impression that RHNA requires growth, when it is in fact, just a tool to be used in planning for potential growth. Whether it is because they have a mistaken impression that growth is required, or they just don’t want to allow for the possibility of growth, or for whatever reason, a movement has sprung up that is trying to have us pull out of SCAG, so that, in theory, we will not as a City be required to plan housing per the RHNA program.

But here’s the thing: RHNA is an assessment process performed periodically as part of the Housing Element and General Plan updates at the local level. The enforcement of the RHNA obligation lies with the Department of Housing and Community Development. Pulling out of SCAG does nothing to eliminate the requirement to conform to RHNA as part of the Housing Element update, it just eliminates the chance to influence the allocation of numeric goals at the local level.

Since SCAG does far more than just housing (transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality) by pulling out of SCAG, we’ve eliminated our ability to be part of the discussion on all these issues. The discussions about these major issues, any of which could have major impacts on Sierra Madre, will still go on, they’ll just go on without input from Sierra Madre.

Some of the folks that don’t want to see Sierra Madre remain as a member of SCAG are doing their very best to scare people into thinking that their friends and neighbors are in danger of losing their homes to the city through Eminent Domain, so that the City can conform to its RHNA numbers. Unfortunately, the facts don’t support this position. But apparently, the truth is just an inconvenience, because the same wrong information is repeated over and over again.

The following post appeared on a local website, after the recent Housing Element workshop, and had this to say in an article titled “Homes Listed as Possible Eminent Domain Seizure Targets For the Purpose of Building Multi-Family Low Income Housing in Sierra Madre.“ “Below you will find a list of those homes identified as candidates for Eminent Domain seizure should the statute be revived. Once these homes are seized by the government they would then be razed and the property used for the construction of multi-unit low income housing. The notion behind this singular act of government violence against a selected few citizens here in Sierra Madre is to jam high-density housing into what is already a very built out town.

Okay, let’s look at that. Both the headline and the first sentence of the post contain statements that are just completely inaccurate. There were no (that’s right NO) homes listed as possible Eminent Domain seizure targets. There were properties that the City identified as candidates to be zoned for higher density.

That means the property owners could, should they so choose, build, or sell to someone who would build, more units on the property than it is currently zoned to allow to have built on it. In essence, they’ve possibly increased the property value for the owners, by increasing the options the owners have as to what they can do with the property. They have not targeted it for Eminent Domain, or even possible Eminent Domain.

But just to make sure, I contacted Danny Castro, Development Services Director for the City of Sierra Madre, with a series of questions I had about the workshop, and about some of the information that was now appearing on the internet. A couple of the questions dealt with this issue directly:

Coburn: Of the properties listed as potential multi-family sites, was there anywhere or any time that these sites were listed as “possible Eminent Domain seizure targets for the purposed of building multi-family low-income housing units in Sierra Madre?

Castro: No, because they are not and have not been considered as seizure targets.

Coburn: At any time, was there any discussion that “these homes (would be) seized by the government (and) would then be razed and the property used for the construction of multi-unit low income housing?” Castro: No.

In another post, the same author, who has called for Sierra Madre to pull out of SCAG, stated “So what does this mean for us in Sierra Madre? Well, as we saw in the consultant prepared “Sierra Madre 2008-2014 Housing Element” report issued by our City planners on March 31, we too have a SCAG mandated RHNA number. And it is apparently quite a burden on this town. To the point where certain factions within City Hall actually felt they needed to identify properties as candidates for possible Eminent Domain seizure in order to meet SCAG’s arbitrary demands for high density housing.” (author’s note: emphasis mine).

Again, nobody identified any properties as candidates for Eminent Domain. And SCAG has made no arbitrary demands for high density housing. What they did was set targets. The City then attempted to meet those targets. It wasn’t that “certain factions within City Hall felt they needed to identify properties as candidates…”, it was that the City is required BY STATE LAW to do so. AB2348 requires that a Housing Element Update provide an inventory and identification of adequate sites (vacant or underutilized residentially zoned land) to meet Sierra Madre’s RHNA requirements.

The way they did it was to identify properties as appropriate to be zoned at a higher density. SCAG doesn’t care whether you use high or low density housing. They don’t even require you to build the housing. They just ask that you determine how your City will meet the RHNA targets. The property owners can do absolutely nothing if they so choose. Again, I asked Mr. Castro about this:

Coburn: Slides 20-28 discuss possible sites for multi-family housing. What would be the process to make them available for multi-family housing? Strictly re-zoning?

Castro: The eight sites that were identified as potentially suitable sites are currently zoned for multi-family housing (R-3, Multiple-Family Residential, Medium/High Density), which allows a density of up to about 13 units/acre. The process, as required under state law, would be to amend the current zoning to allow for an increase (to) at least 20 units/acre, on enough of those sites to meet the state imposed housing numbers. The Planning Commission and City Council would have to review and approve the zoning change after conducting public hearings.

Coburn: I’ve heard that the City charter does not allow for the City to employ Eminent Domain. Is that correct?

Castro: The use of Eminent Domain is not a factor in the Housing Element Update. Under state law, the City’s update must provide for the “opportunity” for the development of assigned numbers of affordable and market rate housing units through use of it(s) zoning powers. The City is not required to and is not currently considering any proposals to acquire properties nor is it in any way requiring that these properties be developed with affordable housing. The property owner retains the right to determine if and when to develop their property.

Those last two sentences by Mr. Castro seem to me to be pretty significant.

An earlier post from the same website: “The dirty secret is this. In order to build the low income housing Sacramento and their toadies in SCAG are demanding, you’re going to need somewhere to build it.

And since this town is already built out to the limit, you’re not going to find anywhere to do this deed without first tearing down already existing single family homes. And the only way to do that would be to seize houses through Eminent Domain and evict the families already living there. After all, isn’t that what “redevelopment” is all about? Tearing down things that already exist and redeveloping the vacated properties?”

Again, SCAG isn’t demanding the building of low income housing, only that we zone so that the option of building low income housing exists. By stating that the only way to do that would be to seize houses through Eminent Domain, the author has conveniently ignored the fact that the property owner has the option of doing the building themselves, or selling to someone who might, without the City seizing the property (they also have the right to do nothing). As to the author’s suggestion about seizing houses through Eminent Domain and evicting families living there, I asked some questions point blank of Mr. Castro:

Coburn: Was there any discussion at the workshop of the City using Eminent Domain on any of those sites?

Castro: None.

Coburn: Is the City considering the use of Eminent Domain on any of the sites listed as possible sites for multi-family housing?

Castro: No.

Coburn: …does the Redevelopment Agency have the same limitation regarding Eminent Domain?

Castro: The Redevelopment Agency does not have the authority to acquire property by Eminent Domain.

I’m not going to tell anyone how they should feel about Sierra Madre‘s participation in SCAG. But I do think that those who are questioning it and trying to determine their opinions should be able to make an informed decision that is not stoked by scare tactics and misinformation.

My personal feeling is that we should remain a part of it. As I stated earlier, if there’s an organization that is making decisions that affect our City, and we have an opportunity to have representation in the organization so that our voice is a part of the decision making process, I think we want to be part of it, rather than bowing out, remaining silent during the decision making, and then just having to accept what is decided by others about our City. I also don’t think the organization is evil incarnate, as some seem to think.

But if I did, I think I’d want to follow the advice of 4th century BC Chinese general and military strategist Sun-tzu, who said “Keep your friends close, your enemies closer.” Either way, we’d stay in SCAG.

Bill Coburn is publisher of the SierraMadreNews.Net website, and a 15-year resident of Sierra Madre. He is also Executive Director of the Sierra Madre Chamber of Commerce, however the opinions stated in this article are Mr. Coburn’s alone, and should not be construed in any way as representative of the views of the Chamber of Commerce, which has not taken a position on this issue.