MURRIETA OPEN FORUM - Get it said, get it read, communications for the community.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Enochs and the DA

There is a good article on the front page of this month's Insider about whether Councilman Warnie Enochs should step down in the face of the criminal charges against him. I decided to boil it down a bit and get the gist.

The first of his infractions, based on a timeline in the article indicate that Enochs might have had problems with expired boat registration at Big Bear Lake, and that he had forged a Murrieta police officer's signature to sign off on the fix-it ticket. The kicker here is that the expired registration that was signed off was supposedly completed two months later.

Forgery?

He also seems to have problems stemming from a contract that he (A to Z Lighting) and Dan Williams (Dans roofing) entered into to roof Enochs' house. They both had agreements with Lamb's Fellowship for electrical and roofing, respectively. The church under construction was burned in a range fire, and it is implied that Enochs threatened to implicate Williams in the fire if he did not sign a mechanic's lien for $48,000. Whether this lien applied to Lamb's Fellowship or Enochs' house was not indicated.

Extortion?

He refused to pay an $18,000 bill from George Osmond for tile work on his house, accusing one of Osmond's employees of sleeping with his wife. He allegedly tried to get Osmond to sign a statement outlining the affair, and Osmond, who might not be inclined to intrude on his employee's peccadillos, refused. Enoch's is said to have threatened him with bodily injury, and when that tactic didn't work, he wrote his own statement and forged Osmond's signature to it.

Forgery again and assault?

In a meeting with Williams and his attorney, Enochs was asked to sign a statement claiming that Dan's roofing had left the church site long before the fire. Enochs then reportedly told the two men that he would sign only if paid to do so. No amount was specified, and with no payment forthcoming, he left without signing.

Soliciting bribery?

This was apparently all the Couty DA needed to obtain a warrant, this after an earlier meeting with the DA where Enochs denied all charges. Looking at the nature of these charges and the amount of hearsay involved, It appears to me that the DA might have an uphill fight. It'll be hard to deny that fix-it ticket, though. The DA is reported to have 14 felony charges aimed at Enochs; is expired boat registration a felony?

272 Comments:

  • Mr. Kunkle, If you read both newspapers you can put things together a little better. "a lot of hearsay ... an uphill fight." Please! The DA has stated that it is a complex case with a lot of documents. The Riverside DA's office has a 91% conviction rate. Do you really think they waste time with trivial matters that they don't have a chance of proving? As to an expired boat registration being a felony; no, it was the fact that Mr. Enochs forged a non-existant police officer's name. Does anyone not see what kind of person commits this type of act? All he had to do was pay the registration, show proof to one of his police buddies he's always bragging about and be done with it. Not him. He considers himself above the law.
    According to the papers the mechanic's lien was applied to Enochs' house -- one of several, and not only by Dan Williams, but other 'friends' of Enochs.
    As far as Osmond, he wanted the money owed to him but did not wish to sign anything stating he knew about an affair when he didn't. Breaking people's legs seems to be a recurring theme concerning Enochs. He tries any means available to him in order to get what he wants. In this instance he was prepared to do whatever it took to punish his wife for leaving him. As an added note, talk to people around town. It is well-known Mr. Enochs has a problem with going after women. And going after anyone he doesn't like or gets in his way. From what I've heard his position to bully and intimidate people. Wake up. This is the tip of the iceberg. I believe the DA could have charged Mr. Enochs with a lot more, but were being conservative to be sure of a conviction.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 09, 2006 2:15:00 PM  

  • Seems you know a lot 2:15. I heard that you are an axe murderer and I heard that you have could be in on that car that was stolen and I heard, I heard, I heard. Either say what you know, or why bother saying anything? Hersay is when someone says they have been threatened and no one else heard it. Throw that one out right away. The attorney has said that the boat ticket was past the statute. But you'll have to prove that Enochs signed it and no one else. We haven't seen any witnesses, no proof from the DA. Do you have any idea what a 91% conviction rate means? They made deals on 90% of those mostly dropping it to probabtion in the deal. Means there is no trial, just a deal made in the Judges chamber and the county collects probabtion fees. What is the conviction rate when a defendent goes to trial. More to the tune of 60%. They throw as much mud against the wall as they have and hope something sticks. Ask me how I know.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:36:00 PM  

  • 336 I dont know exactly how right your statistics are but your main point is well stated. Most civil and criminal law is the practice of promoting fear, and then seeing what comes out of it. As a result of plea barganing innocents are punished and criminals get off lighter than they should. Whether any of this relates to the Enochs case I cant say for sure but if not it would be the exception and not the rule. In the case of public figures we have to factor in all kinds of elements in addition to the public prosecutors tendency to threaten and deal and see what comes out of it. We also have to factor in possible pro or con influences of political pal networks and bias in the press. You wont hear much about the latter in the papers but it is there. If they endorse a candidate they show bias. If the cops endorse any candidate they show bias against that candidates political opponents. As voters and everyday citizens we are left to sort it all out.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 09, 2006 5:11:00 PM  

  • That is the most wholly biased view of the WE situation I have ever heard.

    I wonder if Kunkle is really WE? Only WE or a RM shill could have cooked up that rose color'd glasses approach to someone who is clearly engaging in illegal activites.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:40:00 PM  

  • WE now has the full force of the DA and related agencies bearing down on him. Any attempt at encouragement he can get from the sidelines is nothing that can protect him so why berate anyone who wants to promote a point of view? Enochs basic nature is that he enjoys being tounge whipped and thrashed in the press by his opponents so he is not going to step down. Enochs core support base is made up of people who get fired up by anyone who picks on him. Prediction: Hung jury first time around. Then a soft plea bargain which moves him out of office but leaves the door open for running again in the future.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:55:00 PM  

  • This whole situation is absurd. W.E. is making the City of Murrieta a complete JOKE.........

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:09:00 PM  

  • Sorry, the joke is the way two members of the City Council vote the same way on every issue!!!! The same way the developers, the Chamber wants them too. That's the embarrassement this City faces. Who really cares about a man's divorce, it doesn't put high density slums in my city. Seyarto and McAlister do.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:59:00 PM  

  • If you don't like the general plan, then work to change it. You are attacking the council members that are enforcinging it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 10, 2006 4:19:00 AM  

  • Wrong comparison Rholmgren. Murrieta evolved from being mostly a beautiful ranch community around a farm town business core to being a hodge podge of mass housing and traffic woes built around a freeway oriented commercial core. The new commercial core could be a plus, but instead it has become the tax generator necessary to feed the socio-economic needs of a massive conglomeration of increasingly dense housing. Anza is, on the other hand, a far flung backwater community that the developers are not interested in milking dry, because there is nothing there to milk dry.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 10, 2006 9:05:00 AM  

  • 9:05, Roy's problem is he personally can't make any money off of a ramshackle trailer. His agenda is don't make anything better for the average homeowner, his theroy is love it or leave it. Don't complain about having things go terribly wrong, ESPECIALLY when it goes in his pocketbook. Just shut up and leave. Kind of sounds like Kelly doesn't it, two peas in a pod....no wait, Deadbeat Doug doesn't do anything without Kelly, so three peas.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 10, 2006 9:16:00 AM  

  • "Mayor Kelly Seyarto's vow to reverse the decision as soon as the council politics allow is short-sighted and misguided. Residents have a right to know that the city's plan is built on a more solid foundation than sand."

    This is an excerp out of todays Californian under "Roses and Rasberries". The Rose went to our City Council for having the fortitude to change the existing voting on the General Plan to 4 of 5 votes. It is here where we find the true meaning of ethics in voting. We had a leader step forward and it's not our current Mayor. It's another Councilmen (Gibbs)that has shown the foresite to protect the homeowners of our town. Mayor Seyarto is the Rasberry, the bully, that as soon as he has the Council back to a 3-2 developers voting block he will change the new rule. Do we want to continue to be led by someone who is this arrogent, this subservient to interests for the Corporate developers. I don't think so.

    Kelly, come back on here and post under your name, we have sooooo much to talk about.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 10, 2006 10:57:00 AM  

  • I Don't get it. Either we accept the current General Plan or work together to change or modify it. Are you saying the council members are to disregard the General Plan when voting.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 10, 2006 1:15:00 PM  

  • 115 - Unfortunately we are caught between the fetid bog and the swamplands. The present general plan is bad news enough, with its multihousing developer favoring slant. The potential for further changes made at the command of developers is even worse. Which murky result do you prefer? With elections doomed to bring on the profit motivated onslaught of endless developer dollars, the best offense at this point appears to be to construct some kind of defense. The 4/5ths majority is not a pretty puppy, but it's the only one available that could become the guard dog we need to help defend us all.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 10, 2006 1:29:00 PM  

  • You're making blanket comparisons that don't hold up for the kind of samples you need to make your point Rholmgren. The kind of areas someone like you would hunt around were not the ranchlands of old Murrieta. Someone like you would have been shown the other end of the kind of toy you were brandishing if you'd have been caught poaching in the kind of areas some of us miss now. But don't worry, the true ranchlands are now gone. Which would have been minimally acceptable if the development that followed had not been of the variety that searches out and then pillages anything that will yield a buck. One way or another, all you really care about is a buck, right Rholmgren? Your kind won, and people who have community values lost. Congratulations. People like you whose taste runs to hunting among mobile homes and looking at condos styled after prisons have had their way with this town. A bloody dead deer where a live one once ran, a row of prison-like walls where any other reasonable option would have been better, all so pretty in the eye of Mr. Macho.

    And by the way, your other adjoining post was incredible. If a developer who has multifamily zoned land wants to rezone that, who in there right mind thinks that any council in this town would not give up a 4 vote majority to make that happen? The council is divided between politicians who will give developers anything they want, and the others who detest high density insanity. Where do you see a chance for your example to play out? You can surely do better than that lame arguement. If not, you've proven the value of the 4 vote majority.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 10, 2006 3:13:00 PM  

  • Roy, youre so tied up with Kelly Seyarto that you repeat his excuses for high density. Why, do we have do double the population in Murrieta? Just because the State projects the state to double. If you are so willing to have people move in, sub-divide your property and let them live there. Or where don't we just build some skyscrapers here.....there you go kelly, just think of the Corporate money that you can bring in for development. They may make you Govenour. Roy, ask the regular homeowner if he wants high density, ask the normal guy on the street. He doesn't, only you do, because it puts change in your personal pocket. What is the Murrieta's homeowners share...making this into Hemet???
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 10, 2006 10:42:00 PM  

  • 7:25 What an offensive sounding person. If you ate everything you killed I hope you stepped on a lot of bugs. And if your idea of a "lucky" day is defined by seeing snakes I suggest you go to a few council and planning commissions meetings. You can decide for yourself which members are snakes, but you say you like snakes and you've already told us who you like on the council. Figures.

    And if you think our home town should volunteer to become the sponge that soaks up population sprawl, I'm all for it too. Why not? And while were in the process of devaluing our town and therefore our own properties lets go ahead and make more sacrifices by volunteering Murrieta as the town that pays double income taxes, double the number of halfway houses, double the number of violent offender shelters, and you know what else. Why stop with the housing agenda when we can be good citizens and do it all?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, February 11, 2006 9:56:00 AM  

  • No Rholmgren didn't sound obnoxious. He was almost sentimental. Maybe he does need to kill animals to feed his family. Who can be the judge of that except the man himself? Since it is no longer easy to find deer in Murrieta, keep a close eye on your dogs and cats.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, February 11, 2006 8:26:00 PM  

  • Leave Roy alone. The delay in the Alexander Communities project hurt his wallet. He may need to use his AK-47 to shoot THINGS. Just kidding buddy.

    Has anyone seen the Murrieta Insider? The front page story wasn't a story at all but editorial propaganda. It didn't build a story, it jumped to what it thinks should happen in the Enochs case. What kind of sampling is it to ask van Haaster's Father, Brother-In-Law, Great Aunt and Rescue Murrieta (I thought that group was not in business). Ed who spoke for Rescue Murrieta?

    You can see where more developer money will go in the near future....right into the van Haaster/McAlister/Seyarto connected Murrieta Insider. Watch for more pro-developer stories to hit their front page. Now did they run a story about van Haaster trying to cheat the city when he was Mayor? Or about the three Councilmen during the recall. Should these men step down as the recall was putting and did put a black eye on the city? Of course not.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, February 11, 2006 9:31:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren, Some of your attacks on people and their political beliefs even in Murrieta are emotional and full of name calling. When someone says something that offends you your response is again emotional and full of name calling. "ice cube moron" is just one of your many names for people you disagree with. Do you think those kind of responses ever help convince anyone that what you have to say is correct? The result is more likely the opposite. Same is true for people arguing against you. Emotion is not convincing when trying to prove a point.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 13, 2006 8:52:00 AM  

  • This RHolmgren guy brought up hunting just- what was it -a day or two before the Cheney news report. RHolmgren must have had insider knowledge and was trying to get a jump on the hunting topic in this blog. RHolmgren could have had such knowledge because he is a close supporter of the Cheney/Bush agenda. If this conspiracy theory is correct it means the Cheney hunting accident was planned in advance. Not an accident! There is undoubtedly a crime here, and everyone so far is overlooking the RHolmgren connection.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 13, 2006 2:54:00 PM  

  • 8:52, Roy is a name caller, it's his style, or lack of it. It's isnt like he knows if someone really is an ice cube or a lollipop. It's not a descriptor like default Mayor, or deadbeat or felon if we find Enochs to be that. It's made up in his head as he uses them as a power move to scare people into not commenting against them. Now anytime he wants to call me a "dork" like my wife sometimes does, it would be a true descriptor.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 13, 2006 2:55:00 PM  

  • 2:54 - Rholmgrens first post about hunting was Friday. On Google's news service just an hour ago a Texas paper was quoted that Bush knew about the shooting on Saturday. If your conspiracy theory is correct, then Rholmgren was in the know before Bush. That is not too surprising. But what is very disturbing is the fact that Rholmgren may have been aware of the shooting BEFORE it even happened. The real question we all have to ask is "What did Rholmgren know, and when did he know it?"
    We may never know. But the good thing about this situation is that we have something to discuss while there is a lull in Murrieta news.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 13, 2006 6:12:00 PM  

  • What really happened is that this was supposed to be a Conservative, I mean Republican hit, gone awry. Who would think that a politician that hasn't said many straight things in the last 6 years could shoot straight. Will this be on the season premier of th Sopranos? Tony (Bush) sends Michael (Cheney) out to whack the plamegate informant. Everybody in the Family (Republicans) knew this was coming. Thats how Roy knew.

    Naw, this wasn't the Sopranos at all, just more of the same incompetance in the White House....proves they are not straight shooters.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 13, 2006 6:34:00 PM  

  • No MT, they don't spy on conservatives. They already know you believe the propaganda. They spy on everybody else to see if they have found out who shot JR...or whoever Cheney shot.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 13, 2006 8:27:00 PM  

  • This is an invitation to Jeff to go quail hunting. How bout it Jeff? I promise to be more careful this time. I'll keep a real close eye on you, Boy. I've been watching you real close for a while now anyway.
    The Veep

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 13, 2006 10:28:00 PM  

  • Ha Veep, I've done enough shooting for ten people in a lifetime so I'll pass. And Roy, no birdshot wasn't going to get the job done so no I haven't.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 14, 2006 6:44:00 AM  

  • It was in my driveway. Did Kelly send me an advance copy?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, February 15, 2006 8:10:00 PM  

  • MT, instead of writing a story about the incident, it's frontline headline was should Enochs resign. It didn't give a balanced view, it basically told the residents of Murrieta that Enochs has two choices, through an interview of residents opinion, to stay on or resign. It basically didn't protect his rights that he is innocent until proven guilty.

    Who are the residents it chose to interview? One resident was only called Rescue Murrieta. I asked Ed if that represented him, I had thought the RM had stopped functioning as a group and if it was still a group he was spokesmen.

    At the end of the article it put down a timeline.

    But for a newspaper to editoralize a major event as it's only story of an event, when the publisher is connected to JVH and the other two, I find it manipulative at best and downright unreasonable. Had it mentioned that a poll of 1000 residents was conducted and gave the results, that would be more in line. But what it did to me, again my take, is it made Enochs appear guilty, and when will he step down before a court finds him guilty to save this city pain. Was there a same article about the three Councilmen slated for the recall vote last year? Of course not. This is the same paper that over the year quoted Enochs in a very bad light about the future of this city, always printed pictures of Seyarto and McAlister and when quoting those two it did it in a non-controversial way. It was a railroad job. And I came out saying Enochs should resign, but the more I think about it, the more I think for the PROTECTION of Murrieta he has to stay. If he leaves it just will be that much harder to keep Seyarto from getting the voting block he's preparing to get back. You read his remark about when things change in November he will change the 4 of 5 vote back to a 2 of 3 vote on changes to the general plan.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 16, 2006 6:00:00 AM  

  • No, on the sequence of events in the Enochs criminal doings, such as when the boat ticket was issued, when he alledgedly threatened the contractor.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 16, 2006 12:28:00 PM  

  • Well well now. Everything has become so peacefully quiet in Murrieta in recent days. Are we all finally getting along, or is this just the eerie quietness that hangs in the air before a storm?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 20, 2006 8:42:00 PM  

  • Hey Jeff,

    In reference to Warnie Enochs' pending criminal prosecution you said, "Who really cares about a man's divorce, it doesn't put high density slums in my city."

    Here's a news flash for you: WARNIE ENOCHS IS NOT BEING PROSECUTED FOR GETTING A DIVORCE. WARNIE ENOCHS IS BEING PROSECUTED FOR CRIMES HE ALLEGEDLY -- I REPEAT -- ALLEGEDLY -- COMMITTED, 14 FELONIES IN ALL.

    So your question might be better phrased like this, "Who really cares about their city councilman being charged with 14 felonies?" A few more people might say they care. Even Warnie would say he really cares. If he is convicted, I think the vast majority would really, really care.

    But not you, Jeff. You don't care.

    You wouldn't happen to be one of those guys who think that Bill Clinton was impeached because he had sex with his intern, would you? Just wondering because Clinton supporters were saying hey who cares who he has sex with -- he shouldn't be impeached for that! And he wasn't. Clinton was impeached because he lied under the oath and he prevented the truth from being known. One is called perjury and the other is called obstruction of justice and they are both crimes. (I just threw in this part in case you needed a parallel.)

    I hope this clears things up for you.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 21, 2006 4:58:00 PM  

  • Hi Audrey,

    No I am not a Clinton fan and yes he lied to our faces and deserved to be impeached. If you want you can take that part to the National Politics column. But Clinton would not have been impeached for having the sex, but for lying about it.
    I wonder what you get for lying and sending a country to war?

    I do care and if you read back, I said he should step down from day one. However, Audrey, his violations occured outside his duties in the Council. Had they happened during his time, his indictments, alleged or not should have been immediate removal. But since we are talking the apples and oranges of local and federal politics, what do you think of a Congressman, like Tom Delay, who has been indicted for crimes that were connected to his office?????
    Oh, I thought so!!!!

    You should get more clearity by reading all of my posts to get the real meaning. Had Enochs been indicted for anything that came from his duties to the city I would have had the tar and feathers ready.

    What talking points did I miss Roy?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 21, 2006 7:40:00 PM  

  • Clinton made Enochs do it! Great common sense MurrietaT!! Just another offended Republican by Jeff's true comments. Audrey, let's hear your true colors. Republican, yes. Republican Women's group, yes. Do they give you hand outs each week, on what to blame Clinton for. It must read---Everything.
    Waiting for Answers

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:19:00 PM  

  • MT, I hope he wasn't talking about you. I think he was talking at Miss Audrey. Anyways, no problems here.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, February 22, 2006 10:58:00 AM  

  • Has anyone heard the latest buzz about the mass housing traffic concerns that are constantly growing in the commercial corridor areas? The enhanced design for offramps in the Triangle area is a good idea, but the traffic burden that will be caused by the megacomplexes of apartments and condos is going to make the side streets from old town all the way up to the Triangle a traffic mess. City planners are starting to really worry about what they have done. The mass housing mess is expected to generate a lot more traffic in this area than was initially calculated. At this point the city is starting to think about shifting some of the cost burden for the residential traffic nightmare onto new businesses. Any plan of that kind is short sighted and puts a damper on the interest in new business development in the commercial areas. This is one more example of how the tax revenue eating mass housing complexes are starting to create a chain reaction of negative tax revenue influences in Murrieta's highest potential commercial areas. The city is shooting itself in the foot by turning the commercial corridors into mass housing messes.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:40:00 PM  

  • To Jeff: I think the Tom Delay thing is just terrible and I believe it has been taken care of, although I can't say his replacement is much better. I'm glad you agree that Clinton is a criminal and that the matter was dealt with correctly and fairly.

    To someone named Anonymous: Yes, I am a Republican and yes, I belong to women's Republican groups (quite perceptive of you). The men's groups wouldn't let me in! No, they do not give me hand outs each week on what to blame Clinton for. I was actually able to come to that conclusion all on my own. C'mon. Give me more credit than that. Furthermore, I don't think it's appropriate for you to insult me, but it does seem to be your M. O. You would never survive in my social circle where a gentleman is highly regarded. I am assuming you are a man because of your gruff nature. If you're a woman, I would have to slightly alter my last statement.

    Back to Jeff: The point I was trying to make is this and only this: It's not Warnie's divorce that is at issue -- it's his alleged invovlment in criminal activities, and I was responding to just one post -- the one I quoted.

    To Murrieta T.: Sorry you incurred the wrath of anonymous, who obviosuly mistook my post for one of yours.

    To the others who offered me kind words: Thanks! I appreciate that.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:01:00 PM  

  • Audrey,
    I am sorry you got some wrath too. I don't think that you should be disrespected. I have mentioned I think that the continual use of Bill Clinton when there is a more recent criminal in our midst that should have been used. Don't you think? Thats why I used Delay. Maybe it was the MO that linked you to being a Republican.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, February 22, 2006 7:02:00 PM  

  • MT, Nothing in the Dominigoni Triangle area is showing apts. In fact the Triangle itself is not the problem. The traffic area of greatest concern is sort of a wide angular cross section running from Washington/Kalmia to the Madison/MHSR intersection. The main reason the cloverleaf-like changes are being forced into the Triangle plan have much more to do with rush hour apartment and condo traffic on and off the freeways than with commercial activity inside or outside the Triangle. The build out of mass housing being pushed as an agenda by certain council people is fuel on the growing fire. Safety valves are being sought for the increasingly worrisome mass housing traffic impact. Murrieta is being hurt and hurt a lot by this mass housing craziness. There is still time to stop it, but the political implications and housing developer high dollar influences are probably going to win out over logic.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:21:00 PM  

  • No problem, Jeff. I wasn't aware of the excessive usage of Bill Clinton analogies on this forum. (I'm kinda new here.) Had I been, I might have resisted.

    Anyway, no harm done. Carry on.

    Audrey

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, February 22, 2006 10:17:00 PM  

  • 821 I know you and you know me and we both know the city traffic manager is playing a stupid game by screwing with the triangle at this stage of progress. There is profit potential in condos in the triangle and the city could do zilch (nothing at all) about it if the developer throws up his hands and goes that direction. Yes you have it dead to rights about the root of the growing traffic worry and its the same thing that turned the jefferson project overnight from 4 to 6 lanes by changing the ways lanes are painted. Its called PANIC and its coming from the dense housing clusters.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 23, 2006 10:28:00 AM  

  • You guys can complain all day long if you want, but I don't see any solutions. We need more sales tax generating business and less condominiums, but how can that happen if the profit is on the side of condominium development?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, February 25, 2006 5:40:00 PM  

  • One solution would be to keep developer friendly council members out of office come the next election. Some say the many condo/apartment approvals are already set in stone. This may be true, but if only one project is stopped, it will at least be some sort of a success. Also, more residents need to speak up at public hearings, not just the same old RMer's.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 6:50:00 AM  

  • Rholmgren Do you personally profit from the development industry in some way?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 11:36:00 AM  

  • Well Mr. Rholmgren, then let's all stop complaining, bury our heads in the sand and go on our merry way. Of course good things have happened, but as seen on this blog, and from yourself, only the bad things are emphasized. The reply to anon 540 was only to say that if anyone wants something done, then it's going take more then just a handful of people, whether you are on board or not. But the reality is if you want the condos to stop then you had be willing to do something about it, even if it means you have to overlook the past good deeds. Two rights don't make a wrong (okay).

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 12:50:00 PM  

  • PS....where in my post did I say Enochs was the right one for the job? Just because I suggest ridding the council of developer friendly members, whether present or future, doesn't necessarily mean I am pro-Enoch's.
    Anon 650 and 1250.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 12:54:00 PM  

  • To anon, who said, "Also, more residents need to speak up at public hearings, not just the same old RMer's."

    A reference to my age? (Written while grinning.)

    Edward Faunce

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 2:59:00 PM  

  • 11:36 Yes, Roy (Rholmgren) does benefit. But he also sides on most issues that support Corporate profit rather then resident happiness.

    12:50- really good point. If we sit here and let guys like Roy and our two developer friendly Councilmen talk, we will get what we deserve. Shafted. But really it's not up to them, it's up to us to rid Kelly this term. It is up to us to examine closely those that want the jobs that will be open. As Ed Faunce outlined, anyone supported by the Murrieta Chamber of Commerce will not serve us, the residents, but will support the Corporate interests they represent.

    Ed Faunce- has anything come from that first meeting you had looking at new candidates?

    Roy- why do people always have to be labeled? Enochs will be judged and the City will move forward. What Roy wants to do is tag anything Enochs has done to anti-development people. No one is anti-developer. We are just pro Murrieta and don't want our town in ten years to look like Hemet, or Lake Elsinore.

    I agree, I think we have to look to men like Gibbs and build around him. If we could just get 2 or 3 more men, who represent the City, not the development community.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 3:08:00 PM  

  • Roy, you don't have to have the developer write you that check now do you? You earn your money, I have never thought otherwise. Haven't seen you lately Roy, we missed your comments. The more you say the more easier it is for guys like Ed to prove their points. Kelly's been hiding again. He just made his HIT AND RUN, when the Enochs controversy hit. Wonder is that was planned just like the ole switcharoo for Mayor.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 5:09:00 PM  

  • Yes Mr. Rholmgren, you should follow Mr. Faunce's lead more often, as there are no Candid Cameras on the blog to know whether you are grinning or not. Apology accepted, if that was what you meant to say (written while grinning).
    Anon 650

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 9:12:00 PM  

  • Jeff. Unfortunately, I believe those that will seek office are already seekers for a leg up by the Chamber. Amongst others, one would include Randon Lane. And one has already boasted of being a shoe-in. And also unfortunate, the Planning Commission schedule has seen light duty lately and performances may not be able to be monitored.
    Anon 650

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, February 27, 2006 9:29:00 PM  

  • Lord help us all if Randon Lane gets on the council.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 28, 2006 10:33:00 AM  

  • Randon is just another McAllister...a sheep in wolves clothing. Candidacy already declared by CC.
    Anon 650

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 28, 2006 12:38:00 PM  

  • Steve Flynn will probably also run, don't know about Steve Rawlings.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:12:00 PM  

  • Steve Flynn is the one that boasted he is a shoe-in. That was a month ago. A surprise will be coming his way.

    Rawlings is the "amongst others" referred to above.
    Anon 650

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 28, 2006 7:08:00 PM  

  • Odds are all will apply for reappointment just to cover all the bases. McAllister came from PC.
    Anon 650

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 03, 2006 9:34:00 PM  

  • I said it once and i shall say it again W.E. is DONE

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 04, 2006 7:13:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren: Everyone in Murrieta should join in the fight against the so-called "adult" establishments. The city should spare no expense in the fight, and if necessary should hire top notch specialized attorneys to assist the city attorney in the fight. Heaven help us if the rauncy side of life gets a foothold in our city.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 05, 2006 9:36:00 AM  

  • They waited until blog readership had started to die out. No coincidence, people. The word is not going to get out in time. The planning commission agenda for this week has just been released. They intend to raise the allowed density for multifamily housing in the historic zone. And they are going to be pushing the agenda for more and more apartments and condos. Unbelievable? Go to city hall and get a copy of the agenda. Your city is being sold out to the ultimate degree in favor of the combined interests of the state's low income housing agenda and the mega-unit mass housing developers.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 06, 2006 5:22:00 PM  

  • 5:22 -
    I saw that on the agenda. It is disgusting. Will people go and speak up? The council meeting is tommorrow night. It would be a good idea to let them know how we feel. Then the planning commission is Wed night. Again, people have to go so they know they are being watched.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 06, 2006 7:04:00 PM  

  • Sure Enochs is an embarrassment. But the real crime being committed against this city is the conversion of our town into a permanent mass housing nightmare by our city management, the city planning commission, Seyarto, and McAllister. If they fail now, they will keep up the effort until their stinking deed is done. That may be now, or November, or any time before or after. The influence of the state and developer money is way too big for a normal city to defend itself against. Our city council does not have all the vertebrae needed to form a strong spine. This town needs a real hero to come forward, someone who can bring the people together. And we need that person real soon.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 06, 2006 7:33:00 PM  

  • Enochs is an embarassment, but the ones who are sticking the knife in the belly of this city are Seyarto and McAllister and their appointed clones on planning commission. They are ready, willing and able to sell Murrieta down the river for nothing more than political favor. That's the REAL crime.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 07, 2006 10:00:00 AM  

  • Development is one thing. And it is a positive if done in a high quality manner WITH careful moderation in traffic impact AND WITH an emphasis on an over all positive cash flow when comparing commercial tax revenues with the very large negative tax impacts of multi-family housing. The fly in the ointment (and a virally infected fly at that)is when a community of any size begins to give a back seat to those above listed priorities. This typically happens when political motives and/or strong profit motives are gaining control of a local government. It does not take a whole lot more than average common sense to recognize the motives and directions that are presently the primary forces at work in the city of Murrieta. This city is in the final stage of it's only chance to protect itself from the permanent damage that can and too often does occur when private profit and politics form a partnership to the detriment of a community. Once a town is overbuilt with multi family housing, there is no going back. The ensuing years of the community become a constant struggle to deal with the traffic and socio-economic problems which always follow extensive consturction of medium to high density residential projects, and especially when those projects become concentrated in a section of a community which is intermixed with commercial businesses and streets which are already showing potential as future high-volume traffic arteries. If the political advantage, and the related housing developer profit advantage, were not associated with mass housing development, this would not even be an issue. No city would steer itself into a problem-filled future unless powerful ulterior influences were at work.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 07, 2006 2:25:00 PM  

  • There are some people in this town who for various reasons are determined to let this community remain on the path to a really mediocre future, and there are some who apathetically just don't give a hoot. Only a few are looking the situation in the face, and seeing it for what it is. The quality of life in this town is going to go to hell, and everyone who still owns a home when the end result arrives will be looking at the situation and wondering how it could have happened. It does not take a genius to recognize where this town is going, and why it is going there. It only takes the willingness of people to open their eyes and look at the situation straight on. There are political and housing development financial interests that have combined in this town to form a very toxic brew. A lot of everyday good homeowners seem to be willing to blindly swallow that brew, and they will probably be the same ones who eventually cry about the painful results a few years from now.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 10:22:00 AM  

  • Anon 10:22am,
    what do you propose to do, are you willing to take action, do you need some help? Let us know.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 10:49:00 AM  

  • Prime example as to who does what for who:

    Gibbs fights with A.C. for a better project while Seyarto says he doesn't want to hold the developer hostage or hold up their project. In the meantime, Seyarto gets A.C. to pony up $7500 to his daughter's band booster club. While it may be a grand gesture on the part of A.C., it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see who's doing what for who.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 12:23:00 PM  

  • 12:23, where did you find out that Alexander Communities contributed $7500 to Seyarto's daughter's band booster club?

    I disagree 10:22 with your assessment that it's a lot of everyday homeowners willingly doing anything about the development interests in this city. It's uneducated homeowners that don't know what the plan is and don't spend the time understanding the Seyarto/C of C/Development agenda. They don't see what loading up Washington and Jefferson and the streets around the Old town area will do to our City. Yes, MT is right when she says some apartment and condo buildup is OK. But how much gets us the Federal grant money? Are we already there? It's in Seyarto and McAlister's interest to push through as many apartments and condos as possible on the rest of our open undeveloped land. Why can't the tax money you say we will need Murrieta T come from commercial properties along these areas? I again go back to the issues of parks. Has anyone seen new parks springing up around these new apartment complexes. I don't think so.

    Roy doesn't want adult stores in our city and I agree but he's OK with slamming our city with as many apartment complexes as he can get in here. No matter what anyone says, apartment complexes will bring in problems. It happens everywhere. It's just how it is. He doesn't care about these problems. And why? He profits personally, so don't listen to his misleading statements about high density. He's says he lived in San Diego County when there was open land and look at the traffic problems that are occurring today. The 15 used to back up at North County Faire and now backs up around Deer Springs road and any improvements to that will not happen for a decade if then. We already see major traffic headaches here. We can't allow our City to turn into Hemet or the areas along the West side of the 15 in Lake Elsinore. If we now let the remainder of our city fall to the development profiteers we have only ourselves to blame.

    Seyarto and McAlister owe the development community!!! We have to put in place people who look out for us before they have sold us all a bill of goods. It takes a plan and I for one have to look to the only people that have challenged the development community and won......what else can we do? Ed Faunce...your comments please?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 2:54:00 PM  

  • The crazy thing about anyone thinking grant money is all that big a deal is this: It amounts to a tempting payoff to a naive community, a heady load of dollars coming into town to give a temporary financial high. After that comes the hangover.
    A community can become strung out and dependent on government grants and programs. Compare this to the welfare programs of the 1960s and 70s era, when the government was making it financially appealing to a dependent mom to keep having more and more kids, and a vicious cycle was formed. That too was political, as a whole political constituency was built on the addiction to government funds. Murrieta is in the same fix, or is getting there.
    Grant money (big government funding, by any name) comes, and grant money goes, and big time needs are left behind. Traffic, socioeconomic woes. Big daddy government agencies are there to fill that need, as long as a local government remains compliant. It is a horrible addiction, this needle in the arm that comes calling itself by various names such as grants, assistance, etc. And it comes with a ready made marketing plan, political talking points, that are repeatedly used in communities which become the targets of the pushers of the government programs. We in Murrieta are hearing those talking points. The catch phrases. The strained logic. Everything that goes into making a community swallow the poison pill of big government assistance programs.
    Just as with individual people and individual families, self reliance is the only path to success. A strong commercial base with strong commercial tax revenues, and tax drains such as multifamily housing kept to a minimum. That is the key to a city's financial health. The only thing we can all do to help is to try constantly to force the local politicians and city hall bureaucrats to keep their political noses clean. All of these people depend on the voters for their jobs and their positions. They all feel secure in their positions because the ongoing force of housing development political financing is a very powerful influence on the community, and so they serve the interests that create that financing. A community can overcome this self-centered force only if enough of its citizens are determined enough to make their voices heard. It can be at council meetings, in this blog, in public journals, and in many other places in many different ways. What is important is energy and persistence. Nothing else can save a community from its own political establishment when that establishment has fallen into the trap of financial dependence.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 4:01:00 PM  

  • 4:01, your post has a great deal of substance and logic. It would be reasonable to put a call name to your post so we can identify you as you are a welcome addition. Reason is missing here sometimes and overridden by politics and by people who have a financial interest in the developers. We have seen what happens in this city when Councilmen are bought by developers. It leads to massive problems and lessens the quality of infrastructure and services that we receive as a community. Please keep posting.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 4:47:00 PM  

  • Roy, now who would those influential groups in Rancho Santa Fe and Fairbanks ranch that blocked the freeways.....oh Cunningham and all his rich friends. The elite of San Diego Republicans. But the Corporate developers kept on building, with no regards to the infrastructure or lack thereof in the area. That's what the Corporate developers want to do here. Build, build, build. If the state does not build their part of the infrastructure we are left with what? Overcrowed EVERYTHING. Schools, roads, businesses and entertainment that can't and will never keep up. So much for high density. Like you said Roy about the adult store. Let other communities deal with high density. Let Murrieta stand far above them.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 8:08:00 PM  

  • MT, I totally agree!!!! Why the rush to fill every inch of our town? Because, they know that maybe Seyarto is overturned. Maybe new blood comes in and changes the direction. They know they need to strike now and do whatever they can to empower Seyarto and McAlister.

    What's happening tonight?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 8:11:00 PM  

  • Jeff. The A.C. donation was a presentation at City Council last night. View the webcast. See and listen to Seyarto mention how the donation came to be. Others should do the same. I remember the presentation to be in the 10 minutes or so of the meeting.
    Anon 1223

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 08, 2006 8:23:00 PM  

  • MT,....Thanks. I understand now. Who is the "they" here? All of the Council? All of the planning commission? Does this need the 4 votes to pass in Council, or does it ever reach Council?

    I read in an article in the Californian about the meeting but nothing was said about increasing or changing zoning. There were a few useful things about increasing lanscaping surrounding projects and more one story homes but I saw nothing about zoning.

    The more often that I drive down Washington and pass that eyesore fortress built by AC the more I feel the pain of letting the Murrieta Chamber, VanHasster, Seyarto and McAlister be involved in the development of our community. It should be a symbol of whats been wrong in the past here and what we need to stay away from. The above mentioned let that complex come in here and they should be forced to feel the damage it has done here. It is their glowing failure.

    About Seyarto getting AC to contribute to the High School. I say two things here. Councilmen should not be involved with developers and ask for funds. It makes them responsible to the developer. If developers are really interested in putting back monies into the community they should set up a special fund for that and the City could draw from that fund. Having a Councilmen that tightly wrapped with a developer is unethical. I'm glad the High School got the funds. But could I the homeowner go to a developer and ask for funds to benefit a local organization in Murrieta. Of course not!! Why? Because the developer knows that I have no impact on his financial interests in the future. If an organization has a money need and wants to seek help from a Corporation, it should NOT use a Councilmen or Planning Commissioner as a lobbyist. It is a conflict of interest as now the developer expects help in the future by people who can affect the developers bottom line. The second things is.....what did you all expect coming from Seyarto? If he was a good Councilmen he should be able to ask for help from the homeowners, the people who he should be indebted to and they to him. Do you see the conflict here??
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 09, 2006 10:02:00 AM  

  • And that's the point Seyarto wants us to remember. It is wonderful that the kids get to fly to Boston. However, it is a major conflict of interest. Seyarto makes major decisions concerning the financial bottom line of these developers. It effects our Cities bottom line. Just from the last AC project where Seyarto and McAlister voted to pass AC's proposal but Gibbs fought it and got more out of them. Thats the difference!!! That $7500 is just another buy in to Seyarto. He gets a little more tied into them with each favor, the last being the contribution to his recall fight. Seyarto could have asked the homeowners in the city? You know the ones he works for....US. But he really doesn't work for us, according to his post of 8 months ago. Who has our Mayor's votes favored? Not this city!!

    In my business, even when my Buyers work daily with the same suppliers and vendors, do any of us think it would be ethical for them to call them up and ask to sponsor a company party, or a party that supports a relative of one of the company employees. OF COURSE NOT!! It's in our ethics policy. So our Councilmen's associates should not be the very people that they protect our cities resources from. Who else is our guardian? Who watches that we get the most for our valuable resources. We pay the Planning Commission and the Councilmen to do it. That's why they should have no personal relationship connections to the development industry and the last thing they should do is ask for contributions to events. I'm saying that the ONLY reason AC puts up money is for political favors. If that isn't right then you and I should be able to go to them and ask for cash for our favorite charities and events. They'd laugh at you if you did. Why?? Because you aren't in a position to help them. Seyarto is and by that vote I talked about above, he tried to.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 09, 2006 5:04:00 PM  

  • MT I see a huge difference in the developer/government official realtionship as compared to the relationships you cited. The potential to repay favors requested to the taxpayer's detriment is nothing to dismiss lightly. This is not a case of "giving back to the community". It is instead fulfilling a request for a person who has the power to grant very big favors.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 09, 2006 5:57:00 PM  

  • MT, if AC really wanted to repay this city they would have given a check to the new Library or new Senior Center. There are plenty of ways to do those things.

    Do men who are in power really know or care when people are watching? We watch each vote Seyarto and McAlister make and each vote is to benefit developers or to support the hope that they regain the Council in the future. That's default-Mayor Seyarto arrogance at work. The same arrogance that told me that he doesn't work for me and you. He thinks he is above our comments.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 09, 2006 7:54:00 PM  

  • MT, you said "he is not stupid enough to let a contribution to a band affect a vote". I agree with you in that Seyarto is not stupid. However his smartness is that he knows his action will affect the votes more in a postitive then a negative manner. He was willing to the take the risk the knowing the blog would pick up on what he did, but knowing there aren't many out there watching, listening, nor participating on the blog. And of course the NCT will will only publish his good deeds. The positive I refer to is the number of votes he has just won over on his on side from the parents and friends of the booster club. That's maybe 10 or more doors he won't have knock on.
    Anon 1223

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 09, 2006 9:38:00 PM  

  • Correction on the above post. The 10 was intended to be 100 or more.
    Anon 1223

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 09, 2006 9:40:00 PM  

  • Roy, I too am in favor of protecting this vital area. But which way do you think Seyarto leans? Developer interests or conservation? I feel there will be a compromise and it will not favor coyotes.

    MT, Seyarto hasn't changed his voting style once. Each of his and McAlister's votes ALWAYS go to the developers advantage. Even when Gibbs showed the disadvantage of the AC project, Seyarto and McAlister STILL voted for passage in favor of AC. This guy has to vote that way. It is a must for him, he's tied to them, especially coming down to re-lection. I would think fewer and fewer projects will come into play over the next six months so we cannot focus on his voting pattern. The developers want to protect him. You have to judge him by his history. History tellsme he and McAlister are bought and paid for.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 10, 2006 7:41:00 AM  

  • MT: re/ your 6:27:
    I do think Seyarto knows people are watching, and I think part of his pleasure in life comes from arrogant actions that defy decent people to do anything about it. Whatever complex he lives with feeds off of "in your face" activity, even when that activity is destructive to the very town in which he lives. The way I see it, it appears sociopathic. I could be wrong, but the more I see of how Seyarto operates the more I think this man is someone Murrieta should see as a very big mistake to have on city council. The band contribution item is a very minor point in this big picture, but at least it served to illustrate a much larger and more serious point.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 10, 2006 8:56:00 AM  

  • Anyone can order the new Toby Keith album presale at:

    http://tobykeith.musiccitynetworks.com/index.htm?act=signup&ref=98700732b921ea03a0937c3898664c93

    The new single "Get Drunk and Be Somebody" is really taking off!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 10, 2006 7:08:00 PM  

  • Good comment Roy. I agree totally.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 10, 2006 10:23:00 PM  

  • I'm sorry to have to agree because I am someone who used to give Mayor Seyarto the benefit of the doubt. There is something wrong with anyone who sells out their town.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 10, 2006 11:44:00 PM  

  • 11:44, you're right. He has shown in every vote that the importance to him is furthering the profits of the Developers who keep him in office. His future as a Councilmen is tied to their money. He has sold us out.

    But with that said. Most homeowners know nothing about the city government. We need ideas to rid ourselves of Seyarto, McAlister, and all who work for the through the Chamber of Commerce and not for us the homeowners. What are we going to do about it?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 11, 2006 8:54:00 AM  

  • Rholmgren - it is possible to be pro development and pro murrieta without being pro seyarto. In fact you can't be all three at once because two of them are opposites.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 11, 2006 12:37:00 PM  

  • I suppose all is quiet on the Murrieta Council front. But I also think this is a time when we should be hearing from people as I watch the Southern sections on Murrieta be developed. I look on and watch some very good upgrades such as the road widening. I wonder why construction of Jefferson North of Kalmia is taking so long? Months have gone by. Let's face it. Except for a few days of rain, construction crews could be working full time, as our weather here is amazing. Why do areas of Jefferson sit vacant of workers. Why isn't the City management teams pushing for these areas to be completed. The walls along the existing houses have taken, what a year and they are still only half complete. A good crew could have completed a project like that in a month!!!

    Does anyone have any more information on the high density housing along Jefferson and on areas adjacent?

    How about Council candidates? Ed Faunce, what has become of looking at candidates, where is that in the process.

    If we sit back and don't get information out to the voters, what we will get is vanHasster and Stephenson just doing as they please, bringing in high profile City Planners who are going to change the voting structure back to the 3-2 Seyarto advantage. Do we want that? Do we want a man that can ask a developer to pop over thousands of dollars whenever he wants? Do we want Councilmen who owes these developers and then gives up things this community deserves?

    The best example we have of the Seyarto/McAlister voting pattern is the last Alexander Community when they voted for approving the existing plans, but only for the voting of Gibbs/Enochs/Ostling kept it from happening. But really it was the work of Gibbs, working hard for the people of Murrieta who got us a better deal. If we had left it to our default Mayor and the Councilmen who turned down being Mayor, we would have been stuck with whatever Alexander Communities was willing to give us.
    That in itself should show us what we have in Mayor Seyarto and Councilmen McAlister. Two public servants who don't serve us as well as they HAVE to serve the development community.

    Now I am not a fan of Enochs or Ostling. Neither of them work hard to dig into these matters. The only benefit I see with them is that they are a vote against the other two. I do see it as a benefit that Ostling is leaving. We should strive to feel his seat with another go-getter like Gibbs. Enochs too is not full of new ideas and with his legal issues, should not re-up next time. We need new blood, people we can trust and that aren't out to service the Corporate developers and aren't out to step higher up the political pole, but are here for us. We need to start fighting that fight, or we will be stuck with puppets who are in place only to benefit the development community. Once development stops, we will be left with whatever the developer wants to stick us with. It's now or never.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:01:00 PM  

  • Cindy Shuck has an excellent letter to the editors of the Californian today. It asks why is there such a closeness between Mayor Seyarto and a developer that has sued our Councilmen for voting their hearts in keeping a project from going forward. As I mentioned above the dishonorable Mayor Seyarto and his unethical buddy Dougie voted alone to pass this project. In the end we had a Councilmen stand up and fight for the City and basically win for us. He didn't get everything we wanted but we got a heck of a lot more then those developer funded two did would have gotten us. Cindy is right. Why would our Mayor cozy up to a developer that tries to give us less then we deserve and who sued two Councilmen trying to pressure them? Seems a conflict of interest Mr default Mayor. Seems unethical to me. How about all of you?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 15, 2006 6:48:00 PM  

  • Those damn unions! That's the reason. No, it's those Gays!! No it's the Pro-choice people!!! Wait, it's got to be Clinton's fault, he's the one slowing down the road construction. Roy, these contractors lay out a plan and the contract should have dates that they have to hit. If they beat the date the make more money, if they are late they get a penalty. I don't know how City management does it here. All I know is whenever I go by there is no one working.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 15, 2006 8:18:00 PM  

  • Roy and MT,
    Skilled labor isnt needed to build the cinder block wall that will protect the existing homes along Jefferson. I watched as each community thats built has the same walls surrounding them and they are built in a hurry by unskilled (illegals)workers. This is the same song and dance we constantly hear from you guys. Come on we have 340 beautiful, good working days here in Murrieta and it takes a year to build a wall a half a mile long? Road work here takes forever. Do you have memories of how long old town took? Just imagine if this was the midwest where rain occurs once a week and snow and cold shuts down projects for months. Contractors still would have finished in a month. And trust me West of the Mississippi is where Unions florish. Here we have illegal workers that do most of the work. Have you driven by these development projects and looked who's building our roads and homes?

    Do you guys blame everything on what you assume are liberal groups like unions? It's City management here. If these are city roads, they are at fault. They create the contracts and they are responsible for the lack of progress. Contractors like these wouldnt get paid for such slow progress. But I'm sure there is no slow payment to these contractors. How long have the streets around the new police station but in disrepair? Sitting water? Potholes? If you want to blame someone, maybe it's that we just tear up streets without a plan? Then it takes months and months to get them completed. Maybe as I have been saying we don't have to build out our City in a day. Take our time and do it right. We can see the results, inferior construction and inferior complexes.

    If the Mayor wants to get involved asking Developers and Contractors for money for charities, maybe he should start asking them to do their jobs? But he can't can he. He owes them!!!
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:16:00 PM  

  • Roy, then the city shouldn't be handing out contracts to Contractors or developers who don't have the resources to complete the work in a timely manner. It shows that we have a high level of incompetance in that area. Your right, I shouldn't have expertise in what contractor has resources and which one does not. Thats why we have a City Council and pay high salaries to our City Manager and her group of highly paid employees. Why do you assume that these contractors are Union?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:55:00 AM  

  • Here is the story from the Californian on one Contractors problem with hiring skilled workers and his being late on a project.."A contractor's inability to hire enough union workers is holding up the opening of the Los Alamos Hills Sports Park, officials said Wednesday.

    The park was first supposed to open in October, then was delayed to January because of last winter's rain and additional work required on the site. Now, the park is not scheduled to open until the end of July, Deputy City Manager Jim Holston said Tuesday.

    Bill Estrada, project manager for Santa Fe Springs-based Griffith Co., said Wednesday that the high amount of construction going on in the area has resulted in a shortage of qualified union workers.


    "We're a union contractor," Estrada said. "We have to go to the union hall to find quality workers, but they are just not available."

    Deputy City Manager Teri Ferro said Wednesday that on public works projects, the city is required by the state to hire a contractor that pays "prevailing wages." Those are typical of what union workers earn, though it doesn't have to use union labor."

    Well isn't it the reason we added managers for the City Manager to check into contracts and assure the City that when a contractor or developer is awarded a contract, that they have the ability to complete it in the time frame they promise. Well the same article above states that the City of Temecula cancelled a contract in mid-stream because this company didn't perform. Isn't that something our City Management should be all over??? We did add salaries to help out a totally inexperienced City Manager, didn't we?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:08:00 PM  

  • I wasn't downgrading what it takes to build a retaining wall, however, the work is done throughout our community by unskilled workers and laborers. It just doesn't take a year to build the walls. I have watched the progress along Jefferson daily and rarely until the last day or two do you even find anyone working at all. Mostly it is vacant.

    As to the lack of skilled workers after a contract is signed. Thats just my point. You make sure that the contractor already has the workers to assure the task is done in the time frame you request. He doesn't get a contract unless he has the resources signed on. That's why the contract should have penalites attached for not completing phases by the dates they are due and also incentives when the dates are completed. So I blame the City for not checking and the Contractor for signing on when he doesnt have the employees to complete the task on time. Being that I sign contracts daily with suppliers, those are the requirements that I need to assure that the contracts are completed when the supplier promises. I aduit them prior to giving them the contract. It's not always about the best cost, it also entails the ability to meet the demand and quality of workmenship. I don't care if the work is done by unions, non-unions or residents. I just want the City to stop issuing contracts to unskilled Contractors, like developers who only want the money, not whats best for us.

    I am asking for results from this City's Council and Management. I am not an excuse person. These city servants are well paid and we deserve the best for our taxes. I don't think a year to complete a 1/2 mile strip of road is doing the best they can do.

    I shouldn't be having to send notes to Lori Moss, it's her job to be on top of this, not mine to let her know. It is she who should be keeping the City informed on the status of projects and why they are delayed. Wouldn't good communication from the City Manager be something we would all require her to do?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 17, 2006 4:13:00 PM  

  • To Kassen Klein, it seems you left out the details of Cindy Schuck's letter to the editor in the Californian that you challenged, and the details about who Alexander Communties is in regards to our Council. This is the same developer that left us an eyesore of a development on Washington. It's the same developer who sued three of our Councilmen when his poorly designed development didn't pass, then having their suit thrown out of court. It's the same developer that contributed to Murrieta's default Mayor's "No Recall" movement, buying his vote in ALL future votes regarding any Alexander Communities developments. We as a City saw that "bought vote" on the newest AC development, thanks to the efforts of a real Councilmen, Gibbs. Mr. Gibbs voted to challenge AC's project and negotiated a better overall deal for Murrieta, where Seyarto voted to "just pass it". That's the details that you forgot to tell the residents in your misleading letter. But that of course is what a Jack vanHaaster henchmen would want to get across isn't it? Well Seyarto asking a developer for a contribution, no matter what the cause, is not only a conflict of interest but it is highly unethical. But what are ethics to your developer association Mr. Klein? Be on notice that every dime is being tracked going into November.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 18, 2006 10:41:00 PM  

  • Oh it's a real showplace Roy. Their comments line the upper portions of the outer buildings. For Sale signs!! It is truly the ultimate example of a developer taking advantage of the vanHasster regime. If there is one picture that should accompany EVERY flier to eliminate Seyarto from the Murrieta City Council, it should be the front picture of the Sonrisas complex and what was allowed to happen in our beautiful city. It is more of this that will happen if Seyarto stays and other Chamber of Commerce candidates are elected in.

    Roy, it just shows your personality when you defend this complex as anyhting but a disgrace. It's how you are with ANYTHING that goes against your ideology. It's always the same. If Seyarto OK'd a trench in a field, you'd find a way to defend him and the trench. It is not a very educated approach to protect people that enrich your income. Let's face it, you being tied financially to the development community makes you a very cheap shill for them and your comments totally for your personal gains. Your comments then mean nothing to anyone listening. No one cares about a community having walls, it's that they slammed in as many dwellings as they could into a small area, and are profitting with the least investment. As I pass by it, it looks like a low income dwelling with the for sale signs hanging from the tops of the buildings. Tenament dwellings is the closet thing I can get to describing it. It will be a thorn for Seyarto in the upcoming elections as will his lobbying developers for donations.
    Great ethics Mr. default Mayor!! Do you think Alexander Communities would pop over 5 grand for my wife's community charity or my church. Oh that's right, I can't give them a vote on the City Council!!!

    That's the type of ethics our true blue Mayor has. Come on Kelly we haven't heard from you in so long. Maybe we will when there is more news about Enochs so you can gloat again. You are the most unethical politician in this area this side of your pals vanHasster and McAlister.

    You too can come on here Klein and I'd love to discuss Murrieta with you. Oh that's right, you already do but don't put your name to the posts.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 19, 2006 4:30:00 PM  

  • So Roy again you display why you have a lack of credibility. Because people have a different opinion politically then you, you don't like the look of the homes they live in. But you do like the looks of that Sonrisas disaster on Washington. Would that be because it represents AC and the vanHasster regime that you defend against 90% of the posts on here? It reflects all your political comments where even when wrong, corruption and disaster is shown to your face you deny it. Thats where anyone who wants to appear honest lacks credibility.

    The Murrieta Ranchos development is compared to a "shack" and Sonrisas is NOT an "eyesore"????? Credibility? Now if this isn't a sure sign that you lack it, there is no other sign. But maybe Murrieta T and Gottorun will come to YOUR defense on this one. What do the two of you think to Roy's comparison? I don't think you'll run to answer this request, seeing that if you answer truthfully you will make Roy appear exactly like I've pointed out. If you answer to protect him, it will show that you go to extremes to protect a person just for their political ideology not facts. Just a simple question MT. By the way I did e-mail Moss about the Jeffereson street construction along with her highly paid assistants and got no answer so far.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 20, 2006 11:54:00 AM  

  • Murrieta T, Good comments on the Sonrisas area. I realize that people who live there are proud to be homeowners as was I when I first bought my first home or for that matter moved into my first one bedroom apartment. It wasn't a stab at the people but at the builder and the Councilmen and Planning people that let this complex get through without high scrutiny. It should be an embarrassement to those bodies. High density homes can be done extremely well, if time and resources are spent. That is my point. My point also is that with this embarrassement in mind, Seyarto and McAlister were OK with passing the next AC project without a high level of scrutiny. Burn me once shame on you, burn me twice shame on me?? But burning the city once should NEVER be acceptable! Ever!

    The political comparison is that no homeowner in their right mind could think that the Sonrisas complex is even acceptable. The only reason they could is that they are defending the losers that passed it through. That has been Roy's purpose for well over a year. If it comes to high density in Murrieta, no matter the public complaints, no matter the majority, no matter the good of our City, Roy has sided with the vanHasster's regime, then and now. Like I said, if Seyarto voted for a tent in a mud hole, Roy would back and defend him. Sounds really familiar to his posts on other topics now doesnt it?

    Where is the Warm Springs school at???

    And no I don't live in the Ranchos, although I did look at them and love the size of the property lots. There were a few other things my wife wanted so we passed. I live on the opposite side of the 15 near the Inland Valley Hospital.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 20, 2006 1:56:00 PM  

  • Cindy,
    I did already. I copied the same post I first did there to this blog. Keep commenting, we need more voices.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 20, 2006 10:36:00 PM  

  • Roy, I'll take my chances promoting the site to be the cover of a campaign to displace thhe unethical Seyarto by displaying what the vanHaaster regime including Seyarto, McAlister and Klein are capable of. I'm sure most people will feel we were sold out.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 20, 2006 10:39:00 PM  

  • Jeff: Just a vote of agreement with your statement that the blog needs "more voices". But as an occasional reader I want to say you and the other regular contributors have built a real following in this town. Just as there are a lot more people who read the newspapers than there are who write, the same is true here. You who write are making a difference in this town. The diversity of viewpoints being expressed, and the spirited exchanges, give the readers a lot to think about. You writers have already made a difference in this town. I hope this blog goes on forever.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:21:00 AM  

  • Over zealous development during the past 5 years is now biting the City of Murrieta, and more the Murrieta City Council and its staff, in the butt. For the first time I agree with Kassin Klien that Murrieta needs to get it together and make decisions. Unfortunately, and as predicted, the decision that was needed tonight had to be made in a reactive mode then a proactive mode. While project after project after project was approved by the past developer friendly City Council, the City of Murrieta put the future in the back seat. Tonight the City Council, as recommended by staff, was forced to approve two moratoriums in order to study road alignments. Coincidently, twice tonight the Recall was mentioned. Cited as the main reason for the Recall, development went so fast no one was looking to the future. To the folks that didn’t believe that there was too much growth and the City was headed in the right direction, you’ve now got what you asked for…a moratorium on one of the most needed developments, medical clinics. The excuse offered for why the advance studies weren’t done in a timely manner was because of lack of funds. As believable as it may be, it is the wrong answer. As Councilman Gibbs stated, strategic, advance planning needs to be a priority so that development can go forward. Thank you Seyarto, vanHaaster and McAllister for putting advance planning in backseat. What is humorous to it all is that during the Recall Kassin Klien spoke harshly about it, but tonight in his own way he agreed that the City hasn't been doing it's job manner to really help the City grow.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:26:00 PM  

  • Kassen Klein is very political, he is interested in running for council and makes sure he is in front of the cameras whenever. But he does not have the answers, he was on the planning commission for years and bears a huge responsibility to our city's infrastructure problems.( I.e. approving Rachel van Haasters daycare center in an already overburdened location with traffic chaos around the existing schools! He was willing to ruin the livlyhoods of private horse owners/ trainers and breeders next to the proposed site.) I have no respect for his arrogance displayed at every puplic meeting, by body language and manner of speaking. His attitude is offensive to many, he needs major lessons in humility and people skills. He is playing the game by pleasing the people who can help him, never failing to see the inferior projects that are pushed through, like the Sonrisas on Washington and the first AC proposed project that was saved by Rick Gibbs. Thanks, Rick Gibbs for not accepting an inferior project! KK is a developers boy, plays his cards to hopefully advance himself and doesn't give a hoot about the residents in this town. What we need in November are men and women who truly want to serve the community and not advance their own personal careers.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:16:00 AM  

  • Kassen Klein is very political, he is interested in running for council and makes sure he is in front of the cameras whenever. But he does not have the answers, he was on the planning commission for years and bears a huge responsibility to our city's infrastructure problems.( I.e. approving Rachel van Haasters daycare center in an already overburdened location with traffic chaos around the existing schools! He was willing to ruin the livlyhoods of private horse owners/ trainers and breeders next to the proposed site.) I have no respect for his arrogance displayed at every puplic meeting, by body language and manner of speaking. His attitude is offensive to many, he needs major lessons in humility and people skills. He is playing the game by pleasing the people who can help him, never failing to see the inferior projects that are pushed through, like the Sonrisas on Washington and the first AC proposed project that was saved by Rick Gibbs. Thanks, Rick Gibbs for not accepting an inferior project! KK is a developers boy, plays his cards to hopefully advance himself and doesn't give a hoot about the residents in this town. What we need in November are men and women who truly want to serve the community and not advance their own personal careers.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:16:00 AM  

  • Hello. Are 'JLM' or 'Been There' still around? If you are out there, please comment on the buzz going around town about the Jefferson/MHSR instersection. Rumors are starting to fly that a five star commercial project is in the works (and that it bumped out the 400 unit mega apartment complex). Does anyone have an inside line on this?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 22, 2006 3:05:00 PM  

  • This blog is apparantly not supervised. The topic lines are worthless as descriptions of the content. The city may soon offer a monitored blog that will be much more educational. If you like to grandstand and insult your political opponents you will not find the city blog useful.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 22, 2006 4:43:00 PM  

  • City blog site? Monitored? As in only give you the information they want to share? That's one of the biggest problems with our fair City.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 22, 2006 5:46:00 PM  

  • Why should a blog be supervised except to limit bad language? Limiting would hold back free commenting. Explain grandstanding 4:43? Not having your opinion? We run off the headlines that are placed and they they grow legs here.

    10:16 very good comments. I agree Klein is just another vanHasster clone and as arrogant as Seyarto. We'd just be voting in a second Seyarto.

    3:05, which corner of MHSR and Jefferson are you talking about so we have it clear?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:02:00 PM  

  • Jeff, MHSR = Murrieta Hot Springs Road. The intersection of Jefferson and MHSR, in specific terms, the big section of acreage at the NE corner. The same one that had been topic of discussion when it was almost ready to go before Planning w/400 plus apts. If JLM and/or Been There are still around, please share some info. Or anyone else??? Word is out that something big is happening. Can someone share some hard facts?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:25:00 PM  

  • 625, where are you hearing the words? Staff, developer circle, otherwise? Any info you can provide would be helpful.
    Just Curious

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:39:00 PM  

  • 6:25 --- Yeah, I'm still around. I know what you're writing about. Key city employees and some major players and a few politicians are keeping more quiet than usual about this one. What I've heard is interesting, and a big time improvement over the nutty apartment proposal as long as the local governments (city and county) keep their own egos out of the picture. If any the involved public officials are reading they should know exactly what I mean. But I don't have enough details to comment any more than that. Maybe someone who is reading can tell us more.
    Been There

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 23, 2006 12:15:00 PM  

  • I agree with you Roy that Murrieta is not a place for adult stores or adult clubs. I think our Council should have been looking at these protections long ago and now that a license has been issued it may have a hard time getting Mr. Kim to move. Mr. Kim may have misled but I don't see a crime here. We should be thankful that his store is in an industrial complex and not on a street like Jefferson.

    I do not agree that we have any right to tolerate or not tolerate a persons right to due process. I know how you love the elimination of the civil rights of citizens within the US Roy, but due process is critical. Enochs pleaded NOT GUILTY. Most criminal trials take months and months to go through discovery and research by both sides. Because you don't like someone politics, or want a quick conclusion, his trial has nothing to do with you. The resulting effect of it's conclusion will be that Enochs will be forced off the Council or that it stays as is.

    I understand why you want the rush to a conclusion, so the Council can be swung more easily to the old vanHaaster crew. Maybe they then could build row upon row of the Sonrisas that you think beautify our community.

    We need to really start to focus on the upcoming election. What our main focus should be on besides ridding this community of Seyarto, is that we keep out other pro-developer types, that come directly from our planning commission. These people already have that developer connection and most have been tied with the van Haaster regime. If they are allowed to team with Seyarto, we will be steamrolled again by a majority. We have to be vocal and soon.

    Ed Faunce, what's going on with your group, you have been very silent lately?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 24, 2006 10:11:00 AM  

  • You bloggers will be interested in this. The Jefferson apartment nonproject is a nonproject in part because of the negative reaction that came from places like The Californian and this site's blog entrants. It is true that a new suitor came along but it is true also that the city gvmt was getting nervous about a big new issue coming out of the woodwork in an election year. Keep up the good work. It took years to start happening, but citizens who care about the future of their city are finally making a difference in Murrieta. Kudos to JL Kunkle and the Murrieta bloggers.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 24, 2006 12:29:00 PM  

  • Also hiring a real traffic engineer may just have turned the lights on to the upper management of the City. I'm sure no one liked the idea of a 6 lane Jefferson really meant for 4 lanes, and the revamping of the interchange.
    Just Curious

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 24, 2006 11:07:00 PM  

  • The 6 lane idea was announced after the traffic engineer was hired. 6 lanes will still be necessary because of the mass housing mess that has already been built that feeds trafficwise off of Jefferson. The 400 unit apartment proposal took the city out of denial and forced them to admit the 6 lane necessity which was going to be a necessity even without the apartments. The public outcry over the need for six lanes was started in this blog, and helped make the 400 unit project a no go. These are facts. It is also a fact that there was concern about Faunce getting involved after he had made comments in this blog. Everyone who is anyone at the city knows it. Ask around at the city if you'd like, and see if someone will admit the truth.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:21:00 AM  

  • 10:21
    Its not news but the added "rush hour" element of 400 units was starting to look like an ugly deal killer.
    Commercial traffic (with a wider dispersion of traffic flow) made more sense and commercial also is a much needed income generator for a city like Murrieta.
    Yes the apartments were starting to look like a big political problem and even with all that being true the apartments would still have been pushed through by the local politicians if a commercial big timer had not made an entry.
    The news is being guarded like it is only when a major deal is happening behind the scenes and I would say more but my news is no better than yours at this time.
    Y

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:39:00 AM  

  • So from the comments of the last day or two, the remarks made, we have politicians in this town who would do it harm if not challenged by newspapers, blogs, ect. They would have supported a huge complex we have talked about for months and months. We have read and re-read the research of Ed Faunce on the manipulating power of Dan Stephenson at the Chamber of Commerce, the conflict of interest of Councilmen McAlister, the arrogance and ethics abuse of our duly defauled Mayor Seyarto. All of these issues are driven by one thing, the greed of the development community, to push on us complexes that will increase traffic woes, increased headaches of a city already bursting due to overburdened growing pains. A development community that will steam roll us into submission and walk away counting it's profits as we endure years of problems that may never be straightened out. Going forward into the final years of buildout, do we want Councilmen like Seyarto and McAlister and the late vanHaaster who brought us Sonarisas and would have passed AC's last development with no improvements?? Or a Councilmen who has shown me in his brief tenure that he will work for us like Gibbs? Many in this community don't care and don't even know who the Mayor is. We need to change that and let them know who and what Council McAlister and Mayor Seyarto are and how they have tried to manipulate the Council leading up to a recall and surely after. We need to take back our City from those that have sold us out to development. We need to end Seyarto's reign of arrogance and deception. We need Councilmen that work for us. When asked, default Mayor Seyarto told me he doesn't work for me. But he DOES work for me and you. It is time to change the guard and move forward before it is too late. Stop politics as to the ways of vanHasster and make them the ways of men like Gibbs.

    As for Enochs. I have never seen much effort besides voting against the power of three from him. Maybe in years past, he was a good driving force on the Council. But not anymore. I don't hear him commenting and being involved like other Councilmen. I don't much care that he is indicted over trying to screw his Ex out of money, or the vindictiveness they had for each others affairs. What matters mostly is how much he wants to do for me. Thanks Warnie for all you have done to protect me with your vote, but I need more from my City Councilmen. I need a person standing up in that Council Chamber, working for me. If this is not your role anymore, step aside so we can bring in someone that will fight. Your friend Ostling is the same but he sees it as his time to leave and I agree. We need to build around Gibbs, build a Council that works together and for us, not for what they can get from developers. Vote out Seyarto in November and you will be voting for your neighbor and the neighbors to follow. But we need to act now, not later.

    OK, so this 400 unit apartment complex is not going in there. Could a deal have been worked out to move it to another property, maybe in the vicinity? Does someone know if this is the case. I am against any large high density complex in the remainder of the buildout.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 25, 2006 1:41:00 PM  

  • Jeff, I am so glad you understand everything that is wrong, you have cited it all many many times before on this blog.
    Its time you came up with a plan and a solution, you feel so strongly about the state of affairs in this town. I think you have a good head on your shoulder and you need to spring into action and stop the armchair critique.
    Its a bit like our national politic, isn't it? And you do not need RM to do it for you, you are capable to build support for whatever solution you propose. You have some supporters on this blog, I am sure, including myself.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 25, 2006 3:01:00 PM  

  • 3:01,
    In another time I would get off my butt and step up, but I just don't have time to do more then have an opinion. Actually I am off my butt, but only finishing a career in the world of running a manufacturing company and getting my last son through school. My work days start early and they end most days very late.

    What I do volunteer to do is get out there and do the physical work, go door to door and talk to my neighbors as I have been doing. You can see I'm opinionated and the people in my housing development will at least be educated to the happenings in our city. I have gotten them all to at least know about the blog and pass it on. They do know the name of the Mayor. I also volunteer my resources. Which means I will back financially the candidates I believe in. Besides that and a voice here, thats all I can do today. But I want someone like Ed Faunce, who could really challenge Seyarto to run. Ed is a driving force with a background and a success in his past with the Recall election. I hope you all realize the effort and great achievement RM did, beating the development money and power. It proves that word of mouth, the power of the vote can beat money.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 25, 2006 4:07:00 PM  

  • Good morning Murrieta blog posters,

    Although I’ve had little to say for about the last month, I’ve been watching the posts. Jeff, you are giving too much personal credit to me for the recall success. Countless hours of hard work were contributed by dozens of Murrieta citizens. Without the grass-roots effort we would not have been successful. But, isn’t that the way democracy is suppose to work?

    What made the effort so difficult, and the result so astounding, is that Murrieta is simply a microcosm of what’s wrong with our country generally. Corporate money, business interests and career politicians have combined at every governmental level to cheat ordinary Americans from the fruits of their labor, the future of our children and our moral leadership in the world.

    I am astounded, for example, that despite the efforts of thousands of Murrietans, our City Manager, Lori Moss, just doesn’t “get it.” She is still on the Board of Directors of the Murrieta Chamber of Commerce. Her picture is placed last on the Chamber’s website just after the deposed van Haaster. Why? Maybe Ms. Moss doesn’t recognize the deep division between the Chamber and the people of Murrieta Her continued presence on the Board is an affront to our efforts to reform City Hall.

    I think we should all call on her to resign from the Chamber Board of Directors - immediately. Frankly, I think that her membership on the Board places her in a conflict of interest with her City responsibilities. The City’s first allegiance, and that of its City Manager, must be to advance Murrietans’ quality of life rather than the profit and loss statements of the Chamber’s business members. (Remember, that most of the influential Chamber businesses are headquartered elsewhere mainly in Temecula.) The City Manager’s conflict of interest will cause her to divide her loyalty, but no person can serve two masters for either she will love the first and hate the second or vice versa.

    So, Ms. Moss, here is my request that you immediately resign from membership in the Chamber. That would continue the process of clearing the conflicts out of City Hall.

    Of course, Ms. Moss works for our City Council. They could call upon her to eliminate this obvious conflict of interest. But, then our City Council is also conflicted because it continues to give money to the Chamber and at least two Council members, Seyarto and McAllister, Kowtow to the Chamber and its members.

    I also think that Councilman Gibbs correctly identified the single most important City government requirement for building out Murrieta – long range and careful planning. And I don’t just mean zoning, building plan checking and the like. What I have in mind are professionals who can look at the multiple factors of population, traffic circulation, housing, businesses, water resources, etc. and make professional predictions for obtaining a desired goal. Simply approving developers’ project after project misses this big picture. That’s what I believe Councilman Gibbs meant, i.e., that we need to carefully plan for the overall result.

    Some have criticized RM saying, “Hey, RM’ers, what’s your plan?” But, RM is not a professional City Planning organization. In fact, neither is the Murrieta City Council nor the City Planning Commission. Even the work done by the General Plan Review Commission is mostly the result of persons with no expertise in executing a design for a new City. Despite the best of intentions, Murrieta’s development seems to have suffered from at least a moderate case of the “blind leading the blind.” As the good book says, they will both fall into the ditch.

    It seems to me that what this City needs is a City Council that is willing to ask the academic types for assistance. It should not be expected that our elected officials would know how to get Murrieta from what it is becoming to what we want. But, we should expect that our Council would not hand the decision making to non-professionals and economically conflicted business owners.

    Surely, there are long-range professional City Planners that could be engaged to assist in managing the integration of all the elements for creating a workable City. Those professionals should be identified and their services engaged. Murrieta is not the first new City. Others have already plowed this ground before. We should build on that knowledge.

    My critique of Councilmen Seyarto is that he has shown no humility about his lack of professional training and knowledge in his decisions. Instead, like most politicians, he tries to substitute his Council committee assignments for professional training and certification.

    McAllister has even less claim to making meritorious decisions. Besides having no professional training and certification, he’s actively seeking employment by the very business interests that should be SUBORDINATED to his Council responsibility. These two council members should be removed at their next election cycles.

    Edward L. Faunce

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:16:00 AM  

  • Good morning Ed Faunce!!!!
    We in the past have both identified the connection Lori Moss has with the Chamber as a conflict of interest. But to call for Seyarto and McAlister to ask her to resign will not happen. It is up again to the bloggers to get the word out and to identify the connection between the developers tool (the Chamber of Commerce) and the connection they have into our city government. You're right when you say that it is an unhealthy conflict of interest. It's like the President being President but also on the Council to Improve Oil profits. Oh, he is?

    Ms. Moss's only agenda should be the residents of this city. Why we have such close connections between city government officials and the Chamber of Commerce is not in our best interest. It is a big conflict in a city already struggling to build out. Ms. Moss's e-mail address can be found on the City of Murrieta web site and I will be sending her an e-mail asking her to resign from the Chamber. She also works for all of us residents not for any businesses in town.

    Instead of working on the C of C board she should be setting up communication forums, as to the plans of her office and her highly paid helpers. I want to hear more about internal improvements and projects she is working on. We should rate her performance by continual improvements in our City government. In my work field, to be a supplier for me, you have to show me a marked continuous improvement or you will lose my business. The same goes for our City Manager. We are an incredible City, growing leaps and bounds and our City government cannot just maintain status quo. It has to follow those leaps and bounds. I haven't seen this communication from our City Manager and I don't just mean at the City Council meetings for 3 minutes. I mean her own meeting with the residents. Constant improvements. They hired someone to build the gap between the city officials and the residents, when all we needed was open communication.

    All of us need to ask Ms. Moss to resign from the Chamber, and spend the time she did there on meetings with the residents and showing us that continual improvement in her departments. It's all about "lean" governments. I thought thats what Republican politicians were about?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 10:09:00 AM  

  • Congratulations Jeff. Your constant Republican bashing has once again messed up whatever good the bloggers are doing. If the developers and Seyarto are not paying you for helping them out they should be.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 11:50:00 AM  

  • 11:50 no need to bash anyone. It's way too easy to. One comment throws your ideology into a tether doesn't it? LOL. I'm asking why we have such a big City government when it's run by conservatives? Thought they were into LESS? Why three department heads? Maybe instead of being on the board of the Chamber of Commerce, Ms Moss could spend more time doing their jobs we could eliminate 100K from the budget of this City. By the way, not bashing, just truths.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 12:40:00 PM  

  • There is no benefit to Murrieta for a city manager to be affiliating herself with existing business owners (c of c). There is only benefit to two groups of people. (1) Those who are members of the organization and who can use the social access to lobby for their own interests, and (2) Politicians who gain political backing from those businesses.

    Jeff - Whatever self gratification you get from your snide little remarks about conservatives is just as bad for Murrieta as any Seyarto or McAllister or Van Haster. LOL this all you want, you are simply being ineffective.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:01:00 PM  

  • Wow! You people who call this city hall and Kelly Seyarto "Republicans" or "conservatives" are politically clueless. If they are anything it is socialist style liberal. They are using mass housing developers to forward their "housing for the masses" agenda. If they are calling themselves Republicans or conservatives they are doing it to fool you and to fool their political support base.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:16:00 PM  

  • Roy,
    I leave 2:16 to you.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:33:00 PM  

  • Self gratification for what is happening in the world? Hardly gratifying. Isn't it terrible that all you can do is come back with comments about me, the person with an opinion. Wouldn't it be wonderful if you had ammunition to come back and tell me all that's right with your ideology? How wonderful you've made our nation in the last, what 6 years. How bonded your ideology has made our GREAT country. What percent 65% think youre wrong? Incompatent???

    I won't even go into it. We have a bigger more personal problem right here in River City.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:39:00 PM  

  • Didn't Seyarto at one time say to just build and we will worry about the infastructure later? Can anyone concur on this?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:44:00 PM  

  • I don't remember him saying that on this blog, but I've only been commenting for a year or so. He has said that with each vote he's made, however. He doesn't care about infrastructure. He cares about the level of profit that the developer makes and that he did state on here. He said that he was "worried" that it was costing the developer money to wait on a Council decision as to what was right to do. The residents should NEVER care about the profit of a developer. We are letting them build out "OUR" town, not vise vera. They need to do the BEST for us, not whatever they can get away with at the most profit for them. We have seen the Seyarto's, McAlister's, Klein's and vanHasster's let the development community dictate to us. Finally Gibbs stepped up and maybe started a different direction. The only problem is that he sits alone with the other two voters. Ostling and Enochs are just votes and nothing more. Gibbs needs help and backing. He needs us, the voters to bring in people who will help him build out our town. Ten years from now we will thank ourselves if we do. If we don't....as we sit in traffic looking at more Sonrisas', blame yourself.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:57:00 PM  

  • Please don't Rholmgren. It would be the blind leading the sighted. You are Seyarto's lap dog because you think he is a conservative. You are clueless.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 7:19:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren you said: " In general Mr. Faunce your weak attempt at tearing down 3 city officials does little to inspire anyone. Instead why not just list your alternatives and positions and let others choose to follow. I see nothing wrong with Moss' Chamber affiliation."

    Oh I went far beyond critiquing three City officials, I also reminded everyone that the alliance between the developers, the bogus Murrieta Chamber and the City employee unions is anathema to our long range community well being.

    Rholmgren, I have moved far beyond justifying what I say to you. For example, if you don't understand the conflict of interest of having our City manager be on the Chamber's Board of Directors, that does not surprise me. But, I really don't have the time or inclination to try to educate you. Plenty of others see the conflict and agree that it should be ended.

    The current discussion direction seems aimed at what the community should do with regard to the coming election. We already know that you, Rhomgren, were totally opposed to our attempt to rescue the City from the moribund developers' grip. But you lost that argument. I have no illusion that my comments fail to inspire you. So what?

    We are now discussing how to preserve and extend the reforms begun during the recall. That's why the comment about Lori Moss is germane.

    As to Seyarto, he has been and still is a tool of the developers -- Dan Stephenson's group. Seyarto is completely in bed with the Chamber's attempt to hand power over to Dan Stephenson (he was voted their man of the year last year). Seyarto does not represent the needs of ordinary Murrietans -- he is an elitist thinking of himself as superior. He foolishly thinks they "respect" him, but once he's stripped of his council vote, he will have no more utility for the developers and will be tossed on the trash heap of out-of-office politicians. Of course, the rest of us will have to cope with the damage he (and McAllister) have wrought.

    Edward L. Faunce,
    Continue Murrieta City Hall Reform
    Vote Against Developer, Chamber and City Employee Union backed Candidates
    Remember, the Ballot Box is Mightier than their Bank Accounts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, March 26, 2006 10:40:00 PM  

  • Yo Murrieta Blogsters: A major victory for free speech, including truly free speech which is not bought and paid for by profiteering developers... This is a quote from the Associated Press:
    'WASHINGTON - The Federal Election Commission decided Monday that the nation's new campaign finance law will not apply to most political activity on the Internet.

    In a 6-0 vote, the commission decided to regulate only paid political ads placed on another person's Web site.

    The decision means that bloggers and online publications will not be covered by provisions of the new election law. Internet bloggers and individuals will therefore be able to use the Internet to attack or support federal candidates without running afoul of campaign spending and contribution limits.

    "It's a win, win, win," Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub said, adding that the rule would satisfy concerns of campaigns, individuals and the Internet community about whether the campaign finance law applies to Internet political activity.'

    Let's raise a glass of Boston Harbor Tea! It's a good day for America, and a bad day for politicians who benefit from mass housing developer contributions.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 10:33:00 AM  

  • One anon hack above cited they see no reason for the city manager to be in contact with business owners. What a dunce. In a city dying for businesses you honestly can't see any benefit for the city to be in contact with the primary business advacacy group in that city? Furthermore, Moss is only a member of the board by invitation, not election. Just like the school district representative, to facilitate communication between businesses, city gov't and school district - something you people are always bitching about that it doesn't exist. Well it does and you can thank the chamber for it.

    Faunces ongoing allegations about the chamber are nothing short of idiotic. Starting with his oft-stated allegation that Nancy Stephenson is Dan's Wife when the simplest of inquiries would have put the lie to that canard. He was also wrong on about 2/3 of his assertions of residence or business location of the board in his 'well thought out expose' of the council. Dan Stephenson has nothing to do with the chamber othert than his company being a member (and not even a major supporting member, es evidenced by the credits given on the chamber website). Nearly 900 local businesses are currently members of the Murrieta Chamber and their political advocacy committee is active on behalf of me and almost 2,500 other businesses valley wide. Before making any other half-baked accusations about things you know not, yu might check out their website and try to get involved in something positive for this community instead of just stroking your own ego with meaningless chit-chat between Faunce and Jeff. Occasionally you guys make a valid point, but not often enough to sort through all your BS to find it.

    Go ahead now. Attack. It's the only thing you seem to enjoy - you're not good at it, but if you enjoy it I guess it at least keeps you off the streets at night.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 10:48:00 AM  

  • Golly Jeepers 10:48. So much emotion. If you have any blood vessles in your cranium, one may rupture if you're not careful. For your own sake, calm down please.

    The trouble with the chamber is that it is used as a partisan political tool in this town. Meditate on that, calmly, calmly.

    If someone else makes an error once in a while, that's human. You and/or others seem to dwell at long length on points of trivia, while overlooking the real substance of abuse of position by city officials who subvert the public good in favor of tax draining mass housing development.

    No one is after you, so don't be so focused on your 'Attack' paranoia. Relax, please.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 12:23:00 PM  

  • If the Chamber plays a key roll in the economic growth of Murrieta, when are we, the residents, going to see the results? Or is it the new furniture row something we should be looking at…no class or style to the store fronts or parking areas, off-the-wall businesses that probably won’t last a year leaving an eyesore of vacant stores or fill-ins of 99 cent stores. The Ashley center on Madison has curb appeal, but too bad it can’t be seen by the Interstate traveling public. Maybe it’s the new restaurants in town we should be looking at….the ones that accepted bribes of 50k to locate to Murrieta. Let’s see we, the residents, pay businesses to come to town, pay the Chamber 60k a year to promote business, and pay to be in an economic partnership with Temecula and Lake Elsinore, with Richie's Dinner being about the best we can do? Oh yes, there’s Applebee’s soon to open, but it too had incentives because it’s in a redevelopment area. There may be 2500 business on the Chamber’s roll, but how many of them really get any benefit out it? Wasn’t it Stephenson, or his cronies, the one that visited a few member businesses last year during the Recall and told the owners not to support the Recall by putting signs in their windows? Then there’s Rex Oliver telling the residents how to vote when he’s not even an American citizen and qualified to vote. One has to wonder what he’s getting out of the Chamber agenda?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 12:51:00 PM  

  • Golly Jeppers 12:23 The trouble with the chamber... Please, for my calm edification, try to point out when exactly (not in Faunces glittering generalities) did the chamber get used in partisan politics? The recall? No wait, you've all been claiming the recall wasn't partisan. No appartently it's just because the chamber happened to be on the same side the republican party was on - whether the republicans should have been involved or not - that's not the chambers business. The chamber took a stand against the recall because it was not in the best interest of the business community of our city (including yours truly) Not just Stepheson and his developers (who probably built the house you live in), but all the small businesses and home base outfits trying to eke out a living. It was also an idiotic waste of time, foisted on a gullible (apolitical) public by Warnie and cronies (in spite of Ed's pleas to the contrary). Face it, if Warnie had been allowed to be mayor 2 or 3 years ago, the recall would never have come about and you and I all know it - although yu won't admit it. The chamber makes an easy target for people who don't know what the hell they're talking about. Why don't you talk to a few chamber members and find out if the chamber does them any good - and if not, why do they belong and why does membership continue to grow. The chamber is very active politically - not partisan politics, but politically in trying to get things done. Contrast their recent most recent attempt on your behalf by getting Rep. Benoit to sponsor a piece of legislation making it easier to get road improvements done. Contrast that with the empty ramblings of Faunce and the even more lame excuses by the hero of the stupid, Jeff. Awwww, he's too busy to help the city - he's got a busines to run. I'll bet. He aughta join the chamber so they could fight some of the regulatory battles on his behalf, that might free up some of his valuable time to do something besides shoot his mouth off. Naw. Just wishful thinking.

    Dwell on points of trivia? What would that be, oh enlightened one? Some of Faunces many misquotes? The claptrap that passes for information in the Murrieta Bungle? The BS perpetrated in this blog by Jeff and the anons?
    Attack? You ain't seen attack, brother. You people just get upset when somebody has the temerity to come on your comfortable little mutual masturbation blog and blow a few holes in your sycophancy. That's my agenda - live with it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 1:17:00 PM  

  • 1:17 Through your own words you have done a very good job of exposing your character, and by extension you have wronged the people you support. You (or people very much like you)have visited this site in the past. Good people (from all sides of local politics) have previously urged everyone who participates to please remember that there are school aged children who are among the readers of the blog. You do not need to turn foul in any attempt to make your arguements. We will all read and consider what you have to say, but as a neighbor and a parent in this community I would ask that you please keep the wording clean.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 2:13:00 PM  

  • 1:17, would that be the same Chamber that during the Recall they claimed projects were being lost because of the Recall? Turns out it wasn't true after all; it was only a scare tactic for the community. That would be dirty politics, partisan or not, and something no Chamber should be involved. Because of that, why would anyone want to trust the Chamber? You asked Jeff to talk to Chamber members to see how they felt, we’ll I have, and they weren’t the Rancon’s or Temecula Valley Bank types, they are the everyday Joe Business owners in town, the ones that make up a vast majority of the 2500 members you speak of. Those would be same ones that were threatened if they dare post Recall signs, and ones that received no support AT ALL during the downtown fiasco until the media got wind of the story, which forced the Chamber to form an alliance with the downtown shop owners. You say Stephenson is “just” a member? He just so happened to be the ring leader for the Southwest Co Taxpayers for Responsible Government and the one I believe that the Chamber named “man of year” by Chamber. You can’t fool anyone, whether he’s a director or not for the Chamber, he is a major player and the Chamber follows his lead. Now continue to get your feathers ruffled, rant and rave in your posts, but there isn't much you can say to get many readers to believe tyrant antics. And please, save the foul languange for the Chamber Board meetings.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 3:22:00 PM  

  • 213 Thanks for caring. I'm not someone who knows what to think yet about the Chamber of Commerce in Murrieta, but I would like to think of my "new home town" as a place where vulgarity is not a regular part of the public discourse. I will not let the offensive writer influence my opinions one way or the other, but that kind of personal expression should be kept in bars.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 4:26:00 PM  

  • Were projects delayed during the recall? You bet. Would projects have been lost had the recall prevailed and a Warnie led council put in place? You bet. And the sad fact is you know it. Not dirty politics - just watching out for businesses.
    Stephenson was named person of the year because of his many contributions to this comunbity over the past 30+ years, including the recently opened Old Town Theater in Temecula. You should try making some contributions to the community as well instead of just spewing more of Faunces misguided rhetoric.

    Foul language? If the term 'mental masturbation' insults your tender sensabilities, tough. How do you manage to exist in the real world? You consider that foul language? Can you read a newspaper? Do you listen to television? What a silly boy you are.

    And finally, please point out where it was documented that business members were threatened and when the chamber was forced to do anything. The chamber was supporting old town businesses for over 45 years, long before you started getting righteous. But I sure can't fool you. You're already there.

    To the previous blogger - sorry if I offended your kids but tell me - what in heavens name (better?) are your kids doing reading this crap? As a parent you should monitor your precious childs use of this dastardly (not a bad word) medium. You lack parental control methinks and wish to shift the blame.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 4:31:00 PM  

  • The level of discussion that you (4:31) consider normal may seem normal and decent to you, but not everyone is like you. It is true that the world has a lot of garbage to deal with, but that does not mean you have to deliver it to everyone you meet.
    Try to leave the path a better place than it was when you encountered it. That is the message we should be teaching our children. And sure they will always have to encounter foul expressions in this world. And if this blog (or any other place) is where they have to encounter such expressions, it is at least a place where they can also see that there are other and better ways of saying things. I do not dispute your views, but I also do not enjoy seeing any cause I might support being hurt by people who are profane, even if they try to temper their profanity by trying to impress by throwing in pompous and haughty sounding words and phrases. You've already tried to explain and justify your use of profanity. That is never necessary unless a line of decency has been crossed.
    Please leave the support for your cause to those who can do it justice. I have no beef with the Chamber. You are not helping things.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 5:04:00 PM  

  • 4:31, you ask me for documentation? Of course there isn't any documentation as to business owners being bullied. Think they just crawled out of hole and don't know what's good for them? Now back at you, where's the documentation for those projects that were delayed, cancelled or otherwise? And the purpose of the forming the special alliance with the downtown business would be because? If the news media printed something incorrectly about the reason for the alliance, then why didn't they publish a correction notice?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 5:49:00 PM  

  • Aha, just as I thought. Kelly couldn't keep from making his uncivil postings when he thought he was under attack.

    The facts are clear and I have already spelled them out in detail about the unholy alliance between Dan Stephenson, the bogus Southwest Taxpayers' etc. developer money-laundering front, the Temecula business run Murrieta Chamber of Commerce and the City Councilmembers Seyarto, McAllister and deposed van Haaster. There were no generalities. I showed the amounts, the quotes, the business connections etc.

    Now its time to demand that our City Manager get off the Chamber's Board because it is simply a cover for the clique which seeks to run Murrieta as their own private club.

    So, Kelly anon, your vituperative language and disdain for ordinary Murrietans has unmasked you once again.

    Edward L. Faunce
    Continue Murrieta City Hall Reform
    Vote Against Developer, Chamber and City Employee Union backed Candidates
    The Ballot Box is Mightier than their Bank Accounts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 7:19:00 PM  

  • Anon 431, the Recall did prevail, or in other words was successful. It would have been a Grand Success to get 2 and unreal to think that 3 would have been taken down. You say “a Warnie led council”. Why is that you think if 3 were taken down Enochs would have been in power? What about the thought of a Gibbs plus 2 plus 2 run council? But of course if you think Seyarto should be the one in power, then Alexander would have had to pony up much less then they did. You silly boy, Seyarto was a coward when it came to standing up to Alexander.
    Anon 322

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 9:25:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren, you are so shallow. Why do you think that Temecula has the businesses and that Murrieta is being developed as a bedroom community? Could it be to insure an income stream for the Temecula businesses? Duh.

    You just don't get it. You have your sights set low that you think what we have in Murrieta is a positive.

    You cannot see the difference between "business bashing" -- which I do not do -- and pointing out that there is an alliance determined to build Murrieta out and leave us with enormous deficits in our infrastructure.

    You say that I'm not trying to bring us together. What are you talking about? Bring you together with those who see the problems while you see nothing? It's not possible to bring you into the community of active community members who see that the direction of Murrieta's development needs sudden and drastic change.

    You would rather simply ride the Titanic down and take an Applebees as a bone. Hey, have a nice ride.

    Edward L. Faunce
    Continue Murrieta City Hall Reform
    Vote Against Developer, Chamber and City Employee Union backed Candidates
    The Ballot Box is Mightier than their Bank Accounts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, March 27, 2006 9:41:00 PM  

  • You're so right Roy! We do want this City to be of a higher class (ala Beverly Hills). Why not? In comparison, you would accept Hemet. Well I for one will not. I want more then the Applebees of the world in our city. On my Wedding anniversary, Valentine's Day and other special times, where have I been able to take my Wife? Thank God a new restaurant is going in next to "the Mill". I want the BEST, not just what we can get. Why ever settle? The sky isn't falling! That's exactly why we all should demand the best for our city while we still have the time. We have time to do it. But if we leave it to the business community (the Chamber of Commerce), we will get only what they want us to have. Only what puts money in their pockets. Only what puts money into their corporate developers pockets. Why let that happen? It is very clear Roy, that you will take whatever comes and not say a word. It's that attitude that will lead developers and businesses to do whatever is best for them, and not the residents and homeowners of this town. When we complain, it isn't because we think the sky is falling and all is bad. It's just the opposite. We see true potential, love our homes and community, and want....no demand the best for it, not what Dan Stephenson, Kelly Seyarto or Jack vanHaaster has sold us out for. That's the pure difference. This demand has nothing to do with partisan politics. I don't care who their political backing supports. It really doesn't matter at the end of the day here in Murrieta. What does matter to all of us, the homeowners and residents, is that we have the true Diamond of the Valley here. But that isn't what the development community wants. They want to strip mine our city of as much wealth and value as they can get, and leave us with the residuals.

    We have ethics problems in our city. Do any of you think that catching vanHasster was the ONLY time it happened? Why do you think ole Jack went from being a recalled Mayor to the Chamber? Part of the payoff for backing big development business. Do not think that vanHasster won't jump into this Council race again. If you are blind to the fact that he wants back in, pinch yourself.

    Moss works for us. She is here to hand out contracts to the business world. She is here to MANAGE them for us, not work for them. Would my Buyers in my business sit on the boards of the businesses the buy from????????? What a conflict of interest!!!! A City Manager sitting on the Board of Directors of the people that lobby for the businesses our city buys from. There is no defense for that!!! It's downright unethcial. But what else is new here? Seyarto can ask a developer for thousands of dollars for his child's school. McAlister works for the development community and then says yea or nay to development projects. As to personal ethics, we have Warnie's civil issues, deadbeat Dougie's past, vanHasster's childcare center, 600K gathered by the development community to keep it's voting team intact to save itself loads of money and a City Manager, who gives contracts to the very people she represents or lobbys for on the Chamber of Commerce. Roy and Kelly sit back and post on here and in essense tell us to "shut up" and be happy we have homes that the developers built for us. Be happy for what you get, Roy says. Don't want the best, Roy says. Well I am happy that I live in Murrieta, but sorry Kelly and Roy, but I want the BEST!! I don't want whats best for your pockets, but best for each and every person living here in this great city.

    Ten years from now, maybe sooner, this will be over and we will reap.....not what we sow, but I'm afraid of who gets voted on to the City Council this time around.

    Oh by the way Kelly, my clock says 4:30am and now I have to drive the 91. Looks like a lot of my day is spent working. But if the Chamber is giving tours and opening it's books for me to see what they have been up to, I could find the time to visit them. Otherwise I know what they do.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 28, 2006 4:38:00 AM  

  • Murrieta T....what ties are beneficial for Moss? If you make a statement like that, tell me, the benefits you personally know about.
    How clear do ethics violations like this have to be? She's on the board of people shes sworn to protect the City against. The Chamber of Commerce represents contractors and developers who do work in this town. So the person we trust to hand out contracts also lobbys for them on the Chamber??? Come on!!! Either you have no comprehension of business or there are other ties here. But then again, I run a company and you sit at home. Who has seen abuses in business and who has only read about them?

    Like I said, I complained to Ms. Moss and got an e-mail back just today asking that she wanted to make time to meet with me. But thats what this is NOT about. I'm one voice and to explain to me doesn't help anyone. If I did spend time talking to her and came back on here and said what I agreed or disagreed with, those of you who side consistently with the Chamber, Moss and Seyarto group would question the truthfulness or the twisting I would supposedly doing. I asked her to have weekly communication meetings with residents and speak to issues. I asked her to resign and spend the time she spent on the Chamber, on us, the residents. I didn't ask for her to tell me her reasoning or complaints personally. Would I want a personal hearing with the Govenour or President? Of course not. I want her thoughts and reasoning and accomplishments out on the table for everyone to see and decide what is best for the City. It's not for me to decide, it's for all of you to.

    Gottorun, so youre OK with the switcharoo on the position of Mayor where the position defaulted to Seyarto because McAlister and he schemed politically?????? You're OK with the fact that Seyarto and McAlister voted for Alexander Communities, only to lose and Gibbs fight and GET more!!!! Then that means to me that you don't care about me or my neighbors or your neighbors or even your future neighbors that will move into those AC dwellings. It's better to say nothing and GET NOTHING. Don't rock the boat. Don't make waves. You know what you're gonna get??? Seyarto re-elected, and one of the Chambers hand picked partisans, maybe even vanHasster back and you have the same block. So why did you waste your time getting up the recall election day and go vote for a recall when 18 months later you have the same back again???? It's you and MurrietaT and Roy, who want eveyone to "shutup". Don't make waves. Hide your heads. Defend!!! Where have we heard all of this before???????? I question why you two voted for a recall only to let the same players come back and take it away again?

    So unless a person likes me runs for office, I should shut up and stop complaining and let things be?? Again the same exact rhetoric. It is our rights to demand the most and best from all of our politicians and when we see abuse, ethics violations or the appearance of violations we should stick our heads in the sand. NO. Not me.

    Roy once called me a coward and a traitor. But I find more corwardice in people that sit silent. I find that a person witnessing a crime and stands and does nothing as much a criminal as the one that does the crime. There is no weakness or fault in us that challenge what you don't see. Because you don't see ethics abuse or reconize it doesn't mean it's not there.

    Whether Ed Faunce has a grudge against the Chamber or not has nothing to do with my feelings about them. I guess none of you get it. They endorsed the 600K to stop the recall the last time and will endorse possibly more this time to get back the same voting bloc. Too bad two fine individuals want to leave it be.

    Roy wants to blame everything on the RMers and on other political group. I am not one of them, and don't know any of them, but am proud of what they did for me.....yes directly to protect me. I'm proud they stood out at the shopping centers with petitions. I'm proud they stood up to the development community, you know the one that pays your salary Roy??

    It's always your partison politics and leaning. I don't see anyone in our city laying out a plan. They are the politicians, the ones I pay with my tax dollars. I see the developers and contractors laying out the plans backed by the Chamber of Commerce and everyone except the hard working Gibbs and the two Mummy like Councilmen (Enochs and Ostling) voting for us. It's not for the residents to lay out plans. We are just voices, no more or less, HOWEVER, we pay the bills and the politicians work for us. The Chamber of Commerce doesn't.

    But I can tell you this from my heart. No developer has enough money nor enough power or enough of anything to buy my vote, or buy my ethics. Too many in our City have sold us out.

    But you do see Roy, MurrietaT, and Gottorun how our complaining and not sitting still may have changed the minds of people about that 400+ high density complex? Oh, I guess I was writing on here for my own satisfaction. No....it was for all three of you. And yes, it pisses me off when I see corruption or the appearance of corruption and weak people turn their backs. But I do have fun laughing at some of your comments and that sometimes is satisfaction in itself.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 28, 2006 11:48:00 AM  

  • Roy, something I would like to know more about is your opinion on the Immigration Bill in Congress. I have no other way of contacting you except on this site and I know you to be a Hispanic. I don't know which way to lean except to know that the violations really lay with the people hiring the Illegals as if they stopped the Illegals would not come. Where do you stand and why? Not a trick question, I'm really interested, I have no side.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 28, 2006 11:54:00 AM  

  • "She's on the board of people shes sworn to protect the City against."

    Well, there's genius Jeff again. Moss' job is to protect our city from businesses? And you claim to run a business? Oh Lord, please run for council so everyone in town gets to share your special wisdom and insight, not just those of us fortunate enough to stop by this blog once in awhile. I keep hoping I'll read something of interest on here but hope is fading. I won't use the 'M' word that a previous writer used because obviously a bunch of knee-jerks think that word is foul and profane, so I'll just agree that most of what passes for whit on here is little more than 2 or 3 people stroking each other.
    OK, now it's your turn to label me as either Kelly or a Kelly wannabe and stroke ole' Jeff's ego some more. After all, he's a bidnessman, doncha know.
    Please

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 28, 2006 3:53:00 PM  

  • Moss' job is to hand out contracts, audit the work thats done by the businesses that have already steamrolled Murrieta. She has the authority to give out these contracts and at the same time promote businesses and lobby the City for them. Come on!!! But I don't hear what you believe in just you attacking me. Have some class and tell us what you think of this City's management and Council. But I already know what you're about. You're the right wing lugnut that was on the other section of the blog. The one that was run off because he lacked any credibility and class. You're the only one that has worried about my ego and mentioned it there too. Ego is defined as "An exaggerated sense of self-importance; conceit.
    Appropriate pride in oneself; self-esteem."

    I am confident that my views have stirred you and irratated the heck out of you, you being someone that supports the Chamber and thats all this is about.....it's called a blog.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 28, 2006 4:14:00 PM  

  • Pro-communist, I haven't read anything about that. Where was that shown?

    I agree that the borders have to be sealed, but they cannot call it for Homeland Security because it would be just as easy to cross from Canada. I've crossed there many times and the Mexican border is by far more secure at the check points. Even if a wall is built, they will find ways to cross. How different will it be then the Berlin Wall? I realize we are keeping people out instead of in but still, how terrible that we have to resort to the 1950's. I wish there were other ways. I again think the other way, is if a Guest Worker program is instituted that it be really enforced and Businesses breaking the law be prosecuted. If they cannot get a job legally, why would they cross. We also halt free medical care except in life and death and ship people attempting to get care back to Mexico to get care there. We need to stop the perks I think on both ends of the border. Slave type labor and Illegals breaking the law. But I also agree that shipping 11 million or more people, putting them through the court system, would just bankrupt this country. We need something that works for everyone involved, and I am watching and praying that something good comes of it. And no....Kelly isn't responsible for it. LOL
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, March 28, 2006 6:25:00 PM  

  • What if the border fence were built just inside Mexico by Mexican citizens. Jobs! What if those same Mexicans who would have been sneaking into the US were paid to keep anyone without proper papers from crossing that fence. Jobs! Who pays for those jobs? American company owners would be paying extremely high fines for hiring undocumented workers.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 8:00:00 AM  

  • The more I read the more that I find Ms. Moss' connection as a board member on the Murrieta Chamber of Commerce both distrubing and unethical which equals a conflict of interest. I don't want to pay for someone who's full time job is not to enhance the governing of Murrieta. It's not Ms. Moss' job as City Manager to lobby business to the City of Murrieta and then in turn make decisions that protect the residents. If the Chamber recommended a business and it was potentially negative to the City, which way would Ms. Moss decide?? Do we know?? Do we know where her true alligence resides? Is she influenced by Jack vanHaaster a discredited, recalled ex-Mayor?? Do the residents who wanted Mr. vanHaaster out of government to influence a NOW co-worker?? One of the listed Core Competencies of the Murrieta Chamber of Commerce is to REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF BUSINESS TO GOVERNMENT!!! How can someone do that without being influenced. How can a FAIR decision be made? We sit here and mouth off about development, where it's running our Council, yet it basically has our City Manager representing it to herself!!!! Another Core Competency is political action. Do we want Ms Moss being political active representing our development controlled C of C??? This is a definite conflict of interest, it is highly unethical. Especially with regards to the influence on her position by the ethics and power of Jack vanHaaster. I call for her to resign from the Chamber. If her position with the City of Murrieta does not take enough of her time and effort then maybe the City Council should think about removing a Deputy City Manager to add some work to her plate. We the residents pay her to work for us, fairly and ethically hand out contracts to businesses, not to do cheerleading for them! This is all about the total overall control of Stephenson, vanHaaster, Seyarto and McAlister to put more money and power into their pockets. We need to not only build a positive, resident backed Council, but we need to scrub clean all the controls that have been spun right into the guts of City Management, Planning and Services. The foremost is cleaning up ALL unethical, the appearance of unethical business as usual.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:48:00 AM  

  • If Seyarto joined vanH in the world of political bygones, Lori Moss would be a ship without a rudder.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 11:58:00 AM  

  • No matter what way anyone says it, the glaring fact remains that the chamber and Ms. Moss have heavy links to the seyarto camp. They are part of the same partisan political organism. The chamber as an independent organization has the right to become political (aka the right to do something divisive and self destructive), and they made that choice. As a natural result, they unnecessarily deepened a chasm in the community. Ms. Moss would have been wise to hold her distance from a politicized chamber. This internally nasty political entanglement is absolutely not business as usual for a normal chamber of commerce. In this kind of situation the city manager does not need to have membership in the chamber to retain whatever beneficial communication may be appropriate. The only benefit of her membership accrues to the political advantage of the very same people she happens to be most closely affiliated with politically. We do not need self-centered foolishness of this kind to exist at the highest level of our city government.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 1:24:00 PM  

  • Reading all the talk about the Chamber and Moss made me wonder as to other Chambers and their makeup. In checking I found that none of the Board of Directors for the Riverside or Temecula Chambers are management level, City staff. For San Diego and Irvine, they gave no listing on the internet, so their makeup is unknown. What I did find interesting is something published on the Irvine Chamber’s website:

    “The Irvine Chamber is one of Orange County’s leading organizations advocating business-friendly legislation on behalf of our members. The Governmental Affairs committee monitors legislation, environmental statutes and issues, and political issues of concern and impact to the business community. The committee recommends positions on ballot measures, participates in educating the public in aspects of government operations and compliances issues, and sponsors candidates’ forums.
    Under the Governmental Affairs committee are three sub committees: the Legislative Action committee, the Education committee, and the Housing and Transportation committee. The Chamber’s Legislative Action committee reviews current legislations and makes recommendations to the Governmental Affairs committee. The Education committee works with business, educational institutions and the government to help prepare our future workforce. The Housing and Transportation committee reviews housing and transportation issues and makes recommendations to the Governmental Affairs committee.”
    If the Murrieta Chamber acts in much the same role as the Irvine Chamber does, then having a management level City staff member on the Board would seem to me to be a direct conflict of interest.
    Just Curious

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 1:29:00 PM  

  • Murrieta T, no one says she has done anything wrong. There is no corruption scandal. But, there is an appearance of an unethical alliance and a definite conflict of interest. There is also the case that she's participating on a board with a discredited and ethic challenged recalled politician that this city voted out. Would any government official want to serve on a team with a politician that had been disposed of by the residents of this city. vanHaaster's reward from the Corporate supporters of the Chamber of Commerce for years of selling the city out was a position on it's board. I answered today an e-mail from Councilmen Gibbs and from City Manager Moss with this e-mail. It's long but I wanted you to all see that I have done due diligence and been respectful in my requests.

    "Mr. Gibbs,

    I appreciate your candor and immediate response. I don't know what hours Ms Moss keeps however, I certainly think as I stated today on the blog she cannot serve two masters who may have the same basic agenda, to bring good businesses into our community, however the motives and goals may have two very different ends. I believe that Ms Moss cannot fill two of the Core Contingencies of the Chamber of Commerce and do both jobs. One of those Cores is to promote business to government. It is also as stated on their website that another is political action. That means two of the five Core Competencies are in direct conflict of interest.

    Here's why: How can Ms. Moss as a City Manager, handing out contracts, negotiating business for our city also promote business to herself and be fair? She cannot. I'm not saying that Ms. Moss is an unethical person. I have no idea and no opinion on that. But what it sets up for the city is a Government official working for the business community. It doesn't work that way. A government worker can't be a lobbiest. It's not done, because it is a conflict of the two goals. What if the Chamber decided it wanted a business to setup here in town that the residents were against? For example, Hooters, which to some is a very nice restaurant but to others it represents all that is bad. Which does Ms. Moss do? Can you tell me for sure. Is someone auditing what she does in this regard. What if a local contractor was being pushed by the Chamber to do business in this town and Ms. Moss was nudged into giving them business, yet this contractor was a borderline quality businessman? So many of these could be direct conflicts. The examples could go on and on.

    Ms. Moss doing any political action in our city for any organization would be a conflict of interest as the positions are suppose to be non-partisan.

    So now that’s 40% of her core competencies for the Chamber of Commerce that are directly unethical or a conflict of interest.

    We can go on and say that I don't want my city government officials to be working directly with a discredited and unethical former city official. Would the Federal government want its government officials working on teams in the business world, while employed by the government with others that have been removed from office by the public, while working for the public that removed them? I don't think you would see that happening. Why, because it has the appearance of being unethical.

    You wrote me once and told me to go to a site about government ethics. On that site it stated that even the appearance of unethical behavior is a definite NO NO.

    I don't have a bad opinion of Ms. Moss. I do know we increased the city budget to add Deputy City Managers. I know the workload has increased as our city has exploded population wise. I just want ethics to be watched as our City is at the bottom of the barrel and so many things I have questioned are real.

    Mayor Seyarto asked Alexander Communities for thousands of dollars for a school trip. I have no problem with Alexander Communities contributing to a High School trip, but when it's a Mayor that has specifically voted in favor of their projects and been on the losing side two or three times in a row, and his vote proved to be wrong, then I have all the reason in the world to call the motives of the contributions and asking for the contributions unethical. My wife would be laughed at if she asked for thousands of dollars for a civic event or project from Alexander Communities. Why? Because the contributor doesn't get anything back. They expect something back in return. That’s how business works. You do know that and so do I. I work for a large company that has lobbyists in Washington, so I know the routine. Most of the public applauds this contribution that Seyarto got, but those of us who know the system, understand the reasoning's and we will see it in future voting's. I know you cannot comment to me on this, but you are a smart man, as I have seen and know what's going on.

    We really have to reach out now to this community in November and open eyes. If not all the work done by the recall will be for nothing and this city will be run, business as usual. Being from Chicago, I know how city governments run business as usual and even on this small level in Murrieta, we have some major issues past and future to overcome. No one wants the city to be steamrolled by Contractors and Developers and when they leave, who pays the end price? We the residents do.

    This really was not an attack on Ms Moss, whether it appears that way or not. It is a resident that has seen many things arrogantly shoved down his throat, and he's gagged way too many times. I believe that in the best interest of our City, Ms Moss should step down and WORK IN HARMONY with the Chamber of Commerce, but not as a board member. Working in harmony, no one could challenge her for any mistakes or slipups that occur. We would have it in our minds that she works for us the residents and not for a business which the Chamber is. Now they could question her as I am doing. Maybe with less time spent doing Chamber work, she could get home at a reasonable hour.

    Mr. Gibbs, I trust you. I voted for you and will again. You are not arrogant like two of your counterparts and not lazy and irresponsible like the other two. But, if we don't stand up for ethics, be it unethical behavior or the appearance of unethical behavior, we will never have a city government we can trust. Right now I don't trust it. If we don't vote out the current Mayor in November and a new voting bloc is set up, it will only be a matter of time before you leave from frustration. I don't spend hours writing about our city politics because I want my name on the internet, but, because I really care about this community and my neighbors. Most don't care one way or the other. They probably don't know the name of our current Mayor let alone his character. I am not a part of Rescue Murrieta. But I know we will lose in November all we have gained and that will cause us to eventually lose a quality Councilmen in you."
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 5:39:00 PM  

  • To Murrieta T, the problem is that the Chamber is NOT really a Murrieta organization. I invite you to review the backgrounds of the governing body members. I spelled it out in my post on the Chamber.

    Here is what is really going down. There were Temecula businesses that wanted to move into and profit from Murrieta's development. Fair enough, but they used a Trojan Horse stealth process. They took over the Murrieta Chamber. Of course the banks, real estate interests, developers were all in favor of gaining control of Murrieta's development.

    But it's too "in your face" for the developers to just take over. They have to create front organizations. That's why they created the bogus "Southwest Taxpayers for Responsible Government." It's a lie, but one that is hard for the average Joe or Jane to penetrate.

    They get the Republican Party to stand in front. They claim the support of cops and firefighters. But each of those organizations has their own axe to grind or grist for the mill.

    But the best front of all is the Chamber. Most people think that the Murrieta Chamber is likely an organization of Murrieta businesses who would do nothing to injure the long range vision of the City. HOW WRONG THEY WOULD BE!

    But, the developers are not stupid, they work at these problems 24/7. They know that if they can get a couple of dufus council members to join up or even a City Manager, then who would ever believe that the Chamber really represents outside interests?

    Its really a big PR spin. That's why I said that with respect to the Chamber, the developers provide the money, the Chamber provides the cover and the City officials provide the legitimacy.

    We have got to get rid of this bogus Chamber cover and the first step is to separate our City Manager from that organization. She must resign. The longer she stays on, the more urgent it becomes.

    Mark my words, the Chamber will be called upon to play an enormous role in the upcoming city council elections. If Lori Moss is on their Board, it only gives that organization's duplicity the City's stamp of approval.

    We can not allow this.

    Edward L. Faunce
    Continue Murrieta City Hall Reform
    Vote Against Developer, Chamber and City Employee Union backed Candidates
    The Ballot Box is Mightier than their Bank Accounts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 7:06:00 PM  

  • Roy, you're jumping off the deep end. No one is accusing Moss of anything. You know it. You just don't get it. But we all know why you don't get it. Because you do make your living off the development arena. So how credible is anything you defend? Everything that has been written today is completely logical. No other city, at least in my checking in the area has a city government employee on the board of directors. Especially at the level Ms Moss is at and her responsibilities in issuing city contracts and working protecting and negotiating for the city. If you have any business sense or sense of government verus business you would understand. It's why politicians don't continue with their secular work when in the State and Federal government if it has anything to do with government, when they are elected. So there can be no conflict of interests. But I guess when it benefits you personally, all you can do is defend. You give no examples at all why it's not unethical or not a conflict of interest. That's the pattern you who benefit from these arrangements have. Attack the poster, but don't tell anyone why or your reasons for disagreeing. It shows that all you really have is the same rhetoric. Do you think that any normal citizen would come on here and be so forcefully against these issues. Most don't have a clue. Its just the Kellys, Dougies, Jackies, Dan's, Klein's and maybe a Deputy City Manager or Planner who come on as Anonymous who would really care. Or a real estate agent or someone who works for one of these developers. They only care because there is a extra dollar to be lost.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:15:00 PM  

  • I have waited a long time before someone has finally figured out the connection all of us in city government already know. The Moss- Chamber-Vanhaaster connection. Congrats! What has taken so long? You should thank Mr. Jeff and Ed Faunce. They nailed this one perfectly.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:18:00 PM  

  • Well Rholmgren -- I see you're back to being that neighborhood dog that just won't stop barking.

    Oh, and by the way, you asked what group of people I've not alienated, try the Murrieta voters.

    And one more by the way, all the groups you named off, well they alienated a lot of us Murrieta voters.

    Come to think of it, you're quite alienating yourself!

    Edward L. Faunce
    Continue Murrieta City Hall Reform
    Vote Against Developer, Chamber and City Employee Union backed Candidates
    The Ballot Box is Mightier than their Bank Accounts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 29, 2006 10:11:00 PM  

  • Rhomlgren, one last time, decent honest Murrietans who are able to think for themselves, without just being a "team player," saw how the power structure had aligned itself to allow unfettered development.

    I only raised my voice to alert others who may not have had either the time or inclination to search out the reasons why Murrieta was being so overwhelmed by development and underwhelmed by infrastructure.

    Your pollyana approach is what got Murrieta into the mess it was. You are the one with the toxic politics because you can only be a team player, totally unable to think outside of that straightjacket. Jeff is correct in pointing out that you are like a one-fingered piano player -- you've got only note -- all your arguments are based on calling people names. There's no melodic substance to your rants.

    Hi Gottorun! I have already told City Manager Moss that she should not be on the Chamber's Board. I am taking steps to publicize this position more widely than this blog. Thanks for the suggestion.

    Edward L. Faunce
    Continue Murrieta City Hall Reform
    Vote Against Developer, Chamber and City Employee Union backed Candidates
    The Ballot Box is Mightier than their Bank Accounts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 30, 2006 12:14:00 AM  

  • Gottorun,
    I too, as you saw above in one of today's posts sent e-mails to both Councilmen Gibbs, each time copying our City Manager. Ms Moss' response was that she'd make time to talk to me. Well, my purpose was not to have a disagreement with her as I don't think talking to her in private would sway either of us. However, if the voters and residents knew the facts it would be a bit more powerful and believeable. Councilmen Gibbs answered my first e-mail but my above e-mail was a return to him. I thought I'd use a chain of command perspective here as I have said already said that I cannot attend most meetings because of my work schedule. I wanted answers first from the top with reasoning of why this connection has been allowed. Had there been some reasoning that could have convinced me I was totally off base, I would have changed my thinking. I really haven't gotten any yet to chamge how I feel. I think you and Murrieta T think this is a vendetta, but it's not. I'm so tired of this city's morals and ethics and conflicts of interests. We all pay high property taxes. or at least I do and I want the absolute most for my money. Maybe you don't.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 30, 2006 12:44:00 AM  

  • Roy, no one especially not me is looking past Enochs' problems. But, he's not convicted or indicted for anything that involves the city or he would be already history. But with that said, I have asked that he resign. There is still a useful purpose for Mr' Enochs, if he won't resign and that's to make the right Council votes. I haven't had a single problems in the last year with his voting pattern. The same goes for Ms. Moss, if she doesn't step down from the Chamber, what more can we do? We can state our facts and ask the right questions. If nothing comes of it, there is nothing more. McAlister is a creep personally too with his past family issues. What can we do but call him a creep. It's the workings of the city that really matter to me and the ethics of the city. Enochs will get his just reward soon enough if he's guilty but there is nothing more to do but wait. I think it will be much more then losing his Council seat.

    However, Roy, all you blabing means nothing. You make a living off development. Your comments always side with it because it might cost you a dollar. You have absolutely no credibility talking about development, the ethics of the city management, chamber of commerce and city council when a swing one way or the other can have an effect on your personal income. On the other hand, none of this has anything to do with my income. See the point? Guess not. Youre too used to the politics that your side of the aisle are involved in. Business as usual, right Roy?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 30, 2006 12:56:00 AM  

  • Rholmgren is right in the fact that many of the infrastructure issues are freeway related. However, when large scale projects are approved with “optimistic” projections of freeway improvements, then the ball lies in the court of City when they approve a project before its time. This where Rholmgren is wrong. Case in point, Clinton Keith at the 215. The Orchards is approved and under construction, now the City says (per the Californian) that the interchange will not handle the already approved project, let alone other projects, which is one reason why the emergency moratorium was approved last. The City is scrambling to catchup….a game they know all too well. And now the Orchards developer wants to lend a hand in getting the interchange done. Is it because they are guys? Hell no. It’s because the tenants won’t sign until they know exactly when the improvements will be completed.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:24:00 AM  

  • It's because private development sees the opportunity for quick money especially two and three years ago. The faster they build and more they build the faster a hot product sells. They are in business for only one thing. To make as much money as fast as they can the cheapest most economical way. Any shortcut, any way they can get more inexpensive labor (illegals), any skimping on raw materials they will do. They don't care if they build and build and build and there is no infrastructure. They want their ROI (return on investment). They would build on top of build if they could. They don't care a single bit about the homeowners or residents of this town. Thats one very powerful reason we need a strong City Council and City Government to work with, challenge, negotiate the best deal possible for us. That's why we have to fight those who through their votes have sold us short. It's very clear if you just look at the voting pattern of this last year. You can also see the arrogance in the voting by two members, they did not get the message when they won by slight margins during the recall. They still stick their middle fingers up at us in support of their Chamber friends and development compadres. To vote for quick approval for the last AC project in the voting by Seyarto and McAlister should in itself sum up everything that is wrong with these two people reprsenting this city. They intentionally voted to sell the city short to save money for their development money backers. It would be plain to even a child (Roy), that their votes, if they had won would have sold us short. It's now a fact. A proven fact that only an idiot could deny. If people like Roy can't admit that, then every word they say is not credible, because they want to mislead us. People that support Seyarto and McAlister support Development profit over the health and welfare of the people that live in this city and pay taxes. PERIOD.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:08:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren, again I agree with you to certain extent. Out State government is nothing but one big bottleneck, no matter what the platform. Our state highway projects were much more efficient when the environmental and design services were consulted out. That came to a halt when the State employee unions lobbied to stop the outsourcing, and from there on out our highway systems slowing began to fail. However, and where we disagree, is that their (State) lack of action does not relive local government from doing what they can to keep things in balance. If it takes delaying projects, then so be it. In the instance I sited, this is where they failed. Between the Council and the developer, they sold the residents a bill of goods. So far, and after a almost a year and half, all we’ve gotten is a makeshift sidewalk for the high school students. Were you at the council meeting when the project was approved? I was. In part, the bill of goods was 1) that the interchange could (“optimistically”) be completed by the time the Orchards was completed; 2) that in the interim, the City would provide for a separate traffic manangement plan (TMP), spearheaded by McAllister. Fast forward to today…nothing on either fronts. Yes, the city hired an “expert” to deal with Caltrans and yet the interchange plans have yet to be approved, and maybe not even started in its final design stage. Now we both know how long it takes for projects to go to bid, etc. As for the TMP, there has been nothing done on it either, at least as seen from eyes of the residents. The City will disagree and say they are working on it. But what they really are working on is Clinton Keith to east of the high school. The plan, as state in the hearing, was to coordinate with the developer; yet in the end (without even a start) they through the ball into school’s court to handle with one solution being to provide shuttles to get the students through the interchange. That came with a cost to the parents, with not many not wanting to pay the additional cost. Now that’s the City’s position. What about the Mr. Developer? Well he sold the City a bill of goods as well. In the public hearing he sells his project, as “it will be something never before seen in Murrieta, with promises of grandeous stores not yet seen in the valley. First it was rumored that Fryes and a new, unknown, home store (quote from developer) would be coming to town. Fast forward to today…the developer needs tenants to sign, and the tenant rumors (Californian) have changed to clothing and office supply stores. Now the tenants won’t sign on the dotted line because no one has a schedule for the interchange. So, Mr. Developer comes back a month or 2 ago to the City Council to say “I’ll help you out to see how we can get things kick started”. Do you see the writing on the wall? Personally, I traveled that interchange daily. Today I don’t. I gave up a good job and ownership in a business just from the stress of dealing with the traffic. Today I earn half of what I did last year. That change also cost me 5 years in retirement. Am I bitter, you bet. How many others do you suppose this mess has affected? Do I blame the State? Yes, in part. But to me, the real blame is with our City that sold us a bill of goods based on false, non-existence truths. Normally I am a passive person, willing to deal with inconvenience. For this, it’s gone way beyond that. To quote Jeff: People that support Seyarto and McAlister support Development profit over the health and welfare of the people that live in this city and pay taxes. PERIOD. (thanks Jeff)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:39:00 PM  

  • Roy said.."Some people narrowly focus on the construction side of development and leave out the long term jobs that are created once commercial, retail, and office space is inhabited." Tell me Roy, what jobs in these commercial, retail and office spaces are created that allows a person to buy a home and live in a home in Murrieta? Can a waitress working at a new Applebees afford to make a house payment here? How about a salesmen or cashier at CompUSA? I realize that some doctors and lawyers will open their businesses here and thats great, but they aren't creating a job except for a medical assistant. It's great these businesses are opening here but it's not the jobs that you and I can take to maintain the Murrieta lifestyle as head of our familes. These aren't the manufacturing jobs, or technical jobs that this community needs. To be paid $14 an hour is fine for my son, or as a second income coming into a home, but it can't pay a house payment in this city of 400-600K homes. We have seen areas, like French Valley explode with nice new houses, but have we seen high enough paying jobs come into the area to keep most workers close. No! Most of us drive north to Riverside/San Bernadino, West over the 91, or south on the 15 to San Diego. That's why we say that the prior City Council's of vanHaaster group letting these developers slam in so many homes here as fast as they could was so wrong. Now most of us get up at 5am or before and commute. But the infrastructure we commute on is weak. Foresite would have had this Council planning more, building slower, calling for more developers to put more profit back into our infrastructure as they built. Bringing manufacturing here, in areas like French Valley, instead of zoning the area with 30 housing projects, even if the land stayed vacant longer, would have done more for this city. But dollar signs and the thought of short term power glowed in the eyes of vanHaaster and Seyarto and Klein and we are stuck with this. So now why should we be OK with ANY MORE high density projects? Doubling the already burdened weight of our buckling infrastructure? That's what I mean when I say we were sold out and we are being sold out. If the Chamber of Commerce and our paid City government employees wanted the betterment of our city, they would chime in and recommend a slower build out, they would encourage manufacturing instead of high density. That would be my plan. For example a small machine shop where 20-30 machinists making 50-100K per year working in their trade, would, to me, be more of a valued addition then an apartment complex. It would bring jobs where a tradesmen could now stay local instead of driving to Vista or Corona. This doesn't bring in development profit, but it does keep people close to home and less driving that hour or two each way. I'll bet if the City Council had all the homeowners before them and had a vote on businesses with better or higher paying jobs versus high density apartments, so our Mayor told us on this blog, we can house the growing population of Southern California here in Murrieta, which one would be voted for? But that machine shop doesn't make our Mayor Seyarto and McAlister popular and powerful in the Chamber and development world now does it? Nope. They won't remember him when it comes time that they have been detected and voted out of the City Council will it? That's why we'll see high density housing, more Denny's and no real jobs here. Sad as I leave the house at 4:30AM every day.

    It is time for truly a different Council running this city. Gibbs was the best thing we have done in a long time. We need 4 more. We need to also look at the City Planning area and connect the dots as Ed Faunce has done with the Council. Who is planning with the homeowners in mind and who is planning with developers wallets in mind? It seems to me that a City Planning position may be the stepping stone to being qualified to be a City Councilmen. My question is: Is that stepping stone because the Planner has already developed the tie with the Chamber of Commerce and the development community? Or because he has proven to be such a great neighbor and protected and developed this city for the current homeowners and residents? Let's watch who runs for City Council in the next few months. Let's watch who the Murrieta Insider endorses and pushed on us?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 31, 2006 6:08:00 AM  

  • Does everyone understand why this blog is read by only a small group of people in Murrieta? It reaches and is read by the most influential citizens and by the "biggest" politicians in town, but the average citizen does not even know it is happening. I told someone about the blog and later heard they looked at it and all they found recently was the string about Enochs and the DA. This lack of regular work on the blog topics (CURRENT MURRIETA topics)just kills it for anyone new who is checking it out. Most people don't have time or even understand that they should to dig down an endlessly long string to find other current discussions going on.
    This is a true shame because so many Murrieta citizens are very frustrated with their city government and have no idea of where to go to read about Murrieta political matters on the internet. A great opportunity is being blown here only because this misleading and sometimes irrelevant topic site just turns people off as soon as they click to it. Something needs to be done. I don't have the answer, but I bet someone at city hall is thinking up their own answer and it will benefit their own agenda.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 31, 2006 7:58:00 AM  

  • 7:58a
    you are right. A newcomer to this blog would not know that under the header "Enochs and the DA" are 259 letters that have nothing to do with that headline. We need more categories and have bloggers adher to subject matter and not just post and respnd off the subject matter. I am grateful for this blog, but am also wondering how to organize it better.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 31, 2006 9:16:00 AM  

  • Roy, it's wonderful that more and more people are working out of their homes. Once inawhile I'm able to do it. It's also great that one couple is moving here and opening up a 99 cent store. I also know the need and importance to people that the $14-20 dollar an hour job is to Murrieta. But let's face facts, it is not superficial to say that the majority of two income families, get on one of the major interstates and commute to work. They don't work down the street. The don't even work in Temecula or Menifee. They work in Irvine, Oceanside, Sorrento Valley, Riverside. If what I'm saying is superficial, lets ask the lines of people that travel the 215, 15, 78 and 91 daily.

    What is wrong with bringing higher paying jobs locally instead of high density living? Is Murrieta people poor, or job poor? Why would anyone stand on the people poor side of the line? Roy, do you always defend topics no matter what the logic is? I say this shaking my head. Who out there besides you....Kelly and all the development and real estate agents think Murrieta IS NOT people poor. We've grown far past the point of too many residents. We will never have the proper infrastucture to manage the population that is now and forever will overburden us. Not too mention that Wilomar will soon go into the same panic mode buildout. Menifee is starting. Lake Elsinore will continue. All of these areas that border us will only add to ours. More higher paying jobs, More infrastructure, more quality to the retail and commercial developments. Less high density, less buildout, less ethics issues. These should be the topics of our upcoming election.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 31, 2006 9:20:00 AM  

  • I join those who agree with 7:58. There probably would be thousands of readers if this was done right. I bet Rholmgrens estimate is very high. Probably way less than a hundred users now. Very confusing blog. Most people looking for Murrieta political talk are not going to be interested. People dont have time to decipher the odd way this site is being managed. The national politics being discussed even make it more confusing for those who want and need Murrieta discussions. Confusion makes it a very small audience. Its being totally wasted.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 31, 2006 9:40:00 AM  

  • This is 7:58 again. Just wanted to add that I think the blog is very good but its just not anywhere near what its potential could be. My brain is not coming up with any better ideas but there must be some kind of way to make this blog easier for people to understand. Looking back over months of entries there's always a string that ends up being the one that everyone gravitates into for Murrieta discussions. But if I did not know that from reading for a long time I'd be lost. New people don't hang around in a site that confuses them. The blog needs some kind of organization that is up to date and easy to understand for people who come in to it for the very first time. Are there other blog sources that work better or is this as good as they get? Elections are coming up and if the public does not have a good blog the control of the dialogue will be in the hands of public relations people at city hall.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 31, 2006 2:54:00 PM  

  • First off, yes there has always been a frustration on opening up new current strings on this blog. I don't know Mr. Kunkle but would ask that he please so just that and we keep the string to the topic listed. We have deviated from this because of the lack of strings on here.

    Roy, you're right, it is hard to bring in large Fortune 500 companies. All the reason's you state are true of California especially Southern California. But the business I mentioned was as basic as a machine shop which doesn't take up acres of land. Technical businesses that line areas of Riverside, Corona, Ontario and areas in Orange County. We still have room for them. I realize they don't bring in the same tax revunue as retail stores but they would make life easier of the job commuter. Where I do disagree is that people have choices in their careers. Not if theirs is a technical or manufacturing career. You almost have to commute to make the kind of money you need to afford the homes here. I couldn't quit my job and do the same thing here. If I lived in San Diego or Orange County I probably could. So the only choice most people have is to move if new opportunities don't come here.

    But we don't need more people that is a fact. Slowing housing growth would ease the pain. I don't know why we have a need for any more housing growth here. Are we working on a budget? Do we have to reach a quota? I don't think so. I think this is just a race to buildout every inch of bare space before the City government changes. I will always advocate wildlife sanctuaries, hiking trails, parks, should be our new focus. We had a chance at one time when building this city to make some beautiful parkways, such as Jefferson along it's whole length. But the City Council put the cart before the horse and that them build the developments before the roads. Now all we can do is squeeze infrestructure in. Drive down Jefferson and see. We could have done it right, and improved the roads prior to the developments. They didn't. I wonder why? Does anyone have a guess. I recommend that everyone on a nice weekend take a drive over the Ortega Highway and look at how the city of Rancho Santa Margarita is laid out, the condition of the roads, the beauty of the vegetation along the roads and in the center divides. It was well done. Here you can look in most areas and see that these developments were built without the foresight of creating the roads first. But we can't change whats already here. What we can do is slow down. Why do have HAVE to build out tommorrow? Someone answer that??? Why? Why won't slower work better? We have so far done it half-butt. Let's finish right.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, March 31, 2006 3:52:00 PM  

  • Is Mr. Kunkle still around? Maybe he moved or got squished by an apartment builder's earth mover or maybe something even worse happened. If anyone knows the man, please knock on his door and see if he is OK.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, April 02, 2006 5:42:00 PM  

  • With all due respect to JL Kunkle, anyone can start and host a blog without spending a dime. Murrieta needs new blood. http://www.blogger.com

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, April 02, 2006 7:16:00 PM  

  • To get a blog that people wish for doesn't come free and doesn't come without work, as I'm sure Mr. Kunkle knows.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, April 02, 2006 7:56:00 PM  

  • This blog just died, we have been abandoned by our captain Mr. Kunkle without warning. How are we going to get rid of our frustrations now? No one to bless and/or blame, nowhere to vent and assault,no more running wild with our opinions. It is a sad state of affairs indeed. Maybe we all have to go to council meetings and planning commission meetings and form our own opinions without insulting anyone elses, wouldn't that be terrible? How could Mr. Kunkle abandon us? We have grown acustomed to each otghers face (blogs) and have become attached...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, April 02, 2006 8:47:00 PM  

  • 7:56 True but there is a solution that is not perfect but which is fairly simple. This or any other blog with a local political focus can succeed most easily by not having topic headings, but rather by having date headings. This can be weekly in a city the size of Murrieta, or daily if discussions become intense. It keeps things sorted sufficiently to keep strings from becoming so long that they are hard to handle. IE: having a new string starting on Monday of each week. (Although daily is OK too). This model works better than you might expect. I am not exactly a fixture in your community, but I do check out your discussions once in a while. Kunkle's method of hosting is very difficult to maintain over time. I suggest you try the simple dateline approach. You'll like it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 03, 2006 12:03:00 AM  

  • We may all be assuming Kunkle reads the posts, where in fact he doesn't read them and does not know that he is being asked to help the site out.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 03, 2006 2:33:00 PM  

  • Maybe right 233... but regardless 1203 is right too.

    Let the readers set the agenda. A simple 'dateline approach' sounds like a brilliant idea. Mr JL?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 03, 2006 5:09:00 PM  

  • Until we get a hold of Mr. Kunkle,
    there are two tpois we could start writing under.
    1. Election 2006- lets all get involved has only 1 comment on it

    2. Upside-down has 14 comments.
    Perhaps we could exchange comments under one of these headlines until Mr. Kunkle adds new topics. The date line approach sounds good to me.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 03, 2006 10:41:00 PM  

  • Jeff, I stopped writing posts because I didn't want to monopolize the blog. But if you'd like, I'll submit something in order to get a new topic underway.

    Edward Faunce

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, April 04, 2006 12:05:00 AM  

  • I disagree with you, Jeff. Any topic should be unbiased and not be written for the purpose to influence bloggers with anti-city sentiments. The blog should not be dominated by Mr. Faunce or anyone pushing an agenda. Perhaps Mr. Faunce should have his own website.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, April 04, 2006 8:53:00 AM  

  • Does anyone have a comment on the "Harper Valley" dialog by Hunneman? It appears that Murrieta residents are not the only ones keeping an eye on the City's shenanigans.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, April 04, 2006 12:24:00 PM  

  • To Anon 8:53, your comments make no sense.

    What is the "city" to which you refer in your comment about "anti-city sentiments?"

    Is the "city" the residents, or the City Council, or some of the City Council members or the City Manager or . . . .?

    And, by the way, what's wrong with pointing out problems? Things can't be fixed which are not identified.

    Finally, those who write without an agenda will probably not be read or responded to because such aimless material is boring.

    How's this for an agenda: we should eliminate the unfair collusion between certain wealthy businesses, the Temecula dominated Murrieta Chamber of Commerce, the City Councilmen whose careers have been funded by the collusion. We should insist that our City Manager withdraw her membership in an organization which is "up to its neck" in partisan politics regarding our City Council.

    We should insist that our City Council cease providing any taxpayer funds to the Chamber as long as it engages in partisan politics. Otherwise, to be fair, the Council should fund all community groups to the same extent.

    Hey, how about it Murrieta City Council, RM wants $60K also!

    Edward L. Faunce
    Continue Murrieta City Hall Reform
    Vote Against Developer, Chamber and City Employee Union backed Candidates
    The Ballot Box is Mightier than their Bank Accounts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, April 04, 2006 5:20:00 PM  

  • Jeff, this is 1224. Did you see the Hunneman dialog in March 30th Californian? I call it a dialog because what he writes is somewhere between an article and an editorial. Here it is as taken from the internet version:

    Welcome to Harper Valley

    By: JOHN HUNNEMAN - Staff Writer

    When I got up off the floor, I read the story again.

    What knocked me off my chair was not the part about the city of Murrieta filing a lawsuit against Dream Box, the adult sex toy store that moved in last month.

    It would be bigger news if the city had decided not to sue to try and shut down the store.


    No, I was sent sprawling by the last few paragraphs of the piece in which Murrieta City Attorney John Harper said it was his decision, not the City Council's, to file the lawsuit.

    I've lived in Murrieta for a long time, since well before cityhood, and I don't ever remember voting for anyone named Harper.

    There are five members of the City Council ----- a couple of whom I actually did vote for ---- and, silly me, all this time I've been thinking they made those decisions.

    Under the Ralph M. Brown Act ---- the open meeting law that protects the public's right to know what's going on with their government ---- if the council decided at its March 21 closed-session meeting to file a lawsuit against the Dream Box owners, it should have reported the "action taken" when it met in public session.

    The council made no such announcement.

    Section 54952.6 of the Brown Act states "action taken" is "a collective decision made by a majority of the members of a legislative body, a collective commitment or promise by a majority of the members of legislative body to make a positive or negative decision, or an actual vote by a majority of the members of a legislative body when sitting as a body or entity, upon a motion, proposal, resolution, order or ordinance."

    That's legal mumbo jumbo meaning that if the council decided, even informally, to go ahead with the suit, it should have told us.

    However, Harper said the Brown Act was not violated because it was his decision, not the City Council's, to file the lawsuit. He said he listened to the opinions of the council members ---- in the closed session ---- and then made up his mind to file the suit.

    "There was no authorization," Harper said. "That's what the city attorney does for a living. He decides to file or not to file."

    Fine, Mr. Harper, and how is the weather on your planet today?

    Harper then compared his authority to take legal action on his own with that of the County's district attorney.

    The hole in that argument is the district attorney is elected.

    Temecula officials told me their city attorney's job is to make recommendations about filing lawsuits, but it is the City Council that makes the ultimate decision.

    That's how I thought it was supposed to work.

    So, in Murrieta, we either have an attempt to cover up a Brown Act violation or a city attorney acting without the consent of the City Council, both of which I find more disturbing than a store selling sex toys.

    Contact columnist John Hunneman at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2603, or hunneman@californian.com.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, April 04, 2006 8:36:00 PM  

  • Just like other major appointed members of city staff the city attorney is allowed discretion in routine matters. If keeping sex businesses out of Murrieta is not seen as a routine matter, it should be. Harper did the right thing. Hunniman wants to make it a political issue, but there's nothing politican about the common sense decision to protect this city against the sex trade. Its about time a city employee did the right thing in this town. Maybe Moss - who makes politically controversial alliances - could learn something from this. Kudos Harper.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:28:00 AM  

  • To Anon 11:28, filing a law suit is NOT a routine matter. It subjects the City to liability both for the costs of the suit, the attorney's fees and potentially for cross-complaint damages.

    What may have happened is that the City Council could have said to Harper, "Check into this situation and if there's a legitimate basis for filing a suit, then use your discretion to file."

    If that's what happened, then the Council made no actual decision to file and, under the Brown Act, they may have thought there was no decision to report.

    Hunneman's point would seem to be, the decision to give Harper discretion to file, was a decision which should have been reported following the executive session.

    Which point is right? I'm not sure. But I don't think the City Attorney has the right to file suits on behalf of the City without some expression from our City Council that it desires the action filed.

    Edward L. Faunce
    Continue Murrieta City Hall Reform
    Vote Against Developer, Chamber and City Employee Union backed Candidates
    The Ballot Box is Mightier than their Bank Accounts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:38:00 AM  

  • Anyone who can not tell the difference between a Hooters Restaurant and a porn shop is either mentally or sexually challenged in some way. We don't need personal agendas being pursued by city management, but we also don't need a city attorney who is afraid to exercise sound judgement. In my opinion, it is sound judgement to make the very reasonable assumption that it is OK to sue a porn shop. Let the chips fall where they may. If that means the city gets sued, is anyone reading going to be quivering in fear of that lawsuit? Hunniman is paid to act indignant. That's his newspaper job. As for Moss and her Hooterphobia, what nonsense. Take your petty personal agendas elsewhere, and keep them out of the city manager's office.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, April 05, 2006 6:43:00 PM  

  • I don't find this subject interesting but for those who do, my sources tell me that the California Grill (on Jefferson in Temecula) has been sold to the Hooters Restaurant chain. If this tidbit of info has already been published in the newspapers I apologize for posting old news.
    Been There

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, April 07, 2006 11:55:00 PM  

  • If it's true what is said about the California Grill, then it could be one (more) business lost to Temecula. Personally, I've been to Hooters and don't see what the hype is all about. In fact, I find it much more tastefull then Texas Loosey's. Neither are a place I would frequent often, but neither are worth banning. Before passing judgement, I wonder if Ms. Moss has even been in Hooters?

    Back to the previous conversation, a Californian editorial again raises the question as to whether the City Council acted appropriately when they reported "no reportable action" regarding the lawsuit against the Adult Store. From what I read, it's sounding more and more like they are walking a thin line and could possibly lose the suit due to the process....not like we haven't seen this happen before in Murrieta. Case in point, improper noticing of Council/Planning Commission agenda items.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, April 08, 2006 6:54:00 AM  

  • Moss is no bargain for Murrieta. Her starting salary was way out of line for someone who had never been a city manager before. There were quite words spoken at city hall about why she had been given that cash windfall and why she had been quickly elevated from existing employees without first conducting a real talent search such as usually happens when a growing city looks for a new city manager. She is now the most politically prejudiced city manager in Southwest Riverside County, and she silently thumbs her nose at anyone who is offended by her alliance with an organization which takes political sides in the city she supposedly manages as a politically unbiased employee. Now she introduces her own personal insecurities into city decision making. Something about the "Hooters" restaurant chain offends her nonsensical personal biases in a way which translates into major tax dollar losses for Murrieta. Moss is no bargain for Murrieta. She is increasingly an expensive emparrassment, supported editorially by the local paper for their own politically correct reasons, and our milquetoast council members are politically scared stiff to say what should be said about such a damaging individual.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, April 08, 2006 11:39:00 AM  

  • Great. On the Moss watch Temecula gets the tax producing top name Hooters restaurant and Murrieta gets the law suit producing porn shop. Did someone say Moss gets paid ABOVE average? What are we, crazy or something?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, April 08, 2006 9:52:00 PM  

  • Time to e-mail council members and city staff, incl. L. Moss! They neeed to know that we are watching.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, April 09, 2006 12:16:00 PM  

  • As I understand the post by Jeff, the quote is from Gibbs with regard to a conversation with Moss. If this is true, then the entire conversation is disturbing. First, Moss asks permission to “not” talk to the Hooters people. Seems Moss already had her mind made up. Second, Gibbs is just one on the Council and policy/decisions shouldn’t be made by a single Council member. What is not known, and would be further disturbing, is if she spoke to at least 2 other members on the council, then that would seem (to me) to be a violation of the Brown Act. But most of all, none of the above should be the ones making the call as to who or who not can do business in town as long as it abided by all Development codes and policies. Hooters is no different then Richies Diner, in the fact that it is a legitimate business allowed by the development code to operate in the City. If at the time of a public hearing the residents where against their type of establishment, then the council could deny the project based on the public outcry. The public hearing scenario would be if they built their own project. Now in a case where they purchased an existing building, as like the California Grill, I’m not sure if or how the public would have a say in the business. I suppose their say could be by banning any patronage of the establishment, but again, that would work only if there were enough residents to have an affect. And if there weren’t enough, then that would say that a majority of the residents were not opposed to the establishment. The bottom line is that it should be the residents that make the call, not 1 or 2 individuals.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, April 09, 2006 9:13:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren, this is 913. I agree with you over the differences between Dream Box and Hooters. However, I wouldn’t agree that any violation of the Brown Act should be acceptable, even if it benefited the residents. The Act was put into place to protect all parties. There was a good comment posted in the Californian in response to their editorial last week about the Dream Box (Murrieta plays fast, loose with Brown Act, April 8, 2006). As far as I could tell, the writer doesn’t appear to be a participant on this blog. Here it is in case you or others on the blog haven’t seen it:

    "Posted 4/7 12:48pm. Every citizen should read the Ralph M. Brown Act - [CAlif. Code 54950] and as elected officials [& all candidates] if they think it is "ambiguous". ""CA Code 54950: In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created."" "

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 10, 2006 12:47:00 PM  

  • It is also now obvious that Gibbs has been infected by the same distain for the rules that had infected other councilmen in the past. He and Seyarto and others seem to think its ok to play the game however they want to play it in this town.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 10, 2006 1:26:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren - I thought there might be a misunderstanding. Thanks for the clarification.

    gottorun - what town hall meetings are you talking about? Are they City sponsored? I checked the City's calendar and I didn't see it listed. Will Council members be there to answer questions? Hearing from them directly on certain issues is the only way to "help in the speculations and judgments", as long they give honest replies and not double talk. A few posts above it was reported as an email by Rick (Gibbs?). It seems to say much without any speculation needed. If it's true, I for one am truly disappointed.
    913

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 10, 2006 4:53:00 PM  

  • goggorun and everyone else:
    Anyone who has ever been to "town hall meetings" know that they are usually designed to create the appearance that concern is being shown for the bothersome activists who might otherwise do things like write letters to the editors of newspapers. Political troubles are kept in check when people feel like they have let out steam at these kind of gatherings. The vast majority of the voting population is far more influenced by the local mass media than by these relatively small gatherings. It is media exposure is that elected officials and entrenched city employees fear. Town hall meetings are usually "moderated" by city hirelings, but even when they are not they tend to have no meaningful results at all. They are charades.
    This blog (though lacking any kind of coordination) is much more important than any contrived or even well meaning attempt at city hall meetings, which benefit only politicians already in control and for egotistical public speaking grandstanders. Such meetings often do more harm than good. To make it worse, citizens foot the bill for these meaningless acts.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 10, 2006 5:22:00 PM  

  • I couldn't agree more about the Town Hall meetings. And if the City is sponsoring the "dance", then it's a last minute item, and something being done as a "reaction and PR campaign". It falls right along the lines of corporate America trying to sooth the soles of their employees, but usually nothing but a PR campaign.
    Anon 913

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, April 10, 2006 5:41:00 PM  

  • Is it true that the ethics class will be team-taught by vanHaaster, Seyarto and McAllister at the Chamber's offices and guest speakers, Dan Stevenson and Lori Moss?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, April 11, 2006 8:36:00 AM  

  • And unless, MT, Gottorun and Rholmgren have no complaints, then one would expect to see you all and be speakers at the Town Hall meeting? We already know how Jeff, Faunce and others feel and would expect to see them there. Maybe we could have "blogger" seats reserved and we could all see other face to face and have a few laughs. I for one will probably attend, but expect nothing less then lip service, as in how "how great we are doing" (something done last year just before the Recall). That would be the job of the newly hired PR person (from Riverside).
    Just Curious

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:32:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home


 
Google