- Sanitation Board delays vote on chloride tax hike until spring, with board member Supervisor Antonovich saying the “board was rushing to a decision,” according to the Signal. It was standing room only in the Council Chambers with protests outside the building occurring before and during the meeting. The move buys more time for SCVers to return their rate hike protest forms SIGNAL
- City Manager Ken Pulskamp earns $241,633 for overseeing the City of Santa Clarita, an amount the city says is inline with other cities in California. And our City Counilmembers take home about $18,860 a year for their part time service. All this in reaction to the City of Bell, whose city manager was making over $800,000 a year SIGNAL
- The County approved yesterday a 1,260 home development named Skyline Ranch in Canyon Country. The development, which will be built by Pardee and includes a new elemntary school, will be built south of Vasquez Canyon between Whites and Sierra Highway. Interestingly, Lynne Plambeck used the chloride card to protest the development, saying the new homes would increase the amount of chloride in the Santa Clara River, to which the sanitation dude said, “the concentration of chloride in the Santa Clara River wouldn’t increase because whatever chloride is discharged into the river would be diluted with more water.” Huh? By the way, Al Ferdman of the Canyon Country Advisory Committee says neighbors support the development SIGNAL
- If you were born today in Santa Clarita, first of all, welcome to the Daily Brief and congratulations on being able to read so early in life. Secondly, LA County Public Health says you can expect to live an even 80 years, all things being equal, and further says that our city ranks in the “third quintile” for life expectancy in all of Los Angeles County. We were beat out by places like Agoura Hills and Beverly Hills (those rich bastards live five years longer on average!) but we dominated -dominated!- Lancaster and Palmdale, so at least there’s that LA TIMES
- Home and condo sales increased in June, but the median home price of $400,000 and the median condo price of $230,000 is down by 2 and 1 points from this time last year. But SCV realtors are happy with the increase in sales saying the SCV real estate market’s “pulse is getting stronger.” SIGNAL
- Meg Whitman trailing Jerry Brown 46-40 in polling with evidence that some Californians resent the amount of money she has spent on her campaign, says TALKING POINTS MEMO
- Former First Lady Nancy Reagan will be at a signing ceremony with Governor Schwarzenegger at the Ronald Reagan library today as the Gov signs George Runner’s Ronald Reagan Day bill KEYT
- Congressman Buck McKeon says that despite the Afghanistan “war logs” leaked on WikiLeaks, he is “confident US forces will succeed in Afghanistan if given the time, space and resources they need to complete their mission.” NEWSPAPER
- A Virginia blogger responds to McKeon: “Can you even define realistic success, Mr. McKeon? And what resources are you talking about? We are fighting guys in robes with state-of-the-art weapons and still can’t break the back of the Taliban. What resources aren’t we providing, Mr. McKeon?” BLOG
- Getting scary out there: That Signal LTE protesting the Ground Zero mosque is a picnic compared to what’s going on in Temecula, where self-described patriotic residents are set to protest a proposed 24,950 sq. ft. mosque that City officials say has met planning standards. The patriots plan to bring dogs and women to their protest Friday “because Muslims hate dogs.” ROLLEYES
- Autoblog.com test drives the $33,000 all-electric Nissan Leaf (“gadgetry is impressive…[but] the Leaf is simply a car”) while Grist.org compares the Leaf with the Volt, which just got priced by Chevy at $41,000 or $350/month on a 3 year lease
- LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa wants a bicycle summit following his bike crash earlier this month LAist
- Can I get an amen? “Speed, speed, speed” in the Santa Clarita Valley is a way of life. Speed-limit signs be damned. This unfortunate collision will plague us for the rest of our lives. This should be a good lesson to all motorists who can’t control their speeding to realize the havoc that this crash has caused a family and the damaging repercussions to one and all,” Letter Writer says.
- Newhall Land to host a Canines, Coffee and Donuts event this Saturday in West Creek. “Visitors will be treated to free coffee from Newhall Coffee Roasting Company while local favorite S&S will provide guests with free doughnuts throughout the event. Meanwhile dog lovers will get a chance to meet and mingle with each other on what is expected to be a beautiful Saturday morning.” Of course they’re going to invite you to take a look at some new homes, but free coffee and donuts in this day and age is a pretty sweet incentive! VALENCIA.COM
- Local blogger details run-in with “crazy lady” in her neighborhood COMICALLY FLAWED
- John Boston remembers a kinder, gentler, and more articulate age in the SCV and the nation when young men and women weren’t so cavalier about using curse words WRB
- Great column by Gary Horton this week on bigotry in the SCV, the military, and the media SIGNAL
@SCVTweets onTwitter
- Bike to Work Day
http://t.co/jWAkeDfm2012/05/17 16:01 - Excellent! RT @Petz2: Cadet Petzold
http://t.co/mfXxCymI2012/05/16 12:31 - It's an embarrassment of riches. As of today, 4 the 2nd time ever, there are 2 actual barbecue spots in SCV: @longhornsbbq and @Lucilles_BBQ2012/05/16 10:27
- Over the months, we've reached out to @Lucilles_BBQ several times to talk BBQ and got the cold [pork] shoulder. But still, we welcome real Q2012/05/16 10:17
- If you love substance like we do, Jeff has a great interview with @LeeCRogers.
http://t.co/sJj9FNvc2012/05/10 09:04 - Tone of the meeting: BK and FF playing dads to TBB rebellious teenager. LW and MM the aunts who don't see why you need to dress like that.2012/05/08 23:39
- Bike to Work Day
Loading ...
Co-sign
Co-Tangent
Just a side note: Congrats on being named as one of Santa Clarita’s 40 under 40, Jeff! Love reading this site and the conversations that ensue. Keep up the great work!
“By the way, Al Ferdman of the Canyon Country Advisory Committee says neighbors support the development SIGNAL”. by Jeff
Jeff, Al Ferdman says many things without consulting anyone else and giving the false impression that he speaks for others on multiple topics and at various venues. HE may believe the neighbors support the project but that is HIS opinion since I do not believe he has ever asked any of the “neighbors” of the Skyline Ranch project in Canyon Country whether they support this project or not although they very well may. The Canyon Country Advisory Committee listened to a presentation by the developer. No one present at that meeting was asked whether we supported or opposed this development or voted to take any official position, let alone the “neighbors”. Simply because “neighbors” did not show up in mass to protest does not necessarily mean they approve either. Please witness the recent debacle involving both the Benz Road and Canvas/Linda Vista issues that Mr. Ferdman also said were “supported” by the neighbors but turns out only by those that came to Al to champion their cause and lend the weight of the CCAC to, which he readily did without taking a committee vote according to CCAC policies in force. When Council recently heard from a broader group of Benz (in Saugus) and Canvas/Linda Vista neighbors, after months of Council being told how they ALL felt, THE MAJORITY OF RESIDENTS present did not support the position Al championed and misrepresented as supported by the entire CCAC. Council realized they had made of mess of things by “trying to help” based on the input of only a few of the affected residents. Kudos to Frank and the rest of the Council for honestly assessing the situation and at least putting the brakes on the Canvas/Linda Vista issue.
Speaking in support or opposition of issues without a vote of those he purports to represent and actually excluding people from the conversation is a recurring theme with Mr. Ferdman and one I have objected to on several occasions. An ethical person would preface his/her comments by making it clear they are not reflective of anyone other than him/herself as required by our CCAC rules and the City Code of Ethics and Conduct which he apparently feels applies to Bob, Frank and others but not to Al Ferdman.
Although I am a founding member of the CCAC, Al Ferdman certainly does not speak for me since he has made it clear he does not want my opinion and further disrespects me when I do participate in an effort to have my views heard, particularly if I disagree with him. When I ask to have items put on the agenda so we can all discuss them, an agenda that he solely controls, he does not do so despite repeated requests. When I do try to express my opinion at CCAC meetings or to him personally, he gets nasty, cuts me off, shouts over me, and dismisses me. Does that remind you of anyone else?
Whether you like me or don’t, or agree with me or don’t, the Canyon Country Advisory Committee was created in partnership with the City of Santa Clarita to provide a forum for Canyon Country community members to present issues concerning THEM for discussion and resolution (wherever possible) with other stakeholders in the community (neighbors, City, businesses, etc). When only one point of view is presented and as though it is MINE without allowing for my input on the subject that is unacceptable.
Mr. Ferdman is not above lies and distortion to achieve his goals and has done everything possible to try to discredit me, ignore me, marginalize, and push me out of the CCAC. Tough luck Al and friends! Canyon Country is not Ferdmantown nor is it Venezuela or Cuba either. To add insult to injury, Mr. Ferdman actually has the nerve to criticize Council members and others as being bullies, liars, and unethical! Give me a break… I would rather deal with all of the five folks on the current Council any day than Ferdman. At least they can say my name right and I have my 3 minutes to address them in public!
Pardee homes presented the Skyline Ranch project to the Canyon Country Advisory Committee several times. They listened to concerns raised by our members, made appropriate changes and returned to show the improvements.
Several of the aspects of this project were very well received by our members. The fact that a buffer was being provided around the project and residential streets were not being connected to existing adjacent neighborhoods translates to NO CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC will be generated for their neighbors. As you are well aware, this has been a major problem for Benz, Canvas, Ermine and many other neighborhoods. Skyline Ranch will provide it’s own collector road from Whites/Plum to Sierra Highway. Besides providing this additional access it assures that no existing residential streets will be burdened with additional traffic. Pardee has designated 80% of the property as Open Space ensuring no further development will take place on that site. Density of the design is 3 homes per acre, well below the zoning density. The project will provide a public park, elementary school, bike paths and trails.
So you have to wonder what aspect of this project is Ms. Gonzales upset about? Or is she just using this issue to forward an agenda of her own.
Hello Allen,
I live near Whites/Plum Canyon, where is this development going to be?
drive66
Skyline Ranch will be located between the top of Whites/Plum Canyon and Sierra Highway. The new collector road, named Skyline Ranch Road, will connect the two streets and provide access for the project. Homes will be located on the South end of the property with the remaining property to the north being deeded as Open Space.
If you need additional information please email me at ferdmana@gmail.com. If I do not have the information readily at hand I will be happy to get it for you.
Al I know you can read so you must be aware that I never said whether I was opposed to or in support of the Skyline Ranch project. You are trying to change the subject again and it is not working.
I clearly said you presented your PERSONAL opinion regarding the Skyline Ranch project without clarification that it does not represent any official CCAC position or the “neighbors”. I mentioned a presentation by the developer. Even if we witnessed 1,000 presentations, without a vote to agree to take any position in support or opposition by eligible voting CCAC members present and following all the approved CCAC rules, it is ONLY YOUR OPINION and you have no right to indicate otherwise. You certainly have absolutely no authority to speak for the “neighbors” either.
You are free to state your opinion IF you state clearly that is YOUR opinion, something you consistently fail to do intentionally. I asked you privately to stop doing this many months ago but you refused despite acknowledging rules regarding spokesperson authority YOU feel are no longer relevant. I told you your habit as Chair of misrepresenting your personal opinion as that of the CCAC position(s) is unethical and could not continue. You told me to “do whatever you feel you have to” so I am. You do not want to follow any kind of democratic process, approved policies and rules, Code of Ethics, etc. You have destroyed the credibility OUR committee enjoyed for many years. It is a community committee Al not your personal forum. You do not get to decide everybody else’s opinion. Certainly not mine since you don’t want to hear it. You do not get to skew information to guarantee acceptance for your position(s) without opportunity for rebuttal or other presentations offering balance. You do not get to recruit only the people who agree with you. You do not get to exclude any Canyon Country people from participating whether you agree with them or not. You will not succeed and get me to give up due to your nastiness, lies and rudeness. It worked on others but not on me. If anything, I am even more determined to stick around.
You high jacked the CCAC and morphed it into a group where anyone from any area who wants to bitch about the City gets your backing to increase your personal sphere of influence. Benz, Bonelli, Calgrove, opposing Extreme Neighborhood Makeover, North Oaks, Special Standards Districts, and the list goes on.
Most of the original members do not even attend anymore since it is the “Al Ferdman Show” and things have gotten so far off track. We had a good thing going with the City and others. Collaborative relationships and goodwill, which you destroyed by your actions and with your arrogant duplicity. Yet again, you are trying to make the City and me the bad guys in your narrative. The City may not respond but I sure will Al. You can try all you want, I am not going away. You don’t speak for me or many others in Canyon Country. Especially since, you do not want to hear what we have to say.
I appreciate all of the improvements the City has made in our area and do not feel the need to insult and rage at City Council meetings on behalf of everyone else with a gripe. I want to work to make Canyon Country better as we identified in both our Vision and Mission statements. We can’t accomplish anything if we are always pissing everybody off Al. Your ego has gotten too big and is driving your actions. I am not keeping quiet.
The gloves came off between us when you abused your position as Chair yet again and made your untrue personal comments about me as part of your presentation before the assembly at the July CCAC meeting but would not permit me time to rebut your statements.
Please let me know if I have still not made the issues clear enough for you. You have my home/office phone number, cell and email address information.
One more thing, after 12 years of seeing my name, you might want to look at the spelling. It is GONZALEZ and my first name is not Birdu either.
Hey, I know that crazy lady are her initials CN and her first name rhythms with Dam
I would like to thank all of our residents that took the time to attend the Sanitation Board Meeting last night. For the 7500 residents that filled out a protest form and those attending the meeting, you can be assured that your effort made a difference. Board Members Weste and Mclean joined the community in voicing concern and opposition to the requirements levied by the Regional Water Board.
I would also like to take this opportunity to commend Supervisor Antonovich who very vocally stood up for our community. In addition, Supervisor Antonovich insisted that the Sanitation District provide justification of their Operation and Maintenance increases and provide time for a public hearing on that issue as well.
Participation by our residents, public transparency and the free flow of information can only make our community a better place to live.
Mike led the charge, the others just fell in line
That’s a fact. And McLean’s Kellar-esque try to get support for a $50 increase with a show of hands did not go the way she hoped. It was 150 to 2 in the opposite direction. After that they had nowhere to go but to follow Antonovich’s lead.
Re: The chloride disaster
..and make no mistake on what a disaster it is. It’s going to have an impact on existing families and business in the SCV now, but that pales in comparison to the impact it will have on any new businesses wanting to come into the SCV. Want to start a restaurant here? Forget it, unless you are part of a chain with enough capital to shell out thousands of dollars for a sewer hookup. It actually makes me really sad to think about the impact this will have on small, locally owned, businesses. I will be surprised if we don’t see a noticeable impact from this.
I am really disappointed in our Sanitation Board. From what I understand (and please do correct me), they really let us down. I attended the meeting last night and as the Board spoke I was struck by how ill prepared and reactionary all of their comments were. We should have been exploring these options (legal, legislative, etc) back in 2008 when the MOU was signed, or even before. They’ve really backed us into a corner by not being more pro-active on this. Did anyone else have that impression? Yes they were angry and had all the right emotion, but we should have had a strategy to deal with this two years ago and raising hell with state legislatures. If whatever governing body didn’t want to do additional tests, we should have funded the damn tests. I highly doubt the cost of doing that would be any more than a small fraction of what we are forced to pay now. I don’t know if it’s a lack of competence/underestimating the issue or just playing politics, but I can’t help but be struck at how none of this happened until after the city council elections.
I have the upmost respect for the city staff; they have received numerous deserved praise from both inside and outside the city. However, I am shocked at how under prepared they seemed to fight this issue. I know it isn’t exciting work, but we count on the staff and council to keep abreast of these issues. This shouldn’t have come as a “surprise.”
I don’t blame the farmers in Ventura wanting to protect their own self interests. They had the smarts to think long term and lobby for what they wanted while we avoided the conversation. I place the blame right here in the SCV for not being on top of this.
When are we going to stop playing checkers and start playing chess?
I’d co-sign with a caveat. People who drive oblivious are no better than those who speed. A good example is when cars drive next to each other for miles blocking all lanes and totally clueless about the cars behind them. When this happens, people behind get increasingly anxious, frantically swapping lanes to break out of the pack. It’s very dangerous for ALL drivers. The left lane is for passing. Execute your pass, and open the lane. When there’s flow, most people behave normally and safe distance between cars grows.
Couple of more things. Pull to the right (don’t just stop) when emergency vehicles pass. And this might be new to some… this rule DOES NOT APPLY when on the opposite side of a divided road.
Use your freakin’ blinker and for God’s sake, use your rearview mirror to make sure your in touch with what you’re doing to the people behind you. If people are speeding past you, you might just be the problem!
I agree!
Inattentive and distracted drivers are far and away more dangerous than +5 or 10 mph over the limit speeders!
Those rolling roadblocks are also cause for many people going for a risky breakout. Please pull over, unless your real
point is to create a parade behind you of pissed off people!
As a member of the CCAC and as a resident of a neighborhood that has been NEGATIVELY impacted by traffic due to poor planning, I have this to say…
It’s not whether or not land is going to be developed it’s how the developers plan on developing it.
I was at the CCAC meetings when Pardee presented Sky Line Ranch, (and yes it was more than one time) and as much as I DO NOT want more homes built in SCV, Pardee did an excellent job in listening to the residents and OUR concerns about this development. The fact that this is not a high density development, they are dedicating much of the land to open space and they are protecting the older neighborhoods by not opening up streets should say it all. SMART development. Smart planning.
Now as far as our city council putting their breaks on mitigating the traffic that has affected Benz Rd and Canvas St due to POOR planning…. it’s not over. Not by a long shot. Just because the FEW impacted residents are out numbered by the inconvenienced ones does not make it right. The FEW’s voices should be heard far louder than the rest. It is our quality of life, our property values, our sanity. The city should be protecting us helping us they just CHOOSE not to.
On one last note, Alan Ferdman you are a man with dignity and one that I and many others admire. The time that you put into this community does not go unnoticed. Thank you so very much and keep up the good work many are right behind you!!!!
Let’s see. Let me guess either Tony Natoli from Benz Road in Saugus who brought his issue to the CCAC even though there is a Saugus Action Committee but I like Tony and anonymous is not his style. More likely Nadine Teter who I hear is a pretty good shot and joined the CCAC because of the Canvas/Linda Vista issue to get support for what SHE wanted despite the protests of other neighbors. Ya, its Nadine.
Berta:
I am appalled at your ill manners!
The fact you would even joke, or make comment about Nadine and what she has been through is inexplicable….”heard she is a good shot”. What the heck is THAT about?!
I can only hope you will NEVER have to experience the same ordeal she has…though some may feel differently and think it would teach you a lesson!
I am also appalled that people threaten me!
Moreover, you have no idea what I have experienced either so you can be appalled all you like.
Berta,
It’s OK. Alan is a good guy and started something years ago that has done much good for canyon country. It doesn’t come without controversy from time to time. Everything does at some point. He has no ill intent or conspiratorial motives. You write in a way that transfers your personal opinion and frustration squarely on the legitimacy and service he has provided. To berate Alan with the strong language you have used sounds out of place for someone who is astute as yourself. Perhaps you should have a private chat with Al and solve your issues. Swinging a wrecking ball right through the middle of the CCAC shows more of a personal (or Personality) issue with Alan rather then a public one. You’re quite a fire cracker there at city hall. You’re fun to watch and you have the right to say what you want. This just sounds a bit personal rather then an official issue.
Hi Sterling.
Al Ferdman did not start the Canyon Country Committee, others and I did. He joined a couple of years after we were already established, had a Vision, Mission, Membership requirements, area represented and had achieved some success as a group. I stepped away for a time for personal reasons and returned to find a different committee.
Al has discouraged me from continuing to participate. I tried many times to address this and other issues with Al in private. If he does not want to discuss it, it is not discussed period. He controls the agenda, the guests, the website, presentations, topics and discussion. He has brought people into the group who exclusively support his views, many of which are in direct conflict with our founding principles, goals, etc. He does not encourage and support an exchange of differing viewpoints, especially mine. I asked him multiple times to place the very issues I discussed here today as well as others on the agenda and he refused each time. I asked for meeting minutes taken during the time I was absent since I never received any during that interval. Al promised they would be forthcoming. I am still waiting.
I believe in an inclusive democratic meeting process above board and fairly run. I do not sit quietly when anyone behaves in a dictatorial manner and then is a hypocrite to boot. I am not willing to have my views ignored and then see Al presenting his opinion and attaching the support of the CCAC when it was never asked for nor given in the manner still in vigor per CCAC rules.
He made it personal by using (abusing) his Chair position to make a presentation maligning me personally by making several false statements about me at the July CCAC meeting before everyone and then refusing to allow me to rebut his false statements. You would not put up with that behavior if directed at you Sterling.
I have given Al Ferdman many opportunities to correct his behavior or bring the issues raised before full committee for open and thorough discussion. He refuses. He also refuses to abide by any existing rules or Code of Conduct and most of the current members do not even realize they exist. Ferdman told me after I persisted to bring it up at the next Steering Group meeting and when it was brought up by someone else , promptly shut me out of the conversation making it appear to the others that I was the one out of order. After that meeting, Al found yet another way to excluded me from attending special meetings by holding them in a private home, invitation only. I remind you this is a Canyon Country community committee, which is supposed to be inclusive and participatory.
None of this crap is ok with me especially when decisions and statements made affect my home, neighborhood, community and me personally.
Sterling I think you have me beat as a firecracker and I gladly cede you the title.
It is personal now. Thank you for your kind words.
Ms. Gonzalez-Harper:
I am a newer member of the CCAC (about two years now) but a lifetime resident of the SCV. During the last two years Mr. Ferdman has been nothing but supportive, polite and informative. The knowledge he has regarding the policies, processes and political history of the City is impressive. He has never once been forcefull with his opinion or even become the slightist bit offensive when I have questioned that opinion or the information he was supplying.
I can understand your need to voice YOUR OPINION, but find the manner in which you do it extrmemely rude and volatile. As a neutral bystander, I am always interested in hearing all sides of an argument, but do not want to read a slanderish post in which name calling and accusations seem to be the primary goal.
If misinformation was conveyed about you, by Mr. Ferdman, may I suggest you list those issues (in this blog or maybe another?) and clarify/correct them?
Name callling and accusing should be done in private and the community blog should be used to convey accurate information we could all benefit from.
Oh, and to not offend: The above is my opinion only.
I do not have the time to provide the entire list you request today but will do so in the near future but I will respond to one item now.
CCAC meetings are supposed to be participatory in nature not a lecture from the podium with only Al or his invited speaker allowed to comment. If Al is facing the audience, I raise my hand. If he keeps passing me over which sometimes happens, eventually I do “chime in”. I know he does not want to hear what I have to say. Tough nuggies. If he makes an incorrect statement with his back turned to us, I state the correct information. I don’t yell it out, I say things in a voice where attendees can hear me since I don’t have benefit of the microphone as does Al. If I said it under my breath, you would criticize that too. The agenda is usually so jam packed that there is no time for open discussion from the floor and as I have already commented before, anything I request placed on the agenda for discussion NEVER is.
Al seems to have your permission to say anything he wants to about me or anything else before the CCAC. You seem to have no problem that he will not allow a member to respond to his personal attacks or ask questions. On the other hand, is that the case only if that member is I? You single out my commenting on various issues as is my right but I notice you have never said anything about Tony, TBB, Spence and many others making corrections, jokes, etc from the floor so you are not as “neutral” an observer as you profess.
I will get back to you on the other list.
I have not been to a CCAC where I have heard you speak out (or even any of the others for that matter)…Nor have I seen Al ignore your raised hand or concerns. I am not able to attend all the CCAC meetings as somtimes I play co-ed softball on Wednesday evenings. However I get to as many as I can.
Quite frankly, I didn’t even know there was this civil war going on…until I read your posts today. I guess that proves 2 things: I need to start attending more meetings because, like a hocky game, a fight might break out..and that is interesting! And two, I am not embedded as deeply into the politcal arena as you are. Kudos to you…seriously as I just don’t have the patience.
So because of this I have no idea who TBB, or Spence is, (I think the Tony you are referring to is on Benz…right?) I don’t know what you are talking about when you say I allow Al, et al to speak about your or ignore you.
I have my own views and tend to share them freely and rarely does anyone “speak” for me But hey, if Al happens to be singing the same tune, why kick him out of the band? In my opinion he is doing a good job.
I like facts-not
Shannon I have to prepare for a meeting so can’t give you an in depth response.
You might want to read my post under the July 29th Daily Brief comments. If you still have questions, I am in the phone book. Thanks.
Mrs González-Harper,
I should mention that the CCC is not connected to or a part of any other group in SCV. We are solely involved in our Wiley – Calgrove issues as a Committee. We enjoy a good working relationship with the city and consult often regarding our areas needs and development.
While some may individually keep their ears to the ground to be informed about outside issues, the CCC does not farm out their influence beyond the locality of the Calgrove – Wiley area.
Mrs Gonzalez-Harper,
First let me say that I am amazed at how you instinctively presumed the anonymous posting came from the two people that you listed. CLEARLY you have more than just a personal issue with Mr Alan Ferdman, confirming to me that you mask your lack of integrity with delusions of grandeur. You make comments like I hear she is a great shot. An ethical person wouldn’t chose to use something like that as their defense. I hope you never have to experience anything like I am sure she must have.
You are merely upset like a child throwing a tantrum because you are not getting your way. You remind me of someone else I hear that likes to refer to the people that disagree with him as “the 22 people on an email the he received”. Yes I was at that meeting, Yes I attend CCAC meetings on a regular basis and I am glad to see that the CCAC is not run by another City Council Puppit. I think you just like to hear your own voice. With the amount of personal hostility that exudes from your comments, and the class in which Mr Alan Ferdman responded (or didnt respond) it is clear that you are upset because your identity was taken away, you want to be more important than you really are.
You are unhappy because your opinion isn’t heard. The reality is that it is just not respected and rightfully so based on the derogatory, rude, and maligning comments you consistenly make. You use the words like “high jacked” and “pushed out” with regards to your roll in the CCAC. Amazingly, I have attended several meetings where I have heard your opinion, usually as you yell it out from the crowd interupting the speaker with your comments and corrections. Have you contemplated that there are people who have different opinions than yours, or this councils, and having them does not mean that they are in collusion with Mr Alan Ferdman or as Frank justifies his lack of interest, with Mr Gauny, or Mr Boydston. You are not impartial and rational enough to lead any group like the CCAC an you prove it time and time again with your attacks. Yes Berta I am a “Neighbor”, and I have “Neighbors” who would agree.
Please stay focused on the topics at hand and keep your rude and maligning comments to yourself. Have you heard the word LIBEL? I am not clear how your opinion should even be considered in matters like Skyline Ranch.
Thank God we are in a place where we have freedom of speech, and it can stay anonymous…. so guess again Berta.
For the record Berta you forgot the “a”…Natolia with an “a”
Berta you sure it wasn’t me? Every other post you don’t like is me, so why not this one?
Nate: This one is easy. I know it is not you because my HAIR is not mentioned once, you unequivocally support Frank Ferry, and my comments address his opponents.
You have a right to your opinion and to follow and support anyone you choose. Others throughout history have also exhibited complete loyalty to a leader who sided with them or their cause without concern for the damage he or she does to others.
Mr. Ferdman has said and done many things I agree with, but he has also said and done many things that have been detrimental to OUR committee, community, and me personally. He and I parted ways when he decided his agenda is the only important one and any normal democratic process for chairing and running the CCAC is irrelevant and at his sole discretion. We as a committee implemented rules, which Al has unilaterally discarded, to avoid exactly what has happened. The chair and a few loyal supporters push their personal agendas to the exclusion and detriment of other stakeholders. It is clear part of Al’s agenda is to foment an anti-city dialogue within the CCAC. I leave it to others to determine what they think is his motivation.
A perfect example of this is the Bonelli issue, which is not a Canyon Country issue, but Al made it one and now counts complaining Bonelli folks as his supporters on the CCAC. Al completely skewed presentations, invited guests, made comments to favor the 19 residents who complained despite my protests and without the input of the 111 or so other Bonelli residents or City Staff to provide the other side of the issue. He addressed Council in support of Bonelli and gave them the false impression he spoke on behalf of the CCAC. He pushed Special Standards Districts for anyone who had received a notice to fix up their property claiming it would relieve them of making City requested improvements. My repeated requests to agendize and have a fair and impartial discussion of the issues were not honored since “the agenda is too full” for months on end. No time allotted for open discussion either. Somehow, there was always time for his pet peeve, signage or “surprise” guests like the Bonja’s from the Bonelli Tract but not any of the issues I want discussed. The Bonelli issue has had a direct negative effect on MY NEIGHBORHOOD in Canyon Country. Al also decided to tell the City we do not have a gang problem in Canyon Country without any open discussion of this issue. Al decided to falsely tell people coming to him with citations in my neighborhood that I was responsible. He knows I cannot disprove his accusations and lies since the City does not divulge the complaining party’s names. I could go on and on.
Al like you thinks he gets to decide for all of us what happens here. He does not. He has his opinion and vote, but not mine. If you want to give him Carte Blanche to say whatever he wants on your behalf, fine. I choose to retain my own voice and opinion and insist on my right to express it despite Al’s attempts to shut me out. I have the right to at least have my vote cast AND counted indicating whether I support or oppose HIS position while officially representing the CCAC before Council, Planning, City Staff and others.
You know why I mentioned your being a good shot. I have been threatened, retaliated against, called names, and had my reputation maliciously impugned. It was to let you know, I will not be intimidated. No one will stop me from speaking out.
My loyalty is not to Ferdman or anyone else on the CCAC but to my community of Canyon Country and the values of fair play I believe in. Before Al arrived on the scene, we had already accomplished quite a bit and many positive results you see in Canyon Country today are a result of my individual efforts and this community working in partnership with the City and others. We did not take up the cause of everyone with a gripe against the City. Neither does the Saugus Action Committee to this day. We had numerous subcommittees and NO ONE who was eligible and wanted to participate and contribute was excluded or disrespected. Approved Rules and Policies were followed and it was a credible, functioning, inclusive, successful (by any standards) City sponsored committee. That is no longer the case because Al decided to go rogue. Most of the original members decided it was not worth arguing with Al and friends and being subjected to his nastiness and no longer attend, and new recruits were brought in as a result of Al’s supporting THEIR issues, like Benz, Bonelli, Canvas. You and others came into the committee while I was absent and changed the CCAC into something it was never intended to be. I can send you the Mission, Vision, operating rules, membership and voting requirements, etc. There are plenty of things here in Canyon Country that need attention. Full participation should be encouraged of all area residents. Especially those who are willing to work towards positive change.
Those of you who support Al, but do not insist that a democratic inclusive process as approved by members is followed by the chair and all other members of the CCAC, are part of the problem. You are fine because you are part of the invited click. Since Al supports YOUR cause and includes you, it is ok to exclude others and not give them a fair opportunity to participate. If the situation were reversed and you were the recipient of Al’s dismissive and exclusionary tactics, I assure you I would still be speaking up even though I am perfectly aware you dislike me personally. The right thing to do does not change based on whether it involves your friend or your foe.
Al Ferdman puts in countless hours to make our community a better place to live. The CAAC has been a great forum for the SCV to gather information, get clarification on issues, and debate the merits of policies. The CAAC as a group has been apolitical, and Al has worked very hard to make sure that it remains so. It is one of the only places where the public can dialogue with City and County officials, developers, and rerpresentatives from organizations and neighborhoods in a public setting. To have the City withdraw support is shortsighted and wrong.
I do not speak for the City and I am sure many other considerations came into play but from my perspective, this divorce was inevitable as there are irreconcilable differences within the relationship that have been a couple of years in the making.
One party chose not to honor the commitments made to the partnership, and abuse the others willingness to pay the bills and try to work together. The other party finally had enough and decided to break up with the unfaithful partner not willing to play fair. There was no other alternative that did not create even more problems or that could renew the lost trust and good will so it became necessary to sever the relationship altogether in order to end the drama and the abuse.
It seems simple to me. You played the role you selected.
B – Simple would mean I wouldn’t have to hit page down 4 times to get past one of your posts. Brevity can be the spice of life and a much more effective way to get your point across.
Hi, Brook.
Thank you for taking the time to read my lengthily post. When I have something to say, I will say it. Some things I can say in just a few words, others require a more in depth response. My name is always listed at the top of the post. If you have no interest in what I have to say or do not want to read a long post, please just skip past it. If you choose to read on, thanks for your time.
Nate: I actually agree with you on your comment regarding Frank. I do not always agree with him, but I do understand his frustration when people keep taking shots, calling him names, insinuating all kinds of things, manufacturing drama for attention, etc. but never produce irrefutable evidence.
I think Frank frequently says what others on the Council and elsewhere are thinking but are not willing to publicly state. Sometimes though I think he needs to refocus his aim and call out only those who are really culpable. He tends to lump us all in together. We are not all cut from the same cloth.
I hope your team has a fighting spirit and does not give up no matter how tough the opposition.
Mrs. González-Harper,
First let me remind you by the title of this post, you are commenting to the wrong person. You continue to prove the point that you cannot see past your own personal feelings towards these people, and continue to speak as if you were not picked to hang out with the popular kids. You give warrant to your comments about Mrs Teter as a way to show you won’t back down. “My loyalty is not to Ferdman or anyone else on the CCAC but to my community of Canyon Country and the values of fair play I believe in.” Is this an example of your values and fair play. You choose to take cheap shots, and speak of something you know little to nothing about. Go figure!
“The Bonelli issue has had a direct negative effect on MY NEIGHBORHOOD in Canyon Country.” Is it the same as the effect that all the new development has had on my neighborhood, ( you seem to hold opinions about?). There is nothing wrong with aligning yourself with a group, or person who has the same beliefs and values, it does not mean they have Carte Blanche, it means we agree.
Again let me say, you have the right to your opinion as do I. The issue is clear that you are are an angry woman. It is clear you are so worried about people liking you personally and it is not about the differences in opinions, just simply that they wont let you be in control. You do not run the CCAC and I am sure it is for good reason, and why is the CCAC so important to you, you should be content speaking for 3 min at the city council where “everyone knows your name”. Understanding that you have, I’m certain, had people make negative remarks about you, your comments against people like Mr Alan Ferdman and Mrs Teter are equally malicious, spare us your ignorant tirade. Is it that you really believe the CCAC has the power to effectively change policy, or are you just upset that your tantrums do not elicit the responses you are looking for.
I am sure that Mr Ferdman could probably confirm that your “parting ways” has a different version, you still show and speak at the CCAC meetings.
I give you this quote “Somehow, there was always time for his pet peeve, signage or “surprise” guests like the Bonja’s from the Bonelli Tract but not any of the issues I want discussed.” or “Al completely skewed presentations, invited guests, made comments to favor the 19 residents who complained despite my protests” or “many positive results you see in Canyon Country today are a result of my individual efforts and this community working in partnership with the City and others.” or “I assure you I would still be speaking up even though I am perfectly aware you dislike me personally. ”
I ask when is it really about your community of Canyon Country and not just you?
I understand that you have formulated your opinion and are not interested in hearing anything that does not validate that opinion, so I will not waste your time or mine.
I am not questioning your opinions, more your methods. So you conveniently do not answer those questions. How do you respond to your negative comments that you use to state your opinion, arent you doing the same thing you claim others are doing to you?
WARNING LONG RESPONSE!
Hello “anonymous”, no I do not believe I am.
As I said before, I do not think you want to hear anything that does not validate the opinion you have already formed and expressed. In case I am mistaken here goes:
I am not falsely accusing anyone of anything. I am not excluding anyone from anything. I am not abusing my position as chair of any group to give the false impression I speak for others. I am not deciding for all the residents of Canyon Country what is important to them without allowing them to “chime in”. In order to manipulate perceptions against my neighbor, I am not falsely telling my other neighbors that the neighbor I disagree with is calling thousands of code complaints into the City when in fact I am the one complaining. I am not calling in complaints on one neighbor I do not like, then defending another I do like with the same violations and issues, and fraudulently attaching the credibility of the CCAC to my complaint or support. I am not running a community committee like a dictatorship where my hand picked supporters and I get to make all the decisions despite rules to the contrary. I am not abusing my position yet again by getting up before the CCAC, and making a PowerPoint presentation on a large movie screen spreading more lies about my neighbor that disagrees with my tactics to inflame members against her further. I did not prevent the target of my defamation from responding to my comments. I am not encouraging my supporters to attack “anonymously” a member with a different point of view. I do not yell at him stating he cannot come to “MY meetings with City Staff regarding Canyon Country issues”. I am not the one who refuses to follow any ratified CCAC rules, or a Code of Conduct and Ethics. I am not the one who attempts to silence anyone questioning my practices. I do not personally have supporters who would anonymously call Mr. Ferdman and threaten “I’ll shoot you in the head if you don’t shut your mouth” or “ you go to lots of meetings that end after dark, accidents happen”, “I know where you live”, and so on.
These are not accusations against Al Ferdman. They are facts. You can disagree with my methods if you choose and I am ok with that. I am not keeping quiet or acquiescing to threats to intimidate me either. I am stating the facts that resulted in this now very public disagreement, however unflattering they may be to Mr. Ferdman and friends, and presenting my side of the issues. Al left me no other viable options.
I tried to address these issues privately with Al many times. Most of you are newer members, and we no longer have a member roster as we used to for direct communication. PowerPoint presentation of meeting minutes are not always reviewed and discussed, are never provided in hard copy or via email for all previous meetings upon request, posted anywhere, and do not include all conversations, objections or requests at meetings anyway. If a specific amended copy is requested, it is never provided. There is not always an agenda item or time left for open discussion, and even when there is, who is permitted to speak is at Al’s discretion. If he does not like what I have to say, he cuts me off. Private conversations have no record, I do not know you newer folks personally, and Mr. Ferdman does not permit me to address these issues at any CCAC meetings. He could have easily avoided all of this by complying with the approved rules, or placing this and other issues on the agenda for discussion as I have requested several times within the past two years.
I also believe Al has intentionally portrayed the City unfairly, a recurring theme, in this instance regarding withdrawing support for the CCAC. There are several other problems but, if the City continues to provide free meeting space, insurance and now must add security for “Al’s group”, then the City must do the same for ANYONE asking for meeting space for their group. Any and all other groups like the Tea party, Minutemen, Amnesty for All, Terrorists United, Berta Against Misogynists, etc. can demand free meeting space, insurance and security on City owned property. The budget for insurance and security alone would be astronomical and we all pay for it! Al and friends are the ones who ruined the longstanding partnership of the Canyon Country Advisory Committee and the City of Santa Clarita and put all the residents of this city in a vulnerable legal and financial position. He also has created a hostile environment, not the City. The City is protecting the resident taxpayers.
“Al’s group” can meet anywhere they want including a private residence where they can continue to “invite” anyone they want and exclude anyone they do not want like me but they cannot continue credibly saying THEY represent the COMMUNITY of Canyon Country because they do not. Many of us appreciate the effort, staff time and taxpayer dollars allocated to make our area better and stand by and want to return to our collaborative partnership with the City. So you see it is about Canyon Country. I do not appreciate our opinions being ignored or misrepresented by Al Ferdman and friends.
If you want more facts and hard evidence “anonymous”, I am sure you know how to reach me.
Obviously I am going to have to take a few more days to read this response…its seems redundant…and still does not answer the question….
we all know your opinions about what “Al” is doing to you…I simply questioned how do you respond to your attacks and the things you chose to say about other people. can you not respond with just the facts? it all still seems too personal and could possibly bog down the CCAC for years with every issue that I am sure you would want to complain about or bring up. it’s unfortunate that you cannot see the forest through the trees and your responsibility in all of the issues you claim. sounds too much like the victim stance for me, although I do always enjoy a good discussion!!
OK “anonymous”. I am not covering the same ground yet again. I do not believe anyone can be that obtuse. Have it your way. So please consult your new member packet provided at your first CCAC meeting which includes Founding Principles, Mission and Vision Statements, committee area boundaries and membership eligibility, voting privilege information, Code of Ethics and Conduct, Officer names/duties/terms of office, grievance procedure, Minutes, By-Laws, spokesperson authority, etc.
Thanks!