Comments by Joel Farbstein

LCP fined for election code violations in connection with Voice of the Coast

If there were no “intent to deceive” by the LCP, this thread (and the fine) wouldn’t exist. Everything I wrote is true; you guys are just too close to the violators to see it.  (Or maybe you ARE the violators!) It is really pathetic:
1. What the LCP did (no argument, lest there be no fine),
2. That you continue to try to make excuses for it,
3. That you think election violations are NOT a bad thing, and
4. You’re incapable of accepting responsibility.
(and 5, that you don’t see that George Muteff just giftwrapped a workable plan of action with the FPPC if your opposition ever tries the same deceitful tactics.)

LCP fined for election code violations in connection with Voice of the Coast

Are you kidding me? “Intent to deceive” is the standard, and the LCP clearly violated that. Read it as an impartial observer, not as someone who got caught and is still trying to make excuses. The apology needs to come from the League for Coastside Protection and the Voice of the Coast authors, and not from people like me who support the FPPC’s ruling and aren’t fooled by the LCP’s nefarious practices.

LCP fined for election code violations in connection with Voice of the Coast

I find it even harder to argue that this is only some small technical rule violation (which the LCP P.R. team is in overdrive trying to claim) when the FPPC investigated a complaint and ultimately found the LCP in violation (of two separate laws), then levied a fine. 

In my mind, a legitimate publisher (and the general public) would be thrilled that a regulatory agency assessed penalties when it found people (or organizations) guilty of “intent to deceive the voting public.”

If you condone the LCP’s actions, or try to excuse them in this instance, you’re letting your friendships cloud your judgment.

Rick Kowalczyk nominated Brian Ginna as his appointee on the HMB Parks & Rec Commission

Stronger headline: ‘Recreation supporter Ginna unanimously approved as Kowalczyk pick for Rec Commission’. (Or maybe choose something from the first 5 of 7 paragraphs.)

Good move by the new City Council member. Ginna has spent countless hours running several active youth recreation programs, and I expect him to tirelessly dedicate himself to enhancing the parks and recreation opportunities for Coastisde children and adults alike.

LCP fined for election code violations in connection with Voice of the Coast

For as much a stickler as Kevin Lansing is on following the rules, I’m a bit surprised he isn’t appreciative that the Fair Political Practices Commission enforced the law. Maybe in his world you can choose which laws to obey, but election violations are serious business; don’t try to claim it was a minor error.

All those Coastsider.com readers who aren’t familiar with the facts should realize the FPPC found the League for Coastside Protection violated the law, and fined the LCP for its deceptive practices. 

I fail to see the merits of continuing to argue that being found guilty of “intent to deceive the voting public” isn’t bad, and that the LCP broke the law only a bit. Um, twice.

LCP fined for election code violations in connection with Voice of the Coast

No comments on this story, Barry? Not even from you on the League for Coastside Protection’s deceptive “Voice of the Coast?” I’d think that you, as a publisher, would appreciate the Fair Political Practices Commission’s finding that the LCP’s political rag violated the law by attempting to appear to be a legitimate newspaper.

I guess since you allowed it to reprint Coastsider.com articles, that might explain your likely dismissal of the seriousness of the violation.

btw, while true that the fine was well below the $10,000 limit, it’s also true that the ruling discussed the “intent to deceive the voting public.”  Also, the fine was the “typical administrative penalty” for a (serious) “mass mailing violation”... “in the low-to-mid range of available penalties.”

I consider election violations to be serious business. If you don’t condemn the LCP’s deceptive actions (remember, it’s not me saying that, that’s the FPPC’s ruling), I think we’ll all learn something about Coastsider.com’s editorial position.

In fact, I’d love it if you’d send a (deserved) Thank You card to George Muteff for filing the original complaint and supporting real journalists, but I doubt you’ll ever admit that he’s on the right side of this decision. (Though he clearly is, according to the FPPC.)

Recount called off in GSD election

That’s strange… You wrote:  “A 10 vote difference is a pretty big gap.”
But Naomi Patridge gets 400 more votes than Deborah Ruddock’s 1,053, and it’s close? Too funny!
And Sabrina Brennan, County Elections Manager David Tom said the recount would take roughly a day. Not sure why you saw fit to insinuate something about Jim Larimer.
http://www.hmbreview.com/articles/2009/11/24/news/breaking_news/doc4b0c79607b111597676128.txt
Thanks, Brett Turner, for posting some enlightening (and worrisome?) articles.

CUSD’S “Push Poll” for a Parcel Tax

There you have it: Ken Johnson is opposed to a parcel tax. (That’s news?) Doesn’t matter what sacrifices CUSD has made. Doesn’t matter how the money raised will be spent. Doesn’t matter how it’ll benefit the students. Ken Johnson is opposed to it. He doesn’t need to see the plan; it’s not how he’d do it. I hope the rest of you will be more objective. (Just like they teach you in school.) Read first, then decide.

Current HMB City Council’s slate sweeps the field

Please don’t put words in my mouth about growth. Read my posts again. My comments on this thread are focused on helping the LCP realize that HMB voters want essential services in place before we achieve build-out. In my view, there are win-wins out there.

Current HMB City Council’s slate sweeps the field

See Comment #6.

The LCP DID have good candidates: Despite Zero name recognition going in (tied with Rick Kowalczyk), Dan Handler came within 11 votes of Deborah Ruddock. You have good canddiates, just not a message that’s palatable to enough voters.

And you’re not helping your own cause if you claim the reason for the LCP’s loss is because of smears. You need to reconnect with voters, and understand they want to move forward.

Current HMB City Council’s slate sweeps the field

You don’t recognize that not winning a single seat, with 3 available, is a mandate? HMB voters repudiated League for Coastside Protection policies the last THREE elections. The LCP has a good organization and it turned out its base. But that’s not enough. Because of its message.

Like I said, some people will continue to struggle with being marginalized. I wonder why I’m even trying to prod you into reality that your core message is just part of several elements HMB voters want for their City. 

(And as I wrote 2 and 4 years ago) One suggestion is to figure out how you can compromise… tone down the rhetoric and work together with developers to enhance infrastructure and improve the business climate while sustaining the environment.

Or, you can continue the negativity, continue attacking the messenger(s), and continue your long journey in the political wilderness. I hope your choice reflects the voters’ decision on Nov. 3.

Current HMB City Council’s slate sweeps the field

At some point when you oppose all locations, it becomes clear it’s not the location after all.

Seems some of your friends are in deep denial and it’ll take them longer to get used to moving forward, which we need to do. Agreed? btw, Barry, I’m happy to chat about which one of us has the more positive outlook for the city.

Current HMB City Council’s slate sweeps the field

“Incredulous” is my first reaction. There’s so much spin in your first paragraph I half-expect you to next claim the LCP is in favor of positive, open communication and transparency in government. Glad you agree there are “much needed facilities” but your claims are beyond belief. And you know better.

We agree, however, that parks and recycled water are two issues that have been delayed due to politics. I’m glad to see there is positive momentum building for both. You going to allow the CC to have a honeymoon period? Let’s give them a chance to see if they can start fulfilling our common goals.

Current HMB City Council’s slate sweeps the field

A mandate to quit playing the blame game. A mandate to move HMB forward, not look backward. A mandate to explore new ideas on how to improve HMB’s business climate. More support for schools, libraries, police, and Boys and Girls Club facility, among other things.

Voters expressed a clear repudiation of League for Coastside Protection policies, no matter how you look at it. I’m sure it’s going to take a little time for it to sink in, and there’s going to be some painful attempts at denial, but that’s the truth. (Barry, you and your website can help curtail the negativity. Can we count on you?)

Will the new City Council members solve all of HMB’s problems? Of course not. But they can and will set a new tone—note that extremists on both sides lost—and I hope that bodes well for increased civility and progress for HMB and the entire Coastside.

Let us all wish Godpseed to Allan Alifano and Rick Kowalczyk (and the rest of the CC) on delivering on their campaign pledges.

Current HMB City Council’s slate sweeps the field

The word MANDATE comes to mind. Or rather, the healing continues.

Video:  The final HMB City Council candidates’ forum

Startling in a good way, I agree! The Coastside Young Professionals should be commended for 1. being involved and 2. looking forward, not backward. They got all 8 candidates there, stuck to their time limits, and asked questions that (mostly) didn’t allow the candidates to repeat their stump speeches.

CUSD’s head lice policy is not supported by science

That’s what I’m asking you. That, and to be constructive, not destructive. If you want the policy be changed to “the child may return to school after the situation is treated” or whatever else it is that you want, start with that, then present your facts. Your headline could then read, “Change to CUSD lice policy could benefit students, family budgets.”

CUSD’s head lice policy is not supported by science

Barry, you spent 18 paragraphs playing victim, but have you spelled out your proposed solution?  You want CUSD to “reverse the policy,” and the facts you state would seem to support a revision. But wouldn’t it be more constructive to specifically list here what your proposed new policy would be, and approach it that way, from the desired goal? Why not be proactive and use Coastsider.com to rally support for your specific policy recommendation?

I think you’d find the “CUSD should revise its policy to xxxx because 1-2-3” approach would have a greater chance of effecting change than “CUSD is wrong because 1-2-3.” And your readers would probably appreciate being able to debate actual policy options rather than hypotheticals.

What is the Midcoast Community Council?

I’d agree with Vince Williams on the entertainment value of the MCC as political theater, except that I realize that people are volunteering to serve in an honest effort to move the Coastside forward. Neil Merrilees, for one, seems to have managed to grok input from all MidCoast viewpoints, and get Rich Gordon’s ear. So hope springs eternal, and there are 3 more people who will soon undertake that goal.

But Carl May, and even Deborah Lardie, are making their job even more difficult. Does Lardie, in post #26, not realize she’s de-legitimizing the MCC with her comments? What purpose did her post serve other than self-satisfying snarkiness? Great, you feel better by being catty; the MCC (and we, the people ) loses credibility because you can’t control yourself. Here’s a heartfelt suggestion from one constituent to our elected representatives: CUT IT OUT!

To me, Sabrina presented some thought-provoking ideas in a new forum, an online audience. I urge the MCC, with its new members, to continue to explore creative ways (along with resurrecting the “supervisor adoption program“) to be more effective representatives to the Board of Supervisors.

Photo: HMB election gets ugly fast

Thanks, Barry, and I’d use even stronger terms to condemn this kind of activity. Can we get all candidates to publicly disavow this type of behavior, and to encourage their supporters to stick to the issues?

People should direct their questions and concerns to the candidates themselves. The MCC, for instance, is hosting a Candidates Forum on Wednesday, 9/30, at 7:30 pm at Seton Medical Center, with the LWV (which I learned about on the posting on your site).

Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 >  Last »