Happenings: Recuse-a-thon 2008, Old Houses, and Waterfowl

Tonight's City Council meeting proved considerably more watchable than expected. I credit most of this improved watchability to a man in a bird costume.

.
THE ENDER-FERRY FAN CLUB, CANVAS ROAD, AND A LARGE YELLOW DUCK
After an inspired invocation by Councilmember Laurene Weste, we had the usual spate of presentations to local groups[1]. While the Soroptimists and the Foundation for Children’s Dental Care took center stage, a yellow duck sat quietly in the front row. After an excruciating wait, the web-footed wonder arose, striding with quiet confidence to the front of the room. It was then introduced as a representative of the Rubber Ducky Regatta, an event benefiting the admirable work of the Sam Dixon Family Health Center[2]. Lacking opposable thumbs, it proved incapable of accepting the recognition plaque.

Duck in audience (left). Ender tries to force-feed duck in shameless appeal to foie gras sympathizers lurking in SCV’s finer eateries (right).

Public Participation came next. Conventional wisdom predicted comments on powerlines and perhaps some follow-ups concerning Benz Road. More comments, however, dealt with traffic on Canvas Street (if it’s not Benz it’s Canvas, right?). These were about as productive as they usually are. Nadine Teter, perennial Canvas speaker, was understandably exasperated at her street’s condition. She went on to request that Mayor Pro-Tem Ferry asnwer her Canvas-related emails like other members of Council do. Apparently, he's being unresponsive.

Nadine Teter wishes Frank would write her more. Get in line, hon!

The bulk of Claritan comments, though, concerned G&L Realty’s big ol’ building project[3]. Getting things off to a rip-roaring start was TimBen Boydston. He began his speech with an uncomfortable analogy between the injustices that prompted us to found the City of SC and those that sparked the Boston Tea Party. Gradually, his voice rose and passion deepened as he chastised the Council for dismissing the concerns of SCV citizens: “They are lectured, they are scolded, they are told that they just don’t understand.” It was a barnburner of the don't-forget-who-you-work-for-we-deserve-better sort and drew thunderous applause, relatively speaking.

Soon after, Lynn Vogel came forward and said “I’m here to speak about bias.” She wasn’t the only one. Many Claritans would take to the podium and ask Frank Ferry and Laurie Ender to recuse themselves from the G&L/HMNMH expansion issue. SmartGrowthSCV's attorneys put forth several arguments as to why Ferry and Ender would be unable to fairly deliberate on the Henry Mayo Master Plan. Speakers dropped quotations from Mayor Pro-Tem Ferry in which he said that he was unabashedly for the expansion project.

Ender did have a couple of people come forward on her side. A certain Sabrina claimed “Laurie Ender is one of the most trustworthy and honest people you will ever meet!” It was all an attempt to peddle the idea that the voters who elected Laurie into office weren't duped by flyers but voted for her after careful evaluation of all eligible candidates. When they voted for Ender, they knew they were voting for a pro-medical office buildings sort of gal.

.

“STRONG FEELINGS” vs. “FIRM POSITIONS”
After Public Participation, of course, the people sitting up front got to respond.

Carl Newton, City Attorney, spoke on the issue of Henry Mayo bias. He tried to clarify what sort of biases would force a councilmember to recuse him- or her-self from an issue. The "operative words" of his professional advice, he claimed, were that “a councilmember should not assume a firm position for or against a project” before all information is made available to the public and discussed. He reviewed the letter from SmartGrowthSCV’s attorneys and came to the conclusion that prior comments did not establish any councilmember as having taken a firm position for or against the HMNMH expansion “Certainly there are strong feelings [about the expansion]” but not enough to justify recusal. In short, Newton said that "strong feelings" and "firm positions" are quite different things, especially when it comes to hospitals. One wonders…

Ferry deigned to forgo answering the recusal demands. Ender, on the other hand, responded directly to her critics: “I have no intention of recusing myself on this issue.”
.

NO HOME FOR YOU!
After councilmembers took their potty break, there was the Joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency business to attend to. Erin Moore-Lay delivered a presentation on “Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Hidaway Apartments.” Essentially, developer Mercy Housing California sought a loan of more than $2M to restore the apartment complex for use as affordable housing. (I dreamt of the regatta duck through much of Moore-Lay’s oh so very, very thorough presentation.)

When it came time for the public to weigh in, we learned why this wasn’t a universally beloved idea. A couple residents of Hidaway came forward and said they feared being uprooted so that their homes could be rented to other, poorer people. And they would indeed be kicked out if their income was too high to qualify for affordable housing. Based on a voluntary survey, only half of the current residents would be allowed to stay, paying estimated rents of $600-$1200. The others would be kicked out and given three-and-a-half years of housing subsidies to ease the transition.

Despite this downside, the Council decided to go ahead with the loan to Mercy Housing. Pushing councilmembers to take this action was the fact that Mercy Housing was asking for a loan--not the usual grant--to spiffy up the apartments and provide affordable housing. Also, the Hidaway property is in default, and a new owner could come in, raise the rent, and force everyone to leave. More cynically, giving the loan to Mercy represented a relatively painless way for the City to work towards meeting its affordable housing goals. More cynically yet, Cam Noltemeyer suggested this was a way of keeping low-income persons out of the way in Canyon Country.
.

FERRY & KELLAR GET IT RIGHT, GET OUT-VOTED

The other big piece of business tonight concerned an ordinance for historic review on a number of properties. Two weeks ago, during the ordinance's first reading, almost all of the comments were gleeful: “Claritans love history and we want to preserve it, rah rah rah!” Tonight, the comments were rather the opposite.

Speakers warned about “overzealous preservationists” and a “malicious perversion of government power.” The list of properties that would face historic review was said to be deeply flawed. Many buildings were simply old, not historic, and their inclusion on the list belied shoddy research. Private property rights stood to be violated, many said, since the ordinance could limit what owners could do with their buildings. Cynthia Harris called it "a totally unfair ordinance.” The bespectacled Harris gazed intently at Mayor Kellar as she gave her comments, saying "Bob, you should know better.”

And ultimately, he did know better. Mayor Kellar noted that historic listing would be a discolsure that would lower property values or make a property harder to sell. After all, what buyer wants limits and reviews on what they can do with the structure they acquire? Mayor Pro-Tem Ferry agreed and did not want to unduly burden historic/pseudo-historic property owners.

Indeed, Cynthia Harris should have directed her "You should know better" quip at Weste, McLean, and Ender.

Before voting in favor, Councilmember McLean talked a lot about the ordinance, asking if the review process really imposed that much of a hardship. She somehow missed the fact that the annoying, burdensome review process was exactly the hardship property owners were objecting to. Paul Brotzman encouraged this dismissal of the burdens imposed on property owners. With a hyperbolized sense of urgency, he claimed that we are in an “all or nothing situation”, as if not approving the ordinance would result in a fleet of bulldozers leveling every home with a scrap of historic value.

Mayor Kellar suggested that the City could buy vulnerable properties that come onto the market if it really wanted to preserve them. His idea was ignored as the double X-chromosomed members of Council gave their yeses (or "aye" as the case may be) while the XY-chromosomed members said "no!" Whether the voting divide along gender lines was simple coincidence or something more is unclear. Regardless, homeowners of "historic" properties will now need to ask the City to review planned alterations or demolitions of their homes and buildings. Thanks to this ordinance, many old, ugly buildings will be spared the wrecking ball and preserved for us to endlessly marvel at.
.
IN SHORT
A preemptive strike to have Ferry and Ender recuse themselves on the G&L expansion failed; it's out with the old, in with the new at Hidaway; and it's in with the old, out with the homeowner control at historic/pretend-historic buildings in Newhall.

[1]The agenda may be read here.
[2]To take place on October 18, details here.
[3]Pulskamp confirmed that this will be on the agenda at the next C.C. meeting, which will therefore stretch until 1am--if we're being optimistic.

Happenings: 5 Gangs, 1 Traffic Diverter, and 4 Councilmembers

Laurie Ender drew inspiration from Gandhi during the invocation of the August 26 City Council meeting[1]. She began by lamenting the Claritans who won’t be able to attend $150-per-plate charity fundraising dinners/galas because of the tough economy[2]. A decline in donations going to worthy non-profits would be unacceptable, to be sure. But Gandhi has the solution! Ender explained that we just need to take his quotation “Be the change that you want to see in the world” a little more literally. Then, she pulled out piggy banks for all the councilmembers and instructed them to “be the change: save your change.” The pun was meant to get people to gather enough coins to make a nice donation to a deserving local charity. Oh my.

Next we had the Public Safety Topics of the Month presentation where the topic was...gangs!, those groups of violent youths one can avoid by living in Valencia. I found it to be an interesting talk, by far the best in the series. Deputy Dan Finn skipped the woe-are-we preamble and got straight into numbers and facts about the state of gangs in the SCV:

*Newhall 13. 160 members, 100 active. This is our oldest gang (alert the historical society to mobilize for preservation!). Finn explained that it contains some second and even third generation gang members.
*Vale Verde Park 13. 40 members, 15 active. This gang, apparently, experienced a major decline after dozens of members moved.
*Canones 13. I missed the numbers for this group.
*Malditos Mexicanos Surenos 13. 25 members, 15 active. MMS is a Fresno gang that translocated to our peace-loving valley some 6 years ago.
*Brown Familia 13. 65 members, 45 active.

(Perhaps having 200 active gang members explains why we’re not the #1 Safest City.)

Finn closed by discussing programs used to teach families the signs that their child might be involved with a gang and how to prevent said child from joining a gang. Mayor Bob Kellar asked about whether injunctions—a legal tool aimed at preventing gangs from congregating in particular areas, like a park or alley way—could be used as they’ve been used against LA gangs. Finn replied the SCV gangs aren’t really tied to one specific spot, so injunctions were unfortunately not feasible. The councilmembers then took a controversial anti-gang, pro-law enforcement position.

Up next we endured Public Participation. Jim Farley discussed a California Supreme Court ruling in Santa Clara that called the validity of open space assessment districts into question. (Recall that an open space assessment of $25/yr passed earlier this year with the intent of preserving natural areas in and around the valley.) Said Farley, “Our open space district is an illegal tax…it’s been confirmed by the California Supreme Court.” City Manager Ken Pulskamp said the two assessments were based on very different engineer’s reports and that he would clarify the issue with Farley. I’m sure he’ll keep us Claritans posted.

The next block-o-comments concerned Southern California Edison utility towers installed near Decoro and the Belcaro community[3]. As the old saying goes, there’s nothing like a 22-story utility tower to bring out the hyperbole. Indeed, you’d think the electricity-conveying towers were the end of the world. One person presented a picture of the structures, drawing horrified gasps from all who viewed the lattice of steel. Laurie Ender mentioned that her son thought they were ugly/alienesque, and Laurene Weste called them “hideous” and “heart-breaking.” My favorite part, though, was listening to Hunt Braly[4], the mouth that says what you pay it to, try to sound outraged about their construction. The guy who lobbies for G&L Realty (among others) actually spoke out against SoCal Edison for being secretive and showing no regard for the community[5]. And he did so without an iota of irony.

The bulk of public comments, though, concerned “One Valley, One Vision.” TimBen Boydston said there hasn’t been enough public participation, and he claimed there are major problems with density. Annette Lucas, representing Calgrove Corridor Coalition[6], brought forward apparent contradictions in the number of acres of parkland per resident, an important part of OVOV and the General Plan. One City document claimed 5 acres/1000 people, and a newer document claimed that both the City and County held to a 3 acres/1000 people standard. It’s still not clear what’s going on with this park matter, but Lucas claimed that sneaking in provisions for “bigger buildings, fewer parks” epitomized the lack of transparency that characterizes OVOV. One speaker summarized her feeling thus: “I am terrified…the residents of Santa Clarita do not approve or condone the direction the City is going in!”

Needless to say, Mayor Kellar and Councilmember McLean got defensive after the tongue-lashing by upset Claritans. (Mayor Pro-Tem Ferry would have gotten angry too, but he wasn’t there). The Mayor reminded Claritans that they need to give the City a chance to help them out as they’ve done in the past with the MRF, Las Lomas, and CEMEX. Councilmember McLean was a bit more on edge. She was thoroughly annoyed with some unnamed persons who speak “untruths” in order to “stir the pot.” She twice appropriated the phrase “matters not in evidence” that you may recall from a recent article by Tim Myers. She closed by declaring that there’s a new paradigm in development, and it calls for more dense building, so get used to it! And in a final verbal flourish, she advised “Don’t let a few negative people ruin your life.” Sure we can guess to whom she's referring, but maybe next time she'll name names.

On the consent calendar, only provisions to protect historical buildings elicited much response. Most speakers were in favor of a phased approach to historic preservation that could affect at least 62 properties. Only Molly Hodson spoke against the plan, noting that her property would likely be designated as historic even though it was really "just old". Stricter standards for what constitutes a historic site will be included in more comprehensive plans to be developed.

The evening closed with a discussion of Benz Road, where cut-through traffic makes life a nightmare for 26 residents. People came up to say that cut-through traffic puts their children in danger and sends their quality of life down the toilet. The solution was to make the traffic cut through on another street, thereby putting other children in danger and sending other people's quality of life down the toilet. It was heart-warming.

Definitive action was taken, though. After 20 speakers largely ripped apart a proposal to try out temporary speed humps, the Council decided to give a traffic diverter (the option favored by Benz road residents) the old college try. It was late in the meeting, so City Clerk Sharon Dawson and Laurene Weste took some time to make sure the wording of the final, approved motion was recorded accurately. Roughly, the plan is to [here I’m half-quoting, half-paraphrasing] “Try the diverter for 3 months, taking out turn restrictions, and evaluate it after 3 months. Staff will then have latitude to use speed humps wherever necessary after the 3 months report is given.” McLean would have preferred to see no speed humps unless absolutely necessary, but she was out-voted. There was some applause, so some people were happy. Others were not. I'm sure we'll hear more from both sides.

Tonight's meeting was a good warm-up for the September 9th meeting when Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital and G & L Realty will again take center stage. Get those comment cards ready, kids!

[1]Here is the agenda, brought to you by the City of SC
[2]I think the phrase "tough economy" and variants thereof were uttered at least 453 times this evening.
[3]The Signal gives some background here.
[4]Hunt Braly hired! Details from KHTS here.
[5] Eighteen years of my life were spent staring at the 4 towers I could see from our yard, 1 of which was only 100 yards away. I got over it. Color me cold and unsympathetic, but I say deal with it, Decoro.
[6]Calgrove Corridor Coalition

Happenings: A Resilient Budget and A Nightmare on Benz Road

Shortly after the meeting began, Mayor Kellar’s leaky water glass began to mar his notes and agenda. It was then that I fantasized about being able to write “Faulty cup brings City Council meeting to a premature close.” Alas, it was not to be.

After professing allegiance to our Motherland and recognition of some high school kids who are awfully good at sports, it was time for our monthly lesson in public safety. I trust I wasn’t the only one delighted to hear some super-helpful summer security tips. For instance, sleeping with an open window is unsafe, especially for females living alone! And don’t forget to lock your doors before you go to sleep, either. What clever ways to foil thieves and rapists--thanks, City of SC!

Public Participation came next, and perennial podium fixture Allen I-am-the-Chair-of-the-Canyon-Country-Advisory-Committee Ferdman defended the tactic of citizen bombardment of the Council over traffic concerns. He noted a lack of progress on the Benz Road problem—to be discussed later in the evening—and other local traffic problems as evidence. People involved in the Canvas/Linda Vista traffic headache expressed preemptive support for the Benz issue as well. Indeed, before the agenda item dealing with Benz Road had even been reached, people were already getting riled up and giving us a taste of what was to come.

City Manager Ken Pulskamp fought back with a cool, logical (but ultimately unsatisfying) “I ask that everybody keep an open mind.” Pulskamp shone more brightly in his discussion of 08/09 Operating Budget draft. The good news was that the City will “maintain financial solvency” through this period. Still, he cautioned “This is not the year to be taking on new, significant expenditures”, citing growth in the general fund of a paltry 1%. The general financial picture painted, he offered us the chance to ruminate on some more specific budget highlights. Among these: $200,000 to work towards a resolution with CEMEX; $100,000 for Old Town Newhall professional services and marketing; two commuter buses; demolition in preparation for the (second) Newhall Library; and new positions like a tree specialist, commercial enforcement deputy, and community preservation officer. Budgeting for the expansion of Central Park and Phase IV of the Santa Clarita Sports Complex was also discussed. Pulskamp summarized his presentation by stating that because the City budget has been “conservative and balanced”, we will still be seeing improvements and expansions while many other cities cut back in the face of a less-than-ideal economy. The budget will be up for formal approval at the June 24th meeting.

The only speaker on the budget was TimBen Boydston. Miraculously, he resurrected the spectre of Big League Dreams, asking whether it’s the wisest investment in the current economy. Pulskamp responded by saying that the Big League Dream Feasibility Study is already underway but has been allotted no additional resources.

Before moving on, Councilmember Laurene Weste gave a plea that the City budget to help out the Senior Center. Apparently, a sum of $75,000 is urgently needed to help support the Meals-on-Wheels program so vital to the senior community. Said Weste “You cannot let grandmas and grandpas of America starve in their communities.” Everyone largely fell in line behind the need to ensure funding, and the City Manager promised to make sure this was reflected when the budget returned on the 24th.

Then it was time to deal with traffic on Benz Road. This is one of many instances in the valley where “residential streets carry major traffic flows” as A. Ferdman nicely summed it up. People looking for shortcuts drive on Benz Road at high rates of speed. This in turn threatens the safety of residents and diminishes the quality of life for homeowners. But if you block traffic flow through Benz, cut-through drivers will simply destroy the quality of life for people living on adjacent streets. Andrew Yi, City Traffic Engineer, made a presentation covering the results of a recent survey on this very dilemma.

T’would’st have been better for Mr. Yi if this survey had ne'er been sent out.

Indeed, it pitted neighbor against neighbor, was extraordinarily biased, and it delivered the predicted result: most people want the traffic patterns on Benz Road to stay the same because they like using it as a shortcut. There were plenty of Benz Road residents ready to give the survey the skewering it so richly deserved, and plenty of nearby residents ready to support it in hopes that the traffic headaches wouldn’t be diverted their way.

Here is a small sampling of what was said. I withhold credit for the quotations because I think I got the names mixed up along the way—so much for blogger credibility, eh?

“Andrew…you’re throwing us under the bus. There’ve been many times when…I don’t know what to say I’m so angry right now.”

“Convenience is never as important as safety.”

“I’m very disappointed in the City Council. You have not kept your word, nor do I believe you ever intended to.”

“The situation is going to go from nightmare to beyond belief.”

“Part of good government is good planning.”

“You do not throw an entire neighborhood to the sharks.”

“How much longer do they have to live like this?”


Some of these comments got really dramatic—even tearful. One woman claimed that as she crossed the street, a motorist accelerated from his pause at a stop sign and tried to hit her! We even heard the story of a man who brandished a gun after a Benz Street woman told him to slow down! The lives and safety of children were said to be riding on how the Benz Road issue was resolved.

Councilmember Marsha McLean demonstrated her frustration over all this. “What are the physical solutions? Period! That’s all. What are the solutions?”

Mayor Pro-Tem Frank Ferry took a different approach, urging thoughtful decision-making since any decision will make a policy statement. He brought up de facto policies of never cul-de-sac-ing public roads or adding speed bumps.

The discussion vollied back and forth from City Attorney to Yi to councilmembers to Pulskamp for a while, with the only conclusion being that enough direction has been given for the City to work on and Ken Pulskamp to report back shortly. In short, it is far from "over", and everyone will be trying to answer to the disparate demands of residents of Benz Road, their worried neighbors, and convenience-seeking commuters.

Happenings: City Council sans Conflict

Tonight's City Council meeting was a delightful departure from those in past months. There were no hordes of angry speakers, minimal citizen outrage, and the whole thing wrapped up by about ten minutes after seven. The most entertaining part of the evening was hearing a girl named "Mary Jane" talk about the problem of drug use, causing my irony-meter to beep uncontrollably.

The evening began, though, with Councilmember Laurene Weste giving a rather nice spiel about Memorial Day. Several members of Council touched on yesterday's observation and events in the City that honored those who died in service.

Then it was time to hear about a program called STAR that teaches 6th graders about drugs, violence, crime and all the other things that make life worth living. Some of the top students were invited to talk about "What the STAR Program means to me." What the speeches lacked in eloquence and clarity they made up for in wisdom. One girl, for example, said guns were bad because “In a public place, one simple act from a gun can create chaos.” We also learned that one can also say no to drugs with the handy excuse "I have to go make my bed" or by "pretend[ing] like you didn't hear them."

After Mary Jane and the others concluded, we had a very brief public participation section followed immediately by City and Newhall Redevelopment business. Nary a speaker showed up to say anything about the resolution to spend about $1.2M to acquire a property on Spruce Street. The space will be used for retail/offices with a side of library. The resolution was adopted, meaning that the City will buy out and serve as temporary landlord to current business owners on the property, all of whom will have to relocate.

Other notable business this evening was an appeal for public support of Representative Buck McKeon's CEMEX bill--I'll be posting more about this later. Mike Murphy discussed a trip to D.C. to work on getting the bill passed and the CEMEX issue resolved once and for all (theoretically).

Before the meeting closed, though, Mayor Bob Kellar suggested a "Team Building Day" for the City Council members. I will pay good money for a photo of Ferry and Weste climbing a rope course together or McLean walking through a forest blind-folded, guided only by the spoken directions of Laurie Ender. I know, that's probably not the kind of team-building activities they're talking about, but allow a blogger his fantasy.

Happenings: On Trusting Ken Pulskamp

NOTE: Sorry I've been bad about posting this month. It is the breeding season for the animals I'm studying and I've been busy trying to keep tabs and grab data. Expect more regular posts soon, though, and know that I am resenting my study species for tearing me away from that which is truly important: hearting SCV.

Did you hear it—that bellow of rage and distress just a shade more desperate than the noise a mammoth would have made after wandering into a tar pit to be devoured by cave lions? Well that was me. To be more precise, that was me after Mayor Bob Kellar announced that there were going to be SEVENTEEN speakers on the Smiser Ranch property development[1]. Of course it’s a horrible idea to build densely on the Smiser property, I yelled at the commenters on the screen, But you don’t need to remind me every week! I begrudgingly concede that such displays of opposition can be important. Indeed, we know that Jeff Lambert talks to folks at City Hall when we’re not around to listen, so hearing from the public on a week-to-week basis may legitimately reinforce the magnitude of opposition in the minds of City leaders. Lambert, incidentally, was appropriately villainized during comments and would do well to stay clear on Southern SCV.

Before comments about the Avenue project, though, public participation had focused on the closure of the Transitional Care Unit at Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital. The planned closure would leave the citizens of Santa Clarita without a TCU for at least 18-months, which Mayor Kellar described as an “optimistic” estimate of how long the wait would be.

Everyone in the City and on City Council was upset by this issue and wants to see something done about it. For an in-house opinion, HMNMH's own Dr. Gene Dorio showed up to say that most admissions to Henry Mayo are old people (although I believe he phrased it “senior patients”) who derive a lot of benefit from having a TCU available to them. Public speakers agreed, oft regaling us with tales of ailing mothers using the facility or how they may be in need of it in the near future.

All of these comments could only do so much. “As a council, we have no power over the hospital to tell them what to do…I get very frustrated…that we can’t do anything about it” said Councilmember Marsha McLean. She suggested contacting state agencies to see if there was some way to step in and intervene. McLean also proposed investigating whether a partial, as opposed to full, closure of the TCU was feasible. Councilmember Laurene Weste suggested partnerships with in-city groups like the Senior Center to drive the relatives of TCU patients to visit their loved ones in facilities out of town. Laurie Ender agreed that transportation-based solutions might be the best option assuming there was no way around a closure.

It was Mayor Bob Kellar who took action—at least on paper. He proposed a letter be drafted that said something to the effect of “The closing of the TCU…is an inappropriate course of action.” The agreement to write and send such a letter garnered applause from the masses and settled the issue for the time being.

Next, we heard some bickering over landslides and soil stability and house foundations and heritage oaks that was far too tedious to coalesce into anything meaningful in my mind. If you’re worried about the particulars, well, that’s too bad.

Adoption of the City Code of Ethics and Conduct proved slightly more bearable an agenda item. There were a number of speakers on this issue, one that has been floating around since last year. Claritans agreed that the Code of Ethics[2] was a good start (or an “OK but impotent start” if they were feeling less generous) but that a more aggressive code would be needed. Several called for an Ethics Commission, but the City Attorney noted that such a group would not have the power to enforce or control ethical conduct.

Instead, everyone pointed to an existing hierarchy of what-to-do-when-ethics-are-violated that essentially leads to City Manager Ken Pulskamp. Got a grievance and want to take it to the top? See Ken. Need to report a breach of ethics but afraid of confronting your direct superior? See Ken. All of this led Annette Lucas, among others, to say “I just think we need somebody to check Ken Pulskamp.” [Yikes.]

Everyone on Council was more or less OK with the code, though some tweaking (e.g., a list of who to contact) was needed[3]. The fine-tunings shall come, I think, but until then, it’s a matter of how much you believe Bob Kellar’s closing speech. In it, he expressed how frustrated he is that people harass a City that employs so many quality individuals. “This council and this city lives by a high ethical standard,” he said. If so, I guess there’s really nothing to worry about.


[1]This is the proposal to build about two-million square feet of retail, residential, etc… on a parcel that is clearly much too small to accommodate a project of that scale. Read more about it in my posting here, which also has helpful links.
NOTE: Also check out the site put up by the Calgrove Corridor Coalition. This group arose in response to the proposed Avenues Project, and they have a nice side-by-side of potential City seals.
[2]Read the Code of Ethics and Conduct
[3]Mayor Pro Tem Frank Ferry was a little upset by the issue of ethics even being raised, as was Mayor Kellar.

Happenings: Traffic Woes Heard, Coots Find Friends

Quick Reminders:
1. If you heard about the more than 400 abused animals recently found in Lancaster, consider making a donation to Gentle Barn, a local group that’s looking after hundreds of dogs and other abused creatures. Their site can be found here.
2. Don’t forget to send me results from the Candidate Recognizability Survey, which you can find here. Send it in today.

. . . . . . . . . .

“Will you vote for me then, Frank?”
“We’ll see in two years.”
-Councilmember TimBen Boydston and Mayor Pro Tem Frank Ferry, after Ferry extends a verbal olive branch to Boydston.

Everyone was pleased to see Councilmember Laurene Weste back in action at tonight’s City Council meeting--recall that she was in a car accident on her way to a meeting earlier this month. As a welcome back, she was treated to four hours of traffic woes, annexation frustration, and pleas to be green.

Per Unwritten Rule #12 in the City Council Code of Conduct (“There shall be at least one weird event at every Council Meeting”—oh damn, I wrote that which was unwritten), we had three youngish people encourage the Council to pass a resolution in support of Lyndon LaRouche’s “The Homeowner and Bank Protection Act of 2007.” Lyndon LaRouche, for those fortunate enough to have not heard of him, writes many things that few read and is always running to be the President of the United States[1]. Inexplicably, LaRouche manages to win cult-like devotion from a small fraction of college students year after year. As an undergraduate at UCLA, I knew of a LaRouche disciple who actually dropped out of school to help on one of his many campaigns. In any case, the three LaRouche-heads at tonight’s meeting made for a bizarre tangent. They wanted Santa Clarita to pass a resolution that supports legislation to protect homeowners from foreclosure. Someone should have told these kids that the City of Santa Clarita makes resolutions about grocery bags, not irrelevant old men.

Far more impactful was a discussion of traffic in communities near Sierra Highway. Fully eleven residents on or near Canvas Street commented during Public Participation. Many of them haven't been able to get out of their driveways since Canvas Street was connected to Sierra Highway. Cars have been vandalized and stolen, and residents have observed an increase in crime. Motorists commonly travel through the neighborhood at speeds that are double the posted 25 mph speed limit. It takes a lot to get one person sufficiently worked up to endure a City Council meeting. To get eleven residents from the same area to show up on the same night means things must be unbearable.

The traffic nightmare arose when Canvas Street was connected to Sierra Highway as part of a recent development of homes.

In response to the neighborhood’s collective frustration, City Manager Ken Pulskamp said “we certainly have empathy for the issues that they’re dealing with.” This empathy has been made evident in the two sets of four-way stops (three, counting the one approved tonight) and additional speed limit signs that the City has lavished on the area. “I want you to know we have done a lot of work here”, noted Pulskamp. Unfortunately, none of the residents agree. Councilmembers McLean and Weste were very sympathetic to the plight of these Claritans, and they made it clear that some serious changes need to be enacted.

In other vehicular news, you will soon be driving on Newhall Avenue where you once drove on San Fernando Road. The name change was approved. That’s 1 for the Newhalls, 0 for Saint Ferdinand and spruce trees.

As for other matters on the Consent Calendar, things got a bit heated over the reusable bag resolution (I called it!). Councilmember McLean and Mayor Kellar got a little snappy and short with one another—McLean and Weste devoted too much attention to the resolution for the mayor’s taste. In any case, the resolution that essentially says “we like reusable bags” passed. McLean and Weste teamed up to go green again when Teresa Savaikie mentioned the killing of American Coots and poisoning programs along the Santa Clara River. The coots should be happy to know they have allies on the City Council[2].

Finally, residents of Hasley Hills were generally eager to move forward on annexation into the City of Santa Clarita. Both they and the City Council were frustrated that LA County is holding them up on the process—the County won’t have certain key reports ready until February 2009. Until then, Santa Clarita shall remain Santa Clarita, a land where coots can swim (sometimes), cul de sacs can be corrupted, and even LaRouche fanatics can comment at City Council meetings. .
NOTE (2/01): A LaRouche-watcher just alerted me to the fact that I had called him Leroy when, in fact, his first name is Lyndon. The mistake has been corrected on paper, though not in my head, where I still regard him as Leroy.

[1]LaRouche, anyone?
[2]Incidentally, coot control has been intense and ugly in Los Angeles County's past. This is an excerpt from a 1986 report I found while researching the subject. (You can click on it to make it easier to read, but it basically says that 3,000 coots were shot and put in a landfill over the course of just 15 manhours at the direction of the County Agriculture Department of Los Angeles).

Happenings: Feinstein's Ideas Enthusiastically Rejected, Other C.C. Notes

At this first City Council meeting of 2008, CEMEX mining has again moved to the forefront of Clarita’s collective consciousness[1]. It’s the headache that keeps on aching; we’ve been talking about CEMEX since the last millennium (i.e., 1999)! Tonight, however, we got a special treat. It was a discussion of two brilliant suggestions to resolve the conflict between CEMEX and the City of Santa Clarita provided by none other than United States Senator Dianne Feinstein.


As it stands, the City wants to prohibit mining in excess of historical mining levels. That is, only 300,000 tons of material can be removed each year. Senator Dianne Feinstein, devoted environmentalist, asked the City to consider increasing this level by a factor of five. After all, CEMEX has a God-given right to turn a profit on the land, and CEMEX claimed it would need to extract 1,500,000 tons of sand and gravel each year for its project to be “economically viable.” That translates into 757 smoggy, sand-dropping, road-clogging truck trips a day for decades to come.

An even better idea was the option of saddling taxpayers with a $170 million bond to buy out CEMEX’s lease. It would have to be approved by voters, but it’s an option. The thing is, the Bureau of Land Management would still own the sand and gravel mineral rights on the land in question and could actually sell them again. I’ll say that one more time: taxpayers could buy out CEMEX and the BLM could then re-sell the mining rights to someone else. Inexplicably, this perfect little solution was dismissed by the Council!

Councilmember TimBen Boydston responded appropriately. In a composed, mini-tirade he remarked: “I was under the impression that she [Feinstein] was trying to help us. […] Is someone on her staff smoking particulates from mining? […] This is not help in any way.” Speakers like Andrew Fried and Pauline Harte agreed that CEMEX must be continue to be fought. Thus, Santa Clarita remains opposed to the mining.

Boydston also made some interesting remarks about another favored issue, the Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital expansion project. By Paul Brotzman’s estimate, it won’t be discussed again until May because of hold-ups with the hospital’s revised Environmental Impact Report. Boydston noted that Roger Seaver et al. had been pushing hard for a timely resolution to the expansion but that “Now, suddenly, it doesn’t seem to be quite so important.” He knows what’s up. As SCVTalker J-to-the-Wilson and other Claritan commentators have wryly noted, waiting for a new, presumably Boydston-less Council after the April elections might make it easier for HMNMH to get its plans approved. This new tack means SCV’s 2007 buzzword of “collusion” must now be replaced with buzzphrase “strategic, quasi-slimy, manipulative delays". That’s not quite as catchy, is it?

In an unusual show of restraint, Cam Noltemeyer spoke only about half a dozen times this evening. Her resounding theme was that more building—in the form of a new Civic Center, HMNMH’s expansion, the Westfield mall expansion, the 21,000 units in Newhall Ranch—would exacerbate already existing problems. Apparently, forcing too much stuff into too little space can actually decrease quality of life and increase traffic congestion. Obviously, we must temper Cam’s views with what we have to gain from all the new building— 60,000 new neighbors and a Cheesecake Factory.

Apart from CEMEX and development, the Council discussed and approved Mayor Kellar’s pet initiative, a $40K investment in a year-long series of informative safety months. This was quite timely, as Old Orchard resident Edith Coranzo had expressed concern over increased gang activity earlier in the evening. In Kellar’s own words, “important information on issues of importance” will be disseminated to the public.

The evening closed with a discussion of a chance to build a new Civic Center to improve the current, out-dated courthouse and Sheriff's department. Ken Pulskamp could scarcely contain his giddy enthusiasm for the prospect of uniting State, County, and City into one grand, centralized center. In infomercial-like fashion, he noted this was a limited-time opportunity. After the Council and public offered comments, a bold, daring plan of action was approved:
“RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and allow the City Manager to continue discussions with Los Angeles County Supervisor Antonovich's Office.”

Indeed, discussions shall be allowed! Rejoice at will.

*NOTE: Laurene Weste wasn’t at the meeting tonight because she was in a traffic accident on the way to the meeting. We hope she’s alright and wish her the best.

[1]A good place to get background on this issue is this interview that covers one chapter of the ever-evolving CEMEX affair. Complex issues of land ownership, mineral rights, leasing, air quality, etc… are discussed in relation to Stonecrest—remember that?
[2]Senator Feinstein’s website. Be sure to click on “Breakfast with Dianne”. Sounds like a bad sitcom, no?

Happenings: Meaningless Gestures, Anyone?

Yesterday’s City Council Meeting can be summarized as “Meaningless gestures and the people who love them.” To wit:


Meaningless Gesture 1: The Lobbyist Registration Ordinance

At the urging of a few suspicious citizens, the City embarked on a journey some months ago. The destination is a splendid promise land where all lobbyists appearing before the council are registered and declared as such. Sadly—but accurately—Mayor Pro Tem Bob Kellar called the lobbyist registration ordinance “absolutely meaningless to the citizens of Santa Clarita.” Indeed, Councilmember Ferry could rattle off SCV’s lobbyists’ names by heart and Councilmember Weste made the point of knowing the identity of all lobbyists when she spoke a last week’s meeting. Mayor McLean said something close to “it’ll make them [Claritans] feel better”, which is exactly what this bill is about. The council will say officially, rather than informally, that it knows who lobbyists are, and that’s just the sort of meaningless gesture that makes my day.

TimBen Boydston said “I respectfully disagree completely” after Kellar made a point about Lobbyist Registration being totally meaningless. Kellar still gives the measure his support.

M.G.2: Annexation Amendments
Altering the annexation initiation threshold by 5% isn’t meaningless, but appearances by Castaic folks were. Everyone speaking feigned disinterest in the outcome. If they were all mashed into one person, he would have said “Oh I don’t really have a position about whether we want to be annexed or not; I just want things to be done properly. There are studies to finish! Let’s all cooperate and respect one another, shall we?.” A slightly amended version of the policy carried in the face of these exquisitely helpful platitudes.


M.G.3: Accountability Panel Extension
The Council (minus Boydston) agreed to extend the deadline for applications to the Open Space Financial Accountability and Audit Panel. Despite having five qualified candidates (five are needed, and a sixth has put his name back into the race after withdrawing) turn in their applications by the deadline, city Manager Ken Pulskamp thought it would be a swell idea to extend the deadline to December 28th. Councilmember Ferry called it like it was—a (meaningless) gesture, but one that’s nice to make in light of the fires that swept through town during the week of the deadline. Obviously, there will be another extenstion after the December 28th one in case people were too busy dealing with the holidays to turn in their application.


I’m all for meaningless gestures, but I also respect Boydston’s observation that people who want to participate in things like accountability panels “are few and far between.” There aren’t a lot of Claritans salivating over the chance to study, review, and debate complicated land acquisitions. Thankfully, Jim Farley (who opposed the measure from the beginning and will provide a much-need critical voice) is one of the people willing to serve. He and pal Sterling King noted that the deadline extension seemed like a convenient way for the City to get someone more in line with their thinking . We shall learn if this was actually the case only if the City manages to muster another application or two before December 28th; I’m not holding my breath.

Happenings: Controversy Averted (Disappointingly) at City Council

Tonight’s City Council meeting was excessively civil. Reasonable points were made and acknowledged, and reasonable counter-points were offered and discussed. Even the potentially contentious issues of lobbyist registration and Las Lomas development elicited nothing more than appropriately impassioned testimonials. I have no patience for this sort of behavior.

Indeed, it was with some disappointment that I watched the Council skirt the first potential flare-up over Big League Dreams[1]. They are a private baseball stadium builder, and Councilman Frank Ferry is very enthusiastic about the prospect of them building a fantasy-inspired field in SCV, a plan currently being explored. If you’ll recall, Council member TimBen Boydston’s remarks on such a stadium being a waste of money prompted a verbal tongue-lashing from Ferry some weeks ago. Today, Canyon Countryan Steve Lucia expressed his opposition in public participation, calling it “repulsive” for the City to aid the private company with tens of millions of dollars for a stadium. Then, Boydston brought up a B.L.D. project in Gilbert, Arizona that exceeded the original budget by about 70%[2]. Ferry, however, stayed out of the fray and made no mention of the issue whatsoever.

Reason and cool tempers prevailed again when it came time to discuss renaming the road called, variously, Bouquet Canyon, San Fernando, Main Street, etc. Leon Worden, Claritan-of-Consequence and over-estimator of parade attendance, made an eloquent plea that Saugus names (Bouquet) stay in Saugus while Newhall names stay in Newhall. His sentiments were echoed as others suggested an extension of the name “Railroad Avenue” and still others called for additional study. Ultimately, the plan for street name change has been tabled. San Fernando road remains San Fernando road for at least a while longer.

Ball parks and street names might be poor fodder for controversy, I reasoned as the meeting passed the 90-minute mark, but lobbyist registration would surely provoke more passion. I was wrong. There was discussion of fines for failure to register as a lobbyist, whether attorneys would be exempt from registering, and availability of the registration online. Trust me; it was thrilling. Discussion will continue at the next meeting by which time some problematic language in the ordinance will be corrected. Regardless of when they'll ultimately register, Laurene Weste pointed out (while eyeing Hunt Braly) that "We know who the lobbyists are."

Cam Noltemeyer proved a godsend when it came to keeping the lobbying discussion interesting. During two of her four-hundred and eighty-six comments tonight, she mentioned a peculiar observation about City Council. It seems that, on occasion, they eat an evening meal in the company of one another. Alright, so dinner seems normal, especially during busy City Council meeting days, but she said that she’s seen lobbyists begin “swarming” just as these 5 o’clock suppers begin. Her suspicions that inappropriate business/discussion might be going on behind closed doors were quickly allayed by Ferry, however, who assured her that they had most recently used dinnertime to discuss Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Kellar’s ironing, not the business of Santa Clarita.

Next on the agenda was a resolution opposing Las Lomas (“The Hills” in Spanish—does that mean MTV will be filming a reality show there?). The development would bring 5,500 dwelling units and associated commercial space into 550 acres just outside SCV. Everyone from Congressman Buck McKeon to Supervisor Antonovich sent reps to read letters expressing firm opposition to the project. I don’t see why they’re all so against it. I mean, the only problems with the Las Lomas site are that it’s an important wildlife corridor, geologically unstable, fire-prone, ecologically sensitive, has land with slopes in excess of 50%, and would require millions of tons of grading. Oh, and the planned development would exceed density standards set forth by the general plan, has an unrealistic transit program, would aggravate traffic problems, has major infrastructure issues, and is utterly absurd in every way imaginable. Other than that, it’s just fine.

Poor, mild-mannered Matt Klink of Las Lomas Land Company was the only one in favor. After apologizing for poor penmanship on his comment card (really), he offered a letter from a higher-up in his company that showed Las Lomas was smart growth and forward-thinking development. Providing this letter amounted to throwing a single drop of water at the raging inferno of opposition against Las Lomas (at least on part of people outside of LA City and the LA Mayor's office). To paraphrase SCV Mayor Marsha McLean, you just don’t build houses on steep mountains next to freeways, and everbody knows it. In case you haven’t gotten the point yet, here are what three Claritans had to say about Las Lomas:
“Such a ridiculous project.” Diane Trautman
“This is irresponsible from A to Z.” Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Kellar
“This is a terrible project. It’s universally known.” Councilmember TimBen Boydston

With Las Lomas settled, all that remained was discussion of the Certificates of Participation associated with the Open Space Preservation District. Cam Noltemeyer brought up the issue of vote/assessment allocation that has been discussed at length by herself, Sterling King, and Jim Farley[3]. The City assured everyone that the vote was legal (the term “super-compliant” was actually used) and that the records had been made totally public because there was nothing to hide. I suspect that the explanation proved predictably unsatisfactory to the Claritans most involved in the Open Space issue. In any case, a call for transparency in government actions has remained the central theme in Council meetings ever since Boydston uttered the word “collusion” all those months ago. I doubt it's going to go away any time soon.

Random Notes:
The issue of Henry-Mayo-expansion returned briefly when Dr. Gene Dorio spoke in the public participation section. He reaffirmed his opposition to any expansion that didn't first make provisions for more operating rooms. Henry Mayo CEO Roger Seaver's attempts to spin Dorio's letter of opposition and similar letters from more than 70 other hospital staff members was called a "deception."

IHeartSCV was mentioned by TimBen Boydston, specifically a remark about the relationship between the length of City Council meetings and his presence at them, here. Gosh golly!

[1]Do you dream BIG?
[2]I don't believe this is the article cited by Boydston, but it deals with the Gilbert budget drama
[3]I present a summary here

Happenings: Council Caps off October

Keen observers will have noted two facts about tonight’s City Council meeting: (1)It was quick, and (2)Council member TimBen Boydston was absent. How the keen observer links these two pieces of information is left to his or her discretion.

Though brief, tonight’s meeting offered an important opportunity to reflect on what has been a most tumultuous October. Frank Ferry acknowledged the leadership of Assistant City Manager Ken Striplin through the freeway accident/closure and the fires. Laurene Weste and others expressed profound appreciation for emergency personnel.

In her turn, Mayor McLean focused on more pragmatic lessons from October’s trials and tribulations. “These past few weeks have reiterated that transportation is still our number one issue,” she began. McLean continued to say that she has recently been in contact with Senators Boxer and Feinstein. She plans to use the senatorial attention as an opportunity to communicate Santa Clarita’s needs, noting: “We’re on the map again.” "For the wrong reasons!" replied Frank Ferry. McLean pooh-poohed Ferry's nay-saying, though, and suggested that it was the City’s quick response to tragedy rather than tragedy itself that put all eyes on SCV…at least for a while.

The public hearing that followed this discussion proved disappointingly civil. The hearing was held in response to Salt Creek Grille’s appeal of the Town Center East expansion. (S.C.G. was upset about how their parking would be effected by the expansion, from what I got) Claritans-of-consequence, like Laurie Ender, had shown up pumped and ready to fight for the expansion's promises of upscale dining and shopping, but they were qucikly deflated. Indeed, it seems an agreement had been reached behind the scenes. Hunt Braly, representing Salt Creek Grille, said that the restaurant and Westfield had resolved all parking issues. No one else offered anything but support for the expansion—well, no one but Bruce McFarland. He marveled at the “flexibility" of Mr. Braly who is simultaneously representing a client that claims to have enough parking (i.e., Henry Mayo), and one that needs more (i.e., Salt Creek). We see it too, Bruce.

Anyhow, Claritans needn't fret over the Town Center expansion. More opportunities to eat and spend money, our two most cherished pasttimes, are on their way.

Happenings: Did Somebody Say Commitment?

If you need to be brought up to speed on the Henry Mayo Master Plan issue, I suppose you could read this Signal article[1].

Despite hopes for the contrary, there wasn't a whole lot of "new" at tonight's hospital-centric City Council meeting--just alarming overuse of the word commit in all its various forms[2].

Sure, the new-ish Development Agreement was discussed. Paul Brotzman fearlessly led us through a summary of the document and pointed out potential benefits provided by its so-called "sequencing of improvements." For example, G&L Realty wouldn't be issued the building permit for Medical Office Building 3 until they began construction of the new Inpatient Building--the one demanded by the community at large. As many speakers would later note, however, G & L Realty could still get away with building only medical office buildings and parking structures under the Development Agreement per a "no obligation to develop" clause.

Overall, the Development Agreement inspired a lot of hypotheticals regarding what the city could withhold (e.g., the certificate to occupy a building, building permits) in order to compel construction of the Inpatient Building, sufficient parking, and other perceived necessities. By 11:30, Mayor McLean and Roger Seaver were talking very frankly about what would have to happen in order to assure the elusive "third vote" in favor of the Master Plan.

Still, the status quo prevailed. Tonight, as ever, HMNMH CEO Roger Seaver said that signing an agreement to build the new Inpatient Building--and not just medical office buildings--was an impossibility. And tonight, as ever, David Gauny[3] and other opponents said that just wasn't good enough. Gauny reported hearing "no", per usual, in response to his group's many well-defined and reasonable negotiating points.

That not much new was said at the City Council meeting didn't diminish its importance, however. It was an opportunity for both sides to present their cases in polished, practiced form. When the time came for public comments, Roger Seaver and Reena Newhall were the effective figureheads for those for and against expansion, respectively . Despite having only three minutes to speak and no PowerPoint to back her up, Reena was the clear winner in this match-up. I'll give you a break-down in a very long aside:

[KEY PHRASE:
Roger - "We are committed" was said eight times in as many minutes. It worked remarkably well as ammunition for the opposition to aim squarely back at Seaver, as in "Where's the commitment to a new hospital, Mr. Seaver?"
Reena - "Appeasement du jour" was coined to describe laughable concessions made by the hospital in an attempt to appease the community. Reena takes this round.

FAVORED RHETORICAL DEVICE:
Roger - Emphatic repetition was not limited to "we are committed." Roger also singled out each City Council member by name and rattled off the same set of rhetorical questions at them. Roughly, it was "[Council member], I'm asking for your commitment. I'm asking for your commitment to the full master plan. I'm asking for you to commit to the residents of Santa Clarita..."
Reena - Speaking in a bracingly sardonic style, Reena eviscerated the appeasement du jours. I was particularly fond of her ode to "the melodious sound of helicopters" and "therapeutic" gasoline fumes awaiting those in the planned healing garden.

INTERACTION WITH THE COUNCIL:
Roger - Despite singling out each council member with the "I'm asking for your commitment" schpeel, I think most members were left wondering "Is he going to do that to all of us?" rather than feeling personally addressed.
Reena - How nice it is to have someone who is not afraid to call out City Council members by their first names. In particular, she got Laurene Weste's attention by mocking the proposed healing garden's open space dedication.

AUDIENCE SUPPORT:
Roger - He drew yawns and sighs. It didn't help that HMNMH's own Dr. Gene Dorio came forward with 62 letters signed by hospital staff concerned with the immediate need for more operating rooms--not office space.
Reena - She drew guilty giggles and amused gasps with her pluck and sarcasm.]

One thing was made amply clear at tonight's City Council Meeting: it's time for a decision about the Henry Mayo Master Plan. As Council Member Laurene Weste said, "If we don't move ahead ... we're gonna be dog-gone in trouble as a community." The decision is still several months away, however; the Council won't likely discuss it again until January 8, and even that date's tentative. In the interim, the new E.I.R. will be circulated and there will doubtless be many meetings. Of course, neither of these actions will change the situation very much at all.

If I'm reading the prevailing tides correctly, Roger Seaver and G&L are going to get approval of their master plan early next year. There will be some kind of clause that sort of forces construction of the Inpatient Building--perhaps before the second Medical Office Building can be occupied--in order for G&L to get the rest of their desired M.O.B.s. The community around the hospital will suffer more than was anticipated as a too-big project is forced into a too-small space. City Council members may remember with some regret that they were under no obligation to do G&L favors--this when construction of the Inpatient building is delayed or complicated. At that point, of course, progress will have begun and will not be stopped.

Oh yeah, and we'll be spending $60,000 to fix the configuration and angle of parking in Newhall; Jeff Wilson of SCVTalk lobbied for dogs-sans-leash; and I'm tired and not writing very well so I'm off to bed with heart-felt apologies for a lack of clarity. Thank God the meeting only went until 12:35 a.m.

[1]"Hospital Plans Are Front and Center", by Jerry Berrios in the Sunday, September 23 edition.
[2]To be fair, Frank's restrained manner was new.
[3]Of SmartGrowthSCV