Happenings: David vs. Ferryliath

The Final Count

For those who like their councilmembers loud, dismissive, and burnt-out, today was a good day. Incumbent Frank Ferry won reelection to the City Council, defeating challenger David Gauny by a mere 32 votes. He will be joining fellow incumbents Marsha McLean and Laurene Weste for another four years behind the dais. Ferry is perhaps best known for his decision-making style. After hearing about a difficult issue, he immediately makes up his mind and then zones out until it’s time to vote.

We are well used to Frank Ferry by now. The Santa Clarita City Council has included him more often than not. Indeed, both he and Laurene Weste have been in charge for more than half of Santa Clarita’s years as a city. Like herpes, once the City Council got Ferry, he was there to stay. (He’s usually quiet, but the flare-ups can be something.)

Click to make this chart larger. It was constructed using the timeline in the excellent The City of Santa Clarita: Celebrating 20 Years of Success by Gail Ortiz and Diana Sevanian.

Before his tenure could be officially extended, however, 600 or so votes had to be counted. These were votes that remained after the main count last week and that would decide whether Frank Ferry or challenger David Gauny won a seat.

Watching this morning’s count proved exhausting. SCVTV played what are apparently its only five music clips, each of which was about a minute long and combined the worst elements of 80s synth, Mannheim Steamroller Christmas music, the Disney Electric Parade theme, and background music from the Oregon Trail computer game circa 1996. I recorded clips but for some reason can't embed them--sorry.

"Hey buddy--my eyes are up here."

After the counting, City Manager Ken Pulskamp announced the winner. Gauny had waited for the results in the front row with his lovely family by his side. But victory was not to be his.



A Good Fit


Why did Ferry get those extra three-dozen votes? It’s tough to say, but I have found one variable that was very tightly correlated with the number of votes that the top five candidates received: the total square-inches of glossy campaign mailers on which they appeared. I gathered the dozen or so campaign mailers that were sent out this year, measured them, put the numbers into a spreadsheet, and fitted a logarithmic model. It has an R^2-value of 0.995, which means that the very simple model describes the actual election data extremely well. The logarithmic nature of the relationship suggests that even a single campaign mailer made a big difference in the number of votes a candidate received, but there were diminishing returns as a candidate put out more and more mailers. But the relationship between mailers and vote shares is only correlational—it doesn’t imply causation.

That’s just one of many problems, I know. I fit a curve using only five data points; I made it after the fact so it can’t be tested; important variables are missing; I excluded half of the candidate pool… Still, it’s a really good fit. This is probably because the number of mailers issued is an accurate indicator of many factors important to winning the race. As Tim Myers has pointed out, these important factors tend to be correlated. There are those candidates with lots of money, lots of endorsements, and lots of mailers (we call them incumbents); and then there are those with very little of anything. So, at least for this election, it looks like square-inches of campaign mailers ended up being a very good indicator of how the candidates would perform.

What’s Next?

In real world match-ups of David versus Goliath, things don’t always end Biblically. But Gauny has already demonstrated that he can work effectively using his three-minute comments at City Council and reaching out to his neighbors, and the City Council would do well to heed his words considering that more than 6,000 Claritans voted to put Gauny behind the dais. If he runs in two years, he might well take over the seat that Bob Kellar has occupied for a decade, something that both parties would probably be pleased about.

Only in SCV: A Family Affair

It is not uncommon for members of the ruling class to be related. Monarchs marry their cousins, titles are bestowed on relatives, and sometimes a proclivity for the political life just runs in the family. In keeping with the long tradition of politics being a family affair, this month’s election is forcing two relatives to fight each other for a seat on City Council.

Candidates Frank Ferry and David Gauny are related. It’s a non-blood, only recently discovered, rather convoluted kind of related, but related they are. Seriously[1].

.

After a family party, the link became apparent. David married Tracy, who happens to have a cousin who had a child[2] with a woman whose uncle is Frank Ferry (one can only imagine the meeting; it would be wonderful if it went something like "David and Tracy, I'd like you to meet Uncle Frank!"). Put another way, Frank Ferry is David Gauny’s wife’s cousin’s child’s great-uncle. Put yet another way, there exists a child who will likely invite the Gaunys and Great-Uncle Frank to their wedding some day, as that child is related to both parties.

For those who think best linearly:

*David Gauny married Tracy

*Tracy’s cousin had a child with a nice young woman

*That nice young woman’s uncle is Frank Ferry

.

If Ferry and Gauny didn’t get along as well as they do, this could have made things really awkward. Happily, Ferry and Gauny share a mutual admiration that long outdates discovery of their family tie. The two even josh each other as relatives are wont to do. If you’ll recall, Ferry good-naturedly teased David with “You threw the first punch, and we’re coming after you now…you’re going to learn the hard way” to which David joked back “Ferry exemplifies everything that is wrong with our government.” And now, they’re cousins—of the kinda sorta variety.

.

The union of the House of Ferry with the House of Gauny, however tenuous, has several important implications. In a tight election where every vote will count, the discovery means that Tracy Gauny has only one of three bubbles not yet inked in (assuming familial loyalty obliges her to vote for her husband and Frank Ferry). Hence, the remaining candidates must fight especially hard to win her third vote. With regard to social etiquette, I presume Frank, as family, will be obliged to attend David’s victory party even if he (Frank) loses. If both win, they can celebrate together. Finally, City Attorney Carl Newton will have to get to work crafting another of his famously rigorous legal opinions as to whether Ferry and Gauny could serve together without violating the City’s nepotism policy.

.

In any case, David and Frank will have to start being nicer to one another. There's a young person out there that shares 6.25% of his/her genetic code with Tracy Gauny and 12.5% of it with Frank Ferry (I calculated the coefficients of relatedness[3]). That child might well tune into a City Council meeting, and it would be a shame if they had to watch a family quarrel.

.

[1]Confirmed by sources that are undisputed experts on the Gauny family tree.

[2]And I shall refer to him/her exclusively as "the child," not only for its somewhat miraculous connotation, but in the interest of keeping said child's identity private.

[3]The coefficient of relatedness tells one the probability that two individuals will have the same copy of a gene because they both inherited it from a shared ancestor. It's 0.5 between mother and child, 0.25 between grandchild and grandparent, 0.25 between aunt and niece, etc.)

Happenings: Wildflowers by the Millions, Part I

The law is unacceptably vague as to whether it is legal to trespass on private property in order to better appreciate masses of Spider Lupines in full bloom. Consequently, I was at a loss for what to do when we came across the extraordinary lupine fields at the northern end of the Grapevine.

We were driving towards Kern County in pursuit of wildflowers. The Theodore Payne Foundation Wildflower Hotline[1] suggested that the hills near Gorman were full of California Coreopsis, a flower conspicuous as brilliant splotches of gold and yellow on steep hillsides.

However, the real show was to be found further north on part of the Tejon Ranch property. As we descended towards the hopeless wasteland called the Central Valley, a broad swath of blue commanded the eye and drew us onward.

Once down the Grapevine, we immediately took the Grapevine Road exit and headed to the 76 Station adjacent to the Ramada Limited Hotel (occupancy zero—just a guess). Many other travelers had likewise decided to stop and marvel at the sea of violet-blue wildflowers. Along the field’s margins, most of the color was provided by Blue Dicks (Dichelostemma capitatum subsp. capitatum). These common perennials grow from corms and bear bluish flowers on long, thin stems.

After a few hundred yards, however, the scattered Blue Dicks were overtaken by a vast, gently undulating sea of lupines in foamy blue and white. They were almost exclusively Spider Lupines (Lupinus benthamii). I hate to even try and put a number on how many flowers were blooming when we visited on Sunday the 27th, but I’ll be conservative and say millions. The lupines stretched on both sides of the freeway from the end of the Grapevine all the way north to the IKEA warehouse.

As one can tell from the photos, many people decided to take a self-guided tour of Tejon Ranch private property. They squeezed through a white vinyl fence near the gas station (some had to squeeze more than others) in order to gain access to the field. It was possible to enjoy the lupines somewhat more legally from the side of the road or behind the fence, but people were simply drawn to walk among the wildflowers.

Experiencing the enormity of this natural show was something of the sublime. It's a one-hour drive from Santa Clarita, sure, but who knows how many chances there will be to see a spectacle like this one?

Spider Lupines are so called because their very narrow leaflets resemble spider legs or spider webs. Twenty or so flowers are held in a raceme (flower stalk). As each flower matures, the white splotch on its banner (upper petal) turns progressively darker until it is a deep purple. The four flowers at the bottom of this arrangement were found on the same stem and show the progression of color with age. Plant writers seem to think it's important to remind readers that lupines are highly poisonous; I'll do you the courtesy of assuming that you don't try to eat everything you see and will leave the lupines out of your mouth.

[1]Yes, it exists. It’s quite useful, too. Visit http://www.theodorepayne.org/hotline.html or call (818)768-3533 to hear a very enthusiastic gentleman tell you about flowers all throughout Southern California.

Happenings: Happy Endings and Ugly Facades

Despite the fact that tonight’s was the last City Council meeting before elections, Councilmember Frank Ferry was unable to attend. Mayor Weste mentioned that he might arrive later on in the meeting, but it was not to be. It seems voters will have to decide whether to reward Ferry with a vote on April 13 without knowing his current feelings about library facades or skanky massage parlors, the primary topics of tonight’s meeting.

The urge to mash avocados into guacamole meant I came into the meeting just after 6pm to hear Mayor Pro-Tem Marsha McLean reading a list of bizarre local ordinances (e.g., In Carmel, New York, a man can’t go outside wearing pants and a jacket that don’t match). I thought she was reading a chain email (circa 2003), but she closed with a mention of the recently deceased Ed Redd. I was confused.

The awards bestowed this evening were many. One was given for having a lot of trees, another for having a lot of web-based resources for residents, and another for having a lot of restraint and using it to keep a balanced budget. Tempering the City’s glee over the intensely coveted “California Society of Municipal Finance Officers Budget Award” was what Mayor Weste called a “bittersweet” development. She was referring to the promotion of Commander Anthony La Berge, who will no longer serve Santa Clarita directly. La Berge thanked the City for being so supportive of law enforcement, and Mayor Weste sent him on his way (figuratively) with some kind words, a photo ‘neath the City Seal, and a warm but awkward side-hug.

During Councilmember reports and comments, Bob Kellar praised Backwoods Inn, the dimly lit steakhouse on Sierra Highway with ancient décor, menu, and staff. He promised that it has “Reasonable prices and the best food you can find anywhere.” Marsha McLean eulogized Ed Redd, the recently deceased Parks and Recreation Commissioner, counselor, and family man. In light of his “boundless compassion” and dedicated work serving local youth and families, McLean suggested that the City Council name the Community Center’s teen room in Ed’s honor. Finally, Mayor Laurene Weste welcomed Mitsubishi to the Valencia Auto Center and noted that it is the largest such center in all of Southern California. She then turned from vehicles to vegetables, reminding Claritans to focus on “fruits, vegetables, and whole grains” in order to maintain optimal health. The crowd gasped audibly at such a bold recommendation.

Items on the Consent Calendar were quite dull. Local hotels sent written comments in support of a 2% “Transient Occupancy Tax” that would be used to fund a Tourism Marketing District. We will hear more about it at later meetings. The City also put forward over half-a-million dollars to complete designs for the widening of the Golden Valley Road Bridge from two lanes to six. Speakers TimBen Boydston and Alan Ferdman welcomed this plan, but suggested there would be potentially severe traffic congestion in the interim before widening. Ferdman saw the currently narrow bridge as the most recent example of how the City prefers the west side to the east side of town. This got Mayor Pro-Tem McLean a little mad. She said ‘Sometimes speakers come up to the dais and have these “revelations” [about City negligence or wrong-doing]…when all the time we are working on that subject…if you need some information, you want to learn something, call.”

The entirety of the Consent Calendar passed without much modification (McLean just inserted some language about noise levels for a cell tower to quiet the fears of residents). Further, public hearings on the annexation of Crystal Springs were continued to a future date to allow residents the time to read and respond to new materials and notices.

During Public Participation, David Gauny spoke first. He was upset about how massage parlors (read: “massage” parlors) aren’t being controlled effectively by the City. He found it ridiculous that a city as large as Santa Clarita has LA handle its business licensing, which makes it vulnerable to having unsavory businesses approved. Refuting the idea that the City was doing enough, Gauny cited research that many massage establishments advertise online where it seems that illicit services are hardly hidden; the going rate for a happy ending seems to be about $40, observed Gauny. Bruce McFarland carried on the massage parlor theme, saying that The Signal had repeatedly rejected his (non-neutered) opinion piece on the topic in favor of taking letters from more pro-City interests. Gauny’s fellow City Council Candidate, TimBen Boydston, joked that “there’s not that much tension here in Santa Clarita” to warrant all the parlors.

The other topic that captivated speakers tonight was the ugly new Newhall Library. The plan calls for a large gray box with a chunky silhouette and lots of rock. Kevin Kornethal called the plan a “ski chalet” and thought the exterior should be redesigned to better reflect Newhall's endemic architecture before it is built. Many agreed with him, including the chair of the Old Town Newhall Alliance who said that Newhall didn’t have many massage parlors, but was nonetheless looking for a "happy ending" to the library design controversy.

City Manager Ken Pulskamp responded as always by defending the City. Santa Clarita has aggressively pursed law enforcement at massage parlors, he said. He did make a good point about the indecent massage accusations that have been lately circulating, however, saying that there was no evidencee that human trafficking and other very serious crimes were occurring. As for the library façade, Pulskamp essentially shrugged and called evaluation of it “subjective.” Weste, McLean, Kellar, and Ender were more sympathetic to the public speakers, and all called for an investigation of whether the library design could be improved without too much delay for project completion. Ender got it precisely right when she said that perhaps too many (not too few) people weighed in on the project's design so that any singular vision for an architecturally striking building was obscured. Pulskamp’s defense of the project as architecturally appropriate for Newhall seemed flawed after Laurene Weste pointed out many non-traditional elements like expansive plate glass windows, flagstone, and metal doors. The City will now be assessing the feasibility of making a grander, more Newhall-esque library exterior, though everyone agrees that the interior is swell.

There was also an annoying development regarding political signs. Alan Ferdman described how the City had gone back and forth about its sign size ordinances and whether they were legal/would be enforced. It wasn't until March 15, however, that City Attorney Carl Newton sent City Council candidates a letter clarifying the matter of sign size requirements (or lack thereof). By that time, of course, absentee ballots were out so it was too late for a timely response.

The meeting adjourned in the memory or Ed Redd.


[1]Here is the agenda

Happenings: Illegal Immigration, Massage Parlors, and a New Captain

I began watching the meeting a little late, in the midst of newly-promoted Commander Anthony La Berge’s review of crime in Santa Clarita[1]. He highlighted the reduction in gang-related violence over the past year. Sergeant AJ Rotella was recognized for his work with the City of Santa Clarita Business Alliance Program, which Councilmember Frank Ferry credited for Santa Clarita’s relatively low rates of cigarette and alcohol sales to minors compared with other cities. And finally, we were introduced to Commander La Berge’s replacement, Captain Paul Becker. Becker will serve as the new Chief of Police for the Santa Clarita Valley, and he was excited about his new post, noting that he had “big shoes to fill.” And indeed, Becker was slight next to La Berge, so it's unlikely that they could exchange footwear and enjoy a satisfactory fit.

Next, it was time for the City Councilmembers to give their reports. Mayor Weste began by describing how wonderful it is to have CBS filming in our City. The one downside is that film crews will continue to use Soledad Canyon Road through Friday. If you live in Canyon Country and have to deal with the traffic on Soledad, you may not share Weste’s warm regard for the entertainment industry. Mayor Pro-Tem Marsha McLean described her efforts to build support for a ballot measure that will prevent the State from “stealing, confiscating, [or] taking” City money. She handed out some petitions and asked for them back, noting that about 700,000 of the required 1.1 million signatures had been collected thanks to efforts by the League of California Cities.

The whole chamber grew somber and quiet as the City Council turned to reflect on the recent death of a soldier from Stevenson Ranch, Ian Gelig. He was killed by a roadside bomb while on a routine patrol in Afghanistan. A service for Gelig will take place at 1pm on Saturday and will include a procession along Seco Canyon Road; details will be forthcoming from KHTS and The Signal for those who are able to turn out and pay their respects.

At 7:08, we moved onto the Consent Calendar, which consisted of just 5 items. The City Council took the recommended actions on all of them. In so doing, they accepted a grant from the Red Cross for a community emergency preparedness handbook and authorized the planning of road improvements on Golden Valley Road. Strangely, Mayor Weste affirmed the recommended actions with a “yes” instead of the usual “aye.” (By the end of the evening, she would return to her trademark "ayes.")

Next it was time for a controversial bit of “New Business.” Mayor Weste introduced seven pieces of federal immigration (and immigration-ish) legislation that the City Council could vote to support. They included a resolution to support English as the official language of the United States, a resolution to add 350 miles of fencing to the border, one to de-fund ACORN, and a resolution to prevent illegal immigrants from receiving in-state tuition unless all legal citizens from out-of-state were also given access to the same in-state tuition rate. More controversial was H.R. 1868, the Birthright Citizenship Act that would “exclude granting naturalized citizenship to those persons born in the United States of parents who are residing in the country illegally.“[3]

Mayor Weste stated that her intention in presenting these legislative actions to the City Council was to start a "dialogue", a word she would utter 246 times in half-an-hour.

Public speakers got to weigh in first. Juan Jose Gutierrez said that he had come to Santa Clarita—where he does not reside—because he “couldn’t not notice the issue you’re dealing with tonight.” He said he was in favor of birth-right citizenship, and said nothing could be more un-American or inhumane than withholding citizenship from children born to illegal immigrant parents. Gutierrez was followed by a number of other speakers who were equally upset at the content of H.R. 1868, including Alan Ferdman, who gave an unusually impassioned speech about how the resolution would destroy rights granted by/implied in the 14^th Amendment.

On the other side of the issue was David Gauny, who got off to a good start by saying “Mayor McLean” instead of “Mayor Weste.” He then made a suggestion, half-jokingly, that he was leading the City Council before he had even been elected. That is, he had said earlier that his first action on the City Council would be to support federal immigration legislation, and the sitting CC had decided to do just that a few weeks after he made the suggestion. He said that his next plan to address illegal immigration would be to get the League of California Cities to unite and pressure state and federal governments to act decisively against illegal immigration. Roger Gitlin followed Gauny, and he quoted “an SCV blogger”—by which he meant the SCV blogger, Jeff Wilson—who wrote about sympathizing with some of the anger that Minutemen express over the consequences of illegal immigration[2].

Other notable speakers included a two-month resident of Santa Clarita who called the birth-right provision a “poison pill” amongst somewhat more reasonable proposals. There was also a speaker from Honduras who told us in not-so-great English about how he waited for 10 years to come to the United States legally. He felt very strongly that we should support legal immigration, suggesting that in Central America, immigration enforcement is stricter than it is in the US.

Councilmember Bob Kellar tried to get the City Council to support these resolutions with a quick motion that was seconded by Frank Ferry. Laurie Ender, however, said that she wanted to vote on supporting H.R. 994 and 1868 separately. These measures would do away with automatic citizenship for children born to parents who are in the United State illegally. Ender said, barely holding back tears, that she was very uncomfortable with challenging the traditional interpretation of the 14^th Amendment as it pertains to citizenship, and she said that local children need support regardless of their citizenship status.

Weste spoke after Ender. She admitted “I don’t think any of these bills are going to pass”—at least without modification—and argued that all of the items should be supported in the name of promoting debate and dialogue at the federal level.

Without much more discussion, the City Council voted unanimously in support of 5 of the H.R.s, but Laurie Ender chose not to support H.R. 994 and H.R. 1868 for the reasons expressed during her comments. With this nod of approval, it is expected that the House of Representatives will make sweeping immigration reforms beginning tomorrow.

At last it was time for Public Participation. Alan Ferdman reminded Claritans that the Canyon Country Advisory Committee would be holding its final installment of the City Council Candidate question/answer sessions. It seems that Johnny Pride, the unlikely CC candidate who was recently accused of raping teenage girls, is scheduled to appear. Who knows what will happen in light of recent “developments”? Next, TimBen Boydston came forward to remind the City that it had done a miserable job of interpreting crime numbers from the previous year. He added “Another thing that is disturbing is the explosion of the number of massage parlors.” According to Boydston, these parlors might be offering more than massages. The penultimate speaker was an older gentleman who said that the City ought to forgo a celebratory party for the opening of the cross-valley connector and instead give the money to the Food Pantry. Finally, the last speaker asked whether McLean and Weste were displaying campaign signs that were too large according to City rules. City Attorney Carl Newton gave a vague and unsatisfying answer about how limiting the size of posters could be seen as limiting free speech, so the code would not be enforced.

The meeting adjourned in the memory of Ian Gelig.

[1]Here's the agenda

[2]Gitlin quoted J-to-the-Wilson's fourth from last paragraph here: "I did share one thing with the Minuteman. I am angry. I am very angry that Deputy David March was murdered. I am angry there are illegal immigrants driving without licenses or insurance. I’m angry that the taxpayers foot the bill for an undocumented immigrant’s kidney dialysis at my mom’s unit while an elderly American gentleman struggles getting his insurance company to pay for his. I’m angry that Adrian Avilla, an illegal immigrant, raped several women in Canyon Country a few years ago. I’m also angry that American companies get fat off the backs of these people and no one stops them."

[3]Read all of the H.R.s here

Signal Fails in Attempt to Use, Understand Basic Arithmetic

When not preoccupied with accepting plagiarized submissions or patting its own back, The Signal’s editorial board finds time to show off its dazzling statistical incompetence. TMS’s Sunday editorial[1] is the most recent example. The piece discussed changes in the amount of crime in Santa Clarita between 2008 and 2009, and in doing so implicitly defends three ridiculous conclusions: (1)The non-violent crime of theft is just as important as the violent crimes of rape and murder when calculating our city's crime rates, (2)Year-to-year changes in crime rates are meaningful, and (3)There is no further need to dig into the numbers provided by SCV Sheriff’s Department in order to understand crime in Santa Clarita.

The First Dumb Conclusion: All Crimes are Equal

Our justice system recognizes crimes as being unequal in severity—that’s why you fry in the electric chair for committing first-degree murder while you just get a monetary fine for speeding. This distinction was lost on The Signal’s editorial board members.

In their article, they say “Crime was down by 1.1 percent in the city of Santa Clarita.” The 1.1% value is a meaningless, aggregate statistic that counts larceny the same as it counts rape, that mathematically weights auto-theft as being as important as murder. It was arrived at by adding up all the crimes committed in 2008, all the crimes committed in 2009, and looking at the percent difference.

The problems with this approach are many. But the central problem is that the big statistic used to describe Santa Clarita's overall crime rate means that whether you’ve prevented 10 car thefts or 10 murders, you’ve improved the City’s crime rate by the exact same amount. Of course, we’d all rather live in a city with ten more car thefts per year instead of ten additional murders, but no matter. A crime, whether violent or non-violent, counts exactly the same.

What really happened between 2008 and 2009[2]?

*There were 2 more homicides in 2009 than 2008
*There was 1 more rape in 2009 than 2008
*There was 1 more robbery in 2009 than 2008
*There were 4 more aggravated assaults in 2009 than 2008
*There were 69 more burglaries in 2009 than 2008
*There were 4 more larceny thefts in 2009 than 2008
*There were 13 more incidents of arson in 2009 than 2008
*However, there were 134 fewer auto thefts in 2009 than 2008

Indeed, the one-and-only factor responsible for the claim of a 1.1% decrease in crime in Santa Clarita is a large decrease in the number of vehicular thefts. However, The Signal’s editorial team chose to not to distinguish between types of crime, instead writing rather generically and generously that “Crime was down 1.1 percent in the city of Santa Clarita.” That’s a deliberate misinterpretation of numbers. There were more homicides, rapes, robberies, aggravated assaults, larcenies, and acts of arson—but on the bright side, fewer cars got stolen. The paper presented these values in an earlier story, but for those who read TMS only on the weekend, this vital decomposition of the data into its constituent parts was missing. If honesty was a priority, the editorial should have read “Seven out of eight classes of crime increased by a few incidents per year between 2008 and 2009, but there was one exception—fewer vehicular thefts occurred in 2009.” Instead, TMS seems not to care whether it’s one less homicide or one less car theft—any reduction in any crime counts the same.


The Second Dumb Conclusion: Year-to-Year Changes in Crime are Meaningful

They’re not. You need far more data points to establish a statistically significant trend[3] in crime reduction, and there are these things called “noise” or “error” that mean random events can cause observed values to diverge from a characteristic trend.

Put simply, no one should be using the ridicuolous 1.1% value or any other single number to suggest how crime in Santa Clarita is changing. But that’s exactly what TMS did. The Signal then shameless fawns over the incumbents, saying they’re “taking a bite out of crime.” Note to The Signal: a 1% change in a meaningless statistic does not a “bite out of crime” make. At least their out-dated cliche drew attention away from their fauly reasoning.

The Third Dumb Conclusion: The Numbers from the Sheriff are Sufficiently Informative

The editorial on crime in Santa Clarita simply parroted numbers provided by the Sheriff's Department. However, the writers could have made these numbers much more interesting by answering a few simple questions. For example:

1.Controlling for population growth, is crime increasing or decreasing?
2. Is there a higher per capita rate of crime inside or outside city boundaries?
3. Are there long-term, statistically meaningful trends in how crime is changing in Santa Clarita?

Instead of pondering what the numbers really mean, the editorial bases its arguments off one really bad, non-controlled, uninteresting statistic. They then take the very embarrassing step of asking readers to ignore the headline they first used to describe crime in Santa Clarita:

"In the near future, you will open your mailbox and there, screaming at you from an obnoxious piece of junk mail, will be Tuesday's Signal headline, 'Crime on the rise in SCV,' complete with the subtext: "2009 saw increase in reports of several serious crimes.' [...] It will be a lie." That's right, the editorial board is saying you shouldn't trust its headlines as they're misleading (even when they're more factual than editorials.) How lucky we are to have such intelligent folks interpreting life in Santa Clarita for us all...and also telling people how to vote.

IHSCV Conclusions:
*The Signal's editorial was an embarrassment that demonstrated no ability to critically evaluate statistics.
*No one, whether Ken Pulskamp, TMS, or the unnamed CC candidate responsible for the mailer should use statistics on annual changes in crime as evidence for trends or accomplishments; they mean very little, except when you can supply other evidence to link cause and effect (ex: the Sheriff's Department's aggressive pursuit of gangs and a corresponding drop in gang-related crimes).
*It's clear that TMS is endorsing the incumbents by lavishing them with undeserved praise--what a surprise. Way to go, editorial board!


[1]Here's the link--I can see why they don't sign editorials such as these.
[2]Here's the source, the SCV Sheriff
[3]Statistical significance has a very precise meaning, which is also lost on TMS. They don't quite grasp that a small change in a value from 2008 to 2009 says very little about the shape of the underlying trend.

Happenings: Gauny and Ferry Will Never Be Friends, KellarGate

Tonight’s City Council meeting featured awards for high school bands, passionate words from a self-described socialist running for Governor, a continuing outpouring of support for Bob Kellar, and David Gauny's accusation that Frank Ferry openly threatened him with an all-out smear campaign.

But it all began with Mayor Weste’s invocation[1]. Her Presidents' Day-inspired remarks reflected on the wisdom and foresight of George Washington.

Mayor Weste, seen presiding over tonight’s meeting, sported freshly cropped hair and a smart floral jacket.

Next, all six of our local high school bands were recognized for competing in the Bands of America Competition. Hart, it seems, won. Councilmembers were quick to embrace the opportunity for awkward banter with students as they came up to the City Seal for photographs. Asked Councilmember Laurie Ender to one small boy “How come the shortest guy plays the tuba?” Councilmember Frank Ferry then reminisced about having “flag-offs” with flag team members, recalling with obvious pride that he “twirled it the best.”

Committee Reports followed the. It was the usual blend of hooray City (for open space), boo State (for letting criminals out of state prisons to help balance the budget), hooray charity events (celebrity waiter dinner).

On the Consent Calendar, two items drew comments. Alan Ferdman came forward to applaud the City for passing (after second-reading) a zoning change ordinance that will allow for a much-needed medical office building to be built in Canyon Country. Ferdman said “It’s been a long time coming.” Larry Mankin was inspired to comment on behalf of local businesses, applauding the City for establishing an Industrial Development Authority that will allow certain types of local businesses to apply for tax-exempt bonds. The money comes from the State, not the City, Weste reassured anxious Claritans.

At 6:41, it was time for Public Participation. Duane Harte was the first of many Claritans to come forward in support of Bob Kellar, who is still the focus of attention for attending an anti-illegal-immigration rally and using the word “racist” in a weird way. Other supporters included Ellen Wright who said that not only was Kellar “a decent man,” but also “a good realtor.”

Somewhere around the middle of the Kellar love-fest, some LA-based immigration activists came forward to have their say. First was Carlos Alvarez, a 23-year-old running for Governor of California and affiliated with the Party for Socialism and Liberation[2]. He delivered his generic, pro-illegal-immigrant speech quite eloquently and with excellent timing and emphasis. But try as he might, his attempt to link Bob Kellar to the Minutemen to the KKK didn’t work out.

Following Alvarez was the rather sad Robert Gittelson, a man who made bold demands with a timid voice and squirmy eye contact. He began by saying that Councilmember Kellar’s words had put the Hispanic community “in some measure of danger, and a large measure of distress.” He told Kellar that his group, the Full Rights for Immigrants Coalition, would not pursue legal action against Kellar if he verbally acknowledged that comprehensive immigration reform, as outlined by Gittelson, was needed. He basically proposed granting illegal immigrants citizenship if they paid taxes and passed a background check. When he challenged Kellar to give his support, Mayor Laurene Weste was happy to dash Gittelson’s hopes by saying that the Council does not respond directly to public comments when they are made. For Gittelson, it was a resounding ultimatum FAIL.

Berta Gonzalez-Harper came forward shortly after and dismissed the words of those who had come from LA to speak out against Bob Kellar. Holding back a skeptical chuckle, she told Governor-hopeful Alvarez “Good luck with that” and suggested that he and his fellow speakers go home. Gonzalez emphasized the distinction between legal and illegal immigration and, despite her usual vociferousness, finished her comment with time to spare and even a sprinkling of applause (which Mayor Weste was quick to squelch).

Delivering the closing remarks for the anti-Kellar contingent was John Fernandez. He submitted copies of a letter of formal complaint that he would be submitting (or had already submitted--it wasn't clear to me) to the CA Attorney General and others. He gained instant credibility with the locals by referring to “Santa Clara’s Code of Ethics” (emphasis added; he would later say Clarita, though). Apparently, eight violations of various parts of the code have occurred. The first one was Kellar’s failure to declare that he was speaking as an individual, not a City official, when he talked about illegal immigration at a rally. Other violations apparently refer to fellow City Council members for not condemning Kellar’s actions. As you may have guessed from the Clara/Clarita mistake, Fernandez was not a very good speaker, and relied primarily on throwing around words like “xenophobic” and “racist."

Nearly lost in the back-and-forth was an incredibly gutsy, gasp-provoking comment/accusation from City Council Candidate David Gauny. Gauny said that at the last City Council meeting, Councilmember Frank Ferry approached him in the chambers and—reportedly in front of several witnesses—Ferry threatened Gauny with an all-out smear campaign. Gauny described the encounter, recounting that Ferry said “You threw the first punch, and we’re coming after you now...you're going to learn the hard way.” Gauny reaffirmed support for Bob Kellar as a model councilmember, and said in contrast that “Ferry exemplifies everything that is wrong with our government” and derisively called attention to the non-angelic behavior of “our esteemed Catholic High School [Alemany] Principal.” And no, this wasn’t TimBen Boydston wearing a Gauny mask. It was the sort of comment there is no going back from, but one that will surely offer Gauny (and others living vicariously through Gauny) deep satisfaction whether he wins a CC seat or not. We can only presume that Gauny is telling the truth about Ferry's threats, as this is not the sort of thing one just "makes up," which means Ferry has some explaining to do.

The end of the meeting was a drawn-out affair. Kellar said that hundreds of people have offered him overwhelming support. He says that whether words are delivered in person while he buys coffee or over email from people across the country, the message is the same: “Bob, stay the course.” His repeated arguments about how much money “illegals” cost Californians drew the ire of the LA illegal immigrants rights crowd, one of whom tried unsuccessfully to challenge Kellar by coming to the public microphone and yelling something about the Brown Act before he was cut off.

It was decided that within a month or two there will be a Study Session—which the public can attend and comment at—on illegal immigration and what the City of Santa Clarita can do about it. If anything, the Kellar-inspired immigration dialogue is growing louder, not softer.

[1]Agenda

[2]Here's the Governor-to-be's website