View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

 

A little respect, please

Posted: June 26, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: June 26, 2014 2:00 a.m.
 

Once again, Councilman Bob Kellar slams his constituents by saying that many who signed the petitions to overturn the council’s decision to permit digital billboard on our freeways were not fully aware of the full details of the proposal (“Billboard matter will be put to a vote,” www.signalscv.com).

I can assure you, Councilman Kellar, that I understood what I was signing: my clear statement that I did not want digital billboards in our community.

Please afford the 18,544 people who took a stand on this referendum some respect; we care about issues and we deserve better.

 

Comments

OldReliable: Posted: June 26, 2014 10:06 a.m.

Councilman Acosta stated very clearly that he personally experienced misleading statements from signature collectors at several locations.


chefgirl358: Posted: June 26, 2014 11:15 a.m.

Thank you Karla! I couldn't have said it better myself. I am disgusted by Kellar's comments. For those idiots on the council to pretend like more than 100 people didn't show up at EVERY meeting regarding this issue in protest can't mean anything other than they are as crooked as it gets. They were repeatedly hounded with emails, phone calls, protesters and the like, and yet they pretended none of that was happening, put on the blinders, and signed bs deals so they could get a bunch of money and sell us all down the river...lined with huge hideous digital billboards. Everyone knew EXACTLY what they were signing, in fact I drove to a store specifically in search of someone that had the petition so I could sign it. For Kellar to malign all of us is just adding insult to injury. The only person on that council that stood up for us was TBB, the rest of them can all go to hell being the lying, crooked, dirty politicians that we read about every day.


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 26, 2014 11:26 a.m.

Kellar and Co. are crooks. They've exposed their self-interests pretty clearly on this one, folks.


lars1: Posted: June 26, 2014 12:58 p.m.

Mr. Acosta stated that he experienced misleading statements. That was the same line that Kellar and Mclean also stated. Nobody else in the audience supported these statements. People stated that there were Allvision blockers out there, but the city council was silent on that issue.

Mr. Acosta, by his false statements, is now a member of Santa Clarita Urban Management. (SCUM) When asked about the fact that the billboard ordinance does not prohibit alcohol advertising, his statement was, he thinks Metro does not allow alcohol ads. Well there is nothing in the ordinance that prevents that.

http://jasoninhollywood.blogspot.com/2013_07_01_archive.html


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 26, 2014 1:14 p.m.

Acosta = City Council Rubber Stamp. How disappointing.

He looks a little like Jimmy Hoffa too.


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 26, 2014 4:36 p.m.

LOL. C'mon people. I was at the meeting too. The only people that were acting up were the anti-electric billboard crowd. Petzold got removed from the chamber and was nearly cuffed (note to Steve: don't resist the deputies. They can make your day really bad)

Marcia went up 5 notches in my book. Even after Petzold's bad behavior, she instructed the deputies to allow him back in. She is a total class act. You guys should take notes.

Let the people decide. That is what your petition wanted. Well, you got it. Be happy and campaign to your heart's content.


stray: Posted: June 26, 2014 6:31 p.m.

"Let the people decide"

That's right... Let us - as we already decided with the overwhelming signatures gathered... The council was elected to represent the peoples' best interests - and NOT make decisions AGAINST the citizens they represent. They KNEW before they voted on e-billboards that it wasn't what WE THE PEOPLE wanted, but they did it anyway. Not hard to figure out why... So, when the council votes in something where it is adamantly against the community residents' desire, they clearly display the middle finger in our faces which is nothing less than total ignorance, and arrogance while completely pissing off the community in the meanwhile.


chefgirl358: Posted: June 26, 2014 7:24 p.m.

Stray is absolutely right. From the secession of the LA county library system, to the bike lanes, back-in parking, Ender's crooked hospital parking structure deal, etc., etc., it's the same old crap with these idiots. They have a pattern of practice of COMPLETELY DISREGARDING the majority opinion of the residents here and doing whatever the hell their own personal agendas dictate. This is the worst city council ever.


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 27, 2014 10:40 a.m.

Nope. 11K signatures (some of which were acquired on false pretenses) does not constitute a "majority opinion of residents." C'mon, chefgirl, you are smarter than that.

The people get to vote on it. You can't change the rules just because you don't like the outcome. Now, gear up for the election. You earned it.


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 27, 2014 10:43 a.m.

And, let's be honest. I've seen the council chamber be standing-room-only on some issues. I went expecting to see the same response. What I found were about 2 dozen very vocal activists and a lot of empty seats. Pretty disappointing, gang.


lars1: Posted: June 27, 2014 12:29 p.m.

Always right, you are wrong again/ Maybe some people can say you are just misinformed.

The people should be aware that the county violated the rules when counting the billboard referendum signatures.

The county was supposed to randomly sample the signatures. If it's more than 110% of the signatures needed (12,287) the petition automatically qualifies (that would be a validity rate of 68.3%).

http://www.santaclarita.com/blog/view.php?blog_entry_id=31113


Although the actual number 12,800 exceeded the acceptance threshold of 12,287, they were directed by ??? to do an entire count!

Of the 18,544 signatures submitted, the County Registrar's office looked at 16,496 signatures before stopping. In all, they found 11,370 valid signatures, a 69% validity rate. At that rate, an examination of all the signatures would have yielded about 12,800 signatures, or 1,630 (14.6%) more than the 11,170 required. This was a one-by-one count, not a random sample as was expected.

http://www.santaclarita.com/blog/view.php?blog_entry_id=31157

So the number of valid signatures was closer to 13K rather than the incorrect 11K that AR states.

12,800 is almost the number of voters in the 2014 city council election. (there were 3 positions open, so the number of votes was 3 times the number of voters).
http://www.signalscv.com/section/36/article/117748/


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 27, 2014 1:28 p.m.

LOL. Please. You got what you wanted. A very vocal minority forced the City council to do something unprecedented. Be happy and stop complaining.

Make your case to the people now and drop the conspiracy theories, insults, and charges of misconduct. It does not help your cause.


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 27, 2014 2:03 p.m.

Alwaysright: The behavior of this city council is not a "conspiracy theory;" it is right in our faces for all to witness. They have given this community their collective middle finger (TimBen aside)... it certainly is not under the radar.

Lars gave you valid links to support his opinion.... have you?


CaptGene: Posted: June 27, 2014 2:42 p.m.

Oh look, the city council has their very own apologist! I wonder what one of those costs.


strays: Posted: June 27, 2014 2:53 p.m.

AlwaysRight -

Do you believe that you have a halo over your head? Apparently so, by your user name... Let me tell you that you don't. And going by the majority of other users comments, you are seriously ALWAYSWRONG. Your opinion is always welcome, but your twisted rationale is not. So, go ahead and move up Marsha 5 notches in your book. You are completely ALONE on that one - ALWAYSWRONG!


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 27, 2014 2:54 p.m.

"A very vocal minority forced the City council to do something unprecedented."

You know.... that small 18,000+ minority.


strays: Posted: June 27, 2014 3:09 p.m.

AlwaysWrong -

Is Marsha your grandma?


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 27, 2014 3:13 p.m.

With a user name like "AlwaysRight" I think we may be dealing with an actual member of the council.


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 27, 2014 5:41 p.m.

strays- you can't even recognize that the mayor pro-tem showed a little class to an unruly political opponent? Remarkable.

The letter was titled "a little respect, please." Rather ironic eh, strays? Next time, show a little respect in your posts.


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 27, 2014 6:09 p.m.

Tell us more about this unruly 18,000+ MINORITY.... please.


stray: Posted: June 27, 2014 9:45 p.m.

"Show a little respect in your posts"

Don't hold your breath waiting!


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 28, 2014 10:26 a.m.

AlwaysRight wants us to show respect to the man who said that 18,000 SCV citizens were too stupid to understand what they were signing.

Uh, yeah... don't hold your breath is right.


stray: Posted: June 28, 2014 5:05 p.m.

@Egbert - "Too stupid to understand what they were signing"

Can you show me where he said that and where it was printed? I've searched previous articles and I have not found it. If that's true, I'm gonna have a few sweet words back to him.


timothymyers02: Posted: June 28, 2014 8:29 p.m.

Folks I know the identities of AlwaysRight and OldReliable and what is truly pathetic is they have no pecuniary interest in this matter but are instead a couple of junior varsity wannabe commissars that enjoy sniffing the underwear of the Politburo.


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 30, 2014 11:30 a.m.

Wow. You complain about "respect" but you have none for those with whom you disagree. Can't have a polite discourse. That is truly unfortunate.

Suggest you figure out how to argue in support of your proposal rather than hurl invectives or insults. BTW- if you speak directly to the Council, it is best not to insult them.


cj64: Posted: June 30, 2014 2:13 p.m.


http://www.ehow.com/how_2096901_recall-city-council-member.html


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 30, 2014 4:56 p.m.

Just giving the same respect back to the council that was afforded to us.


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 30, 2014 6:57 p.m.

They listened to you, Egbert. No one interrupted, no one insulted, no one shouted out. Every council member watched and listened intently. That was respectful.

They disagreed and they questioned as is their right and responsibility.

The posters here need to take a lesson from baseball. An umpire will never throw out a player for saying "that was a blank-blankety-blank call." An umpire will always toss a player for saying "you blank-blankety-blank. That was a bad call."

Diagree with the decision. That is your right. But stop there. Thx.


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: June 30, 2014 10:57 p.m.

The most repulsive city council I can ever remember.


cj64: Posted: July 1, 2014 12:13 a.m.

Just wait and see the election material generated by this council. They will say its all legal, but its full of lies and deceitful. They will randomly pick(ha, ha) the arguments against their unpopular ugly digital electronic billboards. They will subversively write the opposing statements to make their billboards look like a gift from God.


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: July 1, 2014 9:34 a.m.

And now add the "salt tax" to their conquests. Great.

THESE PEOPLE ARE NAUSEATING, ESPECIALLY KELLAR, THE RINGLEADER.



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...