{"id":568,"date":"2010-04-18T15:54:45","date_gmt":"2010-04-18T22:54:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/?p=568"},"modified":"2011-02-27T16:22:54","modified_gmt":"2011-02-28T00:22:54","slug":"41810-editorial-post-election-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/?p=568","title":{"rendered":"(4\/18\/10) Editorial – Post-Election, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"

This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident.\u00a0 It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with whom I am associated.<\/em><\/p>\n

Okay, it\u2019s been a couple days.\u00a0 Frankly, I think what I posted on my blog more or less said it all:\u00a0 Yes, Yes and YES!\u00a0 Congratulations to our next Mayor, Joe Mosca, and to new council members Josh Moran and Nancy Walsh. The good people of Sierra Madre have spoken, and I think what they’ve said is: Enough is Enough!<\/p>\n

Thirty-nine words pretty much covered it.\u00a0 But I\u2019ve had people contacting me asking when I was going to put my take on the election up on the website.\u00a0 As I said, I thought I did.\u00a0 But one of the people in particular who contacted me, a long-time resident (for whom I have a great deal of respect) that no longer lives in town, e-mailed me that she was \u201ceager to see your election report.\u201d\u00a0 And the more I thought about it, I realized, if anybody can turn 39 words into 2,000, it\u2019s me, and if that\u2019s what people want, I\u2019m okay with that.\u00a0 Besides, in a year and a half, and then again in three and a half, as the election year campaigns pick up, I may want something a little more detailed to refer back to than the thirty-nine words I\u2019ve already posted.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Add to that the fact that my silence was not matched by the other guy in town that writes more than he should, and I decided to put a couple things down to say what I think about the election.<\/p>\n

Obviously, I\u2019m happy with the outcome, having endorsed the three candidates that will be seated on the council a week from this coming Tuesday night.\u00a0 Last Tuesday, when people asked me what I predicted the outcome would be, I told them frankly that I didn\u2019t have a clue.\u00a0 I was concerned, in fact.\u00a0 While I don\u2019t think I told anybody this specifically, I kind of thought that we were going to see Mosca, Crawford and Watts seated, though I did think it possible that I might be underestimating the power of Josh\u2019s having grown up here in town.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But I had another underlying feeling that made me a little more hopeful.\u00a0 I\u2019ve heard the last couple of elections that there\u2019s a silent majority in town, folks who don\u2019t necessarily get out and beat the drums, but a majority that includes people whose opinions are respected and who have some influence with their fellow residents.\u00a0 It was my feeling that those folks had been a little complacent the last couple elections, and I kind of had a feeling that the tone of this campaign had been such that these folks might just have been roused out of their\u00a0 complacency, and that we might just see their influence in the outcome.\u00a0 I think I mentioned this to a couple of people.\u00a0 But I think most people that I talked about it with, I expressed concern, because I really thought there was a good possibility that Maryann, Don and John were going to have a majority for the next two, if not four years, and I frankly thought we\u2019d be better off if that didn\u2019t happen.\u00a0 And even though I had the underlying hope I discussed earlier, I was afraid I\u2019d jinx it by actually expecting it.<\/p>\n

In 1974, Garry Trudeau and Doonesbury were at the height of their popularity.\u00a0 During this time frame, there were a series of cartoons in which blocks were being added to a wall in front of the White House, with the block wall eventually completely obscuring the White House.\u00a0 After Nixon resigned, if I remember correctly, the cartoon showed the White House, wall removed, with birds flying by, a rainbow, sun shining, a brand new day.\u00a0 I feel like that\u2019s how many Sierra Madreans felt Wednesday, based on my conversations with people.\u00a0 And before the critics start posting, no, I\u2019m not saying a City Council election was comparable to the President of the most powerful country in the world resigning, I\u2019m saying the feelings some people had Wednesday reminded me of feelings people might have had in 1974, as represented in a comic strip. See the difference?<\/p>\n

Why did the election go the way it went?\u00a0<\/p>\n

I think there were a few reasons.\u00a0 First of all, I think the winners deserved to win.\u00a0 I think there are a lot of people in town who have respect for Mosca, Moran and Walsh.\u00a0 Even though Joe pissed some people off in town right after he was elected, there ARE some people in town who have actually gotten over it.\u00a0 They recognize Joe for who he is, a hard working, good guy, who really likes this town and wants to give back.\u00a0 Josh grew up here, and has a lot of family, and that familiarity coupled with the support group that is his family and friends, had a substantial influence. He also has worked for the City, and volunteered for several years on commissions and committees.\u00a0 Nancy is not as well known, but she has been a volunteer in this town for a few years, sitting on and chairing the Senior Community Commission.\u00a0 And while I don\u2019t know if she would have won the seat running individually, she was aligned with a slate that, it turns out, had the most support.<\/p>\n

Secondly, I think that people didn\u2019t like seeing people they perceive as good people, as givers, people who volunteer and work hard for the community, being maligned in the manner that they were.\u00a0 The derisive comments on Crawford\u2019s blog were a little too much for some people.\u00a0 Calling Nancy \u201cWhat\u2019s her name\u201d, turning Josh\u2019s surname into moron instead of Moran, and the out and out verbal attacks on Joe, just weren\u2019t smart moves when you\u2019re trying to get people to support you.\u00a0 And I\u2019m not saying that John Crawford did those things, for the most part it was his supporters that did it.\u00a0 As I said in one of my editorials, you\u2019re judged by the company you keep, and I think (actually I know) people judged John by the things his supporters said.\u00a0 But it wasn\u2019t just people judging John by the company he keeps.\u00a0 I think a lot of people didn\u2019t want to align THEMSELVES with the people that were supporting John in that manner, they didn\u2019t want people judging THEM as people that were willing to act in the manner that some (not all) of John\u2019s supporters were acting.<\/p>\n

Which brings me to a tactical mistake that I think was a major contributor to the Crawford\/Alcorn\/Watts slate losing the election.\u00a0 John should not have campaigned as a blog.\u00a0 I know that if he hadn\u2019t, I wouldn\u2019t have been able to editorialize in the way that I did.\u00a0 First of all, much of the opinion on his site, even in the articles he posts, are actually other people\u2019s opinions, supplemented by his own.\u00a0 A lot of John\u2019s articles cite other blogs, paragraphs at a time of his articles are pulled directly from other websites, blogs or print media, and then he throws in a few lines of why he thinks the people are right (or wrong).\u00a0 Secondly, John\u2019s careful to use implication and conjecture as tools, and that leads to much of what he is criticized for.\u00a0 He doesn\u2019t come out and attack people anywhere near as much as he is accused of doing it.\u00a0 He\u2019ll frequently say things that will incite others to post things.\u00a0 He\u2019s kind of like a shock jock, to a degree.\u00a0 He says things for a reaction, and his supporters are generally willing to oblige.\u00a0 And it was those posts by his supporters, sometimes in reaction to John\u2019s articles, sometimes not, that I think really hurt John with voters.<\/p>\n

Another thing that hurt the C\/A\/W camp was unsubstantiated allegations.\u00a0 To hear that Mosca was in the back pocket of the developers and just dancing at the ends of the strings of Sacramento\u2019s marionettists, that Josh was a puppet of the real estate industry out to enrich his real estate industry family members, that Nancy was handpicked by John Buchanan to further his pro-development agenda, and that all three candidates, were, along with Buchanan, pro-development fiends, without anything anywhere to back it up, I think, left a sour taste in some folks mouth.\u00a0 It just didn\u2019t ring true.\u00a0 All of the candidates made it quite clear that they were against four-story buildings downtown, yet we still kept hearing that that\u2019s what we were going to get if we elected them into office.\u00a0<\/p>\n

I think that the Mayor\u2019s letter asking residents to elect the C\/A\/W slate to help her stay the course and move forward her agenda, backfired.\u00a0 And while there were some who perceived it as problematic on its own merits, it became a bigger problem after the City Council meeting of March 23rd.\u00a0 There were many people who felt the Mayor bullied Joe to further her own political agenda at that meeting, and who felt that if this was the course that was going to be stayed, it might be better to set sail in another direction.\u00a0 I sent a letter to the editor of the Mountain Views News about that meeting, but never discussed that meeting on my site, I don\u2019t think.\u00a0 So for those who didn\u2019t read my letter, here\u2019s my take:\u00a0 The Mayor has to walk a fine line between allowing people their right to free speech, and ensuring that meetings don\u2019t get out of hand due to personal attacks.\u00a0 It\u2019s a difficult task, and in this case, I think only one person really crossed that line.\u00a0 And I think she REALLY crossed that line.\u00a0 I think Mr. Mosca should have yielded the floor when asked to do so, and the Mayor was right to gavel him down and warn him that he might be removed if he didn\u2019t respond to her requests for order.\u00a0 That said, I think that if I were Mr. Mosca, I\u2019d have done the same thing he did, as I think the Mayor should have been more pro-active in limiting that speaker\u2019s attack, and I think she also should have allowed Mosca to speak with the City Attorney to determine if he had the right to respond, even though Public Comment is generally a one way conversation. If I felt I had a legal right to respond to someone I felt was personally attacking me verbally, and that right was being taken from me, I\u2019d have been vocal about it too.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But that\u2019s just my take.\u00a0 Even though I think the Mayor was within her rights to gavel over Mr. Mosca and to threaten him with removal from the Chambers, there were many people who didn\u2019t feel that way.\u00a0 And I think it\u2019s highly ironic that after numerous calls on the Tattler and at City Council meetings by people that supported Crawford\u2019s candidacy for more regular replays of the Council meetings on Channel 3, it was, to a degree, repeated replays of the Mayor\u2019s actions that contributed to some folks choosing to vote against his slate.\u00a0 And I know that it happened, I\u2019ve had people tell me that it changed their vote.\u00a0 I had one person, a senior, tell me that she would NEVER vote for anyone that Mayor MacGillivray told her she should vote for.<\/p>\n

How did John Crawford get 1,000 votes?\u00a0 Well, actually, it\u2019s probably not surprising.\u00a0 I was of the opinion that Crawford \u201cwon\u201d the candidate forum sponsored by the Chamber.\u00a0 Why?\u00a0 Because for a lot of people, that was their first exposure to him, and the people who\u2019d heard from his critics how awful he was were most likely favorably impressed when he came off as quite reasonable at that forum.\u00a0 And I think that many of the people that voted for him were people who\u2019s homes he visited during the campaign, and who heard him say that he was responsible for the eminent domain being on the ballot, and who were told that thanks to him, there was an ordinance in place that was going to bring the Skilled Nursing Facility folks to justice for allowing their property to go downhill while it sits empty.\u00a0 Both of these are issues that resonated with folks in town, but many of these people had no idea what was happening on his blog.\u00a0 I think Crawford\u2019s vote tally would have been significantly lower if more people perceived him as the blogger, and fewer as the guy who helped make SNF and ED issues in this campaign.\u00a0 Credit where credit is due, though, he was instrumental on both these issues.<\/p>\n

I was glad to see that Pat Alcorn fared well, even though she didn\u2019t win a seat on the Council.\u00a0 She conducted herself with class, was knowledgeable on the issues, and frankly, might have done even better had she not been part of a slate which I believe dragged her down.\u00a0 Of the non-winning candidates, she was behind only Don Watts, the incumbent, and by fewer than 150 votes.\u00a0 Incumbents generally have a distinct advantage due to name recognition, and Pat was right there with him.\u00a0 And I think she did a great job on that mailer we received days before the election.\u00a0 It would be nice to see something like that come out from sitting Council members a couple times a year, as Pat told me she planned to do if she had been elected.<\/p>\n

Where do we go from here?<\/p>\n

Well, I think Joe\u2019s going to be mayor.\u00a0 I\u2019m curious as to whether the Mayor will nominate him.\u00a0 It would be a good political move for her to say, since she will still have the gavel, that she recognizes the will of the people, that in the spirit of reconciliation, she congratulates him and the new council members on their win, and that in that spirit, she hereby nominates him.\u00a0 Some people with whom I\u2019ve spoken about this just can\u2019t see her doing that, saying they think it would be too much of a backpedal for her.\u00a0 I really don\u2019t know.\u00a0 This would be a smart thing to do politically.\u00a0 She\u2019d be perceived as doing the right thing, even if she actually isn\u2019t doing the right thing because it\u2019s the right thing (who knows her motivation but her?)\u00a0 But she\u2019s a woman of convictions, and it will be interesting to see if she chooses to do the politically smart thing, or if she stands by her convictions.\u00a0 I personally would like to see John Buchanan have the opportunity to nominate his friend.\u00a0 But we\u2019ll find that out in a couple weeks.<\/p>\n

Crawford has, after a one day hiatus, brought the Tattler back, and has a \u201cseriously, is there anything left to lose\u201d attitude.\u00a0 He\u2019s continuing to see things in his own unique way.\u00a0 For instance, his first day back, an article that said: \u201cBut when it came to the City Council, Sierra Madre voters soundly rejected the Tattler style – snarky, funny, eloquent, nasty – by giving the Tattler’s author, John Crawford, the least votes of any major candidate.\u201d generated this headline: \u201cThe Pasadena Star News Praises the Tattler.\u201d\u00a0 Not how I think most people would have interpreted those words.<\/p>\n

On election night, I heard one of the folks who will be sitting on the Council for the next four years telling someone that the Council\u2019s job now is to bring Mayor MacGillivray back into the fold.\u00a0 In essence, this person said that rather than ostracize or criticize her, the Council needs to be inclusive, because if they can get her working WITH them, the council can only get even more accomplished.\u00a0 Of course, the other side of the coin on that is that if Ms. MacGillivray chooses not to work collaboratively with the other members of the Council when they have attempted to work with her, it will reflect poorly on her.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m going to go out on a limb and say that four years from now, we\u2019re not going to see 4-story buildings on Sierra Madre Blvd., or Baldwin.\u00a0 There won\u2019t be a Walmart where the Skilled Nursing Facility is, we won\u2019t have a MacDonald\u2019s or a Jack in the Box, and we won\u2019t have a stoplight either, barring a tragic accident that makes the City (and its residents) look at things with a different perspective.\u00a0 In short, I don\u2019t think that the catastrophes predicted to happen if Mosca, Moran and Walsh get elected are going to happen.\u00a0 I think Sierra Madre will be pretty much the same as it is now.<\/p>\n

But I hope there\u2019s one change, and it\u2019s going to take a lot of effort from both sides, which frankly, I don\u2019t see happening.\u00a0 But I\u2019ll hope for it anyway.\u00a0 Let\u2019s tone down the rhetoric.\u00a0 Let\u2019s try to stick to the facts.\u00a0 Let\u2019s try to treat each other like we\u2019re ALL worthy of respect (even if you don\u2019t think so, TRY).\u00a0 Let\u2019s be a village.\u00a0<\/p>\n

While there\u2019s a lot of talk about the Tattler and the fact that even after being more or less rebuked by the residents of this town it\u2019s come back out swinging, I\u2019m also a little disappointed in the Weekly.\u00a0 In my opinion, the Sierra Madre Weekly has, in its election coverage, taken some unnecessary potshots.\u00a0 I think some of their election news coverage read like Opinion pieces.\u00a0 News coverage should be fact based coverage, Opinion should be clearly marked as Editorial.\u00a0 It\u2019s one thing if opinion is offered in a columnist\u2019s column, an editorial (marked editorial), or an Op-ed commentary (marked Op-ed).\u00a0 But when it is written into what should be \u201cJust the Facts\u201d news coverage, you\u2019re crossing a line.\u00a0 And much of what I read in the paper this week wasn\u2019t categorized as Opinion or Editorial, and could easily have been perceived as being news reporting, yet it was full of opinion.\u00a0 And frankly, some of the opinions in this week\u2019s paper, to my mind, lacked the civility and respect that the candidates (and the paper itself) have been calling for as we approached the election.\u00a0 So here\u2019s hoping that the Weekly will swing its pendulum back to its pre-election news approach.<\/p>\n

Now I know I\u2019m going to take some hits from people who will say that they feel it\u2019s hypocritical for me to call for toning down the rhetoric and treating people with more respect, when, they will say, I was one of the people that was smearing their candidate.\u00a0 All I can say is go back and read my editorials again.\u00a0 The harshest thing I said was that statements that were being made were inaccurate, and that two of the candidates had, in my opinion misled voters.\u00a0 I don\u2019t consider that smearing.\u00a0 You may, but I don\u2019t.<\/p>\n

And if you do, you\u2019re entitled to your opinion.\u00a0 But in this case, and I\u2019m not saying I agree with you, your opinion is about something that you perceived to have happened in the past.\u00a0 It\u2019s okay if we disagree, different people perceive things in different ways, that\u2019s life.\u00a0 I\u2019m hoping that, as we move forward, we can try to be a little nicer to each other, even as we disagree.\u00a0 I will try.\u00a0 Will you?<\/p>\n

Okay, I was wrong.\u00a0 I can turn thirty-nine words into thirty-two hundred, not two thousand\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This editorial is the opinion of Bill Coburn, publisher of Sierra Madre News Net and 15 year Sierra Madre resident.\u00a0 It is not intended to reflect the views of any other person or entity with…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[5],"tags":[58,30,53],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/568"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=568"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/568\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=568"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=568"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sierramadrenews.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=568"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}