More Murrieta Council and Initiative C D E posts
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Thursday, October 14, 2010
- All I see for the most part in this discussion is a biased former councilmember along with the current council's close biased allies. They are afraid their status quo will change. They defend outrageous compensations. Here is an example of the current council's arrogance. Councilman Rick Gibbs thinks those that are for C D E are "jealous." This is from this week's candidate forum. City Council Member Lashes Out At Private Citizen Bob Kowell knows he’s not the most popular person at Murrieta City Hall. His Murrieta Initiatives C, D, and E has drawn sharp criticism from the members of the city council. Rick Gibbs is an entrenched city council member, and former mayor, of Murrieta. Mr. Gibbs was one of the eight candidates present at the Murrieta City Council Candidate’s Forum at The Colony at California Oaks on Tuesday night. The audience was stunned when Rick launched into a personal attack against Bob Kowell during the forum, pointing Mr. Kowell out in the second row, proclaiming that Kowell’s initiatives were the result of jealousy over incomes, and anger that candidates of the past who supported Mr. Kowell’s initiatives did not win their elections. As the drama unfolded, some people in the audience sat stunned, while others actually applauded Rick Gibbs’ unethical attack. Mr. Kowell simply sat there, refusing to take the bait, and allowed Mr. Gibbs to continue his personal attack against him without retaliating. Rick Gibbs did not seem to realize what he had done wrong, and at the end of the forum brushed by Douglas V. Gibbs, a candidate that supports Kowell’s initiatives, without even a word, or a handshake, as Douglas extended his hand. Outraged by Rick Gibbs’ behavior, Douglas V. Gibbs called Rick’s actions unethical, and uncalled for. “City Council members,” said Douglas, “are supposed to be serving the citizens of the city, not verbally attacking them. Frankly, I was surprised about what I witnessed. Rick Gibbs claims to be a stalwart member of the community, yet verbally attacked Mr. Kowell without provocation.” When the forum ended, Rick Gibbs vanished quickly. “If city council members are supposed to serve the people of the city,” Douglas Gibbs added later, “Rick Gibbs failed to serve as an example of service by attacking Bob Kowell. It is one thing to be against the initiatives, but it is another to personally attack someone verbally in front of all those people. Surely, the code of ethics he swore to uphold would not condone such actions.” Douglas Gibbs also said he thinks Rick’s anger is rooted in not only his opposition to Murrieta Initiatives C, D, and E, but also in past disputes he has had with Mr. Kowell. Bob Kowell indicated that he did not feel threatened by Rick Gibbs’ actions, but that Rick’s outburst was not consistent with the kind of behavior a city council member is supposed to portray.
Colony Forum and Rick Gibbs
City Council Member Lashes Out At Private Citizen
Bob Kowell knows he’s not the most popular person at Murrieta City Hall. His Murrieta Initiatives C, D, and E has drawn sharp criticism from the members of the city council.
Rick Gibbs is an entrenched city council member, and former mayor, of Murrieta. Mr. Gibbs was one of the eight candidates present at the Murrieta City Council Candidate’s Forum at The Colony at California Oaks on Tuesday night.
The audience was stunned when Rick launched into a personal attack against Bob Kowell during the forum, pointing Mr. Kowell out in the second row, proclaiming that Kowell’s initiatives were the result of jealousy over incomes, and anger that candidates of the past who supported Mr. Kowell’s initiatives did not win their elections.
As the drama unfolded, some people in the audience sat stunned, while others actually applauded Rick Gibbs’ unethical attack. Mr. Kowell simply sat there, refusing to take the bait, and allowed Mr. Gibbs to continue his personal attack against him without retaliating.
Rick Gibbs did not seem to realize what he had done wrong, and at the end of the forum brushed by Douglas V. Gibbs, a candidate that supports Kowell’s initiatives, without even a word, or a handshake, as Douglas extended his hand.
Outraged by Rick Gibbs’ behavior, Douglas V. Gibbs called Rick’s actions unethical, and uncalled for. “City Council members,” said Douglas, “are supposed to be serving the citizens of the city, not verbally attacking them. Frankly, I was surprised about what I witnessed. Rick Gibbs claims to be a stalwart member of the community, yet verbally attacked Mr. Kowell without provocation.”
When the forum ended, Rick Gibbs vanished quickly.
“If city council members are supposed to serve the people of the city,” Douglas Gibbs added later, “Rick Gibbs failed to serve as an example of service by attacking Bob Kowell. It is one thing to be against the initiatives, but it is another to personally attack someone verbally in front of all those people. Surely, the code of ethics he swore to uphold would not condone such actions.”
Douglas Gibbs also said he thinks Rick’s anger is rooted in not only his opposition to Murrieta Initiatives C, D, and E, but also in past disputes he has had with Mr. Kowell.
Bob Kowell indicated that he did not feel threatened by Rick Gibbs’ actions, but that Rick’s outburst was not consistent with the kind of behavior a city council member is supposed to portray.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
More on Californian
T WT NBT..all your facts do is demonstrate that you and your cohorts support the ripoff of Murrietans with out of line salaries. Murrietan's are smart and will see through the council's bias and the coordinated bias of their close supporters. All the reasons to vote against C D E don't hold water... here are a few lame positions from the opposition: a non vote has more power than a vote... really? so we shouldn't vote? Limited government is conservatism in socialist clothing. uh so big expensive government is socialism in conservative clothing....I get it! Oh this one is even better! Public safety is at stake! We ill become a less safe city if MANAGEMENT gets paid less. REALLY? So all the rest of MPD will stop doing their jobs or quit because their bosses get their pay cut? PATHETIC! Vote YES ON C D E and do not fall for the propoganda of the biased council and their power hungry close supporters.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/murrieta/article_a8fd18a0-c4f7-50d3-abb8-eff126fbde56.html?mode=comments
This makes complete sense and is why you should vote YES ON C D E. Of course the police union will endorse those that back up their high salaries and benefits. Of course they would prefer Alan Long a fire captain of union firefighters over Gary Thomasian. If we support leaders who support inflated public employee salaries and benefits then we deserve what we have now...the highest taxes. We cannot allow public employee salaries and benefits to continue to grow unchecked. We cannot allow extreme council benefits. We cannot allow arrogance on our council by entrenched incumbents. There is a coordinated effort on this blog by the council and it's close social clique to defend the council's power and high public salaries paid to the city manager and those managers whose salaries are tied to it. Should we listen to the biased opinion of these people or should we use common sense knowing these people are over-compensated and over-benefited and vote accordingly to set limits. Limit council perks. Limit the high city manager salary. Limit incumbents to 2 terms. VOTE YES C D E
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
An Opinion From The Oct 4 2010 Candidate Forum
And add two more opinions...Barbara Nugent, a council supporter and groupie and who wrote for the opposing view on the ballot, and Kelly Seyarto, former councilman and union fire captain, both spoke out against the Initiatives. Nugent seemed to think not being a charter city like Bell meant that we could not be abused by high city salaries. Really Barbara? Have you seen the salary list? If you think those city salaries are justified I have a bridge to sell you on Date Street. Mr Seyarto also chimed in with his biased opinion like only a public employee union member could. Mr Seyarto seemed to think that dropping yearly salaries to a level that was still well above what most Murrietans earn would hurt the city. Really? Tell that to all the taxpayers supporting those salaries or those without jobs that are as qualified as those employed by the city and would gladly work for the lower and market based rate. So far the unified bias by all council members, a former council member, and their close groupies, should send up a red flag. They are trying to protect their benefits that would be lost should the Initiatives pass. Mr. Seyarto is probably nervous that if these go statewide his last few years of salaries might be reduced and hurt the pension he will recieve. Wow think about it: These Initiatives may be part of the answer to public employee pension abuse. Hey Steve Mandoki how is that 25k a month pension working for you? Can we trust the opinions of those affected by the Initiatives? The answer is NO! VOTE YES C D E!!
Sunday, October 3, 2010
FROM THE CALIFORNIAN...VOTE YES C D E
MORE FROM THE CALIFORNIAN...VOTE YES C D E
Remember when...ignorance is bliss huh? Murrieta is a charter city? Maybe you should educate yourself before you preach to others. You are council elitist personified. 4 Murrieta ..so reducing exorbitant salaries is "an experiment?" That's a rather weak argument don't you think? If they are too high then they are too high...they need to be contained. By using a formula,instead of a council compensation whim, Murrietans are guaranteed that they are not "Belled" get it? At least that Wildomar candidate has the outside the box thinking to speak up about over compensation. And the supreme court found the assessment to be unlawful...since most people are law abiding there should be no issue. Wildomar will find it's way just like Murrieta did in its early years. It's funny to hear the Council's propaganda from the council groupies. So we are suppose to take the recomendation from council and their close close close supporters and do what they say. So we should vote according to the opinions of those most affected. Sounds like we hens are being led by the foxes.
MORE FROM THE CALIFORNIAN...VOTE YES C D E
Ah Remember when...the elitism that comes out of your posting pores almost wafted into my keyboard. Listen to this person..the state government has control over what the city pays...hmmm so I guess that explains the huge differences in city manager compensation city to city from the link I furnished in my previous post. So Murrieta can point to Temecula and say oh we pay much less than Temecula so we are in line...and Temecula can point to Moreno Valley and say thay don't over pay... There is no justification for these high salaries. Intergovernmental country club memberships and other golden perks should not be part of the council package...Ask Los Alamos Hills residents how well these memberships have served them? Overall these Initiatives are needed and the taxpayers of Murrieta should not tolerate fiscal extravagance from their city. I can see that the few and active council groupies are being busybees this morning. Keep calling each other and posting. You are helping the Initiatives' cause like you don't even know. Thank you.
FROM THE CALIFORNIAN...VOTE YES C D E
Look at Gem Of The Valley: An obvious council and government groupie. Murrietans look at this. This poster is crying the blues because the City Manager salary will drop to 144k and others may drop from 200k to 133k. So both will go from making more than Congressmen to making slightly less than Congressmen. Here is a link to what city managers are paid throughout California: http://www.cacities.org/resource_files/29179.FinalSurveyResults9.10.10.pdf Do you wonder why your taxes are so high? Most of your taxes go to the salaries and benefits of public employees and that includes those that work for Murrieta. Does anyone think paying these people 144k or 133k is under paying them? There is a problem with over-compensation and the Initiatives begins to address this problem. Cities like Bell. Vernon, and now the citizens of San Marcos are looking at Murrieta voters with hope that We The People can control out of control government salaries. The Initiatives are a good start.
FROM THE CALIFORNIAN...VOTE YES C D E
You are right Wildomar watcher. The Murrieta council and their groupie supporters are scared. The concept of limited government is what is needed in not only Murrieta but in other cities as well. Look at this article on the city of San Marcos. http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/san-marcos/article_990aff72-3c8e-598f-884a-c72cec82c2a3.html?mode=story Limiting government pay benefits the taxpayer but as you said takes away those golden perks that the Murrieta council enjoys. Term lmits are needed especially in Murrieta. We have had too many multiterm council members go corrupt and limiting time served will curtail members from becoming self serving and corrupted by developers. It is odd that those that fought corrupt Murrieta politicians in the past now fight so hard against the Initiatives now. Could it be because "their" people are in office so they think term limits now are not needed? Well even this current council is vulnerable to corruption and Murrietans cannot let entrenced politicians and their supporters consolidate too much political power over time. We need turn over so that no one set of citizens and their council members becomes overly elite over the rest of us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)