Liar Liar pants on fire

So yesterday’s blog wasn’t the point in which to say this but I apologize for my absence  on Monday and Tuesday of this week; I have written before how stay at home parents don’t get sick days, and from those specific duties I don’t, but I did decide to put off writing in place of rest and recoup time. I had to be at least up to 80% by Tuesday night in order to attend the University Heights City Council meeting, because we all know that no one would want me to miss that. Ok who am I kidding there are several members of our small community who rejoice at my absence, and that is specifically one of the reasons I attend.

Today I want us to think about the primary purpose of local government. The farther away from the people a governing body gets generally the more out of touch with that populous the elected officials are. So local government gives each individual citizen the ability to communicate and express their wants, needs, and concerns about issues facing the local municipality in this instance.  There is a debate in congressional politics as to just what the money lobbyists spend actually buys, the cynical view is that it buys influence, and that by giving money to this candidate or that candidate that you can effectively influence public policy. A less cynical view is that by donating money to candidates, that you are buying not influence but access. This access in turn enables different groups the ability to state their case, their cause, or their wants to members of Congress.

Our local city council should in all actuality work more like the latter without the exchange of campaign donations being necessary. You see the wondrous thing about local government is that those who are interested, those who attend meetings, those who take the time to contact the city council have access. Whether or not Silvia Quesada shows up at your doorstep to look through your window to see what the view might be of the proposed development, or if Virginia Miller knocks on your door to ask if you would like a tree planted in the right of way in front of your house, or Zadok, Jim, or Mike simply respond to an email you sent, our small community offers each of us access to the process.

It appears that the problem or the disconnect with this concept comes in that some don’t just want access but they want influence and sometimes it seems undue influence. Not that it is necessary, but I thought I would use a quote from the UH-place facebook site to highlight this specific concept

“Now that the election dust has settled, it is time to get to work as a community on what will happen with the St. Andrew property development. Although one of the newly-elected council members mentioned in the Press-Citizen article on the day following the election his excitement about “finally having a green light for the development going forward,” UH Place hopes that the new council will “proceed with caution” and do as they promised–keep the expressed wishes of the community and the financial security of UH in mind a they work through the agreement with the developer. If the new council really wants to move forward and bring healing to the community (as mentioned in their campaign materials), they must be responsible. They must uphold their commitment to consider seriously all citizen feedback, including that from those who may not have voted for them.”

This statement can be read word for word in that the individuals who run UH-Place would like to foster a healing of the community while approaching a deliberate and sensible approach to the proposed project at the St. Andrew’s site. Or we can read it how it was really meant and see that although their hand picked candidates lost, and although the majority of the community wants to move in one direction they still want their voices to be heard and their wants and wishes to matter more than those of the rest of the community. I contend this in that despite efforts on my part to regain access and the ability to be able to share my voice with the community of the Uh-place page, I am still persona non grata. And that I have seen little or no want to compromise on their part.

The proposed development will be a monumental task for the council, it will require the ability to balance the needs of the community, the wants of the community(all sides) and the needs of the developer and church. All of these things will not always align, and making the tough choices is why these 5 individuals were elected. You and I get the easy job, we get to take credit when the council does something good, and place blame and bitch when they don’t. But each of us in the community must also understand that the outcome of this balancing act may not lend itself to each individuals idealized vision for the development; I mean seriously it isnt like I am going to get a bookstore or comic-book shop in the commercial portion now am I.

What highlights this need to point out the difference between the ability to have access and the ability to have influence is that certain individuals in our community continually point things out or make comments in the phrasing of “I dont like this”, “This isnt what I want”, and so on and so forth. The battle seems to have shifted from the front building being too high, increasing the traffic too much and things, to now the back building is too high, and we dont want the front building looking like a strip mall. The patience of this community in letting a concept develop into a plan is about the same as a toddler waiting on a snack; nonexistent.

Now I am going to the dark side in some’s opinion, and I am going to defend the evil of development. University Heights could use an expanded tax base, the developer bought the property in order to make money, and should be allowed to do so under the scrutiny and restrictions set by the council and the zoning, and my god, this talk of a 6 story building being a sky-scraping monstrosity is just absolutely ridiculous.  The detractors wanted a lower front building, and they were given it, and now that want a lower back building, before long I truly expect them to propose we just go back to one building, and maybe say build a church there. (Oh wait they have done that already). Far too often I think the council is stuck trying to deal with teenagers. All of us who are parents I am sure have tried a give in take in parenting, and many of us have been disappointed in that no matter how much we give, the children still want more and just take, and refuse to meet in the middle. Those who began in opposition to this development want to keep changing their objections, and moving the target that the council is aiming at. I personally find it frustrating, and counterproductive. But all citizens will be heard, that doesnt mean given their specific way. Learn to deal with it, it is called being an adult.

On a separate but related point. Silvia attempted to describe that she had made an effort to go and talk to the individuals who live in homes whose view and privacy might be affected by the proposed development. This was not done in a way to show that she had spoken with every possible individual, or that she was now speaking for all of those individuals, merely a statement that she was attempting to show due diligence. For her effort she got called out, castigated, bullied, and basically called a liar at the council meeting because 1 particular household was not home when she stopped by. The confrontational manner in which the issue was approached is reminiscent of something we might expect to see on a school yard, not in a city council meeting. I want to remind this individual that neither the world, the country, the state, our town, or this project revolves around them; and by stating such it is clearly time to grow up and leave the immature behavior at the door. Silvia is a likable, caring, and concerned councilor who is clearly doing everything she can to keep in touch with the people and be respectful of their opinions, even when being attacked. And while she is too nice to call you on your antics, no one has ever described me as nice. So once more just for the record, and in case the point was missed, take your overly aggressive bullying tactics elsewhere.

All in all the meeting was productive and efficient, there were only the one instance of minor fireworks, and the normal comments from the public that have been stated before and remain unchanged. As always some of the highlights come from being able to pick on Silvia, specifically her word choices, such as “summoned by the church”,it gave the image of being called to the principles office or more readily called in front of the Spanish Inquisition.(NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition.) and then there was “further flesh on the skeletal proposal” a much more poetic and descriptive phrase than I expected to note at a city council meeting . As the development plan moves forward I can only guess that the meetings will become more contentious, and that tempers we have seen bubbling may come out in force, and I would hope that we can all approach these matters as adults, but I for one wont hold my breath. And so endeth another tale of the University Heights City Council meetings.

The Scariest thing in University Heights.

Well I have always been one to make waves, and rock the boat, but it seems I have done so rather well, and what makes it even more fun is that I have done so, with those annoyed with me not really even knowing who I am. I guess I take some sort of satisfaction in being an annoying pest to what I find is a campaign of lies and fear mongering. But just so we are clear, I have not tried to hide, or be anonymous, I am very upfront with my indignation. And a future with the We R 4 UH group has me terrified.

But before I break down the wonderfully inaccurate and misleading letter University Heights residents received from the We Are For UH campaign, let me first mention something about their puppeted voicebox UH Place. So I came across UH Place and their Facebook, page and then followed the link to the webpage just to see what it was all about. And here is their mission, taken directly from their website:

Mission
UH Place is about life in University Heights.  It offers insights and information for the purpose of enhancing and strengthening residents’ own ”sense of place” and inspiring their community involvement.  All University Heights residents are invited to contribute to UH Place by sending their suggestions and content submissions to uhplace@rocketmail.com.
UH Place advocates for strong neighborhoods, responsible and transparent city government, and good stewardship practices on behalf of the citizens of University Heights.  We are the people’s voice; we are not the voice of local government.
UH Place is committed to the preservation of University Heights as a unique and sustainable community in which to live, play, and work.
Find us on facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/UHPlace

Ok as I read that, I would suspect that the site, and the mission to be simply a centralized place to post, discuss, and share information that is important to University Heights residents. Ok, that works for me I have been a University Heights resident for over 9 years and we all know I have my own opinions, so I thought I would keep and eye on it. So on the 21st of this month when an endorsement for the We R 4 UH group showed up on the Facebook site I called foul.

UH Place endorses candidates Hopson, Leff, McGrath, and Stewart in the upcoming University Heights election.
http://uhplace.org/uh-place-endorses-hopson-leff-mcgrath-and-stewart/

And here was my response.

Jase Humphrey While I realize that it is clear that the pull of this specific Facebook page is rather limited, I personally take offense that something that is supposed to be as you claim, a community place to pass on information and ideas, is clearly and biasedly one sided. So what I gleen from this is much like the We R 4 UH candidates, you are a place only for those that share your specific vision for the future of University Heights. Your endorsement above accuses the other candidates of tricking people with half truths which of course is a page from the backhanded scare tactics that the We R 4 UH group has employed since their creation. While I am clearly not so naive to believe that this comment will remain up for long, I would wish that if you are simply going to be a megaphone for the We R 4 UH group that at least you come out and say so clearly as opposed to the not so clever mascarading that is currently going on.

And as if speaking from a psychic, I was clearly right, but not only did they take down my comment, but I have been blocked from liking, or commenting on anything else that is posted on the UH Place page, ,so much for neighborhood of inclusion, or maybe my voice was too loud, or simply out of tune with the orchestrated fear and one-sided political system that they support.

I know so far it has been a list of they said this, I said this, and they said this type of thing. But hopefully the point was clearly made. For an idea that personally purports to foster The people’s voice, they were quick and decisive in attempting to silence mine. Oops, my parents and wife and both tried to shut me up for years, and it just cant be done. Now on to the next act in our political circus.

Now unfortunately I cant give you a link to the letter, which means I have to type out everything I want to take issue with, my what a pain to be ACCURATE, but for the sake of authenticity just hang with me here. So for the next while and in order to make it as easy to follow as possible, the bolded type is there letter and the non bold type is my response.

The Politics of Campaigning

For a clue as to how a candidate will govern if elected, look no further than how he/she campaigns for your vote.

While I in my limited knowledge of campaigning, and such(insert hysterical laughter here), I may not agree entirely, lets just say that I buy their premise. And if this is truly the case then we can expect the We R 4 UH group to govern by fear, misinformation, and as consistent a policy stance as Flipper the dolphin. Machiavelli would be proud of the tactics and strategies employed and the wealth of misinformation and distorted sense of reality that they portray. Jim Morrison on an acid trip saw the world more clearly and accurately than these 4 candidates.

In our initial ‘We Are 4 UH’ mailing we stated that we would be accessible, but not intrusive. We promised to respect your time and privacy by providing all University Heights residents with detailed , written explanations of our positions on the issues.

Well la ti fricken da, what we are supposed to read here is that we have not come and beat down your door and annoyed you at dinner time, and distrubed your life. Ok Granted not a single one of your candidates has shown up on my doorstep…. this election. But just 2 years ago I was bombarded and berated, in my own front yard. But when the opposition decides to hit the streets you claim they are intrusive? Really, you want to go that far. Did you think that we as residents of University Heights had the memories of goldfish, and that we had all forgotten the last election cycle. Shame on you for treating us all like we are idiots.

However, as autumn arrived and yard signs proliferated, we realized that informal, face-to-face discussions would be helpful and appropriate , if done with genuine respect for each resident’s time and concerns. So we initiated a modest amount of door-to-door contacts.

I would first like to point out that the wonderful blooming of yard signs, was initiated by the We R 4 UH group, and that the 5 independent candidates simple followed suit. You know the whole when in Rome thing. But I haven’t even gotten through the first third of the letter and I am already feeling like a young child being told by its parent, “Do as I say, and not as I do.” Don’t annoy the residents, unless I want to. Oh and just so we are clear, modest amount of door-to-door means, people who don’t already support any of the other candidates, and we think we can scare into voting for us. Because let me just be very clear, at no point, whether at the candidate forum, or at my house have I been contacted by any We R 4 UH candidate, I was approached by 3 of the independant candidates that I didnt personally know at the candidate forum, and have had people stop by my house, although having missed me.

What did we learn from our conversations with residents? Many gave troubling reports of intrusive contacts by other candidates seemigly more intent on talking at them than talking with them. Even more concerning, we learned that “Building Common Ground” (BCG) the PAC (political action committee) supporting the other five candidates, war pursuing a strategy of ‘selective distributon’ of their campaing materials– if you had one of our campaign signs in your yard, chances are you didnt recieve their campaign information. We can only conclude that people who support us are of little interest to them.

This is clearly some sensationalized propaganda if I have ever seen it. The big bad PAC BCG is selectively distributing their campaign information, the secrets are being kept, none of our supporters know where they stand. Ummmm it is a small community, their are few questions as to where anyone stands, and guess what, YOU DO THE SAME THING, with the mild exception that this time, unlike last election you seem to be sending your leaflets to everyone. But here you want to convince me, I want numbers of the individuals who told you these stories, because remember you only did a modest amount of door-to-door campainging, so just how many doors did you knock on, and how many people said that they be intruded upon and talked to.

Now at this point I know I have thrown a lot at you. I have asked you to read a half a page of campaing jargon, and my decoding and response to it, and I know most of you have busy lives, and dont necessarily want to spend all day reading my novel on the evils of the We R 4 UH campaign, so I will take some shortcuts to finish this up.

In the next paragraph they tell us they mail to everyone and that being inclusive is what a campaign should be about. Ok, this point is quick and easy. We already know that inclusion is not what they are about. Sure if you want to follow their pied piper speil of fear and destruction they would love to include you, but if you are a free thinker and willing to call them out, nope, you are cast out into the cold wilderness, and not allowed into the warmth of the University Heights community. Its a good thing I brought my parka. Ok maybe I took a little literary license and used some hyperbole for effect. So here, agree included, disagree ignored or blocked.

I can illustrate this post even better. In my last Blog about this election I attacked the We R 4 UH campaign and raised concerns about Virginia Miller’s comments about renters. I have heard nothing from a single We R 4 UH candidate, but I almost immediately was contacted by Virginia Miller so she could clarify her position. I am not hard to find, and she took the time and effort to INCLUDE me and make sure that her position was clear. I appreciate the time, and the response. The other candidates I know have been informed of my thoughts and feelings about their stances and their campaign, I have heard it second hand from reliable sources, but yet still not one candidate has defended their positions or said anything.

To finish up their mailing they directly the attack the Building Common Ground group and state that the mailings that not everyone got are posted on the We R 4 UH website, and that the BCG group is only listening to the 50% who agree with the 5/3 mixed use development and turning their back on the other 50%,. That’s not leadership. And its certainly not “building common ground.” Wow look at that snazzy turn of a phrase and that wonderfully fuzzy math. If we take the 10% ( which is drastically less than 50%) and combine it with the 23% that want something different than the 3 plans which were provided, at most the proposed 4/2 plus plan is representing the first choice of maybe if they got everyone, 33% of the residents who took part in the survey. So I guess if we use the We R 4 UH groups logic they are turning their back on 67% of the residents of University Heights.

Its easy to make your argument sound correct and viable, when you are working in isolation. Anyone can make a hasty generalization, if they don’t have to support their contentions with facts. I am confident that I have shown you the flaws in their logic, the holes in their rhetoric, and most of all that if we jump on the We R 4 UH ship, we all better bring a life raft. On November 5th I know I will be supporting Haverkamp, Lane, Miller, Nampala, and Quezada; wont you join me in building some common ground in a community  that desperately needs its.

I am Jase Humphrey and I approve this message.