City Of American Canyon Online Community Forums

Yesterday when I attended the Walmart hearing I was surprised to see that Joan Bennett, Mark Mcguire etal who ran for city council were not there. This was a critical decision the City Council had made and everyone who wants to run for city council should of been there. It was give them some insite on potential errors that could happen in the future.

I agree, everyone should have been there. In fact the whole city needed to be there, this is a very important milestone for AmCan. As for Paul McGuire, I must come to his defense. He happens to be very ill right now and I am thankful he "stayed away", until he feels much better. Paul is generally at the council meetings and has been very beneficial on many matters.

Hope your feeling better Paul! AmCan needs your support.

or what about all the others?

I just want to check my facts, isn't there an election Nov 2005 for 3 City Council seats? (Ben, Leon & Cecil) If so, that isn't very far away!

It is a good thing you are checking your facts. No we will not be able to replace Leon, Andersen or Shaver until next year.

We definitly need new blood in the City Council. People who are not business as usual. Professional people who have experience and education in finance, planning, law etc. People who want to work on the infrustructure.

Ms. Bennett was not present because she is spending time with her dying son.

Why do these people need to be replaced?
If they have done such a terrible job why is this city such a desirable place to live?

What do any of you feel there are doing wrong? just asking....

Ms bennet actually returned from her ailing son's bed to deal with a very ill husband.
Shame on you for judging. She ran and didn't make the council. So what!

Does that mean she's obligated to attend every meeting until the end of time? Some people put value in family life above the shameless politics and hatred displayed in this forum.

Where do I send my dollar, so you can buy a life?! I mean this in the nicest way

Who really cares who attended the hearings. It is all moot anyway. The key players showed up those named and that is that.

If I was planning to run for City Council, I think I would lay low and be very careful about my support for current or future projects because the City Attorney seems to be able to keep you out of the vote on some very important issues. Maybe this is the game plan of future and past candidates. Don't take a stand till you have to? Or take a stand and suffer the consequences...

Why do you think that it is the city attorney? He doesn't block any votes on anything. Councilmembers can't vote on issues that have a possible financial interest. He is actually quite tame compared to other cities.

The problem is with the city manager. He is the one that provides the staff reports that the council relies on to make an informed decision. If those are adjusted from department heads as it has been stated before in the past or fabricated as it was stated in the past case then who is really to blame?

I believe the council failed to perform with several key issues last year. Maybe they are bored or frustrated. Colcleasor had short-term-itis and couldn't care less all he wanted to do was stick it to the city for abandoning his business when the Home Depots opened.

Garcia is living in Neverland....never responding to the asked question, never giving a reliable answer, never listening to other council members.

Shaver teeters on the border of anal retentiveness with his infinite attention to the most ridiculous of details. Plus the guy is just plain lonely.

Anderson has his own issues and he is frustrated. Who can blame him? The guy has a heart of gold and has donated hundreds of hours and dollars for local non-profits but yet his requests continue to fall upon deaf ears with the staff. So why bother?

And then there is Luporini, the Grand Dame of council. Who keeps her fans entertained with humorous outbursts and everchanging hair color. Controversial and outspoken she too has learned that without the reliable and responsible support from staff things are not going to get done. And as they didn't get done her "attitude with staff" escalated.

Do you ever recall seeing her anger directed at the city attorney? No. She clearly directs towards the city manager.

As for Coffey that was a mutually agreed decision to not allow her to be in the closed session discussions with the remaining four and the city attorney, those are protected under the attorney/client rule. Besides it isn't in the city's best interest to for Coffey to be in there in the event that they lose. WM could come back and use it as ploy to get back all of the legal fees. It was all explained at the very first meeting.

If and when the issue comes back to council all members can vote on it.

So please explain to me how you think the city attorney accomplishes the blocking maneuver again. Thanks-

AC Resident: you are probably correct in that the city attorney is only acting on requests from the council or staff. I however still feel that the more vocal a future candidate is, the more it may cost them down the road. Just my opinion.

record straight wrote:Ms bennet actually returned from her ailing son's bed to deal with a very ill husband.
Shame on you for judging. She ran and didn't make the council. So what!

Does that mean she's obligated to attend every meeting until the end of time? Some people put value in family life above the shameless politics and hatred displayed in this forum.

Where do I send my dollar, so you can buy a life?! I mean this in the nicest way

I did not know that Ms. Bennett was having family problems. The point is next year we will have 3 positions up for City Council and any of those who ran last year intend to run next year should be attending City Council, planning & parks commission meetings.

By attending meetings and prospective candidates voicing their opinions we can better determine their skills in leadership. Are they just going to follow status quo or are they going to do what is right?

Take for instance thursday nights city council meeting. Instead of the City Council voting no on the "Working Plan" that wasn't complete for the parks commission they approved and gave the Parks commission a raise. Although they talked about the absentism instead of standing firm on the attendance of those once a month meetings they gave them a raise and said its okay you can telecommute. Many people did not apply for the parks commission because they didn't feel they could meet the commitment. And to have 3 people who haven't shown up to vote on issues is a bad thing.

myopinion wrote:
Why do these people need to be replaced?
If they have done such a terrible job why is this city such a desirable place to live?

What do any of you feel there are doing wrong? just asking....

American Canyon is such a desirable place to live because it is centerally located. 45 mins to the city by ferry, 45 mins to sac, 25 mins to marin etc etc etc. I have lived here for over 3 years and have yet to see any improvements in the parks. They always talk about what they are going to do, but I have yet to see it get done.

Mindingcitybusiness, that is a great post!

The moral of the story is if you reward down statistics you get more down statistics! ( down statistics= low production, no results, not showing up as promised)

This is just typical of people who have never really been in business. You cannot put up with this type of crap, or you are soon out of business.

The attitude presented some of the members in and of itself was evident of their lack of commitment to do the work.

I will say it again: You either get reasons, or you get results.

The council is too , way too, REASONABLE.( willing to accept reasons)- instead of DEMANDING results.

mindingcitybiz - I hope you get in there and run! I am considering it again as well, unless their are some candidates I can support.

I have always supported Luporini because although I may not agree with her all the time, as least she is willing to call it like it she see's it, and is trying to do something about it. The council needs to get their act together and hold individuals accountable. Thats the bottom line.

And after reading dan judges article-

Ok, so we use to pay them 25 dollars now we are going to pay them 105 dollars- lets see

There is 4K a year of the cities money because " garcia doesnt feel $25 per meeting is enough" Come on- so you give them a 4 x increase?

That is very bad fiscal responsibility. Period. Especially in light of the attendance issues!

It is MINDBOGGLING;

Oh and now you can just attend the meeting by phone- may be ok once in a while, but look, but what about the materials you are referencing in the meeting? How are you productive without those?

UNBELIEVABLE- HEy , lets have our city council meetings by phone to, then we can all just call in!

The compensation issue was brought up by Luporini during the initial comment section. It was also agreed to by Coffey who said "this should have been done back in 2001".
Then all the council voted on it.

Well thanks for the Kudo's Paul, but I won't be running for city council anytime soon. "I have pressing committments that would not allow me to always attend meetings." If and when I do decide to run, I wouldn't want anything from interfering with my ability to give a 110% to the job. When your dealing with other peoples lives and money you need follow through.

I agree. You don't tell someone they are missing too many meetings and in the same breath give them a pay raise. Duh.

Mihdingcitybiz- Look, at the end of the day, if you want something done, you have to give it to a busy person anyway, as they are the only ones GETTING anything done!

You and I both know that 80 % of the work is done by 20% of the people most of the time.

I have heard Lori mention at the last 2 meetings the issue of the kids living in the mobile home park and the danger of their crossing American Canyon Rd to get to the new grammar school. I totally agree. I wouldn't want my child to cross any intersection on American Canyon Rd. The City Manager's response has been the same each time this question is asked. There will be busing for Montevino kids and a crossing guard at some intersection. My question is why doesn't Lori and the City Council direct the city staff to work with the school district on a more acceptable plan. Instead, it just kind of hangs out there. Also, what about the kids at Canyon Creek, 2525 Flosden, La Vigne. The school bus needs to go right by several of these areas to pick up kids in Montevino, why are they not stopping in other areas? This seems like an accident just waiting to happen.

I agree and these days it seems that the number has dwindle down to about 10%.

I have complained several times about not having a cat walk go over hwy 29 at American Canyon Road to Safeway. I have seen children and adults running for their lives to get to the shopping center. Hopefully with change of Broadway which will go directly to the street for Vintage Ranch and have a stop light the children should be safe crossing the street there. Only time will tell with red light runners and all.

In the last two council meetings it was determined the safest and planned way for students to go to the new school was to proceed to the corner of Fairgrounds and Am Can Road/Newell Road. There will be a crossing guard when school begins.

The roads, stop lights and Broadway Construction will not be done in time. But they are beinmg worked on. Take a deep breath and deal with the reality and growing pagns of an expanding city. Better yet, Stop your --itching and volunteer to be crossing guard if it mean so much to you![/url]

Guest, I think you missed the point. I don't even think the crossing guard is safe at that intersection during the morning commute.

There were several issues that were addressed Thursday night.
Luporini brought up the fact of attendance, but didn't bother to investigate the details.
Regarding your claim that the plan was 'incomplete".Wrong. The fact encompasses open space, parks, transit, recreational fields and etc for fice years. What was presented to the council was Yr. 1 of 5.
Coddey tried to abastain. Illegal. Meaning she didn't understand the entire picture presented. Every council member had the oppty to ask ?s and get clarifications. Not the commissions fault for denseness or lack of understanding.

Background: While Coffey complained the plan was incomplete. Let the facts be known. This is the commission she chaired- which was disbanded because of her leadership. Violation of the Brown Act for discussing city business at a local home. Exceeding a budget they were given. And never delivering on a 10th Anniversary Bash for the city because of her bad planning.

The result is a well-detailed plan to address the city's needs. "jus the facts ".

It is so easy to see who has lived here for awhile and who hasn't by the comments.

When Coffey was on Council the Brown Act was not violated it was an error on stationary, that was, by the way signed by current Commissioners Plate, La Voie and Iliff. How convenient that Coffey was the only one replaced after a very close election and replaced as a campaign pay off to Garcia's campaign manager by hmmmm let's see Victor Rivera.

As for the 10th anniversary ball, once again the committee was not asked to attend the council meeting nor given any notice of it being agendized. In fact it was Garcia who inappropriately presented erroneous facts (something he still does today). The committee was not asked to give updates to the council the Rec Dept Head did, but the city certainly enjoyed some of the highest attended events.

As for the dedicated money; that was earmarked for a 10th Birthday party in January which had over 1500 people attending in the gym and banners acknowledging the city's birthday that was the extent of the obligation of the committee.

Recognizing great success with the birthday party the committee decided to sell sponsorships on the banners instead of purchasing them direct which raised an additional 7K, with a portion of this money they bought t-shirts commemorating the year and sold them for yet another profit.

The group also produced the highly successful Cinco de Mayo with over 4K attendees ( more than the 4th). The group had a float in the parade, purchased permanent decorations for the Community recognition Ball (which are used every year) and paid for a band. Yes, paid for a band that did not get to play because the council at Garcia's urging cancelled it causing the group to refund over 125 tickets at $55.00 each. It might also be noted that instead of participating with the group, Garcia was always out campaigning and taking credit for the activities.

After paying the balance to the band, over 2K was put back into the general fund and the remaining t-shirts given to city employees. But what is important is to know that the event was cancelled because it was on the same night as the Chamber's Casino Night main fundraiser and God Forbid if something better should compete.

Oh and the reason for that supposed Brown Act Violation (which by the way was over the mishandling of the 4th of July by the Lions Club) was that the commission submitted a letter as the 10th Anniversary Committee
( who participated in the event), and a typing error where it was put "Commissioner" under the individual signature lines instead of "Committee member" to sign thier name.

As for the Brown Act Violation it was a grey area at best as said by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

I know all of this as I was on that committee. It was my first time to be a part of a city related committee and was my last. After the crap the city pulled, it was all I could do was to move out of this 2-bit flea bag town and we did. If I am going to have to deal with crooked politics I would rather live in a big city where you don't have to notice. At least our home sold quick. My only regret was living here.

guest wrote:It is so easy to see who has lived here for awhile and who hasn't by the comments.

That is the problem with this country. Most people listen to gossip and take it as fact instead of doing the homework and investigate the facts.

Since I was singled out for not being at the Walmart meeting, I would like to respond. I have a son dying in Oaklahoma and have just returned from there. I have great interest in the Walmart issue and in the health and well being of the city as a place and in the health and well being of its citizens. Certainly Walmart is in the forefront of a lot of minds. If it comes it will directly or indirectly impact all of us. I missed the last two issues of the Eagle so I don't know what happened at the meeting. Would the person who criticized me for not being at the meeting care to summarize for me?

Joan,
Thank you for taking the high road on this issue. Apparently some people don't know the election is over. I beleive you've conceded already. Apparently, not enough.
People are willing to put hatred, negativity and personal agendas before the correct way to respond to others in a social environment.

Take care of your husband and son- leave this alone. They don't deserve the energy.

I too was singled out for not being at the trial. At the time I didn't even respond, because the whole accusation implies that those that ran are not concerned enough about the city. Of course, the people that make these acccusations Joan didnt run for office either, so what does that tell you.
They would have little clue of the time, effort, costs, paperwork, and energy involved to campaign.

I did attend the hearing on the injunction. I did not attend the trial as I was ill. I am sorry I was. It would have been great to see.

But lets get to what really matters about your post Joan.

Few things are worse for a parent than to lose a child, and I wish you the best in the challenges that lie ahead. Life is a precious thing.

Joan, if you read the above comment you will know I was not aware of your situation. The purpose of the comment is to make people who want to run for city council again next year, or new people realize they need to attend city council, parks & recs, planning commission meetings and yes sometimes hearings that will effect the community. People who attend meetings tend to let their voices be heard. So when it comes time for me to choose, who the three people I am going to vote, for I will know what their positions are.

It is not a personal attack on anyone. I didn't vote for either of you last time, because I just didn't know where you stood on all the issues and what you really where bringing to the table. I researched planning commission & city council meetings prior to the last election. Okay call me a geek, but I like to now how people stand on the issues and whether they are going to flip- flop or not. LOL

p.s. Joan my prayers are with you and your family at this time. My the Lord cover your family with his angels and love.

Who really cares who attended the hearing. As far as I am concerned if your name wasn't on the lawsuit then who else really needs to be there. The original post was stupid and this whole thread needs to end.

The fact is if you have cable you can watch the meetings at home. If you have a computer you can download the agendas and minutes. If you don't have cable then you can borrow the tapes from city hall and watch.

Just because you are not there day after day putting in your two cents on every issue whether it is relavent or not doesn't mean you are not qualified to run. You can be up to date on issues without foregoing dinner with your family.

Whether Mrs. Bennett, Mr. Russell, or anybody else attended the meetings faithfully is not important. What is important is to address the concerns of the community and offer viable solutions and stand by your decisions.

But remembering what the community wants is what is important and listening to them. I remember that very few candidates even took the time to walk the streets, do mailers, or even make contact with many of us. To me that is what is important. Listening to my concens and representing them without me having to be there to make sure you do.

As I said before MCB and the rest of the posters this is a really bad thread to continue, let's let this one lie. Surely we can do better.