Top Stories of 2011: No. 4—Capt. Chaos
Jesse Petrilla's call to military training at Fort Knox was anything but the gold standard. His reputation suffered, and he didn't do his colleagues on the City Council any favors either.
Though asked not to attend, Jesse Petrilla (right) took his place at the fete honoring former councilman Gary Thompson.
Photos (1)
Photos
To Jesse Petrilla, it's all about him. That much became evident in 2011, soon after Rancho Santa Margarita's youngest City Councilman was called to military training with the California Army National Guard in February. The gamesmanship that followed was hard to watch.
When 2nd Lt. Petrilla received his papers from Uncle Sam to report to Fort Knox, KY, he had attended just four meetings in his role as a newly elected public official.
By law, the city had the option of temporarily replacing Petrilla during his four-month absence, or leaving the seat vacant and taking a four-man approach to local governance—a move that would run the risk of a 2-2 deadlock on council voting.
Petrilla didn’t want anyone keeping his seat warm while he was gone. Instead, he said he wanted to govern from long distance.
He admitted during his last council meeting before leaving for the U.S. Army Armor Basic Officers Leaders Course that he knew he would be called away for extended military training during his City Council term, although he didn’t expect it before December 2012. However, he had failed to openly share this notable information with voters while running for the council seat, and some in the community were critical of the omission.
What followed after he received his marching orders was a poor reflection on Petrilla, who seemed to use his military uniform as a shield against criticism. But he was no Capt. America.
Like a schoolboy asking Dad to let him stay out late on prom night, Petrilla did everything short of begging his council colleagues not to appoint a temporary replacement for him.
Petrilla told the council “my time is my own” and said he could engage in teleconferencing—thereby governing by long distance—as long as he wasn’t out in the field at the time.
Even though Fort Knox is a closed military base with a three-hour time difference, Petrilla insisted members of the general public could attend meetings on the base at his location so there would be no open-meeting Brown Act violation. He got that info, he said, straight from a guard at the gate.
Yet councilmen Gary Thompson and Jerry Holloway had reservations indicating they knew more about military workings than Petrilla did. Or maybe they just had more common sense. Thompson had for decades worked with the military and supervised the repair of a nuclear submarine fleet in San Diego in the wake of 9/11. Holloway was a retired police officer.
The council wanted assurances the on-base teleconferencing that Petrilla proposed could take place, and that members of the public could have access to Petrilla’s location during the meetings so that a Brown Act violation didn’t occur.
The Army, though, refused to provide such assurances.
About Petrilla’s time availability, Goblirsch indicated he would inquire with Petrilla’s instructor but “my assumption is that course organizers will strongly discourage this.”
—"Petrilla's Chances of Serving City and Country Take a Hit"
Thompson, Holloway and Mayor Tony Beall had been through the complex and time-consuming budget process before, and took the stance that five heads were better than four when it came to analyzing every item of the city’s budget—the major task during Petrilla’s absence.
Additionally, City Manager Steve Hayman said there were several upcoming matters, such as "important land issues, several key contracts," that could bog down the city with a 2-2 deadlock vote. The council chose to appoint a temporary replacement for Petrilla, who by law would resume his role as councilman immediately upon his return.
Steve Baric, the other newly elected councilman, cast the sole dissenting vote because he had "grave concerns that a significant portion of this community would think this is political payback."
Petrilla fanned those flames. He responded to the council’s decision by sending a misleading email blast that painted his colleagues as disrespectful toward the position he was elected to, and implied they were unpatriotic and disrespectful of the military uniform he wore.
Petrilla's message was that the Army had his back and he could teleconference as necessary.
But the Army ultimately provided correspondence to the city that demonstrated Petrilla was wrong on every count. Civilians wouldn’t have the run of Fort Knox at midnight—or later—on nights when Petrilla would be attending to his City Council duties. He would also likely be too busy to attend meetings through teleconferencing anyway.
Rancho Santa Margarita Patch contacted Maj. Chris Almagauer at Fort Knox and shared the language Petrilla used to his followers indicating the military had endorsed his participation: "The Army has expressly stated that teleconferencing would be possible despite some statements made in council meetings, or in various media." Almagauer specifically would not endorse that comment.
The city, and the military, deserved better from Petrilla.
Through misleading emails and Facebook posts, Petrilla tried—somewhat successfully—to rally public opinion against his City Council colleagues.
Thompson, Holloway and Beall had their inboxes flooded by those who had received Petrilla’s messages, many not even from California. They were threatened with being recalled—and their patriotism was wrongfully questioned.
Then, days later, it got even more dramatic and convoluted. Thompson, who had been caring for his ailing father, resigned to focus on his family and his consulting business, a move that some incorrectly credited to pressure from voters and the threat of a recall. Thompson’s father died four months later; his mother was already in convalescent care.
Holloway indicated that he had misjudged the emotional impact on the residents who had filled his inbox. As a show of goodwill, Beall offered to nominate Petrilla to replace Thompson as the city's mayor pro tempore when the aspiring tank platoon leader returned from training.
With Thompson’s resignation, Beall, Holloway and Baric wanted to ensure all council members—including Petrilla—were involved in selecting Thompson’s replacement. The notion of temporarily replacing Petrilla was scrapped.
It was determined Petrilla would participate in council meetings via telephone, and would be involved in the selection of the new council member.
Petrilla did physically attend two council meetings while he was in training.
The first was on a weekend when he returned to Rancho Santa Margarita on a pass. A special meeting was hastily called to accommodate Petrilla’s schedule — even though the mayor was unable to attend because he was away on a planned business trip. Six of the 12 candidates for Thompson’s position were interviewed publicly. Each councilman was allowed to ask two questions of each candidate. One of the standard questions Petrilla asked: “How do you define government?”
The other meeting Petrilla “attended” was the one in which the council set out to actually select Thompson’s replacement. That was the only meeting—City Council or budget study session—in which Petrilla used the teleconferencing technology.
With council chambers packed and the meeting heading into the long hours of the night, Petrilla refused to follow the rules. Councilmen were asked to list their top three candidates. Three promptly complied—but Petrilla refused and listed only one, Kenney Hrabik, owner of the controversial Dove Canyon Courtyard.
Jaws dropped in the crowd.
Petrilla insisted Hrabik was his only choice and refused to name a second and third choice. At one point, Petrilla said he didn’t want to name a candidate who wasn’t listed on any other ballots.
The crowd groaned and his colleagues shook their heads in wonderment at what to do.
With the process at a standstill, Petrilla eventually relented and ranked three candidates, but not before all in attendance saw past the uniform and claims of patriotism and recognized other traits: selfishness and arrogance.
- Video: 2011 Year in Review
- Top Stories of 2011: No. 10–A Worthwhile Compromise
- Top Stories of 2011: No. 9–Beau Knows Golf
- Top Stories of 2011: No. 8—Death of a Racer
- Top Stories of 2011: No. 7—The Killing of Elvis
- Top Stories of 2011: No. 6—Dove Canyon Courtyard
- Top Stories of 2011: No. 5—The World Stage
After the better part of five hours, on the last night Petrilla said he had available to participate in the selection process, the meeting was adjourned to conduct additional candidate interviews at a later date.
A few days later, after publication of an editorial in Patch calling for him to find time to participate or excuse himself from the process, Petrilla cut his losses and left it in the hands of Beall, Holloway and Baric to make the choice; they unanimously chose Carol Gamble (whom Petrilla last month nominated to be the new mayor; she declined).
Given the hit to his credibility, Petrilla would have been better off if the council had actually replaced him temporarily.
Petrilla returned to the council in June and, although he had not participated in a single budget discussion, voted for the adoption of the budget. In that meeting, Petrilla didn't bring any of the drama that had marked the spring.
But he was still playing by his own rules. Before that June 22 meeting, Thompson was honored at a reception in the city’s community center. Thompson's family asked, through the city manager, that Petrilla not attend the function because they felt Petrilla’s actions had been so disrespectful to them.
Petrilla attended anyway.
His actions led Beall to rethink the mayor pro tem nomination. Over the succeeding months, Petrilla proposed some agenda items sure to cause a stir.
He suggested council members be subject to term limits. It didn't pass.
Then he proposed that the position of mayor become an elected position by the people. It didn't pass.
By year's end, Petrilla’s antics had played a huge role in the most chaotic year in City Council history.
And, in the opinion of many, it didn’t pass.
How did your opinion of councilman Jesse Petrilla change, if at all, over the course of the year?
Tell us in the comments.
Lawrence (Larry) McCook
8:31 am on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Jesse Petrilla is both young and inexperienced and perhaps due these factors made some ill advised statements. But, certain council members have exhibited both their lack of decorum to a young man called to military active duty who had received over 7200 votes from the citizens of RSM. Some of Jesse's ideas have had some merit, maybe not presented in the best format but, these valid ideas were scoffed at by some council members. There is a lack of civility exhibited at times on the RSM City Council and during the last election also.
Flannery4
3:35 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Really sir, "ill advised statements?" Have you ever seen this? Is this the way you think a military member should act? Just look! http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/09/177883_comment.php
HOMER
4:27 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Mr. McCook. I am in compete agreement. I have witnessed many meetings and I believe we should throw them ALL out. I know I will not be voting for any incumbent. I blame Mayor Beall for not being able to move past the last election. He created the environment that we find ourselves in.
Sharon Y.
4:41 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Homer, welcome to patch I see this is your first post, I must disagree 100% with your statement and have to wonder what political axe you have to grind. I can not think of one good reason anyone would throw out any of the council at this time, we are blessed to live in a wonderful city with a balanced budget, safe streets and new businesses everyday, I say thank you to all of the council, even Jesse who I have no love for due to his lack of maturity.
Homer take your manufactured political strife and head to San Juan, a city with huge debt and big problems.
Council avoid this , ignore the few malcontents and keep up the good work keeping our city safe.
owen callahan
5:11 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Is that picture real? If it is, it is this kind of garbage that makes the U.S. military look really bad. Way to go voters.
HOMER
5:12 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Sharon, you seem to carry a lot of anger. Breathe.
Sharon Y.
5:33 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Nice deflection Homer, no anger at all , I will repeat I enjoy living in this wonderful city that is safe for my young children with a balanced budget and fabulous business
So for those reasons I take issue with your secret political agenda that does not appear to me to be in the best interest of the community at large.
Dove Canyon Oldtimer
8:57 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
Petrilla has proven on more than one occasion that he has dishonored the uniform he wears. Mr. McCook, I have all the respect in the world for the military, but not all of them are perfect angels. a key word that all military men and women are expected to breath in their everyday lives, and live by is HONOR. There is no honor in Petrilla. And for you to defend him just has me questioning your judgement as well. As you are an announced candidate for the next city council election, you should start thinking about recognizing honorable people and those that use their color of the uniform for political purposes, as Petrilla has done.
Flannery4
10:25 am on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Wonderful article! My neighbor had a Petrilla sign on her fence. When I asked her why, she said it was because he came to her door and she didn't know anybody else who was running. He came to my door too, but I thought he might have been campaigning for his dad who was waiting in the car! My neighbor did a full 180 after Petrilla apparently made a jerk of himself at a meeting that he attended over the phone. I heard the details from a lot of people at church. If what they said is true, this article doesn't go far enough in explaining what happened at that meeting. Id love to hear from others who were there as to what really happened. I'm amazed this guy got elected.
Sharon Y.
12:08 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Sorry Jerry I could not disagree more with your notion new blood is needed! Clearly that did not prove to be a positive change from the last election. Both of the new council members have brought nothing but divisive politics to our wonderful community and it is unfortunate.
Jerry Nathanous
11:38 am on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Let me first say that I'm no fan of Jesse. His antics on the council were not intended to improve our city's business climate or way of life, rather they were more like self-serving political manuevers with no real benefit to the residents of RSM.
That said, this article is truly a one-sided opinion piece, not news reporting. There were equally shameful antics and political manuevers done by Tony Beall and Jerry Holloway in 2011. Their antics are completed omitted here. Objective reporting should also include exposing the truth about your friends on the council. Wouldn't you say?
Blogging from both political camps have taken on a very negative tone. Let the voters decide who should be elected in Nov. I'm for new people on the council with fresh ideas and a genuine desire to serve RSM. No politics, please.
April Josephson
12:58 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
We all agree that we don't want politics, just people willing to represent our city to their best of their ability. New blood has taken a formerly exemplary council and turned it into a circus at times, due to the new self-serving, politics before governance, blood.
RSM residents deserve governance, not politics. I watched everything and did not see shameful antics other than by the new blood that this first time Patch blogger is preaching. Funny, that is exactly what was said by the new blood to get onto council, and look where that has gotten our city.
Jerry, this article is dead-on and is clearly labeled opinion. While I don't always agree with Martin, IMO, he's done an excellent job of recapping the unnecessary drama caused in the last year. There are many links in this piece to the stories where objective reporting was done that led to his opinion.
I would love to see only positive blogging. If the new blood stops playing politics, then maybe that can happen.
Jerry Nathanous
6:47 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
So, April, are you saying that there is nobody else in the entire city who can serve on city council and do a good job? I know you're protecting your friends on the council, but, really, others can do as good of a job as your friends. Some people have no political agendas and just want to serve their community.
Nancy Thompson
7:47 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Jerry that's what it sounds like to me too! Everyone on the side of the "old guard" (those who wont use their real names hahaha) like to blame it all on the 2 new ones.
Flannery4
7:52 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
I agree with you Jerry. There must be people in the city with some good ideas who want to serve without having a political agenda. This article indicates that Petrilla wanted Kenny Hrabic as a councilman. If he is Petrilla's guy he sure isn't somebody I would ever vote for. The rest of them only wanted Gamble. The article doesn't say who the remaining candidates were.
April Josephson
9:12 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Jerry, absolutely there are other people in RSM who could do a good job without the political drama. I did not say otherwise. I said we deserve governance, not politics, and from my observation, the current new blood is all about politics both inside the council chambers and out. That is something we never had before they arrived, and something I would like to see end.
This has nothing to do with friendship. It is about putting the best interests of RSM first without the political games—whether we agree with all of their decisions or not—and I certainly do not agree with all of their decisions.
I am guessing it is about friendship for you, though, since you brought it up in both your post about Martin's editorial and in your response to me. To me, THAT is politics.
Thanks to the efforts of our previous councils and city staff, RSM has continuously been recognized for many positive things. It is a safe place and fiscally sound. Why not focus on that?
Jerry Nathanous
6:53 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
So criticizing Jesse and Steve is not political, but criticizing Tony and Jerry is?
Sharon Y.
8:13 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
What have they done to improve the life of RSM residents............nothing!
I am all for new people if I see some one who has been involved in our community and does not use this position as a political stepping stone, that is not the case with both Baric or Jesse......
Nancy Thompson
9:11 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
Sharon how are these people you are accusing using their position as a politcal stepping stone, exactly?
April Josephson
9:59 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
Jerry, once again you are trying to put words in my mouth. I have not named any people in any of my posts. I agreed with Martin's opinion expressed in this article. Other than the person that this story is about, I am not saying that one or another person is playing politics...You pluck names out of a hat and say that I said something I did not. My statements are generic, based on the entire history of our city and my personal observations.
Why are you trying to make this more political than it already is?
The whole point of my comments has been that it is time to put politics aside and govern. Let's focus on the positive and be done with the political games that never existed until the current council.
Sharon Y.
11:00 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
Nancy, IMHO both Baric and Jesse are using the council seat as a stepping stone to launch themselves to higher office, both at one time or another have stated so. I find it very dishearting that they do not have the love of community that the past council has shown and if I ever vote for a new candidate it will be with great reservation and a proven love of community. With the country in such unstable times it is nice to know our beautiful city is on solid ground and it is in large measure due to past council, you might not value that but I do. I will encourage all of my friends , family and nieghbors to vote current council members, why because they deserve it ! they have done an outstanding job
Change for the sake of change........did not work out so well in last election
Wayne Quackenbush
4:39 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
Using city council as a stepping stone for higher office or for non-RSM interests is disingenuous and putting your own interests above those whom you serve. If Jesse and Steve have indicated that, it's a real shame. But you have to include those city councilmen that have also made such pursuits:
Neil Blais running for State Assembly
Tony Beall running for and currently on the Republican Central Committee
Paul
9:30 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
Blais and Beall have without question used their positions for political self-gain, even to the potential detriment of RSM. While running for Assembly, Blais sued Beall's opponent just to protect him. The old guard also wasted their time trying to support some Arizona bill that had nothing to do with RSM, just so they looked better for their campaign. They couldn't care less about RSM.
Petrilla is an idiot according to this article, its unbelieveable to me what this kid has done. But how does Baric fit into that? Outsiders perspective here, but everything I've seen about him is positive - gang prosecutor, sex offender ban, only one responsible enough to slot into Mayor Pro Tem. Are you saying he's not interested in helping his community? Most people in a higher office have started locally - are you saying none of them care about the place they live? Ridiculous.
RSM Dad
9:00 am on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Well Paul let's see. Baric is an election lawyer who makes his money lawyering for politicians and political campaigns, then challenges election results when his clients lose. He is also vice chairman of the state republican party. His campaign counsultant in the city council election is a known political "hit man" operative in county politics. And it just so happens that this last election was the dirtiest on record in this city with negative campaigning by Baric's political ally lawyer from Coto. No politics there eh? Let's face it, Baric is in it for himself, everything he has done so far has been for his own political self interest and every time he takes a vote, he has his finger in the air first so he can see which way the wind is blowing.
RSM Dad
5:34 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Those that would try to defend Jesse Petrilla either haven't been paying attention, or are just his political shills. Anyone that has watched this immature kid and political wannabe play his games along with his sidekick Baric already knows how disruptive they both have been to a city that never had political issues before. Both of them need to be voted off the island sooner than when their terms expire.
Nancy Thompson
6:05 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
I agree Petrilla has caused a big stink with his actions on the council. His actions will be judged when election time comes around and he is voted off
As far as Steve Baric goes , why do people attach him to Petrilla??? Just because they came on board at the same time doesnt mean they have the same ideas. I havent seen anything from Mr. Baric that would suggest he is not a good fit for our council
RSM Dad you seem to be so set in lumping both the "new" members together, making charges that "they" are the reason our council isnt running smoothly, I have been at those meetings as well and have seen the "old guard" members acting just as poorly as they accuse the new ones of acting.
Seems like anyone who goes up against the "old guard" is a trouble maker. Would you be happy if there was never a change in members, ever?????
Dove Canyon Oldtimer
8:52 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
Follow the record Nancy. Everything Baric does and says is more about how he looks politically, than whether it is a good business decision for the city. Although the focus has been on Petrilla because of his antics being so far out of orbit, but Baric is operating in just the same way, bur being less visible about it. Start paying attention. Go back and look at the record of issues he has faced and see how he responded. Then look at the city council agenda for Wednesday and the item the mayor has placed on the agenda due to a couple of letters received. I find it striking that one letter is from Kenney Hrabik, and the other is from Baric's planning commissioner, Peter Whittingham, a lobbyist who works for former Anaheim mayor Curt Pringle and his lobbying company. Strking how the letters are promoting the same political agenda. Baric is no saint and he should be watched just as much as Petrilla. I for one am very glad that we have as you term, "the old guard" in place looking out for these wasteful political agendas.
HOMER
9:29 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
DC Oldtimer - I looked at the agenda for Wednesdays city council meeting http://cityofrsm.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=31
and find the RSM VOTERS BILL OF RIGHTS refreshing. Who would argue with what this is about. Transparency and term limits will keep are city officials honest.
April Josephson
10:04 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
Homer, we have transparency now. Term limits = more politics. RSM deserves better. We deserve governance, not politics.
Eric Richardson
5:19 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
I just read this "Bill of Rights" and it makes no sense to me. I have to question the intentions of the people who submitted it. It gives no benefits to the voters of RSM. If anything, it looks detrimental to the well-being of the City and city leadership.
Sharon Y.
5:41 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
I agree Eric, but even more curious is that the infamous Kenny, Jesse's only choice for council, the one who threatened to sue the city, the one who just got a settlement from the city, the settlement voted on by his guy "Jesse" and Baric who both were supported by.....yep Kenny. I see a little pattern here, Kenny bought himself some council seats and those new guys paid their boy back with our tax dollars,tangled web Kenny weaves, what does he want now..........voters beware
Chris McLaughlin
11:14 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
CAPTAIN Chaos?? I'm pretty sure Jesse is still a Lieutenant. Probably a First Lieutenant, but not a Captain...
Martin Henderson
10:10 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
Last I heard, councilman Petrilla was a Second Lieutenant.
RSM WATCHDOG
12:01 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
I'm Back!
Mr. Henderson, you really know how to stir it up. Having watched the politics of Rancho Santa Margarita since the beginning, our council is currently a mess. For Tony Beall to be picked as Mayor in back-to-back years, says it all. Cronyism. He is bringing the same problems to RSM that he brought to CAPO. He and his wife are cunning, divisive people. Until he is removed our city will suffer. I know all his supporters will slam this post. Tell me how the Beall's helped CAPO? Our school district stands to lose millions because of the Bealls. Looking forward to supporting a new councilman in 2012.
Flannery4
12:37 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
Who is running? I'm pretty new on here, but from reading the articles at the right side of the page it seems like the top dogs were Hrabik, Safranski, McGirr, Whittingham, Stanley. Most seemed to get good reviews. I dont know Hrabic but if Petrilla wanted only Hrabic, I would never vote for him. What about McCook? He is always on here and seems to be running for something.
Marilyn P.
4:32 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
To be honest, the city council was never a mess until after Steve Baric and Jesse Petrilla were elected last year. Before that, our city council worked well together as proven by our safety record and good business climate. But since the newcomers were elected, it's been one fiasco after another, mostly due to Jesse's antics.
Who would you have chosen for mayor instead? Certainly not Jesse. He's proven time and time again that he severely lacks maturity. Steve Baric will be busy in the coming election year. Carol Gamble has family issues. That leaves Jerry Holloway, but he didn't seem interested in taking on the position. Why do you think making the best choice for our city an example of "cronyism?"
Wayne Quackenbush
6:30 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
Can we get candidates not affiliated with any city council member? Why do we need politically tainted folks?
Chris McLaughlin
6:45 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
Hi Wayne, can you define 'not affiliated'? (For clarity of discussion purposes.)
Wayne Quackenbush
6:59 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
Appointed by, sponsored by, campaigned with, contributed money to, related to, has vested interest in...are some examples.
Chris McLaughlin
2:10 am on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
In that case, Wayne, I don't think so. Anyone who is interested in being on City Council is probably already affiliated with one or more sitting Council Members in one way or another. Most people consider the Planning Commission the normal stepping stone to being on the Council, and being appointed to the Planning Commission takes being affiliated with a sitting Council Member (that's who appoints the Planning Commissioners). It's rare that someone comes out of nowhere like Jesse to run and get elected, but even he was connected with local politics already through the RSM Business Alliance and apparently has some strong ties to Kenney Hrabik (see above article).
The phenomenon of being an outsider/untainted and having a chance at getting elected is kind of a Catch-22, so that's why it never happens, but like Carol Gamble said last year during the proceedings, it's not supposed to be easy to get on City Council. You need to really, really want it, and work at it for a long time, and go through a thorough vetting process. It's hard to not let that process kind of taint you, I guess...
angela preston
5:17 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
I would hope that most people who run for office would be in some way affiliated with the city. I don't want to vote for someone who doesn't take the time to be involved or doesn't have the city's best interest at heart.
Personally, I've been happy with the way the city has been run. I think we're lucky to live here. I read through that "bill of rights" and i laughed out loud when I read the part that was comparing RSM town to Philadelphia, New Orleans, and San Francisco. Really? Our small town??? According to who? OMG!
RSM WATCHDOG
1:02 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
The only people who have come out and declared they are running are McCook and Acosta. I predict the field could be deep as the last election showed new blood is wanted.
Chris McLaughlin
7:07 pm on Monday, January 23, 2012
I admit there was some sentiment during the last election for a change in Council Members, but a lot has happened since then (see the article above), and the climate is not the same now. I wish there were some way to easily quantify the depth of buyer's remorse the RSM electorate have in regards to electing Jesse, but there's not, and we'll just have to wait another two years from November to see if Jesse is a 4-and-out Councilmember. (Been watching a lot of football lately...)
As far as how many people are going to run this year, I'm sure there's several who are mulling it over right now, but I imagine the field will narrow quickly to a fairly short list of the usual suspects in no time. McCook and Acosta are already on that short list of people who want to take it seriously, and the ones who got callbacks last year for more questioning would be the usual suspects.
RSM Family
7:44 am on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Wow. I don't post often, but had to say something now. My family is disappointed in our voters for choosing Jesse Petrilla and Steve Baric. Just look at this mess! RSM was a quiet place until you arrived. Way to go voters is right!!
RSM Dad
9:05 am on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Follow the money and follow the politics with Baric. He receives significant support from Hrabik, he has Hrabik on his top three list of replacement candidates for Thompson, he appointa a planning commissioner, Peter Whittingham, a known lobbyist working for a lobbying firm that is very politically active, and now both Hrabik and Whittingham dream up this "voters bill of rights"? Who is Baric trying to fool. If it walks like a duck, it is a duck.
Nancy Thompson
3:21 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
wow what is everyone afraid of with this "bill of rights" being presented to the public to decide??? Maybe that their office will not be secured for years on end???
April Josephson
8:54 am on Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Hi Nancy, we've known each other for years and have always worked hard to do what we think is best for RSM—and we're using our real names. So, I thought I'd respond. I believe this proposal is not in the best interest of RSM. The U.S. Bill of Rights protects all citizens' freedoms. To me, this restricts freedom. City council spends a lot of time doing their job. They balance our budget while receiving their minimal compensation, including benefits. This bill takes away their freedom to choose whether or not they want to receive benefits if they need them. It could limit future choices for council if someone who wants to serve decides they can't afford to because they have to make money to pay for insurance rather than serve our city.
Ever since Jesse started asking for voluntary term limits, I've made my opposition known. It takes away voters' right to choose from among ALL possible candidates. Why get rid of someone if they are doing well? Let the voters decide between everyone. They've already chosen three new people without it.
In choosing council, voters have already chosen who they want to make the decisions. If there's a vacancy, they should be trusted to choose rather than leave RSM unrepresented. Forcing a special election leaves us without representation and wastes money.
If people want this, they should go through the initiative process to put it on the ballot, rather than spend city council's time on it. That's is how I believe we let voters decide.
Claire O'Donnell
9:40 am on Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Why should a part-time elected position get full-time benefits? Our city council members are using taxpayer money to pay for their health care benefits and to fund their retirement. I don't think that's right. Serve because you want to serve. Don't expected taxpayers to flip the bill for these perks, especially when each person has a full-time job.
Lawrence (Larry) McCook
10:52 am on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
I have stated that am no close friend of Jesse Petrilla but, I will defend any actions that I consider unjust to the uniform in which he wears. The motion to replace him while on active duty came before any council member had a first hand opinion of Jesse. A member of the military may not respect our Commander In Chief but, there is some respect to his position and they follow orders. It is obvious that most of the blogging comments are politically motivated. The same people have lined up in support of their favorite incumbent politicians.
To respond to comments using "divisive" and to "the Old Guard" there is some truth in both. I have attended more City Council Meetings than anyone blogging here or for that matter, more council meetings over the last two years than three of the sitting council members. There was nothing divisive, of course, until new ideas (some had validity and were shot down) were presented to the City Council by someone not part of The Old Guard. In electing new blood and ideas the voters in RSM has indicated it is time for change in faces (for sure not as in "Obama's Change"). This is not a personal attack but, like it or not, reality.
Karl H.
3:39 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
"I WILL DEFEND ANY ACTIONS that I consider UNJUST to the uniform in which he wears." Good luck running for city council with THAT comment McCook! So as long as Petrilla is in the military, hanging someone in effigy in front of a mosque is something you defend. Wow. I suppose if a military reservist hanged in effigy a Catholic priest in front of a Catholic church, you would defend that too? If not, you are not only ignorant, but a hypocrite too!
Lawrence (Larry) McCook
7:03 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Karl,
You have brought in a lot of unrelated subjects with your comments. You have also obviously not understood my comments or sentiments and your analogy is incongruous.
Of course I find hanging any effigy wrong and once again I am neither a friend or supporter of Jesse Petrilla. But, if you had been at the council meetings and witnessed how some of his good ideas (yes he has had some good ideas) were scoffed at by certain council members. This has been far less than dignified council behavior and embarrassing to me as a RSM citizen..
Larry
Karl H.
7:57 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Unrelated subjects??? Look around Mr. McCook, I quoted YOU verbatim. YOU said that you "defend any actions" of the military, even if "unjust." If you wrote it, we assume you meant it. If we don't understand your comments that are repeated verbatim, that's YOUR fault.
Lawrence (Larry) McCook
7:07 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
I might add that I will always defend The United States Military as much and possibly more than anyone you may ever meet,.
Lawrence (Larry) McCook
10:18 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Karl,
This is becoming comical. You have taken some words from my comment and left out some words totally changing the meaning of my statement. Do you work for Newsweek?
Since you have provided such levity, it is fun!