.

City Council: No Appointment but Plenty of Antics

Jesse Petrilla proves difficult on a bad night for City Council, which is unable to make much progress toward choosing Gary Thompson's successor.

After more than 4½ hours on Sunday, the four council members of the Rancho Santa Margarita City Council decided to call it a night. They didn’t choose a successor to Gary Thompson, which was the goal. They didn’t interview any candidates, which was an option. And they didn’t really impress anyone, either.

They did determine that they would call another special meeting, possibly as early as Tuesday. They heard from former Councilman Thompson, who thought his four former colleagues were so deadlocked and facing such a tight deadline that a special election was required. They ignored candidate Carol Gamble when she addressed the councilmen—as a resident and not a candidate—and asked who has accepted money from any of the other finalists.

Yes, they did eventually reach the point where all four council members submitted their top three choices—and even that didn’t come without a struggle. It took about 30 minutes to convince Councilman Jesse Petrilla to give more than one name at a time despite the council’s unanimous decision to do so.

The meeting began with residents addressing the council and a number spoke, many expressing support for Gamble or Brad McGirr. Afterward the council made a procedural mistake by not determining up front an acceptable point system, and whether it was binding or non-binding, for later in the meeting if a consensus couldn’t be reached through discussion. Instead, they tried to do it after each had disclosed his top choice, at which point the integrity of any succeeding rankings would come into question as councilmen could sandbag to skew the point totals.

Petrilla, who was participating for the first time via teleconference—audio only—from Fort Knox, KY, while he is in training with the California National Guard, exasperated his colleagues and the crowd in the council chambers in which he basically held his colleagues hostage. He wanted to submit only one name, and find out if his top candidate—Kenney Hrabik—was on any other lists.

“I don’t want to throw a name out there that’s not on anyone’s list,” Petrilla said.

At a loss for how to continue with Petrilla’s refusal to follow the decisions and with no legal mechanism to compel him to do so, Councilman Jerry Holloway shook his head and said: “I’m stumped.”

Beall responded: “This is not a game. No council member should be playing ‘hide the ball.’ ”

Petrilla remarked that it was Beall who was playing a game and that when Petrilla votes for president, he votes for only one candidate, he doesn’t rank them by preference. “I want to choose a council member that is the most qualified that represents the voters,” Petrilla said. “I don’t want to turn this into the Capistrano Unified School District.”

That line drew a loud collective gasp from the audience. Beall was previously involved in the recall of CUSD board members, and many thought Petrilla was taking a jab at him.

Beall asked Petrilla if he was unwilling to rank three candidates even if the council agreed to do so by a properly made motion—which had happened earlier—with weighted scoring, to illuminate a consensus candidate. Three times Petrilla responded that he was unsure of what Beall was asking. Several in the audience then spoke out the words “special election.”

Petrilla countered with a substitute motion to rank one, two or three candidates on a list.

“I will accept it and I’ll second it, and now discussion,” Beall responded. “It’s a bad idea.”

Petrilla’s motion was defeated, 3-1.

Petrilla did make at least one valid contribution: “The point is to discuss and appoint a council member, and we’ve only discussed and voted on two out of the 12.”

However, when Beall tried to develop discussion, Steve Baric said he didn't want to talk negatively about any candidates, same as Holloway. The only "discussion" was a monologue of why each candidate chose his top applicant.

In contrast to what Petrilla said, they only voted on one candidate, and that came relatively early in the meeting after each candidate named their top selection. Beall and Holloway named Gamble, a former mayor of RSM; Baric named Peter Whittingham, the man he appointed to the planning commission; and Petrilla named Hrabik, who owns the Dove Canyon Courtyard. The vote for Gamble to be the next council member ended in a 2-2 deadlock.

Finally, hours into the meeting, Petrilla relented amid the discussion of expressing more than one choice. “If you’re forcing my hand and will not continue the meeting until I choose two more, I’ll submit two more,” he said.

That decision may have owed to Petrilla’s schedule. He said that Sunday night was the only time he had available through May 2, apart from April 23-24—Easter weekend—at which time Holloway will not be available.

If the council doesn’t choose Thompson’s replacement by 5 p.m. on May 2, the choice goes to a special election.

After a short recess, and by secret ballot, Petrilla’s list of top candidates was transmitted to City Manager Steve Hayman. The top candidates were then announced by Hayman and gridded on a whiteboard. They were:

  • Beall: Gamble, Brad McGirr, Curt Stanley.
  • Holloway: Gamble, Michael Safranski, Hrabik.
  • Baric: Whittingham, Safranski, Hrabik.
  • Petrilla: Hrabik, Safranski, Whittingham.

Using the city staff-recommended 5-2-1 point system, four favorites emerged: Gamble (10 points), Hrabik (7), Safranski (7) and Whittingham (6).

Baric and Petrilla were both in favor of a 3-2-1 system, which would have resulted in scores of: Gamble (6), Safranski (6), Hrabik (5), Whittingham (4), McGirr (2) and Stanley (1).

Curiously, Baric and Petrilla had the same three choices but in reverse order. Both of their top choices were contributors to their election campaigns. Whittingham contributed $200 to Baric. Hrabik contributed $600—including $500 in a non-monetary contribution for use of his Dove Canyon Courtyard—to Petrilla.

Hrabik also contributed $100 to Holloway.

McGirr, who is Beall’s appointee to the Planning Commission, contributed $100 to Beall.

Because Petrilla was free until about 1:30 a.m. PDT—he expressed a desire to hammer out the process Sunday night. Beall expressed a desire to interview the candidates. Petrilla, who had earlier said that council members had done a sufficient job of interviewing the second set of candidates at a meeting that Petrilla missed, countered that he wanted to be present so that he could also interview candidates that he didn’t get a chance to address in person.

At one point, Thompson requested to speak to the council, and he suggested that they call a special election because of Petrilla’s lack of availability beyond Sunday: “I’d be very concerned if you made a decision that isn’t as thought-out as it should be but it’s done in the next couple of hours because the councilman has to get back to duty, which is understandable.”

When Beall asked Thompson who his choice would be, he indicated he had read all the résumés, had only seen the second round of interviews, and knew most of the candidates. He said Gamble was the best choice.

“She is the one who can jump in with both feet and move forward with very little training, very little work by city staff to get up to speed on how the city operates, how the government operates, how the budget is put together,” Thompson said. “Just teaching someone how the budget is put together is a difficult task.”

Petrilla made a motion to appoint Hrabik to the City Council but didn’t get a second.

“I don’t think we’re going to find somebody that all four of us agree on,” Petrilla said. “If the three of us can agree on one, the other can agree to work with the individual.“

He then made a motion to appoint Safranski to the City Council.

Holloway seconded for the purpose of discussion, then said the reason he wouldn’t vote for Safranski or Hrabik during the meeting was because it was too important to hurry through the process.

“It’s important. We need to do it in a reasonable fashion, and now we’re getting to the point where it’s not going to be the best decision, in my opinion,” Holloway said as the meeting moved past the four-hour mark.

Said Baric: “I don’t think the mayor’s request [for a special meeting] is unreasonable. … I’ve been assured all four members will be included in this process. That is absolutely essential. I trust the comments of my colleagues that they want input from all council members to make an educated decision that’s important for the future of this community.”

Petrilla then withdrew the motion after being given the opportunity by Beall but cast doubt that a special meeting could be called for any purpose other than choosing a candidate without him.

“What’s the purpose of those interviews if ... I’m not available before [May 2],” Petrilla asked. “We have two people on three lists … I’d hate to waste this opportunity to put this to rest and end all the unpleasantness that’s occurred in the newspapers the last couple of months. … We need to have somebody on that council so we can move forward and put this all behind us.”

The other three council members then voted to adjourn the meeting.

Jack Leonard April 19, 2011 at 12:49 AM
Last night, considerable time was spent in the special council meeting to discuss and debate "the point system". There were those in the audience that felt two or more council members had strategied in advance of the meeting; others that felt one candidate was unfairly given a no-lose edge. If a point system were used, and whether it was the city's recommended 5-2-1 weighted plan, an only briefly discussed 4-2-1, or a simple 3-2-1 point system, Carol Gamble was alway the number one point winner with a tie in one scenerio. Mike Safranski was number two, or in a tie for second in two of three options; Kenny Hrabik in second, tied for second and third with the point systems above, and Peter Whittingham tied for 3rd with one scenerio, and placing 4th with two others. I applaud Mayor Beall and the seated two council members in the city chamber last night for agreeing to continue the interview process as soon as possible. There is public concern that a $100,000+ "clock" is ticking should no solution be reached by 5pm on March 2nd. With regrets, councilman Petrilla is faced with a "they told him so back in February" inability to get the time off (day or night) until after May 2nd according to statements made by him last night. The three council members here in RSM will hold a special interview session later this week to keep the process moving forward. Thank you rsm.patch.com writer/photographer for the "tell it all" photo of Leigh Hrabik with her daughter.
Jack Leonard April 19, 2011 at 01:11 AM
RSM.patch.com's photo of Leigh Hrabik with daughter, by some, might be construed as a photo of lost hope and despair. But for those who understood the long, long process they have been through, struggling to retain a business here in Rancho Santa Margarita; now sharing unquestioned love and support for husband and father in his quest for a position on the city council, is a photo representing unity and perserverence with humility and grace.
April Josephson April 19, 2011 at 02:47 PM
This meeting clearly showed residents of RSM who they chose in Jesse Petrilla. Petrilla pushed his agenda of paying back a large campaign contributor by denying that there were any other viable candidates that he could choose for close to an hour—a late hour on Sunday night, at a special meeting held to accommodate his schedule. The city bent over backwards to include Petrilla in this process, to the exclusion of the mayor, the disruption of other council business, the inconvenience of candidates, staff and residents, and cost to the city—because Petrilla wants his way and will do whatever it takes to get it. Had council stuck by their initial decision to appoint a temporary replacement until Petrilla's return from training, they'd only have had to deal with media hype caused by Petrilla—who insists at every juncture that he's entitled to have his cake and eat it too. We would already have a new council member appointed, and not be looking at (and now asking for) a special election. It is truly a shame that he was able to garner 1% of the vote more than the others in the election, and has convinced people that he won by a landslide. I for one am tired of hearing that he is the will of the people and knows more about what the residents want than the residents themselves. He never voted in RSM until he voted for himself for council. He still doesn't know the difference between city and SAMLARC jurisdiction. It's time for RSM to stop coddling him and get back to work.
Lawrence (Larry) McCook April 19, 2011 at 06:45 PM
Please in no way consider the following as "sour grpes"! As a matter of fact, having a big sense of humor and having had no expectations of being appointed to the vacant council seat, I submit the following observations. At times our city council has provided considerable amusement at times for four months 1. This has included scrambling and bending over backwards in attempts to reverse negative public opinion over the perceived lack of support for The United States Military. (Please note that there is no one in RSM more actively involved and supportive of our military than myself) 2.There have been numerous inferences that any candidate could/would only be qualified as a finalist with past service to RSM. This meant that "Politically Appointed Candidates" could/would be considered 3. The insinuation that it is a qualifying necessity to have lived in RSM when there were dirt roads and no gas stations to be good for RSM. I personally want to preserve our small village atmosphere, stand against annexation of Coto de Caza but believe we must now look to the future for any continued success of our city. 4. I think Carol Gamble is a reasonable choice but, speaker after speaker said that she should be chosen for her gender and for being a former experienced RSM politician. (Please Note that my admired mother earned two Masters Degrees well ahead of the times, was successful and never played the gender card. Many of the candidates, including myself, have been business owners
RSM Dad April 19, 2011 at 07:16 PM
Larry. I would like to comment on your 4 points. This is a two part post since it will be too long Point 1- Yes, that is true. There was a huge over reaction to the negative press articles trying to insinuate that the first decision to replace Petrilla temporarily was politically motivated and a dissing of his military service. But that was caused by a disingenuous email that Petrilla put out after that decision and Baric manipulating his Coto lawyer and Register columnist buddies to turn it into a political slamfest. Right there anyone with any sense could see how those two were going to be. Point 2- I don't believe that was the only criteria, but an important one of several. It was clear that Beall and Holloway recognize the importance of having enough experience and community "knowledge" on the council currently to move forward through the budget process and until at least next year. With two councilman who have never been active in the community, and neither of which has been through governing a city, especially at budget time, I can see why Holloway and Beall would be concerned about another "newby" for lack of a better term. And that is the difference between their first choice and Baric's and Petrilla's. Beall and Holloway made a business decision for the city, Baric and Petrilla made a political decision to payback what we now know were campaign contributors from the last election. I wonder what other "paybacks" they have in store for the community.
RSM Dad April 19, 2011 at 07:17 PM
Part 2 Point 3- There was no insinuation that a requirement was to be a 20 year resident as you suggest. Although I consider it a plus. And how do you correlate past history with not having a vision for the future? Your observation here is just plain silly. Point 4- I didn't hear the word "politician". What I heard was people saying she was an experienced leader who help found the city and establish the positive direction this city has headed for the last 10 years, although she has been off the council for 7 of it. Only a "politician" would hear it otherwise. As far as being a woman, well some people think that is also an asset to a city council that hasn't had a woman on it since she left. Do you have a problem with women?
Lawrence (Larry) McCook April 19, 2011 at 07:22 PM
Part Two 5. Unfortunately, it sadly now appears that some donations to certain political council campaigns may have now influenced some city council decision processes. I continue to feel honored to have chosen one of the 12 finalists with so many qualified applicants and once again thank the 4,326 RSM voters who chose me in the voting booths last November 2, 2010. Some of the other applicants were perhaps even more qualified than some of the final top choices made by the council. I had from the start predicted which 3 finalists would evolve and 2 of these 3 predictions came true. I find the council to be transparent even when they are not trying to be transparent. I might also state that not one applicant has volunteered and performed more civic work than myself. I have served as an Legislative and Advocacy Representative for soon to be 6 years fighting for the survival of our public school systems. This involved countless hours (up to 172 hours in one month) working for the Saddleback Unified School District, Orange County/District IV, The State of California and our Members of The United States Congress. CONTINUED BELOW
Lawrence (Larry) McCook April 19, 2011 at 07:40 PM
Page 3 I remain a life long voting Republican and Reagan Conservative though I am beginning to think The Tea Party might be the Real Republican Party today. In The Republican Party, I served as C0-Chair of The 23rd Assembly District (which was the last time it voted Republican), served as a Member of The California Republican Assembly and as a Member of The California State Central Committee. I bring a conservative fiscal attitude, strong family values and more business development and budgetary experience that any current member of or applicant for the city council. There are many willing to serve our City of Rancho Santa Margarita. There appears to be considerable tough economic times ahead and careful experienced senior decisions need to be made. And not to fail to mention, the fact is that our city needs the creation of new "Real Jobs"! STILL SERVING MY CITY AND COUNTRY
Lawrence (Larry) McCook April 19, 2011 at 08:05 PM
To answer your last question first. I have absolutely no problem with a woman serving or for that matter Carol Gamble being appointed. I just noted that speaker after speaker said we need diversity. I rate men and women equally. In answer to other questions. Please revert to my first sentence about levity. I find little humor around today among the population.
April Josephson April 19, 2011 at 08:36 PM
I concur with RSM Dad and want to add to his points: 1. This council made the right decision initially when they voted to temporarily replace Petrilla. There was never any disrespect of the military and that has been proven. Since that time, Petrilla and his cohorts have proven their disrespect of everyone else. 2. Past service in RSM does not equal a political appointment. Larry, had you pointed out your Trabuco Mesa participation in the interview, instead of in the press, that would have given your application more consideration. Past service demonstrates the applicant's commitment to the community. It's the "actions speak louder than words" concept. 3. Having someone who understands the history and vision of the city is a valid consideration, and helps maintain what we have all committed ourselves to do here in RSM. This can be shown in other ways, but having the insight is a necessity. Additionally, in no way does having the history mean you don't have vision for the future. We have only been able to build such a stellar community with the founders having such vision. Being able to put that vision in place immediately to take the place of someone else who had that vision is the best possible scenario and the right thing to do. 4. Larry, you offend me by saying that I or any other speakers stated Carol should be chosen BECAUSE she is a woman. She is the best qualified and it's a bonus to have the diversity that voters originally chose. We are 50% of the population!
April Josephson April 19, 2011 at 08:47 PM
Larry, I have said all along that your business expertise could be used on the Economic Development Committee. Please consider participating in that process. The business growth aspect is only a part of the council position. It is the entire focus of our efforts on the EDC. There never was any doubt in my mind that the two freshman councilmen would make the political aspect the number one priority in their suggestions for appointment. Hasn't that been their M.O. since day one? Notice how they had nothing to say that could discount why Carol Gamble would be the best choice to replace Gary Thompson, so they avoided mentioning her at all. There's a reason for that—she is the best choice for what we need right now, especially because of their political gamesmanship. She was already the best suited. Now, I feel more strongly than ever that she should be appointed, or we should go without and have a special election. We need immediate restoration of solid governance. Carol is best equipped to do that. To do anything short of that just begs for a special election for one reason or another.
Stamper April 19, 2011 at 08:55 PM
I wasn't at the meeting, but I sure have been hearing a lot about it around town and even on the radio this morning. I googled and found all the OC Register and Patch articles. I went to Jesse Petrilla's Facebook page yesterday to see if he had written anything about it, and I saw that this article was posted. Now I looked again but he had removed it. I wonder if he has any idea what people are saying about him here. I feel a little silly now because I voted for him. A lot of my friends did. He came to my door when he was campaigning, and he seemed like a nice guy. Yes, I thought he looked really young, but he seemed very sincere. Now I'm finding out so much more about him and I wish I had known all this before I voted. I'm still learning a lot from all the people's comments on the articles, so thank you to the people who are sharing their experiences. It helps others like me to find out what's going on.
Lawrence (Larry) McCook April 19, 2011 at 11:10 PM
April, Perhaps you misunderstood what I said or meant. You would not be offended if you took my analysis in the way I intended it to come across. We were at the same meeting and virtually every speaker on Carol's behalf mentioned gender and/or diversity. These comments were added to comments about her other fine attributes. I repeat that I consider men and women equal in the workplace or in politics and deserve the same consideration based on their attributes. We all know she ran for prior political election. As far as joining the EDC, I still have this under advisement I tend to be a pragmatic take charge type of guy and wonder how this would fit? I also agree that everyone involved should understand the history of RSM and thanks to several people, including you and Jack Leonard, this has been a pretty good primer. What I meant also was that new thoughts that do not currently exist might help RSM. There appears to be fear of losing political control existing with some "movers and shakers". We all need to lighten up and smile more! There has been far too much negativity and rancor from certain interests about certain people. Hope these statements help!
Lawrence (Larry) McCook April 19, 2011 at 11:56 PM
Brad, Like myself, I consider you as a worthy candidate! Carol Gamble could probably jump right in. This issue might be left up to the voters. Larry
April Josephson April 20, 2011 at 02:59 PM
Thanks for your clarifications, Larry. As far as the EDC, let's talk specifics sometime.
Chris McLaughlin April 20, 2011 at 03:57 PM
Thanks Martin for the thorough article on what happened at the meeting. I can't make all of them, but am trying to follow the process as closely as possible. I hope the three members here don't get intimidated to not act before May 2nd, whether Jesse's available for more City overtime or not. Avoiding a 100K+ special election is more important than ensuring Jesse has the maximum opportunity to stonewall the process.
Jack Leonard April 20, 2011 at 08:42 PM
Good post Chris. I am optimistic that somehow, councilman Petrilla will find the means and method of allowing city staff to post the advance notice of attendance in Kentucky where he could be teleconferencing in the late hours of one or more council meetings planned for next week. I applaud mayor Beall and two of the three council members for agreeing to hold a final series of interviews with not just one or two "top" candidates for the 5th position on city council. We'll see who on the council sees the "glass half empty" and who sees it "half full", ahead of the May 2nd deadline to appoint someone, or not.
RSM Radical Centrist April 20, 2011 at 09:02 PM
I think that the candidate(s) that ran on a "Tea party" like platform wanting to keep taxes low or no increase in HOA dues (even though the city council has nothing to do with the area HOA's) should be showing some concern about the amount of city funds all of this must be costing. All I see is candidates that promised fiscal conservatism turned city councilmen spending city money like a teenage girl at the mall with her daddy's credit card. Instead of a special election to replace Gary Thompson, maybe it should be turned into a recall election to stop this monkey business and elect city councilmen that are concerned about the city of RSM & not their political aspirations or which of their donors they can take care of.
April Josephson April 20, 2011 at 09:14 PM
Chris, thank you for being so gracious as one of those who has participated in this process that seems to have gotten out of control. I am still hopeful that we will reach a positive conclusion, if the rest of the city does what needs to be done to get back to work, and moves ahead without Petrilla.
April Josephson April 20, 2011 at 09:17 PM
Well said, RSM Radical Centrist. They need to put their money where their mouths are, and quit spending ours.
Chris McLaughlin April 21, 2011 at 06:21 AM
Thanks Jack and April, I think if the Council had realized teleconferencing's not that difficult from the get-go, maybe we wouldn't be in this situation at all. I don't see anything posted yet on the City website for a Special Meeting this week. The 2nd is what, 12 days from now?? I hope they don't cut it as close as Congress did our final national budget this year....
April Josephson April 21, 2011 at 07:09 AM
Chris, thank you for being a concerned citizen. I am always happy to see more people get involved in our city government. I heard that meeting scheduling for the next round of interviews was being worked on earlier this week. I hope they can confirm a date sooner rather than later and we can put this behind us. Unfortunately, there was some misinformation and/or miscommunication on the original teleconferencing issue. The council was always willing, but the information provided by the military said it was not possible on-base and highly discouraged off-base. City staff utilized that information, which was provided in February, and the statement by Jesse himself to the city manager that he would not pursue it further, to make their initial determination that it was not feasible. It seemed reasonable for them to move forward with a temporary replacement, just as you would do if someone was on a leave of absence in a business. There was never any intent to disparage Jesse or the military. Sadly, rather than accepting that decision and moving on, which would've allowed the city government to go back to work—or being proactive by looking into alternatives such as the off-base option at that time, Jesse sent a press release stating that some of the council members were unwilling to allow him to participate. I'm guessing that is probably when you heard about the situation, as did most of the residents. The rest is history...
Chris McLaughlin April 21, 2011 at 11:23 PM
Hi April, I was actually at the meeting where they first decided to deny Jesse's teleconferencing request. Ft. Knox and Jesse's CO at the school didn't explicitly support or deny his request, the Council didn't seem to try very hard to accommodate him, and the Mayor in particular seemed to be hiding behind the Brown Act as to why it wasn't feasible. Baric was the only dissenting vote against appointing a temp replacement for Jesse. That's when the public backlash happened, and things really went sideways for the Council. I'm glad that Councilman Holloway pushed for the emergency agenda item to get teleconferencing established and now Jesse has had his chance to weigh in on the candidates. Since it's clear Jesse only wants Kenny Hrabik as the interim Councilmember, the other three should meet and either pick Hrabik or someone else that the (majority) three members decide on, without needing to work any further around Jesse's schedule.
April Josephson April 22, 2011 at 12:52 AM
Hi Chris, because I've worked with city staff, I trust their judgment. I read the emails and felt as the city manager and city attorney did that Jesse wouldn't be able to teleconference. I credit the other councilmen with listening to their staff recommendations. It was about authorization and logistics. From the information given, it seemed clear to me that the military's answer really was no. It wasn't likely possible, and they didn't want him to do it. If there was an off-base option, I had expected, as did others, that Jesse would've already looked into it and provided information, since he was the one asking for the special accommodation. Since there was no information showing feasibility and the city manager was told by Jesse that he wouldn't pursue it further, it appeared he was done with the issue and it was time to move on. I felt the council was right, because you only make an accommodation for those also willing to do their part. Jesse didn't and proves over and over that it's more about his ego than about governance. I was one of those who spoke in favor of a temporary replacement. I believe in efficiency and full representation, and felt that pursuing Jesse's request further would impact the city government. Jesse should've been prepared with information rather than sending an email with misinformation in it and badmouthing his colleagues. When Gary resigned, they could've emailed Jesse for input, and we'd still know he only wants Kenny Hrabik.
Kid Chicago April 24, 2011 at 07:58 AM
April, I'd like to see YOU put your money where your mouth is!!!
April Josephson April 24, 2011 at 08:35 AM
Thank you for your thoughts, Kid Chicago. You'll need to explain yourself on this one, though, as I have always stepped up and put my money where my mouth is through my participation in various organizations and processes. Otherwise, I would not publicly be speaking my mind to the point where you felt like you needed to attack me using an alias. Besides, I am not one of those on council faced with these decisions. I advocated a temporary replacement for Petrilla, which would've prevented the unfortunate display of immaturity we saw on Sunday night, the special meetings, the negative publicity, and the costs that the city has incurred so far, and the replacement for Thompson would be in place by now. The only downside that I see would've been the ruffling of a few feathers in the military crowd. But, hey, that happened anyway. If you'd like to put me on council, I would be very happy to make the decision, as it seems straightforward to me. If you cut out the political games and do what is best for RSM, the answer is quite clear.
Kid Chicago April 25, 2011 at 02:15 AM
Kid Chicago, E. Publius, Emily Bronte: More of a "handle" than an alias. No thought_S.....only ONE thoughT. Put your money where your mouth is...not volunteer activities and criticisms through the Patch. It seems by your writings/comments that you know EXACTLY whats wrong with RSM but yet, you didn't apply for the spot? Why is that?! You have done some great work for the city regarding the Historical Assn. But when one's remarks and vitriol get to a certain level, it's time to put up or sh_t up. You seem to have reached that level. I applaud your participation and dedication to RSM, maybe time to throw your hat in for next election!? "You can yell untruths from the top of your lungs, but only need to whisper the truth and it will carry across the mountain tops." -Anonymous When a boat leans to one side only, it's not seaworthy.. Captain Ahab (NOT)
Kid Chicago April 25, 2011 at 02:16 AM
BTW...hope you had a great Easter!
April Josephson April 25, 2011 at 02:58 AM
Happy Easter to you. Not everything I say or do is a criticism. That is your opinion, which many others don't seem to share. There is a simple answer to your question as to why I did not put my name in for the appointment, although I had been asked to do so: Because I care more for the city than I do for my own political aspirations.
Chris McLaughlin April 25, 2011 at 03:43 PM
Hi April, for what it's worth, I think opinions submitted anonymously or under a cryptic alias carry very little weight. It seems to be less of a problem on the Patch article Comments than other forums, but apparently something to annoyed with here, too. I also was ready to go along with a temporary replacement for Petrilla, even though I didn't agree with the decision at first and am glad teleconferencing got established, but in retrospect, having Jesse join a tense meeting without being able to get the immediate feedback from the audience was pretty enlightening, huh?

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »