CARMELITES 'SHOULD BE GRATEFUL"

A Refutation of THE HERALD'S VIEW: Incumbents best bet for Carmel
Saturday, March 25, 2006

Note: Bold type REFUTATION; Light Type The Herald's View

The Herald's View
Incumbents best bet for Carmel

"Carmel City Council has been faced with tough choices in recents years. What to do with Flanders Mansion and the coastal plan? How to manage Sunset Center? How to keep costs down without putting off too much maintenance?

The council hasn't been able to avoid controversy in the process, but that's a function of the city's outspoken population more that it's a reflection on the decisions...It needs council members willing to do their homework..."

REFUTATION:
The Herald's View thesis: the Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council has generated "controversy," not because of their "decisions," but because of the city's "outspoken population." In reality, the City Council has generated controversy because of their decision-making processes and decisions. Examples abound, including:

1. Flanders Mansion Property
The City Council's decision to hire a consulting attorney to find that the Flanders Mansion property is not "parkland" in order to avoid a vote of the people. The City Council's decision to sell the National Register of Historic Places property, originally citing "1) generate funds for needed City capital improvements involving a number of municipal facilities and 2) divest the City of a property in need of significant funding for rehabilitation," evinces a disregard and disrespect for the 30 plus year history of the Flanders Mansion as a public trust. Just because the current City Council is unable and unwilling to find a public use for the Flanders Mansion should not preclude future more creative and cooperative City Councils from honoring their public trust responsibilities.

2. Local Coastal Program (LCP)
Now, 16 months after the California Coastal Commission's certification of Carmel-by-the-Sea's Local Coastal Program, citizens realize the extent of City Council Member's lack of knowledge of the LCP's contents. Case in Point: A Mills Act contract between the City and the Hutchings was on the City Council's December 2005 agenda. Yet, at the City Council meeting, the Mills Act contract item was continued indefinitely by the City Council, despite a staff recommendation for approval of the contract and the presence of Mr. Hutchings. Defending their continuance, the City Council stated that they needed a "workshop" prior to authorizing any Mills Act contracts. Yet, the Mills Act contract is an integral part of the historic element of the LCP. Did the City Council Members "do their homework" here? Case in Point: Faced with over 90 appeals by property owners of their residences/buildings on the Inventory of Historic Resources, City Council Member Rose was "surprised and shocked" that there are 300 buildings on the Inventory of Historic Resources. Again, the Inventory is an integral part of the LCP. Did City Councilman Rose do his "homework?"

3. Sunset Cultural Center, Inc. (SCC)
The Mayor's decision to facilitate the creation of SCC without ascertaining the existence of a public consensus has generated ill will towards the City. The City Council's decision to fund SCC at $762,000/year plus for 3-9 years without funding the Forest Theater, Scout House and Flanders Mansion evinces a solitary concern for the Sunset Center to the exclusion of other significant city assets.

4. Failure to Maintain and Upgrade City Assets
The City Council's failure to annually budget for the maintenance and improvements (including ADA compliance upgrades) of the Forest Theater, Scour House and Flanders Mansion, despite an annual budget of over $11 million and $7-8 million in reserve funds, is not an acceptable means of keeping "costs down without putting off too much maintenance."

The Herald's View:
"Carmel residents should be grateful to have a mayor like Sue McCloud who works long and hard to help manage the city."

REFUTATION:
The 2005 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Final Report on Open Government, which focused on the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, stated as its seventh FINDING, "Over-control of this process by mayors is not in the public interest." Mayor McCloud's "over-control" of the LCP certification process and SCC installation process, as examples, has led many to conclude that the Mayor should not work "long and hard to help manage the city." Rather, the city would be better managed by a competent City Administrator.

The Herald's View:
"Over the years, the council has been correctly criticized for being a bit secretive but McCloud, Rose and Hazdovac seem to be doing their best to solicit opinion and make the process more transparent."

REFUTATION:
Only a "bit?" The BACKGROUND section of the 2005 Grand Jury Final Report on Open Government stated that "a number of complaints were received from residents and former employees of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea." The FINDINGS section's first finding stated that "Interviews disclosed that a pattern of obstacles exist that make it difficult to schedule, discuss, document for the record, and gain appropriate resolution of topics or issues presented by the public." The City's response to the Grand Jury's FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS was a letter with numerous falsehoods, including the City's claim that there are forms and procedures for public inputs into City Council agendas at City Council meetings. There are not any forms for the public to request an item be placed on an agenda. Moreover, at the March 2006 City Council meeting, where the Grand Jury Report was on the Consent Calendar, City Council Members disparaged the three residents who voiced their concerns about the City's response to the Grand Jury Report. Is this behavior representative of "doing their best to solicit opinion and make the process more transparent?"

CONCLUSION:
With The Herald's View conclusion that "There is no reason for a change," The Herald is continuing its tradition of acting as a propaganda agent for the City Council of Carmel-by-the-Sea! The Herald's failure to practice the "elements of journalism," as enunciated by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in their book, "The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect," evinces a disrespect for citizens. Specifically, in The Herald's news reporting and editorial commentary on Carmel-by-the-Sea, reporters and editorial writers fail to honor the following essential elements of journalism; "journalism's first obligation is to the truth," "its first loyalty is to citizens," "its essence is a discipline of verification," "its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover," and "it must serve as an independent monitor of power." As a result Carmelites, as citizens, are not well-informed or well-served!