On Sunday, 26 March 2006, The Monterey County Herald reported that the City of Pacific Grove has scheduled a budget meeting Monday as part of their "desire to create a more open and transparent government." Jim Colangelo, Pacific Grove's City Manager, stated that "the real focus of the meeting will be to get public input;" after his presentation, citizens will "work in groups to develop ideas and present recommendations to city staff..."
The City of Pacific Grove, a city which was not the focus of the 2005 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury, is hosting a "open 'hands-on' residents meeting" with the goal of a more open and transparent government, while Carmel-by-the-Sea, the focus of the Grand Jury, put the City's response to the Grand Jury Report on the Consent Calendar to discourage public comment.
2 comments:
The following is an e-mail I sent to the Herald without success. Have not been successful with either the Herald or the Pine Cone
Monte
Subject: letter to editor Monterey Herald
Date: Sunday, March 12, 2006 2:31 PM
Letter to the Editor regarding your Saturday, March 11th editorial on the new grand jury finishing the work of the old grand jury:
Carmel is required to respond to the Grand Jury's Report. Their response letter was on the March Council agenda for review and discussion by the public and the city council. Members of the public addressed the council on this response letter. These citizens pointed out several factual errors in this letter. For example, the response letter stated there were published procedures and forms for the public to place items on the council's agenda (Finding 6). This is not true, there is no procedures or forms for the public.
The citizens who spoke about these factual errors respectfully urged the city to correct the letter before sending it to the Grand Jury. Rather than discuss our comments, we were rudely attacked by council members and strangely accused of being politically motivated. The council berated the Grand Jury report and said that it didn't really apply to Carmel. Then they voted unanimously to send the same factually incorrect letter to the Grand Jury. Receipt of the Grand Jury report hasn't changed our city council. Open government is still not alive and well in Carmel.
Monte Miller
In e-mail correspondence with Herald Staff Writer Kevin Howe regarding corrections to his February 2006 article "Suit against Carmel can proceed: Flanders Mansion battle will be fought in court," Mr. Howe wrote that a correction was not warranted. He wrote,"Yes the city has a biased legal opinion. So does the Flanders Foundation. It's called advocacy." Amazingly, this incompetent and biased staff writer not only did not present Flanders Foundation's side, only special city attorney William Conners' position, but he beleieves acting as an advocate for the city as a news reporter is acceptable. I then wrote the following letter to Carole Leigh Hutton, Vice President/News Knight Ridder.
Carole Leigh Hutton
vic Prisident/News:
The Monterey Councy Herald's numerous factually inaccurate articles on the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea over the years is directly attributable to Executive Editor Carolina Garcia's statement, "We print what we're told." This "we print what we're told" policy has led Staff Writter Kevin Howe and other writers to print what they are told, without verification, in effect acting as advocates for the "City" of Carmel-by-the-Sea. Needless to say, as my e-mail correspondence with Staff Writer Kevin Howe illustrates, this "we print what we're told" policy is in direct contradiction to Bill Kovach's and Tom Rosenstiel's nine core principles of journalism.
In a recent WSJ editorial, John Ellis characterized Knight Ridder newspapers as a collection of mostly second-rate newspapers. In the case of The Monterey County Herald, that characterization is exceedingly charitable.
Post a Comment