Menifee City Council Meeting - March 3, 2009

The city council met yesterday. Scott Mann was not present. Here's a recap... Words of Inspiration Pastor Jim Amador from Heritage ...

The city council met yesterday. Scott Mann was not present. Here's a recap...

Words of Inspiration

Pastor Jim Amador from Heritage Christian Church gave some words of inspiration.

New Hires

City Manager George Wentz introduced Julie Woodruff as the new Executive Assistant, and Mike Butler from Winzler & Kelly's San Francisco office to help for 5-6 months with engineering stuff. Winzler & Kelly, if you remember, is the company the city hired to provide a city manager and all related staff.

Riverside County Regional Detention Center

County Supervisor Jeff Stone gave a presentation on a new detention center proposed along the I-10 freeway in Whitewater. He was on hand trying to earn the support of cities throughout the county. Menifee was the last city on his tour.

riverside county supervisor jeff stone
He gave out statistics illustrating a situation where county detention facilities are so overcrowded that the Sheriff is having to release convicts well before their sentences have been completed to make room for new convicts. In 2007, they released 6,000 convicts early, and in 2009 they expect to release 9,000 early.

The proposed facility will be large enough to house 7,200 detainees, which is double the capacity of the county's current inventory.

He said the new facility will be paid for with cash on hand that they've been saving for, and no financing will be needed. It'll create 1,500 jobs.

John Denver asked what Mary Bono-Mack thinks about this new detention facility, considering it's located just outside of her hometown. Stone said that she's not happy. He explained that they offered to put the facility elsewhere if she would offer up some BLM land to the county, but she never responded.

The Powerpoint presentation that Stone brought went on to show that they considered four other locations, including Mead Valley, Gilman Springs, San Timoteo, and West Badlands.

Fred Twyman asked how long it would take for the surrounding trees to grow up to a tall enough height to hide the new facility from view. Stone said about two years. They'll be planting mature trees, and not saplings.

Chuck Reutter stepped up during the public comment period, and asked Stone what he and the public could do to help fast track this new facility. Stone summarized his efforts to win support from all city councils.

The city council finished by adopting a resolution to support the new facility.

You can learn more this facility on the county's website: http://saferstreets.countyofriverside.us

Public Comments

Chuck Reutter, started off noting that Proposition 8 passed, yet elected officials are trying to get it thwarted through the courts. Then he related that to Menifee voters passing Measure G (districts), and the city council opting to study options through a Blue Ribbon Panel rather than honoring the outcome of the election. He went on to say that our country was founded on taking a stand to oppose government.

Ann Weston, began by acknowledging Chuck Reutter, and that she knew what she voted for (in reference to districting). She went on to describe Procinctu, the private military training facility located just outside of the city limits, but perhaps one day within the city's sphere of influence. She noted that there was no environmental impact report, no citizens oversight committee, and that it was fast tracked at the urging of Supervisor Ashley. She described some kind of license for 27 years, sniper training, and an firing range.

City Manager Wentz responded that Procinctu is outside of the city's sphere of influence.

Bill Zeidlik, asked the council if they've ever taken a look at the inventory of TUMF fees available, what they are for. He brought up issues of taking a population of the city. He noted that we're way behind on getting a Planning Commission, and wants a Planning Advisory Group. He also asked if the city knows what's going on with Bundy Canyon. There were other things he tried to cram into his 3 minutes, I just couldn't write them all down, or understand what he was saying.

Blue Ribbon Committee

Darcy Kuenzi announced they had assembled the Blue Ribbon Committee. They fielded 30 applications in all. From that field, they looked at where people lived, and also tried to create a gender balance.

The Committee comprises of Betti Cadmus, Daniel Taylor, Bill Beeman, Todd Reed, Lois MacGregor, Bekki Kroenke, Dawn Prather, Matthew Liesmeyer, and Thomas Giedroyce.

Greg August had originally applied, and was selected, but rescinded his membership, and Thomas Giedroyce was named in his place. There are also two other alternates, Ernest Rondeau, and Louis Mazei.

Greg August, was allowed to issue a public comment, offering congratulations to Scott Mann for being appointed as Mary Bono-Mack's California Republican Party Delegate, and noting that Mann declared districting would set up "taxation without representation", yet illustrated the Blue Ribbon Committee as thwarting the will of the people, and wasting money on an already decided issue.

Anne Pica, spoke as the president of the newly formed "Citizens for Fair Representation", saying that they collected 773 signatures and addresses in the last two weeks for a petition to dissolve the committee. She read the petition, which stated the formation of the Blue Ribbon Commmittee "violates our federal constitutional and statutory rights", referring to the delay of Measure G's implementation. The petition also noted that the council is ready to spend $20,000 on the Blue Ribbon Committee, and up to $45,000 on a special election, and that this is an improper expenditure of public funds for what she described as "the disenfranchisement of 3,345 voters" who voted for districts.

Bill Zeidlik, mentioned he's talked to some college students on how many people actually live in Menifee, and has seen numbers suggesting 62,000 to as much as 80,000. He also noted there was a 1% margin of difference in between districts and at-large. Then he asked the council if the Blue Ribbon Committee knows what they are instructed to do. Darcy Kuenzi answered that their instructions were printed on the application.

Sherman Road Accessory Structure

This matter concerns a homeowner who owns an acre of land and wants to build a couple of outbuildings, one of which is very huge, 8,000 square feet of storage space in a metal building, with four roll-up garage doors. The other a small 512 square foot building containing a toilet.

The city's planner noted some problems with the initial plan, which had called for a height of 24 feet, but got the applicant to accept a lower 20 foot height. And because it was a metal building, got the applicant to paint the walls to match the homes in the area. However, one bone of contention was that the building could only be used for residential uses, meaning, it had to support purposes that would coincide with what a typical homeowner would use it for. In other words, no commercial or industrial stuff.

The applicant took the stand and said when they bought this land, they forsaw a need in the future for a massive structure as this to store equipment, or perhaps vehicles, or even a nursery, so as to consolidate costs. What I got out of the discussion is that this particular piece still remains an unresolved issue, or perhaps I didn't hear what the resolution was.

However, Leroy Parsons, who lives next door to this property appeared and spoke in opposition to this project. He said the applicant's property already has water drainage problems, and is frequently having to pump water off of their property after rainfall. He said the construction of this building will likely divert water on to his property.

John Denver asked Carmen Cave, the city planner, if this building would create water drainage problems. She responded that the County Flood Control department approved this project, though not specifically addressing water runoff onto Leroy's property. John Denver tried to be more specific, asking Carmen if she can tell him specifically that this new structure would not create a water drainage problem. She couldn't answer.

And from that Denver began a discussion that the city pays a lot of money for its city staffing to figure this stuff out. The council also made the point that plans involving outbuildings and accessory structures really don't need to involve the council, except in cases where unresolved issues arise.

The council didn't approve this project, instead they directed the city planner resolve this, and issue approval/disapproval.

Fred Twyman asked Carmen Cave about public notices, in the context of this particular project, and which neighbors are notified that a public hearing is taking place. She said that they typically take a 300 foot radius from the property in question and notify neighbors in that radius. Twyman asked what happens when the property in question is 300 feet long or wide, does anyone get notified then? She said they typically extend that to 600 feet.

Prohibition of Fireworks

The city adopted a ordinance banning all fireworks in the city, except for those where the city grants a permit.

Ben Adams was allowed to make a public comment asking the council to provide for adequate enforcement, illustrating a case in Alaska, where he previously lived, that a house caught fire after a bottle rocket was launched.

This is not a new law, previously Menifee was under a similar county ordinance. The city's definition of illegal fireworks includes sparklers and firecrackers.

Ordinances for Consideration for Adoption

This is about what more laws do the council members want. City Attorney Elizabeth Martyn read off a laundry list of ordinances that other cities tend to adopt, and entertained recommendations from council members on what they felt were more urgent.

Ideas for recommended ordinances, and more urgent ordinances, include off-roading laws, tobacco sales, sludge, graffiti, smoking, roadside vending, day laborers, business licensing, and golf carts.

Regarding smoking, there's concern about smoking outdoors in parks and playgrounds and other city owned property.

Regarding day laborers they felt a good way to enforce that is to prosecute it as people trespassing on private property to seek employment, or seeking employment on public property without permits.

Regarding roadside vending they want to find a way to bust people selling cars, and people selling flowers, but not bust the people selling strawberries or lemonade.

Media Relations

The City Manager presented the council members with draft policies and/or ordinances on how city officials and staff interact with members of the media. It would eventually graduate into some kind of policy or ordinance down the road.

Public Safety Committee Report

John Denver, who along with Scott Mann, comprise the Public Safety Committee, and Denver gave a report on how things are going.

He said that because Menifee's population is increasing, the city needs more cops. He cited a figure of $323,123 in additional funds needed to boost police services, along with an additional $29,162 in traffic patrols.

For the next contract with the Sheriff, they would like to add ATV patrols, and get a gang taskforce. They'd also like to put more police vehicles on the road, but can't decide on getting more cars, or getting some motorcycles.

He also talked about homeless people in the context of public safety. He talked about homeless people hanging around the Vons in Sun City and presenting some kind of physical threat. He didn't give out any specifics, but noted that he and Mann are looking at "alternatives".

Fred Tywman asked Denver about the population increases requiring more cops, and wondered what data did he and Mann use to figure this out. Denver deferred to City Manager Wentz, who named off the State Board of Equalization (sales taxes), along with the Registrar of Voters.

Fred then mentioned that the lines drawn for voters precincts should be considered for drawing district lines, since districts are going to have to coincide with all that stuff.

Related

City-Council-Districts 7269734705310593816

Post a Comment

  1. I think Chuck Reutter should worry less about Prop 8 and more about cleaning up your filthy city. I've never seen so much tagging.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Its not Chuck Rutters job to clean up Menifee City. Its the job of the City Council to see about cleaning up our filthy City as you put it. But they are too busy with this silly blue ribbon committee to address the real problems.

    ReplyDelete
  3. People with drug offenses should not be imprisioned. They are wasting precious space. Drug addiction should be treated by doctors- not prison. If the county cuts back on education- we will surely need more prison space. Illiteracy leads to imprisonment.

    In addition- we might as well revote for the city name while we are considering district or at large. Menifee vs. Menifee Valley was just as close of a race.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What are you taking about, drug offenses should not be imprisoned? Is it not illegal and does an individual make a choice? They sure do. If you make an illegal choice and then become addicted, oh well. With that mentality we should label all habitual sex offenders and other violent criminals as victims and treat them medically too. Then our prison system would empty out and our medical system would shoulder the burden. Wow just imagine not getting into an ER, urgent care or other medical appointment. Wait it is hard enough now.

    I know it is your opinion and we are all entitled, but be real.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Placing a person in jail for possession of Marijuana or speed does no one good. 400,000 people die each year from cigarettes and alcohol. Less than 10,000 from illegal drugs. You recommend we place illegal drug users in jail? the real burden on healthcare is the cost associated with legal drugs.

    Also- day laborers should not be targeted but the people who hire them should. If there is no demand for their services, they would not stand there looking to make a living. If a day laborer is not trying to earn an honest living, they are more likely to be breaking into a home committing a crime.

    Lastly, from what I heard if we keep Menifee by district, 3 of the council members wont be elgible for re-election as they all live in the same district. For this reason, they are pushing for Menifee at large..

    ReplyDelete
  6. First let me say that I am a 44 year old male who has never used an illegal drug, smoked a cigarette and does not drink. So yes my views might be different.

    I have first hand in my career path dealt daily with drug users, alcoholics and yes criminals. I cannot tell you the number of times that I have dealt with cocaine, heroin and other recreational drug users that either have died or seriously killed off organs. And yes sometimes other not even knowing what they are doing. In some cases maybe they used a "legal" or prescription drug. Either way legal or illegal they made a choice.

    If you want to debate whether marijuana or speed are ok to society, let's take it somewhere else other than a city council meeting blog. You can email me at simplyme1@verizon.net

    ReplyDelete
  7. Imprisoning people for smoking pot is a waste of money and ruins families. Alcohol is far more destructive, yet is legal. Strange is it not? While ill admit, smoking pot might not work for every one, that does not mean everyone should be banned from using it. Supposedly, this is a free country, however we are banned by law, forbidden the right - to enjoy some pot when we feel like it in our own homes. I think that people should be able to do as they please as long as it does not harm fellow citizens. Smoke cigs if ya please, drink a beer if you like, smoke a hooter if it floats your boat - just be a good person and responsible citizen. If your smoking and blowing smoke in kids faces - stop. If your so stoned that your driving 30 MPH on the 215 and think your driving 80 - you should be busted, thats dumb - just as driving in both lanes while drunk would earn you a trip to the drunk tank and a date with the judge.

    Dont drink and drive, smoke smart and be a good person.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is for lack of a better word "STUPID". Focus on the concil and not you opinions on topics not related to the issue...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Did Mr. Ruetter really compare the battle over Prop 8 to Measure G. How stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  10. To Anonymous March 5,2009 9:31am.
    What is so stupid in Chuck Rutters compairing prop. 8 & measure G? Both were approved by the voters and now prop.8 is before the courts and on measure G council person Darcy Kuenzi is trying to undermine or overturn the vote of the taxpayers by setting up this committee for that purpose. Wake up and see the light on what is going on in your newly formed City before its to late. How many City Council meetings have you attended to see how they rubber stamp everything that comes across their desks???????????????

    ReplyDelete
  11. Simply put, if you didn't like what the council is doing you should have run for it yourself. Quit being part of the problem and start being part of the solution.

    Get on board and be heard the right way. Stop going to meetings and being a crybaby...nobody likes to hear it...especially the foul mouth Hispanic woman who was sitting with Ann Pica the other night...SERIOUSLY, if you have something to say, fill out a damn slip and say to their face....otherwise quit being disrespectful to everyone else who has the nerve to step up.

    ReplyDelete
  12. to anonymous March 5, 2003,11:15 AM the only cry baby is you. Everytime someone disagrees with the City Council and stands up for their rights you come up with the same old stupid line, Stop being part of the problem. The only problem here is people like you who stand back and let a city council stomp all over the rights of its citizens. So stop being so childish and get used to people standing up to the plate and voicing there opinion. And to set the record right the Hispani woman who sat beside Anne Pica never opened her mouth or used foul language. It just shows how you discriminate against and make up stories about people of a different race. What a cry baby BBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The good thing is that Marijuana will soon be legalized now that we have Obama in office. If anyone has followed it lately he has barred the DEA from conducting any further raids on Medicinal Marijuana clinics. This is the first step in legalizing it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I agree with the blogger that posted on 3/5/09 at 11:15 a.m. He was able to succinctly put the feeling of myself and many others about the actions of the Negative Ladies and the Hispanic Lady. Although the Hispanic Lady didn't open her mouth at the meeting, she has been very aggresive and hostile at other meetings. All City of Menifee residents attending the meeting should conduct themselves in a respectful manner. Everyone is getting tired of threats of causing trouble from them.

    ReplyDelete
  15. To Anonmous March 6, 2009, 6:58 AM It appears that you are wrong in your statement that you and many other Menifee residence are tired of hearing the ladies get up and speak at the council meetings. 773 of your fellow residence asked the lady who represents C.F.F.R. to speak on there behalf in objecting to the actions of the city council. Now I only see you and one other person objecting to the ladies who speak at city council meetings and that is on this blog not in the public forum. Strange I did not hear you mention your tired of hearing the men that get up and speak against the city council actions? Why not? I think 773 people out weight 2 cry babies who don't like strong women who stand up for what they believe. Just because other people don't believe the same as you does not mean that they are negative or should stop attending the meetings. Talk about cry babies if you don't like your fellow residence getting up and speaking out then you should not attend the meetings if it bothers you so much. Thats why its a public meeting so the public has a chance to speak to its city council. So grow up and stop acting like spoiled children and learn there are many people who do not agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  16. To the blogger on 3/6/09 at 8:47 a.m., have you read the letter to the editor entitled Transparency for some, but not all. You should! It dicusses Ann Pica's comments in the The California article "Watchdog group forms in new city," March 3.

    Sosme of the following points the writer point out were:

    1. Citizens for Fair Representation has close meetings.

    2. There are 100 members but only three can speak for the group

    3. It sounds to the writer, Travis Montgomery, that it is a committee of three.

    It sound to me that most of the signers of the petition are part of Ann Pica's political base.

    The other 75,000 residents have not mobilize or wish to do so until the Blue Ribbon Committee research information on the pros and cons of District versus At Large. To take City Council actions or their designated committees to the streets is not productive and it is disruptive. It is safe to say that most residents want to obtain information in a fair and controlled manner.

    Remember the ones who are highly critical of the City Council and the Blue Ribbon Committee are primarily the same ones who spearheaded the No Cityhood vote and lost by a landslide of nearly 62% to 38%. It is safe to assume that if a vote were to be conducted after a thorough discussion on Districts versus At Large that Districts would be voted down except for the two senior dominated voting precincts in the Senior Core.

    To negative ladies, grumpy old men and their "wannabe," younger "hangerons," get a grip and be part of the solutions instead sitting on the sidelines. Carping at the City Council and those associated with the City of Menifee is turning off people. Will these individuals participate in the many city committees. These committees will be transparent and everyone can participate.

    ReplyDelete
  17. To 3/5 6:12
    "It just shows how you discriminate against and make up stories about people of a different race."

    Nice generalization considering I am an anonymous poster. You must psychic or something.

    I was sitting 5 feet from her listening to her mutter, "this is bulls##t, and we didn't vote for this c%&p" I am making that up? NO. I know what I heard. And she looked like a fool. As far as the racism comment? You said it, not me. I don't know her name, and that's the easiest way to describe her. Grow up. You couldn't be any further from the truth.

    I don't feel the Council has stepped on my rights thus far and as such I have not had a reason to step up and speak out. I agree with them, and the few who voted against city hood and continue to show up at meetings with the same ole story, need to suck it up. We are a City now, deal with it, move on. If you don't like it, feel free to complain, just know that eventually, nobody will listen and nobody will care. Anyone notice how the council is talking amongst themselves when people like Ann Pica stand up. They don't care. They don't listen. 773 people is barely 1% of the population of the City. I think Council is more concerned about the other 99% to be brutally honest.

    If you don't like Cityhood, then move. Personally, I was totally disatisfied at the levels of service the county was providing. Our streets are trashed, the weeds growing in the sidewalks are overbearing for pedestrians, we had NO police service. Our area was rapidly starting to look like white trash. I am looking forward to a cleaner more respectable City.

    ReplyDelete
  18. To Anonymous, at March 06, 2009 11:04 AM

    AMEN! This place was, and still is, in need of some work. Menifee can be a great place. It's going to take a little elbow grease, money, and smart development.

    Keep the faith City Council. You have a silent majority out there waiting to see this community get cleaned up and reach its potential.

    ReplyDelete
  19. … Anyone notice how the council is talking amongst themselves when people like Ann Pica stand up. They don't care. They don't listen. …

    Don’t care/don’t listen is not a good position for the council. If anything, they should at least give the illusion that they’re paying attention to what people say. If, as you suggest, they’re not listening to their constituents, we should elect others who will.

    … These committees will be transparent and everyone can participate. …

    That’s true, but regardless of any input by the citizens and/or Blue Ribbon Committee, I expect the council will choose to put a re-vote on the ballot. At this point, it’s just a matter of trying to make the decision appear popular.

    I voted for and still prefer “at large”, but I object to the council’s attempt to revisit valid election results.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Look I’m not one to point fingers but I think it to be very, very important for everyone to remember that the city council are politicians, and politicians didn’t get their reputation for nothing. I know the residence and businesses expect a little political slime to ooze out just as long as it is only a little. And the council has the majority as there first priority.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Good points have been made regarding the same ol' naysayers attending the Council Meetings from the very beginning and making negative statements. The same ol' people who were against cityhood and hope that the city will fail. Fortunately, the voters put in courageous council members that have the personal confidence to stand up to threats of recall. Onc can anticipate that the entire city will back these courageous council members should a recall be filed by the negative ladies and grumpy ol' men.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Can one person give five legitimate reasons why cityhood is a bad idea? I have yet to heir anyone give reasons as to why it’s a bad idea. All we’ve heard is spit and sputter. What I’m asking for is FIVE good reasons and then we can have a debate about that. And if no one can give Just FIVE reasons why cityhood is a good idea. Then I propose that you all shut the hell up and quit your bi#@&ing.

    ReplyDelete
  23. To March 6, 2:58, I don't see how you can say the council is courageous. I had to laugh at that one, the only courageous one on the council is the mayor! He is the only one to stand up and actually listen to the people. The other members are only watching out for themselves, especially Darcy because districts could possibly mess up her political future. I voted for cityhood and I want us to be a city but I think what the council is doing is wrong! The vote should stand, or redo all of the catagories in the elections that were that close. The name of the city was very close one, should we redo that one? John Denver won over Dean Deines by only 45 votes how would Denver feel if we re-voted one that one? Lets face it the council chose district vs. at large to challenge because it is in the best interest of the council not necessarily the people.

    ReplyDelete
  24. To anonymous March 06, 2009 11:04 AM I am psychic and I see you posting over and over on this blog just to hear yourself think. All you do is try an insult other people and nothing constructive too say. Just the same old same old blame the other guy for everything that is wrong or not going your way in the city. What a waste stop crying you big baby.

    ReplyDelete
  25. To the blogger on 3/6/09 at 3:57, there was a great effort from the 22 candidates running for City Council and residents to debunk the comments of the "No Cityhood" supporters and now "District" supporters. The debunking worked by the Pro-Cityhood winning nearly 62% to only 32 percent for the "No Cityhood." In many areas of the new city, the percentage of the vote was even larger. Unfortunately, the "No Cityhood" supporters were making such emotional and outrageous comments that took time to retort that the other measures such as Disticts versus At Large was little noticed.

    To the blogger on 3/6/09 at 4:07, the courage of the City Council is very appreciated. They will not bow down to political pressure groups regardless of issues or concerns. The City Council must govern for all of the city not just the noisy ones that have the time to come to city council meetings. Those other city residents must come home from work, take children to music, scouting or sport practice and then make sure that the children do homework and get tucked into bed. These voters frequently are not at meetings but will vote as we have seen in supporting the school bond issue in February 2008 and Cityhood in 2008.

    We are a city now and will be from now on... However, the need to discuss how the city select council members is important. Anticipate that the Blue Ribbon Committee will conduct a very thorough review. This review is needed because all residents risk losing the right to vote on four council members and can vote for only council member. Secondly, there will a costly expense to divide the city into five districts in 2009 for the 2010 election.We must then in 2011 have another costly expense of splitting the city into five districts for the 2012 election. The $20,000 costs for the Blue Ribbon Commission will be much cheaper than the two districting costs in 2009 and 2011Additionally, the redistricting in 2011 will have very different boundaries than in 2009. The entire political system will be in upheaval as many neighborhoods will have to be moved from one disrict to another to accomodate the rapid growth that occurred from 2000 to 2008. This growth will be reflected in the 2010 U.S. Census. There are many more reasons which I am sure that the Blue Ribbon Committee will discuss.

    ReplyDelete
  26. To Anonymous, at March 06, 2009 5:44PM The people who attend the city council meetings also have a life besides city council meetings. The big difference is they feel it is their civic duty and fit in the time to see what is going on in there city. As for the blue ribbion committee it does not matter what information 9 people decide to share with the rest of the poupulation the law is the law and districts won and they the city council must draw lines before June of 2010.

    ReplyDelete
  27. To the blogger on 3/7/09 at 9:36, for parents with younger children and commuters, their more important civic duty is to take care of their children and provide quality family time. For a great percentage of the families in the City of Menifee, there is precious little time at home during the work week. The City Council has been entrusted to provide representation for them.

    Many voters will agree that a question of losing the ability of voting for four council members and being allowed to only vote for one council member deserves a thorough discussion. Additionally, this discussion is important on the basis voters losing 4/5th enfranchisement is an important consideration. I simply want to protect my enfranchisement of voting for all five council members.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Many voters will agree that a question of losing the ability of voting for four council members and being allowed to only vote for one council member deserves a thorough discussion. Additionally, this discussion is important on the basis voters losing 4/5th enfranchisement is an important consideration. I simply want to protect my enfranchisement of voting for all five council members.

    The ability to vote for candidates for all the offices is the major upside of “at-large” and is what initially appealed to me about that option. The downside is that it results in the dominant city demographic being in complete control of city decisions.

    The city now appears to have three distinct demographics: Rural, Senior and Working Families (overlaps exist, of course). If one of those groups becomes the dominant voting block, at-large voting will allow it to overwhelm the others and elect council members who support its agenda. Members of the minority demographics have good reason to object.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "The ability to vote for candidates for all the offices is the major upside of “at-large” and is what initially appealed to me about that option. The downside is that it results in the dominant city demographic being in complete control of city decisions."

    I'd like to add that the "taxation without representation" argument is weak. We don't have the ability to vote for all 5 county supervisors. Nor do we have the ability to vote for all 70+ state assemblymen, or the hundreds of US congressmen.

    The system of districting is the dominant representative structure throughout our entire political system, and is part of what provides the checks and balances that prevents from one voting block from getting too much power.

    ReplyDelete
  30. To the Blogger on 3/8/09 at 8:38 a.m I compliment you on a well constructed response. However, there is only one minority group in this community. This group is the Hispanic population. There are some concentrations of Hispanics in Quail Valley, Romoland and in the rural area east of I-215 and south of Mt. Jacinto campus. However, this group will probably need to be placed in voting districts of primarily mainstream populations.

    We must also remember that the five districts must be divided based on population and not geography. Thus, these five districts will include rural as well as urban areas that will cut across the recognizable geographic areas i.e. Quail Valley, Sun City and and Romoland. The end result of districting in 2009 may be one that no one likes.

    As soon as we are done districting in 2009, we must go through the expensive costs of redistrictring in 2011 using the 2010 U.S.Census. The end results will be new district boundaries that will move many neighborhoods and rural sections of the city to different districts.

    Another end result is that the political stability of the city will be affected as city council members may be placed in different districts than the one that they were first elected. Therefore, projects started in a district by one council member may be deemphasized by a new council member who will be representing different constituencies of a vastly reconfigured district.

    We must keep in mind that the City of Menifee changed greatly from 2000 to 2008 because of massive growth patterns. The selection of council of members "At Large" is a better system than "Districts" to accomodate the massive growth of this decade and into the immediate future.

    When the city has a population of 250,000, more stable growth patterns, more distinctive minority neighborhoods then the District system could be a better system. Let's visit this issue when the population reaches 250,000or more probably around 2050 or later.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Well the city says they are in the black so they have the necessary funds to do the transformations. The people have spoken and we can not continue to debate this issue. It does not matter if districts passed by a slim measure. It passed and that is the point.

    I'm very disappointed in the council's continued defiance. I voted for city hood and districts. I have a clear understanding of the councils motivation and as such will not be re-voting for any of them and spreading the word to all Menifee residents.

    ReplyDelete
  32. However, there is only one minority group in this community. This group is the Hispanic population.

    When I said minority, I was not referring to ethnicity. I was referring to whatever groups (Rural, Senior or Working Family) have less population in the city.

    When the city has a population of 250,000, more stable growth patterns, more distinctive minority neighborhoods then the District system could be a better system. Let's visit this issue when the population reaches 250,000or more probably around 2050 or later.

    The council’s job is to determine what kind of a city we will have in 2050. By that time, the city will be fully formed and council decisions have little effect on future development. The time to be vigilant about the city’s course is now, not decades in the future. If districts will make sense then, they should make even more sense now.

    ReplyDelete
  33. To the blogger on 3/8/09 at 10:53 a.m., I disagree with your premise that selection of city council members by Districts is currently the best system now for the City of Menifee. I disagree for the following reasons:

    1. It will be very costly to divide the City into five distircts in 2009 and then again in 2011.

    2. The redistricting will be done by population instead of geographic areas. Each new district will have to include the urban core (Sun City and Menifee Village, particularly in 2009 redistricting) in two or more districts. Thus, districts could be designed that many residents will be disatisfied with the boundaries of the different districts.

    3. The massive growth that occurred between 2000 to 2008 will not be reflected in districting in 2009 but in 2011.

    4. The boundaries of the five districts will be greatly reconfigured in the redistricting of 2011.

    5. The redistricting in 2011 for the 2012 election could create instability in the governance of the City because of planning for projects for a neighborhood or series of neighborhoods that are in one district. However, projects for these neighborhoods could be deemphasized when redistricting in 2011 move the neighborhoods to another district and voters are represented by a new council member.

    6. Redistricting from subsequent U.S. Censuses (2020, 2030, 2040...) could be just as chaotic in creating a good form of governance until the city becomes built out and matures. This may not occur until 2050 or later, maybe in 2075 or 2100.

    7. At this time for the next decades, At Large will provide a more stable form of government to develop projects for the entire city because the council members (all five) will have a stake in all areas of a rapidly growing and changing city. All council members will be subject to the will of all of the voters in the City.

    8. If Districts would be adopted to select council members, all voters in the city will be disenfranched by 4/5, which means that each voter will only be able to vote for one council member and not able to vote for the other four.

    9. The Blue Ribbon Committee will thoroughly review the pros and cons of At Large versus Districts and provide in an impartial manner findings so that each voter independently can make individual decisions whether to be represented by At Large or By Districts.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Re: March 8 @ 12:25…

    You gave lots of reasons why at-large makes more sense but, as Steve pointed out, that form of governance is not the norm at any level (county, state or nation). Unique interests are not well-served when the largest demographic rules.

    I understand the concern of establishing districts for the 2010 election and then again for 2012. It would be an unnecessarily costly exercise.

    There’s a middle ground. Have the 2010 election be at-large, but switch to districts for subsequent races. If I recall correctly, only two council members will be elected in 2010 and they would not have to fear opposing one another in the at-large election.

    After the 2010 census, slice up the city into four districts and, as Mayor Edgerton once suggested, elect the mayor at-large.

    ReplyDelete
  35. To the blogger on 3/8/09 at 2:13, it is appreciated that you recognize the costs of districting in 2009 and again in 2011. I really doubt that we can take the middle ground of what the city approved on June 3, 2008. We must redistrict the city into five district for the 2010 election or the residents can vote for At Large as a means to select council members. Why make the electorial process and governance so difficult for us at the point of the City of Menifee's history. Maybe our grandchildren's generation might have more reasons to consider Districts. Anyhow, the Blue Ribbon Committee can look at different options that everyone can accept. At least give the Blue Ribbon Committee a chance to make findings on the best method of selecting council mambers.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Re: March 8 @ 4:51…

    … At least give the Blue Ribbon Committee a chance to make findings on the best method of selecting council mambers.

    I simply offered an idea that the Blue Ribbon Committee might consider as an option. It would be less expensive than districting twice and no more difficult to implement than any other option that includes districts (which the voters already chose). It also has an at-large element that might make sense even to those who voted for districts.

    Please remember that the purpose of the Blue Ribbon Committee is to offer suggestions or advice to the council prior to its decision about scheduling a re-vote. A major part of the process will include measuring the community’s appetite for changing the status quo.

    Some of us believe the majority of council members have already made up their minds.

    ReplyDelete
  37. To the blogger on 3/8/09 at 7:54 p.m., the Blue Ribbon Committee should explore all options and then review thelegality of each option. Many residents of the City of Menifee are wanting more information before taking a stance for Districts or At Large. Let the Blue Ribbon Committee do its job as you have suggested. I agree with your suggestion.

    ReplyDelete
  38. None of the arguments posted here explain why it's a good idea to spend the kind of money we're talking about for the committee and a new election on an issue that was already voted on by the public.

    Sure, Menifee is in the black NOW, but after they spend the money to get the vote decision THEY want, we will have less to clean up our "filthy city" (as it was described by 3/4 3:57) or other projects.

    Bottom line - there are many more important matters to focus that money on than appeasing the council members' future political ambitions.

    In regards to the Hispanic woman with the bile mouth; unfortunately, this seems to be the social tide. I've noticed F-bombs spoken loudly at Super Target and Lowes - by young and old alike. I am part of the minority, it seems, that is still bothered by this type of degradation and lack of respect by fellow citizens. I even witnessed an older member of the council (not the Mayor) using foul language in public as well. It is sad.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Americans, overall, have been conned into believing that government is crooked and is the problem. Naturally, citizens assume that a politicians actions are always misguided and sinister. Here is the thing. People voted for districts. Regardless of whether or not you agree, districts won out. If the electorate wants to create at-large, get the prerequisite signatures and put it on the ballot for 2010. If people want it, they will vote for it. The "Blue Ribbon" council is a waste of money. If you want to know what the community thinks, show true interest and ask them.

    ReplyDelete
  40. To March 7, 11:26am. Right now I would be happy to vote for just one council member that has my neighborhood interest at heart. I live in the part of the city that used to be Romoland. Since none of the council members live in this area they don't have a vested interest. That is probably why they are planning on putting so much industrial area here. They won't have to put up with the big trucks and declining property values in their neighborhood. The people of Romoland, Heritage Lake and Quail Valley had better wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late, there is no one on the present council from any of these areas. It does not help me to be able to vote for 5 members if none of those members care about my area. Three of the five council live over by Scott Rd. What kind of projects and zoning will they enact in their own neighborhood? Four of the five have already proved themselves untrustworthy by trying to change an outcome that the people voted on.

    ReplyDelete
  41. refering to Anonymous at March 08, 2009 12:25 PM I disagree with your premise that at large council members is currently the best system for the city now and in the future for the following reasons.
    1. The vote has been cast and residence of Menifee have approved elections by districts.
    2. In establishing districts the legislative body may give consideration to the following factors: (population,topography, geography, cohesiveness, contiguity, integrity,compactness of territory, and community of interests of the districts. So it is not all cut and dry on how to setup districts.
    3. It will not be any more costly to divide the City into five districts in 2009 and then again in 2011 then $20,000.00 the city council is wasting on the blue ribbon committee and the $35,000 to $45,000 for a special election to revote on districts. Per the city council and city manager we have a couple mill in excess that would cover this expense.
    4. Once the districts are drawn up it will not cost that much to redraw the districts in 2011 or 2012 once the census results are issued.
    5. You only have 34,300 something registered voters out of a population of 65,000 in the city of Menifee. There has been no massive growth in population between 2000 to 2008 and I say that due to the fact that Riverside county have the highest forclouser rate and unemployment with that comes the decline in population.
    6. Voters are well aware that districts will cut into the core and include rural area's. And just a footnote Council members must live in the district that they represent so believe me districts will be carefully drawn and each district will be served as they should be by having there own representative.

    ReplyDelete
  42. To the diffrent bloggers that are supportive of Districts, I disagree with many of your premises and have concerns as listed in previous posts of the reasons that we must study the issues of District versus At Large. The Blue Ribbon will conduct a factual study of the pros and cons of At Large versus Districts. As for costs, the $20,000 is a small fraction of the city budget for one year. It is about 1/10,000 of the budget. Some of the bloggers who support Districts are penny wise and pound foolish. It will be money well spent when a question of taking 4/5enfrachisement away from individual city voters is being considered. Anyhow, the Blue Ribbon Committee is empaneled and will be meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  43. To the blogger on 3/9/09 at 4:09 a.m., one would not have a foul mouth in a Court of Law, a Board of Supervisor's meeting, or a established City's council meeting. The foul mouth persons would be quickly singled out and possibly ejected! Why shouldn't we expect those in attendance to have more respect in themselves and those around them. Shouldn't we all expect a proper decorum in our conduct at council meeting?

    ReplyDelete
  44. To the blogger March 9, 6:13pm. I live in Romoland and I feel like I have no representation, not even 1/5. The Blue Ribbon Committee means nothing, they picked 9 people out of the 34,000 voters. I'm sure the deck is pretty well stacked in favor of at large. The committee was picked by the council (Darcy) that wants at large. You know what they are going to say even before they have their first meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  45. To the blogger on 3/10/09 at 12:52 a.m., I wish you a good evening. I hope that you do not have to get up early in the morning and go to work.

    I have a comment on representation from Romoland. Did you run for City Council or are you planning to run for City Council? Did you volunteer for the Blue Ribbon Committee and are you going to volunteer for any other Committees or Commissions? Are you going to simply sit on the sidelines and complain as the Negative Ladies and Grumpy Ol' Men have been doing carping to the City Council from one subject to another?

    By the Negative Ladies and Grumpy Ol' Men actions, they simply do not support Cityhood and are willing to do anything to destabilize the City. They apparently have not been able to get over their crushing defeat (nearly 62% to 38%) of the No Cityhood measure in the June 3, 2008 election.

    As for the Blue Ribbon Committee, they will research different issues, concerns and questions that many in the community are needing to take a stance on the At Large versus District issue.

    One question that should be researched is the break down of the districts by population or by registered voters. I believe it will be broken down by population, which will create a much different configuration of the districts than by registered voters.

    Have a good day. I have to go to work by 5:00 a.m.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Re: 3/10/09 at 12:52 a.m

    ... By the Negative Ladies and Grumpy Ol' Men actions, they simply do not support Cityhood and are willing to do anything to destabilize the City. They apparently have not been able to get over their crushing defeat (nearly 62% to 38%) of the No Cityhood measure in the June 3, 2008 election. ...

    A majority of voters also chose a District configuration, but fewer total votes were cast for that measure than for Cityhood. I think it’s reasonable to believe the difference is because many people who voted “no” on Cityhood didn’t bother to express a council choice. You suggest that those who voted against Cityhood are naturally inclined to vote for Districts. If so, the District margin would likely have increased had they bothered to express a choice.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I know their are city council members on this blog posting information for at large because they have too much information on cost and so forth.

    The PEOPLE have spoken they voted for districts. Who cares about the margin. IT PASSED!

    In an economy like this why are we wasting 20K money on a blue ribbon committee. Yes, the city is in the black but this does not give the council the excuse to waste money because they want to further their careers.

    People are upset and they see the true colors of the council. I voted for cityhood, districts and city council members.

    If we have to re-vote I think we should put all items up for re-vote including council members!!!!

    I'm not a senior citizen but a thirty something with kids and I want what is best for my family. So stop blaming the seniors for being the only ones who voted for districts.

    I will make sure all my fellow neighbors, co-workers and friends know about the city council. You want young people and families to be involved I will make sure they know what is going on and spread the word. They may not be going to the council meetings but they will know what is going on.

    I guarantee you will not like the decision they will come up with.

    ReplyDelete
  48. My comments to the blogger that posted on 3/10/09 at 9:20 a.m.

    The blogger wrote, "I'm not a senior citizen but a thirty something with kids and I want what is best for my family. So stop blaming the seniors for being the only ones who voted for districts.:

    Response: You are right that others besides Seniors voted for Districts and Seniors voted for At Large. However, the same two elderly ladies that spearheaded the "No Cityhood" campaign have been very highly visible in their support of "Districts." If you have gone to city council meetings, you find these ladies as well as other primarily Seniors formed a political pressure group. For the above reason, the comment was made about the Negative Ladies and the Grumpy Ol' Men.

    The blogger wrote: "I know their are city council members on this blog posting information for at large because they have too much information on cost and so forth."

    Response: I posted some of the earlier posts, which are very very detailed. I am not a Council member. I am simply a long time resident of the Sun City portion of the City of Menifee. I have gotten information from public sources such as the City of Menifee Incorporation Documents that can be found in the Riverside County Local Formation Commission site. I have also attended City Council meetings and gotten information there and have also applied common sense. I encourage you to attend the Blue Ribbon Committee meetings and also City Council meeting, if you haven't already. I anticipate that the Blue Ribbon Committee will delve into many questions and concerns express by the Pros and Cons supporters of Districts.

    The blogger wrote, "I guarantee you will not like the decision they will come up with."

    Response: I hope that you can find within yourself to keep an open mind!


    Have a good day.

    ReplyDelete
  49. What kind of trees grow in Whitewater? S.O.M.

    ReplyDelete
  50. WTF THERE IS NO MORE SUN CITY! YOU LIVE IN MENIFEE. ONCE YOU ALL FIGURE THAT OUT PEOPLE WILL BE MORE WILLING TO ACCEPT YOU WHEN YOU PREFACE YOUR COMMENT WITH:

    I LIVE IN MENIFEE AND THIS IS MY CONCERN.....

    NOT
    I LIVE IN SUN CITY PORTION OF MENIFEE

    ReplyDelete
  51. Why are having distinct communities in the City of Menifee a bad thing? Every city is made up of communities that have a different name than the city. I think the communities should remain.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Blue Ribbon Meeting March 12 at 6pm.

    ReplyDelete
  53. By not following the law, our Menifee city council has divided our city residents and the name calling on this blog tells all of us what kind of people are expressing his/her views. It looks like those who favor wasting our tax dollars on the Blue Ribbon Committee may favor another form of government and that would be a dictatorship. After all, what kind of government do you have when you give up your right to vote or have your vote overturned? The issue here in Menifee is whether or not we will honor the American way of government and all of our service people who served and died so we can keep our form of government. Are we so weak and stupid to let our city council dictate to us rather than do what we voted for them to do?

    ReplyDelete
  54. To the blogger on 3/11/08 at 9:30 a.m., my ideas of a democracy is the ability to discuss different ideas. My idea of a dictatorship is an environment of not being able to discuss any ideas once an action has been made.

    The Blue Ribbon Committee has been empaneled to study the best method of selecting our council members. The discussion is important because the public is evenly divided on whether a voter could lose 4/5 of their enfranchisement in an election of if the system selecting one coucnil member per voter is more desirable. The Pro District leaders want to quash any discussion and then paint anyone or group wanting to study all angles on selecting a city council as encouraging a dictatorship. This blogger incredibly stated, "It looks like those who favor wasting our tax dollars on the Blue Ribbon Committee may favor another form of government and that would be a dictatorship."
    Blogger on 3/11/09 at 9:30, are you serious with the above comments?

    These leaders are using the same tactics that they applied in the Cityhood election, which they lost by nearly 62% to 38%. When will these leaders learn their lesson? The public is smarter than they realize. Maybe, they need another dubbing in the next election.

    ReplyDelete
  55. To the Blogger on 3/11/09 at 9:30 a.m., my idea of a democracy is that differing opinions are encouraged and debated in order to derive the best course of action. In a dictatorship, there is an effort to quash opinions and demonize anyone with differing opinions. In this case, the Blue Ribbon Committee is simply researching the issue of Districts versus At Large. I guess shining at light on the topic is very frightening to some.

    ReplyDelete
  56. To Anonymous, at March 11, 2009 9:02 AM


    There is no "City of Menifee" is is called "MENIFEE".

    Also, you mention distinct communities with in a larger city, tell me one city the size on Menifee that has such a system. We are not San Diego, or LA....

    ReplyDelete
  57. To March 12, 2009 6:52 AM:

    According to the City website, we live in the "City of Menifee".

    ReplyDelete
  58. I live in the City of Menifee too!

    ReplyDelete
  59. Does anyone know or has anyone heard about the Menifee Elementary reopening? What year or if it will ever reopen?

    ReplyDelete
  60. So you write on your return mail addy "City of Menifee"?

    ReplyDelete
  61. After reading some of the responses on this blog I should probably write “City of Ignorance” as the return address.

    ReplyDelete
  62. "City of Menifee" is the official "corporate" name. I believe we are required to have either "city" or "town" in our official name.

    We are not required to use "City of" on our mail.

    And to the poster at 10:35 AM - I thought the "City of Ignorance" was in the "State of Confusion"?

    Sorry, I couldn't resist.

    ReplyDelete
  63. This is DUMB!

    ReplyDelete
  64. UNBELIEVEABLE! The #1 issue to voters in favor of cityhood was POLICE PROTECTION....and all you people can find to blog about is the stupid Blue Ribbon Committee??

    Has anyone else noticed that there are NO MORE COPS around here than there were before we became a city? They repainted a few sheriffs cars to say "MENIFEE POLICE" and that's it! There is no such thing as Menifee Police. It's still the undermanned, overworked Sheriffs department trying to cover the whole county AND our city. It's a joke. They don't have any more deputies than they did before the election....just read what the sheriff says in paper.

    Get a clue people...we're getting screwed and nobody cares?

    ReplyDelete
  65. By the choices we make we define ourselves. We reveal our biases and beliefs. And so, too, do our institutions. In writing the $789 billion stimulus bill, Congress revealed that, for all its "Buy American" blather, it does not truly put America first.

    It does not believe that 10 million jobless Americans, in the country their fathers built, should receive any preference in hiring 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens who broke into this country and owe her no loyalty, allegiance or love.

    Is this a slur on the patriotism of some of our congressmen? You betcha.
    What other conclusion can one reach after Congress refused to require that employers on construction projects, paid for by U.S. tax dollars in the stimulus bill, verify that their workers are Americans? For that is precisely what Congress did.

    And all of you are worried about cityhood or no cityhood. if we could get everyone that blogs on this site and everyone they know to email the senators and congressmen and inform them that we will not put up with this any more then maybe they will listen.

    ReplyDelete
  66. I agree COMPLETELY with the below posting on March 13, 2009 11:31 AM and would add the following:

    Has anyone else noticed that there are NO MORE COPS around here than there were before we became a city? They repainted a few sheriffs cars to say "MENIFEE POLICE" and that's it! There is no such thing as Menifee Police. It's still the undermanned, overworked Sheriffs department trying to cover the whole county AND our city. It's a joke. They don't have any more deputies than they did before the election....just read what the sheriff says in paper.

    To compound matters we are in the midst (whether we like it or not) of a HUGE matter involving the MSJC Police Department....and it KEEPS GETTING WORSE!

    Last week the second in command (Corporal Mark Medina) for the college pd, who happens to patrol our dear city, was branded a perjurer when he went into court on March 9th and gave contradictory testimony regarding a temporary restraining order he had secured against one of the former officers suing him. I read the article and supporting courtroom documents on a website called msjcpdlawsuit.com.

    This is significant because, as the aforementioned poster indicated, we have no police force in Menifee and now we have to contend with a police officer (Mark Medina) who lies in legal proceedings/court paper work running amuck on the streets of Menifee. We are doomed! I have read the stories about Chief Segawa and I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt because I thought this thing was all about four angry ex-employees. However, after following the facts and given the new developments of last week, I'm starting to think there might be a problem with the MSJC PD.

    Where there is smoke there is usually FIRE!

    I emailed Chief Segawa (ksegawa@msjc.edu)in order to be assured that he was going to be taking action against this lying officer and have yet to hear back from him. I also tried to contact Mr. Schultz (rschultz.edu), who is the president of the MSJC, and still got no answer. Maybe some of you will have better luck (for the sake of us all).

    ReplyDelete
  67. I read the webite to and learned the following:

    In the latest of the despicable events that have transpired in and around MSJC and its police department the Police Corporal, Mark Medina, who has been accused of numerous violations of law and policy, was recently was found to have committed perjury in court.

    According to msjcpdlawsuit.com, which has copies of the court documents, Medina made false claims on a court document and then got caught in his lies in court.

    The judge, who obviously saw through Medina’s perjurious comments, denied the claim and then ordered him [Medina] to pay $564.00 in restitution.

    The questions that obviously come to mind are:

    1. What else has Medina Lied about?
    2. Does he, or anyone, expect the public to trust any testimony he gives ever again?
    3. How many innocent people were arrested or cited by this proven and documented liar?
    4. What civil suits will this new information bring against the college and Medina?

    If you were ever arrested or cited by Corporal Medina wouldn’t you challenge the testimony he gave in your case. I would.

    It is fair to say that officers have been telling the truth all along and Medina and the others [Kevin Segawa, Ryan Myers, Irma Ramos and Roger Schultz] have been following lies.

    ReplyDelete
  68. How did MSJC Police Force become a discussion item on the City Council Meeting for 3/3/09? The City of Menifee has "nothing" to do with MSJC. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to have a MSJC blog so that bloggers can vent their opions on that blog instead of posting on City of Menifee blog?

    ReplyDelete
  69. Afraid in MenifeeMarch 14, 2009 11:07 AM

    I disagree with March 13, 2009 9:39 PM,

    I think that because the topic of police presence came up the msjc police department should be included. Let's face it, they work in the city of Menifee and everything the do either directly or indirectly affacts people within the city limits.

    I am greatly concerned over the latest information.

    A cop that lies on the stand working in our city? How is that not relevant?

    The MSJC police jurisdiction covers all of California, and people have been compliang, here and elsewher, for years about the way they patrol our city.

    We now know why.

    ReplyDelete
  70. To the blogger on 3/14/09 at 11:07, the City of Menifee does not have any jurisdiction over the MSJC Police. This blog is about the City of Menifee. You need to set up a blog for MSJC Police and then you can vent all you want.

    Have a good day.

    ReplyDelete
  71. This blog is certainly about the City of Menifee and I am not sure how much say the city has within the MSJC, maybe none. But one thing certainly bothers me about this lying cop driving around our city.

    This is definetly an issue for our city leaders to address. How many Menifee residents has this guy given tickets to and lied about what really happend? How many Menifee residents has this officer arrested and lied about the circumstances of the arrest?

    If the city council has not input with MSJC thats fine. They should however send a letter to the college advising them of their concerns as the MSJC does operate with the City of Menifee borders. The letter may have not bite but atleast it shows the City Council will not tolerate dishonest law enforcement in our city.

    How many more incidents can come from this really small police department? What really scares me is this is what we know about, just imagine what is going on that we DONT know about.

    ReplyDelete
  72. To the Blogger on 3/15/09 at 98:37 a.m.

    The City of Menifee has "a lot" on its plate to involved itself on another entity's personnel problems. However, you and others on both sides of the issue can follow procedures in makeing your complaints or compliments of personnel to the MSJC governing board.

    Have a good day

    ReplyDelete
  73. I agree with the bloger who said that in a dictatorship, there is an effort to quash opinions and demonize anyone with differing opinions. And that is just what is going on in Menifee City with our city Council members. The followers of the City Council dictatorship continue to try and demonize the senior ladies and older gentlemen who get up and speak against the actions the city council dictatorship is taking to over throw the out come of the vote on measure G. The Queen of this dictatorship Darcy Kuenzi continues to control your local at large council members to do her biding. This is a small picture of what at large council members servies to the residence will be like. It is for sure you will be under a dictatorship of Darcy Kuenzi and her water boys. I know down the road this will come back and bite Darcy's political career when the seniors get the word out she will not be on our council for much longer. That my friend is Democracy and the old ladies and grumpy old man as you say are still standing tall and believe they have a right to stand up and say when they see their officals doing something they don't agree with it is their God given right to stand up and say enough is enough and if you don't like it then you best not show up at the city council meetings.

    ReplyDelete
  74. To the blogger on 3/15/09 at 11:26 a.m.,

    Get a grip! Many Seniors voted for Cityhood and are getting tired of the antics of the Negative Ladies and Grumpy Ol' Men. Fortunately, not all of the Seniors think the same as this pressure group of Seniors. This Negative got a thrashing on June 3, 2008 when the No Cityhood measure went down in flames by nearly a 62% to 38% of the vote. Get over losing big time and become a productive resident who will run for office and volunteer for committees and commissions. Help the City of Menifee succeed!

    ReplyDelete
  75. To the Blogger on 3/15/09 at 11:26 a.m.

    I believe a democracy is best functioning when there is an opportunity to collect information, review this information and make conclusions from them.

    The Blue Ribbon Committee is simply gathering information, reviewing it, and will making findings from this information. The public is invited to participate at all of the meetings. A very transparent effort.

    I believe a dictatorship is imposed on a group of people when another group of people or individuals controls information, put pressure on others not to gather information and to disrupt the release of information i.e. Communist Russia and Cuba jamming the airways when Radio Free World beemed its information from Western Europe and the United States. Knowledge is power and the best guarantee of good governance.

    ReplyDelete
  76. to By Anonymous, at March 15, 2009 11:26 AM

    Are you serious? WOW. Step out of your box and realize that Seniors are not the only people who vote.

    Where are the police? I know I don't want MSJC cookie cops in me city!

    ReplyDelete
  77. My question to the blogger who said he/she is tired of the old ladies & grumpy old mens antics and negative attitude at council meetings. I have not heard these people speak against Cityhood and weather they voted for or against Cityhood has nothing to do with what is going on at your city council meetings in 2009. So tell the rest of us on this blog what are the antics these seniors are doing that are so awful? Cause I am at all the council meetings and the only thing I see going on is seniors and young a like getting up and using their free speech rights under the constitution of the US.

    ReplyDelete
  78. To the Blogger on 3/17/09 at 2:52,

    The antics of the "No Cityhood" and "Pro-District" group at City Council meeting has been questionable at best for some of the following reasons:

    1. Threatening council members with dire actions such as recall if they didn't respond in the way that the speaker wished. These threats have been consistent from the very first meetings before incorporations into the present.

    2. Some of the group have been foul mouth with cuss words over statements and actions of the council.

    3. Shouting from the audience and walking to the council dais when it wasn't part of the agenda for public comment

    There are other types of actions that have been done by this primary Senior Group. Granted there are some younger ones sprinkled thoughout the group that sits together. In other words more established cities and Riverside County, their meetings are conducted with more decorum. Those that are not wanting to follow the rules of presenting one's ideas at prescribed portions of the agenda are strongly reminded to wait for one's opportunity to speak and not interrupt the governing board's deliberations. Everyone should be able to express themselves in an environment that is dignified and encourages differences of opinions.

    ReplyDelete
  79. It sounds like Kevin Segawa (at least according to soeone close to him) is not as squeeeky clean as he would like us all to think. All I can say is verrrry bad news for a "chief of police."

    Here is what "The Insider from Laguns Niguel" said:

    http://www.topix.com/forum/city/menifee-ca/TDKMR06PQ7MPBVABN/p4

    Kevin Segawa:
    Public Record of domestic violence in San Diego County against his first wife prior to LAPD.
    Ran around with gang members prior to LAPD.
    Lied on LAPD application.
    Verbally and physically abused his first wife.
    The last incident of abuse did involve his service weapon. He used his polic training on her, permanently injuring her for life. He thew her out of the house and she laid on the sidewalk unconcious in front of their house, when their neighbor, a Santa Monica police officer, had to intervene. And he did this all because she was tired of his lying and challenged his b.s. and wanted out of the marriage.
    He did other heinous things to her before their divorce was final (she moved back to San Diego the day she got out of the hospital from that incident).
    Kevin was with LAPD less than one year. He did finish the academy, but never finished his year probation because he was fired about 5 months into being on the streets. He NEVER worked CRASH and he NEVER was anywhere close to rookie of the year (JESUS what crap!). He does not have his POST.
    Here's an interesting question...how could any type of agency hire him in this type of capacity without doing a thorough background? Did they not check San Diego? Did they not speak with his first wife?
    Kevin....I'm sure you read the posts....Karma will get you in the end!

    ReplyDelete
  80. I don't know anything about Kevin Sagawa, but I do know that when people are hired without background checks, things can go wrong. And if and when they do, it the individual hired does any harm, those who did not do the check, can be held personally responsible.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Things I like: more law enforcement (ATV cops GREAT IDEA!), handling the homeless problems at Sun City Plaza (Vons), new detention center (Fed kick Friday needs to stop).

    Things I find questionable: how are strawberry vendors not subject to a law that flower sellers are? That doesn't seem fair. Permit for one, permit for all (maybe an exception would be school/PTA fundraising).

    Great job council! I've also noticed that graffiti is less of a problem, thank you Menifee Police (aka RSO)!

    ReplyDelete
  82. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Oh and I voted for Districts too. Each distinct area should have a voice in our diverse city. I'm sure those in rural areas have concerns that we in the tracts do not. Let them have a voice!

    ReplyDelete

emo-but-icon

Follow Us




































Popular

Recent

Comments

Subscribe Via E-mail

Have the latest articles and announcements on Menifee 24/7 delivered to your e-mail address.
Email Format