Ventura City Manager Blog

34 people have a new roof over their heads: SHORE opens

2009-11-08T07:53:00.000-08:00

Yesterday was the ceremonial ribbon cutting for Ventura's new homeless transitional housing project, but the tenants moved in last week.

"It's been a long and winding road that leads to the door that opened to a place that 34 people can call home," observed Rick Pearson, the long-time Executive Director of Project Understanding. His group will administer the assistance formerly homeless tenants will receive as they work to get themselves back on their feet.

The 15 units of "supportive housing" are part of the much larger WAV project still under construction in Downtown at Thompson and Garden Streets. The 54 "affordable" units for working artists will open later. The LEED-certified project also includes market rate condos, ground floor retail and a 99 seat performance space.

Pearson has been working on this dream for more than a dozen years. The original goal was a year-round homeless shelter. But when that effort proved difficult to site and finance, it was combined with the affordable artist housing project and shifted to "transitional housing," an equally key part of getting individuals and families permanently off the street.

Project Understanding Board Chair Judy Alexander stressed that the new tenants will be able to regain what the rest of us take for granted: a bathtub, a shower, a permanent address and a place to come home to.

The larger project was financed by PLACE, a non-profit that secured local redevelopment, county, state and federal affordable housing funding as well as private donations and sponsorships.

Mayor Christy Weir hailed the ribbon cutting, thanking Community Services Director Elena Brokaw and Economic Development Manager Sid White for their efforts on behalf of the City to support the successful effort. Councilmember Neal Andrews recalled the City's commitment to the effort beginning nearly seven years ago and called for more partnerships like this in the future.

Measure B: The will of the people

2009-11-05T08:15:00.000-08:00

We've all had the experience of being approached as we head for the supermarket: "Are you a registered voter?" If you nod, you are pressed with a soundbite pitch about signing a petition to solve some burning problem. If you express skepticism, you are reassured, "This is just to put it on the ballot." There is a clipboard with an initiative in tiny type for you to read (if you have twenty minutes or so), but you are handed a pen and at that point, you probably scribble your name and address.

Then later, these signatures are waved around as PROOF every one of those thousands of people ardently support the proposed initiative and are now clamoring for its adoption.

That was the case with Measure B, the so-called "view protection ordinance" that went before the voters on Tuesday.

City Councilmembers, the City Attorney and, yours truly, the City Manager were all denounced for doing everything in our power to thwart the "will of the people" for not scheduling a special election to put the measure to an immediate vote. Camille Harris, the measure's chief proponent, repeatedly claimed that it took a lawsuit for the City to even count the signatures. When the County Registrar apparently misplaced a packet of 100 of the 10,972 signatures submitted, we were all accused of deliberate conspiracy.

Supposedly the citizenry was boiling mad and demanding an immediate vote to "save our views." There was quite a bit of fuzziness about what views, exactly, were at risk. Sometimes it was the view of homeowners out their back windows, which would be forever blotted out by three-story "highrises" built along commercial corridors (this was in areas where zoning had for decades allowed six story buildings to be built there, although, to be fair, none had been.) Other times it was the view of motorists traversing our east-west thoroughfares to have unobstructed views of Two Trees and the hillsides as they drove by. And when the County broke ground on a long-delayed hospital tower, "view protection" was advanced as a general right not to have to look at tall buildings near your neighborhood.

In other words, view protection was, literally, in the eye of the beholder. And that was the beauty of the proposed initiative: it would empower a board of appointed citizens to craft a "view protection ordinance" covering each individual neighborhood's views and desires, all packaged together at the end for the City Council to adopt. If the Council did not, then it would go to the voters (exactly how that was to work was not actually specified.)

To ensure that this process was untainted by City Hall interference, the backers of the initiative would have been authorized to appoint 20 of the 23 members. How this was to be done, like most elements of the initiative, was also a little fuzzy. The initiative said the board of "VCORD" would make the selections for each neighborhood. But when that was criticized, Harris announced that instead there would be an election by all VCORD members. Since VCORD is a political organization, exactly who would be eligible members would be left up to them, but Harris assured one and all that "anyone" could join. How this "election" would take place was left for later.

There are other fascinating aspects of this unusual initiative, but in the end, despite the claims that the signatures proved overwhelming support for the View Protection Initiative, when it was actually put to a vote, it lost 3-1.

As I acknowledged in yesterday's blog post, it is not easy to decipher why voters support or oppose measures or candidates -- after all, we have a secret ballot and there are no "exit polls" in Ventura. But my point in re-opening the often contentious discussion of this measure is simply this: whatever the merits or demerits of an initiative, just because a lot of people sign a petition doesn't mean that a majority of people actually support it.

That's what elections are for. Imperfect as they are (and we've all had our disappointments about election outcomes in our lives) they are the final verdict on whether voters do or do not support someone's panacea for a particular problem.

Had the voters, in their wisdom, passed Measure B, the Council, the City Attorney and the City Manager would have all done our best to actually implement it, despite its fuzziness and flaws. Our failure to immediately do everything its backers demanded was not out of disrespect for the citizens who signed the petition to put it on the ballot. But initiatives don't become law based on how many people sign a petition at the supermarket. There has to be an election first.

Measure B had its opportunity before the voters and like Measure A (placed on the ballot by the Council) and Measure C (placed on the ballot by another citizen group), they all failed to win majority support. That's how our system works.

Of course, we should all give Harris and VCORD credit for putting focus on this issue. While their initiative may have been flawed, their activism and advocacy did prompt the City Council to appoint a citizen task force to tackle the issue. VCORD didn't get everything they asked for, yet the key recommendations of the task force have been embraced by the Council and Planning Commission. This ensures that public views will be better protected in the future, just as the 2005 General Plan promised.

Democracy is not perfect, especially if your standard is always getting what you want from it. But experience tells us that when someone steps forward claiming to represent "the will of the people," we have a right to be skeptical. As the great American political humorist Finley Peter Dunne observed about similar claims advanced in his day, "your argument is interesting, but not conclusive."

Election verdict: Low turn-out, decisive results

2009-11-04T08:25:00.000-08:00

With semi-official final results, yesterday's election produced a vote turn-out lower than two years ago. Three of the four incumbents won re-election (Andrews, Monahan and Brennan.) Another familiar face, retired Police Chief Mike Tracy led the field, which meant Councilmember Ed Summers narrowly lost re-election.

Measure A, the proposed sales tax increase, lost 55-45%. The voters in Ventura opted for a tight rein of finances, which means the deep cuts made this year will need to be maintained. Paradoxically, five of the top six vote getters in the Council race supported Measure A (the sixth, Councilmember Andrews, remained neutral.)

The so-called "view protection ordinance" was decisively rejected 3-1. The anti big box ordinance went down to defeat by a margin similar to the sales tax increase.

Voters also rejected sharp attacks. The sharpest critics of local government did not do well in the Council race and the avalanche of attack mail from the police union backfired.

Interpreting the reasons for election outcomes is always trickier than interpreting the results. Many factors will be cited by winners and losers, but the bottom line remains the same: voters signaled they are looking for an economical approach to local government, with more emphasis on economic development and living within our means.

By their nature, elections never make everyone happy. But the biggest disappointment of the night was the poor turn-out. A lot was at stake yesterday, yet more than 70% of the voters didn't bother to vote. That's the most serious challenge ahead of us: more effectively engaging our community to participate in the decision-making that shapes our common future.

Tuesday's election: 70% won't vote!

2009-10-29T09:25:00.000-07:00

If you are reading this, you probably are voting in the election next Tuesday, November 3rd. But there is something more you can do: encourage your neighbors, friends and loved ones to do the same!

You'd think from the blizzard of signs, the deluge of political mail, the chatter in the media, the strident rhetoric and the plethora of candidates and issues that this year is shaping up as a record turn-out. And you would be wrong.

The record for voter turn-out was set back in 2005 when the same four incumbents seeking re-election today were all handily elected by the 32,823 voters who participated. It was the first time in decades that a majority of voters have turned out for a local election.

This time, only about 30% of the voters are projected to actually go to the trouble of voting, just like two years ago.

How do we know? Overall voter registration is up 10% over two years ago. So is voting by mail, which two years ago was nearly 60% of the total votes. Yet with only three working days left for the County to receive mail ballots, returns are only 10% ahead of two years ago. Without a last minute surge in mail ballots and voting on Tuesday at the polls, the percentage will actually be lower than two years ago. So despite the clamor around this election, most voters are simply ignoring it.

The funny thing is, just one year ago, we had the highest national voter turn out in a generation. People realized then that elections matter. If you don't vote, you not only forfeit your authority to complain -- you lose your opportunity to shape the future. What's being decided on Tuesday is the future direction of Ventura, including the level of environmental protection, emergency response and maintenance of our streets, sidewalks, parks and trees. It is not just the people who will sit on the City Council and School Board -- but three key ballot measures.

There are a few days left. Talk to the people you know, especially young people. Tell them why you are voting, what matters to you in this election. If they need voter information, it is easily accessible on-line here, with more information on Measure A, the voter's verdict on city service levels here.

Last minute attacks, of course, can discourage turn-out. "They're all crooks and liars," is something you hear too often.

But you know better. You know the people who serve our City are decent people. But they have very different views about controversial issues. They bring very different leadership skills. They represent different philosophies of government.

Elections matter.

Let's see if we can get more than one out of every three voters to participate in deciding the future direction of our community. Time is short!

Ken Corney: the right choice for Ventura's next Police Chief

2009-10-27T08:47:00.000-07:00

He's been with the Ventura Police Department for 23 years, rising quickly through the ranks. He's been our Assistant Chief for the past six years, working side-by-side with Pat Miller to reduce crime in our community. Their record over the past five years has been outstanding: overall crime is down 20% and Gang Crime is down 14%. People not only are safer, they feel safer. The number of people who feel "safe walking alone" is up 5% and who feel "safe after dark" is up 10% since 2005.

On the day after Christmas, Ken Corney will succeed Miller as Ventura's Chief of Police.

"All Chief’s have to overcome significant challenges," he noted on accepting the appointment. "Clearly, at the beginning of my tenure we’ll be facing significant challenges on a federal, state and local levels.

The world wide economic crisis.
The continued threat of terrorism.
The uncertainty of our state budget.
The potential for the unsupervised release of tens of thousands our state prisoners.
Increased gang violence and the significant impacts of crime and disorderly behavior on our local businesses.

"While we certainly live in a dynamic and changing times, I believe the formula for success is a constant:

Put together a winning team
Develop a shared mission with clear goals
Relentlessly pursue success.

"I believe the concept of a 'great team' is everything. What a team does and how a team gets the job done may change depending on the environment, but a great team can execute any plan under any circumstance."

With a Master's from Azusa Pacific in Organizational Management and as a graduate of California's Police Command College and the Police Executive Research Forum's Senior Management Institute, Corney brings both a thoughtful perspective and a deep appreciation of the uniqueness of this community to his new role leading the Police Department:

"I am constantly inspired by passion of dedication of our more the 200 police officers, civilian employees and volunteers that make up the Ventura Police Department team. These people are foundation for our success. We must continue our tradition to recruit retain and develop the best and brightest to be part of our team.

"With this team and our core mission to reduce crime and the fear of crime in our Community we will continue on our journey from good to great incorporating the following tools:

Collaborative partnerships - This is not another program; it is part of our DNA. Being part of the Community is the core of how we achieve success.
Innovation – Continue to innovate as the means of leading change.
Technology – The use of technology can be a tremendous accelerator of progress.
Good old-fashioned Police work - Nothing can take the place of experienced, well-trained and highly motivated police officers."

No matter who takes on this job today, it won't be easy meeting rising expectations at a time of diminishing resources. While residents complain about quality of life issues in Downtown and in our neighborhoods, they also expect prompt emergency response, effective action against gangs, police presence to keep schools safe, not to mention a sympathetic ear if they are pulled over for a traffic violation. If any officer or dispatcher ever seems to fall short, critics are quick to condemn the entire department.

Success as a Police Chief isn't measured by popularity, whether inside the department or out in the community. Yet strong relationships are the basis for community partnerships that are crucial to our success. The Ventura County Star described Corney as "a steady, familiar face and deep-rooted community relationships during challenging fiscal times." He'll be able to call on those, along with his outstanding law enforcement record and his innovative approach to problem-solving in the months and years ahead.

Cutting through the rhetoric to the facts on Police pay and pensions

2009-10-26T10:28:00.001-07:00

There are 10 cities in Ventura County, but only one is having an election. So guess which one is routinely battered with criticism about city finances and public employee salaries?

Then on Sunday, the Star ran a story about the Simi Valley Police officers hammering the City Council with public protests, ads and complaints. Finally, a reality check on the constant barrage of criticism about the pay and benefits for Ventura city employees.

So why are the Simi Police protesting? Because they refused to take a 2% cut in their pay despite Simi's deep drop in sales tax and other city revenues due to the recession. They now say the City is retaliating against them on other issues.

Most revealing is the side-by-side comparisons of Simi, Oxnard and Ventura police compensation. They all have the same pension formula. Ventura's patrol officers are paid 14% less than Simi officers and 19% less than Oxnard officers at the top step. Ventura's sergeants are paid 9% less than Simi sergeants and 2% less than Oxnard sergeants at the top step. Simi's monthly medical benefits are more than twice Ventura's (Oxnard's are about 20% less.)

Here's the biggest kicker: "Simi Valley police have long enjoyed some of the best salaries and benefits in the county, including lifetime medical and other benefits for officers and their families once they work in the department for 25 years."

Oxnard Police also receive lifetime medical benefits, partly paid by the City. Ventura does not. Like pensions, these lifetime benefits go on long after the employee retires. But unlike pensions, cities are not required to put away contributions now to ensure the money is there later.

Again, Simi and Oxnard have lifetime medical benefit programs for their police, Ventura does not.

Yet when the recession hit all three cities, only Ventura police officers took a 5% reduction in compensation.

A similar comparison for Fire, by the way, would show even greater disparities on pay -- and Ventura has a significantly lower pension formula than the firefighters on duty in Oxnard and Simi.

Will the facts change campaign season rhetoric? No. There is an agenda in those singling out Ventura for criticism. They'd prefer not to talk about how we compare to other public agencies.

I understand and sympathize those who think public safety pay has gotten out of hand generally -- although I personally think that corporate executives, football players and members of the rock band U2 get paid way too much, compared to people who risk their lives to keep our communities safe. But we are all going to have to reset our expectations as we cope with a drastically different economic landscape, whether we work for government, private industry, non-profits or run our own business. The world has changed and Americans are all going to have to work harder and longer with reduced rewards. Sorting that out is fair game for debate.

Here Ventura is the leader. We are not the leader in high pay, pensions or benefits. But Ventura is the leader in tackling the challenge of reforming compensation. All eight of our unions accepted fifteen month compensation concessions of at least 5%. All are participating in the Council and community-led Compensation Policy Task Force which is looking at how to be both sustainable and competitive in the years ahead.

I am proud to serve Ventura. The City is fiscally sound because our staff have not demanded top pay and have often worked for less than average. They recognize that public service comes with public responsibilities. They (and I) bristle when uninformed or reckless critics single us out for attacks. But we know that serving this community is an honor and a privilege. Our City staff will continue to work with and for the City Council and our citizens to find common sense solutions because they care deeply about the community they serve and protect, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Climate action: Sustainability by any other name

2009-10-15T16:38:00.000-07:00

Today is something called "Blog Action Day" and nearly 10,000 bloggers have signed up to write about the topic of "climate change." (Who knew there were 10,000 bloggers?)

I am often asked about where Ventura stands on California's legislative goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 back to 1990 levels. I usually respond by acknowledging that there are differences of opinion in our community from those who think it is the most serious threat to our species in history to those who think it is a giant hoax perpetrated by Hollywood eco-fascists. But, I always note that while debate is healthy in a free society, it is a scientific fact that the Governor signed AB 32 into law, requiring us to sharply cut greenhouse gas emissions throughout California.

I'm no expert in the science. As City Manager, my role is to carry out the policies of the City Council and State and Federal law. But it seems obvious to me that no matter what your views on climate change, most, if not all, of the actions needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions make sense independently -- and in California, at least, that IS the law.

"Fossil free by '33," the catchy slogan of Santa Barbara's Community Environmental Council, may seem overly ambitious to many -- and even offend those engaged in the locally still important oil business. But we all know that the price of oil is not just a monetary question of whether we can afford it. Much of the world's remaining oil supply -- whether abundant or dwindling -- lies under countries run by dictators and/or kleptocrats. They certainly aren't our friends -- or the friends of the people in those countries. Our addiction to oil is helping prop up their brutal and oppressive rule.

Then there is the environmental price. Here again, there is passionate debate about whether to drill in our local channel -- or on Alaska's North Shore. But the cumulative impact of extraction in ever more remote locations is at the least very troubling -- especially to keep our gas tanks full while we idle in traffic jams.

Then there is the huge indirect economic cost of the vast network of streets, highways and bridges and the staggering expanse of parking in lots and structures. The cost of health care is the number one topic of national political debate -- yet locally we are trying to figure out how Community Memorial Hospital will be able to afford the added cost of a big parking structure on top of the State requirement that they completely replace their current hospital to meet new earthquake codes. If you had $20 million for local healthcare would you spend it on a . . . parking structure?

Finally, there are all sorts of "minor" impacts from our addiction to cars and the oil that runs them. Like the battery acid and lead and other toxic unmentionables that end up in our groundwater, rivers and oceans -- and that local cities are bearing an increasing burden of responsibility to control and clean up. Or paving over prime farmland to accommodate the sprawl of auto-oriented suburban development.

In the end, reducing our dependence on oil and other fossil fuels isn't just good for the planet. It's good for kid's lungs, the American dollar, municipal budgets -- and you, the next time you swim at our beach.

Sustainability is about pursuing our own quality of life and standard of living in ways that doesn't cheat future generations out of the same opportunities. That's a good standard for our actions -- independent of whether you accept the argument about climate change or not.

Be careful what you wish for . . . ballot initiatives and the law of unintended consequences

2009-10-14T08:09:00.000-07:00

In the three decades since Proposition 13 reshaped the California political landscape, most voters have become more cynical about ballot initiatives and the simplistic claims and counter-claims that abound at election time. On average, only three out of every ten measures that make the ballot actually pass -- and many voters adopt a reflexive "when in doubt vote no" position.

Still, the accumulated legacy of one shot solutions lives on in a Constitution that has been amended more than 500 times in the last 140 years (the United States Constitution has only been amended 17 times since the Bill of Rights was adopted more than 200 years ago.) While it's convenient in tough times to blame incumbents for California's fiscal crisis, California Supreme Court Justice Ronald George recently focused on the ease with which special interests can appeal directly to the voters through the initiative process:

"One Bar leader has observed: 'California’s current constitution rivals India’s for being the longest and most convoluted in the world . . . . [W]ith the cumulative dross of past voter initiatives incorporated, [it] is a document that assures chaos.' Much of this constitutional and statutory structure has been brought about not by legislative fact-gathering and deliberation, but rather by the approval of voter Initiative measures, often funded by special interests. These interests are allowed under the law to pay a bounty to signature-gatherers for each signer. Frequent amendments — coupled with the implicit threat of more in the future — have rendered our state government dysfunctional, at least in times of severe economic decline."

Writing in today's L.A. Times, journalist Tim Rutten notes that "the chances of repealing the initiative are somewhere south of zero." But repeal isn't the answer. If we are going to fix California's broken government, every flawed step in the initiative process needs to be addressed.

First, the writing. Today, any interest group, corporation, lobbyist or political operative can write an initiative, file it and begin collecting signatures.

That's nonsense. All sorts of sneaky or ambiguous provisions can be stuck in -- or slip through. If initiatives are "people's democracy," then the writing needs to be public. A system should be devised for public posting for some reasonable period of time -- enough for supporters, opponents, those affected and the press to comment and criticize. Laws passed by local city councils require public noticing of the language, public hearings and two separate public votes before becoming law.

Opening up the "black box" of initiative writing would give the public -- and elected officials -- the opportunity to suggest and pursue alternative solutions and compromises instead of "Yes" or "No" simplistic choices on the language of the special interest's choosing.

The next stage is petition gathering. Courts have struck down residency requirements for professional signature gatherers -- but why? It's against the law to pay someone for their vote or to get a legislator to introduce a bill -- why can't it be against the law to pay someone to collect your signature on an initiative petition? The "business" of commandeering signatures is poisonous -- it invites fraud and abuse as mercenaries try to convince shoppers to sign lengthy petitions they couldn't possibly read or fully evaluate on the spot.

The number of signatures required is also ridiculously low. While signers are told, "this is just to put it on the ballot," as soon as the signatures are turned in, they are magically transformed into evidence of widespread support for the proposed measure. Right. It's classic bait and switch. Duplicates, those ineligible to vote and even forged names are all lumped together as evidence of widespread support. Yet everyone in the political business knows it is not the validity of the measure but the money behind it that counts. At the State level, one million dollars guarantees you a place on the California ballot. Who has a million dollars? Not your typical average citizen.

Then all it takes is a majority vote to pass initiatives and even amendments to the State Constitution. To amend the US Constitution takes two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress and ratification by the State legislatures of three quarters of the states. To amend the California Constitution: half the people voting on that measure in any given election. We all know it takes two-thirds vote in the legislature to raise taxes -- but to authorize or earmark spending is a majority vote at the polls. So special interests can propose costly programs, subsidies and laws through initiatives -- leaving it to the legislature and governor (or mayor and councilmembers) to figure out how to pay for them. What a scam!

Is there hope for reform? A new poll shows California voters actually favor requiring a two-thirds vote for amending the State Constitution. But the very same special interests that thrive on the initiative process will fight to block any reforms. "Don't mess with the people's right to vote!!!" they will scream, with the same shameless dishonesty that they employ at election time when it comes to convincing voters to buy their half-baked or Trojan Horse ballot measures.

Ventura voters are catching up on two initiatives that qualified for this year's election. Both are being debated with the usual war of signs and soundbites. Both require reading the fine print to understand -- and thoughtful consideration of their potential unintended consequences. How many voters will take the time? Is this really the best way to do the people's business?

A Police Chief's Legacy: Pat Miller Retires

2009-10-12T09:57:00.000-07:00

In the six years he served as Assistant Chief, Pat Miller was a quiet, effective second-in-command under the far-more-visible Mike Tracy. In the six years since he accepted the Chief's badge, Pat Miller has been an extraordinarily effective leader in law enforcement.

On the first day he took command, Miller clearly laid out the principles he would follow in leading the Ventura Police Department:

Establish clear goals and objectives
Create a positive atmosphere
Let people do their jobs, and
Collaborate with other City departments

The clear goals and objectives were spelled out in the Department's strategic plan that Miller spearheaded:

Reduce Crime and the Fear of Crime
Improve the Quality of Life in Neighborhoods
Enhance Community and Police Partnerships
Develop Personnel
Continued Accountability

Each one of these goals was spelled out in direct outcomes that could be measured and tracked. And the results are impressive. Most importantly, overall crime is down 20% and Gang Crime is down 14% since 2005.

Ventura residents also feel safer. Each year, a professional survey benchmarks key measures of security for our residents. The number of people who feel "safe walking alone" is up 5% and who feel "safe after dark" is up 10%.

To cut crime, Miller has focused on improving response times, which have improved dramatically. Our understaffed Police Department average was able to arrive on scene to a priority one emergency within five minutes less than 60% of the time when Miller took over. Chief Miller set the ambitious goal of getting there within five minutes 90% of the time. With relentless focus, the number has steadily improved. By this August, the department was able to get to priority one calls within five minutes 87% of the time.

Driving down crime has also meant focusing resources. High crime areas were targeted for intervention with specific goals for reducing calls for service by fixing the underlying problems. The result: a drop in police calls of 17% in the targeted areas since 2005.

Chief Miller has built the community partnerships he promised. The Volunteers in Policing program he established has contributed 35,000 hours of well-trained assistance out on the streets. The School District is now paying for half of the successful School Resource Officer program and the Responsible Retailer program has 98% participation.

Chief Miller has constantly stressed accountability -- while empowering his officers to do their jobs. Again, the results are exemplary. Only 1.5% of arrests involve the use of force and 99% of them have been handled within policy since he took over as chief. Resident satisfaction with our Police is up 5% since 2005 and citizen complaints are down 23%.

During tough economic times, Chief Miller has relentlessly focused on delivering "what matters most." The department's reputation for innovative use of technology led Motorola to pilot its latest generation of dispatching computer software in Ventura, generating national attention and delivering hundreds of thousands of dollars of value for our system behind the purchase price.

Chief Miller has been a vocal and tireless advocate for additional crime fighting resources, especially new officers. He is often quoted for noting that with limited resources, "we can do anything, we just can't do everything." Two years ago, he was successful in adding six additional officers to the force along with funding for Downtown foot patrol. But the national recession has forced the City to cut $11 million to balance this year's budget. Continuing the commitment to funding those additional officer positions now depends on whether voters approve Measure A on the November ballot.

What's even more unusual about Chief Miller is his commitment to teamwork across City departments. The Police Department has worked closely with the Public Works Department to eradicate graffiti. Arrests for graffiti vandalism are up 1500% on his watch -- and convictions have resulted in thousands of dollars in restitution fines assessed against irresponsible parents of juvenile lawbreakers.

Chief Miller has distinguished himself as well by his insistence that you can't arrest your way out of a crime problem. He's an eloquent advocate for preventing crime and working with our schools, non-profits, neighborhoods, churches and families to build respect for the law and steer young people toward positive outcomes.

While Pat Miller is known locally for his deep commitment to Ventura and the Ventura Police Department, he is highly sought after nationally as one of America's top experts on homeland security. He serves on the Homeland Security Advisory Council in Washington D.C. which put together a policy paper in 2008 for the next president. Chief Miller met then President-elect Barack Obama while briefing Janet Napolitano, Obama's choice for Homeland Security Secretary.

Chief Miller holds an MPA in Public Administration from Pepperdine University and another master's degree in Homeland Security Leadership Development from the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey. He's also a graduate of the California Command College. He is a member of the California Police Chief’s Association, California Narcotics Officers Association, National Tactical Officers Association, California Association of Tactical Officers, and California Peace Officers Association.

In 2003, Chief Miller received the California Peace Officers Association’s Award of Distinction for his work in bringing the Crisis Intervention Team Program to Ventura. Every officer on the street undergoes 40 hours of training in handling suspects with mental illness or under mental stress designed to protect their lives -- and the lives of police officers and the public. This common sense approach has been widely copied by other police agencies.

Chief Miller retires after 34 years in law enforcement on Christmas Day. It's a fitting milestone -- for years, he's followed departmental tradition as Assistant Chief and Chief in taking the wheel of a patrol car on the Christmas shift so young officers can spend the holiday with their families. This will be the first Christmas in years that Pat can spend with his wife, children and grandchildren.

He leaves an enviable legacy -- one that his successor is committed to build on.

Local victory: Ban on dispensaries upheld

2009-10-06T08:14:00.000-07:00

Advocates of medical marijuana (and marijuana legalization) argue that California's vaguely worded Proposition 215 trumps Federal law that bans the sale, possession and use of the drug. They may be right on the overall public policy merits of their case -- the "war on drugs" may never be winnable. But from a constitutional standpoint, it's a weak case.

Without irony, however, marijuana advocates reverse course when they insist that local land use authority is trumped by their interpretation of Proposition 215. Although the initiative approved by California voters in 1996 aimed to "encourage the federal and state governments to implement a plan to provide for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need of marijuana," it was silent on the issue of local land use regulations.

The result is a legal morass. Under Federal law, marijuana remains an illegal drug. Under State law, there is a narrow provision for "seriously ill Californians" and their "primary caregivers" to possess or grow marijuana for "medical purposes" with a "recommendation from a physician." According to the State Attorney General's office, profit-making "medical marijuana dispensaries" are illegal under both Federal and State law. Only non-profit "co-ops" organized by medical marijuana patients and their "primary caregivers" are authorized to distribute the drug. Local governments are then left with the murky challenge of applying these distinctions to local land use regulations.

Cities have taken widely divergent approaches. Oakland tightly regulated a handful of marijuana "co-operatives" that distribute the drug. Voters there recently approved a big tax hike on the "non-profit" businesses that will generate hundreds of thousands in local revenue. Los Angeles allowed nearly 200 "medical marijuana dispensaries" to open their doors before passing a law banning them. The measure left open a loophole that allowed hundreds more to open, however. L.A. is now enmeshed in public hearings and lawsuits in an effort to shut them down. Many other cities simply outlawed them altogether.

Not surprisingly, lawyers follow in the wake of the financial bonanza opened up by the growing "gray market" in selling a formerly illegal drug. Lawsuits are cropping up across the state. In Claremont, city authorities ended up in court for seeking to shut down a marijuana dispensary operating in violation of local law. The trial court ruled in favor of the city and on appeal last month, that decision was upheld.

Claremont City Attorney Sonia Carvalho hailed the ruling. "Obviously we're pleased with the decision," she told the local press. "We're also pleased the court of appeals has made clear once and for all the (medical marijuana) compassionate use act Advertisement does not pre-empt the city's local land-use powers. As this case makes clear, the law does not prevent the city's ability to regulate or prohibit dispensaries."

Whether cities should do so, of course, is the subject of emotional political debate. In Ventura, the City Council chose a careful middle route. A moratorium has been enacted to give the community time to thoroughly examine the complex challenge of regulating "the safe and affordable distribution" of "medical marijuana" called for in Proposition 215. The Council unanimously adopted a motion by Councilmember Ed Summers to prohibit siting of medical marijuana dispensaries in Ventura "pending further study and experience in other communities, and to return with potential language for land use regulations for bona fide 'cooperatives.'" Mayor Christy Weir and Councilmember Jim Monahan expressed strong misgivings about allowing any local marijuana distribution, but joined in the consensus to at least explore the 'coop' alternative.

That leaves two daunting challenges over the year the moratorium is expected to run.

First, navigating the polarized (and sometimes schizophrenic)attitudes about drugs amongst Venturans (and Californians -- and Americans.) On the libertarian fringe are those who argue that marijuana should simply be legalized and taxed like alcohol. On the other end of the spectrum are those who argue its widespread availability will unleash a wave of social and community ills.

Second, local regulations must not only be crafted -- they eventually must be enforced. The most well-intentioned rules allowing "bona fide 'cooperative'" could be trampled by the money lure of catering to consumer demand for the drug. We know from the tempest stirred up by "pro-active" enforcement of rules against illegal and unpermitted living units that making rules is often easier than applying them.

But while the middle way is a challenging one that infuriates advocates on both sides of this emotional issue, it is probably the right fit for Ventura. After all, voters, including the ones in Ventura, have spoken through 215 for "compassionate use" of "medical marijuana." An outright ban disenfranchises that sentiment. But few want to open the door to a gold rush of profiteers with no regard for the impacts on local neighborhoods and kids.

This is an important test for forging public policy at the local level. As elections loom, it's another one of the long list of topics that the next Council will need to deal thoughtfully with in the year ahead.

Grow your own

2009-10-05T09:30:00.000-07:00

UPDATE: A hundred residents attended the workshop and learned practical tips about how to turn yard and kitchen waste into garden gold!

When it comes to saving water and recycling trash, Ventura residents rank among the best in California. Despite growing by almost a third, we use less water today than the community did back in the mid-Seventies. And in response to the need to keep waste out of the landfill, Ventura diverts 70% of our trash through recycling, composting and waste reduction programs.

Part of this conservation ethic means changes to our landscapes at home. Less green lawns and more green vegetables. Less pesticide and more organic ways to naturally control pests. And composting both garden clippings and kitchen waste to turn into rich soil.

This Saturday, October 10, the City is hosting a "Composting and Gardening Workshop" at Green Thumb Nursery at 1899 S. Victoria. The first hour is a hands on demonstration of how to compost -- including "vermiculture" (putting worms to work for you.) There is a sale on compost and worm bins for more than half off, plus refreshments and prizes.

The second hour gives planting tips for the fall.

I decided to give composting another try after seeing Daryl Wagar demonstration at last year's Summerfest. I started at Lowe's looking for a compost bin, but they were out. I found one at Green Thumb and I invested in a small plastic container from Vons for the kitchen. I bulked up with old bark from our low-water front yard and soon had rich, dark soil in abundance (except to sift out the bark I have to shake it through one of those plastic mesh flats that plants come in.)

This spring/summer, we had quite the harvest from that soil. A big crop of heirloom tomatoes (still coming); green beans; eggplant; pumpkins; squash; carrots; potatoes; basil; mint; and rosemary. The corn and broccoli were the only disappointments. I also used the soil to plant fig, pomegranate, grapefruit and orange trees. It also came in handy on the periodic transplants and replacements of plants in the front (which was featured in Sunset Magazine here.) Check out Surfrider Foundation's "Ocean-friendly gardens" suggestions here.

Hope to see you at Green Thumb. I'm thinking about getting worms . . .

Cemetery Park: A Councilmember responds

2009-10-01T08:19:00.000-07:00

Few issues have drawn as much ire on both sides as what to do about Cemetery Memorial Park in Midtown. For one camp, anything short of restoration of the old cemetery is an immoral insult to the 3,000 departed still buried there. For another group, the plan recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission to better memorialize the park's unique history symbolized over-the-top government excess.

As with so many issues in our "soundbite" democracy, judgments are made and lines are drawn on the basis of a newspaper headline or an email blast. Recently Councilmember Morehouse received a sarcastic query from a constituent on the topic of Cemetery Park (I've shortened the name since the resident may not wish to be publicly identified.)

Dear Council member Morehouse,

I was sorry to miss the meeting where you supported a 4 - 6 million dollar renovation of Cemetery Park. I would have been fascinated to hear why you think it would be appropriate to spend that much money on a perfectly fine park while our children are having music, art and other school programs cut. The world has truly gone mad when the dead get more than the living.

"K"

Few elected officials take the job of dialogue with their constituents as seriously as Councilmember Carl Morehouse. He obviously took care in response:

"K":

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and asking a question. Let me address both if I may.

First, with regard to issue of school programs getting cut and substituting City of Ventura capital funds to take care of those things; the answer is that this is beyond comparing apples and oranges. It’s more like comparing apples and watermelons.

The City of Ventura’s tax dollars are completely and thoroughly separate from the Ventura Unified School Districts funds. So nothing in our budget has any impact on the schools and vice-versa. That’s why there is a separate school board election, as there is this fall, and those people are completely separate from the City Council. Personally, I happen to agree with you that society seems to have its priorities slightly off-kilter when so many important programs -- such as music and arts and other things that help make our children more well-rounded citizens of our community – are being squeezed out of school curriculums. However, as a City Councilmember, I have no say in that. For that, please speak to your elected School Board members.

Now, with regard to my vote on Cemetery park. I don’t know if you actually watched the meeting that night either via television or web-cast, or if you simply read the headlines in the paper. If you did watch, you would know exactly what I did and why I did it.

To begin with, you did not have the pleasure of sitting in the Mayor’s seat, as I did, the night the Council chambers were filled with dozens of angry, frustrated descendents of those buried in Cemetery Park. Let me tell you, it was no fun. Those people were extremely angry about how their ancestors’ remains were being treated and they were being egged on by one individual that I contend is a carpetbagger with a single agenda and who is a Johnny-come-lately to Ventura. Still, that did not dismiss the anger and frustration of that crowd.

As a result of that group’s contention that the City somehow or another had a moral obligation to do something about those individuals still interred in Cemetery Park, the Council set a process in motion. To that end, the Council set aside some funds to develop a process, dedicate staff time and to hire a consultant who had expertise in these kinds of matters to bring us back a way to recognize Ventura’s pioneers who are buried there, but to not return it to a full fledged cemetery. (Which the outside carpetbagger contends that we must under State and Federal law.) Therefore, we set out to do that. While the Council did set a limit on the amount we would spend on the consulting firm (which did come out of our General Fund), we set no other parameters on the outcome of the product. We decided that we would let the experts figure that out with the input they got during the public meetings.

Sadly, there was a fair amount of time between the initial public meetings and when the consultants got back to the City’s Parks and Recreation Commission for the final product. And by that time, a fairly extensive plan had been developed. However, in keeping with the process, our Parks & Recreation Commission had a couple of public meetings and took testimony on the consultants’ proposal. At the end of the process, the Commission brought forward their recommendation to the Council. (Remember, the Commissioners are simply appointed citizens, like yourself, who get paid nothing to put in their time and provide guidance to the Council. They are merely your neighbors and fellow citizens.) Their recommendation was to approve the plan as presented and to consider the possibility of phasing it in over time. Unfortunately, the night of the Council hearing, most of the crowd who had appeared angrily in front of me the night I was Mayor did not show up, and supporters of the “leave it as it is” contingent did appear.

As I am a strong believer in process – and we had one from the get go that gave all members of the community a chance to weigh in before the consultants ever did their thing – and as the Parks and Recreation Commissioners are merely unpaid citizens doing their best to advise the Council, I chose to listen to what the Commissioners brought forward. And, quite honestly, while I did not appreciate sitting in the hot seat the night the angry descendents were yelling at me and threatening me, they did have a point about how that area has been treated over time. With that sensitivity in mind, I believed then, as I do now, that the Council could have at least received the plan as well thought out and accepted it as a potential blueprint for sometime well in the future, if the City ever had additional capital funds, to maybe phase in over time. I CERTAINLY NEVER HAD ANY INTENTION OF SPENDING $4-6 MILLION RIGHT NOW OF CAPITAL MONIES WE DON’T HAVE ON FIXING UP CEMETERY PARK. If that’s how you interpreted my action, you are, I’m afraid, way off the mark.

By the same token, for those who demanded that it be fully returned as a cemetery with full up-right gravestones and a surrounding black, gated wrought iron fence, I told them to forget it. That train had left the station in the 1960’s when the Council of that time took over the property from the Catholic Church, who had, basically, abandoned it.

So, while there are some who prefer not to be aware that they are walking on dead people while playing Frisbee or walking their dogs, I do believe that we ought to do a better job of recognizing those dead other than just putting up a small wall with a little plaque on it saying basically “Oh, by the way, there are dead people under your feet here”. (Okay, I’m being a bit sarcastic here, but in some ways that’s what the final Council’s decision was.) To that end, I thought the final proposal brought forward by the consultants met the purpose the Council initially directed quite nicely and it could have, maybe someday, been phased in over time. But in no way did I ever envision spending $4-6 million right today to build some kind of elaborate park. That WOULD have been nuts.

Now, one more thing I’d like to point out. Since you seemed to have had a problem distinguishing between the City’s funds and the School District’s funds, would you do me a favor? I have developed two pieces that occasionally run on Cable Channel 6, CAPS TV. However, they have also placed these on their website, so you can watch them at your leisure instead of trying to find them on the TV. Most people who have initially come to me with criticisms, like yourself, have returned to me after viewing them and thanked me for better explaining the tax system to them. And for that I am thankful. I’m not sure I’ll change your mind about anything, but it might aid you with better understanding where your tax dollars go. So, if you are at all interested, please do the following. Go to: capstv.org, then click on Streaming Media on their home page. On the next page you’ll find “Member’s Projects” and you’ll find my two pieces listed. I would suggest you watch them in order. The first is about a half and hour. The second about 12 minutes. Hopefully, you’ll find them both beneficial.

Thank you, again, for sharing your thoughts. I hope you now better understand where I was coming from. And thanks for caring!

Councilmember Carl Morehouse

Don't know what K.'s reaction will be. But in a time when too much of public debate seems to involve talking only to people who agree with you and shouting at those who don't, Councilmember Morehouse's thoughtful response stands out as a better way.

UPDATE: Councilmember Morehouse received this response from "K" to his explanation:

Dear Carl,

Thank you for the very thoughtful reply. You are right, I wasn't there
and so was very interested to hear your thoughts. I realize that VUSD
funds are separate from City funds - I was just making a general point
of how our tax dollars are spent. Whether the taxes go to one thing or
another, they are still taken out of my pocket.

I am angry because it seems that every few years we spend time, energy
and money on surveys and such over the fate of a park that really is
perfect. I have never seen any disrespect of the graves. Well
remembered are those whose graves are visited daily. Our time and money
could be better spent.

Thank you very much for your reply,

K.

Someone to turn to . . . Ventura's new ombudsman

2009-09-29T15:30:00.000-07:00

It isn't easy in this economic climate for businesses to thrive. On top of everything else, sometimes it is City rules and regulations that can be a hindrance. While most city rules and regulations are there for a reason, how they are interpreted and enforced can make a huge difference -- including whether a business opens its doors, closes its doors or moves to another community.

At the Ventura Economic Summit in May, participants came up with dozens of suggestions and recommendations to foster local prosperity. One of them was to appoint a city "ombudsman," a real person who could lend a sympathetic ear, help direct businesses down the right path and occasionally intervene to untangle red tape (in Sweden, every government has an "ombudsman" who has the power to investigate complaints and correct errors -- in America, the word has come to mean something a little different -- someone who can be a helpful guide and/or ally in navigating bureaucratic challenges.)

In August, the City Council unanimously approved appointing an "ombudsman" for Ventura to help businesses start, stay and grow. In our tight economic times, I was directed to find a way to do this within our budget. Yesterday, I appointed Alex Herrera to be this new role.

I thought hard about what kind of person would best fit the job. Someone from the private sector might bring a fresh perspective and be a little more understanding of the business point of view. On the other hand, someone with public sector experience might better know the ropes and be more effective in coming up with workable solutions. I selected Alex Herrera because he brings both.

Alex grew up in a family of entrepreneurs and started out in the private sector. But he also has ten years experience working for the City of Ventura, often directly with businesses in his most recent role in our Economic Development Division. He's also a perennial optimist who enjoys tackling problems and "getting to yes."

He will report directly to me (while continuing to work part-time in Economic Development.) He will have the authority to work with every department and he intends to be pro-active and visible in offering his services. You can reach him at aherrera@ci.ventura.ca.us or 805 654-7740.

The spirit of the Economic Summit continues to guide our efforts to promote a prosperous Ventura. For more on our partnership with businesses and the community to retain and attract high-value jobs and investment, see the City's website.

The Councilmember who first proposed the Economic Summit was Ed Summers, chair of the City Council Economic Development Committee. He welcomed Herrera's appointment as "indicative of the City's more positive approach to making business happen in Ventura, and a very proactive step in follow-up from the Economic Summit. We look forward to the results the position will yield."

Don't stop thinking about tomorrow . . .

2009-09-28T10:08:00.000-07:00

There seems to be some gathering critical mass around preserving and protecting our future quality of life and standard of living here in Ventura County. I blogged about the series of community workshops finishing up this week, co-sponsored by the Ventura County Civic Alliance and public planning agencies. Marie Lakin attended one and participated in a mapping exercise to chart future growth. Attendees start with a map of current communities and asked to devise a way to allow for expected population growth in the next twenty-five years:

"Our group decided to invest in more mass transit opportunities with town centers situated near transit stations. These areas would encompass living, shopping and high-wage centers in one spot. To do this we had to trade in most of our single-family home tokens, a decision that didn't sit well with everyone in the group. We didn't add major highways, but added connector roads instead to alleviate congestion on major thoroughfares and freeways." (More of her experiences on Marie's blog.)

Then last week, SOAR (the organization behind the County's boundaries that require public vote on conversion of agricultural land to other uses) co-sponsored a morning discussion of regional planning out at Cal State Channel Islands. Nearly 200 community leaders and activists turned up to hear why the time is now for Ventura County's ten cities should work together to plan the future.

Hasan Irkhata, the Executive Director of the Southern California Association of Governments, predicted that over the next twenty-five years, Ventura County's population is projected to grow by another 200,000 to nearly a million people. While many shudder at that estimate, Irkhata pointed out that SCAG's conservative numbers have always been generally exceeded by actual growth in Southern California. Irkhata, Marsha Brown from the State Attorney General's office and Karen Schmidt of SOAR outlined the converging State planning and environmental laws (and lawsuits) that mean that if we don't work together to plan Southern California's future, others may step in and do it for us. Even more ominously, they made the case for why simply going down the road we are currently on is unsustainable and unaffordable. As I noted in my remarks, the one thing Ventura County residents agree on is that they don't want to end up like the San Fernando Valley, a sprawling sea of faceless development. (For more on the SOAR forum, see Kathleen Wilson's story in the Ventura County Star and David Comden's Ventura County Reporter blog.)

A key question remains: who will lead such an ambitious effort to involve thousands of citizens in a genuine visioning of our future? The Ventura County Transportation Agency has always been focused on mobility -- and our future involves far more than roads and transit. The Ventura County Council of Governments is made up of elected officials from all 10 cities and the county, but hasn't demonstrated much clout in the past. The Ventura County Civic Alliance is comprised of thoughtful community, environmental and business leaders, but is essentially a volunteer effort.

The realistic answer seems to be: all of the above and more. This is an opportunity for fresh leadership to bring people together around things everyone can agree on: a prosperous local economy, protecting the environment and providing quality housing for a growing population. Others regions have done it -- now it's our turn. Participants at last week's forum and in the series of workshops are taking the first step.

The "Glocal" economy

2009-09-22T13:55:00.000-07:00

Like the beer commercials where one side shouted, "Tastes Great!" and the other "Less Filling!" -- most political "debates" exclude agreement. So it is with the debate between "Go Global!" and "Buy Local."

The Global Economy is not going to go away. For the last five hundred years, world trade has been growing and it isn't going to go away. But it isn't going to continue growing at the blistering (and reckless rate) of the past decade.

That provides an opportunity for local business, local products and local investment. For a while, cheap energy made it possible to hunt out cheap labor and undervalued raw materials almost anywhere on the planet. But that unsustainable binge is now in the hangover stage -- and we are all making resolutions to be a little more responsible about what we consume.

The obvious centerpiece of this is food. Kids growing up in America are the first generation in history not to know there is such a thing as seasons. Fresh fruits and vegetables are now available year-round by air freight. But it isn't just the calendar that's been conquered -- on a day when you can get fresh strawberries from Oxnard at our local Farmer's Market, if you go to Vons, they've been shipped nearly 400 miles from the Monterey Peninsula. For a huge supermarket chain like Safeway (which owns Vons), it's cheaper to buy in huge quantities for all stores nationwide than to try to look for local (or even regional) sources for your stores. Of course, the real costs of shipping fruit you pop in your mouth four hundred miles are missing from Safeway's bottom line. These include loss of freshness, dependence on foreign oil, costly road repairs, increased carbon emissions and air pollution, not to mention the missed opportunity of our dollars going to local farmers and distributors, who in turn spend that money in the local economy, enriching us all. For a long time, global economies of scale trumped both the shipping costs and the insidious toll on our health, environment and local economies.

So comes the movement to "eat local!" for the health, environmental and economic benefits. Will Ventura consumers stop buying Chilean apples in the summer? Probably not entirely. But if they start eating more Fillmore oranges instead, we might see the beginnings of a fundamental rebalancing of where our consumer dollars go.

It's a hard sell to ask today's stretched consumers to pay more for local product or to patronize local businesses. Some do, otherwise the lady that sells little $12 bottles of olive oil at the Ventura Farmer's Market would be out of business. But while such "luxury" (or "quality") choices wouldn't be nearly as expensive if two things changed: if the hidden costs of sending olive oil around the world were reflected in the price at the supermarket and if more local consumers bought locally, giving local businesses more of the benefits of "economy of scale." To stick with the olive oil lady -- her costs of driving her truck from her farm and renting a booth are the same whether she sells ten bottles or 100. While those aren't her only costs, the principle holds that if she sold 100 instead of 10 each Saturday, she could charge less than $12 a bottle. And the lower the price, the easier it would be for her to sell more . . . and so on.

Will those things change? The price of energy will -- as the global economy recovers, rising demand will send prices back skyward. The price of carbon emissions may also be on the rise if the world's squabbling nations find a shared path to curb the rise in global temperatures. The big question is: will consumers change? Will we start shifting our dollars away from (currently) cheap products from far away toward more locally sourced ones? Will we spend more money in locally-owned businesses -- and less in chain stores or online? That is a harder question.

What do you think?

10 month old baby alone in a motel room at 2 a.m.

2009-09-19T10:55:00.000-07:00

It was 2:00 am on Wednesday morning when Ventura PD officers were dispatched to the Mission Bell Motel on Main, in response to a 911 call about a domestic disturbance. When our officers arrived, there was no response when they knocked on the unit door, but they could hear an infant crying inside the room. When they gained entry, the officers discovered a ten-month-old infant abandoned and crawling around inside the motel room.

It wasn't until thirty minutes later that the 24 year-old mother, a Las Vegas resident, was located walking near the motel.

She was arrested for abandoning the child and booked at Ventura County Jail.

It's hard to imagine mitigating circumstances for leaving a baby alone in a motel room in the middle of the night for an extended period of time. But it is up to the justice system to sort through the tragic circumstances that surround an incident like this, not city managers or readers of blogs and newspapers.

Yet I can't help but reflect on the job of cops.

Villify them, glamorize them -- call them heroes or call them names, practically everyone has an opinion. All too many of those views either seem to come from watching television or personal opinions about how someone felt the last time they were pulled over for a traffic ticket.

But who else goes out at 2 in the morning and ends up having to deal with situations like this?

Police officers are human beings. Yes, they have a job to do. In cases like this, it means taking charge of a 10 month old, tracking down the missing parent(s), making sense of the conflicting stories that come spilling out and making often agonizing judgment calls about whether laws have been broken and how to enforce them, knowing those decisions will inevitably be second-guessed by others who are sleeping in their beds at 2 a.m.

Still, no matter how experienced or trained they are, police officers can't help but be affected by situations like this. Many are parents themselves. After finishing their shift, they go home and try to put the emotions aside and live a normal life. But no one can do a job like that for years on end and not have it take a toll.

It's a tough job -- and someone has to do it. But the next time I hear some loud mouth generalizing about cops and what a lousy job they do -- I'll be thinking about a ten month old baby alone in a hotel room at 2 a.m. And thinking about what a lousy job we give to some of the most caring and courageous people I know.

"Positive, but disappointing growth for years to come"

2009-09-15T07:08:00.000-07:00

Dr. Alice Rivlin was the last Director of Management and Budget to have balanced the Federal Budget, so her opinions come highly regarded. The former Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve spoke at this morning's general session of the ICMA conference here in Montreal.

She traced, with the benefits of hindsight, the now familiar sources of the global economic reckoning from outright greed and corruption to the larger problem of "overborrowing and overspending." On that foundation, she discounted the chances of a second dip ("possible, but not very likely") and inflation ("inflation happens when demand is high and the labor market is tight -- we should be so lucky.") But she ruefully acknowledged that "if I'm right, you are going to have continuing tough times" because the prospects are for "positive, but disappointing growth for several years to come."

"It's not going to be good for shopping centers, commercial property and new housing," she predicted, especially in regions (and at the edge of regions) where too much suburban sprawl occurred in the last boom. Consumers are simply tapped out and will need to pay down debt before they can resume spending.

To Rivlin, the greatest threats ahead are "looming Federal budget deficits" that are "the product of making too generous promises combined with uncontrolled per capita costs on medical care." This mismatch between our appetite and our ability to pay for it forces us to continue to borrow from other countries, particularly China and Japan. "We can't go on doing that," she noted dryly. "We're going to have to cut entitlement spending and raise taxes." Both are politically difficult, but necessary for the two parties to compromise on.

Turning attention to local government, she joked, "If you wanted an easy job, you wouldn't have gone into this line of work." Because local government revenues will recover even more slowly than the sluggish economy, there will continue to be a clash between citizen expectations and willingness to pay. The only bright side of this squeeze will be that it will be easier to win political backing for difficult, but overdue, efficiencies. There will simply be "no choice" about making even painful changes.

That certainly resonated with our challenges in Ventura. Having cut $11 million from this year's budget, we will either have to live with reduced services or pay more for years to come. The "recovery" predicted for the end of the year simply won't come strongly or quickly enough. "Living within your means" is not easy. But the alternative of "overborrowing" to finance "overspending" has been spectacularly discredited at both the Federal and State levels. We must and will take a different, more sustainable, route.

Thriving in the global economy -- cities learning from each other

2009-09-14T19:42:00.000-07:00

"The bottom line is not dictated by the economy, it is determined by our need for clean water, clean air and healthy food from soil," declared Dr. David Suzuki, the Canadian scientist, environmentalist and award-winning broadcaster who opened today's session of the International City/County Managers Association annual conference in Montreal.

The theme of this year's conference is "Thriving in the Global Economy." Suzuki emphasized that economic sustainability derives from environmental sustainability. He noted that both "economy" and "ecology" come from the same Greek word for "household." The management of our household (economy) and the study of our household (ecology) are both rooted in our home: planet earth.

Suzuki traced the evolution of life beginning 4 billion years ago. "If I could push a button and transport us back to that time, we could not survive beyond a few minutes because the atmosphere before plants was filled with carbon dioxide." It was only the spread of plant life around the planet that eventually infused oxygen to the level that animals like us can survive.

Modern humans are just 150,000 years ago -- and would not have been particularly impressive in our debut. "We were the scattered clusters of naked apes in a world teeming with animal life, including woolly mammoths and giant sloths." He attributed our explosion into planetary dominance to the size of our brain -- and our ability to envision a future. He argued that the advantage of foresight is exactly what we are neglecting today as disturbing environmental trends send warnings about danger ahead.

The talk set the tone for three days of speakers, workshops and committee meetings that brings more than 2000 city managers and other public professionals together to compare notes, sharpen their skills and focus their attention on common problems. I'm here to learn. I also serve on the organization's "Sustainable Communities Advisory Committee" and on the Editorial Advisory Board for ICMA Press, which publishes a wide range of books, reports and training materials as well as Public Management Magazine. Today I hosted a roundtable session on Community Design that included participants from the U.S., Canada and New Zealand and tomorrow I will be doing the same for a discussion of "social media" -- like blogs, Facebook and Twitter and how these emerging technologies reshape how local government communicates with our citizens.

In these tight fiscal times, I'm conscious of the expense of this kind of training experience -- and wonder whether these kinds of conferences may be as endangered as the daily newspaper in the driveway. Attendance is down significantly this year. It appears to be less due to fewer cities participating than to fewer participants from each city. City Managers in year's past often brought potential leaders in their organizations to expose them to the wide range of issues facing cities large and small. More of us are taking advantage of video conferences, teleconferences and online training to keep current in our field and sharpen our skills. Adjusting to this trend, this was the first year that many of the annual conference's sessions were webcast.

There is also the challenge of time away from work and family -- although in the age of email on smart phones, work is frequently right there in your pocket. We're spending much less on training and conferences -- and economizing in small ways. I skipped the conference hotels and found a less expensive option a 15 minute walk from the conference center.

Yet the opportunity to hear, meet and interact with some of the most creative and successful professionals in the field of local government is still worthwhile. With more than 3 billion people now living in cities around the planet, it turns out we face common problems even if how we tackle them is vastly different. Learning from each other is part of tackling those challenges -- and I'm looking forward to applying what I've learned.

Preparing for Ventura County's future

2009-09-10T11:22:00.000-07:00

On the eve of September 11, I hope it isn't disrespectful to note that Americans are magnificent at responding to crisis. When it comes to preventing them, not so good.

Whether it is safety for Metrolink trains or the unfolding collapse of the banking system, we tend to ignore warning signs. It's only when natural or man-made disasters strike, scandals erupt or national problems grow too big to be ignored any longer that we scramble to respond.

That's one reason that auditoriums are usually pretty empty when citizens are invited to help plan for the future. Those who do come tend to be either people with a particular ax to grind or long-time civic leaders.

But when something controversial arises in their neighborhood, you can count on people suddenly coming out of the woodwork.

As the father of three kids, I know how busy people's lives are. But for everyone rushing to get the kids to the Saturday soccer game or huddled around the kitchen table helping with homework -- there is another important priority for our children's future: how we plan today for the communities they will live in twenty years from now when they have kids of their own.

Coming up later this month, a broad coalition of public agencies and the Ventura County Civic Alliance are working together to invite citizens to have a real say in planning our future land use, transportation and economic policies for the County and its ten cities.

An analysis of current plans shows that projected population growth will mean that by 2035 development might cover 20 new square miles of land, and global warming-related greenhouse gases might grow by 30 percent. The upcoming workshops will give citizens an opportunity to actively map-out where they think tomorrow’s residents might live, which areas should be kept undeveloped, where new workplaces and shopping centers might grow, and how people might travel about the County.

“There are no wrong or right answers at these meetings,” said Patti Walker, Mayor of Fillmore. "Over the next few decades it will be a challenge for all of us to maintain what we love about Ventura County while more people come. Our hope is to hear how residents would respond to this challenge.”

Based on the maps citizens make at these workshops, three computer-based simulations will be developed of what life might be like in 2035. These snapshots of the future will be the focus of a public discussion over the coming months to learn which ‘future’ residents most favor. This is all part of an effort to make a long-term, county-wide game-plan for growth that is part of an effort called the “Compact for a Sustainable Ventura County.”

There are a variety of venues at different times of the day across the County:

Ventura–September 21, 1:30 to 4:00 pm
Ventura County Government Center Multi-Purpose Room
800 S. Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009

Oxnard–September 21, 6:00 to 8:30 pm
Traductores Españoles
Pacifica High School Student Dining Area
600 East Gonzales Road
Oxnard, CA 93036

Santa Paula–September 22, 6:00 to 8:30 pm
Traductores Españoles
Santa Paula High School Cafeteria
404 North 6th Street
Santa Paula, CA 93060

Thousand Oaks–September 26, 9:00 to 11:30 am
California Lutheran University Lundring Events Center
60 West Olsen Road
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360

Simi Valley–September 28, 6:00 to 8:30 pm
Simi Valley City Hall City Council Chambers
2929 Tapo Canyon Road
Simi Valley, CA 93063

Camarillo–September 29, 6:00 to 8:30 pm
Camarillo Library
4101 Las Posas Road
Camarillo, CA 93010

The Ventura time is not ideal -- during the time when most people are working. But if the meetings around the County are well-attended, it will encourage the sponsors to schedule more to accommodate greater interest than they anticipate. I know they'd be delighted . . .

Facing the pay issue: Ventura leads

2009-09-08T17:04:00.001-07:00

Reading the on-line comment section of local stories in the Ventura County Star gives the impression that taxpayers are boiling mad about out-of-control pay and pension costs for city employees. Yet public servants who work for the City feel the public doesn't understand that Ventura city employees are generally paid less than even the average of people doing similar jobs in other cities -- and that every member of our staff took at least a 5% cut in compensation this year.

Unfortunately, the anonymous critics and the unhappy city employees haven't been talking to each other.

It is tempting to personalize the tough times we are all experiencing. It's easy to look for someone to blame, whether auto works, bankers, corporate executives or public employees. It's not surprising that taxpayers are asking questions about where their money goes.

But is public pay really out of control? Or are Ventura city employees being short-changed? In a world of soundbites and short attention spans, it's easy to spout opinions. But what are the facts?

The City Council has appointed a working group to tackle this controversial issue head on -- to sort out the facts and recommend solutions.

The "Compensation Policies Task Force" includes respected citizen leaders, the three members on the City Council Finance Committee (Neal Andrews, Ed Summers and Jim Monahan) as well as union representatives. They are working toward an October deadline to report back to the City Council.

Their first meeting was held today. The group elected retired city manager Ed McCombs as chair. Two business leaders, Randy Hinton and Bart Bluel were named co-deputy chairs.

Ventura's Chief Financial Officer, Jay Panzica, provided an overview of more than 500 pages of reports and data analyzing compensation costs, formulas and data. It's true that pension costs have risen in the past ten years -- but that's because the stock market boom a decade ago had so padded pension reserves that in 1999, the City owed nothing for it's share of employee pension costs. Looking back over thirty years gives a more balanced picture. Pension costs fluctuate as investment portfolios rise or decline -- and are lower today than they have been in the past.

Are pension benefits out of line? Since pensions are public, much has been made of the highest earnings of those who spent thirty or even forty years in public service and retired in senior positions. But keep in mind that career city employees do not participate in Social Security and rely instead on their city pensions. The actual average pension for all of Ventura's police and fire retirees is $38,131 a year. The average civilian pension is $14,391.

Few Ventura residents know that, unlike most California cities, Ventura does not offer any form of retiree medical coverage. In fact, according to a massive study done by a commission set up by Governor Schwarzenegger, these benefits are offered by 86% of the cities they surveyed. It is these kinds of expensive "extras" (and the foreclosure crisis) that drove Vallejo into bankruptcy. Despite the scare talk of some, Ventura has long lagged behind comparable cities in both pay and benefits. Ventura's current firefighter pension formula remains below that of every single other department our size or larger in the entire State of California.

All this and much more information in the task force's handbook is on-line for taxpayers to take a look for themselves here (click on the Compensation Policies Task Force 9/08/09 Meeting Materials in the lower right hand corner.)

Because they are published in the newspaper like ballplayer pay, public employee salaries and benefits will always get noticed and debated. We owe it to citizens to keep employee costs in line to deliver cost-effective services. Living within our means means shared sacrifice -- and Ventura city employees have rallied to that challenge. Effectively managing public resources is a vital part of maintaining a healthy community. The work of the task force is an accountable way for everyone to ensure that Ventura continues to lead in tackling tough issues and finding solutions.

River clean-up: A glimpse of our future

2009-09-01T13:41:00.000-07:00

It's an old cliche that young people are our future. If it's true, I think we are in good hands.

Yesterday, 600 freshman from Cal Lutheran flooded the Ventura River bottom to haul out tons of trash from litter and homeless encampments. University staff, older student team leaders, community volunteers and City staff coordinated the massive clean-up effort. Mayor Christy Weir joined the students in the dirty job of picking up and bagging garbage.

The students worked in small teams, but as they streamed out of the thick undergrowth, the magnitude of the combined effort was evident.

I spoke with a number of the students about their experience -- and came away inspired by their idealism, intelligence, good humor and common sense.

Josh from Lakewood said the squalor of the homeless camps was unlike anything he'd ever encountered. "It makes quite an impression," he told me. "It makes you understand and appreciate how lucky we are."

The students encountered heat, snakes, mud and various unmentionables, but came away with an upbeat attitude. One team leader asked a student whether he thought he'd made a difference. "No, all by myself I don't think the litter I cleared changes the world," he replied. "But I hope that all of us working together -- and I hope being inspired to do more -- we've done something worthwhile."

Especially in the context of building long-term partnerships. Last year, Cal Lutheran came up with the idea of having their new students plunge into community service in a tangible and memorable way. Now it is growing into an annual tradition. No one knows how many lives will ultimately be changed by the experience. But it is clear that these young people welcome the opportunity for the learning, the bonding and the contribution that comes from community service.

At the end of the long day, as the students gathered on the Ventura beach to reflect on their experience, a team leader asked, "Which is a more valuable lesson -- talking about social issues in class or volunteering to do something about it?"

I was impressed by the answer offered by a thoughtful young man who answered, "You need both. We need to understand the larger picture that we can gain in school and to be personally involved the way we were today. Both reinforce our understanding how the world is -- and how it can be."

Indeed. I'm sure Cal Lutheran feels that they have accepted some very special students for this year's freshman class. Yesterday demonstrated how right they are.

Food, Glorious Food: Can we be leaner and greener?

2009-08-31T09:45:00.000-07:00

We all eat, yet what we eat and where it comes from has changed drastically in the past generation.

Some changes are for the better, some much worse.

We have more varied diet options, with fresh food available from across the planet. We also have lots more heavily processed and modified "food." The overall result is that Americans are heavier -- and heavily reliant on a food industry that exacts a serious toll on our environment.

As one of the remaining California counties with vibrant local agriculture, Venturans have the opportunity to make conscious choices that could emphasize the positive changes and begin to reverse the negative ones.

This Friday, September 4, a wide range of active Venturans are gathering at City Hall to organize for a "leaner and greener" Ventura covering a wide range of related issues:

Promote children's health through better diets and exercise
Improve workplace wellness
Build and rebuild walkable, bikeable neighborhoods
Encourage individuals and groups to establish gardens; access to healthy local food; and support local agriculture
Help businesses and families go green

Cos-sponsored by the Ventura Unified School District, VC LEAN (the countywide coalition for healthy, active diet and life) and the City, the event runs from 9 AM to noon. It will be kicked off by welcoming remarks by School Board President Mary Haffner and Mayor Christy Weir. Charlotte Dickson of the California Center for Public Health Advocacy will outline what other communities are doing on this issue and then participants will break up to tackle specific issues and how to coordinate what is already happening with what else should be happening.

A healthy light lunch follows concludes the event. It will be catered by Main Course California, a healthy new restaurant and catering business. Donation for the lunch is just $10.

Back in 2005, Ventura embraced health and active living in the General Plan unanimously adopted by the City Council. Our farmer's markets, agriculture preservation policies, staff wellness efforts and active recreation programs all support this important strategic vision. But stronger community partnerships could obviously accomplish much more -- so Friday's session is a great opportunity to work together for a "leaner and greener Ventura."

RSVP to asimmons@cityofventura.net if you'd like to come. The meeting will be held in the Community Meeting Room at City Hall, 501 Poli Street.

Killed in the line of duty

2009-08-25T13:00:00.000-07:00

Wednesday is the twenty-five year anniversary of the death of Ventura's K9 Sonny (pronounced “Sony”) who was shot in the line of duty on August 26, 1984.

Specially-trained police dogs are a key part of Ventura's law enforcement team. "They do things that planes or helicopters can't do," marvels Sgt. Jack Richard, whose two decades of experience with K-9 police dogs has made him a statewide expert. He tells the story of using seven officers to hold a square mile perimeter to isolate a dangerous suspect. "It would have taken 25 additional officers to search an area that large, but with a single dog, the suspect was located hiding in a lemon tree invisible from the ground or the air." The suspect tried kicking the dog. Bad move. He ended up being pulled out of the tree by his foot.

But clearing buildings and pursuing fleeing criminals aren't the only useful roles for the K-9s. Their sense of smell so far exceeds humans that they are also invaluable at locating lost kids and criminal evidence. "I've seen a dog find a knife in a strawberry field," Richards recalls. "Their training means a kid can come up and pet them -- and on command a moment later they can outrun and bring down a dangerous criminal."

They also fiercely protect their officer partners as Sonny did 25 years ago. Dogs are not normally used against armed suspects unless officers have the advantage of surprise. In this case, Sonny was deployed to subdue the suspect from behind, but his killer wheeled and shot Sonny twice in the head.

Sonny's partner was Officer Vern Alstot, who is now a Battalion Chief with the Ventura Fire Department. The bond between K-9s and their police officer counterparts is extraordinarily close. The dog and human not only work together, they live together and the devotion of K-9 dogs is legendary. “Even after twenty-five years it is still hard for me to appropriately describe the connection an officer develops with their canine partner," Alstot comments. "I will never forget his dedication and loyalty."

While the suspect was later convicted of the crime he was being pursued for committing, he was not charged with the death of the K-9. As a result of this incident in 1985 California State Senator Robert Presley successfully introduced an amendment to Section 600 of the California State Penal Code (PC), which made the killing of any police animal a felony.

In tribute to Sonny's service and sacrifice, Ventura patrol cars will be displaying a sticker commemorating the anniversary of his loss. His name is also scheduled to be added to the "Faithful Partners" memorial at the University of California Davis, which honors California police canines killed in the line of duty.

600 active young people making a difference

2009-08-24T11:46:00.000-07:00

For the second year in a row, the entire incoming freshman class at California Lutheran University will be spending a day cleaning up the Ventura River bottom. Last year's clean-up removed more than five tons of trash from the Ventura River bottom.

In tough economic times, government services have been reduced. Ventura cut $11 million to balance this year's budget. But that doesn't mean that we can't be creative and work together for a better community.

On Monday, August 31, 600 students from will join forces with the City's Volunteer Ventura! and work alongside staff from the Community Services, Public Works/Environmental Services, Police, and Fire departments for the City's largest annual volunteer project. Cal Lutheran president Chris Kimball, along with staff, faculty and cabinet members, will participate in the event.

Student volunteers, City staff, and community members will begin work along the beach at the Ventura River mouth and spread out north along the riverbed to remove mountains of trash left behind by homeless encampments.

This event will reduce the waste washed into the ocean during the rainy winter months, while raising students' awareness of the social issues surrounding homelessness and its impact on the natural environment. Under new environmental regulatory requirements, the City of Ventura could be fined as much as $25,000 per day if trash levels exceed already stringent standards.

Stine Odegard, CLU's Coordinator for Community Service, declared, "We believe that getting incoming students to help with the river clean-up in their first few days on campus is a great way to introduce them to CLU's commitment to service and justice and to connect them to the local community in a meaningful way."

The partnership extends well beyond Cal Lutheran and the City of Ventura. Local waste disposal company E.J. Harrison, Home Depot, the Water Store, the Salvation Army, Goodwill Industries, and Costco in Westlake provided services, donations and financial support to make the clean-up a success.

Last week, media around the State covered a push by business leaders to promote constructive Economic Development in California. Zoe Taylor, President/CEO of the Ventura Chamber was prominently featured, telling the story of how business, community and environmental leaders came together through our Economic Summit to build consensus and take united action. She urged California to pursue a similar approach.

"Partnerships" is more than a buzzword. Working together works. Carl Guardino, President of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, clearly spells out the formula for community success. "People often ask us how we've been able, in the face of intense competition, to keep Silicon Valley a world leader in technology. It's simple. Communities and regions that succeed are the ones that spend at least 80% of their time on achieving the 80% of the goals on which they agree. Communities that fail spend 80% of their time bickering about the 20% of their goals where they disagree. Nothing gets done and everyone blames everyone else. Shared success is the only way to go in today's world."

It's election time in Ventura, with 15 candidates for City Council and three ballot measures vying for attention. There will be lots of debate on issues of disagreement. But the bigger picture shouldn't be missed. When elections are over, everyone has to work together if we want to achieve the vision of Ventura's citizens for a better future. Whether it is students wading into the river bed to clean up five tons of trash or 150 citizens banding together to work for economic development in their community, partnerships are the way to shared success.

State budget: adjusting to reality

2009-08-07T14:03:00.000-07:00

To close the huge gap in the State budget, legislative leaders and the Governor struck a deal that would have grabbed local property tax revenues; local property tax from redevelopment areas; and the local share of gas taxes. At the last moment, the State Assembly balked at the gas tax theft, which would probably have been thrown out by the courts anyway.

That still leaves the City of Ventura having to "lend" the State of California $2,760,358. This is a "one-time" diversion of local property taxes. Under the State Constitution, the State must pay this back within three years -- with interest. We must also send the State $1,150, 913 of local redevelopment revenue, with more next year.

To balance our budget this year, the City Council cut $11 million -- from $96 to $85 million. This was done in March, by unanimous vote. No IOUs, no tax increases. Just "living within our means."

In November, local voters will be asked if they want to join Oxnard and Pt. Hueneme in temporarily raising local sales tax revenue to help restore vital services. But regardless of the outcome of that vote, Mayor Christy Weir spoke on behalf of the entire Council when she vowed in the annual State of the City address: "We will not spend money we don't have."

That is not the State approach. They continue to rely on borrowing or stealing from local government and accounting gimmicks to "balance" the budget. That means we probably haven't heard the last of State "take-aways." A feature of the proposed November sales tax measure is that because it can only be used locally, the State could not legally lay claim to any of it. Unfortunately, that is not the case with current City revenues.