Ventura City Council Meeting
February 6, 2012
Ventura City Hall - 501 Poli Street
To View a listing of the agenda items for this council meeting, go to www.cityofventura.net/meeting/city-council-meeting-97.
"We could speak at length about things have changed in the city over the last 50 years," said Mayor Tracy after a few opening remarks, "but comparing our stance today to that of other cities, some of the luster associated with being the county seat during the boom years of Southern California has faded." The mayor, a lifelong Venturan, went on to say that in his earliest days back in the mid '70s with the Ventura Police Department, Ventura was one of the safest cities in the county, but that this is no longer the case.
Property taxes and sales receipts necessary to provide the level of public services that are required, includinng those needed to build and maintain infrastructure during periods of rapid growth and concern over the environment, are tenuous at best. The city is relatively safe, but per capita, Ventura does have the highest crime rate of any city in the county, according to the mayor. But considering our extraordinary geography, the level and depth of opportunity and the passion of our citizens for the place they call home in dealing with these challenges, we are just as connected to our past as ever.
This is seen nowhere better than in our skilled and dedicated city workforce, the mayor said, even as 92 employees have been cut from the city payroll since 2008. Helping to fill the gap is a cadre of hard-working volunteers who dedicate over 3,000 hours per month of city service in order to augment the work of our professionals, as well as nonprofit organizations such as the Boys and Girls Club, the Police Activities League and the Salvation Army.
It is clear that our success will depend upon our working together as accented by tonight's theme, Mayor Tracy said.
Four individual topics were outlined representing focal points to be considered over the next two years: (1) economic development and prosperity -- (2) the prioritization of public safety and other core services -- (3) the Safe and Clean Initiative -- (4) restoring public trust.
A Rebuttal to the State of the City Address
Working together should involve everyone in the community -- not just the Downtown Ventura Partners, the Chamber of Commerce, the Police Officers Association, the BVG, the DVO and former journalists, along with their wives, children and honored guests. In fact it was at the mayor's own mentioning that our local citizenry could have contracted its current case of tax aversion through a feeling of separation and neglect stemming from the sins of their city fathers. So yes, we certainly do hope that all this will change.
The video that was played, informative as it was, dealt with a couple of contentious issues. The first has to do with the 2005 General Plan and the controversial form-based planning code written into it by an author/mayor who stayed around just long enough to see it approved before departing the scene. It's called Smart Growth, and by assignment alone, this self-serving nomenclature tries to suggest that all other forms of area planning are "dumb."
The biennial review of the General Plan came up in late 2010, at which only 2 public speakers appeared. One represented the owner of a large tract of land and the other was an outspoken critic of the plan's relevance using Smart Growth as a planning construct given Ventura's mature development, geographical location and various topological considerations. It was said that you [City Council] are "creating a sawtooth effect" out of the Smart Growth concept by including multiple town centers, none of which carries with it the essential transect feature, which is a gradual reduction in density spreading outward from the "center" into a typically rural environment. (We have the video and the only one extant.)
Smart Growth is an ideological and business-friendly construct, so it remains to be seen whether developer friendly or citizen friendly covenants can be achieved in "Working Together" among (1) those who govern and (2) those who are governed by consent.
A brief note here on the second long range area planning policy consideration to come out of the video dealing with the 2005 General Plan -- "infill first." During a sit-down interview with City Manager Rick Cole in late 2010 -- about the time of the Bonsall property (La Canada Larga/North Valley) extension issue -- we asked if such massive annexation would or would not violate the infill first mandate. His reply -- "Infill first doesn't necessarily mean infill only."
We replied, saying, "No, but it does mean "infill first.'" We have the tape.
What we see next is the spread of misinformation so egregious as to be worthy of being called misanthropic in nature. It's anti-panhandling but it's also much more. It's looking for someone to blame when your plans don't seem to be going as planned. Technically it's called scapegoating.
The Director of Ventura County Homelessness and Housing Coalition, Cathy Brudnicki, said at the recent Social Justice Fund conference (covered elsewhere on this website) that for the past five years the homeless count in Ventura County has remained [para] "relatively flat." What is interesting is the fact that the county is five years into a so-called "Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness," and if this is the degree of progress we can expect going forward from what is now the halfway point, something is gravely amiss. But what, exactly, is the problem? Well, what if we said it's the solution?"
Not good. Not good at all, because if the solution fails then we need to rethink homelessness causes, and quite naturally the only causes to be found are the homeless themselves, who -- in circular fashion -- just happen to be flagged with the "homelessness effect" as well.
So much for Aristotelian logic.
The Red Flag Effect Looking for a Cause
You've heard it over and over and yet again in the SOTC video ... panhandlers are far more likely to be feeding their addiction to alcohol or drugs than anyone within the population at large.❶ (Statistically debunked below.❷❸) The problem leading up to this false analogy is twofold: (1) The Red Flag (visible) effect and (2) The Transparent Flag (invisible) effect. The Red Flag effect is defined by Homeless Joe who is highly visible exiting a liquor store, then drinking from a brown paper bag at curbside (problem red). The Transparent Flag effect is defined by Joe Homebody who is virtually invisible exiting a liquor store, then drinking from a can of Foster's at the wheel of his car (problem transparent). Still think "red" is red and "transparent" is transparent? How would you rank the problems? Ask yourself ... Which one is most likely to be scapegoated as the most undesirable, not to mention the greatest danger to society? This kind of fugacious speculation is based in simple bias and it must stop.
Binge drinking vs. heavy drinking
These surveys (see charts) by SAMHSA❹ originate from another government agency, NSDUH.❺ According to the experts, alcohol use tends to be broken down by category -- (1) Drinkers [social] -- (2) Binge Drinkers -- (3) Heavy Drinkers. The surveys would appear to draw a line of distinction between binge drinking and heavy drinking, and yet whatever they're called they are both problem drinking. People who fall into either of these two categories find themselves in frequent contact with law enforcement -- drunk and disorderly -- DUI -- deadbeat dad -- child abuse -- domestic violence -- truancy -- sexual misconduct ... to name only a few.
Whether of not you've heard that under-aged drinking and illicit drug use are growing problems in this country, you probably did not know that tobacco users are eight times more likely to be either problem drinkers, substance abusers or both. So the next time you see a homeless person or panhandler, why not notice whether or not they are smoking? And if you're concerned over whether or not they're making "healthy choices" over alcohol and drugs as suggested repeatedly by your mayor and city government officials, why the snub over cigarettes? Tobacco use is the number one health problem in the United States. Are cigarettes not mentioned in this pantheon of ills because the edict makers are themselves guilty of making unhealthy choices to the tune of a pack a day?
Blind Allegiance to a False Hope
If you truly care about the plight of the homeless and feel that it is time to come up with a viable solution to the panhandling phenomenon, elect different representatives, and particularly, watch their private sector appointments. Elect those who understand that the much ballyhooed "public/private partnership" is essentially more private than public ... a very good thing for the private sector, of course, but a very bad thing for public policy.
Notes
❶ "People experiencing homelessness also have a high rate of substance use. According a 1996 survey, 46 percent of homeless respondents reported having an alcohol use problem in the past year, and 38 percent reported a problem with drug use in the past year." [National Alliance to End Homelessness.org]
❷❸ The graphs below represent alcohol and drug use by the U. S. population-at-large, and are current data (2010). The National Alliance to End Homelessness data claiming that homeless people have an elevated level of substance use is not only out of date (1996), the information has been sadly mishandled as these two charts clearly indicate. [What to look for: The NAEH published report (all ages) cites 46% for homeless alcohol consumption and 38% for drug usage, characterizing these figures as “high” when the top 3 age groups nationally (21-34) yield an average of 40% – a drop of only 6 percentage points (drug group slightly higher, but review the correlation data for both groups on tobacco use). This means that any organized body – The Knights of Columbus – The Amateur Athletic Union – The National Democratic and Republican Caucuses – could be surveyed, and with sufficiently large samples all results would be the statistical equivalent of homeless population numbers. Consider also that if 46% of respondents in the homeless survey are alcohol abusers, 54% are not. Seeing a panhandler on the street, could you tell the difference?] (Grahpics courtesy of [samhsa.gov ])
❹ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
❺ National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH)
❷ National Distribution, Alcohol Use By Age
❸ National Distribution, Substance Use By Age