Tuesday, January 15, 2019
Oh, Dan...
There was supposed to be a "workshop" tonight regarding driveways and swales. The Commission agreed to it, and the scheduled date was today. Dan Samaria called me earlier today to tell me Krishan Manners called him to say the workshop was cancelled. Dan said that Krishan said the reason for the cancellation was that Krishan did not finish putting together a draft Ordinance, which was supposed to be the topic of conversation for the workshop. It wasn't clear to me whether Krishan told Dan that he, Krishan, was cancelling the workshop, or that Tracy Truppman cancelled it, because "Krishan" didn't complete his task. But it was cancelled, and Dan was very displeased. He said he had spoken to the Andersons and the Kuhls, and they, too, were displeased. No one seemed to think this cancellation was right, or properly done. I didn't think so, either, and I advised Dan to do what he was planning to do, which was to hold a gathering anyway. Specifically, I suggested he tell Krishan to inform the other Commissioners that the cancellation was faulty, and that the meeting should be reinstated. At that point, Dan said someone else was calling him, and he'd get back to me. Right.
So, I decided to attend Dan's protest meeting. Unfortunately, it was a standard Dan Samaria gathering, which mostly highlighted Dan letting us know he and we had been wronged, and he was doing the right thing, and was "listening to the residents." This meant encouraging whoever was in attendance to go through the proposed Ordinance, and say what they thought, which I guess will be Dan's insights when the make-up "workshop" occurs, next Thursday (January 24).
Those in attendance were Janey Anderson, Gary and Barbara Kuhl, Ernesto Oliva(?), Jorge Marinoni, Brian McNoldy, Dan Keys, Art Gonzalez, Jared Susi, and someone whose name I don't know, but who says he's lived here 25 years, and still wants a gate to keep out unwelcome people, illustrated tonight by a black male who might have been up to no good, but who knocked on the door. And, recording, was Milt Hunter. I hope I didn't miss anyone. Chuck Ross stopped by briefly, but today being Rox's birthday, the two of them were able to think of something better to do with their evening than being at this gathering. Happy Birthday, Rox.
Well, the meeting soon enough devolved into the space where meetings like this go. Gary Kuhl got annoyed that others were off track, and Dan Keys, who knows everything about everything, told us everything about everything, and had to disqualify and dismiss anything anyone else said. It was the old Dan Keys show, starring...Dan...Keys. The other Dan, the Samaria one, just sat back and listened, presumably complimenting himself for having stimulated this lively, if deadly, discussion. Which was really more like a drone than a discussion. You can fall asleep in the presence of Dan Keys. Or you can get smolderingly annoyed. Unless you get up and leave, which is what I did.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who attended and expected anything other than what you described is delusional. You all know you really went there to gripe to each other and to Dan Samaria, who already knew how you felt. I told Dan so on the phone when he called me (likely in response to my post here in another string) and declined the invite. Other than bitching in the wind, there was nothing to accomplish. When your rightful seat at the table is taken from you, why would you grovel in the back alley for handouts and then complain about it? The issue of HOW the meeting was cancelled needs to be taken up at the next commission meeting.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting about the how, and also about the why. When Dan called me yesterday, he claimed that he somehow discussed some part of this with Tracy (which would probably have been a Sunshine violation, if he did), and she told him that workshops are not for the non-Commission public, but for the Commission to explore something. This, of course, is nonsensical, since the Commission can take as long as it wants, and explore anything it wants, during Commission meetings. What's unique, and uniquely available, during workshops is more active involvement from residents who are not Commissioners. Noting that, we can recall the care that's taken to schedule these workshops, in advance, in public, so that everyone, Commissioners and non-Commissioners, will have their best chances to attend. The effect of abruptly cancelling a meeting like this (did Krishan really not complete a draft of something, or was this excuse just a ruse to cancel the workshop?), and switching it to another night upcoming soon, is that it makes it less likely that non-Commissioner residents can attend and participate. Which appears to be Tracy's reportedly stated goal. In this case, just to take immediate examples, you can't attend, because you'll be away. I can't attend, because I happen to have a commitment next week Thursday night. So, this is just more of Tracy excluding, in whatever ways are available to her, her neighbors. Sometimes, she shuts them down during meetings. Other times, she schedules meetings when they can't be there. "The voice of the residents," huh? Yeah, I'm really feeling that.
DeleteFred you are 100% correct about how workshops USED to be conducted. Rather than being restricted to 3 mins. at the beginning - and of course getting no response to whatever is said during those 3 mins. - residents were able to ask questions and make comments throughout the workshop. This allowed for a give and take and often compromise that doesn't happen with 3 min. public comments. The fence ordinance workshop and the Boat/RV ordinance workshops were all held that way. As a result they got really good attendance. And - the budget workshops used to be held that way too. Funny how the ones who made the biggest deal about "listening to the residents" have run like hell from that concept! All you have to do is read the back up to Betsy's last minute agenda item from the January meeting - specifically under the heading BACKGROUND and it really says it all. She may hold the record for fastest evaporating campaign promises.
ReplyDeleteWhy do people contact me privately about things-- like assertions I got something wrong-- instead of just making a comment? I'm going to address my comment above.
ReplyDeleteDan Samaria called me three days ago. He was a little unclear about what his complaint was, but it certainly had to do with the idea that he could have committed a Sunshine violation. Not Dan. He clarified first of all that the conversation in question, with Tracy, occurred before the election, so the Sunshine Law would not have applied to him then, and second, he implied that I should not have revealed what he told me. (People sometimes do that, too: tell me something they don't present as confidential, then later tell me it was.) In fact, he said, he really should not have told me what he did, as he seemed to imply Tracy told it to him in confidence. This, of course, led us to a brief conversation about why he revealed to me something someone told him in what he now says was confidence, and he didn't even tell me it was supposedly told to him in confidence.
But Dan raised another issue. Dan's other issue was about generally keeping things confidential, unless... The unless was ambiguous, but Dan seemed to invoke the idea that the unless would be something like if the information referenced something of danger, or something illegal. And I thought Dan raised an interesting problem here. I would always keep confidential anything anyone asked me to keep confidential, just because they asked me to do it. But I wouldn't adhere to Dan's limitation, that other things should only be revealed if the person who hears about them determines that the matter is either not about a public danger or not something illegal. The public domain is entitled to far more than that. In the present case, for example, we're talking about Tracy's manipulation of her neighbors, who not only elected her, but pay her, and of the governing process. It was specifically about Tracy's muscling her neighbors out of their rightful roles in the Village. Are they entitled to know Tracy is doing that to them? On their dime? Absolutely, they are. And if Dan Samaria tells this to me, I'll tell it to you. "Unless" Dan only tells it to me on condition I don't publicize it. But he didn't restrict me, so the information is yours.
I told Dan to post a comment about our conversation, or his position about this, and he didn't do it.