Claremont Insider: Chamber of Commerce
Showing posts with label Chamber of Commerce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chamber of Commerce. Show all posts

Friday, October 21, 2011

Venturing Out

The Claremont Chamber of Commerce, currently presided over by former our Assistant City Manager Bridget Healy, will hold its 30th Annual Village Venture Arts & Crafts Faire tomorrow from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.   Claremont's environmental mindfulness will take an eight-hour break to allow vendors to flood the Claremont Village with tchochkes of every ilk.  Get there early before the best ones are gone.

Here's what the Chamber's website tells us:

Directions to Village Venture

Claremont Chamber of Commerce ( Village Venture HQ)
205 Yale Ave., Claremont CA 91711
909-624-1681

Click here to go to Google Maps and get directions from your location to Village Venture

Village Venture

has become THE annual event where family, friends & neighbors meet to wander The Claremont Village, which is filled with over 450 arts & crafts booths including photography, pottery, jewelry, clothing, and garden knick – knacks. Don’t forget to stop by the village businesses on both sides of Indian Hill that will be open all day. This is the place to kick off your one stop holiday shopping, you’ll find something unique for everyone on your list! Sit and relax at one of our sidewalk cafes, or enjoy the international cuisine located on First Street. Well over 20, 000 visitors attended Village Venture 2010 to enjoy not only this one-day event, but also the wonderful shops and restaurants that are located in our city.  

The following streets are closed:

Bonita, Second and First between Indian Hill and College
Yale and Harvard from Fourth ( Fourth is not closed)

This is the place to be every year on the fourth Saturday in October - mark your calendar - Saturday October 22nd, 2011.  

Click to Enlarge

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Mean Girls

SUGAR AND SPICE

We've noticed that the brand of bullying practiced most often by the Claremont 400 has a decidedly feminine component. The coterie that runs things in this town has long been dominated by women. Former mayors Judy Wright, Diann Ring, Ellen Taylor, Sandra Baldonado, and ex-commissioners Barbara Musselman and Helaine Goldwater have called the shots for far too long. And we can add former Claremont Assistant City Manager Bridget Healy (photo, right) to this list.

Just because the style is a dominated by a womanly kind of aggressiveness, though, that doesn't mean it's limited to people of the female persuasion. If you'll recall, men like Claremont Human Services commissioner Butch Henderson, former mayor Paul Held, former planning commissioner Bill Baker we especially nasty in their leadership of the Preserve Claremont campaign in the 2005 City Council race. (Not coincidentally, they are all also very much involved with current city council candidate Robin Haulman's campaign.) And the person who tapped into all that aggression to use it for his own purposes was a man, former City Manager Glenn Southard.

We've always thought the psychodynamic undercurrents in Claremont were worthy of academic research, and it turns out there's actually people who study the kind of female aggression at play here. We found an old NPR Talk of the Nation segment from February 27, 2002, the topic of which was just the sort of bullying practiced by the Claremont 400. (You need the free RealPlayer if you want to hear the discussion.) The segment's description said:

Girls are not all sugar and spice according to some researchers. The latest study on girls says they may be AS likely to use aggression as boys. Rather than fists, girls express it through manipulation, exclusion and gossip-mongering. It's become quite a problem in some middle and high schools, but what's the solution?

CAN YOU RELATE?

People who study such things, psychologists and anthropologists and the like, say that among children and teens, male aggression tends to be more straightforward and less complex than the sort seen in girls. Female aggression is generally indirect and has a strong social component, with the most aggressive girls leveraging their social intelligence to get their friends to ostracize girls they don't like, usually through gossip and whispering campaigns. Female aggression relies on the mastery and manipulation of social relationships to isolate and ostracize, hence the term "relational aggression."

The pressure of wanting to fit in, coupled with the relief at not be the one targeted, causes weaker girls in a group to join in or to at least remain silent, and the group comes to be dominated by the girls who the most socially adept but who have the lowest empathy, the ones who are capable of the most cruelty.

One of the panelists on that NPR show was seventh grader Nicky Marewski from Poukeepsie, NY, who described what she observed at her school:
The girls who are sort of in charge of all this, they figure out who they don't like and who they just don't think are acceptable, and they tell their friends.

That seems to be the general Claremonster modus operandi, which makes us wonder if we're just witnessing a collective case of arrested development. From what the relational aggression experts say, there seems to be some anecdotal evidence of this behavior continuing on through life. It can express itself in the workplace in the form of office politics or, in the case of the Claremont 400, in just plain old politics in general.

It's really empathy, or rather its absence, that seems to be the key factor, and that's certainly something that's been lacking among the Claremont 400, though they seem to be blind to their own shortcomings. Time and again, we've seen them unable to step outside of their own groupthink, unable to place themselves in their opponents' shoes, with the result that they have no openness to ideas that don't comport with their own preconceptions.

Let's go back to the 2002 Talk of the Nation show for a moment. Kaj Bjorkqvist, a Finnish professor of developmental psychology, remarked:
If you combine it [social intelligence] with low empathy, then it turns into indirect aggression. Girls who are high in both social intelligence and empathy tend to use more constructive strategies for solving conflict.

And that's exactly why we're caught in this odd community dance of anger. The people in power leverage their high social intelligence and dominate city elections so that they control the City Council and all the city commissions. Similarly, they control organizations like the Claremont Chamber of Commerce and various local charities. That's why you see someone like Preserve Claremont donor and former Claremont Board of Education member Michael Fay again and again, as treasurer of current council candidate Joseph Lyon's campaign or treasurer of the failed $95 million Measure CL school bond.

Or you see Preserve Claremont spokesperson Butch Henderson listed as an honorary co-chair of council candidate Robin Haulman's campaign and PC donor Bill Baker listed as Haulman's treasurer.


BIRDS ON A WIRE

If you want to observe relational aggression in action, go to a city council meeting. You're likely to see Helaine Goldwater seated in the back row knitting away like Madame Defarge as she watches the little melodramas she creates get played out.

At one recent council meeting, Sandy Baldonado, Barbara Musselman, and Robin Haulman were in the audience, all in a row like crows on a telephone line. Baldonado and Musselman, along with Bridget Healy, are backing Haulman as step one in their plan to get Healy elected to the council in 2013.

Recall that Healy lost badly in the 2009 city election, but rather than accept defeat, she and her friends began an image rehab program by getting Healy a position on the the Claremont Chamber of Commerce board, having her prominently involved with the Claremont Area League of Women Voters and by having her make appearances at City Council meetings to speak, along with Musselman, about the poor performance of current City Manager Jeff Parker, whom they accuse of gutting and outsourcing city services.

In their long range plan to shove Bridget down our throats, they've adopted more than a few positions they fought against when Baldonado was on the council and Healy working in City Hall as Glenn Southard's right hand woman. To listen to them now, they've replaced the secrecy they coveted with concerns for governmental transparency and have claimed to be champions of the people where once they had nothing but contempt for the public.

We can never forget, though, that Healy once authored a city staff report outlining a proposal to have a social worker or psychologist stationed at City Council meetings ready to rule on whether people trying to speak during public comment represented imminent threats to the council, commissioners and staff. The idea was to have a process for removing speakers from the council chambers. Then there was Baldonado, who with her trademark classiness, once told members of the public who were observing a council retreat to "get a life."

As strange as it sounds, the Baldonado-Musselman plan seems to be working. Haulman (photo, left) stands a good chance of getting elected, and people have cut her a lot a slack. At candidate forums she's been unprepared and has read canned responses from a notebook she continually flips through (she's working on fixing this and a few of her other obvious shortcomings), but to hear the after action reports, one would think she's a regular policy wonk when it comes to city issues. People, too, have forgiven Healy and are willing to overlook the ethical conflicts of interests she would have on the council on important issues such as employee pensions.

We'll see how much Claremont has really changed since Healy last worked here. Our guess is that the mean girls still have the run of the town.

Friday, October 8, 2010

Community Service

The debate over the Claremont Unified School District's $95 million Measure CL bond has raged in the pages of the Claremont Courier's reader letters section these past few weeks. Citizens on both sides of the school bond issue have used letters to the Courier as a sort of community forum.

The Courier itself seems to have slanted its coverage more towards the Yes on CL side, presenting an interview with members of the Yes on CL committee, taking readers on a CUSD-sponsored dog-and-pony show tour of Claremont High School, tossing in an article praising the district's test scores, as well as what amounted to an interview with Yes on CL's campaign consultant Jared Boigon of TBWB Strategies, who has been stage managing the yes campaign from San Francisco (at the cost of many tens of thousands of dollars, we might add).

Still, there not many other places to find both sides of CL the argument presented, the Courier did manage this past Wednesday to throw the No on CL group a bone by featuring an interview with their spokespeople, Donna Lowe, Opanyi Nasiali, and Jay Pocock. In a normal election year, our various local service organizations and institutions would be holding election forums where matters such as the November school bond could be debated.

For example, The Kiwanis Club, the Claremont Chamber of Commerce, Pilgrim Place, the Claremont Manor, Our Lady of Assumption Church, and Active Claremont all traditionally hold city council candidate forums, as they will next spring in advance of the March, 2011, municipal election.

The local League of Women Voters chapter holds the forum with the greatest cachet. It's usually one of the best attended of the candidate debates, and a good showing there can certainly help a prospective council member's chances of winning a seat.

Which is why this blurb from Daily Bulletin reporter Wes Woods' Claremont Now blog strikes us as odd:

Pros and cons on the nine California propositions for the Nov. 2 general election will be discussed at 2 p.m. Sunday Oct. 10 at the Claremont Public Library, 208 Harvard Ave.

The league and the Delta Sigma Theta Sorority Pomona Valley Alumnae Chapter will host a 59th Assembly District candidates forum. The forum will run from 7 to 9 p.m. Monday Oct.11 in the Padua Room at the Alexander [Hughes] Community Center at 1700 Danbury Road.

We would have expected the LWV, an organization that prides itself on its non-partisan efforts at educating voters on local, state, and national issues, to have been one of the first to offer both sides of the Measure CL debate to give their reasons why voters should be for or against the bond. This is clearly an issue that's generated a great deal of community interest and one that will affect CUSD property owners' pocketbooks for years to come. Yet, Measure CL is conspicuously absent from the League's fall election events.

Similarly, the Chamber of Commerce and other local organizations, including Sustainable Claremont, have endorsed the bond without giving opponents a chance to present their views. Whatever side one favors in the Measure CL election, all this lack of activity by our so-called communitarian organizations gives a good insight into how things work in our little, close-minded community.

As always, it's not what you know but who you know. It's a good ol' girls and boys network of the same circle of people running each and every group mentioned above, along with the Claremont Education Foundation, the Claremont Community Foundation, the Red Cross, and a host of other local charities.

The result is that opponents of any issues have an extremely hard time making their cases to the voters. Forums, by their very nature, require each side to have equal time. So even if the LWV tries to tailor the debate questions to the strengths of the people it favors, they still have to give opponents a chance to respond.

The absence of any school bond forums makes us wonder if the League and their fellow Claremont 400 organizations recognize Measure CL's weaknesses and are trying to help it by not holding any public debates. This goes along with the perception that bond's proponents are trying to avoid substantive discussions of the measure.

All of the Yes on CL mailings, for instance, speak in generalities, and the proponents, as well as the school board, have failed to offer up any specific details of how the money will be spent. For instance, the most recent mailings, which went out this past Monday and Tuesday, don't make any mention the $95 million price tag. And you'll never hear them talk about the $250 million total price after financing the bond for 40 years - an extra long payment schedule CUSD had to use to keep the payments per household at $45 per $100,000 of assessed value.

Further, CUSD has actually ignored public records requests and has withheld public information on the bond's financial details because they know that their own numbers will torpedo their arguments (another thing you won't hear about in the Daily Bulletin or the Claremont Courier).

The one organization that is holding a forum is Active Claremont. The AC school bond forum will be 7pm Thursday, October 21, in the Santa Fe room of the Alexander Hughes Center. Both sides will answer questions submitted by those in attendance.

By the way, Active Claremont, unlike the League or the Chamber of Commerce, is truly neutral, which probably explains why they're willing to host the debate. They don't endorse one side or another, they just let them talk. So let's stop giving false praise to those other groups for their community building efforts. The real communitarians in Claremont demonstrate their respect for all people and opinions in town through their actions, not their words.

Monday, September 6, 2010

Fair News

Fried Up, Ready to Go!

The LA County Fair opened this past Saturday and runs through Sunday, October 3. The Fair's opening weekend deals end today - $1 admission from 10am to 1pm, $1 22 oz. soft drinks from 1pm to 4pm, and $1 carnival rides from 4pm to 7pm.

Regular admission is $17 for adults and $12 for children on weekends and $12 for adults and $7 for children on weekdays. Kids under 5 are free. Expect to pay through the nose for parking.

If you're looking for a bargain, there are plenty of other deals that cut the ticket price down. Ralph's grocery stores have a Fair deal going. If you bring 5 cans of Ralph's brand foods to the fair, you can get in for free on Fridays from noon to 6pm. You can also get in for $5 after 5pm Wednesdays through Fridays.

Last week, Daily Bulletin columnist David Allen had a preview of this year's slightly downsized fair. The Fair's fare, however, has not been downsized. There's as much fried stuff as ever. More, says Allen:


As for food, the fair promises to mix it up with a selection of food trucks, following a trend in L.A. Not to mention the usual high adventures in cholesterol.

"We will have bacon-wrapped Oreos dipped in chocolate," [fair spokesperson Leslie] Galerne-Smith said.

I can't wrap my head around that.


Between those Oreos and the fried Klondike bars, you're liable to end up as plastinated as the cadavers in the "Our Body: The Universe Within" exhibit under the Grandstand.

Students, faculty, and staff from the Claremont Colleges can get in for free on Thursday, September 23. The University of La Verne, Cal Poly Pomona, Citrus College, Mt. SAC, USC, and UCLA all have their days as well. Click here for all the promotions.

Click to Enlarge
September 23 is also Claremont Day at the Fair. Residents can get in for $5 before 5pm. There''ll be a community parade, so you'll have a chance to see all our local high muckety-mucks, plastinated and otherwise, on display.

You can pick up $5 Claremont Community Day at the Fair tickets at the Claremont Chamber of Commerce at 205 Yale Ave. in the Claremont Village. The Chamber also has discounted $10 adult and $6 children any day tickets. Call (909) 624-1681 for more info.

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Village Wine Walk

Claremont's 9th Annual Vintage Village Wine Walk is scheduled for Friday, September 10, from 5pm to 9pm. The event is organized by the Village Merchant Group, which is part of the Claremont Chamber of Commerce.

VMG is chaired by photographer Sonja Stump, who helped bring us the Claremont Trolley. Fortunately for VMG and for wine lovers, the Wine Walk is vastly more successful than the poor departed trolley.

The event's official website says:

A Portion of the Proceeds Benefits:
  • American Red Cross
  • Pomona Valley Hospital Auxiliary
  • Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
  • Shoes That Fit

They don't say where the non-dedicated portion of the profits go.

Tickets are $30 in advance, $35 the day of the event, though the organizers say the event usually sells out. You must be 21 years or older, and they'll check I.D.'s when you check in.

Tickets can be purchased at various locations in the Claremont Village. Click here for all the details.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Sorry State

The Claremont Chamber of Commerce is hosting the second annual "State of City" luncheon 11:30am today at the Candlelight Pavilion on Foothill Blvd. The Gas Co., Golden State Water Co., Southern California Edison, and VVS, Inc., are co-sponsoring the event.

The Chamber's website had this information:

State of the City Luncheon
Thursday, July 15, 2010, at 11:30 AM
Candlelight Pavilion
455 W Foothill Blvd.

Claremont
Cost per person is $35 RSVP's to Marlene at 909-624-1681 or Marlene(at)ClaremontChamber.org with "State of the City" in the subject line.

We'll probably get the sanitized spin on how well the city is weathering the recession because it's in the Chamber's self-interest to justify the $40,000 per year the City pays them to attract businesses and visitors to Claremont. There will probably be no mention of those 140 foreclosed residences on the market or the empty commercial space around town.

There's been an ongoing argument, in and out of City Hall, regarding the Chamber's real usefulness. Is that money really all well-spent, or would we be better off hiring a professional firm to market the town. Of course, the buy-in for a credible marketing campaign would be much, much more than $40,000 a year. The question is, would a larger expenditure result in a higher return for the City?

One thing is for sure, the Claremont 400, who are without shame, are well-represented in the Chamber. The Chamber's immediate past chair is former mayor and Preserve Claremont organizer Paul Held. The chair-elect is failed council candidate Bridget Healy. And former mayor Sandra Baldonado, current mayor Linda Elderkin, and official council photographer Sonja Stump are among the current board members.

(By the way, Healy, whom the 400 have also welcomed into the ranks of the Claremont League of Women voters, will almost certainly be back for another run at the council once her resume plumping campaign is complete. Fool us once, shame on you; fool us twice....)

With the Chamber, you might just be getting what you pay for.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Tuesday Night = City Council Meeting


Come on down to City Hall tonight at 6:30pm and watch local pols in their native habitat. Do be careful not to disturb them. They can bite, and they're vicious when disturbed or if they're protecting their young.

You can see all the action at 225 Second St. in the council chambers or you can watch online here.

The agenda, if you're interested, is here. Among the items tonight:

  • Recognition of La Parolaccia Restaurant for their Haitian Earthquake fundraiser. (Don't know what happened to Round Table's attaboy. Didn't they have one too?)

  • Presentation of the Chamber of Commerce marketing study by CGU's Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito (or Masatoshi Ho, as the agenda has it) School of Management.

  • A report from City Treasurer Adam Pirrie on the City's investments for the quarter that ended on 12/31/09. This sentence caught our eye: "There was an overall decrease of $1,981,104 in City held investments as shown on the City Investment Report (Attachment A) primarily as a result of the outflow of funds to maintain operations."

  • The City, too, has conducted a marketing study. City Hall's version was done by a consulting firm called Fairbank, Maslin, Maulin, Metz and Associates. (A four namer! Must be good!)

  • The annual report from CPD on Part I crime data for 2009.

Cheese Update

Wallace and Gromit rejoice! We have more Cheese Cave news.

The owners of the fromagerie that's coming to downtown Claremont have joined the Claremont Chamber of Commerce. The Cheese Cave also has a Twitter site.

We suspect the Cheese Cave may be something along the lines of Frogs Breath Cheese Store in the city of Orange. Some friends took us there a year or two ago, and we had a delicious, if pricey, goat cheese tasting.

You have to respect shopkeepers who are tasteful enough to appreciate Escondido's Stone Brewing Company and artful enough to think in verse.

Aldonza Graphics

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Wednesday Night Family Fest Begins Tonight

The Daily Bulletin's Wes Woods has an article about the Claremont Family Festival (a.k.a., Claremont Wednesdays). The weekly street fest begins tonight in the Claremont Village Expansion at 5pm an runs through the end of October. Woods tells us:

Organic produce, arts and crafts, health and wellness products as well as other items will be sold at the festival while music - which tonight will be performed by Big Papa & the TCB - will be performed on the Second Street Stage.

The festival runs from 5 to 8 p.m. in the Village on Second Street west of Indian Hill; Oberlin Avenue between First and Second streets; and First Street between Oberlin and Cornell.

At the same time, a green market will be taking place at the Packing House.

Woods' article also says that an organization called Volunteer Network International and its "beneficiary project Xela Aid" have organized the festival, along with the City and the Claremont Chamber of Commerce. Woods says there will be 100 vendor booths.

The Claremont Family Festival has an official website, complete with printable coupons that you can redeem with vendors tonight. If you want 50% off a donut boat from Tina's Tiny Donuts, make sure to print out your coupon and take it with you tonight.

The City's website has more info:

Claremont Wednesdays!

Experience an evening of fun for the whole family at Claremont Wednesdays launching on April 29. There will be live music, taste-tempting entrées and specialty finger foods, fresh certified organic produce, quality wares and services of local merchants, gift-perfect local arts and craft items, wellness services, products and new technologies for green living. Plus, there's a whole street of fun for children of all ages, featuring a climbing wall, bouncers, and petting zoo.

Date: Wednesdays, April 29 through October 28
Time: 5 pm to 8 pm
Where: Claremont Village (First Street, Oberlin, and Second Street), North of the 10 fwy. on Indian Hill Blvd.

Valuable coupons and special offers at www.claremontwednesdays.org.

Listings about Festival musical entertainment can be found weekly at www.claremontcalendar.com.

Volunteer Network International (www.vnetint.org) and beneficiary project Xela Aid (www.xelaaid.org) is presenting the Celebrate Claremont Family Festival in partnership with the City of Claremont and the Claremont Chamber of Commerce.

For more information, call (951) 733-2588.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Square Head, Round Hole

Whatever else you have to say about Claremont Trolley supporters, you cannot deny their persistence.

A reader wrote in to tell us about a Facebook event this afternoon from 12 noon to 2pm in the Claremont Village. The event is a Chamber of Commerce-sponsored rally to support the trolley, which went belly-up at the last City Council meeting.

As part of the event, you can follow it live on Twitter. Here's the tweeting party's description:

Join me, Joey Coombe, as I Twitter Live from the Claremont Trolley. This event approaches the issue of public funding for transportation related uses through new media and technology.

Follow at http://twitter.com/joeycoombe

[NOTE: This was actually a joke by Coombe. No real involvement form the Chamber of Commerce -ed.]

* * * * *

Yesterday's Courier had a letter from reader Rochelle Darrow, who wrote that she liked the trolley but thought the routing was sketchy:
The trolley was a good intention, but I for one was confounded with its route. If you were for instance visiting the theatre you would just drive there. Once in the village area everything is in walking distance. The trolley route served no purpose.

It would be wonderful if the trolley made a wider route, say north on Mills taking people to Vons. West on Baseline then south on Indian Hill stop at Trader Joes and proceed back down to the village.

The real problem wasn't just the route. Cost was the limiting factor. The trolley runs only three days a week. That really isn't a regular enough schedule to be considered a true transportion service. After all, who'd utilize a bus service that operated less than half of the time?

Why only three days? The trolley ran the schedule it did because the City couldn't afford to spend more than the $887,000 it did on the current level of service.

To run the trolley five days a week would have raised the cost to $1.27 million on its current route. And that's for one trolley that takes 15 minutes to circumnavigate it's little 1.5 mile circuit of the Claremont Village. If you were to add on stops at the Claremont Colleges and trips up to Foothill and Base Line Rd., you're talking about potentially quadrupling the time it takes one trolley to complete a circuit. With only one trolley that could mean up to an hour wait - only 12 circuits in the trolley's 12-hour day on its three days of operation.

To extend the route and keep the stops at the same 15-minute level of service, you'd have to add two or three trolleys, depending on how much you lengthened the route. And to really make the trolley a functional transportation service, you'd have to run it at least five days - and probably seven - a week. You're not only talking about multiplying the $887,000 cost by adding more trolleys and their drivers, you'd also be adding at least two more days of service, not to mention the expense of building the new stops and the added cost of fueling, insuring and maintaining the extra trolleys.

The City bought all it could afford with the money it had and couldn't come close to spending millions more to turn the trolley into a true transportation service. City staff has said as much, maintaining that the trolley was not a transportation service but an economic engine designed to bring more customers to the Village - a mission it failed miserably at.

* * * * *

David Allen was at the April 14 City Council meeting when the council voted 3-2 to pull the plug on the trolley. Allen neatly summed up the non-Trolley boosters' take:
And if you happen to gaze in the trolley's windows as it passes by, you rarely see anyone inside except the poor driver. It's like a - gaaaahh! - ghost trolley.

Condemned to endlessly circuit the Village, making a series of hard left turns, the drivers are on a voyage of the damned, the Claremont equivalent of the Flying Dutchman.

At last, city leaders voted this week to lift the curse, free the drivers and allow the trolley to head into the sunset.

Allen also quoted a clearly out-of-touch Sam Pedroza, who typically did not get it, sounding a lot like former Councilmember Sandy Baldonado.

You might recall when Baldonaldo, along with Pedroza and the rest of the Claremont 400, tried to foist a $48 million assessment district on Claremonters in 2006. After property owners resoundingly rejected the assessment, Baldonado said, "...it's not the city that I know and love."

Pedroza, as quoted by David Allen, displayed a similar tin ear, bringing up another failed Claremont transportation idea:
Councilman Sam Pedroza, however, said another trait of Claremonters is to rush to condemn new ideas. He brought up the traffic circle, which was torn out within weeks of its installation in 1999 due to jeering.

It's simply stunning that Pedroza can reinterpret history so freely. The traffic circle he spoke of, at Indian Hill and Bonita Ave., failed not because of any "jeering," as Pedroza calls it. It failed because it was a potentially good idea shoehorned into much too small of a space to handle the volume of traffic safely. The radius of the circle had to be fitted into the corners marked by the existing sidewalks, which left too tight a space for the number of cars passing through. All it did cause more delays than the existing traffic signal because of driver confusion.

These circles can work if they're in the right places and if they're sufficiently big enough to allow the traffic to flow smoothly - they're everywhere in Europe, and in a number of places here in Southern California - but the Claremont circle, much like the trolley, was jammed into the wrong place without any forethought and with very predictable results.

But, in Pedroza's mind, it's much easier to blame public rather than rationally assess the facts at hand.

Friday, April 3, 2009

Department of Corrections

Our April Fool! post was wrong in its entirety and we'd like to apologize to the community for messing this up. You may recall that we spun a fantastic tale about Bridget Healy, that ol' Carpetbagger, being nominated to the Claremont Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, all done in the most light-hearted and whimsical way to give our readership a little April Fool cheer. We fabricated quotes. We made things up out of whole cloth. We went over the top

Well, it turns out that wasn't such a tall tale after all. Arrives now in the mail the April 2009 number of the Chamber newsletter, Business News, and right there on the front page is the notice of "Nominating Committees [sic] Recommendations for Board Members". Down towards the bottom of the first column is the following:


At the meeting in February the Board voted to increase its size to 20 members. The nominating committee suggested:

Ira Jackson, Drucker School of Business Management for a 3 year term expiring in 2012

Jeremy Cooper, Pay-Pro Services for a 2 year term expiring in 2011

Bridget Healy, Consultant for a 1 year term expiring in 2010

click to enlarge

We see that Bridget Healy has been listed as an "Associate Member" of the Chamber so her "consulting" business must be a new one. Guess she needs a little more than her $150K plus per year city pension to scrape by. (See this post, midway down, under "Doing the Pension Math")


Tuesday, March 31, 2009

APRIL FOOL!

All "facts" asserted here are lies used only for comedic effect
Remember, it's April Fool


Bridget Healy Back from the Dead:
Nominated to Chamber of Commerce Board


click to enlarge
Failed City Council candidate Bridget Healy, who really hasn't lived in Claremont for four years, and who doesn't own or operate a business in town, has been nominated to the Board of the Claremont Chamber of Commerce. "Why not?" quipped Chamber president Barbara Jefferson, a middle manager at the Claremont University Consortium, "Heckfire, I'm not a business person, and David Cash, CUSD superintendent, certainly isn't. Nor is Ann Joslin of the Botanic Garden. Sometimes these real business people get kooky ideas like a Transient Occupancy Tax isn't for them, or maybe the crazy thought that the Village shouldn't have a 'Business Improvement District'. That's why we need Bridget: to keep these folks out of the leadership positions and toeing the Claremont Chamber Party Line."

"Plus, we've got to give her something to do in town to burnish her resume for the next City Council election."

"Of course, we had to pack the board to make a place for her, so we are adding three new positions. Another guy from the Colleges, another non-retailer, and Bridget."

Said Maureen Aldridge, Chamber CEO, "It's quite like Parliament: The House of Lords, with Bridget's elevation, and the House of Commons, with the vulgar cash-register commoners. The cream will rise to the top, you know."

Word is, Bridget's first task is to "Hammer" through either the Transient Occupancy Tax or Bid'ness Improvment District, whichever incoming Chair and Former Mayor Paul Held decides he wants to go for.


* * * * *

These are just fantastic speculations and obvious fabrications motivated by a frenetic need to construct a quasi-humorous April Fool post on-deadline. We made all of this up. Nothing here has any bearing on reality. None at all. Really.

No, we mean it.


Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Claremont: Hip? Or Hip-Replacement?

Branding Claremont

We have covered Claremont's nascent attempts at "branding" our community. Unfortunately for those wanting to establish the New. Hip. Claremont.®, there may be just too much going against the effort.

Last week the Human Services Department mailed out the Winter number of The Claremont View. Tell us if we are wrong, but we think the New. Hip. Claremont.® now has even a more difficult job to succeed in catching on:

click on photo to enlarge

Look closely--even fleetingly--at the picture on the cover. Does that convey the image that Claremont is au courant? What were the City mothers thinking? We don't fault the individuals--they were probably roped into participating, and the consensus of our fashion experts is that they were "dressed up". But why? Notwithstanding the shopping bags, this doesn't seem to us to convey the message of the New. Hip. Claremont.®. The three canes in the picture send an especially compelling subliminal signal, though.


Let us just state our opinion boldly: Any business development or promotion effort that involves city staff or elected officials is doomed to failure. Don't matter whether it's the Economic Development Officer, Assistant City Manager, Human Services Acting Director, or Mayor. The Claremont Chamber and the Claremont business community ought to run away from that crowd in a straight line.


Mayor Ellen Taylor was quoted in the recent Courier article: “We’re not a mall and we never will be,” Ms. Taylor said. “ Claremont may need to seek a new identity and how best to promote that image to continue to grow in the future." Maybe Claremont should start, just before the recent publication of the Winter View, in shedding the old identity.

Of course, the real product of city government is the consultant's study, preceded by the writing of a tens of thousands of dollars check, and followed by an action of those business experts on city council*. The "branding" issue is no different:


The study will “identify who we are, what we’re selling, and what message we want to communicate to our target audiences," according to a city staff report. Staff estimates that it will take 7 to 8 months to come up with a final brand to present to the city council for approval.

We think the video clip below shows the perfect way to bridge the generation gap in the selection of fashionable women's clothing. Welcome to the New. Hip. Claremont.®**:



____
*A family law firm office manager, a public employee, a retired aerospace worker, a former sometime college dean, and another public employee.

**By the way, the City may use New. Hip. Claremont.® at no charge. Our contribution to the community.

Monday, September 22, 2008

Proposed Downtown Parking Ordinance Nixed

Parking in downtown Claremont has long been a problem. Too many cars, too few parking spots. The problem is compounded by workers at Claremont Village businesses who take up prime parking spots in the Village's two-hour parking areas. Some of these workers move their cars throughout the day to the nearest open spot as their time runs out.

In response to this so-called "car shuffling," in June this year the city's Traffic and Transportation Commission approved a staff recommendation on a proposed downtown parking ordinance that would restrict people from parking within 300-feet of their previous parking spot. The parking ordinance was supposed to go to the City Council on July 8th for a vote, but it was pulled for some unknown reason.

Now we know. It turns out the staff recommendation, pushed by Claremont City Engineer Craig Bradshaw and the Claremont Chamber of Commerce's Past-Chair Sonia Stump and Chair-Elect Paul Held, is illegal. The Daily Bulletin's Wes Woods II reported on the subject:

A Traffic and Transportation Commission ordinance passed in June designed to making it harder for Village employees to park in the downtown core had to be thrown out, city officials said.

"There's legal issues to work with in terms of what's enforceable. So it's not a simple issue," said city engineer Craig Bradshaw.

The soonest a new ordinance could be created to address the troublesome issues is January, Bradshaw said.

Mayor Ellen Taylor said prohibiting moving a car in the Village to a parking spot within 300 feet of its initial spot was at odds with state law.

"The commission dealt with incomplete information," Taylor said. The issue of shuffling cars to different parking spots in the Village has been around for 20 years, Taylor said.

When he was a councilmember and, later, a Mayor of Claremont, Held loved using his power to back illegal or unconstitutional measures. Remember Measure A, the anti-conflict-of-interest law that passed with 55% of the vote? After the initiative passed, Claremont and City Attorney Sonia Carvalho did everything within their power to prevent the new city ordinance from being enacted.

Yet, contrary to what Carvalho was telling the City Council, the law was ultimately upheld by state courts and was ruled to be constitutional. Carvalho and the City Council tried to undermine a city ordinance lawfully approved by a majority of Claremont voters, but they failed.

So it's not surprising that once he got a little taste of power again on the local Chamber of Commerce, that Held would be up to his old tricks. Held, too, was one of the main forces behind the 2005 Preserve Claremont campaign. As you can see by his support on the Chamber of Commerce, he's suffered no ill-effects from his efforts at manipulating that election either.

Sunday, July 27, 2008

Comment of the Day: Cut Up that Credit Card

As we wrote yesterday, the state's threat to use $2.5 billion in Prop. 1A transportation funds to help balance California's $15.5 billion or so budget deficit is causing a lot of hand-wringing on the local level.

Claremont Mayor Ellen Taylor had a letter published in Saturday's Claremont Courier urging voters to write to Governor Schwarzenegger and to state legislators to tell to keep their mitts off OUR money.

The problem is that Claremont, like many other cities across the state, have so thoroughly mismanaged their finances that when a rainy day comes, they can't deal with the state shutting off the money spigot temporarily.

Now, this is not to excuse the state-level dysfunction, to which both major political parties have contributed, but if it had watched how it spent our money, Claremont would be much better positioned to deal with the current economic environment.

In her comments, also published in today's Daily Bulletin, Queen Ellen makes the "Poor, Poor, Pitiful Me" ploy. Claremont will suffer needlessly if the state takes that money, Ellen says. Taylor claims that Claremont "lives within its means" but will face a $500,000 deficit if the Prop. 1A money is taken away.

Yesterday, in commenting on Taylor's false claims about our living within our means, we found $135,000 in money that we feel was just thrown away to the Friends of Taylor. A reader wrote in with this response:

If Ellen Taylor is so incensed at the State of California for potentially raiding the City of Claremont’s coffers, let her take the proverbial mote out of her own eye and look at how Claremont City government is borrowing and spending Claremont taxpayer money here.

Didn’t the city (or redevelopment agency- same people, different legal entity) just borrow a million dollars from its own sewer fund to help with Harry Wu’s purchase of the land beneath the Doubletree Hotel? When are they going to pay that back and will it be with interest?

I watch the council meetings when they play on the local cable station and I always hear about the conferences that they attend. There seem to be so many of them that these council members go to and how much does that cost? How many staff members also go to these conferences and how much does that cost every year? How about the benefits that the Courier reported at least two council members (Taylor and Yao) are taking, that has a price also.

That is not even mentioning the extra $ 1 million to purchase Johnson’s pasture, $800,000 for the trolley around the block, $60,000 for the centennial that did not have enough sponsors.

No, I think the Claremont City Council needs to get its own house in order before it starts asking citizens to harass the state for money, our taxpayer money remember, just so it can misspend more of it.

Should the state take away the those transportation bond funds, which voters approved in 2004 with the understanding that they would be used for traffic and transportation projects? No. But should Claremont and other cities in California figure their budgets based on worst case scenarios that include the possibility that those funds might not be available for a time? Of course!

Instead of spending prudently, we count on state and federal grants to fund projects like the Claremont Trolley. Then, rather then saving our local revenue in a rainy day fund to be used in emergencies like the present one, we take the money saved through the use of grants and stupidly give it away. So, when the state unexpectedly stops the money flow, we're stuck with commitments to projects that have to now be covered by our own revenue.

Where have we spent our money? Well, besides the $135,000 we've already cited, the reader mentioned the nearly $11,000 we give Queen Ellen for her deferred compensation, a 401(k)-like retirement account and the similar amount we pay for Councilmember Peter Yao's health benefits. (Hey, another $20,000-plus a year to save!)

And, as the reader also noted, that extra $1 million we had to pay to purchase Johnson's Pasture because of a misphrased deed sure would have come in handy right now.

Of course, the spending hasn't slowed down. Queen Ellen is pushing forward with spending $1.5 million on Phase 1 a highly questionable Padua Sports Park this fall. When completed, the Sports Park will cost taxpayers an estimated $10-12 million.

We hear a lot of talk right now about moral hazard and the need to not bail out homeowners and credit card holders because people need the threat of financial failure in order to properly understand risk. Bailing people and institutions out, the argument goes, may encourage them to take foolish, stupid risks.

Cities are no different. Until Claremont and the people in power in town (the League of Women Voters, Claremont Heritage, the Chamber of Commerce, to name a few) understand that the risks behind their policy decisions and how those risks fit into the bigger financial picture, they will keep on with their foolish spending ways.

The bill is coming due, and, rather than blaming the state (which has its own blame to bear), it's high time they faced that uncomfortable situation that their cumulative decisions have created.

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Readers Respond to Marijuana Dispensaries

We received some feedback to our last update on Claremont's medical marijuana dispensary ordinance.

One reader sent in a link to some legislation proposed by Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA). The bill seeks to legalize personal use as well as medical marijuana applications. Frank's press release for the bill (HR 5842) quotes Frank as he explains his reasoning:

"When doctors recommend the use of marijuana for their patients and states are willing to permit it, I think it’s wrong for the federal government to subject either the doctors or the patients to criminal prosecution. More broadly speaking, the norm in America is for the states to decide whether particular behaviors should be made criminal. To make the smoking of marijuana, whether for medical purposes or not, one of those extremely rare instances of federal crime – literally, to make a ‘federal case’ out of it – is wholly disproportionate to the activity involved. We do not have federal criminal prohibitions against drinking alcoholic beverages, and there are generally no criminal penalties for the use of tobacco at the state and federal levels for adults. There is no rational argument for treating marijuana so differently from these other substances.”

“To those who say that the government should not be encouraging the smoking of marijuana, my response is that I completely agree. But it is a great mistake to divide all human activity into two categories: those that are criminally prohibited, and those that are encouraged. In a free society, there must be a very considerable zone of activity between those two poles in which people are allowed to make their own choices as long as they are not impinging on the rights, freedom, or property of others. I believe it is important with regard to tobacco, marijuana and alcohol, among other things, that we strictly regulate the age at which people may use these substances. And, enforcement of age restrictions should be firm. But, criminalizing choices that adults make because we think they are unwise ones, when the choices involved have no negative effect on the rights of others, is not appropriate in a free society."

* * *


Another reader wrote in to criticize the letter the Claremont Chamber of Commerce sent in to the Claremont Courier regarding the ordinance. The Chamber is opposed to allowing the dispensaries. The reader said:
Subject: insane in the membrane
To: claremontbuzzatyahoo.com

That's one extra-bizarre letter from the directors of the Claremont Chamber of Commerce. Point by point:

1.) "Other dispensaries in the state have been targets of burglaries and robberies, not just in the facility, but also 'follow home' crimes where the patrons of such dispensaries have been the victims."

So have banks and supermarkets and liquor stores. The Von's on Baseline has near-daily shoplifters; a few years ago, the manager on duty confronted a shoplifter in the liquor section, and ended up with a gun in his face. The CPD answers frequent calls for service from the local banks, from tellers accidentally triggering robbery alarms and people trying to cash fraudulent checks and whatever else. Should we close the supermarkets and the banks? What kind of reasoning is this?

Every business with cash or valuable products on the premises is a potential target for criminals, and no one ever argues for closing any other kind of business on that basis. Five minutes with the police blotter devastates this argument. Criminals target retail businesses. The bad actor in that sentence are the criminals, not the businesses. The chamber's argument in a nutshell: We don't want you to open a business in our community, because you might get robbed. And here I thought the Chamber of Commerce was pro-business.

"We are concerned about the impact this potential crime would have on industrial, commercial and residential areas as well as the impact on the time commitment of our police department."

Well, we wouldn't want the police department to have to investigate crime, now, would we?

2.) Employment. "Businesses have a right to protect themselves and their customers by drug testing their employees to help maintain the quality and safety of their work environment."

Huh? If there are marijuana dispensaries in Claremont, employers can't test their employees for drugs or regulate the safety of their places of work? Just like the way that employers can't forbid their employees to be drunk on the job, because Claremont permits the presence of liquor stores. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

"We are concerned with the issues that have surfaced in regards to the use of 'medicinal marijuana' and protecting employers rights in terms of testing and workplace use of marijuana."

This is pure Claremont reasoning: "We are concerned with the issues that have surfaced..." What issues? That have surfaced where? What statute, case law, or public policy are they referring to? Can they reference a news article, a piece of legislation, anything? What the f*** are these people babbling on about?

3). Health. "Due to the fact that these facilities are not regulated pharmacies, it is unclear who would be in charge of enforcement of any health issues of such a facility including amounts, quality, cleanliness, etc. The Chamber is concerned that either these issues would be the responsibility of city staff, or even worse, go completely unmonitored."

This is AWESOME -- the letter begins with a warning that the presence of marijuana dispensaries will "open up our city, landowners and business districts to potential federal raids and prosecution," then closes with a somber bit of handwringing over the dire fact that marijuana dispensaries are completely unmonitored by government. Four paragraphs to complete self-negation -- that's rhetorical skill, baby. Although I do appreciate their concern that the quality of the marijuana will not be thoroughly regulated, cough cough.

Add to this the fact that the chamber is arguing against the city government permitting dispensaries because it's unclear how they'll be regulated. If only local governments had some sort of mechanism in place for creating and enforcing regulations.

Transparently bad reasoning from start to finish. What a shock to see that Paul Held serves on the board.

Friday, April 18, 2008

Marijuana Dispensary News

Daily Bulletin Reporter Wendy Leung has an article reporting on Rancho Cucamonga's City Council voting to ban medical marijuana dispensaries. The article said:


Councilman Dennis Michael said one reason he supports the ban is that police officers have cited an increase in crime in areas near dispensaries.

"That's certainly not the kind of business we want in this city," Michael said.

Rancho Cucamonga joins a host of neighboring cities that have enacted some kind of prohibition on businesses that sell medical marijuana.

Upland, Montclair, Redlands and Colton are some cities that have enacted a full ban. A temporary ban is in effect in La Verne and Highland.

Claremont, meanwhile, continues to slow roll its own marijuana dispensary ordinance, which would allow dispensaries, or at least a single dispensary, in town. The Claremont 400 is split on the issue, with the faction led by Mayor Ellen Taylor and Councilpersons Sam Pedroza and Linda Elderkin in favor of the ordinance.

The Claremont Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, on he other hand, has weighed in with a letter to the Claremont Courier in that paper's April 5th edition arguing against the dispensary ordinance.

The Chamber's primary concern is that allow the dispensaries would be in conflict with federal law. So, the letter said, "The Claremont Chamber of Commerce feels that it is a terrible business practice to open up our city, landowners and business districts to potential federal raids and prosecution."

The letter went on to cite some other specific concerns:

1. Safety—Other dispensaries in the state have been targets of burglaries and robberies, not just in the facility, but also “follow home” crimes where the patrons of such dispensaries have been the victims. We are concerned about the impact this potential crime would have on industrial, commercial and residential areas as well as the impact on the time commitment of our police department.

2. Employment—Businesses have a right to protect themselves and their customers by drug testing their employees to help maintain the quality and safety of their work environment. We are concerned with the issues that have surfaced in regards to the use of “medicinal marijuana” and protecting employer’s rights in terms of testing and workplace use of marijuana.

3. Health—Due to the fact that these facilities are not regulated pharmacies, it is unclear who would be in charge of enforcement of any health issues of such a facility including amounts, quality, cleanliness, etc. The Chamber is concerned that either these issues would be the responsibility of city staff, or even worse, go completely unmonitored.

Claremont's City Attorney, Sonia Carvalho has been working on the language for the ban, and one suspects that some excuse will crop up to slow any progress on the ordinance. Or, Carvalho will come up with something so restrictive as to make it impossible for any dispensaries to open. That way Taylor, et. al., could say they passed the ordinance without ever actually having to deal with a marijuana dispensary in Claremont.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Shop Claremont

Claremont's PR machine grinds on.

The city of Claremont in partnership with the Claremont Chamber of Commerce invested $84,000 a couple months ago in a print and TV advertising campaign to draw customers to the new Village Expansion.

Some of the older and non-Village businesses have felt the ads focused too much on the Village Expansion and didn't benefit Claremont as a whole, so they started their own business-owners group, the Claremont Merchants Association.

A number of our readers wrote it questioning the ad campaign as vapid and déclassé. They seemed to feel that the ads didn't really encompass the Claremont that they knew and loved, a Claremont that is rapidly and vapidly disappearing.

Quite independently of the Chamber PR effort, the San Francisco Chronicle picked up an article, written "Special to the Chronicle," that ran in the paper's January 6th travel section.

The Chronicle article, written by Claremont-based freelance writer Vanessa Hua, seemed as if it were commissioned by the Chamber and was pretty much centered on the Village businesses, talking about Three Forks Chop House and listing only one hotel, the new Hotel Casa 425, which has only 28 rooms and which seems to get its name from its room prices. Not necessarily the place the average Chronicle reader would go if they happened to be in town for a weekend. It seemed odd too, that the Hua would omit other non-Village accommodations like the Doubletree or the Hotel Claremont.

And Jared Cicon, the independent adman who was in the local news last year for entering a couple amateur TV ad contests for Doritos and Heinz ketchup, has been enlisted into the City-Chamber promotional campaign as well:




Blogger and former Claremonter Juliana Brint picked up on the Chamber ads and had a few comments:

speaking of city planning and douchebagery: i'm a big fan of claremont's village expansion HOWEVER its accompanying ad campaign (financed by the city) plays into the worst of southern californian tendencies: superficiality, vapidity and a heightened sense of entitlement. it implies that the only worthwhile part of claremont is the village (only one of the seven "points of interest" on the agency's website is outside the village). the campaign's slogans range from self-satisfied spoiledness ("mia needed couture jeans to go with her superiority complex") to the inane and inarticulate ("claremont: shop, dine... chill").

NOTE: When we originally posted this, we listed Vanessa Hua, the writer of the Chronicle travel article, as "Riverside-based." Ms. Hua actually lives in Claremont. She also has written in to correct us about any notion that her Chronicle piece was commissioned by the city or the Chamber. It was not.

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Local News

There's some bad weather due in later today, so be careful out there. The rain is supposed to begin this afternoon and continue on through Sunday. Snow levels are supposed to drop to 4,000 by Sunday.

Here's the National Weather Service warning for the next few days.

* * *

Will Bigham writes in the Daily Bulletin that some Claremont businesses are not satisfied with the Village-centric nature of the latest city and Chamber of Commerce marketing campaigns. They've formed their own group called the Claremont Marketing Group to promote businesses located outside of the Village.

This complaint of our town being overly concerned with the Village is not new. It colors everything from the dissatisfaction of South Claremonters with how their part of town has been maintained to the affordable housing discussion - why no affordable housing component in the Village Expansion? Aren't they just segregating the lowest income people to outlying areas of town, away from transit and shopping?

With the exception of the Claremont Auto Center and the Old School House redevelopment, businesses outside the Village seem to feel neglected. The Bigham article reported:

Ruby Schmer, founder of the Claremont Marketing Association, said the group is courting businesses north and south of the Village, as well as home-based firms.

Schmer, owner of Biz2Biz Design & Printing, said she plans to send all non-Village merchants an association membership application in the next two weeks.

When the Village Expansion opened, Schmer said, "It made it more challenging because that's where the city and developers put the most money. So obviously a lot of advertising dollars, business-wise, need to go there.

"But we need to make sure that businesses' advertising goes outside the Village."

Schmer and several other non-Village business owners were rankled by a recent ad campaign, paid for by the Claremont Chamber of Commerce and City Hall, that promoted holiday shopping in the city.

The first newspaper ad of the campaign featured background images of the Laemmle Theatre, the Packing House, and Casablanca Mediterranean Bar & Grill - all in the Village Expansion.

Assistant City Manager Tony Ramos and Claremont Chamber of Commerce CEO Maureen Aldridge are both quoted in the article as saying the recent marketing campaign represented all Claremont businesses.

Monday, December 3, 2007

Claremont Chamber Rings in the Season


The Claremont Chamber of Commerce is certainly busy this holiday season. The 12th Annual Tree Lighting Ceremony & Holiday Promenade is this Friday, December 7th, beginning at 5:30pm at the Metrolink Depot at 1st St. and Harvard Ave. in the Old Claremont Village.

The event is co-sponsored by the city of Claremont and a number of Village businesses.

The Chamber is also working with the city on an ongoing postmodernist advertising campaign. You may have seen an ad in the California section of the LA Times with a photo of a seated woman's extended leg about to receive a shoe, a la Cinderella, from the hand a salesperson. The text says:


JENNA NEEDED NEW
STILETTOS TO GO WITH HER
RUBY RED CONVERTIBLE.

CLAREMONT
Shop, Dine...Chill.


The Chamber and the city of Claremont have partnered on this marketing project. They've also created a website: http://www.experienceclaremont.com/.