Loading...
You are here:  Home  >  29 Palms  >  Current Article

ChalkFest 29 promoters wants more public funding

By   /   June 17, 2011  /   3 Comments

    Print       Email

Today’s mantra. . .

“The City of 29 Palms is not a piggyback for the art community… The City of 29 Palms is not a piggyback for the art community… The City of 29 Palms is not a piggyback for the art community.”

Comes now Action Council 29 to ask for another yearly handout of public funds.

During this week’s City Council meeting, during public comments, Chairman of Action Council29, Ray Kinsman, described plans for a Chalk Fest in November. He  asked for a fresh slurry seal on the Luckie Park parking lot to support Chalk Fest.” Last year it was Chairmn Mel Berlin — who certainly got his tit caught in a wringer over his imbecilic imbrogilo.

It’s an another art group made up of many of the same chaps that lobbied for a “grand new” $1,600,000.00 Performing Arts Theater 29.  The Brown Act was (open meetings) was defiled  upon  by this organization and a majority of Council members then seated.

While we have no money for the 29 Palms Fire Department, Action Council29 is back for another handout  (*$16,000)  request to slurry seal the Luckie Park parking lot for Action Council  29′s Chalk Fest 29? * [Last year the cost to slurry was determined by the City to cost $16,000.]

All told, last year they wanted a total $40,000.00 (see below)  but did not get it. How much this year? The good news, this year Action Council 29 is not meeting sneakily or privately with city officials and skirting the Brown Act (as far as we know).  Last year it was a done deal before it was  on the City Counsel Agenda, and all their advertisement went out all across the Hi-Desert and the Coachella Valley.

I guess they figure with a couple of new council members, it doesn’t hurt to ask.

Last year, “The city was hit up to pay $16,000.00 to slurry seal the Luckie park parking lot. Action Council 29 did not get awarded any tax dollars to execute their event.” Nor did they get their 16K slurry seal. After a stormy rebuff from citizens, the city voted they must pay for their own advertising, city employee costs, Sheriff Department costs, fees, etc.  Action Council 29 wanted the application fees waiver and city employee costs however after much ado about much, their requests were defeated.

What will this Council do? Uselessly fret that the Fire Department is seriously lacking funding, while giving away thousand of dollars of public funds to Action Council29

A little history from last year’s unfortunately ChalkFest fiasco:

Ding Dong, Ding Dong… Our own little Bell to ring
Our own little Bell to answer: The Fix is in
Another Link

Another Link

“The Little Red Engine That Could,” ChalkFest 29 Nov. 6

-  END  -

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
    Print       Email

About the author

Branson Hunter

Senior Corespondent At Large

"The ends do not justify the means." If you use illegal mean to accomplish a legal and even desirable result, the good result does not make the bad means you used justifiable.

3 Comments

  1. Richard Myers Richard says:

    How can anyone in their right mind ask for public money to scribble on public property, when some senior citizens and the unemployed/homeless can't get enough to eat? What kind of world are we living in?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
    • Branson Hunter Branson Hunter says:

      I respectfully ask Action Council 29 Chairman Ray Kinsman, how much money does your organization have in the bank this year? It's public information. Last year you folks had $20,000.

      Richard, last year Action Council 29 had $20,000 in the bank. When the Chairman of the organization (Mel Berlin) formalize their funding request (to fund their fundraiser), with much defiant and swaggering behavior he declared they had $20 K in the bank. His appearance was a mere formality since it was a done deal. He already had the green light -- good to go.

      Four of the five 29 Palms Council Members who heard this matter remain seated.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
  2. Branson Hunter says:

    Richard, that's not the half of it.

    If you read the Links in the story from last years controversy, the hubris from a few was a shock to the sensibilities. All told,the city estimated the cost of the Chalk Fest would have been $40,000.

    So what about the 2011 Chalk Fest? They had one last year without public funding; promoters said it was a success. Why not have another successful Chalk Fest without the wet slurry ($16,000).

    It's always the same few bellying up to the public trough in 29. The Fire Department needs the money more, for public safety; genuine nonprofit charitable like local food banks need it more.

    The problem is that the few have had their way in 29 for so long, they almost demand it as their entitlement. One source informs me that the City Council may just approve this for their friends.

    The other side to this is that there are many artists in 29 that are hard working and do NOT expect public welfare to support their causes. The other side to this is that, many of the functions like this are simply FUND RAISERS!

    The final side to this as I recall is that Action Council 29 wanted to sell alcohol in the streets (it's a fundraiser you know). How F' stupid is that? someone gets drunk, drives, and kill someone. As such, the city gets sued for several million dollars.

    After last years humiliation, Action Council 29 is shamelessly skipping back to City Hall for more of your taxpayer's money for their fundraiser.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

You might also like...

A call to all OHV riders, put on your thinking caps

Read More →
Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
UA-9539515-1 e0a5d0bb00574423a5afb96d6b854248