p-3cwPeRbeWWgGk
This Candidates Speakers forum is going to happen. It will happen with or without the use of a city building.
It seem word may have come down from city hall to make things difficult for candidates, the community and the alternative news sources in the valley. This decision flies in the face of the full Council per its Aug. 31 Meeting. My understanding was that the full Council was going to consider wavier of fees for use of a city building.
Readers may be aware that a syndicate of alternative media news & blogs in the Valley are working on sponsoring a 2010 29 Palms City Council Candidates Forum. To name a few of the alternative 
media local sponsors, they are: The American Free Journal/The Desert Valley Star; Cactus Thorns, The Sun Runner, 29 Underground, et cetera. A formal request was made on Tuesday, August 31, 2010 before the full council that a request for the John Calvin Theater city building for one evening, fees waived.
As I recall that was to be taken up by the City Council. Today the City Clerk call and informed that the John Calvin city building is not for rent to the public. I reminded the city clerk we have not asked to rent it. That city building also goes by the name of Theatre 29. This city building is for the EXCLUSIVE USE of one group and no other.
However, the City Clerk informed that the Community Services Building located in Luckie Park may be available for rent. I was directed to Parks & Recreation. I queried the clerk about the City Council Meeting and our request for fee waivers since it was my understanding that this may be taken up by the full council. The City Clerk informed me that City Manager Mike Tree has to make that decisions. Our request was put into the record with the request of council to consider a fee waive and request for the city building. This was stonewalled today.
It is becoming clear the City Council in some situations is a mere figure head. That dark forces undermined the powers granted them by the public. That someone else is running the show. This Candidate Forum is for the community and its candidates. I find it unacceptable for the city to placates a few of the same old cronies, skirting them around codes and making s backroom promises. This is how the City keeps things secret and censored. But when it’s something for the community — the community is not in the circle of influence.
Question: who pays the insurance on the Theatre29 and the John Calvin buildings?
Mike Tree is not working this week so next week I will go to him with some dates and a request fee waivers so candidates may use their building for a candidates forum and voters may meet their candidates. If Mike Tree denies the the use of the city building without the usual fees ($146.00 usage, plus insurance) then fundamental rights afford an appeal process before the full council.
Why is it the City can give a gift of $35,000 (initially it was to be $130,000) to the 29 Chamber 
of Commerce and provide than with a city building, but they can’t waive fees for the public to hold a speakers forum? Why is it the city can give Theatre 29 a free city building for their exclusive use, but can’t accommodate the public to hold a speakers forum. Why is it the City can come up with $16, 000 to wet slurry portions of a city street that does not need it and it is scheduled for slurry two years in the future — so a Chamber of Commerce Director he can hold a fundraiser.
Just who does local government belong to anyway? The politburo of the 29 Chamber of Commerce, Mel Berlin, Gary Daigneault and all their anti-democratic sycophant cronies.
I kiss the American soil we stand on because we have fundamental rights across this great land. Rights that are far greater than all the machinations these self-serving opportunistic jackasses manage to undermine. I see a new town order in 29 Palms. One in which sunshine is welcome. Where the local cronies are put out to pasture.
- END -
UPDATE
Tues. 2:02 PM: — Parks & Recreation spokesperson Kary Minatrea broke down the costs for renting the Community Service City Building, as follows:
Four hours use of city building: $90.00
Refundable cleaning deposit: $125.-00
Class II insurance: $146 to $178
It is now up to city Manager Mike Tree, not the full City Council?
Note: I thank the City Clerk her for getting back to us in a timely manner. She is doing her job in a courteous and professional manner. Likewise, Ms. Minatrea was courteous and professional. Thank you both. bh
“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.
Related posts:
My Mr. Tree position as a candidate, I will push, prod and educate the other four members of the council on the need for a Mr. Tree hit the road resolution, as D T would say Mr. Tree you are fired, your salary and perks has cost this city some where between $200,000.00 and $300,000.00 (some say more) annually. No telling how much was dispensed in the back room to a few under your managment. I can’t even fathom how you can look yourself in the mirror.
Are the setting council members and incumbents that approved Mr. Tree’s ludicrous salary and perks going to identify yourself or hide and pretend it was not I. Was it done in a back room in increments and add-on’s like special insurance policies? How about a good explanation on his pension? Come on guys don’t be cowards, I know you keep up with what is posted on the local blogs.
I would not doubt Mr. Tree sees the righting on the wall and my bet he is looking for another gullible city to set up shop in, after all a resignation is better than a you are fired.
This is not the important part of the story, but is Mr. Tree on vacation again? In June, when I couldn’t get in touch with him, he told me he was on vacation, he said he came back from vacation for the June 22 city council meeting and just to meet with me the 23rd of June. He was also leaving for vacation, but squeezed in a meeting with me the 29th of July, before he left.
If he is on vacation, if that is what is meant by “not working this week” I hope he is enjoying himself.
I am sure things will work out for the forum, I am sure the candidates and the voters both will demand it.
Is this actually legal? I mean, letting some people use facilities, but denying that opportunity to the other candidates? Who can report this and to who?
Strikes me the ogliarchy currently running 29 are getting nervous, and resorting to ugly, possibly illegal tactics.
Also, do we have a Bell situation? Where is the transparency on wages, pension etc -- should they not be in the public domain for scrutiny? Maybe the next council meeting should be pushed for a few answers -- thinking I’ll go and ask the questions (I’m good like that)