Town Square

Post a New Topic

Councilman says he hasn't left Atherton

Original post made on Jan 21, 2010

Atherton Councilman Charles Marsala says he hasn't moved out of Atherton. Responding to a complaint from a neighbor who thought he'd left town, Mr. Marsala said that he is leasing his home for a couple of months to a Stanford Hospital patient and her family.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, January 21, 2010, 10:18 AM

Comments (47)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Tricia 59
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Jan 21, 2010 at 12:16 pm

Typical Atherton busy bodies trying to tattle on a neighbor. Having lived here since 1955, it seems to me there are more and more lethargic Athertonians in recent years with nothing better to do but peek out of their curtains to spy on other residents. It is one thing to keep our town safe, observing suspicious activities, but to those Town Snoops, GET A LIFE! Charles Marsala is doing a noble deed! How many of YOU would do the same for a person or family in need?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Tree Fan
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 21, 2010 at 12:23 pm

I agree. I had this huge but dangerous eucalyptus tree in my front yard, and it needed trimming about 40 feet on the top. I hired tree trimmers, and sure enough, THE POLICE came to my door. A neighbor had called them, instead of doing the normal neighborly thing, coming over, ringing my bell and simply inquiring about our tree trimming since they were SO CURIOUS. The police asked if I was tearing my tree down. I said no, not at all, just trimming it because the neighbor on my right asked me to for safety since much of it leaned towards HIS yard. The OTHER neighbor on my left, I discovered later, was the one who called to "save the tree". So in Communist fashion, I called them both and gave them each other's phone #'s to discuss what they wanted to happen WITH MY TREE. Poor Mr. Marsala having nosey neighbors. Sad. And how much did we townspeople have to pay for the city attorney to render his opinion?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Atherton Neighbor
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Jan 21, 2010 at 12:25 pm

Amazing. This is the type of press once again that Atherton doesn't need. I agree with Tricia on all fronts. It sounds like this was started by another council member "hearing rumors" given the friction and bad blood on this town council. Another self inflicted poke in the eye for Atherton politics.

Good work Charles, given your recent family loss. The family leasing your home is fortunate to have someone like you who is helping them during a tremendously difficult time.

PS. Andrea, you have better things to write about don't you??? How about high speed rail and some of the other pressing issues?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Witch Doctor
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 21, 2010 at 2:25 pm

It seems that Mayor McKeithen is [portion removed; disrespectful language]on yet another WITCH HUNT against Marsala. Previously she went after her fellow councilmembers Nan Chapman, Malcolm Dudley, Didi Fisher, Alan Carlson, Jim Janz, and Elizabeth Lewis. Yes, a WITCH HUNT; and trust me Kathy IS NOT a hunter.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Willy
a resident of Woodside: other
on Jan 21, 2010 at 2:59 pm

Dang, these folks need to get a life. At least we learned where Mrs. Kravitz moved to... (although Charles is probably too young to remember "Bewitched")

Go Chuck - keep on giving them 'ell!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Massachusetts Miracle
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 21, 2010 at 3:25 pm

Whoa!

After reading the story and the reactions in the comments above, I have only one observation. Kathy McKeithen and Charles Marsala are Atherton's own local version of Martha Coakley and Scott Brown. Time to concede Kathy.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by spin doctor
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 21, 2010 at 6:33 pm

One does have to marvel at Marsala's public relations skills.

He makes mention of his father passing away and his new tennant having brain surgery almost in the same sentence.

Then his friends launch an attack on his arch enemy on the council suggesting she was behind the neighbor's complaints.


Karl Rove. I hope you're taking notes.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by busybody
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 21, 2010 at 7:06 pm

Marsala should know that people have been subject to crimial prosecution for lying about where they live.

Remember Steve Cader?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by judge judy
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 21, 2010 at 7:12 pm

In light of Charles record of public service (dare I call him St. Charles?) I\'m inclined to give him a suspended sentence, conditioned upon his immediate resignation from the City Coucil.

But I\'ll throw the book at him if he isn\'t gone by sundown!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by swan song
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 21, 2010 at 8:33 pm

Dear Charles
Glad to see you back in such fine form, enjoying this last taste of power and popularity.
In these few weeks before you finally flame out forever, there is still some last minute damage for you to inflict on this town, just to insure your that your legacy prevails as the absolute worst catalyst for ruination living memory.
Maybe if you look up Rodney Bogonovich in Chicago he will take you in.
Send us a postcard


 +   Like this comment
Posted by sun dried tomatoe
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 21, 2010 at 9:56 pm

Gee I was under the impression that Marsala was staying in Steve Ackley's pool house - the one Marsala helped keep from getting torn down after Ackley was caught red handed building it without a permit.

With all the developer friends Marsala made he should be able live for decades in Atherton rent free.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by take your pick
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 21, 2010 at 11:07 pm

[Post removed; same poster using multiple names in the thread]


 +   Like this comment
Posted by sir isaac newton
a resident of another community
on Jan 22, 2010 at 9:18 am

I calculate the rate at which the political fortunes of Councilman Marsala are falling to be 36 feet per second squared.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by eye in the sky
a resident of Atherton: Lloyden Park
on Jan 22, 2010 at 10:16 am

Its a bird, no its a plane, no it's charles marsala along with his political career falling from up high.


To think just 12 months ago he was one vote away from controlling the City Council.

Elizabeth Lewis sure will be lonely.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Not Necessary
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Jan 23, 2010 at 12:47 am

I am enjoying the transparency of the Atherton City Council and SOME of it's residents for the following reasons; it allows one to see the lack of compassion by others in your community, and your council. It helps us to see why the business of Atherton City Council can't get done, because you're too busy minding other peoples's business.

To the nosey one, and you know who you are, GET A LIFE! If you had as much compassion for another human being as you have time to peer through your windows at your neighbors and gossip, you could be considered respectable. Imagine what good you could do for your community with all that time. Shame on you!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on Jan 23, 2010 at 7:34 am

Does a council member have a duty to report a crime to the District Attorneys Office?

Does the District Attorney (once he has knowledge) have a duty to charge a Atherton Police Chief who has publicly admitted illegally accessing the criminal computer system? (routine background check)

Charles knew of this crime yet chose not to report it. He already lost another Police Chief for the same crime.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by So Sad
a resident of Atherton: Lloyden Park
on Jan 23, 2010 at 7:34 am

This story is a diversion to what is really happening in Atherton. After giving Pilar Buckly $230,000.00, Mayor McKeithen is helping Former Finance director John Johns get money from the town. She requested town documents and gave them to Johns to use in his lawsuit against the town and gave him a declaration to use as well. Johns gave a statement under penalty of perjury that she violated the Brown Act and gave him privileged information that the criminal investigation against him wasn't going anywhere.

She responded with a statement under penalty of perjury that Johns committed perjury with his statement. But Johns statement was correct, the investigation did not result in prosecution.

She has been chair of the Town's Finance Committee for six years and directed Johns to investigate those she had issues with. The first retaliation investigation was Mike Hood. She wanted Hood to prosecute her neighbor for letting the nanny stay in the guest cottage more than 30 days. Hood sent it to the Planning Commission.

After the Atherton Police and San Mateo Sheriff searched her home, she directed Johns to investigate the Atherton Police.

When she was the subject of the recall campaign in 2006, she directed Johns to spend more than $12,000.00 of our town money to have forensics done on the Building Department computers for information on her recall. A politician cannot use public funds for campaigning!

If she can replace Marsala with another one of her friends like Dobbie, she has the votes to cover-up the John Johns favors...so much for transparency!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by same old tricks
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 23, 2010 at 10:38 am

Dear Sad Sack: Great spin! If you can successfully hijack this thread back to the old "tried and true?" spin about McKeithen, then maybe it will work again to take everyones eye off the ball--after all--it has worked repeatedly to confuse the public for years.
Maybe no one will notice yet again.
If it does not happen to work as well this time you can always try the" porn discovered on the computer" method at which you have become so adept.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on Jan 23, 2010 at 12:08 pm

Dear Steve, I mean SoSad

Everyone knew the criminal Investigation against John Johns wasn't going anywhere. The question is why did you open it in the first place, Of course he had authority to purchase things, and then after determining no crime (ipod purchase) was committed, why did you allow the investigation to remain open if not for the sole purpose to interfere with his civil rights. You allowed Investigator I.G. to remain involved and attend J.J. court appearance to put pressure (forcing him to invoke the 5th) on him to drop his civil suit.

Please feel free to double check your facts before you attempt to spin this. It is my understanding the Kathy McKeithen has personal knowledge of being followed by black APD car, before she was a council member.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Candle Lighter
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Jan 23, 2010 at 1:24 pm

The ongoing (and really, personal) "war" between the factions of two members of the town council is doing tremendous damage to this town. Because of this ongoing "war" there is not a united council and Jerry Gruber thus believes he can operate in a manner far more autonomous than is appropriate. Because of this ongoing "war" the police department also feels there can never be any consequences for any of its misdeeds. I think it is important to realize this, and then to stop it, because everyone loses.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by peace-nik
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 23, 2010 at 2:48 pm

Candle Lighter
Well I not sure it does damage everyone. In fact it lets Charles conveniently right off the hook actually, to drop the issue. Do you need him for something?? Think of this all, as a proxy war of attrition between "special interests". Choose a side if you want it over with. Apparently we just can't have it both ways without an endless struggle.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 23, 2010 at 2:56 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

The subject of the Almanac article and, therefore, of this thread is the legal residency of one of the Council members.

If the Forum is to be a valuable place for citizen dialogue then we all need to exercise some self discipline.

Might I suggest that those who wish to discuss other issues take advantage of the Forum to start a new topic on the subject of your choice.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Candle Lighter
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Jan 23, 2010 at 4:09 pm

Peace-nik, I don't need anyone for anything. I just have the ability to prioritize the issues going on with Atherton now. In a way I wish this could be near the top of the list, but the sad truth is, it isn't even close.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by not taking sides
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 23, 2010 at 5:49 pm

Dear Peter

I agree. Posters should stay on topic or start a new thread.

I think Candle Lighter does have a point that is relevant to this thread however.

It is clear there is animosity amongst two members of the Council. It is also clear that this animosity has degenerated into emnity.

The only one who can benefit from the Council's inability to play nice is the City Manager. With a divided council a power vacum is created. The Council-Manager form of government ceases to exist.

It is replaced by a City Manager form of government.

If we want accountability in this town, we need a City Council that can actually function.

I say stop the recriminations and start the deliberations.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 23, 2010 at 6:43 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Not taking sides states:
"It is clear there is animosity amongst two members of the Council. It is also clear that this animosity has degenerated into emnity.

The only one who can benefit from the Council's inability to play nice is the City Manager. With a divided council a power vacum is created. The Council-Manager form of government ceases to exist.

It is replaced by a City Manager form of government.

If we want accountability in this town, we need a City Council that can actually function.

I say stop the recriminations and start the deliberations."

Ok, then start a NEW thread on that issue and quit using this thread for that issue. If we, as an electronic community, cannot regulate our behavior then this Forum will become the forum for the disgruntled and everyone else will, appropriately, leave this forum.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by wicked witch of the west
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 23, 2010 at 7:23 pm

Dear Playing Both Ends Against the Middle:
This effort to protect Charles by pretending it will save the town from Gruber is your most brilliant yet. All of your argument is exactly true enough to to disguise the question "should Charles remain on the council at all??
If he's gone and replaced by anyone or no one, the council dynamic/city manager/vacum all self corrects. I agree that Gruber has abdicated-- thrown his lot in with the police to stay out of the whole council thing and to all of our peril---but Charles was never the answer to solve this problem.
.
Does Charles have your lawnmower or some thing?? Better get it back quick.



 +   Like this comment
Posted by Playing Both Ends Against the Middle
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 23, 2010 at 8:01 pm

The biggest problem the Town of Atherton currently has is the police department which: (1) we cannot afford, (2) we can afford even less than we think we can afford due to the pension costs that are not being reported, (3) we can afford even less that even that based on the litigation dollars that are being spent on the various fiascos having to do with the police department. The reason for these fiascos is the police department is a self-governing body that has no accountability or oversight by citizens. Charles Marsala did not create this problem, as it existed prior to his joining the council (Steve Cader fiascos). If he can help to fix it, that's great. If he won't, I agree, he shouldn't be on the council.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by wicked witch of the west
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Jan 23, 2010 at 8:37 pm

Charles can not support your cause and also survive in Atherton--he will not have to choose as you believe--he will pretend to take both sides, while feeling suddenly important and then dump you both for a better offer.
Your idealism is mildly refreshing--You can not have lived here for very long


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 23, 2010 at 10:44 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

PLEASE start a NEW thread on your personal issue and quit using this thread for that issue.

If we, as an electronic community, cannot regulate our behavior then this Forum will become the forum for the disgruntled and everyone else will, appropriately, leave this forum.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by disgruntled and now dismissed
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 23, 2010 at 11:12 pm

Peter: someone mentioned recently that transparency may get messy-Mr. Gibboney I believe.
This thread may appear to be frayed, but seems at least to me, to be very much still connected.
Please tell us something interesting about the ACIL--


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 5:40 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

The subject of the Almanac article and, therefore, of this thread is the legal residency of one of the Council members.

If the Forum is to be a valuable place for citizen dialogue then we all need to exercise some self discipline.

If we, as an electronic community, cannot regulate our behavior then this Forum will become the forum for the disgruntled and everyone else will, appropriately, leave this forum.

Disgruntled - PLEASE start a NEW thread on your personal issue and quit using this thread for that issue. Starting a new thread is easy; of course you have to define your issue so that other people know what your particular discussion is about.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by what's the big deal?
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Jan 24, 2010 at 9:46 am

Peter Carpenter is right. Let's get back to the subject of this thread.

The issue of what constitutes residency is of extreme importance. Think of it in these terms.

In the past ten years there have been a number of town employees who have left the Town either involuntarily or who have left voluntarily but under a cloud.

What if say Steve Cader, Ralph Freedman, and Pilar Buckley just to name a few decided to rent a room from a resident for say $1 dollar per month just to establish residency?

Would Wynn Furth say that under these circumstances that there is no issue?

Mr. Marsala, you have opened up a can of worms.

A wise man once said once you have openened up a can of worms, how do you put them back? Easy, open up another can of worms......

Mr. Marsala, lets hope you haven't unwittingly opened up an even bigger can of worms in trying to take care of your own financial problems.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 10:11 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Here are the factors which the State of California uses to determine residency for TAX purposes. These factors look to the State in which the following occurred:

1. Birth, marriage, raising family;
2. Preparation of tax returns;
3. Resident state income tax returns filed;
4. Payment and receipt of income;
5. Ownership and occupancy of custom built home;
6. Service as officer and employee of business corporation;
7. Holding of licenses for conduct of profession;
8. Ownership of family corporation;
9. Ownership and occupancy of vacation home;
10. Ownership of cemetery lots;
11. Church attendance;
12. Church donations;
13. Church membership and committee participation;
14. Family doctors and dentist;
15. Car registration;
16. Driver's license of taxpayer year;
17. Driver's license of taxpayer's spouse;
18. Voter registration and actual voting;
19. Charge accounts;
20. Predominant banking and financial accounts;
21. Accountant, lawyer and professional advisors;
22. Wills prepared and located;
23. Education of children;
24. Most days within state;
25. Country club membership;
26. Plaintiff's intended state of residence;
27. Presence of, and visits by, other family members;
28. Social event attendance; and
29. Professional memberships.

I will research residency definition/requirements for elected officials.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 10:19 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

California Code of Civil Procedure section 803:
An action may be brought by the attorney-general, in the name
of the people of this state, upon his own information, or upon a
complaint of a private party, against any person who usurps, intrudes
into, or unlawfully holds or exercises any public office, civil or
military, or any franchise, or against any corporation, either de
jure or de facto, which usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or
exercises any franchise, within this state. And the
attorney-general must bring the action, whenever he has reason to
believe that any such office or franchise has been usurped, intruded
into, or unlawfully held or exercised by any person, or when he is
directed to do so by the governor.

Still looking for what constitutes 'unlawfully holds" as related to residency


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 10:28 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

If a person has more than one residence and that person maintains a homeowner's property tax exemption on the dwelling of one of the residences pursuant to Section 218 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the residence subject to the homeowner's property tax exemption is that person's domicile. However, this presumption shall not apply in the event any other residence is listed as the person's current residence address on any driver's license, identification card or vehicle registration issued to that person by, and on file with, the Department of Motor Vehicles.
If a person has more than one residence and that person claims a renter's tax credit for one of the residences pursuant to Section 17053.5 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the residence subject to the renter's tax credit is that person's domicile. However, this presumption shall not apply in the event any other residence is listed as the person's current residence address on any driver's license, identification card, or vehicle registration issued to that person by, and on file with, the Department of Motor Vehicles.

2032. Except as provided in this article, if a person has more than one residence and that person has not physically resided at any one of the residences within the immediate preceding year, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that those residences in which he or she has not so resided within the immediate preceding year are merely residences as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 349 and not his or her domicile. 2031 California.

A person does not gain or lose a domicile solely by reason of his or her presence or absence from a place while employed in the service of the United States or of this state, nor while engaged in navigation, nor while a student of any institution of learning, nor while kept in an almshouse, asylum or prison. 2025 (California).

If a person has a family fixed in one place, and he or she does business in another, the former is his or her place of domicile, but any person having a family, who has taken up an abode with the intention of remaining and whose family does not so reside with him or her, is a domiciliary where he or she has so taken up the abode. 2028 (California).


 +   Like this comment
Posted by point counterpoint
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 24, 2010 at 10:49 am

Thank you Mr. Carpenter for bringing this thread back to where it belongs.

The issue of Mr. Marsala's residency is of significant public interest. We should remain focused upon this issue. We should not allow ourselves to be distracted by tangentials.

Regarding the homeowner's exemption. This exemption is not allowed for those who rent or lease their property as I understand it.

Regarding the operation of a business. Mr. Marsala does have a home occupation permit. However Mr. Marsala also claims a Menlo Park Post Office box as his business address. Therefore Mr. Marsala may have deliberately misrepresented the true location of his business in order to escape the financial reporting requirements of the Fair Political Practices Commission.

The issue of whether Mr. Marsala should continue to have the privilege of sitting on the Council is a complex one. It is an issue that should not be dismissed so glibly by the City Attorney.

This is an issue that isn't going to go away.

This is an issue I call upon you, in ernest, Mr. Carpenter to take on as President of the ACIL.

I ask that you in your capacity as president to ask the Attorney General to examine this issue and to give us an independent rendering.

Thank you in advance for considering this requet Mr. Carpenter


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Lois
a resident of another community
on Jan 24, 2010 at 10:57 am

Peter: The Almanac dose not need you to edit their forum for them
Everyone knows that you have always been overly fond of Charles
Why don't you take him in and then you can vouch for him with COMPLETE AUTHORITY
This would settle the matter
With this precedent, I may return myself and then run for council


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 11:35 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Any citizen may ask the District Attorney to examine this issue.

Personally, I do not think the law (as have have been able to research it and have posted above) is clear on the residence requirement. And I do not feel that I have a factual basis (certainly this thread has not contributed any evidence on this matter) to either challenge Marsala's residency myself or to recommend that ACIL consider the issue.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by loophole
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 24, 2010 at 12:28 pm

Peter:
Why bother asking the DA anything about Atherton
You might have understood by now that Charles is part of a closed loop that winds around the DA's office with all our recent police chiefs as charter members.
It is not an enormous shock to find the ACIL has been included
but I do know you will feel bad about all this when you finally do get your eyes opened


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 12:40 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Loophole states:"but I do know you will feel bad about all this when you finally do get your eyes opened"

My eyes are wide opened and I am ready to be persuaded by facts, but all this thread has provided is a series of childish diatribes.

It is fascinating to see so many people feel so passionate about something about which they have no facts. Perhaps attacking elected leaders is like a religious cult that simply requires belief and does not require evidence.

Would anyone like to present facts?

Or run for office?

Or file a Form 700?

Or make a case to the State Attorney General if you feel that the San Mateo District Attorney has a conflict of interest?

Or does everybody just want to sit on the fence and throw stones?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by three blind mice
a resident of Atherton: Lloyden Park
on Jan 24, 2010 at 1:05 pm

In our humble opinion Mr. Carpenter is in denial.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 1:55 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Let's see

- no one except the original reporter, Mr. Marsala and I have presented any facts regarding the residency issue.

- with only a few exceptions all of the postings have been anonymous.

- most of the postings have been off topic.

No, I am neither blind nor in denial but rather searching for the truth in a room full of anonymous posters who can neither provide facts or stay on topic.

Once again:
Would anyone like to present facts?

Or run for office?

Or file a Form 700?

Or make a case to the State Attorney General if you feel that the San Mateo District Attorney has a conflict of interest?

Or does everybody just want to sit on the fence and throw stones?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 2:05 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

I suggest that one of you blind mice, loopholes, disgruntleds ect, start a new topic on 'complaining about other people, particularly those people whose names we know'. You will all fit in quite well.

And then the rest of us, and hopefully other truly concerned citizens, can have an intelligent, fact based discussion on the topic of this thread - residency of a Council member.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by naming names
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jan 24, 2010 at 4:54 pm

Mr. Carpenter

Perhaps you would like to disclose the names of those whom you claim to know would would represent good company for three blind mice, disgruntled, loophole, etc.

As far as I am concerned there are those who have presented information that suggests Mr. Marsala has violated the very laws you cite.

As far as I am concerned the posts complaining about the divisiveness of the current council are on point here.

As far as I am concerned, you are are neither worthy of the role nor is is appropriate for you to claim the role of moderator of this discussion board.

There are many postings some of which border on the hysterical in their defense of Marsala combined with an attack on McKeithen.

I respect those postings more than I do yours Mr. Carpenter because those posters have taken ownership of a position, while you ever so slyly take a stance all the while claiming those postings to which you do not agree as being irrelevant.

Mr. Carpenter, you remind me of those who went to Canada in the late '60s and early '70s, to avoid the draft only to return to enjoy the fruits of liberty after amnesty had been declared.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 24, 2010 at 5:20 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Stated by naming names: "Mr. Carpenter, you remind me of those who went to Canada in the late '60s and early '70s, to avoid the draft only to return to enjoy the fruits of liberty after amnesty had been declared."

As a decorated and disabled Vietnam veteran I reject that cowardly personal attack as being a misguided as the rest your our post. I have and will always continue to fight, literally AND figuratively, for the liberties which we all enjoy - including truth.

My position in this thread is clear and repeated - IF there are facts which are consistent with a violation of the law THEN action is warranted. Reread all of my postings. Mindless name calling does not constitute either facts or a recitation of the law.

I am not moderating anything, and obviously not the behavior of most of the posters, but simply ask people to present facts or desist in their personal and hysterical attacks.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Candle Lighter
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Jan 25, 2010 at 12:52 am

Where in the Atherton Municipal Code is the residency requirements for council members specified? I couldn't find it. To honor Peter Carpenter's request, it seems there are two primary issues: (1) what is the legal requirement for residency in order to be an Atherton council member, and is that legal requirement being violated or not?; and (2) if the legal requirement is not being violated, should the legal requirement be refined to apply more stringent criteria (e.g., if the ordinance merely states "s/he must be a resident", it would seem to fall back on the tax definition of living somewhere more than half the year, and most would probably agree six months and a day should not be enough to be on the council)?

I think Peter would agree (2) is a legitimate issue for discussion on this particular topic, and where he and I might differ is my view that discussion of (2) (or even the interpretation of (1), if that is not black and white) will inevitably lead to discussion of motivational factors. At some point, those become too far removed from the original point of the discussion, but I think it's fair game to consider underlying motivations in issues of "justice".


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jan 25, 2010 at 6:39 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Candle Lighter has stated the issues well.

I agree that the definition of residency in the local, county and state codes leaves a lot of ambiguity, with the tax code being the most definitive. In my opinion this thread is about the residency of a Council member and that should be addressed given the current, albeit, ambiguous definition of residency.

Changing the definition of residency is, in my opinion, a different issue - and since I think that staying on topic is a useful attribute of a healthy and productive discussion I have started a new topic with that heading.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Flirtation
By Chandrama Anderson | 4 comments | 1,582 views

King of the Slides
By Cheryl Bac | 4 comments | 1,216 views

Standardized Test Prep: When to Start and Whom to Hire?
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 1 comment | 1,101 views

Finger Food and a Blood Lite?
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 858 views

Where the Sidewalk Ends
By Paul Bendix | 3 comments | 423 views