entire town Busted for Yard-Sign abusement

The Judge declared the entire town "GUILTY!"
of election-time Campaign Yard Sign Abusement.
The Judge - clearly not amused.
It was precedent setting.
The charming, sleepy seaside village was the
first known city-wide civil-case brought against
abusers of a candidate's good name, in ink, stuck
in the ground for everyone to read. Libelous affronts.
Rampant and pervasive proliferated across the
village faster'n hot ashes during a Santa Ana.
How very nasty the sleepy town's pre-election
yard sign-habit / circus, had festered into.
According to eyewitness reports: sign-abusement
by folks both private...and surprisingly, some
Public Official'doms?, vaulted from childish
pranksterism, into full blown angry campaign
signage buffoonery.
Finally - 1 fed-up 'good' public official, wanting
to stem the evil tide of sign-slanderousness,
so lasciviously libelous in content, the 'good'
official yanked a particularly offensive cardboard
character assassinator from its improper rooting
i.e. placed illegally, and was promptly busted.
Busted for doing, "the right-thing."
This happens when strident subversives are
allowed to spew unchecked. Subverting good-laws
in their warped march towards righteous misbehavior.
Twisting truth to lies in the service of bad-natured
self interests. And innocent folks get battered.
On the Plus-side: had the arrest of the town's 'good'
public servant not happened, there'd been no public
Hearing, where it was revealed (on TV), certain
elected officials were witnessed running amuck
in trucks, committing all kind'a campaign-sign
skullduggery for who knows how many election
cycles (the sleepy seaside village's dirty little
secret...until now?).
So - dear tourist, should you visit that quaint and
charming, sleepy little seaside village, and notice
what looks to be upstanding citizens down on
hands and knees scrubbing curbs, sidewalks,
clearing debris (wearing bright orange safety
vests), stop and say "Hello!"
It may be a city councilperson. Or a local land
developer. Who knows who you'll meet.
Apparently the whole town was in on the fun.
Well, maybe not everyone.

LTE - LATimes - The Region - Nov. 17 08

Susannah Rosenblatt's "behind OC's toll road issues"
was accurate if not wholly formed. How could it be?
TCA's (OC's toll road purveyor) have a 25-year head
start on spinning-out TCA's toll road illusion / yarns.
Their big electric road signs warn us: take a toll road,
or our lives won't last as long. What TCA never reports:
they're broke (no question). Upside-down. Like housing
and our economy - BROKE.

Difference is: TCA ain't ever gonna recover.

Their "Star" toll road, the 73 thru Laguna, never has been
right-side-up, since day-1. Now TCA's 241, the supposed
healthy one is worse off than Laguna's 73. How you say,
"in the tank?" Yet, TCA is adding lanes (???) to both the
73 and the 241 (as toll traffic plummets), while hobbling
freeway and arterial improvements via Non-Compete
agreements. That TCA would pave thru a state park for
no good traffic reason, in a direction I-5 traffic doesn't want
to go, at $15 one-way - predicted by OCTA MIS-07 Study:
the least traveled pavement in South County by 2030,
makes TCA scream, "Fixing I-5 thru San Clemente takes
100's of homes!" What they don't report: OCTA (grand pooh
bah of OC transportation) recommends adding the
necessary lanes to I-5 thru SC utilizing "Context Sensitive
Engineering" aka no "Takings," erasing TCA's bogus 241
extension entirely.

Sad fact: majority of OC-electeds pray daily at TCA's alter
of "failed" toll roads, at our expense: the majority of OC
commuters who never drive toll roads; makes one wonder -
who is steering OC?

We all know the direction. The question is, why go there?
And or, when is 25-years of a failed transportation model,
enough? In 2008? 2009?, or 2030?

public-litter versus the common-good

This is the sign Brenda Miller removed (thank you Brenda) from
public property, where it was illegally placed.

Who would not call this slanderous material?
Placed illegally on public property, who would not call this the
worst kind of personal-attack-graffiti.

Post election: Mr. Baker was elected by over 8,000 SC voters
and Mr. Mann received over 7,000 SC votes of endorsements
placing him 4th in a field of 9.

2 percentage points from victory and 12 percentage points
ahead of 5th place.

Clearly, between 1st and 4th-place, in this council election,
it was neck and neck to the finish.
2%, the difference 1st to 4th.

It is my firm belief, Brenda did exactly what needed to be
done (by any thinking SC official) - removing this sign from
our pre-election public landscape.

For the Record, she did it in broad daylight, 1-block from
SC's Sheriff's office. Then turned the trash-talking signage
into SC's City-yard, receiving a receipt for same.

City-yard on Pico is where campaigners go to retrieve lost,
stolen, or in any way salvaged campaign signage.

In my humble opinion: anyone approving of this sign's
blasphemous character assassination message is as
confused and misguided as whoever funded its production.

Elections get heated.

08, on every level - was particularly heated. But it's over.

The economy remains terrible for everyone and getting worse.
Open Spacer's battle developers and visa versa.
Tempers are understandably on edge.

Regardless, our common sense goal must always be,
in dire times, and in good times, keep your wits about you
when others are losing there's. Don't stoop to base instincts.
It solves nothing.

This sign is blatantly slanderous.
Who in their right mind does this?
Anger, and paranoia, its only message.

Unwarranted character assignation on two of SC's selfless
valued public servants is both pathological and dangerous.

That Brenda would be sited for removing it from its place of
obvious illegal placement - reprimanded for doing it - ticketed
for doing it - publicly humiliated for doing "the right thing," is
wrong in every way imaginable in an orderly society.

Aren't we all encouraged to remove litter from our public landscape?

For those who know and work with Brenda: her neighbors,
friends and colleagues, Brenda only ever fights the good fight.
Conscientious to a fault, and law abiding. The Law is her
avocation and occupation. Brenda is a treasured value to
this city, both privately and publicly.

So - rather than being publicly harangued for "doing the
right thing" for all of us, Brenda needs an apology for the
unfair treatment she's been subjected to. Immediately.

Take a long hard look at the sign.
Study it.
Now imagine your name, or the name of your favored
candidate emblazoned in quotes across it.

Try and imagine how you'd feel reading it, if your most
valued-candidate - whoever that is, was labeled "Hypocrite."
How would you feel?

You know how you'd feel - Violated.

Now imagine, finding this slanderous signage placed
illegally on public property - not private property.

A twofer: Violated and Illegal.

City Sign Rule 1a: never plant yard-signs on public property.

If it was 'your' candidate being slandered, most likely you'd
thank whoever removed it.

One might assume, local law enforcement and or code
enforcement officers would have the same good sense to
remove it. That didn't happened.
It was allowed to stay, and slander.

If this brand of dangerous personal public slander, against
anyone - your candidate, you, or any candidate, in any election,
is allowed to fester, it will proliferate and spread.

Without strict civic oversight, local elections will spiral down
into nothing more than base hooliganism in the name of free
speech. Are we there now? This signs says yes.

That's not America. And it's not San Clemente.

Brenda Miller is not who's at fault here.

Let's hope SC's current leadership recognizes freedom
of speech is not freedom to slander. Otherwise the noun
"Hypocrite" will soon enough define us all.

The election is over. Times ahead are challenging beyond
compare without the negative efforts of an overambitious
mischievous few who apparently know no bounds in
employing antisocial tactics.

We suffer these fools equally.

Brenda Miller did the right thing, and is chastised for it,
while someone else does 'wrong' intentionally, for effect,
and there's no penalty? Hmm.

Question: what's lettered in Gold, in Council Chambers,
above our San Clemente Seal - "Who Do We Trust" - in?

Will we act accordingly?

One can hope.