Links to Peak Democracy Company's "Open Town Hall" Evaluative Articles

*Direct Democracy as illusion, my article that explores this premise as applied to this issue.  

Home town Berkeley paper describes devious activities of Peak Democracy company, and its founders--- you can skip the local details to get to the principle of selective reporting of their surveys to reach the results they, or their sponsors desire. 

Email Conversation ( in article April update) with unnamed city council member who followed up on some questions raised here.  It includes focused questions to the city manager on the economic value of the D.P. contract, and the larger issues of governance. 

Link to Column that accuses Peak Democracy of being dedicated to helping city government ignore the wishes of the public.

Link to Article by Zelda Bronstein  in Dissent Magazine that describes the formation of P.D., along with an intensive analysis of the deep harm of trying to transform the inherently emotionally stressful participation in local government into- as it's President describes, something to "delight and thrill"
  

UT article on the city's adoption of this service. 

Peak Democracy Terms of Service

required to be accepted by citizens to use this system.  I was told personally by the City attorney that this would be replaced by one dictated by the city.  Subsequent communication by Mr. Cohen to a member of the council, did not indicate any such global revision was anticipated by his company. 

Special notice should be given to this item from the terms of service which confirms the "60 minutes" story that exposes these practices:

13.1.Some of the Services may be supported by advertising revenue and may display advertisements and promotions. These advertisements may be targeted to the content of information stored on the Services, queries made through the Services or other information. 

13.2.The manner, mode and extent of advertising by PD on the Services are subject to change without specific notice to you.

Hackers Lurking in Vents and Soda Machines- N.Y Times article that describes how anything short of paranoia over these dangers is unrealistic.  Assuming that no harm will come with new internet based connections is gross irresponsibility.

Article describing the European Parliament advancing legislation to prevent Internet unapproved commercial use of private information. This would negate several of the TOS clauses of Peak Democracy--for them, not us.

Full Meeting Video (first 2hr. 40 min.) of presentation and discussion on March 5 of this issue

Remote Control Hovering Craft-Public Safety Issue

6/23/14

Remote Control Hovering Craft-

This latest segment of 60 Minutes, "Drones Over America" was a survey of this burgeoning technology, beginning with it's functional usages for visual evaluation of everything from farm land to disaster areas, some as small as hummingbirds to the most common portable four rotor models.  It closed with an interview with Senator Diane Feinstein discussing why this technology must be regulated to prevent abuses of privacy among other dangers.

The 60 Minutes episode, in my opinion, was subtly biased by cheer leading this technology, discounting the negative potential, the most common being loss of privacy.  It ignored one major issue, which is that while these devices are now being used by the FBI to a limited degree, they could also be used in the pursuance of criminal activities; this could be from casing property associated with burglary, to direct use by terrorists.  I am familiar with the aborted attack described in this N.Y. Times story as my own research led to the correction at the end of the article.

While terrorism and assigning limits that protect airplane space is an issue for the FAA to deal with in its regulations that are in development, the everyday less tragic issues of these devices, now available at the price of a toy (see link to personal experience below), specifically breach of privacy is worthy of discussion.  An analogue to this as a city issue is something called "airsoft" repeating rifles,  mostly used by teens or in more elaborate war game settings.  One problem is the name, which implies that the projectiles are harmless, which they are not if hit in the face.

This is an example of how different regulations are appropriate for different communities.  There is no county or state law against the use of these implements (whether seen as guns or toys)  However Encinitas Code 9.30.010 specifically makes discharge of such air guns an infraction.  I referred to this code when children in my area, many without eye protection were firing thousand of rounds of these hard plastic pellets.  All it took was one visit from a deputy who explained the law, for them to decide to  engage in another sport--and have a lifetime story to tell of their outlaw adventure!

While the uses of toy drones with video capabilities would mostly be harmless fun,  these are unlike other legal encroachment of privacy- refuting the evaluation of the professor in the 60 minutes segment.  They actually allow the user far more capacity than the use of high powered binoculars to reach vantage points never evaluated by regulation or common law.  When we choose where we shall live, privacy is an asset that enhances value- more important for some than others.   We do not allow a stranger to put a ladder on our yard and climb to the top to get a good picture,  yet these devices allow this to be achieved by remote control with no prohibition under current law.

I would suggest addressing this is appropriate for this level of government, and specifically that this expanded Traffic and Public Safety commission should act as an initial hearing venue to gauge the local public's views.  Other municipalities have done this, and passed restrictive laws with exceptions for any superseding federal law.

I have included this survey for feedback,  there is an option to provide name and email, but it's not required.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.

--------------
Addenda:

My own short video of my interaction at the San Diego County fair at a booth that demonstrates what could be the most common use of these low end versions of this technology.

LA Times article that describes how this technology can hinder as well as aid law enforcement. 

Evaluation of Pacific View Purchase of Sale

The following was emailed to the members of the City Council prior to the meeting when this was being discussed.  None of the suggested changes were proposed by any member although several council members confirmed that unless a low rate of interest were obtained for the financing bond we could cancel or renegotiate price.  My understanding of the city's broad right of cancellation if we are not satisfied with clause 4.1 b, suitability for use, was confirmed by the city attorney.  However the City Manager indicated no intent to broaden his due diligence to ascertain suitability for a specific use. 

May 28, 2014

Encinitas City Council and residents

It's time to take a deep breath before we dive into this one.  If we proceed, some changes in the proposed contract should be made.  These two related elements must be addressed in concert.  The first is the action plan on this purchase proposed by the City Manager:

• Point One: Complete the purchase of the property
• Point Two: Property clean up and evaluation of structures
• Point Three: Identify interim uses
• Point Four: Develop Public Outreach for Visioning/Conceptual ideas

This ignores the most relevant clause in the Purchase agreement, which is clause 4.1(b): 

Buyer’s acceptance of the condition of the Property, within sixty days (60)

days of the effective date of this Agreement, subsequent to Buyer’s
physical inspection of the Property which may, but is not limited to, a

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Geo-technical reconnaissance,

Hydrology Study, and/or other inspections or studies deemed necessary

by Buyer for determining the condition and suitability of the Property.

This clause allows the city to complete its traditional due diligence which is to determine whether this raw land we are purchasing at a premium price will meet our desired use.  but, no matter how much research we do, any project must be approved by the California Coastal Commission which means that any plan, even with city approval may be disallowed.  Thus planning costs could increase with multiple applications to this commission along with increasing construction costs.  The reality is that this commission has the final word on whether this concept can even be achieved.

This is clause 6. 4.2Waiver of Conditions. Buyer may unilaterally waive, in writing, any or all of the conditions described in Section 4.1 (above)

This would never be activated by a responsible city official, as it is abrogating the right of due diligence and should be stricken from the contract.  My concern is that this clause is an allowance for mischief that has no place in this sales contract.

This virtual raw land is being sold as an arts-performance center.  While these two uses were conflated to increase enthusiasm, a passive arts center such as galleries and teaching faciility requires different demands for access and peak parking than a performance space.  The first task is to do the feasibility and cost evaluations for both options, including a traffic and parking study, which according to the head of traffic engineering has never been done for this site.  The potental and capacity of underground parking must be part of this evaluation. This must be done well within the 60 day contractual period, but this is not even on the City Managers priority list, which could be a costly mistake.

Clause 1.3 reads:

1.3 Financing to Secure Funding for Purchase Price; Failure to Obtain Financing. Pursuant to the MOU and continuing immediately upon the effective date of this Agreement, Buyer shall use its best efforts to obtain the municipal bond financingnecessary to secure the funds for the Purchase Price prior to the Close ofEscrow. If, using its best efforts, Buyer cannot secure said financing, then the Buyer and Seller shall mutually agree to an alternative financing plan for the Purchase Price, or else the Seller shall refund said deposit to Buyer. 

The question is not whether we can get municipal bond financing but under what terms.  There is no doubt we could get underwriting for a C rating bond at an exorbitant rate of interest, the question is whether we could get underwriting at an investment grade which would provide low interest rate for an insured bond.  This higher rating must be a condition of the contract. as this would require the underwriter do his own evaluation of the merits of this purchase and its risk.

The city's abrogation of the right to move the Historic Schoolhouse (Clause 6.4) would be appropriate if we were purchasing this for a quarter of the value based on the original expectation under the law for abandoned school property.  But while we are paying top dollar, we are even allowing the seller to dictate this point, that no matter what unknown future events, we can't relocate the one room school house.  This defines the tone of this purchase -- obligate a project ultimately costing 20 to 40 million dollars to be paid by future residents who will not have these resources for their constituents' other needs, and then allow them no breathing room to get out of the bind we are bequeathing them. . 

Those hundreds of people who feel so passionately the need to "save Pacific View" can do exactly this as a non profit organization that they would fund and control.  They could define the type of performances and the type of art to be displayed.  They would fund it from within their organization and this would be their prime purpose, not streets, recreation and public safety as are a city's responsibilities.  I'm sure they could get just as good a deal from the School District as the city did, and would have the city's full cooperation. If we were behaving rationally, this sale would close when we have final approval from the California Coastal Commission,  whether the purchase is by the city or the suggested non profit arts organization. 
----------------
Council Discussion of this issue, final item on drop down menu

When, Why and Who -- "signal" laws

General Readers, 

The text below is the formal agenda information sheet associated with the Traffic and Public Safety Commission meeting at city hall on July 14 5:30, details available here.  It is open to the public, and in my own view, if the mandate of the expanded commission is to be addressed, some degree of public sentiment for this must be shown by your attendance and participation.  This link is to my article on details of this mandate, including a partial video of the last meeting where this issue was addressed.

 June 30, 2014


This is presented as a Commissioner Initiated Agenda Item for the July meeting of above commission under the title of "Scope of areas for attention of this commission"

Encinitas, a coastal city of 60,000 in San Diego County has a history of early adoption of laws that have little immediate effect on the problem to be solved.  A recent example is outlawing of one time use plastic bags, something that attempts to lessen ocean pollution, exemplified by the Pacific Gyre where currents cause an accumulation of such material.  This law was passed not out of the illusion that this city will make more than an infinitesimal difference in the total release of effluvia but for the signal value to the broader movement, with the hope it will become broadly normative.

I personally remember the first regulation requiring picking up dog feces being introduced in New York City in the 1970s, accompanied by widespread ridicule and rejection.  Other movements such as preventing secondary cigarette smoke and holding bartenders responsible for serving drunk patrons, all faced the headwind of going against what was being widely accepted.

This brings up the role of this small city's commission which I will argue is most useful not in refining laws already enacted, but in breaking ground, making the case for new laws and restrictions.  This cannot be done in an ideologically laden setting, where there is a general animosity towards government itself, specifically its regulatory function where the benefit of the broad polity supersedes individual freedom.  Once anything is reduced to sorting by the partisan divide of this country into liberal and conservative (including its local manifestations)  the process of discourse stops.   This has already occurred pretty generally on a Federal level, very much in most states, but still less so at the local level.  There, NIMBY, or neighborhood interests tend to intrude, as avoiding expansion of the nearby cement mine or halfway house will unite members of the tea party with card carrying members of the ACLU.     

These political dynamics, I argue, make our local non-elected Commission not only the ideal, but perhaps the only entity in our current legal political constellation able to have a genuine discussion on issues such as I will suggest next.  The first one is on a new technology,  Remote Control Hovering Craft, that I have described at this link

http://focusonencinitas.blogspot.com/2014/06/remote-control-hovering-craft-public.html

The other subject is that of noise pollution, a problem as old as the industrial revolution, a specific cause that is amenable to amelioration but has not been done so in this state or city.  First this commission would look at the documented medical and psychological harm of vehicle noise, specifically that which is not integral to the function of the vehicle, rather used as a choice such as a type of muffler, especially on  motorcycles, which one manufacturer advertises as, "disturbing the peace for fifty years." 

Both topics could be relevant, and more importantly, possible for this commission as it is not immediately subject to electoral influence.  The first task is defining the issue through presentation of existing research on the subject.  Then there would be public feedback of views  from this constituency, which would be followed by a recommendation for action, which could be a local ordinance or a proposal for interacting with other levels of government.  

While this is not a law making body, correctly an activity reserved to elected representatives,  we do have the authority under the defining city ordinance to issue reports on our findings, which would in itself have value in the two areas that I have brought forward.
----------------
Link to Journal article:  Noise Pollution: A Modern Plague
 http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/554566_3

"Uninterrupted sleep is known to be a prerequisite for good physiologic and mental functioning in healthy individuals.^[28] Environmental noise is one of the major causes of disturbed sleep.^[1,10] When sleep disruption becomes chronic, the results are mood changes, decrements in performance, and other long-term effects on health and well-being.^[3] Much recent research has focused on noise from aircraft, roadways, and trains. It is known, for example, that continuous noise in excess of 30 dB disturbs sleep. For intermittent noise, the probability of being awakened increases with the number of noise events per night.^[1]"

This article is a survey of  the myriad harmful effects of interrupted or fractured sleep
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/820529

A third of a year evaluation of the Public Safety Commission

6/10/2014

While there is no "Public Safety Commission" in the City of Encinitas California, for the last four months, there has been one that was expanded from what had been the "Traffic Commission"  It was  was created and defined with these additional words:

2.40.040 Duties of the Traffic and Public Safety Commission.

A. It is the duty of this commission to serve as a liaison between the public and the City Council, and to conduct analyses and provide recommendations to the Council on matters related to the circulation of motorized vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles, and on matters related to public safety.

 The scope of the commission’s role with respect to public safety includes but is not limited to traffic safety, emergency response for fire, medical and other crises, as well as the City’s efforts to control and reduce criminal activities of all types. The commission may conduct informational and educational meetings, prepare reports and analyses, and work with fire, marine safety,ambulance, and sheriff personnel.

Being only one of two of the now seven members who volunteered explicitly for these expanded activities, I have attempted to define them broadly, as allowing for initiatives that go into the underlying structure of the agencies mentioned in the defining ordinance, rather than our being under direction of the City Manager.  In an information sheet submitted for the last meeting, and sent to city officials,  I wrote:

The city manager has stated that he plans to give instructions to future chairpersons of commissions, what he did not say is that he and his staff would work more closely with such commissions --that their work would be open to us, and that we could build on this research.   His tone conveyed that commissions are an extension of his staff, with the single difference that we are not on salary

Here's my video of the meeting beginning at the issue I recorded until the end. In the absence of this, there would be no record of the details of this conversation among the commissioners. My goal, which was stated in my information sheet as repeated at the meeting, was not to usurp the decision on reforming and unifying the Fire and EMS services of the city,  but to suggest that this commission work with the city staff,  as I contend citizen volunteers have a useful broader perspective. Such video recording must be provided if we are to fulfill the broad mandate of the initiating ordinance.

My question was rephrased by the Chairman as whether we should address this particular issue,  which did not address my central point, that an independent group of non elected citizens may go beyond the constraints inherent in the tension between government unionized employees and elected officials.  There are a myriad of books and articles in the popular and academic literature that explore this reality in depth.   

I made reference to this article STRATEGIC TRANSITION TO A FIRE-BASED EMS SYSTEM: MANAGING THE EFFECT ON THE HUMAN SIDE as an example of a social dynamic analysis that is rarely included in formal evaluations of this type of change which could be picked up by a citizen's group that is engaged in this issue.  While the staff under the city manager certainly should be evaluating this issue, along with the professionals in the fire department, both groups share a common identity of being ultimately employed by the taxpayers of this city, which inherently is the very type of interests that must be disclosed for meaningful studies. 

It is understood that even with the best of individual's intentions, financial self interest has the potential of affecting evaluation of complex issues such as this possible change in our emergency services.   For this and other reasons, I continue to maintain the position that I took in the above linked information sheet in spite of the unanimous rejection by this commission. 

Castle Rock, Colorado happens to have demographics similar to ours, and ironically made the exact same transition from an outsourced EMS to one that is now integrated into their Fire Department.  They had no choice, since about twenty years ago the ambulance company went out of business.  They happen to have a Public Safety Commission that also covers issues of traffic but not as a main focus.  Here's the report of their latest meeting, that happened to be held at their police headquarters.  You should note that a member of the council is usually in attendance as an ex officio member.  Page two describes a particular change in an ordinance that was initiated by the fire department, and the proposal was at this commission for a recommendation before going before the city council.  This citizen commission seems to be an example of the type of coordinated independence I am suggesting.

I also had an extensive conversation with a fire department officer with considerable experience who described the interaction between the EMS and Fire fighters, which in their case are all earning the same salary in the same union.  The integration now is seamless, so when the dispatcher knows an ambulance is needed to take a person to the E.R. there is a better chance of such a vehicle being first on the scene.

Like here, their fire crew go to the super market in their emergency vehicles, with one person staying in the truck to alert the shopping crew to drop their basket and get rolling.  And their roll out time, from the fire alarm from 911 ringing to wheels moving, is a half minute longer during sleep time, which is to be expected.  While there are inevitable activities such as training and upkeep that can delay response to emergencies, others that are accepted here among firefighters and citizens are not accepted in Castle Rock. I will not go into details unless the Public Safety Commission is clearly charged with this type of activity.   
 
Only recently did we learn that hundreds of thousands of veterans have endured month long delays before seeing physicians, something that was widely known for years.  Yet, only "activists" brings such things to the public's attention, as it is so much more comfortable just to ignore the defects that become simply part of the way things are.    

To those on this commission who eschew activism, in my view such a subordinate role does not do a service to the institutions under city auspices.  Only such active probing can spot incipient problems, which is why many larger cities have an office of inspector general, or other appointed entities to head off improprieties before they become entrenched. While we do not desire nor need such a legal department, this function can be done by an active Public Safety Commission such as described in the existing ordinance if affirmed at a meeting with the city council to clarify this.














 

Survey on extending contingency period on Pacific View contract

Dear Neighbors:  (direct link to my survey on Pacific View Purchase")

Encinitas has purchased a communication package that you may have heard about in all the local papers with the name "Open Town Hall."   This is being promoted as a way that those who never go to council meetings can still have their views reflected in the actions of our elected members of the city council.

Except it really isn't about this at all; rather it's to create such an illusion which will allow the powers that be, currently mostly in the hands of the City Manager by default, to do what he chooses.  I have made the case both in person and by blog articles on the two issues that now intersect. The first is that the Open Town Hall program should not be foisted on citizens, where to use it they must agree to a set of terms that includes allowing a tracking code be inserted in your computer and then allow the Open Town Hall company to alter your feedback to the city. Yes, the company demands the right to delete or sanitize your comments before they are made public. 

The second issue I've been addressing is the purchase of the three acre site of the abandoned Pacific View school near the coast for ten million dollars, with the plan that it will be turned into some undefined "arts center."  I pointed out in this article that because of the special coastal zoning enforced by the state this could be impossible, and that we have other land already owned by the city that could fit the bill.  But the council and the city manager have turned a deaf ear.  They assume that other than the handfull of people who demanded we buy this land under conditions dictated by the seller, that the rest of the city residents won't even be aware of what's happening. While we will pay for this with our taxes, the city is not really interested in getting our opinion!

Since they won't even allow the flawed Open Town Hall product to be used for the very purpose that it is designed for, I'm circulating this -- a survey that will allow residents to weigh in with a message to city hall.  There is an item on the agenda of the council meeting of July 12 to address this, but without considerable feedback from this survey, it will be a rubber stamp for the existing flawed purchase agreement.  Unlike Open Town Hall, here you don't have to agree to any terms of service, no tracking cookies and giving your name and email is optional.

Please forward this to those with any interest in how their tax money is spent. Better some duplicates than this  not getting full circulation.   

HERE'S THE LINK TO THE SURVEY
     Review your responses, since after you click "done," it directs you to the survey company's web site and closes this letter.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/JS2N5XX

Yours truly,

Al Rodbell
Commissioner of Encinitas Traffic and Public Safety