First Prev
of 3
Next Last
mark

Rosamond, CA

#2 Aug 27, 2011
Yea I read that one of their members quit because of bad vibs
jason

Rosamond, CA

#3 Aug 30, 2011
I hear that Mr. Skaggs is having a meeting on Sept 8 2011 and will have Alatore, Alacon and Willy Brown at the meeting

"Guest Speaker Richard Alatorre will be at the Thursday, Sept. 8 Oso Town Council meeting (6 p.m.) to discuss cityhood with residents. The meeting will be at Holiday Valley at the West Valley County Water District clubhouse "
Da Dong

Rosamond, CA

#4 Sep 1, 2011
WARNING-----WARNING-----WARNIN G

Jan Hellsund is a Nom-de Guer of the bearded wonder who describes himself as a "hiker hanger on" who hangs at the "Hicker Town"
dirt

Rosamond, CA

#5 Sep 3, 2011
Why did Bob Blu-------- quit the committee. Maybe because RS can't produce.

Why is Mr. Alatorre coming to a meeting with white folk when he is the head cheese of LA RAZA

Why does RS want to take over the west antelope valley????
wow

Rosamond, CA

#6 Sep 5, 2011
An Open Letter to the Oso Community, August 15, 2011

BACKGROUND
A few members of the Oso Committee asked what changed the working relationship with the Association Of Rural Town Councils. First, was the OSO committee’s position not to hold elections as voted on by the attendee’ s at their March 3, 2011 committee meeting. Second, were the warnings to the Fairmont and Antelope Acres Town Councils at public meetings. Followed by OSO’s e-mail with the same warnings. Third was the statement telling Fairmont at a public meeting Oso wanted to place two people on the Fairmont Board in November. Oso said place, not elect. Is the OSO committee afraid to hold an election? They need to hold elections to receive community improvement funds. Does the committee claiming to represent Oso have a reason to fear an election? Are they registered to vote? I suggest the community look at the voter registration list Norm Hickling sent to Oso on March 9, 2011 to facilitate holding an election. If the election committee no longer has a copy I’m sure Norm can send another one.

There are statements being tossed about in e-mails and posted on forums. They contain many opinions that people feel passionate about. There are contrary opinions held by people just as passionate. The hard part is separating the facts from the opinion. I will try to point out some obvious facts. Those living on the west side that really want the town councils to continue and prosper will need to separate the opinions from the facts.

AGREEMENTS
Let’s look at the agreements and ‘proposed’ agreements between power companies and an existing Town Council. The agreements already publicized have conditions that must be met. If anyone feels a supposedly ‘secret’ agreement will be any different they are misinformed. The power companies I have spoken with all say the following requirements must be in place for any community improvement funds to be received by a ‘Town Council or a 501 C (3).’

1. The Town Council must be elected by the registered voters in the community.
2. The Town Councils must have an elected board. Oso’s charter says they can never elect officers.(The Town Councils select their officers from those elected to the Board, they are not self appointed)
3. The council must have a non profit 501.C (3) with it’s own governing Board in place to receive any money.

The three steps above are not negotiable. They are required if the community expects to receive community improvement funds. The registered voters elected the Fairmont and Antelope Acres Town Councils. All the other communities except Oso, elected their representatives. Fairmont TC is working on a 501.C (3) in co-operation with, but separate from, their Town Council. Antelope Acres is working to change their Town Council to a 501.C (3) so they can directly receive the community improvement funds.

Oso is adamant they use a non-elected committee structure to interact with other entities. Why? Are they afraid the community really doesn’t want a Town Council at this time and an election would only go to prove this? The Oso committee has yet to meet any of the above 3 requirement as of this date to my knowledge.
wow

Rosamond, CA

#7 Sep 5, 2011
When were the steps to prepare Oso to receive community improvement funds taken? Are there any records? Why do the leaders of the OSO committee decline to hold elections? Is it because of a Charter from 1992 by people no longer in the community? It’s not a secret the Town Councils must be elected in order to represent the entire community. Antonovich’s May 26, 1992 letter to Oso told them this. The Oso community must have a 501.C (3) in place to receive the money and the committee leaders should be aware of this by now. Why aren’t they? Or are they aware of this and have yet to make the community aware of it? It’s another WHY and what’s really going on that needs to be answered.
Does someone in Oso already control a 501.C (3) they’re not telling the community about? If a 501.C (3) exists, who is on the board? Who will decide the fate of any monies? There are many questions that need answering. I can only suggested a few.

CHARTER
As seen on the following pages Oso has at least two (2) Charters in circulation. Both Charters I have are dated June 20, 1992. The first has Bookman Old Style 13 point text for the main body with an Ariel 26 point title. The second Charter is worded slightly different. The second Charter has Bookman Old Style 14, 14.5, 18, and 19.5 point text for the body with Times New Roman for the title and the last paragraph. Why is there exhibit A on one and exhibit A, B, C and D on the other? What areas opted out? Would an original Charter have the font changes? What do you think? How many Charters are there? Which charter did Oso send to Supervisor Antonovich back in 1992? Was it one of these or was it an entirely different document? Where are the signatures of the council members or formation committee to officiate the Charter? These are more questions the OSO community needs to have answered.

The “Oso Charter” doesn’t include any mechanism for change. The Charter was intentionally written to stop what is happening. No single committee was supposed to speak for the community only for themselves according to both Charters.

Where is the election the community voted to have at Oso’s March 3, 2011 meeting? The committee cannot have it both ways. If a straw pole, including citizens not living in Oso area voted at the March 3 meeting , claiming to change part of the Charter, how can the straw pole for the election be called in-valid? Straw poles at public meetings change nothing. The only acceptable method to change the 19- year-old Oso Charter is through the registered voters in the Oso community. Not by a committee.

CONCLUSION
The power companies are not stupid. They can make all the agreements they want with the Oso committee and not transfer a penny. Until the three stipulations under “Agreements” above are met, Oso can never claim the community improvement money.

In other words folks, you can jump up and down screaming foul all you want, but if you want the improvement funds hold an election for a Charter, By-laws, and an Executive Board using Oso’s registered voter list.
I am confident the OSO community will make the right choice for themselves. Hopefully the information I have provided will help you form your own opinion and you will have the opportunity to cast your vote in an open, fair and free election process.

The two charters I have are included on the next two pages.
wow

Rosamond, CA

#8 Sep 5, 2011
Oso Town Council Charter
We the People of the defined area, in Order to retain our Right to Think, Act and Speak as Individuals, with the continuing ability to Unite for a common cause, do ordain and establish this Charter on June 20, 1902.
PURPOSE OF THE CHARTER
space 1. This Charter creates the Oso Town Council.
space 2. This Charter establishes boundaries as defined in Exhibit "A"
space 3. This Charter defines "member" as one who resides, votes, or owns property within the defined boundaries.
PURPOSE OF THE OSO TOWN COUNCIL
space 1. To serve as a public forum for any issue that a member brings forth.
space 2. To ensure, that the members retain the right as Individuals to make decisions and act on those issues, if they so desire.
space 3. To be nonpartisan.
space 4. To impose no taxes, assessments, dues, or fines.
space 5. To elect no officers.
space space a.) As the need arises, temporary committees may be formed.
space 6. To listen to the concerns of neighboring Town Councils; their concerns may be of concern to this area, too.
space 7. To remain autonomous Individuals, the Oso Town Council will
not join any organization of Town Councils.
BOUNDARY CHANGES
The boundaries may be enlarged as other people wish to join the 0S0 Town Council.

We the people of the defined area, in order to retain our right to think, act and speak as individuals with the continuing ability to unite for a common cause, do ordain and establish this charter on June 20, 1992.
This charter creates the Oso Town Council, and establishes boundaries as defined in exhibits "A" "B" "C" and ''D"
and defines it's "members" as one who resides, votes or owns property within the defined area.
The purpose of this charter is to:
space 1. Serve as a public forum for any issues that a member brings forth.
space 2. Insure that all members retain. their rights as individuals to make decisions and to act on those decisions if they so desire.
space 3. Be non-partisan
space 4. Impose no taxes, assesments, dues or fines
space 5. Elect no officers.
space 6..Listen to concerns of neighboring town council. Their concerns may be the concern of this area too.
space 7. Remain autonomous individuals. The Oso town council will not join any organization or town councils
Boundaries may be enlarged as other people wish to join the
Oso Town Council.
wow

Rosamond, CA

#9 Sep 5, 2011
Second Open Letter to the Oso Community
My Second Letter to the OSO Community; More Information on the Town Council Movement August 21, 2011

Town Councils follow a set of guidelines developed and perfected over the past 23 years. Mary Ann Floyd's letter posted earlier in this forum also outlines those guidelines in The Rural Town Councils, a Guide and Handbook. All town councils, except OSO, follow the basics of these guidelines. It’s because of the commitment to the guidelines that Town Councils have become a fixture in the Antelope Valley. They are considered the 'voice of their community' because the 'community’s' registered voters elect them. Also, council boundaries are spelled out in their charter. Many Town Councils have Community Standards Districts with borders voted into ordinance by the County Board of Supervisors, further legitimizing their existence and importance.

Town Councils have standing in their community as a result of adherence to the “Faith and Intent” of election laws and the basic guidelines mentioned above. The following is paragraph 5, second sentence forward from OSO committee member Karl Humphreys' letter to the Association of Rural Town Councils. The e-mail is dated Wednesday, August 03, 2011. In the excerpt below, Karl describes OSO as the antithesis of a functioning council.

“Town councils have no power or borders and only exist because of a consensus of the local residents. There are no laws or regulations to govern them – there are only suggestions and guidelines. Maybe some of the “officers” of our neighboring town councils have become a bit power-mad and think they’re something that they’re not, but we know exactly what we are – an informal group with no officers, no elections, no scheduled meetings, and no secret handshakes, uniforms, or ceremonial hats, as stated by our charter.”

That description is not a 'Town Council.' I'll leave it to you to decide what it really is. I think Karl needs to read the Guide and Handbook. How does Karl know the majority of registered voters want to be represented this way, by “an informal group?” He appointed himself to speak for who?

The 14 other Town Councils brought about very positive changes in their communities. They did it by following those pesky guidelines that OSO is so cavalier about ignoring.

What records will the OSO committee show the power company attorney’s when asked for the charter, bylaws, formation records, and election results? They will be necessary in order to provide documentation to prove the legitimacy of the council before any real negotiations can begin.

The next three steps outlined in my first Open Letter to the OSO Community still apply.
1. The registered voters elect the community Town Councils.
2. The Town Councils must have an elected board. OSO’s charter does not allow elections and says they can never elect officers.(The other Town Councils select their officers from the elected board members. They are not self-appointed)
3. The council must have a legal non-profit 501.C (3) in place to receive community improvement funds.

I was informed the OSO Committee is going to hold an election in late September. A formation election would be a good start. Do the voters want a Town Council? Only the majority of registered voters within the proposed borders can form a town council. If only the OSO committee, as now working, believed in the same due process of democracy, followed by the other 14 Town Councils, I would not have to write to you today. It's our commitment to democracy, one person one vote, that validates our town council's standing within the community.
wow

Rosamond, CA

#10 Sep 5, 2011
I was also informed OSO was allowing anyone to run and vote. If this is true, it is not right. Only the registered voters within the proposed OSO borders can determine their destiny! The “Voice of the Community” is earned only by following a formation election process using the registered voter list which Mr. Hickling made available back in March. So I ask, why has it taken so long? What has been going on that has directly benefited the OSO community to date? I will suggest to you it's just been a lot of hoopla. The real work has yet to begin.

The committee will of course claim 'our borders cover most of the west side.' The problem with that argument is OSO’s original boundaries as received by Supervisor Antonovich were very limited as shown in exhibit A of the original Charter. Supervisor Antonovich in his May 26, 1992 letter to the OSO Town Council was very explicit, they could not speak for any area that chooses not to be part of OSO. Where are the election results showing the areas beyond OSO’s original boundaries wanted in? When did they vote to join the OSO Town Council? Without records of an election using the registered voter list OSO can’t claim anything beyond attachment “A” to their charter as accepted by Supervisor Antonovich. Holiday Valley and Mettler Valley were never included in any map. Holiday and Mettler Valleys, like all other communities outside Exhibit “A,” would need to hold an election using the registered voter list before they can 'opt in' to the OSO Town Council or start their own.

The OSO committee isn’t using the process needed to secure anything for the community. The OSO community should seek outside advice about the paperwork necessary to satisfy the power companies. OSO doesn't stand a chance unless they change. I know several OSO committee members already have a Charter and By-laws that was prepared for them to use as a start. A local resident gave it to them. I also know the OSO community would have plenty of help if they would just ask.

I know the OSO committee was trying to acquire the school property for the community. A noble goal. Creating a community center would be great. To obtain the school is much more complicated than the committee may realize. It would be an extremely expensive venture. Many schools, and Neenach is one, were built using State Matching Funds for construction. If the County were to change the school status, such as the OSO committee desires, the matching funds would revert back to the state. The county is not going to let the school go and then have to repay millions of dollars. If OSO is serious about a community center then they need to develop 'plan B.'

If the OSO committee wishes to be treated as a legitimate Town Council by outside businesses and other Town Councils they need to start functioning as one. Simply claiming to be a council while declining to hold elections and afford the residents the opportunity and right to vote is very self-destructive. It reflects poorly not only on the current committee members, but on the community as a whole.
Pres

Rosamond, CA

#11 Sep 11, 2011
Letter sent to OSO on de-anexing from Fairmont 9-11-2011
Dear Richard and Oso formation members: While the Fairmont Town Council appreciates your efforts to form a Town council, please be advised that we have a elected and fully functional Town Council in place for almost a year now and do not want to be overlapped by any new organization. Please De-Annex our area from any of your formation efforts. Our boundaries include E/of 240st West, S/of Ave A, W/of 110st.N of Lancaster Rd. As you have De-Annexed 3 Points TC at their request we would hope for the same consideration without further action on our part.

Thank you,
Dave Kerr FTC President.
__________

Response from Karl Humphreys of the Oso

Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10&45 -0700
Subject: Re: FTC/Oso De-Annex
From: karlhumphreys60@gmail.com

To: Dave Kerr
Sorry Dave but there is no formation committee. The Oso town council
and it's boundaries have been in existence since 1992 as you well
know. All that is happening here is that we an election.
Please stop your trouble making and rabble rousing.
Karl Humphreys

__________

Dave Kerrs response (Fairmont Town Council Pres)
From: dave K
To:karlhumphreys60@gmail.com

Thank You for your response.
oso watch

Glendale, CA

#13 Sep 18, 2011
Why are the Oso people that attended the 9/15/11 Town council meeting always launching personal attacks on the Fairmont Board members when the members stated they don't want OSO to overlap their borders.

If OSO was a legitimate Town Council how come we didn't hear about them before the Solar companies came. When did they have an election ? Who appiointed the limited 4 people to speak for thousands of people.

What is the correct number for the straw pol vote at the weevil market. I counted 35 for and 2 against. Oso members are touting at one time 90 for and 1 against then it was 100 to 1 then it was 110 to zero. Talk about straw poles being unreliable or is it that others are lying thru their teeth
idiots

Westford, MA

#15 Sep 19, 2011
What's this OSO is offering $2500 reward for information on who was driving by a lawers house at 2:00 in the morning.

Karl Humphries is offering the reward because he is a good citizen.
idiots

Westford, MA

#16 Sep 19, 2011
From: karlhumphreys60@gmail.com
To: janhellsund@verizon.net

In the spirit of being good neighbors, I believe Oso town council should offer a reward to find the identity of the dastardly culprit/culprits who were driving around our good friend/neighbor Dave
Jeffries house at two in the morning, with no lights on. I myself will put up the first $2500 for the name or names of this obvious criminal
element in our community.
K. Humphreys
shirley

Rosamond, CA

#17 Sep 25, 2011
What the heck is your fetish with the word Sheriff. You use it like a jealous druggie who wants other druggies to be aware he is a sheriff. Grow a pair and blow, If you can't write anything that doesn't stand up to public review then you should not have run for office, nor should you send flame mails, they may come back and bite you..
__________
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011
From: gfconroy@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Dave Jefferies
To: David Jefferies

David
Please be advised your response to my reply to "Open letter to Dave Jefferies" was misdirected, as my intention was to share that there was no need for multiple people spending a request for deficiency records from the California Bar (as I have already done so per your request) at the Fairmont meeting-- which by the by, I was present for. I will provide copies to all interested when they arrive. Speaking to the substance abuse charge, although I feel compassion for those who seek intervention, I have not ever been so burdened. Thank the good Lord. On that subject however, your having replied to my address with your rant at 12:30 am and further at 2:00 am to Richard's cell phone with an appeal for him to stop circling your home in his truck with lights on is a behavior on your part of a cry for help. You are in my prayers today.

Sheriff Dave Kerr, your neighbor, should place a complaint as this community does not support, condone, or look the other way when one is bothered we are all affected. The first priority of the OSO Town Council was jobs,jobs jobs (see email below) and we are seeing the results of that effort. Our second priority was an LA County sheriff substation at the Neenach school along with an LA County fire & paramedics facility paid for by the solar companies. Hopefully Sheriff Dave Kerr will accept our joint request to head up a subcommittee to pursue these desperately needed services.

We in the community are grateful for your kind offer to assist with the planned expansion of Hikertown. Hikers from all over the country, and indeed the world, are streaming in as they have for 20 years in greater and greater numbers. This has positive affects to the commerce business, so your assistance with the permit process is welcomed. Thank you Gerard
Red

Modesto, CA

#18 Sep 25, 2011
shirley wrote:
humphryes is full of "cow Pie"
I think Mr. Karl Humphryes is a little out of line.
The 1992 letter from MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH SUPERVISOR FIFTH DISTRICT specifically states that areas have the right to be represented by whom they chose and if they don't want to be represented or overlapped then their wishes must be honored otherwise the election is fraud.
Page 2
As to those areas who choose not to be included, that too is an issue to be resolved within the community. I have advised Council formation committees that it would be difficult to convince someone that a council spoke on behalf of an area or group if it is clear that area or group does not wish to be represented by the Council. Certainly we know that the existing Councils do not represent everyone within their boundaries, but we believe that they represent the majority of the area residents since the formation of the Council and the selection of officers were done through an "at-large" election process.
You're right that a fraud was perpetrated, but it wasn't Oso, it was Fairmont. Oso and it's borders have existed since 1992. That means that Fairmont's election was a fraud and it should be disbanded.
Red

Modesto, CA

#19 Sep 25, 2011
oso watch wrote:
Why are the Oso people that attended the 9/15/11 Town council meeting always launching personal attacks on the Fairmont Board members when the members stated they don't want OSO to overlap their borders.
If OSO was a legitimate Town Council how come we didn't hear about them before the Solar companies came. When did they have an election ? Who appiointed the limited 4 people to speak for thousands of people.
What is the correct number for the straw pol vote at the weevil market. I counted 35 for and 2 against. Oso members are touting at one time 90 for and 1 against then it was 100 to 1 then it was 110 to zero. Talk about straw poles being unreliable or is it that others are lying thru their teeth
The personal attacks started from Fairmont, all you see are the responses. That's the problem with seeing these on avhidesert. None of the Oso people have accounts and can't answer back. Notice the administrators all are Fairmont people. You are only seeing half of the quotes to twist the outcome. Don't be to quick to judge.
Red

Modesto, CA

#20 Sep 25, 2011
mark wrote:
Yea I read that one of their members quit because of bad vibs
The only member that quit, was taking off from his business and needed to be in Canada. He couldn't put it off any more so he asked to be relieved. He is still involved as much as his schedule will permit.Rumers are terrible things.
Red

Modesto, CA

#21 Sep 25, 2011
Pres wrote:
Letter sent to OSO on de-anexing from Fairmont 9-11-2011
Dear Richard and Oso formation members: While the Fairmont Town Council appreciates your efforts to form a Town council, please be advised that we have a elected and fully functional Town Council in place for almost a year now and do not want to be overlapped by any new organization. Please De-Annex our area from any of your formation efforts. Our boundaries include E/of 240st West, S/of Ave A, W/of 110st.N of Lancaster Rd. As you have De-Annexed 3 Points TC at their request we would hope for the same consideration without further action on our part.
Thank you,
Dave Kerr FTC President.
__________
Response from Karl Humphreys of the Oso
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10&45 -0700
Subject: Re: FTC/Oso De-Annex
From: karlhumphreys60@gmail.com
To: Dave Kerr
Sorry Dave but there is no formation committee. The Oso town council
and it's boundaries have been in existence since 1992 as you well
know. All that is happening here is that we an election.
Please stop your trouble making and rabble rousing.
Karl Humphreys
__________
Dave Kerrs response (Fairmont Town Council Pres)
From: dave K
To:karlhumphreys60@gmail.com
Thank You for your response.
How foolish. You can't D-Annex something that was never annexed.
FACT: As you said Fairmont didn't exist until last year. Oso since 1992
FACT: Without investigating you formed a town council
FACT: Therefore you are a fraudulent entity and don't exist.
FACT: therefore you are not worth reading.
Red

Modesto, CA

#22 Sep 25, 2011
dirt wrote:
Why did Bob Blu-------- quit the committee. Maybe because RS can't produce.
Why is Mr. Alatorre coming to a meeting with white folk when he is the head cheese of LA RAZA
Why does RS want to take over the west antelope valley????
"WHITE FOLK" , We can see where you're coming from even without your white sheet!
the wazu

Lancaster, CA

#23 Sep 30, 2011
Red wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right that a fraud was perpetrated, but it wasn't Oso, it was Fairmont. Oso and it's borders have existed since 1992. That means that Fairmont's election was a fraud and it should be disbanded.
According to the #12 post which is a copy of the supervisors letter there is no mention of specific boundaries. It does say if you don't want to be represented you don't have to be. You can opt out. OSO didn't have distinct borders except for the three original houses where the original lady that started OSO lived. This started when you greedy B__tards wanted the whole pie. Now you want to spin everything to your way of thinking. I may be dumb but I didn't crawl out of a rock like you ignorant fossels did

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Mountain Center Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Tony Casas, 77; Former Prisons Official Worked ... (Sep '07) 15 hr Big Hairy Pink Pu... 720
Drugs on rise in Palm Springs (Sep '07) Mon Jean 5
Sheriff's investigators arrest 22 people in Ant... (Jan '09) Nov 23 candy Martinez 58
Review: Simple Cash Nov 22 NoLongerTheirClient 1
Deported American inmate is source of ACLU lawsuit (Feb '08) Nov 21 kimber 16
Costco readies for new opening (Dec '06) Nov 21 A Ha 152
Review: Coachella Valley Collection Service Nov 18 Socochick 1

Mountain Center News Video

Mountain Center Dating
Find my Match

Mountain Center People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Mountain Center News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Mountain Center

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 10:03 am PST