Worst Legislator in California, Part II: Charles Calderon Lets...

Jun 1, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: LA Weekly

State Sen. Ron Calderon and his brother Assembly Majority Leader Charles Calderon, carry on a family tradition every Thanksgiving.

Comments
21 - 40 of 489 Comments Last updated Thursday Jul 3

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jun 11, 2011
 
Remember wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahhhhhhhhhh, you are correct. I thought I read it in the times, but I was mistaken, I read it in the "Montebello Life" magazine.
I guess I should have referred to the hills as "private property" for the past 100 years with no public access unless you had permission as so many of you have now stated.
So, I was wrong about the publication from where I got the information, but I am still correct regarding that the Hills is private property and no one has a legal right to be on the property unless of course, they get permission, as many of you have stated.
I apologize for stating the wrong publication, but I thank you for re-enforcing my argument.
What arguement?

How can it help your support for Cook-Hill by pointing out one of their many objectively verifiable lies?

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jun 11, 2011
 
Montebello Old Timer wrote:
Its time to take your head out of the sand and make the cuts and stop asking for money that cant be payed back why do I still see a lot of shinny new city trucks just driving around and every time I go up or down Whittier bl I see a Montebello transportation van at the in and out or other fast food place who is paying for that gas boys and girls the good times are over man up and make the cuts so I dont have to pay any higher taxes I know I cant get a forgivable loan can you.....
Darth, do you realize that just one of Rosie's smaller extravagant spending examples (the Taylor Ranch Castle plaque)could pay for the gas for more than 15,000 round trips from the city yards to Pico Rivera's In-n-Out? It could also pay for the gas for "a lot of shinny new city trucks just driving around."

She, and the rest of the gang of three are the main reason that this city has no money at this time, according to statements made by virtually all the financial professionals hired by the city in the last 2 years.
Remember

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jun 11, 2011
 
42 yr North Mtb resident wrote:
<quoted text>She, and the rest of the gang of three are the main reason that this city has no money at this time, according to statements made by virtually all the financial professionals hired by the city in the last 2 years.
Oh god, the koo koos are out again. I'll try this one more time. Please tell us where it says ANYWHERE in those reports that any of the council majority was to blame for the finances of the city. Please state anywhere where those reports state "council majority" or please state where it gives a specific name. Again, all the reports claim is that "staff" made questionable and maybe unethical decisions. You are making a conclusion without facts, That's a no no for you.
Remember

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jun 11, 2011
 
42 yr North Mtb resident wrote:
<quoted text>Darth, do you realize that just one of Rosie's smaller extravagant spending examples (the Taylor Ranch Castle plaque)could pay for the gas for more than 15,000 round trips from the city yards to Pico Rivera's In-n-Out? It could also pay for the gas for "a lot of shinny new city trucks just driving around."
Oh, please, do tell. What other "extravagant spending examples" do you have. We would all love to hear them, because I have yet to hear any.

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Jun 11, 2011
 
Remember wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, please, do tell. What other "extravagant spending examples" do you have. We would all love to hear them, because I have yet to hear any.
For about the 60th time, I call attention to the short attention span of the corrupt. TT, Theolona, and others been exhaustively listing the examples for years. I can take only so much repetition. Just read their past posts.
Remember

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jun 11, 2011
 
42 yr North Mtb resident wrote:
<quoted text>For about the 60th time, I call attention to the short attention span of the corrupt. TT, Theolona, and others been exhaustively listing the examples for years. I can take only so much repetition. Just read their past posts.
In other words, "I don't know", but, I'm gonna try and accuse them without facts anyway.

Let's see, the Montebello has a what, 60 million dollar budget or so?
Did the majority purchase or buy anything that would put the city millions over budget?

Just because TT, Theolona and others claim they over spent, doesn't mean thay did. get sone of your verifiable proof, then maybe you can talk.

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Jun 11, 2011
 
All of Cook-Hill/PXP's statemeents, up till today, about the history of public access to the last remaining open space Hills in Montebello have been false. Every one. A PRA made to the Police Department in 2006 concerning arrests or citations for trespassing in these Hills in the last millennium showed that no such citations appear to have ever been made.

Cook-Hill/PXP has put ALL of the risks in the materials, but they haven't identified them all as such, and others are extremely well hidden, mainly as footnotes in the margin, in charts, lists of items, etc. Mainly, saveourmontebellohills.com , the DEIR comments, and other websites, explain the dangers to the public.
lurker

Oakhurst, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Jun 11, 2011
 
Selective Remember
"Will residents need to get permission to enter the hills once the project is approved? No."

Absolutely will

Most of the hills will be unnecessairly closed as a so called "nature preserve"
No reason for5 it except PXP does not want to maintain trails and provide "pit stops" picinic benches, etc.
The rest of the project are "gated condos"
Do you ah to get permission to enter gated communities?
There will be a minscule public park and the fire break, called teh "grand promanade" which will be a no shade "death valley" experience in the summertime.
What is it about "no" don't you understand??
lurker

Oakhurst, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Jun 11, 2011
 
Please tell us where it says ANYWHERE in those reports that any of the council majority was to blame for the finances of the city. Please state anywhere where those reports state "council majority" or please state where it gives a specific name.

Remrmber
Take a look at the Departments Heads presentation from the 6th and the Editorial in the "Spotlight".
also Cosentini's writings
THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL MAJORITY WAS RESPONSIBLE
lurker

Oakhurst, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Jun 11, 2011
 
What we'll REMEMBER
"Ahhhhhhhhhh, you are correct. I thought I read it in the times, but I was mistaken, I read it in the "Montebello Life" magazine. ""
SO FAR SO GOOD

"I guess I should have referred to the hills as "private property" for the past 100 years with no public access unless you had permission as so many of you have now stated."
ESTABLISHES HILLS AS PRIVATE PROPERTY

So, I was wrong about the publication from where I got the information, but I am still correct regarding that the Hills is private property and no one has a legal right to be on the property unless of course, they get permission, as many of you have stated.

NOW HE PATS HIMSELF ON THE BACK ABOUT WHAT HE ESTABLISHED IN HIS IMMEDIATE PREVIOS PARAGRAPH
still correct...

Recall when he said no one had access to the hills, conenienly ommitting PXP!!!
Remember PXP IS a not a NOBODY
Get What U Deserve

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Jun 12, 2011
 
lurker wrote:
Selective Remember
"Will residents need to get permission to enter the hills once the project is approved? No."
Absolutely will
Most of the hills will be unnecessairly closed as a so called "nature preserve"The rest of the project are "gated condos"
Do you ah to get permission to enter gated communities?
There will be a minscule public park and the fire break, called teh "grand promanade" which will be a no shade "death valley" experience in the summertime.
What is it about "no" don't you understand??
Since you are blogging from Oakhurst (wherever that is), I suggest you stay out of montebello business, but since you wrote some BS, i guess i'll have some fun with you.

Lurker...
"Will residents need to get permission to enter the hills once the project is approved? No."
Absolutely will
Most of the hills will be unnecessairly closed as a so called "nature preserve"

GWUD...
The majority of the hills will be off limits from humans because of the Gnat Catcher habitat. The federal government states that the Gnat Catcher is an endangered species and must have a certain amount of space to exist.
Your statement of, "Most of the hills will be unnecessairly closed as a so called "nature preserve", again proves my point that you know nothing of this project. Please leave the grown ups table. LOL

Lurker...
"No reason for5 it except PXP does not want to maintain trails and provide "pit stops" picinic benches, etc."

GWUD...
Again, look at my previous post...

Lurker...
"There will be a minscule public park and the fire break, called teh "grand promanade" which will be a no shade "death valley" experience in the summertime".

GWUD...
How do you define miniscule??? Also, with over 20,000 new tress planted, there will be plenty of shade. however, if you feel there is not enough shade for you, I suggest you keep your butt away from the park and out city. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of our parks!!! LOL!!!
Get What U Deserve

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Jun 12, 2011
 
42 yr North Mtb resident wrote:
All of Cook-Hill/PXP's statemeents, up till today, about the history of public access to the last remaining open space Hills in Montebello have been false. Every one. A PRA made to the Police Department in 2006 concerning arrests or citations for trespassing in these Hills in the last millennium showed that no such citations appear to have ever been made.
Whoever said anything about anyone being cited or arrested for trespassing in the hills? You brought up that subject all on your own. Now who's being hypocritical? You have stated in the past, that I, as well as others, have made assumptions or conclusions about you, or have accused you of saying or meaning certain things, yet there YOU go talking about arrest and citations, when that topic has NEVER been brought up in these threads!

Now, tell me what is false about the CH/PXP claim that the public will now have legal access to the hills?

Have the hills been private property for the past 100 years? Yes.

If someone goes on private property without permission, are they trespassing? Yes

Did people with permission enter the hills in the past? Yes.

Were they trespassing? No

Did people without permission enter the hills in the past? Yes.

Were they trespassing? Yes

Did they get caught or ever get cited or arrested? Apparently not.

Is it trespassing to enter the hills now without permission? Yes

Will it be trespassing to enter the hills once the project is approved? No

CH/PXP is 100% right! The hills have been closed off to the public for the past 100 years because it is private property. However, apparently in certain cases the gave permission for people to enter the hills. How do you get that CH/PXP is lying? Oh, thats right, you're the Sean Hannity of CH.
Get What U Deserve

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Jun 12, 2011
 
Remember wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words, "I don't know", but, I'm gonna try and accuse them without facts anyway.
Let's see, the Montebello has a what, 60 million dollar budget or so?
Did the majority purchase or buy anything that would put the city millions over budget?
Just because TT, Theolona and others claim they over spent, doesn't mean thay did. get sone of your verifiable proof, then maybe you can talk.
I'd like to hear this one too.
Get What U Deserve

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Jun 12, 2011
 
lurker wrote:
Please tell us where it says ANYWHERE in those reports that any of the council majority was to blame for the finances of the city. Please state anywhere where those reports state "council majority" or please state where it gives a specific name.
Remrmber
Take a look at the Departments Heads presentation from the 6th and the Editorial in the "Spotlight".
also Cosentini's writings
THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL MAJORITY WAS RESPONSIBLE
You're gonna have to forward links, because all I found in the spotlight was the commentary which had a little statement that said, "Our city council needs all our support as they try to rectify the financial challenges that they inherited". Inherited from who? Staff, finance department, council, he does not mention anyone. Try again...

As for the Department heads and Cosentini, your gonna have to give us a little more specific information as to where we can actually view those so-called statements.

Until you do, nothing you say matters...

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Jun 12, 2011
 
As those who have proficient English skills can see, ALL the corrupt statements about the history of the Hills that are correct support the contention that Cook-Hill/PXP's previous statements about he history of public access to the Hills have been lies.

Cook-Hill/PXP has always claimed, FALSELY, that the public has not had access to the Hills for 100 years. That is a lie in every interpretation that can be made from those words. Even their recent advertising mailer's slight change, adding the word 'legal' to access, is STILL false, as those residents who wanted and obtained legal access to the Hills before PXP bought them can attest to.

Not knowing anything about Montebello except what they could learn from Newport Beach, Cook-Hill/PXP has still inexplicably refused to accept the truth. What does that say for their caring about what the people of Montebello say?
lurker

Oakhurst, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Jun 12, 2011
 
The spotlight editorial referenced "current council"
English usage then referes to "council" and "inherited from" to the same noun "council" unless another entity is specified.
Did you ever go to school?
You could expand the usage to "current council inherited from the previous council"
But that is not reuired in common usage.
Yo cannot "inherit" from a future council can you?
And you cnnot "inherit" from a different noun, can you?In you case you might have inherited from an inferior species, but in that case you would also be inferior.
Bingo
Remember

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Jun 12, 2011
 
sorry, I meant,

You can spin it all you want, but since the Hills are NOT public property,
Remember

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Jun 12, 2011
 
lurker wrote:
Did you ever go to school?
Yeah I did, don't you remember me going to school and sneaking out your back door after doing it to your mom the night before? LOL!!!
lurker

Oakhurst, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Jun 12, 2011
 
It is unfortunate that ou are not proficient in
English.
Look up inherit
A council can only "inherit" from another council.

42 year is much more precise than I am
I as trying to simplify it for you.
Just not possible.

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Jun 12, 2011
 
Get What U Deserve wrote:
<quoted text>
You're gonna have to forward links, because all I found in the spotlight was the commentary which had a little statement that said, "Our city council needs all our support as they try to rectify the financial challenges that they inherited". Inherited from who? Staff, finance department, council, he does not mention anyone. Try again...
As for the Department heads and Cosentini, your gonna have to give us a little more specific information as to where we can actually view those so-called statements.
Until you do, nothing you say matters...
As lurker says, through a glass, darkly, an entity can only inherit from other like named entities.

Inherit: to have in turn or receive as if from an ancestor <inherited the problem from his predecessor>

In the case of the 'Spotlight' article, the only possible meaning of the sentence quoted is that a previous council caused the 'financial challenges'.

If the sentence had been something like 'Our city council needs all our support as they try to rectify the financial challenges that they inherited from other sources.', then it could have been inherited from something other than the past city council(s).

Still time to sign up for language tutoring this fall.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••