He's a Ph.D on MY CAMPUS?! Please allow me to apologize on behalf of the student body. LOL!

_________________
"I never learned anything from winning, it's the races where I got my butt kicked that I learned the most" - Michellie Jones (Ironman World Champion)

http://www.ericpalmerendurancecoaching.blogspot.com

I'm not sure what Dr. Gerst's function is at UCSD, but I don't see his name on the faculty directory. He may be a board member or may maintain another association with the university. I don't know.

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

Alumni Assoc and patrons of the Library get an email address. I've got one like that, too, but don't use it.

Minette has been pressing to reinstate Greg Lambert, who was an alternate that was approved by the Task Force so we can at least have a voting member on the CAC.

Here is the response (my emphasis):
Re: in the interim/ Minette's request to re-appoint Greg Lambert

Minette:

You have asked once again that Greg Lambert be allowed to rejoin the CAC
as an alternate for SDMBA with immediate voting rights(without further
TF confirmation) because as you state "my concern and desire is that our
constituency has a recognized and counted vote at the LPCP-CAC table".

While I also share your concern and desire, I am equally concerned of
the other organizations that currently cannot vote at the CAC. From my
perspective as Chair, I can see no difference between your concern about
your organization's disenfranchisement and other organizations in a
similar situation.

Anne Harvey has pointed that the current officers have contacted the
task force in a variety of ways over the last month in an effort to
persuade them to meet sooner rather than later. We will continue to do
so, until we can achieve this goal.

Since this decision of mine rests on my reading of the committee rules,
I would be interested in your interpretation of those rules in this
regard, and where, specifically,the rules allow for a reappointment and
immediate granting of voting rights.
It is my understanding that the interpretation of bylaws and rules which
govern an organization such as ours is primarily left to the chair.
Naturally, my interpretation is subject to overruling by the Task Force,
or by city attorney and/or the County Atty. However, since these two
offices are undoubtedly busy and would consider this issue a low
priority, I am afraid that I have no other recourse at the moment.

If, on the other hand, you agree with my interpretation, but are asking
(as seems apparent from your letter) for special consideration for your
organization, let me simply say that if I were to take such a stance it
would lead to chaos in the CAC. I am committed to treat all CAC members
and prospective members equally and fairly. In the last line of your
letter you seem to agree with this while continuing to ask for special
consideration.

Finally, if one your main concerns (as I seem to recall from one of your
previous e-mails) is that your organization will be disenfranchised when
the RMP is finally published, I can only say that I am sensitive to this
issue and as far as internal discussions are concerned your
representative will be treated equally with all the other representatives.

Beyond that, I cannot promise. I do not know when the RMP is scheduled
for publication, nor do I know whether this will be a draft or a final
form and whether anyone, or any organization will have the ability to
further influence that document.

Marvin S. Gerst, Ph.D.
Chair, LPCP-CAC
P.O. Box 3707
Rancho Santa Fe, Ca. 92067
mgerst@...



Seems the CAC must have been full of "chaos" for the years that the Task Force approval was overlooked, and then suddenly reinstated for the select benefit of certain parties on election night.

As for the all important RMP "your representative will be treated equally", until the voting that is. Then it's election/voting fraud, part II.

Chaos.


PS- If anyone has the time to attend this meeting tonight, please go.
"CAC Meetings are held on the 3rd Thursday of odd-numbered months, 7:00 pm, in the Preserve at the Santa Maria de los Peñasquitos Adobe, off of Black Mountain Road. These meetings are open to the public."

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

I don't think Greg Lambert knows what he is getting himself into I hope he brings a to the meeting

_________________
"No matter where you go there you are" BUCKAROO BANZAI
My Pinkbike page http://www.pinkbike.com/u/lambertphoto

I don't know Greg, but you can tell him he's safe. The issue here is that Minette is obviously trying to get SDMBA to have a representative vote at the table, especially in light of the upcoming RMP. However, it is Gerst's interpretation of the by-laws that once a voting member leaves the committee, he will need to again be approved by the Task Force before he can vote, just as any new member would.

Lucky for Greg. Bad for the rest of us.

A suggestion was posted on the LPCP-CAC board to implement a 'grace period' into the by-laws regarding Task Force approval for new members. That is, allow new members to vote for a period of time until the Task Force can either approve or deny (and realistically, how often does that happen?) the appointee. This would avoid any gap in representation, as we are seeing now, especially as the Task Force meets so infrequently. Theoretically, this could be voted on and implemented tonight. Unless, of course, certain voting members prefer to disallow fair representation.

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

So Greg can go to the meeting loaded on Percocet he is taking for his broken wrist

_________________
"No matter where you go there you are" BUCKAROO BANZAI
My Pinkbike page http://www.pinkbike.com/u/lambertphoto

I seem to have gotten myself onto the LPCPCAC mailing list, so I get to see all the mail going back and forth between the various factions. The sheer volume of email lacking any coherent content and the disorganized and likely duplicated file uploads, especially from Marvin Gerst, seems like a giant pile of vomit. Reminds me of a scene from Monty Pythons, The Meaning of Life.

From Wikipedia:

In the sketch, Mr. Creosote dines at a French restaurant. The entrance of this morbidly obese middle-aged man is accompanied by ominous music and is followed by a short dialogue with the maître d', played by John Cleese:

Maître d': Ah, good afternoon, sir; and how are we today?
Mr. Creosote: Better.
Maître d': Better?
Mr. Creosote: Better get a bucket - I'm gonna throw up.

Creosote is then led to his table, and once seated starts vomiting, failing to hit the bucket he had requested a moment before. The floor quickly becomes covered in vomit, and so do the cleaning woman and the maître d's trousers. He listens patiently while highlights of the evening's menu are recited to him; after vomiting on the menu held open right in front of him by the maître d', he orders them all served in a bucket with quail eggs on top, and for apéritifs he has six bottles of Château Latour 1945, a double jeroboam of champagne, and half a dozen crates of brown ale (half his usual allowance). He finishes the lot, vomiting profusely all over himself, his table, and the other diners throughout the duration (causing other diners to leave in disgust). Finally, after being persuaded by the smooth (and possibly vengeful) maître d' to eat a "wafer-thin mint", he explodes in a huge torrent of innards and partially digested food.
When the explosion clears, Creosote is still alive, but his chest cavity is now blasted open, revealing his spread ribs and still-beating heart. As he looks around, seemingly confused by what has just happened, the maître d' calmly walks up to him and presents "the cheque, monsieur."

Maybe I'm a little late on this, but my last recollection was that there were only 2 votes cast by Task Force certified members giving a 1 to 1 tie. (But honestly, I haven't been keeping up to speed.)

So I guess a question is if in any of that vomit can the anointing of any or all of the 'voting' members of the horsey clan by the Task Force be found.

EDIT: I guess it was- see post below.

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

So according to Gerst, let the record show, "that the election was fair and valid***"

Sounds strangely familiar...... Fox news maybe?

But the question remains, why did the horsey group wait until the very night of the election to suddenly pull out this by-law?

In light of the above, another question should be addressed, and that is were Mike Maio, Walter Heiberg and Ross Kirby officially notified by the CAC that they needed Task Force approval in order to vote?




From the LPCP-CAC:
To the board and Web members:

I have just uploaded a large number of files to the website. These are
in the "Files" folders.

These files are the minutes, agendas, and backup material of the
meetings of the City/ County Task Force from October 2003 through
December 2006 (the last meeting to the present.)

These files came from two sources. About half of the total files I had
in my computer and these paralleled files which Gina Washington found in
the city files. The other source, as mentioned, are the files of the
city parks department which operate the Preserve for the city, and in
that context they were responsible for taking notes and otherwise
documenting Task Force meetings.

There are some files in the city, which I do not have, and others which
I have and the city did not.

In addition, I have re-named these files and given them numbers so that
I could more easily sort and describe each of the files succinctly .

I've attached a screenshot of all of the files in this section (ATTACH #1)

You can see that they are numbered 0.0 TF down to 6.2 TF.

The files which the city had that I did not, are 1.0 and 1.1 TF, 3.0 and
3.1 TF, 4.3 and4.4TF, and all of 5-6TF.

The files which I had, and the City did not, are 3.2 and 3.3 TF. Since
these two files are important for the issue of the last officer?s
election let me say a few words about them.

File 3.2 was in my computer with an original creation date of 11/3/2004,
and a copy of this was also in the notebook which Geoff Smith turned
over to me containing such things as letters of nomination by
organizations, the bylaws etc. Also, since this was a memo from Gina
Washington (then Brown) to her then boss David Monroe that document
should be in their files as well.

File 3.3 is in my computer with an original creation date of 10/20/2004,
and supports 3.2 in my belief that this was for a Task Force meeting
scheduled for 10/28/2004 which was then delayed to 11/5/2004.

The reason for this analysis is that Erik Basil and Minette Ozaki,
have charged that the election of 3/19/2009 is invalid because some
voting members were not qualified to do so. Erik has also falsely
asserted that 3 members of the CAC were barred from voting

We now have the minutes and agendas of the Task Force for the time
period 2004-2006. This allows us to determine we can verify the
confirmations by the Task Force and at which meeting. However before we
do that we have to look at the Rules of the CAC, as passed by the Task
Force.

I'm attaching the rules as passed by the Task Force on 4/22/2004.
(ATTACH #2) These rules are in our files section. The relevant sections
are section III subsection A paragraph 4, 6.

III A 4-6 deals with representatives of organizations and groups. When a
group is accepted as a member of the CAC it may send a representative
and alternate to the meetings to participate and vote after confirmation
by the Task Force. The organization annually sends a letter to the CAC
either re-nominating their current representative and alternate or
someone new.

Whenever a new representative is nominated he/she must be confirmed by
the Task Force before they can vote. Prior to confirmation this new
representative may fully participate in the functioning of the CAC with
the exception of being barred from voting. In the case of continuing
service on the CAC by the same representative, he /she may continue to
participate in all phases of the CAC including voting.

In 2004 the CAC was reorganized because of pressure from the bicycle
community for more representation. The end result of this was the
appointment of a number of new representatives to the CAC is culminating
in a meeting by the Task Force on 11/05/2004.

At that meeting a slate of candidates listed in a memo from Gina
Washington (then Brown) to her boss David Monroe was confirmed by the
Task Force (ATTACH #3).

In the minutes of that meeting under : ?action items the adoption item
number 201 CAC membership appointments? , these appointments were
Swanson, Botta, Clews, Justice, Hanna, Lorenz, Smith, Basil, Ravd,
Gerst, Harvey, Stevens. There were more on this list but they have since
left the CAC and we are concerned with current voting rights not
historical information.(ATTACH #4)

Since this meeting was crucial for reorganizing the CAC membership other
pieces of information are relevant.

The first is the minutes of the meeting of 7/15/2004 of the CAC. At that
meeting you will see that the roll call of members in the audience
present was composed of the then current members of the CAC and audience
members described as ?member nominees" next to many of the names.(ATTACH #5)

Secondly, the CAC meeting of November 11/18/2004 shows this same list as
members but no longer ?nominees?. Thus, we know that all of these
individuals now are noted as members.

So of the 11 members qualified to vote in the last election of CAC
officers, 10 were appointed at the Task Force meeting in question. and
have been serving continuously since that meeting.

We then jump ahead to the last Task Force meeting of 12/7/2006. At that
meeting action item 202, shows Bobbi Remnant confirmed as the
representative of Canyonside stables.(ATTACH #6)

This accounts for all members who voted in the recent officer elections.
(ATTACH #7)

The one person who was barred from voting (Ross Kirby) was so barred
because the Task Force has not yet confirmed him. However, even if Mr.
Kirby had been allowed to vote, it would not have changed the outcome of
the election because his candidate lost

(6 for Gerst, 4 against Gerst, 1 abstains, 1 not allowed).

Mr. Basil has asserted that 3 members were barred from voting,
presumably Mike Maio, Walter Heiberg and Ross Kirby. In fact both Walter
and Mike did not attend the meeting and Mike did not call to excuse himself.


*Thus my conclusion is that the election was fair and valid***

I hope your conclusion is the same and we can now move on to the
substantive issues we face as a whole group.

--


Marvin S. Gerst, Ph.D.
Chair,LPCP-CAC
P.O. Box 3707
Rancho Santa Fe, Ca. 92067
mgerst@...

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

man, fuck it, just go ride the tunnels.

no one saw nothin!

(if you happen to be the slow rider, you don't know who that other guy was, you just saw him down there and chatted it up)

This is a situation that has definitely reached "Turko Files" proportions. It definitely correlates positively with the general trend revealing multilevel corruption throughout the San Diego infrastructure.

I think he might find the guts to tackle this one.....it could make him look good. The one i had for him a couple years back had him runnin' a-skeered.

This one's a definite possibility, tho......

_________________
Scum on a Bike

After tonight's CAC meeting I would agree.

_________________
"No matter where you go there you are" BUCKAROO BANZAI
My Pinkbike page http://www.pinkbike.com/u/lambertphoto

Do tell?

_________________
"I never learned anything from winning, it's the races where I got my butt kicked that I learned the most" - Michellie Jones (Ironman World Champion)

http://www.ericpalmerendurancecoaching.blogspot.com

Gerst doesn't really think that his personal stash of files is good enough to be used as official record, does he? Come on...

Here is some metadata from one of the documents he uploaded as "authentic." It clearly shows that he made a revision of the document at some time before uploading it. The original document was authored by Kathy Yeager (or someone using her computer), and was modified by Marvin Gerst (or someone using his computer).

The creation time is suspect. I'm not implying wrongdoing here, but unless he was authorized to modify these documents, I would want them all rejected.


edit: wow, the thumbnail is blurry. you have to click to get the full size.