 |
 |
Gary Wysocky, left, and Jake Ours
By KEVIN McCALLUM
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
At least one of Gary Wysocky’s Santa Rosa City Council colleagues is miffed over remarks Wysocky made about last week’s decision to grant camping permits to Occupy Santa Rosa protesters.
During last Thursday’s emergency City Council meeting, Wysocky proposed adding language to the draft ordinance that would require applicants to affirm they are not a registered sex offender, parolee, gang member or on probation.
Police officials had told the council they had encountered such individuals among the protesters.
But City Attorney Caroline Fowler advised Wysocky that adding such language “creates real potential legal issues.”
That triggered one of the first sharp exchanges of the evening.
“I’m not asking you what you think it creates,” Wysocky replied. “Could we not do that?”
“Not without risk,” Fowler said.
Later in the meeting, after Wysocky proposed adding the language anyway, Councilman Scott Bartley said he would support the draft ordinance — but not Wysocky’s additions. Bartley cited Fowler’s concerns and his discomfort with Wysocky trying to make “modifications made on the fly.”
“So you’re OK with having known sex offenders …” Wysocky began.
“No that is NOT what I’m saying!!!” Bartley interrupted.
Wysocky eventually withdrew the provision, and the measure passed without it.
But the spat spilled over onto the airwaves Friday, when Wysocky suggested in a radio interview on KSRO that Bartley is somehow soft on crime.
“I think a good reason for not allowing someone to camp where there are kids is the fact that they are a registered sex offender,” Wysocky said in the KSRO interview. “If he (Bartley) disagrees with me, then that’s a difference of opinion.”
That prompted Councilman Jake Ours, a frequent ally of Bartley, to call into the show, “The Drive with Steve Jaxon.” He told Wysocky that he owed Bartley an apology for insinuating “that Scott is for perverted behavior.”
“That’s just an insult. It’s a horrible thing for you to say. You owe him an apology. I think you are way off base,” Ours said.
Wysocky defended his proposals as a good faith effort to rectify a “significant omission” from the ordinance, but Ours wasn’t buying it.
“Gary, you were showboating, is what you were doing,” Ours said. “You were showboating and it’s beneath our council for you to do that.”
—–O—–
Click the triangle below to hear a 6-minute audio recording of the Nov. 11, 2011 exchange between Jake Ours and Gary Wysocky on KSRO radio’s “The Drive with Steve Jaxon.“
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
@Grubber
I don’t even live in SR, but the rest of the council have significantly stronger qualifications than Angry Wysocky.
For starters, they act like adults.
In addition, they have integrity.
Also, they recognize they work for their constituencies, not the reverse.
Finally, they are worthy of respect.
Outside of those minor points, they are just like Gary the cyclist.
Let them finish this like real men! Water pistols at dawn between the tents on the lawn at City Hall.
No permits needed, no need to frighten the multitude huddled in the cold tents, just mano-a-mano.
Wysocky will be at a disadvantage in this fight because he is already all wet. But he can play to the crowd as he always does.
Solution;
Say, a pillow fight over tar pit?
I stated that I was GLAD that Gary Wysocky was a council member and that I hoped he ran for RE-election. I stated that his qualification to make sound financial decisions was superior to his colleagues on the city council because Gary was trained as a Certified Public Accountant / CPA.
So I asked the critics here to post the qualifications of their preferred council members and waited for a reply that I knew would not come.
Still waiting.
Still waiting.
Still waiting.
You see, your rants and your hate mean little when you can’t even point to something that the other council members have as far a a qualification. They have NO qualifications. All talk. All pretend.
To phone a radio show out of jealousy and envy of Gary Wysocky and try to engage him on the air proved how childish the other council members are.
I am so glad that Gary is on the council. The others are like children.
Why is everyone assuming they know what Wosocky said? He never got to finish his thought because Bartley cut him off. Does anyone think Wysocky sincerely thinks Bartley supports having child molesters camping there? Please. For all we know, he was trying to say voting against his added language would support them. Was it provocative? Yes. Could he have said it better? Yes. But he was right. His added language would have improved the ordinance, and Bartley’s response made no sense. It’s obvious the Majority Machine doesn’t want to support anything Wysocky. They should be challenged.
Council Member Gary Wysocky did the right thing by bringing up extra protective language for the camping permit. It puts the onus of TRUTH on the occupier without risk to the City, and the City would NOT have to do background checks on all applicants. Police noted ALL of Wysocky’s concerns in the previous council meeting, and Wysocky was being prudent to ask for the language in an effort to satisfy police and safety concerns.
I’m still waiting to see the other posts here come up with the meager qualifications of their favorite council members.
Not much to say ?
Billy C.
Tell us about the qualifications of your preferred council members. I pointed out Gary’s.
I’ll wait. lol.
Whilst the citizens rage at each other over horrors like illegal camping, the banks have taken over the real estate market and raided your life savings one way or the other, but call the riot police – WE HAVE A CAMPING EMERGENCY.
@ Money Grubber
Your joking right ?
Chops to Jake for calling in and setting the record straight. Good job Jake!
How Gary responds to this going forward will be very telling as regards his ability to think a problem through clearly and, more importantly, his character.
To suggest that opposition to his amendment means that one is in favor of child molestation is insulting, stupid, and insulting of the public’s intelligence (a low bar, granted).
Gary owes an apology to the council and the citizens of Santa Rosa!!!
I sure am GLAD that we have Mr. Wysocky on the council and I hope he runs for RE-election.
He is the only person on the council that has the training ( Certified Public Accountant) required to make solid, sound decisions.
Lets hear what the other council members have in the way of training? lol. NOT much. All they have is the usual politician double talk skills. All air, no substance.
The jealousy and envy of Mr. Wysocky’s opponents is astounding.
Shame on Gary Wysocky for his continuous disrespect to Council Members, City Staff, and citizens.
Shame on Gary Wycocky for for thinking he knew better than the CHIEF OF POLICE about whether Occupy Santa Rosa had created a high crime area.
Shame on Gary Wysocky for putting the agenda of a couple hundred illegal campers above the safety of the rest of the community.
http://www.facebook.com/STOPoccupySR
Wysocky has previously been disrespectful to staff, other council members that he doesn’t agree with (anybody but Jacobi, Gorin and vas Dupre), public speakers, Oakmonters, and about 75% of the SR citizens. Dont vote for him-that is better than complaining about his behavior that has never changed since he took office.
What is wrong with Wysocky? That would fill up several books and could be the subject of a life time of study. The bottom line is he is a borish, child like personality at times.
Wysocky is extremely thin skined for a politician. Debate is not his forte.
His attack on the City Attorney and then on Bartley was on called for and out of line. He does need to control his temper and win friends not enemies which seems to be an impossibility.
I watched that counsel meeting and heard that exchange. Scott was trying to find common ground and was looking for a way to
Support the Protesters but not lose total control of the situation. Gary’s attack was uncalled for and childish.
I sense there has been tension between
Gary and Scott for some time now.
I think Scott’s only agenda is to get Santa Rosa back on track and in the black. If he where more assertive Gary probably would not bully him so.
I think Gary owes an apology to the counsel and the citizens of Santa Rosa.
No!
Gary Wysocky being a jerk?
Accusing folks of a malicious motive because they disgree with him?
Acting like a God, forced to live amongst us mere mortals?
I’m shocked.
Not!