Councilmember Corey Calaycay caught some heat for remarks he made at Thursday’s swearing in ceremony for the new city council members.
At the ceremony, he applauded the ethnic diversity of the new council. He also pointed out its geographic diversity since the 5 council members all live in different parts of town.
But he didn’t mention that there are no women on the council; a fact not lost several women sitting in the audience. It’s the first time since 1962 that Claremont doesn’t have a female councilmember.
After Calaycay’s remarks, a few women in the audience remarked about the lack of female council members and didn’t like that Calaycay pointed that out. Even though he actually didn’t.
At last night’s council meeting, former Mayor Karen Rosenthal spoke during public comment on the topic.
“I think Corey has been flogged enough in the press about diversity on the council, or lack thereof,” Rosenthal said. "He said there was diversity and many of us thought there wasn't enough diversity since 52.8 percent of the population is female."
Calaycay later apologized for remarks disparaging women that he didn’t make.
"It's clear that I had a great offense to Ms. Rosenthal and I believe it was mentioned that Judy Wright was also offended by remarks at the last meeting and so I'd like to take this opportunity to apologize to both of them," Calaycay said. "I did not mean to degrade women. As a matter of fact, there are a lot of women in this community who have supported me time and time again coming on to this council and I deeply appreciate all of those women who have supported me and I have no intention of insulting any of the ladies in our community. And I'm sure that the day will come again when women will be back on this council and I apologize that they're not here right now. I did not mean anything in my remarks to offend any women in the community. So I apologize to you."
Spoken like a true man.
Maybe there’d be some women on the council if more women ran for the office. In the last 2 city council elections, only one woman has run in each election, compared to a total of 9 men. That’s not the biggest pool for voters to choose from.
Showing posts with label Karen Rosenthal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Karen Rosenthal. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Reflections on the Landrum shooting
Reporting on the 10 year anniversary of the Landrum shooting was in some way a very difficult story to cover.
The incident was so emotional and disturbing for a community that always seems to strive for perfection.
One reason the Landrum incident was so distressing was that the event exposed some of the hidden imperfections within the city that nobody wanted to acknowledge or even knew existed. Imperfections like transparency in government and how city leaders should respond when faced with a real crisis.
The fact is, nobody truly knows what happened that night 10 years ago, except Officers Kent Jacks and Hany Hanna, who were involved the shooting. Everyone else was just caught up in the aftermath.
I interviewed Karen Rosenthal, who was not mayor when the incident happened but was throughout much of the aftermath. As the voice of the city, Rosenthal was certainly in a difficult position and struggled with being thrown into that role during the crisis.
Rosenthal cried while I interviewed her. Her emotions, which still exist today, personify how lasting an impact the incident had on the community, and all the raw emotions that it invoked.
The greatest criticism of Rosenthal throughout the aftermath was for being insensitive to Landrum and his family and making public statements about his character and personal life that many felt were irrelevant.
Does it matter that he fathered 2 children to 2 different women at the age of 18, as she brought up during our interview? Even going so far as to call him a “rapist, by the legal definition” because the women were underage.
I don’t think so. The young man died under circumstance that could possibly have been avoided. His personal life, aside from any criminal record that he may have had, should not be judged or criticized.
By bringing up these points in public and in statements to the media, along with her "dripping contempt she showed for protesters at public meetings", as one observer noted, Rosenthal made herself appear callous, and likely cost her another term on the council.
When Glenn Southard named the officers Employees of the Year award and released the criminal record of Obee Landrum, he displayed his intent to take an extremely defensive stance over the issue. This did not sit well with those close to him and observers in the community.
With all the poor decisions that he made during the crisis, it calls to question his decision-making abilities on other, less important issues. The city of Claremont may very well be better off without him.
As far as the police, it's hard to say if racial profiling was ever an unwritten policy or a regular practice. Councilmember Sam Pedroza once said after doing a ride-along with police that he felt it was more profiling based on the type of car rather than who was inside.
Regardless, "perception often makes something a reality", as another observer noted. And there was certainly the perception in the community that racial profiling was a very real thing amongst the police. The Police Department was forced to react to that perception and made positive steps to re-building its standing in the community.
Has the city moved on? Yes. Is Claremont a better place? I certainly think so.
Claremont’s civil society rallied to improve on its weaknesses. Let’s hope that if another crisis hits this city, that we will respond better in the future.
The incident was so emotional and disturbing for a community that always seems to strive for perfection.
One reason the Landrum incident was so distressing was that the event exposed some of the hidden imperfections within the city that nobody wanted to acknowledge or even knew existed. Imperfections like transparency in government and how city leaders should respond when faced with a real crisis.
The fact is, nobody truly knows what happened that night 10 years ago, except Officers Kent Jacks and Hany Hanna, who were involved the shooting. Everyone else was just caught up in the aftermath.
I interviewed Karen Rosenthal, who was not mayor when the incident happened but was throughout much of the aftermath. As the voice of the city, Rosenthal was certainly in a difficult position and struggled with being thrown into that role during the crisis.
Rosenthal cried while I interviewed her. Her emotions, which still exist today, personify how lasting an impact the incident had on the community, and all the raw emotions that it invoked.
The greatest criticism of Rosenthal throughout the aftermath was for being insensitive to Landrum and his family and making public statements about his character and personal life that many felt were irrelevant.
Does it matter that he fathered 2 children to 2 different women at the age of 18, as she brought up during our interview? Even going so far as to call him a “rapist, by the legal definition” because the women were underage.
I don’t think so. The young man died under circumstance that could possibly have been avoided. His personal life, aside from any criminal record that he may have had, should not be judged or criticized.
By bringing up these points in public and in statements to the media, along with her "dripping contempt she showed for protesters at public meetings", as one observer noted, Rosenthal made herself appear callous, and likely cost her another term on the council.
When Glenn Southard named the officers Employees of the Year award and released the criminal record of Obee Landrum, he displayed his intent to take an extremely defensive stance over the issue. This did not sit well with those close to him and observers in the community.
With all the poor decisions that he made during the crisis, it calls to question his decision-making abilities on other, less important issues. The city of Claremont may very well be better off without him.
As far as the police, it's hard to say if racial profiling was ever an unwritten policy or a regular practice. Councilmember Sam Pedroza once said after doing a ride-along with police that he felt it was more profiling based on the type of car rather than who was inside.
Regardless, "perception often makes something a reality", as another observer noted. And there was certainly the perception in the community that racial profiling was a very real thing amongst the police. The Police Department was forced to react to that perception and made positive steps to re-building its standing in the community.
Has the city moved on? Yes. Is Claremont a better place? I certainly think so.
Claremont’s civil society rallied to improve on its weaknesses. Let’s hope that if another crisis hits this city, that we will respond better in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
