The Capistrano Insider

Congratulations Capistrano, You've Made Time

 

Time Magazine, that is.

But, predictably these days, not in a good way.

The national news magazine picked up on the Bible-study fines, and wrote a piece about it. Here's the beginning:

The city of San Juan Capistrano, Calif., has resorted to fining a family for holding Bible studies in their home as a violation of zoning codes.

Sure, Chuck and Stephanie Fromm technically don't follow the city's proper permit channels by not gaining a conditional use permit to host a home Bible study. But neither does hardly anyone in the city, since the city code requires a permit for any nonprofit or fraternal group expecting three or more people gathering in a residential situation. That happens just about every weekend all across the city, from friends getting together for barbecues to weekend football-viewing parties to, well, the Fromms' Bible study. But the Fromms now have a pair of $300 fines to show for their effort.

Note to City: The media gets it: The issuing isn't whether you "prohibit" Bible studies, as your statement says, it's about the permits and process, etc.

Here's the rest of the post.

Stephanie Fromm, who was cited with her husband Chuck, even commented on the post:

"to fill in some of the info you all are possibly not aware of...

We are being fined for holding ANY "meetings/gatherings" of ANY size larger than 3 people on a "regular" basis. I have 5-6 ladies over on wednesday afternoons, 10-15 people(not cars) on thursday evenings. This does not bother any of my other 6 neighbors on my street (with houses on one side of the street).
The real issue is: when do I have to declare what we do in our home when we have friends & family over! A "conditional use permit" can cost thousands of dollars. We pay our property taxes, isn't that enough?"

More Bad Press for Reeve=More Bad Press for Capistrano

More and more media outlets are picking up the allegations that San Juan Capistrano City Councilman Derek Reeve is a potential plagiarist, as reported by Capistrano Patch Editor Jenna Chander.

Frank Mickadeit at the Register -- who was in Capistrano last Tuesday to cover the debate over the name of Reeve's dog -- weighs in that it certain looks like Reeve took the work of others and republished it under his own name. That column is here and points out the fact that Reeve has essentially not answered anybody's questions since the issue began. He's even silent on his Facebook page, where he'd posted plenty on the dog debate.

Others weighing in include OC Weekly and the Liberal OC.

Both are very carful to attribute their sources.

On the academic front, Dissent the Blog at Saddleback posts a lengthy examination of the school's policies on plagiarism. That's here.

It makes for an interesting Capistrano City Council meeting on October 4. One of the items expected to appear on that agenda (which isn't posted yet) is Reeve's proposal for a anti-illegal immigration policy. That proposed policy and the news release about it was among the writings Patch cited as containing work very (very very) similar to the (copywrited) work of others.

 

 

Saddleback Professor: Plagarism Allegations Make Capo Councilman Reeve 'Toast'

Saddleback College has been a pretty political place, with faculty against administration in some pretty public battles. All of that spawned a blog, Dissent.

The blog keeps an eye on all things political at Saddleback and Irvine Valley College, and well, Professor (and San Juan Capistrano City Councilman) Derek Reeve is on the radar -- for the dog named Muhammad and now the plagiarism allegations. (see the Patch story here)

Dissent notes that plagiarism is one thing, but plagiarism among academics, well, the blog says, that makes Reeve 'toast.'

Here's the entire post.

No word yet whether Saddleback officials will take any action -- we're also checking with Concordia, where Reeve also teaches.

As for Reeve, no word from him anywhere. He initally told Patch's Jenna Chandler, who broke the story, that he'd made some mistakes combining his research and his own writing, but then broke several promises to get her a full response.

I posted something on his Facebook page asking about the story, but it was immediately taken down.

Patch: Capistrano Councilman Reeves Appeared to Have Plagerized in Blogs

Councilman Derek Reeve, in the news for asking that Capsitrano lift its ban on guns in parks and for offending other city leaders and Muslims by announcing he'd named his dog "Muhammad," appears to have plagerized dozens of passages in blogs he wrote for the website Patch, the site is reporting.

Reeve was a voluntary columnist for the website, but stopped writing after Patch asked about the columns and passages that appeared to be taken word-for-word from the works of others without attribution.

Patch says Reeve initially told them he'd been careless in confusing his notes and writing, but then stopped responding to the site's calls for explaination.

An attorney, Reeve teaches at two local colleges, one of which contends plagerism -- intentionally or unintentionally --  is a very serious offense.

See the full post at www.sanjuancapistrano.patch.com

Conservative King O'Reilly Calls Capistrano's Reeves 'Pinhead' Over Dog Name

Even conservative talk show host Bill O'Reilly has weighed in on the issue of San Juan Capistrano City Councilman Derek Reeve naming his dog "Muhammad," after the Muslim prophet. Reeve said he did it as a lesson in free speech.

O'Reilly's response: "Free speech issues aside, Mr. Reeve is a pinhead," O'Reilly said during the short "pinhead and patriots" segment his Fox News show. "Why offend Muslims if you don't have to? You wanna teach your children about tolerance there are plenty of others way to do it."

Here's a link, with video, via San Juan Capistrano Patch.

And Frank Mickadeit, the OC Register's columnist, has weighed in, too. He attended Tuesday's meeting. His take:

First, was his stated reason for naming one of his dogs Muhammad – teaching his children the meaning of free speech – completely sincere? Did he name his dog something he knew would offend some Muslims because it was necessary to make a point? Or does he mainly just want to offend Muslims?

According to Patch.com, after the Sept. 6 council meeting, he wrote a blog piece for Patch talking about how his two dogs got their names. In the original blog, he wrote:

"While playing with our family's two new Basset Hounds, Muhammad and America (Muhammad is the bitch), I was thinking ..."

But this part of his post was removed a short time later. In response to another reader's inquiry about its disappearance, Patch editor Jenna Chandler wrote that "(Reeve) wrote to me to say he had intended to delete that part of the blog post, and wasn't sure how it remained in our queue. In fairness to him, we deleted it from this story."

So, if Reeves' naming of his dog was also something of a statement – essentially, Muhammad is America's bitch – that would seem to belie his public statement that it was all about freedom of speech. It would be evidence of the insensitivity and mean-spiritedness his critics allege."

Here's Frank's column.

Frank followed up with another column:

"My column yesterday about San Juan City Councilman Derek Reeve naming his dog Muhammad mostly examined the corrupt logic and false sincerity behind his reasoning: he said he was teaching his children a free-speech lesson. Many Muslims consider dogs foul.

It's bad enough you have a politician so consumed by ideology that he gins up some illogical reason to mask what's really going on. That kind of thinking can have spillover into all sorts of policy-setting arenas, so it is worth noting for the future. But what I failed to address, for space reasons, was the very real and immediate impact of his hurtful words within the lovely city of San Juan.

Mayor Sam Allevato wrote me:

"We employ Muslim workers, who were offended by the statement, especially in the manner it was delivered. Who is to speak for them? They won't speak up for themselves as they obviously fear retaliation. I know that a 'hostile work environment' has to be a pervasive culture or pattern of behavior within an organization. But could not a 'pattern' of a hostile work environment begin with one statement made by the highest ranking member of the city?"

SJC is so on notice now, I'd be shocked if you ever heard another slur, but in theory, he's right. More practically, Reeve demoralized a group of employees, and without a real apology that will linger."

Here's that column.