Definition of ‘fair’ cheats the public Thank...

Definition of ‘fair’ cheats the public

Thank you for your detailed report on the Feb. 11 council item

regarding the Alta Laguna lot (“City goes on way on Alta,” Feb. 21).

I’d like to add a couple of additional interesting facts.

Councilwoman Elizabeth Pearson voted against the same changes in

2001 when she was on Planning Commission. And Planning Commissioner

Norm Grossman, though he was the lone dissent in January, actually

made the motion for denial on Jan. 8.

It’s a crying shame how the council majority of Steven Dicterow,

Cheryl Kinsman and Pearson voted. As I wrote to the Coastline on Dec.

5, 2001, the public views from Alta Laguna have been under attack. In

this case, the council majority has chosen to trade protections on

public views to avoid a legal battle. We, the hikers, bikers,

sunset-watchers, neighbors, baseball and tennis players, residents of

Laguna Beach and Orange County, have been cheated by the council

majority. Good existing protections for public views have been

diminished. Pedestrian safety has been compromised despite the

concerns of the Planning Commission, staff and some council members.

This vote was about avoiding a lawsuit, not about an environmental

review. The approved mitigation is weaker than existing mitigation,

which goes against everything I know concerning environmental

reviews.

The City Council has a moral obligation to protect the precious

resources of its constituents. This majority is slaughtering the

hard-earned protections of an irretrievable resource, while also

showing a lack of concern for pedestrian safety. No future amount of

tax dollars will buy back a public view, a park, open space or an

injured or dead pedestrian. Remember this next time you’re up at Alta

Laguna Park: One out-of-state developer will enjoy huge profits,

while the we, the people, will be looking at more stucco instead of

hillsides and the sea. And that appears to be this council majority’s

definition of “fair.”

JOHN ROBINSON

Top of the World

Time for the people to fulfill the Vision

The City Council has finally seen fit to accept the Vision

Committee report, and not a minute too soon. City Council action was

long over due.

Why it took so long is beyond me. More than 2,000 residents took

part in setting goals for what “we the people” want our city to be

like in the year 2030. Kudos to councilwomen Cheryl Kinsman and

Elizabeth Pearson for recognizing that the work of the Vision

Committee was a well-developed and well-presented plan for our

future.

My hope is that this plan, like some in the past, will not

ultimately gather dust in the bottom drawer of a filing cabinet in

some remote corner of City Hall. It is up to “we the people” to see

that it does not.

DONALD KNAPP

Laguna Beach

Aliso Creek Plaza parking suggestions

As a recent stop-by walker and short-term parking (nine times in

two weeks), I observed the problems around the Montage Resort and Spa

area. It is complex.

For workers at the Colony condos, they could park perhaps on the

grass in front. For aesthetics, a green, solar screen could be rigged

up over those cars so it looked decent.

Aliso Creek Plaza should not tolerate people like me who’d use the

public beach for long periods. Hotel key employees might be allowed

to use the many empty spaces under it which had been saved for valet

parking. Busing by hotel from Aliso Beach is great. The area of

three-hour parking should be one- or two-hour limits in some areas.

The Plaza has to monitor its own lot and ticket non-shoppers. The

city should work with shops at the Plaza to police that problem.

JOHN NEWORT

Monarch Beach

City perfectly ethical in Driftwood decision

I just cannot let Robert Harman’s letter in your March 7 edition

(“Council needs to fulfill role as protectors”) go unchallenged. In

my mind, his letter shows both factual errors and incredibly poor

judgment.

In the first place, the City Council did not change the point of

entry for construction vehicles from Driftwood Drive to the access

road onto Ocean Vista. It was the city staff who recommended that the

access road be used for ingress-only traffic. There are several

possibilities for the use (or non-use) of that road, and many

citizens have expressed their opinions about what they think is best.

But the council has not yet taken any action.

Harman then accuses the council of acting on hearsay and special

consideration to friends. That is a strong statement with no evidence

presented, and, I am positive, totally without foundation. After

watching the council for a long time, there is no question its

members go out of their way to listen to everyone who wishes to be

heard. They may occasionally get it wrong (at least from my point of

view), but immoral -- never.

I agree with Harman that the Driftwood development has split the

neighborhood into factions . And that surely makes it impossible for

the city leadership to completely satisfy every single faction. The

action so far by the council has been to try to bring the various

parties closer to a solution, certainly not to foment name calling.

Harmon seems to think that his view on the project, and the use of

the access road in particular, is the only definition of “community

needs.”

He then goes on to compare 110 homes on upper Ocean Vista with 10

homes on upper Driftwood. A look at the streets quickly shows that

all traffic to the project has to pass through the intersection of

Driftwood and Ocean Vista. The rest of the trip could continue on

either Driftwood or Ocean Vista -- it would be driver’s choice. The

only apt comparison is from the intersection to either (1) the

Driftwood entrance to the development or (2) the Ocean Vista access

entrance. There are 10 houses on Driftwood and six on Ocean Vista. To

claim that 110 houses on Ocean Vista can be compared to 10 houses on

Driftwood is nothing but a red herring.

Harman next says that the action of the council reeks of ethics

violations. That is strictly his opinion. And in my opinion, he could

not be more wrongheaded. It is not correct that testimony has shown

conclusively that construction traffic on Ocean Vista would create

substantial inconvenience and potential danger. In fact, the city

staff has stated that, “this access and circulation design will

provide more convenient, safe and direct access to all homes within

the project and distribute traffic more evenly and efficiently.”

It is reasonable to believe that the staff, trained in such

matters, knows more about this than does an anthropologist. Whether

it is the very best solution is something the council will decide.

But to suggest that, if the council decides that the access road

should be used for more than emergencies, this amounts to a failure

of the council to meet its ethical obligations; oh my -- that is the

height of arrogance on Harman’s part.

BILL RIHN

Laguna Beach

First Thursday anniversary, first class

First Thursdays’ fifth anniversary event was amazing. But where

was the follow-up news coverage? There certainly was enough to report

on. The gallery art always leaves even me speechless, but did you see

what I saw at the post-event f the Festival grounds? I felt like an

extra in a Fellini movie -- navigating around the Scarlette Sisters

on stilts, watching exploding wrist corsages from Balloon Diva and

the gyrations of Kimberly Bixler.

Of course this was all topped off by the orchestral maneuvers of

Elvis Schoenburg and the “Miss Thang” in platinum wig.

The canyon temperatures plunges, but the heat from this event kept

the crowd there until closing. Thanks to First Thursdays, the

galleries, the volunteers and the sponsors -- our legacy as an art

colony continues to thrive.

MIKE TAUBER

Laguna Beach

A review of Supervisor Wilson

Since Supervisor Tom Wilson was kind enough to send me his State

of the County speech, I am returning the favor by sharing my review.

Printed in large type, it was 20 pages long. While it was very

easy to read, why didn’t he use both sides and save perhaps thousands

of sheets of paper?

However, he is to be congratulated on his optimism and what

appears to be a commendable job as chairman.

His big accomplishment and ours is to keep the airport off the El

Toro base land. Most of this property is open space with a variety of

uses.

Golf courses and the other open space uses will require large

quantities of water to maintain their green. Runoff should be

designed to go into lakes within the golf course. I hope that the

sports park will contain tennis courts, lawn bowling and a skateboard

area, as well as sports fields. Does education mean a school or

college? What about having a “bark park?”

The Trabuco development is an example of what should not occur in

the future. A recent lawsuit could put an end to “paper water”

projections in the state. This ruling states that developments’

environmental impact reports in the future will have to show that

they can find enough water. It is good that he plans to work

diligently to clean up our beaches and the runoff they receive and

meet the state standards.

Wilson applauds the straightening of Laguna Canyon Road; I just

don’t see what the big deal is unless they enlarged the Laguna Lakes

in the process. Forty years ago, Canyon Road was a particularly

beautiful drive before they started straightening it because there

was a line of trees on both sides. Then came Irvine, Laguna Hills,

Aliso Viejo, etc. -- smog and congestion.

Unfortunately, human services are being cut back because of the

budget deficits in the state and county. He has had a more efficient

and effective communications system implemented to coordinate state,

county and city emergency services.

Overall, he is doing a good job under difficult circumstances.

ANDY WING

Laguna Beach

Just trying to show some love of country

It was with great interest I read your March 7 editorial titled “A

great day in Laguna,” showcasing the wonderful display of patriotism

in last weekend’s Patriots Day Parade.

It also seemed most coincidental that your “Question of the Week”

immediately above the editorial solicited input about the Design

Review Board. Please allow me to introduce you to the most

ridiculous, painful and frustrating design review process my neighbor

and I have been subjected to over the past 14 months, all because we

want to show OUR patriotism by flying our flags. Unfortunately, and

unimaginably, the city of Laguna Beach is attempting to prevent us

from our patriotic right to do this.

On Dec. 31, 2001, we gathered together friends and family to

proudly hoist the U.S. flag and flags from Canada and South Africa

into the air, complete with our respective national anthems. It was a

wonderful moment filled with joy, pride and patriotism.

About two weeks later, I was notified by the city of Laguna Beach

that a neighbor had registered a complaint about the lighting effect

on our flags. He claimed our 25-watt vertical lights disrupted his

nighttime view -- despite the fact his house sits more than 100-feet

above and away from the flags. To make a long story short, we

reluctantly agreed to extinguish the illumination in order to

maintain harmony in our beautiful neighborhood. We were told at the

time that, provided we turned off the lights, the city would not

bother us further on the matter.

Unfortunately, and, quite amazingly, particularly in light of all

that is going on in the turbulent world around us, the city continues

to demand that we remove our flagpoles. They cite, as their

jurisdiction, some archaic city code that states a “structure” cannot

be erected within a property setback zone. Firstly, our flagpoles are

not “structures,” they are just flagpoles. Secondly, in installing

them, I deliberately made them to be temporary in-nature, such that

they can be removed easily and instantly at any time.

Now, after 14 months, four agonizing Design Review Board chidings,

numerous meetings, phone conversations and several lengthy

(unanswered) written communications, the city is STILL demanding we

remove the beautiful flag display from our residential properties.

Despite the plea I made directly to the Mayor Wayne Baglin in

August 2002, all our efforts to proudly display our flags are still

being challenged. In fact, in October 2002, I received a “final

notice” from the city’s senior code enforcement officer clearly

stating that, unless the poles were removed by Oct. 16, 2002, the

matter will be referred to the city attorney. That action has, at

least for the time being, been temporarily suspended as I have agreed

to return to the Design Review Board on March 20.

Making the matter even worse is that despite sending four e-mail

messages, four letters and two personal phone calls directly to our

new mayor, Toni Iseman, pleading for her support, I have not received

even the simple courtesy of one acknowledgement from her or her

office over the past 3 1/2 months I have been attempting to

communicate with her.

In closing, please understand that ALL we want to be able to do is

to peacefully fly our beautiful flags. We have long ago eliminated

the source of concern that had been raised by our one or two

neighbors, yet, for some peculiar reason, the city simply will not

let us go on this profoundly insignificant issue.

Given the tragic and calamitous circumstances immediately facing

us on the world stage, it is beyond comprehension how Laguna Beach’s

elected officials, and their appointed representatives, can be so

self-absorbed that they can and would even consider attempting to

deny us our basic right to fly our flags.

KEVIN KROFT

Laguna Beach

Support outweighs personal politics

The American Legion is an organization of men and women who

served, or are serving, in the United States Armed Forces in time of

war or national emergency. Their motto is “For God and Country” and

they have fought to protect and defend their country, its citizens,

and our way of life; even the rights of those who peacefully protest

against our government

There are more than 500 members of the Laguna Beach American

Legion Post and we are not impressed with the recent paid

advertisement in the Coastline listing the names of people who are

not supporting our country and seem to believe that more inspections

in Iraq will ensure the safety of our country. It distresses us that

in the current crisis the protesters are, (most of them unwittingly)

aiding and abetting our enemy, an act which will surely result in an

increase in the casualties among our troops and force us to kill even

more of the enemy.

We concur with the following statement made by United States Naval

hero, Commodore Stephen Decatur in the early 1800s. “Our country in

her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be in the right;

but our country, right or wrong.”

Legionnaires have been personally involved with war, they know war

and they hate war. They learned in the Vietnam War that the enemy is

not always in front of them; the enemy is often times at their flank

or at their rear; and worse, too often back at home. Our comrades in

arms do not need a repeat of that sad and costly lesson.

JIM LAW

Adjutant,

American Legion Laguna

Beach Post 222

Some direction on how to keep safe, please

In the face of international events, I have begun to think the

unthinkable.

What do we do in case of war?

I address this question to our elected officials. What plans has

the city made for any disaster that might come from San Onofre or

North Korea? We have heard via the media that we should buy plastic

and duct tape. What do we do with it? We learn also from the media

that families who taped off a “safe” room began to suffer from the

build up of carbon monoxide, a lethal gas.

In the 1960s, during the Cuban missile crisis, people were told in

detail how to get ready. Many dug shelters and stocked them with food

and water. Gratefully, they were never needed. But in other

countries, notably England during World War II, the civil defense

saved so many lives.

I am old enough to remember the effects of World War II on the

home front. People were called upon to make sacrifices. Gun defense

units were set up on a nearby hill. We brought the soldiers apple

pies to bolster their spirits. We had practice blackouts. At the

sound of a siren we drew the blackout window shades and extinguished

all lights. My father put on his civil defense armband and went out

into the night. I wanted him to stay with us as we huddled under the

strongest table we had, our dining room table. Everyone knew there

were German submarines just off the coast. Oil slicks on the ocean

gave mute testimony to their success in sinking ships.

In our current situation we feel helpless. No one is asking what

we hope for. No one is telling us what to do.

Those of us who live in Laguna know we are not eligible for the

iodine tablets that will be given to those who live within 10 miles

of San Onofre. What will happen if the wind blows the radioactive

cloud our way? The headlines of the L.A. Times Nov. 12, 2002 tell a

sorry tale: “Handout of Radioactive Pill Delayed.” The editorial,

“Pill Disaster Plan Could be a Disaster” begins, “Just how stupid can

Californians be? The way the state figures it, too stupid to follow

simple instructions that would save their lives in a nuclear

disaster.”

The original plan -- to give each of 200,000 people within 10

miles of San Onofre a pill to take in case of radiation exposure is

on hold in favor of one that would put pills in local hospitals so as

to encourage people to evacuate to the nearest source of the pill.

Think of the traffic jam!

The Times suggests that people be given the pill, costing pennies

each, and that extra stockpiles be held in schools and hospitals.

What implications does this have for those of us who live in Laguna

Beach within 14 miles of the reactor?

Public safety is of utmost concern to elected officials. Perhaps

there has already been discussion of these matters. Information

mailed to each resident would be helpful.

I do not envy city officials in this situation, but wish I them

well.

LIDA LENNEY

Former Laguna Beach mayor

An embrace for the Bammer family

Nancy I’m sorry for your loss!

Never did you want to hear

That News that Call, that Word,

That your daughters not here

It’s not fair

Life taken so early and taken in fear

Parent ... You did, to the complete and utter end

You let her grow you taught her all you know

You had to let her be

You had to let her go

Mother I’m sorry

I feel your loss it’s beyond what can be endured

It’s beyond your control

Nancy and Steph, and Daddy and Bro

Please Please Please let Jen’s spirit Grow

She is special,

We are lucky to have known

The woman you brought up so beautiful and bold.

She shined in my heart and everyone she looked at

She shined in the theirs

Laguna Beach!

The Bammer Family

Reach out to them they are in the time of need

They are strong only because of our hold

Sometimes we don’t know what to say

When people need us in a very special way

Even a “Hi” with a signal of sigh

A wish and a hug can go so far and wide

I know this family they have hearts of gold

They will smile and acknowledge everyone

And never tire of giving compassion or education or just being in

the moment

They Will seem very strong

But remember Laguna Beach we need to embrace

The trials and sorrows that we have to face

When there is trials for our fellow sisters and brothers

It effects us and we have to stick together

Because this is your community and every beautiful creation that

comes from us

Is blessed with Us.

So we pray, Lord look over our youth we need

They are the young and the meek

They try so hard to meet

Life’s complicated demands and the impossible hopes for tomorrows

dreams

Let us all pray for harmony

HEIDI BOUNDS

Laguna Beach

If you would like to submit a letter, write to us at P.O. Box 248

Laguna Beach CA 92652, fax us at 494-8979 or send e-mail to

coastlinepilot@latimes.com. Please give your name and include your

hometown and phone number, for verification purposes only.