Pageant belongs in Laguna Beach I feel...

Pageant belongs in Laguna Beach

I feel that the Pageant and Festival of Arts are uniquely Laguna

Beach. They belong in Laguna Beach and not in Las Vegas or touring

other cities or countries. That would be for money, which should not

be the principal motive, in my estimation.

Don’t go flirting with other beaus, keep faithful to the city that

loves you.

JACK MEALER

Laguna Beach

Anti-gay sentiment is unfounded

The Supreme Court’s wise decision granting equal right to gays and

lesbian should be celebrated.

We are equal to anyone and have never, as Dan Huston intimated,

asked for special rights -- merely to be treated equally in all

aspects of society. I had to laugh at first when I read of Huston’s

ignorant rant that he saw many of his young players “recruited” by

gay residents, then I felt sad for him.

Gays do not “recruit.” Homosexuality is a born trait, much like

eye color and hair color. As to his assertion that “it lessens morals

and social guidelines” I was puzzled. Does divorce strengthen morals?

Does pretending to be something you are not strengthen society? There

is no place in modern society for such homophobia and bigotry. Does

Huston also believe that African Americans should still live in

bondage?

Lastly I did have to laugh out loud when Huston called Laguna

Beach “headquarters for the gay community.” If he is so offended and

is afraid of being “recruited,” why doesn’t he simply move? I and

many friends will gladly offer to help him move to a more homophobic

area where his prejudice will be welcomed.

SKIP HOUSTON

Laguna Beach

Story missed important point

Your story regarding the recent Supreme Court decision on the

Texas sodomy case was anything but fair and balanced.

To have chosen only those with unfavorable views of homosexuality

to speak against the decision showed the obvious bias of authors of

the story. It is entirely possible to hold that the court’s decision

was wrong while not believing that the practice of sodomy in the

privacy of your own home between adults should be illegal.

If given the opportunity to vote I would cast my ballot to throw

out laws regarding sodomy. But I believe that this was a bad

decision. The court has once again invented a “right to privacy” that

does not exist in the Constitution much as they did in inventing the

concept that women had the right to abortion. These issues should be

decided by our duly elected representatives, not five judges whom we

did not elect and who never have to face the voters.

If the legislature in Texas wanted to pass a law that sodomy was

illegal, let them do so. If the people of Texas don’t like the law

they will vote the offending legislators out of office. Moral issues

such as abortion and sodomy and gay marriage should be decided by the

people, not five judges who will never have to face the wrath of the

voters. We the people should be deciding issues of such moral

significance to our country not some activist judges.

JOYCE HOFFMAN

Laguna Beach

No reasoning with dogmatic believers

Sonya Versluys bemoaned the loss of her 4-year-old daughter’s

innocence in her letter last week (“Shame on protesters for graphic

display,” Coastline Pilot, July 4).

She was probably too preoccupied with caring for her children,

driving safely and the shock of seeing the displays to notice that

the protesters themselves were barely 10 to 15 years older than her

daughter. The greater shame is on the elders of these protesters for

exploiting them and turning them too into zealots.

Nice try, but trying to use reason with people of dogmatic faith

doesn’t work.

NIKO THERIS

Laguna Beach

Thanks for making event great

More than 60 people attended the American Legion and the Veterans

of Foreign Wars Fourth of July Independence Day Celebration at the

American Legion Post in Laguna Beach.

The program included all four verses of the Star Spangled Banner,

a reading of the Declaration of Independence, the telling of the fate

of the signers of that document and a ringing of bells to celebrate

it, the “forgotten war” 50 years ago in Korea and a flag folding

ceremony.

After the ceremony, a picnic lunch was served to all. This was

made possible through the efforts of the ladies of the Legion

Auxiliary and the generous support of food and donations from the

following merchants: Center Meat Co., Ralphs, Albertsons, Pavilions

and Wild Oats markets.

We thank these supporters and everyone for making the program and

picnic a great success.

RICHARD MOORE

Commander,

Laguna Beach Post 222

Approval of Mar Vista unbelievable

At the recent City Council meeting where the “Mar Vista Mansion”

was approved, several council members commented about “11th hour

presentations” and that the information should have been presented at

the Design Review Board level. On the other hand, council members had

also recommended that only new information be included in testimony

for an appeal such as this. It is pretty difficult to adhere to both

of these conflicting instructions.

The South Laguna Civic Assn. would like to make it clear that

there were people from the community, including representatives from

the civic association, who testified, that 60% of people had

previously testified before the Design Review Board, and that new

information was presented -- in addition to making some of the same

pertinent points as had been made to the review board --

specifically:

The house is too big and does not fit the character of the South

Laguna Village neighborhood. More than 11,000-square-feet of living

space, nearly 4,800-square-feet of garages, along with over

2,000-square-feet of decks and accessory buildings cannot be called

anything but excessive -- especially because the structure will be

highly visible and the project creates severe impacts.

The access is difficult and constricted to a very long, very

narrow driveway and not appropriate for large numbers of vehicles.

Construction impacts, especially from removal of large amounts of

excavated material (10,000 cubic yards, 1,000 truck loads), will

create severe hardships on people living near the house and along the

haul routes.

The impact on the globally endangered Southern Maritime Chaparral

is too great and could be lessened by reducing the footprint and the

areas of grading, decks, pavements, etc.

At the Design Review Board meetings, with all the comments and the

obvious lack of conformity to the city’s recently adopted

mansionization policies and ordinances, we thought that the review

boardwould respond by instructing the applicant to reduce the size

and impact of the project -- as the review board has done with many

projects of much less impact. We were frankly astounded that the

board approved the project with only board member Eve Plumb thinking

that it was too big.

We believed that the appeal of the review board decision would be

welcomed by the council as an opportunity for them to reaffirm their

recent stance on mansionization. Thus we were even more astounded and

terribly disappointed that the council allowed this mansion to go

forward, with only Mayor Toni Iseman seeing the excessive nature of

the project in our small scale neighborhood.

It is vital that council members back up their words and policies

with appropriate actions at crucial times. And voters should insist

that anyone who serves on the Laguna Beach City Council live up to

their promises and public positions.

BILL RIHN

President, South Laguna Civic Assn.

I am writing to voice my strong opposition to the inclusion of Lot

4 in the Driftwood Estates proposal.

This massive, 50,000-plus-square-foot lot, situated on a prominent

knoll above South Laguna, is a major threat to our village

atmosphere, aesthetic views and the overall environmental health of

our hillsides.

The future estate on this property would tower over the

surrounding neighborhood, whose homes rarely exceed

1,500-square-feet, and would be a prominent example of

mansionization. In addition, it would destroy crucial habitat,

protected under the City General Plan and would utterly eliminate a

beautiful public view shed into Aliso / Wood Canyon open space.

Because Lot 4 is situated on a major South Laguna promontory,

building envelope restrictions are not enough to protect this

valuable parcel. Any home on Lot 4 would be visible from dozens of

vantage points in South Laguna and the impact on the surrounding

environment would be significant.

Seeing the council majority’s consistent record of approving major

development projects, even in the face of massive public opposition,

I have become extremely disillusioned with this council’s supposed

representation of our community interests. Their handling of the

Driftwood Estates proposal will be the ultimate litmus test to

determine whom they represent -- the community, or out-of-town

developers.

The 50,000-plus-square-foot Lot 4, which can legally feature a

home in excess of 25,000-square-feet and is situated on a prominent,

open-space knoll, is so obviously incompatible with our village

community that its approval would be laughable. Yet the

18,000-square-foot mansion approved above Mar Vista proves that

apparently no mansion is too large for the council majority’s rubber

stamp. It is time to stop degrading our village community with

obscene mansions. Let’s start by getting rid of Lot 4.

KEVIN KILLACKEY

Laguna Beach

The Coastline Pilot is eager to run your letters. If your letter

does not appear, it may be because of space restrictions, and the

letter will likely appear next week. 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.