Please view the video by clicking over the URL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNkEY9C86qo
Ron, I believe you are acquainted with Mr. Stanovich in one form or another.
It sure looks like Mr. Stanovich understood what Mr. Freeman was stating.
Of course Ron and others may try to claim that opponents of keeping Eastview Little League on Knoll Hill after the agreed upon contract ends, actually put words into Mr. Stanovich's mouth and edited the clip, dubbed in the words Mr. Stanovich spoke into the microphone and also put a look alike into the seat that would have been occupied by Mr. Freeman so that whole video could be claimed to be a scam.
Fortunately or unfortunately, when representatives of Eastview Little League forget they made comments that were taped, it's kind of interesting that EVLL officers and others seem to be going back on their agreements.
What kind of examples are these folks providing to the youth they claim to help?
Friday, February 27, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Pondering Today, Thursday, With Some Writers and a Meeting
The second issue of San Pedro Today became the first issue to end up on my driveway.
I was ready to read it online, but was pleased to find it outside.
I read each letter, column, article, and viewed all the adds.
While I have to state that Josh did a fantastic job with the first issue, this one presented some comments I could not help offering some words on
I support NOEL Weiss for City Attorney, instead of Carmen Trutanich Mr. Carmine Sasso wrote about in his 'Feedback' comments.
Of course we all must expect that Carmen 'Nuch' Trutanich, a true Pedro Boy will sweep the vote count in San Pedro and he is a great person who could also do a great job as City Attorney.
The rest of Mr. Sasso's writing was dead-on correct, wonderful, insightful, and should be read and voters should vote along the lines that Mr. Sasso intends to vote.
But then.......
Mr. Ron Galosic offered comments about something he should know much more about, than what he wrote with his 'Feedback' piece.
Here is a sentence from that piece.
"The bottom line here is that San Pedro needs a place for Little League to call home, and while some may be convinced otherwise because they are thinking more about themselves and not about the kids of our community, Knoll Hill is the perfect place"
Mr. Galosic, your sentence was just plain wrong.
It appears that you either ignore or downplay the fact that Little League is played in San Pedro like it has for more years than Eastview Little League has existed. (Don't worry, I'll get to another factual misrepresentation Mr. Galosic made, a bit further down).
Peck Park Little League was provided with a Mayor Villaraigose photo op just last April. Little Leaguers play Little League with Leagues other than Eastview Little League. I hop you are not myopic about that fact.
When Mr. Galosic states that opponents to having Eastview Little League remain on Knoll Hill after the contract they agreed to ends, are thinking more about themselves, I really really have to take offence to that.
If an when Eastview Little League leaves Knoll Hill, there will be many, many more opportunities for youth and adults from all over the area to enjoy Knoll Hill without Little League Traffic, Little League fields taking up park land and it will provide a much needed addition to park lands east of Gaffey Street.
Mr. Galosic, do you feel that kids who do not wish to play Little League are somehow defective or don't deserve park lands?
I have it on extremely good authority that Mr. Galosic and others who manage Eastview Little League were told that the State of California is ready, willing, and able to send down attorneys to make absolutely sure that the current contract is honored and that is ends on the date specified.
I do not believe local taxpayers are willing to spend valuable dollars for State, Port, and City attorneys and the costs of trying to keep fields atop Knoll Hill.
As I have written before, I see no reason that one of the two large fields can remain on top of Knoll Hill for the enjoyment of the entire community and not during times Little Leaguers play real games on that field.
Ron, when you got personal, you also allowed yourself to be identified as a person who will stop and nothing to keep fields atop Knoll Hill no matter what the truths, facts, laws, regulations, and other things have been handed to you on a silver platter.
Yes, I did not like getting hit by baseballs thrown by 8 and 9 year-olds, they still hurt.
You never asked if I participated in other sports besides baseball, did you.
Here's a bit of news Ron. The kid who just happened to not like getting hit by baseballs went on to place third in a city-wide decathlon.
That same fellow eventually rowed in seat #1 of the CSULB Freshman 8 Crew. He also did quite well in softball, track, cross country, and was a rated intramural athlete.
As for watching lives change Ron, when I played for Eastview I got the chance to watch another player lose his mother when she choked on bubble gum, in the stands. How is that for being 8 and having to watch a mother pass away?
Please do not try and tell me that Little Leaguers grow up differently than other children simply because they played Little League. Readers are not that stupid.
Here is yet another sentence the person who identifies as being a Former President of Eastview Little League and a Lifetime San Pedro Resident and Parent.
"This is not about me or about any other parent who stood at the past two Knoll Hill planning committee meetings. What it is though, is about preserving an organization that thousands of residents in San Pedro have volunteered to keep together for our kids since 1967."
Well Ron, you also wrote that you are a lifetime San Pedro resident, how can that be?
You don't seem to have died, so how could you possibly have lived a lifetime in San Pedro?
But wait, it gets better Ron.
Where in the H E double toothpicks were the parents and volunteers to pony up funds to work on securing fields the day after you were all told that DiCarlo's was closing?
Don't forget the times, places, and events that too many folks attempted to do to force their opinions and will on others.
I went looking for all the picketers which were promised by folks supporting EVLL when the new Target opened. What's up with that?
I guess the folks who cried, shouted, demanded, prodded, cajoled, and screamed the loudest lost their voice by the time Target opened.
Oh that's right! Since those very same folks were going to enjoy three years atop Knoll Hill, they seemed very sure that they would be able to hold onto the site beyond the contract EVLL management agreed to.
Ron, I believe you may want to purchase a calculator for this next bit.
I played for the Minor League Athletics when I was 8-years old. I finished playing later in that same year after I turned 9-years old.
I was born in 1955.
Now why oh why would someone so knowledgeable and wanting to put their best foot forward for the benefit of Eastview Little League not be more informed about the real history of Eastview Little League.
I'll give you one hint and you may phone a friend. The hint is, look up the history of the League your defend so passionately.
Oh but wait, there's more Ron.
Here is what you wrote.
"So please remember, when you say you oppose saving the fields on Knoll Hill and you are putting up a fight to have the fields removed, consciously or un-consciously, you are trying your best to end Little League in San Pedro. If that's fine with you then okay, but remember, we volunteers will not stop because we want to be sure that our grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and their children have a Little League to play in our town - the great town of San Pedro."
Now Ron, Ron, Ron, why do you suborn the breaking of laws and regulations?
Come on, don't be so disingenuous to readers in San Pedro, they are not that stupid.
Once again, there IS Little League in San Pedro. Why must Little League only be defined as Eastview Little League.
Are your players superior than othe Little Leaguers in San Pedro? Are parents of Little League players in leagues other than Eastview worse than parents of EVLL players.
You were told in no uncertain terms that the State of California would not allow any extension of the current contract and that there could not be a new contract written.
Instead of really working with folks like me who have offered suggestions, you and your group is working solely on something that will bring lawyers down from Sacramento who will cost us money and they will deal with lawyers for the Port of L.A., the Harbor Department, the Department of Parks and Rec. and the city of Los Angeles. All of the lawyers will end up being paid by taxpayers or by folks who are affiliated with the port.
Why oh why do you wish for all of us to pay for short-sightedness?
You are in year two of your contract, yet I don't hear anything about your group's efforts recently to acquire fields that will be on undisputed land.
Why can't your players play outside of normal Little League months? Why can't you all work harder for the Field of Dreams to get put in? Why haven't we read that your group is in talks to try and acquire Knoll Hill that will make all of these debates and discussions moot.
Have you or other members of your group fully discussed the issues with the city of Rancho Palos Verdes and the L.A. County Sanitation Districts?
Hey Ron, have you figured out which year I played with Eastview Little League yet?
Ron, I have said absolutely nothing about, or written one word about the abolishing of Little League in San Pedro. All youths should be provided with any and all opportunities for participating in organized groups, if they choose to AND if they can play on fields where the laws and regulations are followed.
For you or anyone to thing that I oppose Little League in San Pedro is truly stupid and you should be ashamed of lowering yourself to a groveling, snorting, demanding, as a fellow who perhaps throws temper tantrums.
Yes, I was a terrible batsman when I played with Eastview Little League. I also played with extreme exotropia of the ocular sinister, so I had and still do not have any depth perception. I do however, compensate pretty well when playing all forms of softball, I have about an .850 batting average in that sport and I can place a softball over the second baseman or the shortstop anytime I like.
Of course I supported my sons growing up by helping them enjoy many sports activities.
The thing my younger son won a world championship at is not usually called a sport, but he has been winning races with rollerblades and on mountain bikes.
My older son won at Volleyball and also brings home trophies with his mountain-bike racing
Little League is not a hopeless cause in San Pedro unless too many Eastview demanders continue their claims that they must keep and are entitled to the top of Knoll Hill for their use.
I don't think your group could possibly pay the real leases that would be required to have privately leased ball fields on land that is designated solely for public use.
It would have been better for Eastview to not have been provided the fields in the first place.
Janice and others however, were tired of hearing the crying of grownups and their selfish demands that the kids they support are more worthy and entitled that the rest of the kids in San Pedro.
Nay nay I say, Ron. I think your 'Feedback' piece will do more good to the folks who do not wish to have 3 fields on top of Knoll Hill, than you have done with your tantrum.
Ron, do you still need more time concerning the year, or do you need another hint?
Here's a hint because I don't think your 'Feedback' piece demonstrated all that much intelligence.
L.B. Johnson was the President of the United States when I played for Eastview Little League.
Heck Ron, you are going to love this next bit. You weren't the only writer to spew venom, untruths, and misrepresentation.
John Mavar, you should be ashamed of yourself and if you were planning on running for elective office in the near to not-so-near future, I think you will need to reconsider things.
You support the new campus at Angels Gate do you? What was your position about SRHS 14, a campus much closer to northwest San Pedro.
Talk about PIITBY (Put It In Their Back Yard)!
If LAUSD can do whatever they want on property they own, I fell folks who live in glass castles should not throw stones.
Northwest San Pedro is home to quite enough of L.A.U.S.D. owned land to place an 810-seat high school campus, needing just "6-8 acres". Let's see, the land that Cooper and the Science Center currently are on is just over 9 acres and look at all the parking along Sandwood, Barrywood, and Westmont.
John, you simply do not have enough knowledge and information to make a realistic and respected opinion concerning SRHS 15 and I would very gladly debate you on the matters.
Now let's remind folks of something John wrote in this latest issue.
"Small-minded individuals feel San Pedro is not a destination. That's because they have made it a non-destination location. But we have some unique things to do and see here. We can improve and grow with new innovated attractions. But some people in the south part of San Pedro whined about traffic, pollution and not wanting other people in their community. Well, I say then move out of San Pedro! We can make all this work when you think outside the box. If you get mad at me and take issue with what I have written, then you are probably one of those people that are not thinking creatively in trying to make San Pedro the successful, viable and relevant town it can - and should be. God help us?'
John, you lack credibility with just about every word you wrote. You are disrespectful, unrealistic, ignorant, and you probably have supported Bob's original plans from day one.
John, you don't seem to be willing to learn about more than one side of an issue.
I guess the best way to deal with John's misstatements is just to list my thoughts, because John seems to also have gotten personal with me and my issues, and he may need a good response.
John, apparently you never read my comments about getting a Tarawa Class Amphibious Assault Ship that would have gone into mothballs, but would be a great addition and attraction in part of the Fisherman's' Slip, if you even know where that is.
John, point in fact. San Pedro is not any type of destination compared to Santa Monica, Venice, Long Beach, San Diego, and many other cities.
I think you may want to learn that San Pedro is on a peninsula and already has lots and lots of lots with lots of people.
The Naval Base and Shipyard are gone from Terminal Island, so San Pedro doesn't get the amount of visitors and spenders it once had.
I haven't seen any contingent of Naval Vessels moored in the outer harbor, and neither have you.
Just putting a berth for the largest cruise ships in the world in our outer harbor will not make San Pedro a destination, quite the contrary.
How many visitors would be willing to spend their time and money driving around San Pedro when ships call on passenger terminals in the outer harbor.
If we can get a ship like the one I have considered, berthed close to a remodeled Ports O Call, and renovate the downtown district something like I have suggested and along with some things Richard Pawloski is suggesting, then how and why would you consider me and folks like me as being negative.
No John, it must be you who is small-minded because you are unwilling or unable to listen to others in a more respectful manner and talk with them about differences.
One of the fellows I share time communicating with could not be farther away from me, politically speaking. But even though I disagree with many of his positions, I respect him and his opinions far higher than I consider yours.
And another thing John, I did move out of San Pedro when I volunteered and joined the U.S.A.F.
John, what does your DD214 indicate?
Don't you EVER think of folks like me as being someone who is "not thinking creatively". How dare you suppose that on others?
I was volunteering to help San Pedro be a better place to live at least as far back as 1971.
What makes you feel you are superior to folks who do not share you thoughts. You seem to relish in demeaning folks, so I think some payback is in order.
Now John, let's you and me compare how we have helped the communities we have lived in. I'll go first and I can only imagine that you won't come anywhere near what I have provided to and for others.
But I guess I must be small-minded, uncreative, and not willing to help others, even in San Pedro.
Where were you John, during the time I:
Worked to establish the first storefront Free Clinic in San Pedro by volunteering to clear out the rubble left from the previous business owner.
Volunteered and helped restore a youth camp damaged by a flood.
Volunteered and worked in community theater.
Volunteered and served on active duty with the United States Air Force.
Volunteered and taught American Red Cross CPR classes during and after my active service ended.
Volunteered as a Cub Scout leader, Boy Scout Leader, and District Commissioner.
Volunteered to serve on various committees and a Commission to better the communities we all live in.
Volunteered, spent large amounts of personal income, and provided goods, services, and time helping to protect OUR community against a greedy developer who you probably supported and who thought he knew what was best for San Pedro, even though he lives in West Los Angeles.
I assisted in having the Q Qualification Classification placed on lots that helped keep an R1 residential community from having condos built where they should not have been.....and I don't live in San Pedro!
Currently I am helping to provide information to folks concerning many issues they may want more information on.
I continue to keep you and others representing northwest San Pedro informed about the goings on with Marymount College and how that could negatively impact northwest San Pedro, and area you have represented.
I have recently volunteered and begun working with a Theatre Company in San Pedro that had a wonderful run with its first production of the 2009 season and I have donated time, money, and effort, to that group.
I continue to write about what is right and wonderful about San Pedro and the rest of OUR community, yet I was confronted with our diatribe that was more negative than positive with regards to members of your own San Pedro community.
I think John, you just might finally acquire a clue, because your 'Feedback' piece demonstrated very clearly that, when you wrote it, you were sorely missing even the most basic of clues.
John, if you are a young politico type of person, your column did nothing positive for you.
Of course I save things like you wrote and I will be happy to bring your quotes back into publication should I feel it is necessary.
John, don't continue to degrade folks living in the more southern areas of the town you represent, it makes you look small, petty, disrespectful, and just plain ignorant.
Seek out opinions, ask questions, seek truthful answers, learn about OUR community much more that you feel you do right now.
Times are tough all over. Nobody needs to read what you wrote and you seem more negative than positive about San Pedro because you talk down to San Pedrans who don't happen to agree with you.
Also, where were you in offering suggestions to the folks from Eastview Little League. I have offered help, suggestions, and information to them because they need it and they need support to find permanent places to have their league players play baseball, other than atop Knoll Hill.
To Ron and John, it really doesn't matter one hill of beans what can be successful on Knoll Hill.
If it can't be purchased from who owns it today, then the laws, regulations Trust Act, and reality must be followed, whether we like it or not!
I guess you two just don't get it and that does not help any kid or EVLL ball player
Open your eyes and be more reasonable, realistic, responsible, and respectful. When you do that to others, I will be more than happy to provide you with nicer comments and thoughtful praise.
Now gentlemen, read what I can write.....
The Caccavalla Family is simply just about the most wonderful gift we could have received from the east coast.
Mike has brought to OUR community and keeps giving us all nothing but the best.
You will be reading much more in the near future about the third annual Tri-arts Festival Mike's dad puts on in downtown San Pedro.
I have been to the two previous events, yet I didn't see Ron or John at either Festival.
I have also written about the Festival for the prior two years and I will help Joe Caccavalla as much as I can, with this year's events.
Joe and I have already talked and written to each other about this year's Festival and we are trying to have many more folks come down to the two-day event and enjoy different forms of art and have a great community event.
I certainly agree with Mike's opinions concerning the good folks from Beacon House. That facility provides OUR community with events, support, and work and the folks who are recovering at Beacon House deserve our respect, help, understanding, and gratitude.
Ron and John, I hope you know that Beacon House is DIFFERENT than Harbor View House.
Oh John, wait a minute. I doubt you were born when I swam in the indoor pool at what was then the Y.M.C.A. I bet you weren't even born when kids from all over San Pedro went into the basement of the place and had some great time.
I wonder if Ron took the opportunity to run on the wooden track over the basketball court and the gym that was just accross the street from the old Y.M.C.A.
Sorry Mike, I just got veered off.
The entire Caccavalla family is such a great family in OUR community. I don't agree with Joe about Ponte Vista, but Mike, Joe, and their families are what is the best in San Pedro.
Josh Stecker, you published a stinker of a column from John Mavar and you might want to have your columnists provide you with there comments early enough so that if you feel their comments would do harm to your publication you could either ask them to change their articles or fire them, on the spot!
Since I know you have read this blog, it is unfortunate that you allowed a personal attack about me, that also appeared as a comment on this blog, to appear.
I don't like attacking anyone personally, but I have no problem when I feel attacked to provide facts and justified opinions to rebutt those attacks.
I think you just might want to have me write something since Ron wrote something personal about me, even though he disguiesed it a bit.
And now to the meeting with LAUSD about the demolition of buildings at the Angels Gate site.
The meeting was only eventful because a union member took some time challenging the speakers about using non-union workers and workers picked up off the street to do the demolition work.
The person seemed to know what he was shouting about. Even though he did not look or speak like others did, he presented himself and his opinions to the audience and he was credible, though a bit too strong in his presentation.
I deliberately asked questions that I knew would provide the opportunity for LAUSD to mislead, misinform and inform the audience about what they really intend to do, even though they did it via the back door and with misleading answers.
Here are some of my questions and their answers.
Q. Would the debris-hauling trucks use Alma or Barlow Saxton for ingress and egress at the site?
A. "They will use Gaffey" stated Brian Eamer.
Q. Well then, would the trucks use Barlow Saxton or Leavenworth.
A. "Barlow Saxton"
Q. So what you are stating is that the heaviest trucks, carrying the most hazardous materials would use the steepest and narrowest access road to the intersection on probably the steepest portion of the hill Gaffey is located at.
A. (Brian stumbled a bit and kept silent. I guess we both already knew the answer was YES but he was not going to verbalize his answer for others to hear.
Brian also stated that the contract with the company doing the demolition has not been signed yet because their has not been a winning bid given.
Brian stated repeatedly that demolition would begin in March, last until October and that construction would begin before the end of the year.
Brian also made the statement that demolition work normally began between 30-45 days after the contracted company wins the bid.
I opined to a friend in the audience that I think Brian was telling all of us that demolition would most likely begin aroung March 45 or 46.
I didn't have any problems from the LAUSD person who is working on the demolition bids. A fellow who will manage the site for LAUSD while the contracting company does their thing, also provided reasonable and realistic answers and comments.
The fellow running the contracts from LAUSD got up, spoke using the microphone, and stated something like...LAUSD inspects itself using self inspections and that the community has nothing to fear from LAUSD because of its in-house inspections.
I could not let that humor pass. I got up and spoke into the microphone three words that still and will haunt LAUSD until all of us who knows about it, dies off.
You know the three words, let's say them together, okay.
1,2,3, "Belmont Learning Center".
Now about those trucks.
Brian stated that during the days where "load outs" occur, between 15-20 debris-hauling trucks and trailers would use Barlow Saxton to intersect with Gaffey.
This is where I feel we find Brian is quite a pickle.
He stated the trucks would use Barlow Saxton.
I had to then point out where he is misleading, disrespectful to the community and attempting to keep the truth away for members of OUR community.
Safety first and always must be the absolute and unignored consideration.
Catching Brian in something he and I know to be less than the truth was simply fun for me.
The trucks will eventually use Alma, and everyone should now that as soon as possible.
If we hold LAUSD to any safety standards, it is obvious that Barlow Saxton would be the WORST road used by the heaviest of vehicles.
The real reason Brian is sticking by Barlow Saxton is he and others at LAUSD know that when the trucks use Alma, all hell will break use.
Please Brian, consider the safety of San Pedro residents when you speak.
Barlow Saxton won't be improved untill AFTER the trucks haul away debris from the campus' site.
The intersection of Barlow Saxton and Gaffey will still have the same geometry and slopes they have today.
What will be missing from the picture is the signal at 30th/31st and Gaffey that could provide some better measure of safety, but NOOOOOOOOOOOO.
If debris-filled trucks do not lose their brakes descending Barlow Saxton, they will be at an intersection which has hardly been uses and is normally ignored by drivers on Gaffey.
The trucks would turn left, or northbount onto Gaffey and they will be successful only if they do not collide with speeding cars traveling too fast down the steep Part of Gaffey and heading northbound.
They could also collide with vehicles whose drivers are heading south, anticipating a steep uphill portion and swifly try and get up the hill without noticing the trucks.
The truck drivers will be confronted by speeding drivers from both directions as they slowly turn onto Gaffey, crossing both southbound lanes and probably taking up both northbound lanes, if they don't careen into one of the houses on the corner or head east onto 32nd. Street.
It is a recipe for injuries, collisions, and lawsuits.
But Brian doesn't want you to know about the safe route the trucks will eventually take, because he doesn't want to hear residents fume about the use of Alma.
I feel, after two or three days of between 15-20 trucks per day trying to use Barlow Saxton, the powers that be, along with drivers who appreciate a safer route, will find the gates on Main at Alma opened for their use.
The drivers will have to negotiate a narrow Alma, but I have seen plenty of large trucks take up both lanes on Alma and make residents and other wait.
I am not that clear on whether the truck drivers will use 30th Street to Gaffey, but it would be safer that having the trucks turn at 25Th and Gaffey, which can be a pretty hairy intersection at times.
After the meeting ended, I asked Brian why LAUSD was not verbalizing the safest, widest, and best route for pedestrians to and from both SRHS 15 and the Outdoor Education Center.
I repeated by pointing out that taking one or two houses on the south side of 30th street would provide the safest and best access to the facilities and as expected, Brian offered that folks are not happy when the right of eminent domain and the taking of property is discussed.
In conclusion, thankfully for all of us, Rod Hamilton stated that drivers will use the most convient route to and from school sites, and Alma wasn't considered to be an emergency only access point.
Brian had to conclude that Barlow Saxton was the "acceptable" route, but he and I both knew is certainly is not the safest for anyone.
Brian acknowledged the flak that will come when Alma is used for demolition and construction, because it is safer than Barlow Saxton, but the LAUSD folks didn't blink when claims that community members are not listened to, was provided.
Alma will most probably be the primary access road unless Main and Barlow Saxton become a one-way route for students, faculty, visitors, and deliveries, to both campuses.
Nobody with LAUSD is willing to publicly acknowledge that Alma will be used and they cannot run far enough away, fast enough when the safest, easyist, and best access route is suggested.
All in all, I got what I came for and had some laughs, too
I was ready to read it online, but was pleased to find it outside.
I read each letter, column, article, and viewed all the adds.
While I have to state that Josh did a fantastic job with the first issue, this one presented some comments I could not help offering some words on
I support NOEL Weiss for City Attorney, instead of Carmen Trutanich Mr. Carmine Sasso wrote about in his 'Feedback' comments.
Of course we all must expect that Carmen 'Nuch' Trutanich, a true Pedro Boy will sweep the vote count in San Pedro and he is a great person who could also do a great job as City Attorney.
The rest of Mr. Sasso's writing was dead-on correct, wonderful, insightful, and should be read and voters should vote along the lines that Mr. Sasso intends to vote.
But then.......
Mr. Ron Galosic offered comments about something he should know much more about, than what he wrote with his 'Feedback' piece.
Here is a sentence from that piece.
"The bottom line here is that San Pedro needs a place for Little League to call home, and while some may be convinced otherwise because they are thinking more about themselves and not about the kids of our community, Knoll Hill is the perfect place"
Mr. Galosic, your sentence was just plain wrong.
It appears that you either ignore or downplay the fact that Little League is played in San Pedro like it has for more years than Eastview Little League has existed. (Don't worry, I'll get to another factual misrepresentation Mr. Galosic made, a bit further down).
Peck Park Little League was provided with a Mayor Villaraigose photo op just last April. Little Leaguers play Little League with Leagues other than Eastview Little League. I hop you are not myopic about that fact.
When Mr. Galosic states that opponents to having Eastview Little League remain on Knoll Hill after the contract they agreed to ends, are thinking more about themselves, I really really have to take offence to that.
If an when Eastview Little League leaves Knoll Hill, there will be many, many more opportunities for youth and adults from all over the area to enjoy Knoll Hill without Little League Traffic, Little League fields taking up park land and it will provide a much needed addition to park lands east of Gaffey Street.
Mr. Galosic, do you feel that kids who do not wish to play Little League are somehow defective or don't deserve park lands?
I have it on extremely good authority that Mr. Galosic and others who manage Eastview Little League were told that the State of California is ready, willing, and able to send down attorneys to make absolutely sure that the current contract is honored and that is ends on the date specified.
I do not believe local taxpayers are willing to spend valuable dollars for State, Port, and City attorneys and the costs of trying to keep fields atop Knoll Hill.
As I have written before, I see no reason that one of the two large fields can remain on top of Knoll Hill for the enjoyment of the entire community and not during times Little Leaguers play real games on that field.
Ron, when you got personal, you also allowed yourself to be identified as a person who will stop and nothing to keep fields atop Knoll Hill no matter what the truths, facts, laws, regulations, and other things have been handed to you on a silver platter.
Yes, I did not like getting hit by baseballs thrown by 8 and 9 year-olds, they still hurt.
You never asked if I participated in other sports besides baseball, did you.
Here's a bit of news Ron. The kid who just happened to not like getting hit by baseballs went on to place third in a city-wide decathlon.
That same fellow eventually rowed in seat #1 of the CSULB Freshman 8 Crew. He also did quite well in softball, track, cross country, and was a rated intramural athlete.
As for watching lives change Ron, when I played for Eastview I got the chance to watch another player lose his mother when she choked on bubble gum, in the stands. How is that for being 8 and having to watch a mother pass away?
Please do not try and tell me that Little Leaguers grow up differently than other children simply because they played Little League. Readers are not that stupid.
Here is yet another sentence the person who identifies as being a Former President of Eastview Little League and a Lifetime San Pedro Resident and Parent.
"This is not about me or about any other parent who stood at the past two Knoll Hill planning committee meetings. What it is though, is about preserving an organization that thousands of residents in San Pedro have volunteered to keep together for our kids since 1967."
Well Ron, you also wrote that you are a lifetime San Pedro resident, how can that be?
You don't seem to have died, so how could you possibly have lived a lifetime in San Pedro?
But wait, it gets better Ron.
Where in the H E double toothpicks were the parents and volunteers to pony up funds to work on securing fields the day after you were all told that DiCarlo's was closing?
Don't forget the times, places, and events that too many folks attempted to do to force their opinions and will on others.
I went looking for all the picketers which were promised by folks supporting EVLL when the new Target opened. What's up with that?
I guess the folks who cried, shouted, demanded, prodded, cajoled, and screamed the loudest lost their voice by the time Target opened.
Oh that's right! Since those very same folks were going to enjoy three years atop Knoll Hill, they seemed very sure that they would be able to hold onto the site beyond the contract EVLL management agreed to.
Ron, I believe you may want to purchase a calculator for this next bit.
I played for the Minor League Athletics when I was 8-years old. I finished playing later in that same year after I turned 9-years old.
I was born in 1955.
Now why oh why would someone so knowledgeable and wanting to put their best foot forward for the benefit of Eastview Little League not be more informed about the real history of Eastview Little League.
I'll give you one hint and you may phone a friend. The hint is, look up the history of the League your defend so passionately.
Oh but wait, there's more Ron.
Here is what you wrote.
"So please remember, when you say you oppose saving the fields on Knoll Hill and you are putting up a fight to have the fields removed, consciously or un-consciously, you are trying your best to end Little League in San Pedro. If that's fine with you then okay, but remember, we volunteers will not stop because we want to be sure that our grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and their children have a Little League to play in our town - the great town of San Pedro."
Now Ron, Ron, Ron, why do you suborn the breaking of laws and regulations?
Come on, don't be so disingenuous to readers in San Pedro, they are not that stupid.
Once again, there IS Little League in San Pedro. Why must Little League only be defined as Eastview Little League.
Are your players superior than othe Little Leaguers in San Pedro? Are parents of Little League players in leagues other than Eastview worse than parents of EVLL players.
You were told in no uncertain terms that the State of California would not allow any extension of the current contract and that there could not be a new contract written.
Instead of really working with folks like me who have offered suggestions, you and your group is working solely on something that will bring lawyers down from Sacramento who will cost us money and they will deal with lawyers for the Port of L.A., the Harbor Department, the Department of Parks and Rec. and the city of Los Angeles. All of the lawyers will end up being paid by taxpayers or by folks who are affiliated with the port.
Why oh why do you wish for all of us to pay for short-sightedness?
You are in year two of your contract, yet I don't hear anything about your group's efforts recently to acquire fields that will be on undisputed land.
Why can't your players play outside of normal Little League months? Why can't you all work harder for the Field of Dreams to get put in? Why haven't we read that your group is in talks to try and acquire Knoll Hill that will make all of these debates and discussions moot.
Have you or other members of your group fully discussed the issues with the city of Rancho Palos Verdes and the L.A. County Sanitation Districts?
Hey Ron, have you figured out which year I played with Eastview Little League yet?
Ron, I have said absolutely nothing about, or written one word about the abolishing of Little League in San Pedro. All youths should be provided with any and all opportunities for participating in organized groups, if they choose to AND if they can play on fields where the laws and regulations are followed.
For you or anyone to thing that I oppose Little League in San Pedro is truly stupid and you should be ashamed of lowering yourself to a groveling, snorting, demanding, as a fellow who perhaps throws temper tantrums.
Yes, I was a terrible batsman when I played with Eastview Little League. I also played with extreme exotropia of the ocular sinister, so I had and still do not have any depth perception. I do however, compensate pretty well when playing all forms of softball, I have about an .850 batting average in that sport and I can place a softball over the second baseman or the shortstop anytime I like.
Of course I supported my sons growing up by helping them enjoy many sports activities.
The thing my younger son won a world championship at is not usually called a sport, but he has been winning races with rollerblades and on mountain bikes.
My older son won at Volleyball and also brings home trophies with his mountain-bike racing
Little League is not a hopeless cause in San Pedro unless too many Eastview demanders continue their claims that they must keep and are entitled to the top of Knoll Hill for their use.
I don't think your group could possibly pay the real leases that would be required to have privately leased ball fields on land that is designated solely for public use.
It would have been better for Eastview to not have been provided the fields in the first place.
Janice and others however, were tired of hearing the crying of grownups and their selfish demands that the kids they support are more worthy and entitled that the rest of the kids in San Pedro.
Nay nay I say, Ron. I think your 'Feedback' piece will do more good to the folks who do not wish to have 3 fields on top of Knoll Hill, than you have done with your tantrum.
Ron, do you still need more time concerning the year, or do you need another hint?
Here's a hint because I don't think your 'Feedback' piece demonstrated all that much intelligence.
L.B. Johnson was the President of the United States when I played for Eastview Little League.
Heck Ron, you are going to love this next bit. You weren't the only writer to spew venom, untruths, and misrepresentation.
John Mavar, you should be ashamed of yourself and if you were planning on running for elective office in the near to not-so-near future, I think you will need to reconsider things.
You support the new campus at Angels Gate do you? What was your position about SRHS 14, a campus much closer to northwest San Pedro.
Talk about PIITBY (Put It In Their Back Yard)!
If LAUSD can do whatever they want on property they own, I fell folks who live in glass castles should not throw stones.
Northwest San Pedro is home to quite enough of L.A.U.S.D. owned land to place an 810-seat high school campus, needing just "6-8 acres". Let's see, the land that Cooper and the Science Center currently are on is just over 9 acres and look at all the parking along Sandwood, Barrywood, and Westmont.
John, you simply do not have enough knowledge and information to make a realistic and respected opinion concerning SRHS 15 and I would very gladly debate you on the matters.
Now let's remind folks of something John wrote in this latest issue.
"Small-minded individuals feel San Pedro is not a destination. That's because they have made it a non-destination location. But we have some unique things to do and see here. We can improve and grow with new innovated attractions. But some people in the south part of San Pedro whined about traffic, pollution and not wanting other people in their community. Well, I say then move out of San Pedro! We can make all this work when you think outside the box. If you get mad at me and take issue with what I have written, then you are probably one of those people that are not thinking creatively in trying to make San Pedro the successful, viable and relevant town it can - and should be. God help us?'
John, you lack credibility with just about every word you wrote. You are disrespectful, unrealistic, ignorant, and you probably have supported Bob's original plans from day one.
John, you don't seem to be willing to learn about more than one side of an issue.
I guess the best way to deal with John's misstatements is just to list my thoughts, because John seems to also have gotten personal with me and my issues, and he may need a good response.
John, apparently you never read my comments about getting a Tarawa Class Amphibious Assault Ship that would have gone into mothballs, but would be a great addition and attraction in part of the Fisherman's' Slip, if you even know where that is.
John, point in fact. San Pedro is not any type of destination compared to Santa Monica, Venice, Long Beach, San Diego, and many other cities.
I think you may want to learn that San Pedro is on a peninsula and already has lots and lots of lots with lots of people.
The Naval Base and Shipyard are gone from Terminal Island, so San Pedro doesn't get the amount of visitors and spenders it once had.
I haven't seen any contingent of Naval Vessels moored in the outer harbor, and neither have you.
Just putting a berth for the largest cruise ships in the world in our outer harbor will not make San Pedro a destination, quite the contrary.
How many visitors would be willing to spend their time and money driving around San Pedro when ships call on passenger terminals in the outer harbor.
If we can get a ship like the one I have considered, berthed close to a remodeled Ports O Call, and renovate the downtown district something like I have suggested and along with some things Richard Pawloski is suggesting, then how and why would you consider me and folks like me as being negative.
No John, it must be you who is small-minded because you are unwilling or unable to listen to others in a more respectful manner and talk with them about differences.
One of the fellows I share time communicating with could not be farther away from me, politically speaking. But even though I disagree with many of his positions, I respect him and his opinions far higher than I consider yours.
And another thing John, I did move out of San Pedro when I volunteered and joined the U.S.A.F.
John, what does your DD214 indicate?
Don't you EVER think of folks like me as being someone who is "not thinking creatively". How dare you suppose that on others?
I was volunteering to help San Pedro be a better place to live at least as far back as 1971.
What makes you feel you are superior to folks who do not share you thoughts. You seem to relish in demeaning folks, so I think some payback is in order.
Now John, let's you and me compare how we have helped the communities we have lived in. I'll go first and I can only imagine that you won't come anywhere near what I have provided to and for others.
But I guess I must be small-minded, uncreative, and not willing to help others, even in San Pedro.
Where were you John, during the time I:
Worked to establish the first storefront Free Clinic in San Pedro by volunteering to clear out the rubble left from the previous business owner.
Volunteered and helped restore a youth camp damaged by a flood.
Volunteered and worked in community theater.
Volunteered and served on active duty with the United States Air Force.
Volunteered and taught American Red Cross CPR classes during and after my active service ended.
Volunteered as a Cub Scout leader, Boy Scout Leader, and District Commissioner.
Volunteered to serve on various committees and a Commission to better the communities we all live in.
Volunteered, spent large amounts of personal income, and provided goods, services, and time helping to protect OUR community against a greedy developer who you probably supported and who thought he knew what was best for San Pedro, even though he lives in West Los Angeles.
I assisted in having the Q Qualification Classification placed on lots that helped keep an R1 residential community from having condos built where they should not have been.....and I don't live in San Pedro!
Currently I am helping to provide information to folks concerning many issues they may want more information on.
I continue to keep you and others representing northwest San Pedro informed about the goings on with Marymount College and how that could negatively impact northwest San Pedro, and area you have represented.
I have recently volunteered and begun working with a Theatre Company in San Pedro that had a wonderful run with its first production of the 2009 season and I have donated time, money, and effort, to that group.
I continue to write about what is right and wonderful about San Pedro and the rest of OUR community, yet I was confronted with our diatribe that was more negative than positive with regards to members of your own San Pedro community.
I think John, you just might finally acquire a clue, because your 'Feedback' piece demonstrated very clearly that, when you wrote it, you were sorely missing even the most basic of clues.
John, if you are a young politico type of person, your column did nothing positive for you.
Of course I save things like you wrote and I will be happy to bring your quotes back into publication should I feel it is necessary.
John, don't continue to degrade folks living in the more southern areas of the town you represent, it makes you look small, petty, disrespectful, and just plain ignorant.
Seek out opinions, ask questions, seek truthful answers, learn about OUR community much more that you feel you do right now.
Times are tough all over. Nobody needs to read what you wrote and you seem more negative than positive about San Pedro because you talk down to San Pedrans who don't happen to agree with you.
Also, where were you in offering suggestions to the folks from Eastview Little League. I have offered help, suggestions, and information to them because they need it and they need support to find permanent places to have their league players play baseball, other than atop Knoll Hill.
To Ron and John, it really doesn't matter one hill of beans what can be successful on Knoll Hill.
If it can't be purchased from who owns it today, then the laws, regulations Trust Act, and reality must be followed, whether we like it or not!
I guess you two just don't get it and that does not help any kid or EVLL ball player
Open your eyes and be more reasonable, realistic, responsible, and respectful. When you do that to others, I will be more than happy to provide you with nicer comments and thoughtful praise.
Now gentlemen, read what I can write.....
The Caccavalla Family is simply just about the most wonderful gift we could have received from the east coast.
Mike has brought to OUR community and keeps giving us all nothing but the best.
You will be reading much more in the near future about the third annual Tri-arts Festival Mike's dad puts on in downtown San Pedro.
I have been to the two previous events, yet I didn't see Ron or John at either Festival.
I have also written about the Festival for the prior two years and I will help Joe Caccavalla as much as I can, with this year's events.
Joe and I have already talked and written to each other about this year's Festival and we are trying to have many more folks come down to the two-day event and enjoy different forms of art and have a great community event.
I certainly agree with Mike's opinions concerning the good folks from Beacon House. That facility provides OUR community with events, support, and work and the folks who are recovering at Beacon House deserve our respect, help, understanding, and gratitude.
Ron and John, I hope you know that Beacon House is DIFFERENT than Harbor View House.
Oh John, wait a minute. I doubt you were born when I swam in the indoor pool at what was then the Y.M.C.A. I bet you weren't even born when kids from all over San Pedro went into the basement of the place and had some great time.
I wonder if Ron took the opportunity to run on the wooden track over the basketball court and the gym that was just accross the street from the old Y.M.C.A.
Sorry Mike, I just got veered off.
The entire Caccavalla family is such a great family in OUR community. I don't agree with Joe about Ponte Vista, but Mike, Joe, and their families are what is the best in San Pedro.
Josh Stecker, you published a stinker of a column from John Mavar and you might want to have your columnists provide you with there comments early enough so that if you feel their comments would do harm to your publication you could either ask them to change their articles or fire them, on the spot!
Since I know you have read this blog, it is unfortunate that you allowed a personal attack about me, that also appeared as a comment on this blog, to appear.
I don't like attacking anyone personally, but I have no problem when I feel attacked to provide facts and justified opinions to rebutt those attacks.
I think you just might want to have me write something since Ron wrote something personal about me, even though he disguiesed it a bit.
And now to the meeting with LAUSD about the demolition of buildings at the Angels Gate site.
The meeting was only eventful because a union member took some time challenging the speakers about using non-union workers and workers picked up off the street to do the demolition work.
The person seemed to know what he was shouting about. Even though he did not look or speak like others did, he presented himself and his opinions to the audience and he was credible, though a bit too strong in his presentation.
I deliberately asked questions that I knew would provide the opportunity for LAUSD to mislead, misinform and inform the audience about what they really intend to do, even though they did it via the back door and with misleading answers.
Here are some of my questions and their answers.
Q. Would the debris-hauling trucks use Alma or Barlow Saxton for ingress and egress at the site?
A. "They will use Gaffey" stated Brian Eamer.
Q. Well then, would the trucks use Barlow Saxton or Leavenworth.
A. "Barlow Saxton"
Q. So what you are stating is that the heaviest trucks, carrying the most hazardous materials would use the steepest and narrowest access road to the intersection on probably the steepest portion of the hill Gaffey is located at.
A. (Brian stumbled a bit and kept silent. I guess we both already knew the answer was YES but he was not going to verbalize his answer for others to hear.
Brian also stated that the contract with the company doing the demolition has not been signed yet because their has not been a winning bid given.
Brian stated repeatedly that demolition would begin in March, last until October and that construction would begin before the end of the year.
Brian also made the statement that demolition work normally began between 30-45 days after the contracted company wins the bid.
I opined to a friend in the audience that I think Brian was telling all of us that demolition would most likely begin aroung March 45 or 46.
I didn't have any problems from the LAUSD person who is working on the demolition bids. A fellow who will manage the site for LAUSD while the contracting company does their thing, also provided reasonable and realistic answers and comments.
The fellow running the contracts from LAUSD got up, spoke using the microphone, and stated something like...LAUSD inspects itself using self inspections and that the community has nothing to fear from LAUSD because of its in-house inspections.
I could not let that humor pass. I got up and spoke into the microphone three words that still and will haunt LAUSD until all of us who knows about it, dies off.
You know the three words, let's say them together, okay.
1,2,3, "Belmont Learning Center".
Now about those trucks.
Brian stated that during the days where "load outs" occur, between 15-20 debris-hauling trucks and trailers would use Barlow Saxton to intersect with Gaffey.
This is where I feel we find Brian is quite a pickle.
He stated the trucks would use Barlow Saxton.
I had to then point out where he is misleading, disrespectful to the community and attempting to keep the truth away for members of OUR community.
Safety first and always must be the absolute and unignored consideration.
Catching Brian in something he and I know to be less than the truth was simply fun for me.
The trucks will eventually use Alma, and everyone should now that as soon as possible.
If we hold LAUSD to any safety standards, it is obvious that Barlow Saxton would be the WORST road used by the heaviest of vehicles.
The real reason Brian is sticking by Barlow Saxton is he and others at LAUSD know that when the trucks use Alma, all hell will break use.
Please Brian, consider the safety of San Pedro residents when you speak.
Barlow Saxton won't be improved untill AFTER the trucks haul away debris from the campus' site.
The intersection of Barlow Saxton and Gaffey will still have the same geometry and slopes they have today.
What will be missing from the picture is the signal at 30th/31st and Gaffey that could provide some better measure of safety, but NOOOOOOOOOOOO.
If debris-filled trucks do not lose their brakes descending Barlow Saxton, they will be at an intersection which has hardly been uses and is normally ignored by drivers on Gaffey.
The trucks would turn left, or northbount onto Gaffey and they will be successful only if they do not collide with speeding cars traveling too fast down the steep Part of Gaffey and heading northbound.
They could also collide with vehicles whose drivers are heading south, anticipating a steep uphill portion and swifly try and get up the hill without noticing the trucks.
The truck drivers will be confronted by speeding drivers from both directions as they slowly turn onto Gaffey, crossing both southbound lanes and probably taking up both northbound lanes, if they don't careen into one of the houses on the corner or head east onto 32nd. Street.
It is a recipe for injuries, collisions, and lawsuits.
But Brian doesn't want you to know about the safe route the trucks will eventually take, because he doesn't want to hear residents fume about the use of Alma.
I feel, after two or three days of between 15-20 trucks per day trying to use Barlow Saxton, the powers that be, along with drivers who appreciate a safer route, will find the gates on Main at Alma opened for their use.
The drivers will have to negotiate a narrow Alma, but I have seen plenty of large trucks take up both lanes on Alma and make residents and other wait.
I am not that clear on whether the truck drivers will use 30th Street to Gaffey, but it would be safer that having the trucks turn at 25Th and Gaffey, which can be a pretty hairy intersection at times.
After the meeting ended, I asked Brian why LAUSD was not verbalizing the safest, widest, and best route for pedestrians to and from both SRHS 15 and the Outdoor Education Center.
I repeated by pointing out that taking one or two houses on the south side of 30th street would provide the safest and best access to the facilities and as expected, Brian offered that folks are not happy when the right of eminent domain and the taking of property is discussed.
In conclusion, thankfully for all of us, Rod Hamilton stated that drivers will use the most convient route to and from school sites, and Alma wasn't considered to be an emergency only access point.
Brian had to conclude that Barlow Saxton was the "acceptable" route, but he and I both knew is certainly is not the safest for anyone.
Brian acknowledged the flak that will come when Alma is used for demolition and construction, because it is safer than Barlow Saxton, but the LAUSD folks didn't blink when claims that community members are not listened to, was provided.
Alma will most probably be the primary access road unless Main and Barlow Saxton become a one-way route for students, faculty, visitors, and deliveries, to both campuses.
Nobody with LAUSD is willing to publicly acknowledge that Alma will be used and they cannot run far enough away, fast enough when the safest, easyist, and best access route is suggested.
All in all, I got what I came for and had some laughs, too
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Q&A with L.A.U.S.D., A Potentially Very Serious Hazard, and A Possible Solution
Mr. Rod Hamilton from the Facilities Services Division of the Los Angeles Unified School District visited the February meeting of the Governing Board of the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council.
Mr. Hamilton was supposed to be joined by a representative of the L.A. Department of Parks and Recreation to offer answers, on both sides, concerning the Memorandum of Understanding between the Dept. of Parks and Rec. and L.A.U.S.D. over the rights by L.A.U.S.D. to use roads and other facilities owned by the Dept. of Parks and Rec. on the Upper Reservation of Fort MacArthur.
Nobody from Parks and Rec. showed.
Mr. Hamilton offered answers to every single question asked of him, at the meeting.
Here are some of the issues Mr. Hamilton informed the Board and audience members about.
Contrary to rumor, the Memorandum of Understanding has NOT been approved of by the Dept. of Parks and Rec. Governing Board.
Mr. Hamilton stated that the MOU was still in draft form, but the Dept. of Parks and Rec. is scheduled to vote on the matter at the March Meeting.
Mr. Hamilton stated that the swimming pool that is being proposed will be 25 meters by 25 yards and you should be able to pick out the location of the pool on the illustrations below.
Mr. Hamilton also stated that there will probably be 19 more parking spaces added along Barlow-Saxton Road, on L.A.U.S.D. Property. They may already be illustrated on the right side of the Outdoor Education Center.
The next part of this blog will deal with what Mr. Hamilton stated during the meeting and you can take from it, as you please.
There will be 37,000 square feet of solar panels on top of the buildings at the new campus. It is estimated the panels will generate 55% of the daily electrical needs of the campus.
IF the District goes ahead with putting wind turbines on the site, it is estimated that they will produce the remaining 45% of the electrical needs for the new campus.
If SRHS 15 becomes the first school in L.A.U.S.D. to have wind turbines, and develop 100% of the electrical needs of the campus, using solar and wind, it may be one of the only campuses the planet to have complete electrical needs met by naturally provided means.
We would surely see one former Vice President visit San Pedro.
----------------------------------------------------------------
***Ed. Note: If it comes to pass that 100% of the electrical power needed is generated by solar and wind, or perhaps only 75% of the needs can be met, I would expect that there will be a whole bunch of political, and business types that will swarm into the area to see how it is accomplished.
The dynamics of increased exposure throughout the world was not studied in the EIR and would have impacts for businesses, residents, traffic, and studies throughout the area for some time.
This may be one heck of a great idea, but the issues regarding how San Pedro will handle the added interest and presence, hasn't been studied, I believe.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Angels Gate High School will have new modular facilities close to the Oiled Bird Recovery Center and that construction will begin this June.
It is also expected that the Early Childhood Education Center will also be moved, but it may move after Angels Gate does.
Demolition and the beginning of movements of old buildings to sites closer to the Marine Mammal Center will commence in March.
The Removal Action Work plan will not have been discussed, debated, or approved of by then, but if L.A.U.S.D. does not fully follow regulations and safe procedures established by a large number of governmental entities, there could be lawsuits, injunctions, and work stoppages on the site.
According to Mr. Hamilton, construction on South Region High School #15 will begin by the end of 2009.
Alma Street will be widened, but it probably will not be straightened out much more. Sidewalks will be added at L.A.U.S.D. expense.
The widening of Alma Street will be between the access point at Main Street and go south to 37Th Street.
Mr. Hamilton offered that drivers and other who will eventually access the school site will adopt their own routes to and from the school.
There should be no expectation that Alma Street would not eventually become the primary access route to and from the campus, even thought school officials and elected representatives adamantly stated that Alma would not become the primary access point.
Currently there are no plans to have the Alma/Main access be an emergency access point, only.
According to Mr. Hamilton, the members of the Board of Education would have to vote to make the Alma access for emergency access only.
Barlow-Saxton Road is expected to be upgraded using funding from L.A.U.S.D.
Improvements to roadways on Dept. of Parks and Rec. land, other than Barlow-Saxton to the point where it enters L.A.U.S.D. property, would have to be paid by the Dept. of Parks and Rec.
L.A.U.S.D. will pay for signals at the intersection of Gaffey Street and 30th/31st.
The folks at the Military Museum have expressed in having the "Radar Building" on L.A.U.S.D. property moved onto the site of the Museum.
The Museum supporters would most probably be required to fund the move of the building and any other building moves that bring those buildings onto the Museum site.
The historical buildings slated to be moved closer to the Marine Mammal Recovery Center, will be moved at L.A.U.S.D. expense.
Mr. Hamilton reminded everyone about the meeting regarding the demolition plans for the site. The flyer for that meeting, on Thursday evening, is on this blog.
Now to the potentially hazardous situation, some reasoning, and the possible solution.
Below is an illustration depicting, in a very rough form, what can be expected at the site, according to current plans and illustrations.
You should probably click over the illustration to better view the issues.
What is illustrated is the SRHS 15 campus, the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center, the access points to both facilities and the geometry currently planned for Gaffey Street.
According to Mr. Hamilton, there will be a signalized intersection, with crosswalks at the intersection of Gaffey Street with 30Th. Street on the west and 31St. Street, on the east.
At the intersection of Gaffey Street with Barlow-Saxton Road on the west and 32Nd. Street to the east, the current geometry of two stop signs will remain.
There has been and will not be any change to any stop signs along Gaffey Street between it's intersection with Leavenworth Drive at the entrance to Angels Gate Cultural Center and the new signal at 30Th and 31St.
Here is the potentially very hazardous condition that the proposed geometry presents.
Drivers traveling northbound along Gaffey, as they move downhill, north towards the intersection of 30Th Street may attempt to speed down the hill to "catch" the stale green or yellow light that will occur at 30Th. Street.
Drivers attempting to access northbound Gaffey Street by turning left off of Barlow-Saxton Road may not be able to properly judge the speed and distance of the vehicle heading north along Gaffey.
Those turning drivers on Barlow-Saxton may also not be able to safely judge vehicles that sped through the signal at 30Th and Gaffey and head south, up the incline of Gaffey Street.
There appears to be a serious potential of very bad traffic collisions at or near the intersection of Gaffey Street and Barlow-Saxton Road.
Youthful drivers, drivers in a hurry, fog, excessive speed and other factors, along with the very close position of the signalized intersection make for a brew of destruction and injury that nobody wants.
If lawsuits arise from collisions at the intersection, which taxpayer-based entity may be found liable?
It costs usually a minimum of $285,000 Dollars to fund a four-way signal, with crosswalks.
One consideration is to place a double-signalized intersection along Gaffey at all four intersecting streets, but it is highly doubtful that the L.A. City Department of Transportation is willing to pay for the added costs, whether it is warranted or not.
L.A.U.S.D. has offered to pay for the signals at 30Th./31St. and Gaffey.
There is also the consideration of placing crosswalks at Gaffey and Barlow-Saxton/31St.
While it may be warranted, necessary, and required, it still offers a serious potential for injury, death, and collisions because of the location being on a steep hill, close to an intersection too many drivers will speed through.
There is also the factor that Alma Street may become the primary ingress and egress route for the facilities on land owned by L.A.U.S.D.
This is something many officials promised would not happen and some of them have already gone back on their words.
This was not unexpected by me and many who have found that trust of just about everyone, other than teachers within L.A.U.S.D. is questionable at best.
So, after pondering the issues, I may have considered a solution that would cause very little disruption along Gaffey, except for folks turning west onto Barlow-Saxton from northbound Gaffey. (There is no left turn lane proposed).
Make Barlow-Saxton through the two campuses and Main Street one-way roads.
Vehicles would enter the properties from Gaffey Street, with probably 90+% of drivers turning right onto Barlow-Saxton from southbound Gaffey Street.
When leaving the SRHS 15 campus, drivers would easily be able to turn right and proceed a few feet to 30Th. Street, where they can eventually turn either northbound or southbound on Gaffey Street.
This concept would also insure that Alma Street would never become the primary ingress and egress route for SRHS 15, Angels Gate H.S., the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center, and the Early Childhood Education Center.
The concept does put burdens on residents along 30Th, but only eastbound traffic would be more greatly impacted.
This idea would also allow for changes in the geometry of the parking lots and drop-off point for the new campus.
This is also, in my opinion, the only solution that would not mean that property along 30Th. would not have to be taken for a more safe route to and from the facilities.
Everyone should have the safest environments to live, drive, and work in.
Although I have found L.A.U.S.D. to be very resistant to actually providing members of the community with any real input into the final product, I should imagine it may only take one life, several serious injuries, quite a bit of personal property damage, and several lawsuits where they are the defendants, to get the message across.
They can pay now or pay later. I can only hope they pay for safety now rather than for settlements later.
Mr. Hamilton was supposed to be joined by a representative of the L.A. Department of Parks and Recreation to offer answers, on both sides, concerning the Memorandum of Understanding between the Dept. of Parks and Rec. and L.A.U.S.D. over the rights by L.A.U.S.D. to use roads and other facilities owned by the Dept. of Parks and Rec. on the Upper Reservation of Fort MacArthur.
Nobody from Parks and Rec. showed.
Mr. Hamilton offered answers to every single question asked of him, at the meeting.
Here are some of the issues Mr. Hamilton informed the Board and audience members about.
Contrary to rumor, the Memorandum of Understanding has NOT been approved of by the Dept. of Parks and Rec. Governing Board.
Mr. Hamilton stated that the MOU was still in draft form, but the Dept. of Parks and Rec. is scheduled to vote on the matter at the March Meeting.
Mr. Hamilton stated that the swimming pool that is being proposed will be 25 meters by 25 yards and you should be able to pick out the location of the pool on the illustrations below.
Mr. Hamilton also stated that there will probably be 19 more parking spaces added along Barlow-Saxton Road, on L.A.U.S.D. Property. They may already be illustrated on the right side of the Outdoor Education Center.
The next part of this blog will deal with what Mr. Hamilton stated during the meeting and you can take from it, as you please.
There will be 37,000 square feet of solar panels on top of the buildings at the new campus. It is estimated the panels will generate 55% of the daily electrical needs of the campus.
IF the District goes ahead with putting wind turbines on the site, it is estimated that they will produce the remaining 45% of the electrical needs for the new campus.
If SRHS 15 becomes the first school in L.A.U.S.D. to have wind turbines, and develop 100% of the electrical needs of the campus, using solar and wind, it may be one of the only campuses the planet to have complete electrical needs met by naturally provided means.
We would surely see one former Vice President visit San Pedro.
----------------------------------------------------------------
***Ed. Note: If it comes to pass that 100% of the electrical power needed is generated by solar and wind, or perhaps only 75% of the needs can be met, I would expect that there will be a whole bunch of political, and business types that will swarm into the area to see how it is accomplished.
The dynamics of increased exposure throughout the world was not studied in the EIR and would have impacts for businesses, residents, traffic, and studies throughout the area for some time.
This may be one heck of a great idea, but the issues regarding how San Pedro will handle the added interest and presence, hasn't been studied, I believe.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Angels Gate High School will have new modular facilities close to the Oiled Bird Recovery Center and that construction will begin this June.
It is also expected that the Early Childhood Education Center will also be moved, but it may move after Angels Gate does.
Demolition and the beginning of movements of old buildings to sites closer to the Marine Mammal Center will commence in March.
The Removal Action Work plan will not have been discussed, debated, or approved of by then, but if L.A.U.S.D. does not fully follow regulations and safe procedures established by a large number of governmental entities, there could be lawsuits, injunctions, and work stoppages on the site.
According to Mr. Hamilton, construction on South Region High School #15 will begin by the end of 2009.
Alma Street will be widened, but it probably will not be straightened out much more. Sidewalks will be added at L.A.U.S.D. expense.
The widening of Alma Street will be between the access point at Main Street and go south to 37Th Street.
Mr. Hamilton offered that drivers and other who will eventually access the school site will adopt their own routes to and from the school.
There should be no expectation that Alma Street would not eventually become the primary access route to and from the campus, even thought school officials and elected representatives adamantly stated that Alma would not become the primary access point.
Currently there are no plans to have the Alma/Main access be an emergency access point, only.
According to Mr. Hamilton, the members of the Board of Education would have to vote to make the Alma access for emergency access only.
Barlow-Saxton Road is expected to be upgraded using funding from L.A.U.S.D.
Improvements to roadways on Dept. of Parks and Rec. land, other than Barlow-Saxton to the point where it enters L.A.U.S.D. property, would have to be paid by the Dept. of Parks and Rec.
L.A.U.S.D. will pay for signals at the intersection of Gaffey Street and 30th/31st.
The folks at the Military Museum have expressed in having the "Radar Building" on L.A.U.S.D. property moved onto the site of the Museum.
The Museum supporters would most probably be required to fund the move of the building and any other building moves that bring those buildings onto the Museum site.
The historical buildings slated to be moved closer to the Marine Mammal Recovery Center, will be moved at L.A.U.S.D. expense.
Mr. Hamilton reminded everyone about the meeting regarding the demolition plans for the site. The flyer for that meeting, on Thursday evening, is on this blog.
Now to the potentially hazardous situation, some reasoning, and the possible solution.
Below is an illustration depicting, in a very rough form, what can be expected at the site, according to current plans and illustrations.
You should probably click over the illustration to better view the issues.
What is illustrated is the SRHS 15 campus, the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center, the access points to both facilities and the geometry currently planned for Gaffey Street.According to Mr. Hamilton, there will be a signalized intersection, with crosswalks at the intersection of Gaffey Street with 30Th. Street on the west and 31St. Street, on the east.
At the intersection of Gaffey Street with Barlow-Saxton Road on the west and 32Nd. Street to the east, the current geometry of two stop signs will remain.
There has been and will not be any change to any stop signs along Gaffey Street between it's intersection with Leavenworth Drive at the entrance to Angels Gate Cultural Center and the new signal at 30Th and 31St.
Here is the potentially very hazardous condition that the proposed geometry presents.
Drivers traveling northbound along Gaffey, as they move downhill, north towards the intersection of 30Th Street may attempt to speed down the hill to "catch" the stale green or yellow light that will occur at 30Th. Street.
Drivers attempting to access northbound Gaffey Street by turning left off of Barlow-Saxton Road may not be able to properly judge the speed and distance of the vehicle heading north along Gaffey.
Those turning drivers on Barlow-Saxton may also not be able to safely judge vehicles that sped through the signal at 30Th and Gaffey and head south, up the incline of Gaffey Street.
There appears to be a serious potential of very bad traffic collisions at or near the intersection of Gaffey Street and Barlow-Saxton Road.
Youthful drivers, drivers in a hurry, fog, excessive speed and other factors, along with the very close position of the signalized intersection make for a brew of destruction and injury that nobody wants.
If lawsuits arise from collisions at the intersection, which taxpayer-based entity may be found liable?
It costs usually a minimum of $285,000 Dollars to fund a four-way signal, with crosswalks.
One consideration is to place a double-signalized intersection along Gaffey at all four intersecting streets, but it is highly doubtful that the L.A. City Department of Transportation is willing to pay for the added costs, whether it is warranted or not.
L.A.U.S.D. has offered to pay for the signals at 30Th./31St. and Gaffey.
There is also the consideration of placing crosswalks at Gaffey and Barlow-Saxton/31St.
While it may be warranted, necessary, and required, it still offers a serious potential for injury, death, and collisions because of the location being on a steep hill, close to an intersection too many drivers will speed through.
There is also the factor that Alma Street may become the primary ingress and egress route for the facilities on land owned by L.A.U.S.D.
This is something many officials promised would not happen and some of them have already gone back on their words.
This was not unexpected by me and many who have found that trust of just about everyone, other than teachers within L.A.U.S.D. is questionable at best.
So, after pondering the issues, I may have considered a solution that would cause very little disruption along Gaffey, except for folks turning west onto Barlow-Saxton from northbound Gaffey. (There is no left turn lane proposed).
Make Barlow-Saxton through the two campuses and Main Street one-way roads.
Vehicles would enter the properties from Gaffey Street, with probably 90+% of drivers turning right onto Barlow-Saxton from southbound Gaffey Street.When leaving the SRHS 15 campus, drivers would easily be able to turn right and proceed a few feet to 30Th. Street, where they can eventually turn either northbound or southbound on Gaffey Street.
This concept would also insure that Alma Street would never become the primary ingress and egress route for SRHS 15, Angels Gate H.S., the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center, and the Early Childhood Education Center.
The concept does put burdens on residents along 30Th, but only eastbound traffic would be more greatly impacted.
This idea would also allow for changes in the geometry of the parking lots and drop-off point for the new campus.
This is also, in my opinion, the only solution that would not mean that property along 30Th. would not have to be taken for a more safe route to and from the facilities.
Everyone should have the safest environments to live, drive, and work in.
Although I have found L.A.U.S.D. to be very resistant to actually providing members of the community with any real input into the final product, I should imagine it may only take one life, several serious injuries, quite a bit of personal property damage, and several lawsuits where they are the defendants, to get the message across.
They can pay now or pay later. I can only hope they pay for safety now rather than for settlements later.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Pondering the Beginning of the Intermission Last Night
I did promise with my last post that I would not mention you know what, you know where, and the fact that you know what presented by you know who, has seen its run extended.
Sure, I could mention to folks reading this earlier on Sunday, than 2:00 PM, but I wrote this post to let folks know what they witnessed at the very beginning of last night's Intermission, you know where.
Ray, Kara, Bob, the 'you know where' House Staff and myself know a fellow who visits the Warner Grand Theater on a very regular basis to try and find paying work there.
This gentleman is also known in the local area and he has some difficulties dealing with some issues, including reality.
Our acquaintance was told to leave a bar local to the Warner Grand area as he was causing problems.
Local security guards on patrol were summoned to assist in the removal of the fellow, from the bar.
The bar patron left the bar before the security arrived and he then went to disturb and misdirect traffic from the middle of Sixth Street.
He may have known that the security guards were looking for him because during the first act of you know what at you know where, he slipped into the audience while attempting to hide from security and others.
Before the Intermission began, the person provided some disturbance to some audience members while security guards were looking for him and came into the theater, where he was located.
Just after I put up the "Intermission" (10 Minutes) slide, the security guards found the fellow and began attempting to extract him from the theater.
At that point, the guy did not need to have a wireless microphone on his person because his tantrum, shouting, and unruliness could be heard by everyone in the Orchestra Section, the Balcony, the Foyer and probably the basement areas of the you know where.
He shouted loudly that 'they' were hurting his finger while the guards were trying to get hold of the fellow.
As the person continued shouting, their was an audience member who witnessed everything going on and commented to the fellow that 'they' weren't even touching his finger.
The female audience member described, in detail, the events of the extraction of the drunk and disorderly human, and I took every word she said as the real truth.
It just so happens that I purchased two tickets to that particular performance for the woman and her husband as a gift for their 19th wedding anniversary that occurred on February 10.
The husband knows quite a bit about activities of live theater because for two decades he was the Stage Crew Teacher at San Pedro High School, a very close friend since 1973, and my brother-in-law.
Ruth Buono, my sister, gave me an account of things I could only witness from the balcony of you know where as I was changing tapes on two video cameras during most of the Intermission.
Now you know I couldn't end this post with reminding folks about you know what, you know where, by you know who. So here goes.......
Sure, you can click over the image to make it larger.
Sure, I could mention to folks reading this earlier on Sunday, than 2:00 PM, but I wrote this post to let folks know what they witnessed at the very beginning of last night's Intermission, you know where.
Ray, Kara, Bob, the 'you know where' House Staff and myself know a fellow who visits the Warner Grand Theater on a very regular basis to try and find paying work there.
This gentleman is also known in the local area and he has some difficulties dealing with some issues, including reality.
Our acquaintance was told to leave a bar local to the Warner Grand area as he was causing problems.
Local security guards on patrol were summoned to assist in the removal of the fellow, from the bar.
The bar patron left the bar before the security arrived and he then went to disturb and misdirect traffic from the middle of Sixth Street.
He may have known that the security guards were looking for him because during the first act of you know what at you know where, he slipped into the audience while attempting to hide from security and others.
Before the Intermission began, the person provided some disturbance to some audience members while security guards were looking for him and came into the theater, where he was located.
Just after I put up the "Intermission" (10 Minutes) slide, the security guards found the fellow and began attempting to extract him from the theater.
At that point, the guy did not need to have a wireless microphone on his person because his tantrum, shouting, and unruliness could be heard by everyone in the Orchestra Section, the Balcony, the Foyer and probably the basement areas of the you know where.
He shouted loudly that 'they' were hurting his finger while the guards were trying to get hold of the fellow.
As the person continued shouting, their was an audience member who witnessed everything going on and commented to the fellow that 'they' weren't even touching his finger.
The female audience member described, in detail, the events of the extraction of the drunk and disorderly human, and I took every word she said as the real truth.
It just so happens that I purchased two tickets to that particular performance for the woman and her husband as a gift for their 19th wedding anniversary that occurred on February 10.
The husband knows quite a bit about activities of live theater because for two decades he was the Stage Crew Teacher at San Pedro High School, a very close friend since 1973, and my brother-in-law.
Ruth Buono, my sister, gave me an account of things I could only witness from the balcony of you know where as I was changing tapes on two video cameras during most of the Intermission.
Now you know I couldn't end this post with reminding folks about you know what, you know where, by you know who. So here goes.......
Sure, you can click over the image to make it larger.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Pondering Future Theatre Productions
Please click on each illustration to enlarge view.1. I promise that this is the very last post dealing with live theatre events in San Pedro until I publish another post on the subject.
2. If you attend theatre events regularly in San Pedro or the greater L.A. Area OR if you want to look for ticket prices to other events that save you money, please look at www.goldstar.com and consider whether you can actually save some real dollars while attending great performances, concerts, and sporting events.
3. As a member of The Relevant Stage Theatre Company, duty requires that I ask you to attend "I Love You, You're Perfect, Now Change" before you take in either of the first two performances of the next production by the Little Fish Theatre Company.
4. But you should really try to see all four productions mentioned on the illustrations viewed above.
5. I guess I am still in a funny mood after last evening's funny event and that is why I altered the address side of the post card sent out by Little Fish Theatre Company.
6. If you want to see a performance with an audience having fewer folks, come to the Warner Grand tonight, February 20, 2009.
7. If you wish to include yourselves along with a large audience laughing and enjoying a performance, then Saturday February 21 is the date to get to the Warner Grand Theatre.
8. You will just about always find a packed house at 777 South 7th Street, where Little Fish Theatre Company provides their great performances.
9. I don't feel it is necessary to mention that "I Love You, You're Perfect, Now Change" has had its run extended by two performances.
10. But I think you need to learn that the run could not be extended through Sunday March 1, 2009 because of a previously planned event at the Warner Grand Theater.
11. 11 is the sixth lowest prime number. (1,2,3,5,and 7 are the first five)
12. The modern English translation for the number "twelve" is "eleven with two". I know it doesn't make any sense, but I didn't create the translation.
13. Thank you for reading and please enjoy all upcoming productions by two fantastic theatre companies.
Let's Ponder What Is Missing, Below
Please take a look at some recently found information about the new High School campus that has been approved to be constructed.
The paragraph below offers what is going to be built at the site and some of the facilities that are being explored to be considered in a joint use agreement with the Los Angeles City Department of Parks and Recreation.
As I have opined more than once, I continue to believe one of the items L.A.U.S.D. was promising while they were seeking approval of the project will probably never be provided.
It is something that will be built on at least 10 other new school construction sites, as revealed by L.A.U.S.D. in documentation I have saved. This particular amenity is never mentioned to be included at the new campus.
Please take a look and consider what has been left out of the items L.A.U.S.D. is willing to provide on the campus.
---------------------------------------------------------------
"The District intends to build a new high school on District-owned land at Fort MacArthur. This campus will consist of two small schools or learning communities that include classrooms, science labs, and administration. Shared facilities will include performing arts classrooms, a library, multi-purpose room, gymnasium, food service and lunch shelter, indoor dining room, administration support services, playfields, and surface parking. The District and the City of Los Angeles Recreation and Parks Department are exploring a joint use agreement at the new high school."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Can you tell what is missing?
The item also appears to be missing from all but one conceptual illustration of the new campus.
Is it something that OUR community needs and will use? You betcha!
Is it something the member of the School Board for this District promised while seeking approval and support for the new campus? Why yes, I heard him speak about it.
Is it something dealt with in any real manner in the Environmental Reports? Sadly and as expected, NO.
Have you guessed yet?
Don't worry if you can't identify what promised item is missing and most probably will not be provided at the new campus.
If you didn't guess it, you won't be all wet. And it appears that neither will anyone else in OUR community get the opportunity to be all wet, either.
The paragraph below offers what is going to be built at the site and some of the facilities that are being explored to be considered in a joint use agreement with the Los Angeles City Department of Parks and Recreation.
As I have opined more than once, I continue to believe one of the items L.A.U.S.D. was promising while they were seeking approval of the project will probably never be provided.
It is something that will be built on at least 10 other new school construction sites, as revealed by L.A.U.S.D. in documentation I have saved. This particular amenity is never mentioned to be included at the new campus.
Please take a look and consider what has been left out of the items L.A.U.S.D. is willing to provide on the campus.
---------------------------------------------------------------
"The District intends to build a new high school on District-owned land at Fort MacArthur. This campus will consist of two small schools or learning communities that include classrooms, science labs, and administration. Shared facilities will include performing arts classrooms, a library, multi-purpose room, gymnasium, food service and lunch shelter, indoor dining room, administration support services, playfields, and surface parking. The District and the City of Los Angeles Recreation and Parks Department are exploring a joint use agreement at the new high school."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Can you tell what is missing?
The item also appears to be missing from all but one conceptual illustration of the new campus.
Is it something that OUR community needs and will use? You betcha!
Is it something the member of the School Board for this District promised while seeking approval and support for the new campus? Why yes, I heard him speak about it.
Is it something dealt with in any real manner in the Environmental Reports? Sadly and as expected, NO.
Have you guessed yet?
Don't worry if you can't identify what promised item is missing and most probably will not be provided at the new campus.
If you didn't guess it, you won't be all wet. And it appears that neither will anyone else in OUR community get the opportunity to be all wet, either.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Pondering the Candidates Forum For The March 3 City of L.A. races
On March 3, I hope every eligible voter goes to the polls and uses as much information as they can when considering whom to vote for, in the contested races and on propositions and measures that appear on their ballots.
I will be heading for my polling place on March 3 even though my ballot contains candidates of three seats on the Los Angeles Community College District.
Since I don't live in San Pedro/Los Angeles, I don't get to vote in some real juicy races being considered on ballots of folks living in L.A.
At the end of this post are the Internet addresses of the candidates who showed up at the forum and for Ms. Hahn and Mr. David Saltzburg, aka Zuma Dogg. You will also find the yes and NO on Measure B sites, too.
But I have pondered further on who I would like to see win in certain races in Los Angeles and I attended the forum held where candidates for three offices in L.A. appeared and also a supporter and opponent for Measure B had a chance to be heard by the crowd.
John Stinson were almost asked to leave the room when we both could not stop laughing as some of the things said by folks came out.
The festivities began with two candidates for the office of Los Angeles City Attorney made comments and answered questions using a typical format for those such things.
Later on in the evening the two other candidates for City Attorney made appearances, but they came after the Q and A session.
The two candidates for City Attorney who were there at the beginning of the evening were Mr. David Berger, Esq and Mr. Noel Weiss, Esq.
Both of the gentlemen were interesting to listen to and learn about and both of them spoke very ill of Jack Weiss who may be the front runner in the race.
The well informed crowd of folks attending the forum seemed to all agree with the two candidates about Jack Weiss and I doubt Jack will receive a vote from anyone in the room.
Mr. Berger is an award-winning Deputy District Attorney for the County of Los Angeles and Mr. Noel Weiss is a lawyer in private practice who specializes in the rights of citizens against developers and he has worked with groups against over development in the greater Los Angeles Area.
The third candidate for the office of City Attorney to come in was Mr. Michael Amerian, Esq. Mr. Amerian is currently a Deputy City Attorney for the city of Los Angeles and he is the only one of the four candidates who has worked in the L.A. City Attorney's office.
The forth candidate who came from one forum and had to leave to attend another forum after being able to stay at our forum for too short of a period of time was Mr. Carmen Trutanich, Esq. Mr. Trutanich is also a Deputy District Attorney for the County of Los Angeles.
It appears that "Nuch" being a true "Pedro Boy" will garner the majority of votes from San Pedrans.
Mr. Trutanich also can claim endorsements from a wide variety of government types as well as the I.L.W.U. and the Los Angeles Times.
I have a very good idea that any one of the four candidates who appeared at the forum would do a much better job as City Attorney than the current City Attorney, Rock Delgadillo has done.
All four of the candidates were very animated about their dislike of Jack Weiss, the fifth candidate running for City Attorney.
I believe all four are very correct in their dislike and great distrust of Jack Weiss.
I think it is very understandable that Carmen Trutanich will garner the majority of votes from voters in San Pedro and I think that town should be very proud of the work their native son has done over many years.
Noel Weiss is the only candidate who is not currently employed in any government agency.
It may be time for a true outsider to take the helm of the City Attorney's office. Noel Weiss has spent many years advocating and serving regular citizens against developers and even government entities who attempt to over-govern the people.
Noel Weiss has provided guidance, information, assistance, and resources when many of us are dealing with the Ponte Vista at San Pedro project and Noel Weiss is very leery of developers who attempt to change the nature of communities and Noel Weiss has demonstrated that he serves all of us even without being employed by a government agency.
If I could vote for a candidate for the office of Los Angeles City Attorney, I would consider Carmen Trutanich but I would mark by ballot by the name of Noel Weiss.
The second set of candidates to provide their accomplishments and views at the forum were two candidates for the office of Los Angeles Controller.
Ms. Susy Evans and Mr. Nick Patsaouras were the only two candidates for that office to appear.
I am not that interested in the office of City Controller, but both of the candidates spoke well, answered questions with intelligence and both could do a good job in the office they are seeking, I feel.
However, Mr. Nick Patsaouras has served OUR community and the greater Los Angeles area for many years and he also firmly demonstrated the correct position concerning Measure B on the March 3 ballots.
I think both candidates could do the job they are seeking in a very professional manner and would be an asset to the population of Los Angeles.
For this office I lean slightly towards Nick Patsaouras, but only slightly.
The next issue that came up at the forum was the debate/debacle/hilarity concerning Measure B.
Measure B would provide solar panels on about 25% of Los Angeles' public buildings and is the most debated and contested measure that has come up in years, in the city of Los Angeles.
It also brought out the most laughter and almost got John Stinson and I kicked out of the room.
Mr. James Unger, a paid spokesperson for the support of Measure B debated Mr. John Stammreich in what turned out to be quite the fun time where James was basically reduced to the ignorant fellow he, unfortunately is.
John Stammreich and I are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum. John actually agrees with The Random Lengths News' publisher Mr. James Preston Allen and that happens almost never, but they both do on this subject. John has been quoted in print that it is extremely odd that he and Mr. Allen have basically the same views on Measure B.
During the debate and the Q and A session between James and John, there were many issues in dispute.
Even poor James disputed himself from time to time and many of us could not help laughing at the fellow.
You should probably know that there was probably only James Unger in the room that will vote for Measure B, but the trooper he is, he still came out for the oddity.
When the costs were debated James contended that the average residential user's monthly increase would be only about $1.00 to pay for the placement and maintenance of solar panels.
James stated he thought just a $1.00 increase per month was reasonable.
John however pointed out that the D.W.P. is already going to raise the average monthly bill about $13.00 per month without the added costs if Measure B passes.
John was not disputed by James, the supporter when John mentioned that the suspected costs would create the need to raise monthly rates about $1.00 per month for 52 years to pay off the Measure.
James, even though he stated that he thought $1.00 per month may be reasonable then stated he thought the monthly charges would probably be much higher because he considered it taking 52 years to pay of the debt would not happen and the added costs would have to be repaid long before the 52 years had elapsed.
Well this got John Stinson and I going and we simply could not stop because of what was contended with next.
Poor, poor James Unger happened to comment that the D.W.P. knows something about electrical generation because they built Hoover Dam.
John was quite quick to respond that he didn't thing the Hoover Dam was a solar project.
Okay so with that, we were in tears. James was trying to find support for solar generation in the city of Los Angeles and John Stammreich had to remind James that the Hoover Dam has nothing to do with solar panels.
John Stammreich also pointed out something that has never been refuted by James or other supporters of Measure B.
It seems that less than 10% of the I.B.E.W. members who would install and maintain the solar panels actually live within the limits of the city of Los Angeles.
James claimed that companies would be moving into Los Angeles to attempt to get more business dealing with electrical generation by means of solar panels.
John Stammreich then pointed out that if the Measure passes, those very companies would be charged higher rates for their electricity.
Measure B would have solar panels built in China brought to Los Angeles and installed by I.B.E.W. workers who would earn far much more than other unionized workers who could do the jobs for less costs.
The measure was basically run through City Council approval without any of the Council members, other than Jack Weiss knowing the true facts of the measure.
The proposed costs for the measure are not factually known because the first audit of the measure was so bad, a second set of comments had to be issued and they showed a dramatic increase in costs for the project.
Unfortunately for many of us, probably far too many L.A. voters will see any measure suggesting solar panels as a good thing and vote the very lousy measure in.
All the candidates that appeared at the forum are either very opposed or dramatically opposed to Measure B and L.A. voters should vote NO on Measure B.
The last issue to be debated was who will win the March 3 election for the 15th Council District for the city of Los Angeles.
Ms. Janice Hahn, the current holder of the seat was not present at the forum due to a commitment she made last year.
In her place was Ms. Canizales, Ms. Hahn's senior assistant in the San Pedro office.
Also seated next to Ms. Canizales was Mr. Gordon Teuber, another senior aide to Ms. Hahn.
The only candidate to actually show up for the office was Mr. Christopher Salabaj.
The back and forth between the representative for Ms. Hahn and Mr. Salabaj was polite and folks learned more than expected about some of the positions Ms. Hahn has taken and what Mr. Salabaj would do if he were elected.
Mr. Salabaj pointed out that Ms. Hahn used "Quimby funds" to build the San Pedro Welcome Park which many in our community feel is a real boondoggle.
Mr. Salabaj also pointed out that Ms. Hahn dramatic yet unsuccessful attempt to get the anti-gang Measure A passed would have required an increase in property taxes while it would have allowed funds for a very small area of Watts and no place else in Ms. Hahn's District.
The most troubling thing we learned at the forum is that Ms. Hahn either tacidly supports or is neutral on Measure B and that is a real problem.
Ms. Canizales did a pretty good dodging dance around the issue when asked about whether Ms. Hahn supports or opposes Measure B and she never stated that Ms. Hahn opposes Measure B.
Over the years there has been many comments written about how Ms. Hahn is not willing to take firm stands on a number of issues her constituents feel she should. Ms. Hahn also provided frustration by a number of her constituents over her activities and measures to deal with gangs.
Perhaps it may be time to either put the scare into Ms. Hahn by having voters vote for Mr. Salabaj or simply elect Christopher Salabaj as the new 15th District Councilman for the city of Los Angeles.
Ms. Hahn has publicly called for the baseball diamonds remaining on Knoll Hill and that Eastview Little League be allowed to hold games there even after the current contract expires.
Many individuals, including Ms. Hahn have been informed repeatedly that is really doesn't matter what anyone in and around the area truly want, it is the State of California that is quite willing to sue agencies over the legal uses of Knoll Hill and Ms. Hahn knows that.
It really doesn't matter whether the Harbor Department, the Port of Los Angeles, the L.A. Department of Parks and Recreation and the City Council agrees to or provides contracts for. The State has repeatedly informed everyone that they are perfectly willing to sue and I do not believe any city or county agency wishes to spend dollars they do not have against lawsuits brought about by the State of California.
I am also concerned that Ms. Hahn has not been pushing hard enough to help redevelop downtown San Pedro and also working harder on the Waterfront Redevelopment project.
Maybe it is time to get a fresh face into the job of representing the 15th District and the people who live and work within the District.
As much as I appreciate the work Ms. Hahn and her staff have done in dealings with Ponte Vista and the redevelopment of the former McCowan's Market site, if I got to vote, I would mark my ballot by the name of Christopher Salabaj.
Many folks know that Ms Hahn has demonstrated an interest in becoming an L.A. County Supervisor, just like her father was.
The current L.A. County Supervisor for the District ends his current term in 2012 and is termed out in 2016.
Ms. Hahn is running for her last term as a member of the City Council and it may make folks wonder if Ms. Hahn would be willing to serve a full term as a City Council Member or try for Mr. Don Knabe's job before another City Council term ends.
If Ms. Hahn is reelected, might her current constituents have only a part-time Council member in 2012?
-------------------------------------------------------------
At the forum, there were plenty of handouts including two magazines.
The San Pedro 2008/2009 Community Guide and Business Directory has a map of most of the peninsula, including all of San Pedro.
One residential project was singled out on the map in the middle of the Directory. I bet you can guess what property was named and outlined on the map.
The San Pedro Business Journal has an article beginning on Page 1 about the upcoming Honorary Mayor campaign. In the article are photos and comments about past Honorary Mayors.
Can you guess who is missing from the article? The only hint I am willing to provide is: "current".
I guess you all realize by now that I have a very odd sense of humor that doesn't necessarily translate into humor many can understand. I like subtle humor and things like seeing Ponte Vista outlined and named on the map and the omission of Mr. Joe Donato from the article on Honorary Mayor seems a bit funny to me.
The forum proved to be much funnier than I thought it would be and I had planned for a few laughs even before the event began.
I am sorry that my candidate for Mayor of Los Angeles did not show up, but I guess Mr. David Saltsburg, aka Zuma Dogg had other events and forums to go to.
In these tough economic times we all need humor and a big shakeup in the way the current systems operate.
The folks I hope you vote for would do all that and more, I feel.
Just think of all the tourists that would benefit the L.A. economy coming to town to be part of what could happen if Zuma Dogg is elected Mayor.
The City Attorney, City Controller, and 15th District picks I'd like to see elected would help keep L.A. trimmed and the L.A. City Council might actually do something for the folks who provide their pay.
http://michaelamerian.com/index.php
http://berger4ca.com/
www.tru09.com
http://electnoel.wordpress.com/
http://evansforcontroller.com/
http://www.nick2009.com/
http://votenomeasureb.com/
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=46315869753
http://www.janicehahn.com/
http://www.chrissalabaj.com/
http://zumatimes.com/
I will be heading for my polling place on March 3 even though my ballot contains candidates of three seats on the Los Angeles Community College District.
Since I don't live in San Pedro/Los Angeles, I don't get to vote in some real juicy races being considered on ballots of folks living in L.A.
At the end of this post are the Internet addresses of the candidates who showed up at the forum and for Ms. Hahn and Mr. David Saltzburg, aka Zuma Dogg. You will also find the yes and NO on Measure B sites, too.
But I have pondered further on who I would like to see win in certain races in Los Angeles and I attended the forum held where candidates for three offices in L.A. appeared and also a supporter and opponent for Measure B had a chance to be heard by the crowd.
John Stinson were almost asked to leave the room when we both could not stop laughing as some of the things said by folks came out.
The festivities began with two candidates for the office of Los Angeles City Attorney made comments and answered questions using a typical format for those such things.
Later on in the evening the two other candidates for City Attorney made appearances, but they came after the Q and A session.
The two candidates for City Attorney who were there at the beginning of the evening were Mr. David Berger, Esq and Mr. Noel Weiss, Esq.
Both of the gentlemen were interesting to listen to and learn about and both of them spoke very ill of Jack Weiss who may be the front runner in the race.
The well informed crowd of folks attending the forum seemed to all agree with the two candidates about Jack Weiss and I doubt Jack will receive a vote from anyone in the room.
Mr. Berger is an award-winning Deputy District Attorney for the County of Los Angeles and Mr. Noel Weiss is a lawyer in private practice who specializes in the rights of citizens against developers and he has worked with groups against over development in the greater Los Angeles Area.
The third candidate for the office of City Attorney to come in was Mr. Michael Amerian, Esq. Mr. Amerian is currently a Deputy City Attorney for the city of Los Angeles and he is the only one of the four candidates who has worked in the L.A. City Attorney's office.
The forth candidate who came from one forum and had to leave to attend another forum after being able to stay at our forum for too short of a period of time was Mr. Carmen Trutanich, Esq. Mr. Trutanich is also a Deputy District Attorney for the County of Los Angeles.
It appears that "Nuch" being a true "Pedro Boy" will garner the majority of votes from San Pedrans.
Mr. Trutanich also can claim endorsements from a wide variety of government types as well as the I.L.W.U. and the Los Angeles Times.
I have a very good idea that any one of the four candidates who appeared at the forum would do a much better job as City Attorney than the current City Attorney, Rock Delgadillo has done.
All four of the candidates were very animated about their dislike of Jack Weiss, the fifth candidate running for City Attorney.
I believe all four are very correct in their dislike and great distrust of Jack Weiss.
I think it is very understandable that Carmen Trutanich will garner the majority of votes from voters in San Pedro and I think that town should be very proud of the work their native son has done over many years.
Noel Weiss is the only candidate who is not currently employed in any government agency.
It may be time for a true outsider to take the helm of the City Attorney's office. Noel Weiss has spent many years advocating and serving regular citizens against developers and even government entities who attempt to over-govern the people.
Noel Weiss has provided guidance, information, assistance, and resources when many of us are dealing with the Ponte Vista at San Pedro project and Noel Weiss is very leery of developers who attempt to change the nature of communities and Noel Weiss has demonstrated that he serves all of us even without being employed by a government agency.
If I could vote for a candidate for the office of Los Angeles City Attorney, I would consider Carmen Trutanich but I would mark by ballot by the name of Noel Weiss.
The second set of candidates to provide their accomplishments and views at the forum were two candidates for the office of Los Angeles Controller.
Ms. Susy Evans and Mr. Nick Patsaouras were the only two candidates for that office to appear.
I am not that interested in the office of City Controller, but both of the candidates spoke well, answered questions with intelligence and both could do a good job in the office they are seeking, I feel.
However, Mr. Nick Patsaouras has served OUR community and the greater Los Angeles area for many years and he also firmly demonstrated the correct position concerning Measure B on the March 3 ballots.
I think both candidates could do the job they are seeking in a very professional manner and would be an asset to the population of Los Angeles.
For this office I lean slightly towards Nick Patsaouras, but only slightly.
The next issue that came up at the forum was the debate/debacle/hilarity concerning Measure B.
Measure B would provide solar panels on about 25% of Los Angeles' public buildings and is the most debated and contested measure that has come up in years, in the city of Los Angeles.
It also brought out the most laughter and almost got John Stinson and I kicked out of the room.
Mr. James Unger, a paid spokesperson for the support of Measure B debated Mr. John Stammreich in what turned out to be quite the fun time where James was basically reduced to the ignorant fellow he, unfortunately is.
John Stammreich and I are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum. John actually agrees with The Random Lengths News' publisher Mr. James Preston Allen and that happens almost never, but they both do on this subject. John has been quoted in print that it is extremely odd that he and Mr. Allen have basically the same views on Measure B.
During the debate and the Q and A session between James and John, there were many issues in dispute.
Even poor James disputed himself from time to time and many of us could not help laughing at the fellow.
You should probably know that there was probably only James Unger in the room that will vote for Measure B, but the trooper he is, he still came out for the oddity.
When the costs were debated James contended that the average residential user's monthly increase would be only about $1.00 to pay for the placement and maintenance of solar panels.
James stated he thought just a $1.00 increase per month was reasonable.
John however pointed out that the D.W.P. is already going to raise the average monthly bill about $13.00 per month without the added costs if Measure B passes.
John was not disputed by James, the supporter when John mentioned that the suspected costs would create the need to raise monthly rates about $1.00 per month for 52 years to pay off the Measure.
James, even though he stated that he thought $1.00 per month may be reasonable then stated he thought the monthly charges would probably be much higher because he considered it taking 52 years to pay of the debt would not happen and the added costs would have to be repaid long before the 52 years had elapsed.
Well this got John Stinson and I going and we simply could not stop because of what was contended with next.
Poor, poor James Unger happened to comment that the D.W.P. knows something about electrical generation because they built Hoover Dam.
John was quite quick to respond that he didn't thing the Hoover Dam was a solar project.
Okay so with that, we were in tears. James was trying to find support for solar generation in the city of Los Angeles and John Stammreich had to remind James that the Hoover Dam has nothing to do with solar panels.
John Stammreich also pointed out something that has never been refuted by James or other supporters of Measure B.
It seems that less than 10% of the I.B.E.W. members who would install and maintain the solar panels actually live within the limits of the city of Los Angeles.
James claimed that companies would be moving into Los Angeles to attempt to get more business dealing with electrical generation by means of solar panels.
John Stammreich then pointed out that if the Measure passes, those very companies would be charged higher rates for their electricity.
Measure B would have solar panels built in China brought to Los Angeles and installed by I.B.E.W. workers who would earn far much more than other unionized workers who could do the jobs for less costs.
The measure was basically run through City Council approval without any of the Council members, other than Jack Weiss knowing the true facts of the measure.
The proposed costs for the measure are not factually known because the first audit of the measure was so bad, a second set of comments had to be issued and they showed a dramatic increase in costs for the project.
Unfortunately for many of us, probably far too many L.A. voters will see any measure suggesting solar panels as a good thing and vote the very lousy measure in.
All the candidates that appeared at the forum are either very opposed or dramatically opposed to Measure B and L.A. voters should vote NO on Measure B.
The last issue to be debated was who will win the March 3 election for the 15th Council District for the city of Los Angeles.
Ms. Janice Hahn, the current holder of the seat was not present at the forum due to a commitment she made last year.
In her place was Ms. Canizales, Ms. Hahn's senior assistant in the San Pedro office.
Also seated next to Ms. Canizales was Mr. Gordon Teuber, another senior aide to Ms. Hahn.
The only candidate to actually show up for the office was Mr. Christopher Salabaj.
The back and forth between the representative for Ms. Hahn and Mr. Salabaj was polite and folks learned more than expected about some of the positions Ms. Hahn has taken and what Mr. Salabaj would do if he were elected.
Mr. Salabaj pointed out that Ms. Hahn used "Quimby funds" to build the San Pedro Welcome Park which many in our community feel is a real boondoggle.
Mr. Salabaj also pointed out that Ms. Hahn dramatic yet unsuccessful attempt to get the anti-gang Measure A passed would have required an increase in property taxes while it would have allowed funds for a very small area of Watts and no place else in Ms. Hahn's District.
The most troubling thing we learned at the forum is that Ms. Hahn either tacidly supports or is neutral on Measure B and that is a real problem.
Ms. Canizales did a pretty good dodging dance around the issue when asked about whether Ms. Hahn supports or opposes Measure B and she never stated that Ms. Hahn opposes Measure B.
Over the years there has been many comments written about how Ms. Hahn is not willing to take firm stands on a number of issues her constituents feel she should. Ms. Hahn also provided frustration by a number of her constituents over her activities and measures to deal with gangs.
Perhaps it may be time to either put the scare into Ms. Hahn by having voters vote for Mr. Salabaj or simply elect Christopher Salabaj as the new 15th District Councilman for the city of Los Angeles.
Ms. Hahn has publicly called for the baseball diamonds remaining on Knoll Hill and that Eastview Little League be allowed to hold games there even after the current contract expires.
Many individuals, including Ms. Hahn have been informed repeatedly that is really doesn't matter what anyone in and around the area truly want, it is the State of California that is quite willing to sue agencies over the legal uses of Knoll Hill and Ms. Hahn knows that.
It really doesn't matter whether the Harbor Department, the Port of Los Angeles, the L.A. Department of Parks and Recreation and the City Council agrees to or provides contracts for. The State has repeatedly informed everyone that they are perfectly willing to sue and I do not believe any city or county agency wishes to spend dollars they do not have against lawsuits brought about by the State of California.
I am also concerned that Ms. Hahn has not been pushing hard enough to help redevelop downtown San Pedro and also working harder on the Waterfront Redevelopment project.
Maybe it is time to get a fresh face into the job of representing the 15th District and the people who live and work within the District.
As much as I appreciate the work Ms. Hahn and her staff have done in dealings with Ponte Vista and the redevelopment of the former McCowan's Market site, if I got to vote, I would mark my ballot by the name of Christopher Salabaj.
Many folks know that Ms Hahn has demonstrated an interest in becoming an L.A. County Supervisor, just like her father was.
The current L.A. County Supervisor for the District ends his current term in 2012 and is termed out in 2016.
Ms. Hahn is running for her last term as a member of the City Council and it may make folks wonder if Ms. Hahn would be willing to serve a full term as a City Council Member or try for Mr. Don Knabe's job before another City Council term ends.
If Ms. Hahn is reelected, might her current constituents have only a part-time Council member in 2012?
-------------------------------------------------------------
At the forum, there were plenty of handouts including two magazines.
The San Pedro 2008/2009 Community Guide and Business Directory has a map of most of the peninsula, including all of San Pedro.
One residential project was singled out on the map in the middle of the Directory. I bet you can guess what property was named and outlined on the map.
The San Pedro Business Journal has an article beginning on Page 1 about the upcoming Honorary Mayor campaign. In the article are photos and comments about past Honorary Mayors.
Can you guess who is missing from the article? The only hint I am willing to provide is: "current".
I guess you all realize by now that I have a very odd sense of humor that doesn't necessarily translate into humor many can understand. I like subtle humor and things like seeing Ponte Vista outlined and named on the map and the omission of Mr. Joe Donato from the article on Honorary Mayor seems a bit funny to me.
The forum proved to be much funnier than I thought it would be and I had planned for a few laughs even before the event began.
I am sorry that my candidate for Mayor of Los Angeles did not show up, but I guess Mr. David Saltsburg, aka Zuma Dogg had other events and forums to go to.
In these tough economic times we all need humor and a big shakeup in the way the current systems operate.
The folks I hope you vote for would do all that and more, I feel.
Just think of all the tourists that would benefit the L.A. economy coming to town to be part of what could happen if Zuma Dogg is elected Mayor.
The City Attorney, City Controller, and 15th District picks I'd like to see elected would help keep L.A. trimmed and the L.A. City Council might actually do something for the folks who provide their pay.
http://michaelamerian.com/index.php
http://berger4ca.com/
www.tru09.com
http://electnoel.wordpress.com/
http://evansforcontroller.com/
http://www.nick2009.com/
http://votenomeasureb.com/
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=46315869753
http://www.janicehahn.com/
http://www.chrissalabaj.com/
http://zumatimes.com/
A Benefit For Kids Via A Theft From A Great Blog
Ms. Diana Chapman publishes a great blog benefitting youth in OUR community.
I read it regularly and I have been in contact with Ms. Chapman about my theft of information from her blog, The Underground For Kids at: www.theundergroundforkids.blogspot.com.
I altered some of the format of Ms. Chapman's post and for that I am very guilty.
Here goes the altered post from Ms. Chapman:
ENJOY LIFE IN AN AMAZINGLY HUMOROUS WAY;
ATTEND THE LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE SPOUSES CLUB FUNDRAISER
TO SEND MILITARY CHILDREN TO COLLEGE;
And HELP DIANA BY SIGNING UP AS A BLOG FOLLOWER;
(You are more than welcome to sign up as a blog follower on Ms. Chapman's blog. I did.)
Last year, I had the time of my life attending this event.
What was the most fun was the cake auction.
Many of the military wives concocted the most remarkable looking cakes – cakes like I’ve never seen before, some towering as high as wedding cakes – and some looking like the leaning tower of Pisa.
Cakes started out at low rates during the auction, say like $30 a pop, but as the evening wore on and the cakes kept coming out and were paraded around, the prices went up. Someone paid $300 for a cake last year.
If you want to have fun, attend this frosting-filled event by filling out the information below. You won’t regret it. Plus, you help kids!
Los Angeles Air Force Spouses’ Club
13th Annual Auction for Education “Hooray For Hollywood”
Friday, 20 March 09
6pm – 10pm
Fort MacArthur Community Center,
2400 Pacific Ave. Bldg. 403,
San PedroCa 90731.
If you are a civilian we will have to have you on a seperate list to get on base.
(I usually have to show a photo I.D. to get on the Middle Reservation of Fort MacArthur as do civilans who are transported in my Honda.)
Here are more particulars:
$20/per person for dinner
Buffet begins at 7pm
Chicken Piccatta: sauteed chicken breast w/lemon caper white wine sauce
served with chef’s choice of vegetables
** vegetarian option available upon request **(denote option by placing a VEG by the name below)
Please RSVP to attend this fabulous event
Number in party:
____________
Name(s): _____________________________________
____________________________________________
Child care is available for this event.
Parents Night Out is open at the youth center for children.
Kindergartners over the age of 5 and above.
Please contact Pat at the youth center to reserve your spot.
310-653-8383
We also have a group of red cross certified babysitters available to watch younger children (and any age siblings).
Reservations can be made by contacting Cindy Horejsi. boohoocindylou@yahoo.com
310-987-1697
This is a private organization. It is not a part of the DOD or any of its components and it has no governmental status. AFI34-223 / 10
----------------------------------------------------------------
Have a nice meal. Meet folks who may only be in our beloved community temporarily and help them be more comfortable with living here.
Bid on a cake, you fortunate folks. Having diabetes means my former grand times of enjoying many baked and decorated treats continue to be former grand times, but that shouldn't stop you from getting your cake-cutter out and having a fantastic treat, or two, or three, or more.
I read it regularly and I have been in contact with Ms. Chapman about my theft of information from her blog, The Underground For Kids at: www.theundergroundforkids.blogspot.com.
I altered some of the format of Ms. Chapman's post and for that I am very guilty.
Here goes the altered post from Ms. Chapman:
ENJOY LIFE IN AN AMAZINGLY HUMOROUS WAY;
ATTEND THE LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE SPOUSES CLUB FUNDRAISER
TO SEND MILITARY CHILDREN TO COLLEGE;
And HELP DIANA BY SIGNING UP AS A BLOG FOLLOWER;
(You are more than welcome to sign up as a blog follower on Ms. Chapman's blog. I did.)
Last year, I had the time of my life attending this event.
What was the most fun was the cake auction.
Many of the military wives concocted the most remarkable looking cakes – cakes like I’ve never seen before, some towering as high as wedding cakes – and some looking like the leaning tower of Pisa.
Cakes started out at low rates during the auction, say like $30 a pop, but as the evening wore on and the cakes kept coming out and were paraded around, the prices went up. Someone paid $300 for a cake last year.
If you want to have fun, attend this frosting-filled event by filling out the information below. You won’t regret it. Plus, you help kids!
Los Angeles Air Force Spouses’ Club
13th Annual Auction for Education “Hooray For Hollywood”
Friday, 20 March 09
6pm – 10pm
Fort MacArthur Community Center,
2400 Pacific Ave. Bldg. 403,
San PedroCa 90731.
If you are a civilian we will have to have you on a seperate list to get on base.
(I usually have to show a photo I.D. to get on the Middle Reservation of Fort MacArthur as do civilans who are transported in my Honda.)
Here are more particulars:
$20/per person for dinner
Buffet begins at 7pm
Chicken Piccatta: sauteed chicken breast w/lemon caper white wine sauce
served with chef’s choice of vegetables
** vegetarian option available upon request **(denote option by placing a VEG by the name below)
Please RSVP to attend this fabulous event
Number in party:
____________
Name(s): _____________________________________
____________________________________________
Child care is available for this event.
Parents Night Out is open at the youth center for children.
Kindergartners over the age of 5 and above.
Please contact Pat at the youth center to reserve your spot.
310-653-8383
We also have a group of red cross certified babysitters available to watch younger children (and any age siblings).
Reservations can be made by contacting Cindy Horejsi. boohoocindylou@yahoo.com
310-987-1697
This is a private organization. It is not a part of the DOD or any of its components and it has no governmental status. AFI34-223 / 10
----------------------------------------------------------------
Have a nice meal. Meet folks who may only be in our beloved community temporarily and help them be more comfortable with living here.
Bid on a cake, you fortunate folks. Having diabetes means my former grand times of enjoying many baked and decorated treats continue to be former grand times, but that shouldn't stop you from getting your cake-cutter out and having a fantastic treat, or two, or three, or more.
This One WILL Get Interesting
The time is very quickly approaching for asbestos to be dealt with, grounds of a former military installation to be moved, historical buildings to be demolished or relocated, and work to go ahead on finally building an 810-seat campus for about 500 students in a school district that may still have to lay off teachers and other employees."Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" continues to be what seems to be the intentions of L.A.U.S.D.'s highly budgeted Facilities Services Division.
Now it is time for OUR community to make absolutely sure whatever is done on the Upper Reservation of Fort MacArthur, it is done with safety being the very most important issue.
The next steps in building a new campus will provide the most environmentally challenging aspects to the project, to the local residents, the workers on the site, the kids attending the Point Fermin Outdoor Education Center, people enjoying activities and Angels Gate Cultural Center and all the folks who use the buildings on the Upper Reservation of Fort MacArthur, AND the people who work at and visit the Fort MacArthur Military Museum, the Marine Mammal Rescue Center, the Oiled Bird Recovery Center and any remaining students and staff of Angels Gate High School.
March 2009 could see the most hazardous work beginning on the site and it is probably up to all of us to make sure we and the members of OUR community are not harmed in the forthcoming processes.
We will need folks to watch that all truck trailers containing all types of material from the site have been covered and the covers remain in place while the material departs OUR community.
We will need to watch and make sure that workers on the site adhere to only the safest practices and that whatever goes on at the site goes on with the safety of everyone as the most important issue, no matter what goes on.
We need to continue to make sure representatives of L.A.U.S.D. and its contracted companies continue to provide honest, reliable, and continued communication with anyone who asks any question about anything about the project.
We have seen what L.A.U.S.D. and its contractors can do to a school site and we must make sure nothing even remotely bad happens in OUR community.
On another matter, the very hotly contested new elementary school in Echo Park is now being held up because the City Councilman in that area has not signed a document necessary for the project to go forward.
Since at least one roadway near the site will have to be altered, the Councilman's signature is required and he is not willing to provide it without further studies dealing with roadways and transportation being done.
This just might portend something similar with SRHS 15 because Alma Street is slated for a great deal of work being done on it for the SRHS 15 project and we still have issues dealing with the Barlow-Saxton intersection with Gaffey Street.
If a signature is required from Janice Hahn in the future, I hope she thinks long and hard about providing that signature when there will be so many changes along Gaffey and Alma necessary.
If Ms. Hahn only supports a campus having no more than 500 seats, perhaps L.A.U.S.D. should consider altering its plans and reduce its costs by building a campus that would never have more than 500-seats.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
The New Hit Is Being Held Over in San Pedro!
Please click over image to enlarge.The 2009 Season of The Relevant Stage Theatre Company is starting out with such a hit, a request was made to hold the show over for one more weekend!
This is a first for The Relevant Stage Theatre Company and all the members of the Company quickly agreed to provide two more dates of great performances, laughter, singing, and wonderful entertainment in OUR community.
The new dates added for "I Love You, You're Perfect, Now Change" are Friday February 27 and Saturday February 28. Both performances begin at 8:00 PM.
As a matter of fact and as the House Manager for The Relevant Stage Theatre Company, my watch showed that the three previous performances began within seven minutes of their scheduled starting time. The performance last Friday evening began at 8:05 PM and the Sunday Matinee began at 2:32 PM, just two minutes after the scheduled starting time.
All three shows last weekend drew a large number of theater goers and it sure looked like they all enjoyed a wonderful time.
I am still the newest member of The Relevant Stage Theatre Company and I am both very happy and proud to have become associated with The Relevant Stage Theatre Company at the beginning of its second season.
Last year, as a paying theater goer to several productions by The Relevant Stage Theatre Company, I considered that they could do better to become more like our own outstanding Little Fish Theatre Company.
It looks like The Relevant Stage Theatre Company has risen to the challange of becoming more like Little Fish and now we have two fantastic Theatre Companies to entertain OUR community and a whole lot more folks who will come to San Pedro to enjoy productions from TWO excellent Theatre Companies.
All members of The Relevant Stage Theatre Company are looking forward to a spectacular 2009 Season.
Upton Sinclair's "The Singing Jailbirds" was written considering events that occured on San Pedro's Liberty Hill, many years ago.
Even though "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" has midnight performances each and every Saturday night at the Warner Grand, later this year The Relevant Stage Theatre Company will offer a truly different chance to view "Richard O'Brien's Rocky Horror Show" which is NOT the movie, but a live performance of the work by the movie screenplay's author.
The absolute worst thing about "The Christmas Carol" that will be presented in December is that is only runs for too short of a period of time.
"The Christmas Carol" is an adaptation of the Dickens classic that includes singing and music between and different edit of the very old piece.
You will be completely entertained by "The Christmas Carol" and I can state that as a person who paid to attend the performance last year.
While all the future productions have the issue that they might be changed without notice, I am more than quite sure that "The Christmas Carol" will become a staple for The Relevant Stage Theatre Company every December, for years to come.
Ticket prices for all of the productions by The Relevant Stage Theatre Company are just about the best you can find anywhere in the greater L.A. area.
Adult tickets are just $20.00 for folks who are under 55-years old and are not students.
Seniors and students over 18-years old can get tickets for just $10.00 each.
Youths between the ages of 9 and 18 can see "I Love You, You're Perfect, Now Change" for just $5.00 each!
But wait, there are even better deals.
A Season Pass for all five productions by The Relevant Stage Theatre Company are just $50.00 each!
If you want to visit Off the Vine to sample or buy wines AND see the show, those combined tickets are just $25.00 each.
If you buy your tickets online and want a super meal at The Whale and Ale on the evening you attend the performance, that combination is just $40.00 each.
It's hard to find great theater in the greater L.A. area for the low ticket prices The Relevant Stage Theatre Company is offering.
Please plan on attending at least one of the five remaining performances of "I Love You, You're Perfect, Now Change. If you have already seen it, come again and tell all your friends about it.
Goldstar.com the local theatre review and ticket purchase site has already given "I Love You, You're Perfect, Now Change" is "Best Seller" award and there have been over 34 reviews written my Goldstar members who have rated the show higher than the current ratings for "Pippin" at the Mark Taper Forum.
"I Love You, You're Perfect, Now Change" provides a wonderful evening's entertainment and is presented at the historic Warner Grand Theater in Downtown San Pedro.
Come see the Theater that Jack Warner built and proclaimed its greatness when he attended the opening performance at The Warner Grand in 1931.
Pondering What We Can Find on Google Earth
Google Earth can provide a wealth of visual information regarding what is and is not within a community.
In my pondering about whether there truly enough ball fields in OUR community, I decided to take a look at OUR community and zoom in on some athletic facilities in our area to consider whether more ball fields are necessary rather than just demanded by a minority number of residents of OUR community.
"Ball fields" in my pondering are considered by me to be both baseball diamonds and softball fields where youth and adults can place a mitt on their hand if they choose and either bat or field a round ball, usually containing some threading or raised examples of threads.
I wanted to also include several illustrations of different types of playing surfaces that may be built in the future at Mary Star of the Sea High School, Rolling Hills Prep, S.R.H.S. 15, and Marymount College as they all may play a role in our future.
I did not provide any illustration of Knoll Hill.
I feel there should be consideration for thinking that OUR community's youth want to participate sporting events, other than baseball or softball. So I used Google Earth to find four different types of facilities that youth might wish to participate with and also consider how many of those different types of facilities are available in OUR community
Below are four sets of photos and illustrations depicting the swimming pools of sufficient length for competition, indoor gymnasiums for basketball, soccer fields and ball fields our youth might want to use.
Each different type of facility provides teams of different numbers of participants with basketball usually having the fewest members on each team.
You can click over the images to enlarge the combined pages.
The swimming pools illustrated are located at: Peck Park, the Elks Lodge, Miraleste Intermediate School, the Y.M.C.A. and the proposed pool at the South Region High School Number 15 campus. The Fort MacArthur swimming pool is also included, but it may have a limited number of folks who can participate in events there.
Next we can find gymnasiums for indoor basketball games. Here are the gyms that are illustrated in the above combined illustration:
Both the "Boy" gym and the brand new gym at S.P.H.S., Peck Park, Miraleste Intermediate, Dodson Intermediate, Bogdanovich Park, the Y.M.C.A., the proposed gym at South Region High School Number 15, and the proposed gym at Marymount College.
I did not include any indoor gyms for the Boys and Girls club of San Pedro or the Boys and Girls Club of the Port of Los Angeles. I also did not include any gyms at the old Mary Star High School campus or Holy Trinity school.
The third illustration includes fields where soccer can be enjoyed by everyone. The current fields at both the new Mary Star campus and Rolling Hill Prep are far too small to be considered fields where a regular soccer game can be played on.
The fourth illustration should not need too much explanation. There are two fields that appear in both the soccer illustration and the illustration above.
In my pondering about whether there truly enough ball fields in OUR community, I decided to take a look at OUR community and zoom in on some athletic facilities in our area to consider whether more ball fields are necessary rather than just demanded by a minority number of residents of OUR community.
"Ball fields" in my pondering are considered by me to be both baseball diamonds and softball fields where youth and adults can place a mitt on their hand if they choose and either bat or field a round ball, usually containing some threading or raised examples of threads.
I wanted to also include several illustrations of different types of playing surfaces that may be built in the future at Mary Star of the Sea High School, Rolling Hills Prep, S.R.H.S. 15, and Marymount College as they all may play a role in our future.
I did not provide any illustration of Knoll Hill.
I feel there should be consideration for thinking that OUR community's youth want to participate sporting events, other than baseball or softball. So I used Google Earth to find four different types of facilities that youth might wish to participate with and also consider how many of those different types of facilities are available in OUR community
Below are four sets of photos and illustrations depicting the swimming pools of sufficient length for competition, indoor gymnasiums for basketball, soccer fields and ball fields our youth might want to use.
Each different type of facility provides teams of different numbers of participants with basketball usually having the fewest members on each team.
You can click over the images to enlarge the combined pages.The swimming pools illustrated are located at: Peck Park, the Elks Lodge, Miraleste Intermediate School, the Y.M.C.A. and the proposed pool at the South Region High School Number 15 campus. The Fort MacArthur swimming pool is also included, but it may have a limited number of folks who can participate in events there.
Next we can find gymnasiums for indoor basketball games. Here are the gyms that are illustrated in the above combined illustration:Both the "Boy" gym and the brand new gym at S.P.H.S., Peck Park, Miraleste Intermediate, Dodson Intermediate, Bogdanovich Park, the Y.M.C.A., the proposed gym at South Region High School Number 15, and the proposed gym at Marymount College.
I did not include any indoor gyms for the Boys and Girls club of San Pedro or the Boys and Girls Club of the Port of Los Angeles. I also did not include any gyms at the old Mary Star High School campus or Holy Trinity school.
The third illustration includes fields where soccer can be enjoyed by everyone. The current fields at both the new Mary Star campus and Rolling Hill Prep are far too small to be considered fields where a regular soccer game can be played on.
The fourth illustration should not need too much explanation. There are two fields that appear in both the soccer illustration and the illustration above.Miraleste Intermediate School and Dodson Intermediate School have fields that incluse space for both soccer and/or baseball/softball.
So in review we can see six competition length swimming pools, seven current gyms and two proposed gyms for basketball, approximately 12 or more soccer fields, and a minimum of 21 ball fields between Palos Verdes Drive North on the north, the harbor on the east, the ocean on the south, and Portuguese Bend on the west.
I could have included football fields in the mix, but I feel you should all be able to clearly see there are more ball fields available for youths to play at then there are pools, indoor gyms, and soccer fields.
Perhaps if some of the kids who would normally play baseball with Eastview Little League want to take up swimming, basketball, and soccer, there may not be such a demand to have more ball fields.
I certainly understand that kids are required to share sporting fields and courts with adults, but by viewing the number of ball fields already dedicated to organized youth baseball or softball, it should be apparent that there are already quite a few places where kids can play ball.
Perhaps we need more ball fields in OUR community. But it looks like we also need more competitive length swimming pools, especially in sunny southern California. We could easily use more indoor basketball courts and it looks like there may not be enough soccer fields in OUR community either.
It does seem to me though, that there are more ball fields than any other type of constructed or proposed facilities for sports, by looking at Google Earth.
Perhaps we should encourage youth to take up competitive cross-country, more bicycle touring, tennis, weight training, surfing, ocean swimming, golf, or any of a wide array of other individual and team sports not already listed.
There is one illustration I did not include that I probably should have.
I didn't include the park lands and open spaces east of Gaffey Street AND east of Pacific Avenue in San Pedro.
Had I included those areas along with a large overhead of the number of residential units east of Gaffey and then east of Pacific Avenue, perhaps folks demanding more ball fields might see that there is already far too little parks or open spaces east of the two large streets mentioned.
Don't the youth and adults living in the eastern portion of San Pedro deserve some more park lands and open spaces the rest of us enjoy closer to our homes?
Why should eastern San Pedro residents have to transport themselves to parks not as close to their homes as we have in other areas of OUR community.
The new park along 22nd. Street and Knoll Hill are fairly far apart but they will offer residents living within walking distance more options, it seems.
Please take an objective look at what we have as current sports facilities and what we can view east of Pacific Avenue in terms of parks and open space.
Along Western Avenue we enjoy a great deal of parks and open spaces, all within about 1/4 mile from Western Avenue.
Where Western Avenue enters Lomita, there are baseball diamonds. Extremely close to where Western Avenue has its southern end, there is a baseball diamond.
Along the way there is Peck Park, Bogdanovich Park, Dodson Intermediate and there could be baseball and or softball fields at Mary Star and Rolling Hills Prep.
I think eastern San Pedro residents should be provided with more of what so many of us have close to our homes, don't you?
Pondering Whether the San Pedro Youth Coalition Still Even Exists
During the last meeting dealing with Knoll Hill issues and East View Little League being able to remain on the site after the current contract expires, Scott Lane who identifies himself as the President of the San Pedro Youth Coalition got up, was the first to grab the microphone, and then loudly provided his demands and overspoke some audience members who do not agree with his opinions. Scott also continued to speak even after he was asked to finish by meeting organizers.
Scott offered a letter to the editor in the February 17 edition of The Daily Breeze which seems to continue his demand that ball fields be kept on Knoll Hill for Eastview Little League, even after the current contract expires.
I must admit that Scott probably understands about contracts because he is listed on the Internet as a lawyer.
So his outburst and letter got me pondering about the San Pedro Youth Coalition that he claims he is President of. It got be further wondering about the activities of the organization and whether is continues to be active in OUR community and actually provides services it states to provide on its Web site: www.spyc.sanpedro.com.
I visited the site and spent some time reviewing all the pages listed. I found it odd in many ways and it certainly does not appear to be as up to date as many other sites on the World Wide Web.
On the "Links" page there are no refrences to the Boys and Girls Club of San Pedro and there is no specific link to the Boys and Girls Club of the Port of Los Angeles.
Nowhere on the "Links" page can I find any specific link to San Pedro High School, Eastview Little League, and other some other organized youth activities programs that I know occur in the San Pedro area.
I also found it extremely odd that Scott offered the following quote in a December, 2008 edition of The Daily Breeze concerning the new park along 22nd. Street.
Here is Scott's part of the article about the groundbreaking for the new park:
"We have been trying to secure this very piece of land for the children in 1991, so this day has been 17 years in the making," said Scott Lane, president of the San Pedro Youth Coalition. "This effort has been a testament of endurance and perseverance of the humble men and women of the youth coalition."
But the new park is definetly not what the San Pedro Youth Coalition supported in the past.
What makes it so odd for me is that on the San Pedro Youth Coalition's Web site, under the "Activities" menu item is the nine-page, 2.2 megabyte PDF formatted proposal for the
"San Pedro International Sports Complex".
By reading the PDF for the Sports Complex we can view that the San Pedro Youth Coalition supported building the complex on the very spot where the new park is currently under construction.
Why would Scott offer praise at the groundbreaking of a park that he seems to oppose with his letter to the editor and takes up the very space the Coalition wanted the Sports Complex to go?
The file for the Sports Complex illustrated that it was published on April 1, 2003.
In fact and on every item revealed on the "Activities" link is anything dated beyond about May, 2004.
On the "Events" menu, the latest date that also contains a year is for the "Future Leaders Award" and that date was for May 12, 2004.
Whether any of the listed Board members continue to actively serve with the San Pedro Youth Coalition is something I do not currently know.
I could place a call to Mr. Pete Manghera to find out, but I just may ask him the next time I see him.
Also on the "Activities" menu is the "Scholarship Awards Program". The sample scholarship certificate shown on the site looks to be dated May 10, 1996.
No matter, I happen to have known someone who knows quite a bit about scholarships being provided in the San Pedro area. I have known her for about 48 years, so I just might get some information as to whether the Coalition has been offering scholarships since 1996 or even as late as 2004 or thereafter.
One of the items on the "Events" page is the "Youth Track Meet". visiting that particular menu item will bring up a photograph of (apparently) the event. Whether the track meet has gone on in recent years is still undetermined by me. I think if you carefully look at the photo and the location of the Victory Arch, you just may wonder yourself if the San Pedro Youth Coalition is still in business or if Scott is using the former Coalition to continue to remain identified as someone who truly is attempting to support youth activities.
The "Events" page has not been updated after 2004.
When Scott gets up and claims to represent a Coalition or a group continuing to this day, to support youth activities, it needs to be learned whether those activities are still going on.
I would very much appreciate factual information from Scott or anyone else that can prove Scott is not using a former status as President of something that may no longer really exist to support youth in OUR community.
If Scott is going to out shout folks, commandeer a microphone, berate opponents of his thoughts, and demand something that is contractually not agreed to yet, he may need to provide OUR community with evidence that he is not simply speaking as a private citizen and he truly continues to actively support youth in OUR community by being President of an active San Pedro Youth Coalition, complete with all the supportive activities that are listed on the group's Web site.
I am Mark Wells, aka M Richards. I am the President, Founder, and Spokesperson for the Rancho Palos Verdes Film Retrospective, an event that is over ten years old and occurs the Saturday after Thanksgiving.
Almost every production shown at the Retrospective includes youthful persons. There have been only two productions shown at the Retrospective that did not include humans under the age of eighteen-years old.
I have nothing to hide with the group I am President of. Does Scott have something to hide, while continuing to claim he is President of the San Pedro Youth Coalition?
Scott offered a letter to the editor in the February 17 edition of The Daily Breeze which seems to continue his demand that ball fields be kept on Knoll Hill for Eastview Little League, even after the current contract expires.
I must admit that Scott probably understands about contracts because he is listed on the Internet as a lawyer.
So his outburst and letter got me pondering about the San Pedro Youth Coalition that he claims he is President of. It got be further wondering about the activities of the organization and whether is continues to be active in OUR community and actually provides services it states to provide on its Web site: www.spyc.sanpedro.com.
I visited the site and spent some time reviewing all the pages listed. I found it odd in many ways and it certainly does not appear to be as up to date as many other sites on the World Wide Web.
On the "Links" page there are no refrences to the Boys and Girls Club of San Pedro and there is no specific link to the Boys and Girls Club of the Port of Los Angeles.
Nowhere on the "Links" page can I find any specific link to San Pedro High School, Eastview Little League, and other some other organized youth activities programs that I know occur in the San Pedro area.
I also found it extremely odd that Scott offered the following quote in a December, 2008 edition of The Daily Breeze concerning the new park along 22nd. Street.
Here is Scott's part of the article about the groundbreaking for the new park:
"We have been trying to secure this very piece of land for the children in 1991, so this day has been 17 years in the making," said Scott Lane, president of the San Pedro Youth Coalition. "This effort has been a testament of endurance and perseverance of the humble men and women of the youth coalition."
But the new park is definetly not what the San Pedro Youth Coalition supported in the past.
What makes it so odd for me is that on the San Pedro Youth Coalition's Web site, under the "Activities" menu item is the nine-page, 2.2 megabyte PDF formatted proposal for the
"San Pedro International Sports Complex".
By reading the PDF for the Sports Complex we can view that the San Pedro Youth Coalition supported building the complex on the very spot where the new park is currently under construction.
Why would Scott offer praise at the groundbreaking of a park that he seems to oppose with his letter to the editor and takes up the very space the Coalition wanted the Sports Complex to go?
The file for the Sports Complex illustrated that it was published on April 1, 2003.
In fact and on every item revealed on the "Activities" link is anything dated beyond about May, 2004.
On the "Events" menu, the latest date that also contains a year is for the "Future Leaders Award" and that date was for May 12, 2004.
Whether any of the listed Board members continue to actively serve with the San Pedro Youth Coalition is something I do not currently know.
I could place a call to Mr. Pete Manghera to find out, but I just may ask him the next time I see him.
Also on the "Activities" menu is the "Scholarship Awards Program". The sample scholarship certificate shown on the site looks to be dated May 10, 1996.
No matter, I happen to have known someone who knows quite a bit about scholarships being provided in the San Pedro area. I have known her for about 48 years, so I just might get some information as to whether the Coalition has been offering scholarships since 1996 or even as late as 2004 or thereafter.
One of the items on the "Events" page is the "Youth Track Meet". visiting that particular menu item will bring up a photograph of (apparently) the event. Whether the track meet has gone on in recent years is still undetermined by me. I think if you carefully look at the photo and the location of the Victory Arch, you just may wonder yourself if the San Pedro Youth Coalition is still in business or if Scott is using the former Coalition to continue to remain identified as someone who truly is attempting to support youth activities.
The "Events" page has not been updated after 2004.
When Scott gets up and claims to represent a Coalition or a group continuing to this day, to support youth activities, it needs to be learned whether those activities are still going on.
I would very much appreciate factual information from Scott or anyone else that can prove Scott is not using a former status as President of something that may no longer really exist to support youth in OUR community.
If Scott is going to out shout folks, commandeer a microphone, berate opponents of his thoughts, and demand something that is contractually not agreed to yet, he may need to provide OUR community with evidence that he is not simply speaking as a private citizen and he truly continues to actively support youth in OUR community by being President of an active San Pedro Youth Coalition, complete with all the supportive activities that are listed on the group's Web site.
I am Mark Wells, aka M Richards. I am the President, Founder, and Spokesperson for the Rancho Palos Verdes Film Retrospective, an event that is over ten years old and occurs the Saturday after Thanksgiving.
Almost every production shown at the Retrospective includes youthful persons. There have been only two productions shown at the Retrospective that did not include humans under the age of eighteen-years old.
I have nothing to hide with the group I am President of. Does Scott have something to hide, while continuing to claim he is President of the San Pedro Youth Coalition?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
