Questioning Ethics

Click on image to enlarge.

After we all vote by Tuesday at 8:00, it might be a good idea to review the document above to determine if Anthony Misetich lived up to the promises he proclaimed he would keep on the form dated September 9, 2009?

All seven candidates signed the exact same form so whoever you vote for should allow to review whether they lived up to the 12 promises they made during the campaign.

I think all seven candidates were able to keep most, if not all of the promises they signed or printed off on.

There is the one about "Never try to confuse or mislead voters?" that just might be a big problem for one particular candidate.

Brian Campbell took responsibility for a mistake that occurred on a mailer he did not authorize and he even tried to stop the check to the producers of that mailer.

The one that states: "Keep their promise to conduct an issues'oriented, honest, fair and respectful campaign?" also may be really tough to keep for the same candidate who has a problem deciding who actually supports him, political party-wise.

If you receive Email via RPVListserver you may have read Emails from at least two persons who are not running for anything.

You can also read the blog authored by Melissa Pamer of The Daily Breeze. She wrote a splendid post about some confusion by several candidates in this coming election.

Both Mr. Anthony Misetich and Mr. Brian Campbell were mentioned, but Mr. Campbell wants you to know that he did not authorize or willingly paid for the mailer that was ultimately sent out.

I can even now suggest that if you are considering voting for Mr. Misetich, I would encourage you to vote for Mr. McTaggart instead.

However for conservative voters, your first and only real choice should be Mr. Brian Campbell.

I don't want anyone out there having to make excuses why they voted the way they did for the next four years.

Double Write and Ethics Pledge

Click on images to enlarge.

So, the Republican Party officially endorses Mr. Anthony Misetich in the non-partisan election.

Let's take a look at a tiny piece of the Constitution of the State of California.

California Constitution, Article II, Section 6:

“(a) All judicial, school, county, and city offices shall be nonpartisan.

(b) No political party or party central committee may endorse, support, or oppose a candidate for nonpartisan office.”

Did you happen to read "(b)"? A better question would be did Mr. Anthony Misetich read the law? Probably not. He is, after all, a representative of the oil industry. Say, have you purchased gasoline recently or had your oil changed?

Mr. Misetich's mailers indicating he is supported by 'Democrat leaders' must give all of us pause to consider which is the political party Mr. Misetich really belongs to, even in a non-partisan election.

Where will Mr. Misetich go next? Will we see a mailer purportedly providing endorsements form Sarah Palin and others who balk at the Republican candidate for the N.Y. 23 District election in favor of a far right wing person who is not endorsed by the Republican Party?

Will we see a mailer purportedly from folks in the Green Party endorsing Mr. Misetich?

How about the American Independent Party?

Folks, another candidate mentioned to me a pledge most of the candidates made to keep from being deceptive throughout the campaign.

Did Mr. Misetich sign such a pledge and what was meant by not being deceptive.

As you can see from this latest mailer, Mr. Misetich claims he will "Protect neighborhoods from overdevelopment and increased traffic".

OH REALLY!

Perhaps we are now watching a clone of Anthony Misetich running for city council. It could not possibly be the same Anthony Misetich who was and still may be a member of an Advisory Board which was one way Bob Bisno was trying to bring Two Thousand, Three Hundred condos to just 61.53 acres directly across the street from homes in Rancho Palos Verdes.

Why should anyone believe that Mr. Misetich will follow his own statements?

I'd rather you vote for John McTaggart and Brian Campbell rather than those who vote more conservatively and vote just for Brian Campbell.

I hope to get a copy of the ethics pledge and if Mr. Misetich signed the pledge, I think that shoule pretty much prove that his ethics are questionable in regards to running a campaign free from deception and as honestly as the others have run their campaigns.

Misetich Does It Again

Click on image to enlarge.

I guess I am mistaken that the race for two seats on the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council is non-partisan.

Anthony Misetich and others paid for yet another mailer to possible Democratic Party members tauting endorsements from "Democrat leaders".

Again we view the deceptive and inacurate word usage by another conservative who seems to use ridicule over politeness.

A Democrat is someone who belongs to the Democratic Party. This is for party affiliation.

There are Democratic leaders, but it is a slam begun during the administration of "W" when the reference to multiple Democrats is termed "Democrat".

But here also is another attempt for someone who has a great number of supporters who are unafraid to taut their conservative views, some extremely conservative.

Do not be fooled! Mr. Misetich is no bleeding heart 'liberal' and he certainly does not seem to me to be anywhere near the center of the political spectrum.

Yes, I am a registered Democrat. I prefer to consider myself a progressive much more than a liberal and I am dead set against the Baucus Health Care bill because of several reasons.

I am supporting Jeff Lewis and Paul Tetreault for the two seats on the city council.

I would very much appreciate you voting for these two fine gentlemen.

But if you want to vote for a more conservative candidate in place of Anthony Misetich, I feel that Brian Campbell deserves your vote much more than Anthony Misetich does.

There is another very fine candidate who seems to lean towards the left side of the spectrum that is qualified to be a great councilman, too. His name is Jim Knight.

I don't agree with Craig Mueller's stand on the TOT increase which is also on the ballot measure and I strongly encourage you to vote YES on that measure.

But Craig would also make a fine councilman and he has quite a bit of experience with the city's Planning Commission and General Plan Update Committee.

John McTaggart should have stepped aside or not run so as to give five other very good candidates the opportunity he took with 20 years on the council.

Need I remind Eastview and Miraleste residents that Anthony Misetich is the ONLY candidate running for a council seat who was and still may be a member of one of the Advisory Boards for Ponte Vista at San Pedro set up to support Bob Bisno's plans for a massive over development along Western Avenue?

Please do not vote for Mr. McTaggart and/or Mr. Misetich. One has served all of us quite well for an extended period of time and the other sat with Bob Bisno and seemingly supported Bob's plans to build 2,300 condos and forever change for the negative, east Rancho Palos Verdes, northwest San Pedro and other communities nearby.

Two More Reasons Why Anthony Misetich Is So Wrong For Rancho Palos Verdes.

Did you get the Voter Information Guide in the mail?

You know, the one with the eagle on the front and endorsements on the back.

In very small lettering from this "non-partisian" mailer's front side is the following:

"Not paid for or authorized by candidates not designated by an *."

Looking on the back, let's see who's names have a "*" after them and therefore authorized and paid for the mailer.

Well, that would be Anthony Misetich.

Mr. Brian Campbell notified many that he DID NOT AUTHORIZE or pay for the mailer in which his name has the erroneous asterisk by it.

Now, let's look to see who Anthony is stating, in his paid mailer, is endorsing him.

"Local Democrat leaders."

For anyone who knows what has been going on since "W" was in office, Republicans and other conservates use "Democrat leaders" as a term of derision.

It would be the same as if people called folks "Republic leaders" instead of "Democratic leader"

or "Democratic Party leaders".

So you now know that Mr. Misetich uses a term that the dictionary would suggest more of a ridicule against Democrats and Democratic leaders.

But that is only the start of the problems.

Look closely to the powerful Republican leaders who are listed on his Web site as endorsing him.

Here are just a few "Republic leaders" (See, I did what Misetich did):

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher

Supervisor Don Knabe

Supervisor Mike Antonovich

Now one might think, if Mr. Misetich was truly considering himself in the center of the political spectrum, he would have placed these names of prominent and serving conservative leaders on the mailer instead of a Councilwoman who doesn't represent the city of Rancho Palos Verdes and a former Senator.

I don't see current State Senator Rod Wright's name as a supporter of Anthony Misetich.

There is a former L.A. City Councilman listed as a supporter. That would be Mr. Rudy Svornich and that will eventually lead us towards another cliff Mr. Misetich threw himself over rather than supporting the thousands of Residents in the Eastview and Miraleste areas of the city he is running to be a councilman in.

So what does this "non-partisian" mailer try and get folks to think?

Mr. Misetich is attempting to garner votes from centrists and folks on the left side of the spectrum even though Mr. is probably the most conservative candidate of the entire seven running for two seats on the city council.

Brian Campbell also paid for the particular mailer.

There are plenty of big differences between Mr. Misetich and Mr. Campbell.

Brian Campbell did make a really ridiculous remark at the last candidates' forum, but he communicated his true feelings to me, a far-left progressive and a friend of mine who is probably more conservative than even Anthony Misetich.

Both myself and my friend were provided with information that helped us resolve our differences with Brian and my friend has stated he will be voting for Brian on Tuesday.

Brian is probably not at conservative as Mr. Misetich is. I feel strongly that if there are voters in Eastview, Miraleste, and other parts of Rancho Palos Verdes who want to vote for a more conservative candidate than many of the others, I feel you would be served very well by voting for Mr. Brian Campbell and NOT Mr. Anthony Misetich.

Oh, and another thing before I go further. Mr. Brian Campbell did not and does not support high density residential housing at Ponte Vista at San Pedro. Whether it is Senior Housing or not, Mr. Campbell has stated to me that Bob Bisno's plans were way out of line and completely unreasonable.

Click on any part of image to enlarge.

Anthony Misetich's support for Bob Bisno's plans for Ponte Vista at San Pedro needs to be included in your consideration in who you want representing you on the city council.

I have edited a Ponte Vista Newsletter from March, 2007 which includes Mr. Misetich's name as an Advisory Board member for Bob Bisno's plans to build 2,300 condos on the Western Avenue site.

Now Mr. Misetich may tell you that he only supported Bob's plans so that Senior Housing would be built there, but that has quite a few problems with it, by itself.

First and for honesty, I support SOME Senior Housing at Ponte Vista at San Pedro. I support that type of housing only in the context that it is part of a project that has NO MORE THAN 831 total units.

That number would be equivalent to the housing density at The Gardens, the large townhome development that has been successful for decades in northwest San Pedro.

Getting back to Mr. Misetich, you and Mr. Misetich need to know another fact.

As I worked to fight against a greedy over developer wanting to change OUR community forever, I asked fellow citizens of Rancho Palos Verdes and other places on The Hill whether seniors living higher on The Hill would move into Ponte Vista's Senior Housing.

I even asked members of Palos Verdes Watch, a fairly conservative group that opens its eyes and ears to communities on The Hill.

The statements made by very knowledgable seniors who I spoke to indicated that seniors currently living on The Hill have absolutely no interest in moving into Senior Housing units, eventually at Ponte Vista.

Now I asked lots of seniors from many different backgrounds, communities, and political views.

Why didn't Mr. Misetich learn that seniors he now wants to represent, pretty much have no interese in living at Ponte Vista?

Were the seniors Mr. Misetich wanted Senior Housing for primarily living in San Pedro?

What might that say about Mr. Misetich's real interest in serving residents of Rancho Palos Verdes who indicated in large numbers that they not only don't need or want Senior Housing at Ponte Vista, they don't want a giant development there that Mr. Misetich was on an Advisory Board to promote.

O.K., time to show you the edited image. If somebody doesn't believe me that Mr. Misetich was actually a Board member at one time, I can certainly Email them the entire Newsletter and others that have his name on them.

Click on any part of image to enlarge.

But as bad as it looks, it gets worse.

Here is a list of names of supporters of Mr. Misetich's campaign that also provided support, advise, testimony, and encouragement towards Bob Bisno's plans for Ponte Vista:

Rudy Svornich, Jr. Now this fellow not only supported Bob's plans, he was a paid lobbyist for Bob Bisno's endeavors at Ponte Vista.

Angie Papadakis and her son John. I don't know why so many Rancho Palos Verdes residents supported Bob Bisno. Perhaps Ms. Papadakis and her son don't live in Eastview.

Camilla Townsend. As Executive Directory of the San Pedro and Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, it is quite understandable that she would support Bob and other business interests. I just wish she would have considered the residents who just may stay away from downtown businesses even though we all need them badly to support downtown San Pedro.

Lydia Gutierrez, she was the Republican candidate to the seat Senator Rod Wright won with quite a high percentage of votes.

Bob Bisno finally filed bankruptcy and it has been reported that he was ousted from leadership in the Ponte Vista project last December.

The issues at Ponte Vista remain. We still haven't been given an update from the current development team as to the number of units they will apply to build.

What is important to remember is that why you break it, you buy it.

That is what folks should also consider when thinking about voting for Anthony Misetich.

Mr. Misetich bought for whatever reason, Bob Bisno's lines about Ponte Vista at San Pedro.

Those lines proved to be very, very wrong.

Mr. Misetich went directly against the thousands of Eastview, Miraleste and other areas' residents when he backed a developer who stated he know what was best for OUR community over what we know is best for OUR community.

I do not feel Mr. Misetich understood how frustrating it was to fight against Bob's plans, especially by so many of us who still live in Rancho Palos Verdes.

I do not believe Mr. Misetich's name is among the over 11,000 signatures on R1 petition forms people signed to keep an outrageous project from being built along Western.

Several thousand names on the lists are residents of Rancho Palos Verdes.

Mr. Misetich's recent actions and his support for Bob Bisno's Ponte Vista at San Pedro demonstrate that he is not someone who has earned the right to represent so many residents in Rancho Palos Verdes who felt stabbed in the back by Ponte Vista supporters.

Mr. Misetich should probably have spent the time he provided as Honorary Mayor of San Pedro on issues and activities in Rancho Palos Verdes. After all, he is not running for a seat on the L.A. City Council.

Just Some Stuff

Mr. Brian Campbell responded to both myself and Mr. Marshall in a way that made both of us comfortable with what he wrote individually, to both of us.

So let's move on and consider some other things that seem to be happening.

Mr. Pete Fer, who lives on a very important and much traveled intersection in the eastern portion of R.P.V. finally posted several Brian Campbell lawn signs to go along with the Anthony Misetich lawn signs that have been around for a couple of weeks now.

Might yards having both Anthony Misetich and Brian Campbell signs demonstrate something similar but different than yards like mine that have both Jeff Lewis and Paul Tetreault signs?

I think so.

I have a pretty good understanding now that there at least two sets of candidates that make up (sort of) teams seeking the two seats to the City Council.

It is no secret that Mr. Misetich and Mr. Campbell represent the more conservative views of most of the Council candidates while Mr. Lewis, Mr. Tetreault, and even Mr. Knight represent the more progressive views of the candidates.

But I take heart in the concept that there are 6 great candidates that can be considered, no matter which side of the center line in politics we are.

I have corresponded with a VERY conservative friend of mine about the election for Council seats and the TOT increase.

Naturally we disagree on everything, but I found his thought to be things that provoked new ways of looking at the candidates and the very important issues.

What will be interesting to find out is whether the electorate brings forth two more conservative candidates to seats on the Council after the election of Mr. Wolowicz, Mr. Stern, and especially Mr. Long.

I opined to my friend that I appreciate the number of lawyers serving or wishing to serve on the Council because of the giant issues that folks like me don't understand the way more educated folks do.

I think we need the best minds serving the residents revolving around the issues of the Monk's Case, Marymount, the landslides issues, and the continued operation and support of Terranea.

But I also feel candidates with a business and fiscal background can also provide great judgement.

And having an engineer understanding some important dynamics of things is also something to consider.

I continue to plead with east side residents, ESPECIALLY Eastview residents to vote in this election.

The fantastic residents of the Miraleste area have had much more opportunity to vote in elections as they have been part of R.P.V. for a much longer time.

Eastview voters have the opportunity to 'call the shots' ONLY if they come out in numbers and vote.

In this case, calling the shots doesn't necessarily mean Eastview voters will determine the outcome of the Council races or the TOT increase.

It means that if a good showing at the polls by Eastview voters happens, then we/they can demonstrate that they wish to be included more in the governance of our city.

It also means that we would wake up to the possibility of eventually becoming a force that will finally allow us immersion into the School District, rather than what has been for far too long.

Why doesn't PVPUSD want the portion of the property taxes I pay for education going to their district instead of LAUSD? I don't have any kids attending either district schools and I want Eastview residents helping to pay for PVPUSD schools rather than LAUSD schools.

Studies have illustrated that about 80% of school-age kids living in the Eastview area attend PVPUSD schools.

I understand that the State reimburses PVPUSD for Eastview kids attending those schools, but property tax payers in Eastview watch their portions going to public schools, going to LAUSD, a failed system and district.

Just think of the income PVPUSD could enjoy from all of us currently paying into LAUSD, then having our portions go to PVPUSD.

Our kids keep Miraleste M.I.S., Dapplegray E.S. and two high schools open (rather than just one).

The Eastview parents of kids attending PVPUSD schools should have the same rights and responsibilities as other parents who send their kids to PVPUSD schools.

And I think we all want to have the vote to say which folks site on the Board of Education of PVPUSD.

There is nothing we can do about having two LAUSD schools in our city, but Eastview residents should have a say about PVPUSD schools where so many of our kids attend.

The only way for representatives of the school district and the governors of the cities on The Hill who represent communities associated with PVPUSD can be shown how strong our resolve is to become truly part of PVPUSD is to VOTE.

After the election I will post the turnout for the precincts in Eastview. I hope that is shows many more times the number than have been shown as recently as our last Council election.

11% is awful, horrible, and shameful. It needs to change.

For those of you who want to stay informed about Ponte Vista at San Pedro, please visit:

www.pontevista.blogspot.com

I post a weekly update called "Odds and Ends" every Friday.

Nothing much is going on in public with Ponte Vista at this point. But I try to keep folks informed about Ponte Vista and other development news and some other news on that blog.

Now would Mr. McTaggart please step aside and allow the 6 other candidates to serve, just like he took the chance to, so many times.

October 14 Candidates' Forum

Brian Campbell. Boy was I snookered on this candidate.

I had him as one of my four favorite choices of candidates for the upcoming City Council election.

Had I known what I know now, he would not be mentioned well with most of the other candidates.

Here is a little background and then the answer to the question all candidates were posed, along with Brian's answer.

The City Council approved the construction of a 22-unit condominium project on Highridge Road. That development will block views of residents higher on the hill and it will also include several units of lower-priced units which are part of the mandated 'affordable housing' needs of our city.

The question that was posed to all the candidates was, "What was the best decision the City Council made in the last four years and what was the worst decision the City Council made in the last four years?

Several of the candidates mentioned that the Council's approval of the Highridge condominium project was the worst decision the Council made.

But Brian went farther. Actually he went off the deep end.

Not only did he sight the approval of the condominiums on Highridge as the worst decision, he also stated that he wanted the project built on, and read this quote carefully, "Western Boulevard"!

Now this might be another example of a Rancho Palos Verdes resident either not wanting to include Eastview and Western AVENUE as being an equal part of Rancho Palos Verdes. Or perhaps he just doesn't care about one of the densest residential and business areas of the city or Rancho Palos Verdes.

Brian, it is "Western AVENUE"! It is a State designated highway and it was and still may be the longest continuous AVENUE on this planet!

Also Mr. Campbell, the area of Eastview provides a great amount of property tax revenue to the city of Rancho Palos Verdes. It also provides a great deal of business tax revenues and sales tax receipts to the coffers of Rancho Palos Verdes.

We have two of the three largest Supermarkets in Rancho Palos Verdes and Western AVENUE has the ONLY Trader Joe's in Rancho Palos Verdes as of today.

For all of the good I heard from Brian Campbell up to tonight, he basically wrote eastern R.P.V. and especially the Eastview area off his map.

So, if he really considers us to be second class to the rest of Rancho Palos Verdes, I urge all reading this blog to consider other candidates over Brian Campbell in this coming election.

Hopefully we Eastviewers can demonstrate to Mr. Campbell that even though we don't vote in great numbers, we will surely vote for other candidates that may serve us better.

So now I will write about the other candidates who came to the forum on October 14.

Anthony Misetich. Mr. Misetich had his best showing in the three forums I have attended. His opening remarks were better this time than before.

His pluses include his relationships with the business community, more so I think in San Pedro, but his ability to communicate with Councilwoman Janice Hahn and Supervisor Don Knabe.

I found his ease of smiling to everyone, friendly. I think he could be considered by those folks who are more conservative in their politics than I am, but I wouldn't be unhappy if he was one of the two new Councilmen. I just won't be able to vote for him.

Craig Mueller. Mr. Mueller also had a very good forum presentation. He objected to Brian's claims that the Highridge condominiums should be built on Western and he was the only candidate to mention Ponte Vista and his concerns about that large proposed development on our border with San Pedro.

Mr. Mueller and I can't disagree more about the proposed 2% increase in the Transitory Occupancy Tax (TOT) that voters will approve or disapprove in this election.

Craig wants everyone to vote NO on the slight increase to the TOT even though neither of the owners of businesses that would be affected by the increase object to the increase.

Mr. Mueller wants as much done as possible to help Terranea survive and perhaps he feels that even a 2% increase, from 10% to 12% in room tax would be a breaking point to someone thinking about staying at Terranea.

But my feeling is that if someone is willing to pay $300.00 a night for a hotel room, the increase of the TOT from $30.00 to just $36.00 won't break their bank or their thoughts of staying at the hotel.

Craig and all the other candidates mentioned the possible landslides in the lower San Ramon and Tarapaca Canyon areas and the need for our city to spend funds to get that potential disaster fixed.

If Craig really wants the work funded to fix the roads, they it is my opinion, along with a great many others that the increase in the TOT is exactly something that should be used for part of the repairs.

The TOT is a user fee that won't be paid by many of our city's residents but will aid Terranea and Trump and visitors to the coastal areas of the peninsula.

John McTaggart. I have opined all along that I honor and appreciate the service Mr. McTaggart has given to our city. His current membership on at least three committees demonstrates his continued support to Rancho Palos Verdes and its residents.

But I continue to call for Mr. McTaggart to step aside and allow others who also want to serve our city the chances to do so.

Unfortunately at this forum, Mr. McTaggart did not present himself as well as he could have and I think we need to consider whether Mr. McTaggart has the ability and stamina to serve a four-year term.

The two new Councilmen will have challenges from day one that will put pressures on their shoulders and I got the impression during this latest forum that Mr. McTaggart may not be ready to shoulder the needs the office now commands.

Jim Knight. Mr. Knight did a wonderful job during the forum and I wish I could have three votes in this election.

I would have absolutely no problem whatsoever if Mr. Knight won a spot on the City Council.

He is up front about the issues that are important to him and those issues are also important to me.

I feel he deserves consideration and had either of my current choices dropped out, I would strongly urge folks to vote for Jim Knight.

Jeff Lewis and Paul Tetreault. These two gentleman are my two choices for seats on the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council.

Both of them have been endorsed by four of the five current City Council members and that tells me that both of them will work well with the remaining three members, beginning in December.

It also tells me that they will be the best 'elders' in two years when the remaining three members leave because of term limits and are replaced by three new faces.

I agree with the platforms and ideas of both candidates. I am most comfortable with watching Jeff and Paul join the Council and I feel they have my interests and the interests of Eastview and the whole of the east side of Rancho Palos Verdes in mind.

Both Jeff and Paul have stated their objections to having on-campus housing at Marymount and the two of them don't hesitate to tell you of their opposition to having Ponte Vista as a giant development on our borders.

Jeff if most forthright with his support of the Annenberg Project which will bring a $40 Million Dollar enhancement to the lower Point Vincente area and a very large expansion of native plants and animals to our city, all without increased taxes to any of us!

I find that Jeff Lewis and Paul Tetreault are my first preferences to win seats in the upcoming election.

If it comes to pass that Jeff Lewis and Jim Knight are chosen, that is also fine with me.

I can understand if voters decide that Craig Mueller and/or Anthony Misetich win a seat on the Council.

I hope very few, if any vote for Brian Campbell. If you want to vote for Brian, please consider Anthony Misetich over Brian if you are of a more conservative mindset than I am.

I still wish that John McTaggart will step aside and allow Jeff, Paul, Jim, Craig, or Anthony to serve.

I think our city would be dealt a disservice if we have to have a special election during the next two to four years if Mr. McTaggart is unable to serve a full term.

As for the TOT increase, please vote YES! Our city needs the funds that visitors who use our roadways can help us with.

If Palos Verdes Drive East becomes not drivable due to a landslide, Terranea, Trump, residents, and other businesses all around the area, including Marymount will suffer greatly.

I think it is a very small increase in a user fee that will be used for the benefit of everyone and will help insure that routes to and from the area remain open.

Please vote YES on the TOT increase!

October 7 Candidates' Forum

The seven candidates for two seats on the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council came together in front of the public and our T.V. cable channel's cameras for another forum.

This forum offered more information about the candidates' positions, I feel, and it may have helped more folks decide who they wish to vote for on November 3.

I had been waiting for my sample ballot and wondering if and when it would come. Fortunately, Terri and my sample ballots arrived in the mail today.

As you probably already know, my first endorsement went to Jeff Lewis. If we only got to vote for one candidate, then he was, is, and will be my first choice.

I also wrote that after tonight's forum I would offer my second endorsement.

Well that task was much more difficult for me because I wish beyond wishes I actually could have four votes instead of no more than two.

I would have absolutely no problem watching either Brian Campbell or Jim Knight elected along with Jeff Lewis in November. These two gentlemen offer leadership, experience, and service that can be seen, heard, and followed.

But I promised myself and others that I would offer a real endorsement for a second candidate and even though I would be very comfortable with Brian and Jim serving, I am more comfortable supporting Mr. Paul Tetreault as my second endorsement.

For me it comes down to considering how the future will unfold in our city as many issues of great importance continue to pile up within our borders and our shared borders with other communities.

I feel that having the only two candidates endorsed by four of the current members of the City Council says a lot about whether the new council makeup can work together dealing with some extremely significant issues coming up much quicker than we all can imagine.

I will offer some issues and how I heard some candidates talk about them and some of the real importance they are.

The San Ramon/Terra Paca canyons landslide potentials are going to be the next huge issue to fall on Rancho Palos Verdes.

I feel strongly that if voters vote to increase the Transitory Occupancy Tax from 10% to 12% and make if fall more in line with other communities, those extra funds could be steered towards both the San Ramon/Terra Paca and Portuguese Bend slide areas.

Goodness knows that folks who can afford to stay at Terranea and Value Inn can afford a simple 2% increase in the bed tax applied by our city.

Craig Mueller was the only candidate I have heard who stated his opposition to the T.O.T. increase, while he also endorsed spending funds to work on the landslide areas.

I think the small increase in revenues generated by the two transient occupant facilities in R.P.V. should help fun repairs to roads used by guests at both facilities. I also think that a use-tax on golf facilities at Trump and Terranea could also help fund repairs that benefit folks who play golf in Rancho Palos Verdes.

The night's forum also had candidates answer a question regarding on-campus housing at Marymount College and whether they supported that concept or opposed it.

Here again, Craig Mueller sat alone with his remarks that suggested to me that he considered all the others answered the question incorrectly.

What was striking from all seven candidates is that the entire question about on campus dorms will probably end up in court actions IF Marymount receives accreditation to become a four-year College.

All seven candidates should know that there are hardly any, if any Junior Colleges west of the Mississippi River that have on-campus housing while just about every single four-year institution of higher learning in the Nation has at least some kind of on-campus housing.

IF Marymount becomes a four-year College, their best chance of having on-campus housing built is simply go to court and sue the city and even individuals, if necessary, to have on-campus housing mandated for the business that is Marymount College.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Craig Mueller used his time wording his answer to the question to avoid stating support for on-campus housing at Marymount.

One of the first questions asked of all the candidates after they gave their 3-minute opening statements as to why they are running for City Council was basically "Why are you running for City Council?" Boy! What a waste of a good opportunity to ask a different question. Each candidate was offered another two minutes to restate their first 3-minute opening.

But of course, there was one 'brilliant' quote offered by one of the candidates to that wasted question.

One of the last reasons John McTaggart gave for why he is running for City Council AGAIN was,

"I just wanted to get back in the saddle."

John, it is time to allow others to ride herd on the residents. You have had your 20 years and you were great.

Also, it can be argued that those folks who began R.P.V. and were its first Council members, like John was, are the most NIMBY of us all. John even made reference to not wanting too much change in Rancho Palos Verdes.

Times change Mr. McTaggart whether we want them to or not.

I continue to feel that if Mr. Anthony Misetich could get out the vote by Eastview residents, he has a great chance of being elected to the Council.

Too many Eastview residents still have their hearts with San Pedro and being that long term R.P.V. resident Anthony Misetich lived in our city while he was also the Honorary Mayor of San Pedro just might mean votes for him from folks living in my neck of the woods.

It is true that we need to be on good relations with the behemoth that is San Pedro/Los Angeles. Anthony states that he has many connections in many communities and that can also be considered, I feel.

The survival of Terranea was on the minds of all the candidates and that is a good thing. Many of them suggested that they supported the T.O.T. rebate and the revocation of it when the applicant could not agree to the terms.

I think many of the candidates would be open to looking at something to help support the resort in the future but most of them agreed that the issues that brought about the first application for the rebate won't come back again.

If I remember correctly, Paul suggested that if someone named Trump was to buy Terranea and ask for a rebate of T.O.T. fees, he would be inclined to refuse "The Donald". I liked that!

View restoration was also brought up at the forum. Again because of where I live, it is not really germain to many of us in the Eastview area. But that doesn't mean it is not important to many R.P.V. residents.

All the candidates provided reasonable answers to the question about view restoration, I felt.

I think that when John McTaggart admitted the omission of a sunset clause for filing about views, that was something agreed upon by others.

Craig Mueller and Jim Knight received the endorsement of the Sierra Club. To me, that is a good thing. I hold it in much better regard than any endorsement from our Congressman, which Brian and John claimed they have received.

There is another forum on October 14, beginning at 7:00 P.M., again at Hesse Park.

I know this latest forum and the last one were taped and have been and will be shown on either channel 33 or 35 or both. Check you listings to find more information.

Here is where my thinking is as I finish this post.

Jeff Lewis had the strongest showing at both of the last two forums. But since I was already a supporter of his, you can take that however you wish.

Paul Tetreault again came out of the gate with just a slightly less stumble than last week but he made up for it answering the questions. I think he and Jeff would be the best gentlemen to work with members of the Council for the next two years on some very important issues.

Brian Campbell was very strong and believable and he is quite qualified to sit on the Council in my opinion. I wish I had four votes. Brian supports the Annenberg land acquisition.

Jim Knight was very strong and believable and he is quite qualified to sit on the Council in my opinion. I wish I had four votes. Jim is endorsed by the Sierra Club.

Anthony Misetich is quite qualified to sit on the Council, in my opinion. He has experience when dealing with other communities and if he could get Eastview folks to support this Miraleste resident, I think he would receive lots and lots of votes.

Craig Mueller's experiences in serving Rancho Palos Verdes are exceptional and he served on the Planning Commission AND the General Plan Update Committee. Other than John McTaggart, he has a list of activities for our city that can't be equalled by the other five candidates. Some of the answers to questions he gave has given me enough pause to wonder where he really stands on issues important to me and many others.

John McTaggart made the comment that he wants to get back into the saddle. I continue to feel that he has served us well and that he should step aside and support others in having the chance to do what he has done. Let him be a mentor to others holding seats on the Council.

I am comfortable in knowing there are five candidates currently running that I feel could serve our community very well. Unfortunately there are no more than two that we are allowed to vote for. If I voted for four my ballot would be rejected, so I can't do that.

My sample ballot has only two other issues on it. There is an election for the Public Library District and the increase in the T.O.T.

I urge everyone to vote FOR increasing the T.O.T. by a mere 2%. It really is a user fee that can help our community welcome visitors and support residents who use Palos Verdes Drive East, Palos Verdes Drive South, 25Th Street in San Pedro, and other routes that could find funding for needed repairs.

I think our city's residents already pay enough for the maintenance of roads they do not normally use and I think it is more than fair that those who want the views and roads to luxurious places along our coast should help pay for the upkeep of those roads.

Comments About October 1 Candidates' Forum

I attended the October 1 forum for the seven candidates seeking to fill two seats on the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council with its November 3 election.

I will simply create random comments and offer pondering on some things.

I feel that six of the seven candidates could serve our city well and all seven are very well qualified to serve. I will continue to have reservations about John McTaggart because I strongly feel he has served us very well for a number of years and it is my opinion that the other six candidates should have the opportunities to serve as John has utilized.

John commented that he currently serves on three committees already and his contributions to our city continues to this day.

From the get-go I felt that Paul Tetreault and Anthony Misetich both started off fairly rough but both of these fine gentlemen settled in to provide answers that helped everyone learn more about them.

Anthony Misetich and at least two others trumpeted the need for more volunteers serving our city and they opposed the current Council's action in limiting service on committees and the Traffic Safety Commission.

I applaud all who want to see the committee and Commission sized increased but I fear that our city's Manager is not of that same opinion.

I was very pleasantly surprised with just about everything Craig Mueller talked about. I can agree with him on just about everything. However, we are on opposite sides of the T.O.T. fee increase but that is no reason folks should not vote for him if he is one of their chosen candidates.

Jeffrey Lewis and Jim Knight talked about "Western" and its businesses and Anthony Misetich considers the 'eastern corridor' important to business in R.P.V.

Brian Campbell mentioned his vast experience in business and all of his answers to the questions posed to all the candidates were reasonable and respectful.

It was revealed by both Jeff Lewis and Paul Tetreault that they are the only two candidates who have been endorsed by four out of the five current City Council members and that is of some importance to me.

Three of the four current Council members who have endorsed Lewis and Tetreault will serve two more years on the Council before they are termed out. It may be important to have the two newest members of the Council being able to work well with the three other members for the next two years.

There has been some difficulty while the late Dr. Gardiner attended meetings with the other members of the Council and it didn't help our city. That does not necessarily mean that Misters Knight, Campbell, Mueller, and Misetich would have problems with the three remaining members of the Council.

I think it is also important that whoever voters choose to begin serving in December understand that those two Council members will be the anchor for an almost unprecedented change that will happen in December, 2011 when the three current members are replaced by three new members. Term limits have created the opportunity to have a complete change of the entire Council with this election and the election in 2011.

Fiscal responsibility in our city was a major concern of all the candidates as it should be. Concepts like maintaining and even growing our city's reserves were discussed.

The landslide areas, especially the areas near Palos Verdes Drive East and Palos Verdes Drive South were talked about as being critical to most of the candidates.

All the candidates support the success of Terranea, as I do. I did like the comments from, I believe, Craig Mueller who suggested that the T.O.T. currently being collected from Terranea could be earmarked for the critical needs along Palos Verdes Drive South.

Marymount was not the elephant in the room I hoped it would be. I would have liked to hear answers from each candidate as to whether they support or oppose the College becoming a four-year institution.

Jeff Lewis and Paul Tetreault were vocal opponents of on-campus housing at the College and I believe Jim Knight also voted against that.

I recognize that Brian Campbell and Anthony Misetich may be the most politically conservative of the six candidates I am writing about. However, they both offered great observations and answers to the questions posed by the moderator to all the candidates. I appreciate that this election is not using party affiliation and it should never do that in my opinion.

I guess I will be comfortable deciding on who I will endorse other than Jeff Lewis by the end of the October 7 Forum at Hesse Park.

I will use the concept that the two who begin serving in December will be the Council members leading in December, 2011 when the three new members come onto the Council.

All six of the seven candidates I feel deserve learning more about will be able to serve well at the beginning of December.

I have to admit that I am not that up to speed on the Annenberg land dealings with our city. I do like ideas that allow for increased open spaces in our city.

One of the big issues that many residents are concerned about is the building of giant houses in areas where smaller houses stand.

Since I live on the denser east side of the hill in a tract house among hundreds of tract houses, condos, businesses, and heavily traveled Western Avenue, I feel that the candidates are not talking about the areas I am most concerned about in our city.

But as I was the only Eastview resident at the Forum, I fully understand the importance to many of our city's residents who live on the southern and western side of our city, how important building huge houses in their neighborhoods might be.

We do have some fairly huge homes in our more local neighborhoods but our lots are usually much smaller that many of the other lots in R.P.V.

The Valero gas station and the proposed C.V.S. store on Hawthorne apparently are a thorny issue with many residents and the candidates. They are both nowhere near the east side of our city and I don't think many of us care much about that.

By the end of the Forum I feel we all learned a little more about all of the candidates. The six I mentioned improved during the evening and all six of them finished off with home runs, I think.

I was particularly pleased to hear the directness from Jeff Lewis about his beliefs and his vision. But it was already like trying to sell coal in Newcastle for me as I have already endorsed his candidacy.

Would Jeff and Paul be the best catalyst in December, 2011 by working with three current Council members before spearheading a whole new panel?

Would Jeff and Jim, or Brian, or Craig, or Anthony be the best to forge ahead toward 2011 and leadership?

I hope we are able to hear answers to different questions during the next two Forums that will allow us to make the best decisions on who we want to govern us.

I am also revealing my strong endorsement of increasing the Transitory Occupancy Tax from 10% to 12% on the TWO businesses in Rancho Palos Verdes that require guests to pay the fee.

It is a user fee that few R.P.V. residents would pay. It would help fund repairs along Palos Verdes Drive South in the slide areas. The 8/10 of a mile section of the slide area is the fastest moving roadbed in the Western Hemisphere. Why should all R.P.V. residents have to pay for upkeep on a roadbed used by so many Terranea and Trump National guests?

It is just a 2% increase and falls more in line with other cities along the coastline. For folks who can afford to stay at Terranea, it is less than chump change. For the folks staying at the Value Inn, it is not too much added to a fairly low nightly rate.

I think we are in good hands with six of the seven candidates and John does have the experience that is required to serve. Even though I wish he would step away and allow others to serve, he is a good man who only has 47 years in the area.

I came to the house I currently live in 54 years, 4 months, and 28 days ago, so I have seven more years than even John has in the area. These 'newbys', I still gotta love em.