Tom Long's Email From March 2

I received two Emails yesterday that require my comments because of what is contained in both.

I will start with Tom Long's Email because its subject line made my head explode because of its total stupidity and non democratic and non Democratic approach.

The subject line read: "Is PVP Watch An Appropriate Part of RPV Politics?"

Tom, OF COURSE IT IS AND I AM ASHAMED OF YOU!!!

I may object to every single position taken by the members of PVP WATCH but you would be hard pressed to find someone who defend their right to speak out, especially about politics, than I absolutely am.

Individuals and groups have every right to make fools of themselves and say whatever they like. Yesterday is was announced that the United States Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that the completely indecent, disgusting, foul, obnoxious, hate-filled, 'worms' from the Westboro Baptist Church had the right to picket at the legal minimum distance from funerals of military members.

Tom, how can you sit anywhere and consider the question in the first place?

If you truly support our city becoming a charter city then you know full well that there must be individuals and groups willing to monitor the governance of a charter city as there has been while we are a general law city.

I know what it is to be foolish, be a fool and a clown and I know that I and others have a guaranteed Constitutional right to make fools of ourselves and represent groups that may not be welcome anywhere.

I need, Tom needs, and you need folks like those within PVP Watch watching and commenting on, whether you agree with them or not.

Actually, there must be more groups like and unlike PVP Watch in our community. A free and open government must allow, accept, and respect the rights of everyone to make comments, whether anyone likes it or not. I wish and hope to find a group to join that is quite on the opposite political bent than that of PVP Watch.

Of course I will address some of the ridiculous elements contained in PVP Watch's Email sent by Mr. Barry Hildebrand and based on comments created by Mr. Don Reeves, but Tom Long and everyone else on our City Council now and in the future are required to understand that individuals and groups have the right to speak their mind, demonstrate their beliefs in legal ways, and provide the necessary requirements to work at keeping our government and governors open, honest, and trustworthy.

Most of the content of Tom's Email dealt with the worst kept secret in our city, for a number of years. On advice of more than one attorney, I did not post anything about the particular matter on this blog. But there are a whole heck of a lot of folks who knew about it, as I came to find out. Being retired and on normally on a fixed income, I don't have the finances to defend my first amendment rights against any lawyer, at this time.

I think the Palos Verdes Peninsula News had a duty to at least mention the investigation and the outcome of it, but this morning's edition, but I truly believe the newspaper and its Editor and Publisher were more afraid of the fallout than they are of reporting with courage and conviction that the story was newsworthy.

I have a very real problem also with the last paragraph of Tom's Email. I am going to copy and past a portion of it below and comment in a different color font, to each point I find objectionable.

"The voters of RPV don’t need any “guidance” on Measure C in next Tuesday’s election." Really,Tom? Really, Tom!You have been one of the most prominent and influential guides towards making R.P.V. a charter city since at least April, 2010, from my memory. The Email I am using guides folks towards a certain agenda of discrediting PVP Watch and one of its members, in particular. I may happen to agree with much of what you wrote, but to claim you have not provided your own "guidance" on how voters should vote on C, is absurd.

"We just need the opportunity to observe the discussion, weigh the issues, and make our decisions. I admit I am biased in favor of Measure C. But I have gathered links to all of the arguments (pro and con) on my webpage, including Mrs. Yarber’s arguments and I have pushed hard for as many broadcasts of the Measure C debates as the city TV channel can handle." In this, Tom is correct. I do think that he is part of a group that uses talking points and has offered misleading comments in our city's Spring 2011 Newsletter and as our Mayor, I think he can be held to some responsibility as our Mayor for not making the article regarding Measure C, a better and fairer one.

"Consider all the arguments as you see fit and cast your vote on March 8th. I will respect your decision no matter what it may be. But I will not respect and will not associate with people whose standard of conduct is like that I see from Yarber, Capozzola and PVP Watch. I will do what I can to isolate such people." Tom and everyone else is legally entitled to do what he states as long as the steps he and other take are legal and Constitutional.

Tom and the other members of our City Council are legally mandated to 'associate' with anyone who speaks in front of the Council at meetings where a quorum is met. Nobody has to agree with anything said, but the people must be heard and listened to and I have defended that at a Veteran and I will continue to defend those rights as best I can.

I hope Tom's statements and recent comments about Measure C and those opposed to its passage don't sway the voters in November to place on our Council more conservative folks who favor Marymount College having on campus housing, any attempts to not make the necessary repairs to San Ramon Canyon and the Tarrapac landslide as soon as possible, and end all discussions regarding the Point Vicente area/Annenberg Project, and finding ways to build a new City Hall/Civic Center. Our city needs to progress. It takes progressive thought and action to move forward. Progressiveness in the name of benefiting the futures of all of our residents and businesses is necessary, in my opinion