The Festival opens at 6:00 PM on Friday and continues from noon to 10:00 PM on Saturday and Sunday.
This is a FREE event. That means FREE parking and FREE admission to enjoy groups of dancers, musical groups from the local area and from distances further from The Hill.
This year, the TriArt Festival will take place on the brand new extension of the Promenade, along the harbor's edge, in San Pedro.
The locations is the former site of 'Whalers' Wharf', just next to Ports O'Call.
Artisans will be displaying their creations and arts and crafts will be for sale, too.
The new extension is a park setting with trees and excellent access to the harbor's edge and new lawns will be growing under you as you sit back and enjoy the music and dance and even do some dancing yourself.
More information about the TriArt Festival can be found on the Event's Web site:
http://www.triartfestival.com/index.html
Election season now finds eight candidates for three seats on the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council.
Sadly, unfortunately, and in other ways, it doesn't look like this season will be nice and friendly for all and to all.
Factions have been identified and there are hints of some folks already crying 'foul' at some of the initial goings on, with candidates and possible supporters.
I want to make one thing perfectly clear, here. I firmly believe that any candidate or any candidates' supporters who claim outright that "Marymount College" is supporting any candidate or even four candidates is not the truth and should not be used for or against anyone.
"Marymount College" as a entity cannot 'support' any candidate or any group of candidates. There would be a big group of residents heading to all kinds of courts and regulatory agencies and probably the I.R.S. if the administrators of Marymount College even consider throwing the college's support behind political candidates, no matter what the race is for.
Well, I am glad I got that first bit written. Now to the rest of the story.
There is absolutely nothing illegal for individual members of Marymount's Board of Trustees, acting as individuals, supporting candidates of their choice. Instructors, students, administrators and others affiliated with Marymount College also have rights, as individuals, to support candidates.
What appears to be coming into better focus for me is that there are folks associated with Marymount College and/or Palos Verdes Peninsula Watch who 'appear' to have a group of candidates they favor over other candidates in the upcoming election.
There is nothing illegal about that, either.
I have been getting reports from several sources that up to four candidates in the upcoming election repeat the same response to the same question asked to each of them. The response appears to be identical, each time. I think we have a new set of pre-written 'talking points' that do not offer as much openness and honesty as I think our residents deserve.
I am also beginning to notice on some of the candidates Web sites the names of supporters. That is perfectly fine and legal, just as it is fine and legal to pull our my records of the names of folks who supported Measure P, The Marymount Plan, which failed.
I am not all that worried about Marymount's supporters attempting to stack the Council with three new members who would vote in The Marymount Plan because I think the ship has sailed on any near future possibilities for on-campus housing being approved for the college's Palos Verdes Drive East Campus.
I also feel that Marymount's administration is doing a positive thing by looking to expand in the downtown San Pedro area, especially in offering more for the new four-year students and those current students who are now Juniors and/or Seniors.
Marymount's plans to expand more into the San Pedro area offers a great deal of benefits to the college and the San Pedro communities and it also offers positive things for our city, too.
I feel it is somewhat fair to write that candidates who seek and win the support of the majority of the members of Palos Verdes Peninsula Watch would also be supportive of just about anything Marymount's officials, Board members and administration wants to do.
I am now considering which of the top four of the candidates I feel would make reasonable Council members, I should support for my two remaining selections I have not already offered support for in this election.
My dilemma is that I now have to come to terms that no matter what, there is a very strong chance that the majority of the new council will have fiscal conservatives on it.
I am now looking for fiscally courageous candidates who have the guts to look at matters and issues that COULD require either some sort of fee, fee increase, or tax levied on our residents for infrastructure purposes.
A fiscally courageous candidate in my opinion, is not one who would run away from discussing even the possibility of some fee incursion by residents and businesses. They would now cower to the 'no new taxes', 'lower taxes on everyone', 'we already pay too much in taxes and fees' crowds.
Sadly, we have had a history of those types of folks keeping Council members from even attempting to deal with infrastructure issues or safety issues and that didn't really do well for our residents, some years ago.
It is also true that we have seen Council members themselves being those type of residents who decry any new or increased taxes or fees, no matter what.
I have two more votes to find candidates for. I am personally down to about three candidates who I can really consider very positively as to supporting. I know more than one of them is a fiscal conservative and I understand that our years of Stern/Long/Clark/and sometimes Wolowcz are behind us and it is unlikely we will see a majority of their likes, for a very long time. I get it, I just don't happen to love it.
I want brave candidates and not ones that follow the identical response to the same question.
We all need to learn more about the positions and who is supporting who and we will have at least two chances to watch debates among the candidates.
On September 7 at the Point Vicente Interpretative Center, a debate is scheduled.
I believe on October 30, or thereabouts, another debate sponsored by Marymount College will take place. I have heard several sets of rumblings about that one and I am not liking any of those rumblings one bit.
I am worried that a too fiscally conservative majority on our Council will not accomplish the permanent repair of San Ramon Canyon. I am hearing there are those among our city's residents who just wish to pile multiple tons of dirt at the bottom of the canyon rather than having a new drainage system tunnelled to the ocean. This worries me that there are those who will take a cheap fix over a permanent one and the cheap fix carries fewer guarantees and actually offers more problems.
The price of money is at its lowest point in decades. This should remain true throughout the remainder of the first terms of two of our current Council members. I fear if Council members fear reactions by those who decry all taxes and fees such that San Ramon Canyon might not get fixed permanently or that the Council is unwilling to even discuss things like a sewer maintenance fee, our infrastructure problems will find they will get neglected just as too many of them were, in years past.
I view Dave Emenhiser as the most logical choice to take the 'Stephan Wolowicz' seat on our Council. He knows finances and financing in our city and has offered his services and knowledge to serve all of our residents and businesses well, for many years. Yes, he may not be 'conservative' enough for some in our city, but he offers a very reasonable balance of thought and consideration and I know for a fact that he will work well with soon-to-be Mayor Misetich and soon-to-be Mayor Pro Tem Brian Campbell.
Brian and Anthony will certainly get at least one fiscal conservative on the Council to go along with Dave who I feel is a reasonable and responsible on our city's fiscal health and all matters.
I understand that Ms. Susan Brooks and Mr. Ken Dyda may be more to much more of fiscal conservatives than Dave is, but they are both very good candidates who will offer their views prior to the election.
I still don't know enough about Ms. Dora de la Rosa because I still deal with LAUSD more so than PVPUSD and Ms. de la Rosa's tenure on their Board of Education. I have no idea what her fiscal considerations are and I need to learn much more about her candidacy and her views.
I must inform folks that I have learned that on her Web site's endorsements page are names of folks I don't appear to be politically aligned with, if you get my drift.
Continuing with my honest admissions, Mr. Jim Knight was by third choice for one of the two seats up for election, last time. I will write a check for his campaign and put it in the mail and I don't have much of a problem having him as my second vote. I think he will most likely be my second vote, but I will wait until after the first debate to finalize that position.
More than a couple of people have independently told me that Mr. Alegria moved into our city, just this year. I really need to learn lots and lots about him and his candidacy. But moving into our city this year when I first came to the home I live in, in what is now R.P.V., back in 1955 has given me pause to think about a candidate who 'appears' to have spent very little time in our city, dealing with our city, and having experiences I would hope very qualified candidates have had and accomplished, in our city.
I still do not know enough about Mr. Jerry Duhovic. I have been offered information, but some of it seems good and some of it, not so good. I tried to access his Web site earlier on Sunday morning, but it appeared to still be under construction.
The latest thing I know about Ms. Cynthia Smith amounts to basically nothing and that is a shame on several levels. I wish she had a site up so I could learn more about her candidacy and experiences being an active member of the R.P.V. community.
Again to be honest, I get the following rumor coming to me all the time and I think somebody should confirm it, once and for all. It seems to be the only thing many of us have learned about her. She does deserve the opportunity to confirm or dispel 'The Rumor" that she is an employee of Marymount College. Even is she is an employee of the college, if that is the only thing folks need to know about her to either support her candidacy or oppose it, perhaps those folks need a lesson in government.
With several of the candidates, to me it comes down to their experiences in our community, how they have helped our community, what might they do on Council to keep R.P.V. on the correct tracks that have helped our city stay 'in the black' and offered their time and efforts to the residents of our city.
No comments:
Post a Comment