Traffic Signals at Miraleste and P.V. Drive East???

Do you want to have a signalized intersection at Miralest Drive and Palos Verdes Drive East?

That should be a very simple question to answer if you live or work nearby, or travel through that intersection daily or frequently.

This is not a new issue and I have written about it before.

But it has come up again recently because we are still in the comment period for Appendix D of the Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project's Environmental Impact Report.

Appendix D was mandated because of the College Administration's application to offer Bachelors' Degrees at the school and having the College become a four-year institution.

The Appendix was also mandated because of two new proposals for the large athletic field being constructed at the Palos Verdes Drive East campus.

During a recent R.P.V. City Council meeting where the members received comments concerning the Appendix, I spoke.

I requested that the city and the college jointly fund a study dealing with whether the nearby residents, business owners and frequent travelers through the intersection really wanted to have the intersection signalized.

For several years, the "LOS" of Level of Service associated with the intersection has been an "F", which means that there is so much traffic using the intersection that it is one of the heaviest used intersections in our city and the surrounding area.

Traffic studies, along with the proposed college expansion project have found that placing traffic signals with pedestrian crossing signs is 'warranted' and lights and signs should be placed at the intersection.

There is also very strong evidence that residents who have to use the intersection on a daily basis and others who use the intersection frequently have absolutely no use for or wish to have traffic signalization at the intersection.

A great many number of us who are so very familiar with driving through that intersection have adjusted well to learning to negotiate the intersection even at its busiest hours.

Traffic is at its greatest numbers and congestion is at its worst during just two periods during only weekdays.

Since Marymount traffic uses the intersection in the mornings and afternoons, and we all see the traffic for Miraleste Intermediate School utilize the intersection during the same period, added with construction traffic and traffic to and from other local elementary schools, there are really only two groups of minutes during the weekday when the intersection is at its worst.

I don't even feel it is fair to consider that the worst periods for the intersection are hours long, to begin with.

Miraleste Intermediate School's classes begin at 8:10 in the morning and the greatest numbers of cars heading to and from the school do so during a rather short period of time. It appears that from about 7:40 AM to about 8:15 AM, we find congestion at its worst, through the intersection.

There is usually a traffic control officer at the intersection where the school driveway meets Palos Verdes Drive East, before classes begin and after the school day ends.

Likewise, there is a great deal of congestion at both intersections, for a short period of time in the afternoon when schools let out their students.

So in essence, the most congestion at the intersection of Miraleste and Palos Verdes Drive East lasts about 40 minutes in the AM and then in the PM, but again, only during weekdays when Miraleste Intermediate School is holding classes.

Signalizing an intersection can cost in the neighborhood of $285,000. To many, that is a staggering amount of money.

It could probably cost more than that for the intersection in question because of the large distance between the eastbound lane and westbound lane of Miraleste Drive.

The intersection is not a mere three-way or four-way intersection. It is more complicated with the area in the middle of Miraleste Drive and the proximity of the intersection just south of it that flows towards the shopping plaza and fire station.

I think it is a fair request to have a study done to find out if the folks who use the intersection the most really want traffic signals placed at the intersection, especially if they are to be used 24 hours each day.

I have also written about my safety concerns with having humans, particularly students who attend Miraleste Intermediate School, attempting to cross Miraleste Drive during one signal cycle. I feel the gap between lanes along Miraleste causes a real problem for pedestrian safety if they wish to cross during only one cycle.

I also don't feel that cyclists who go through the intersection from Miraleste Drive south onto Palos Verdes Drive East would appreciate having to deal with signals that they would probably ignore in the first place.

The conditions placed on Marymount by the city with regards to a traffic signal state that the expansion project offer funds to support the placement of traffic signals at the intersection.

Lawyers for the college and its expansion project claim that they would help with the funding, but they also contend that since the signalization was warranted several years ago, that the traffic signals should have been installed years ago, using city funds only.

I strongly feel that we as citizens who use the intersection and pay property taxes have a right and a responsibility to stand up and state whether we want signals at the intersection.

I hope folks respond to this long post with comments. Your comments offer to others and city government a 'signal' about your feelings about signals at Miraleste and P.V. Drive East.

Even though I feel that a signal system is not wanted by me and so many others, I would appreciate learning why supporters of having signals placed feel and think the way they do.

Whether you want signalization or not, it seems the final decision time is approaching and we all have a right to voice our opinion and be heard by the governors and staff of Rancho Palos Verdes and the administration at Marymount College.

Misetich is Wrong Choice for Ponte Vista Alternate

Happy New Year.

Councilman Anthony Misetich is currently being considered to be the alternate to Mayor Wolowicz as the Ponte Vista Development Liaison.

Mr. Misetich was an early supporter of Bob Bisno's plans to build 2,300 condominiums on 61.53 acres of land directly accross Western Avenue from homes in Rancho Palos Verdes.

While Mr. Misetich may continue to contend that he supported Bisno's plans so that Senior Housing Units could be built, it means that his support of such a large residential project on our border needs to be considered, even though the plans have changed.

Mr. Misetich is associated with former L.A. Councilman Rudy Svornich. Mr. Svornich was a paid lobbyist for Bisno Development Co. LLC and received payments from one of Bob Bisno's organizations.

I feel there could be an appearance of a conflict of interest having Mr. Misetich have any involvement while serving as a Councilman, with Rancho Palos Verdes and Ponte Vista at San Pedro.

Our city council's history concerning Ponte Vista at San Pedro was to oppose both the 2,300-condo project and the subsequent 1,950-condo plan offered by Bob Bisno, who is now the former developer of the project.

Currently the new development team for the project has yet to publish new plans for the project worked out with the Los Angeles City Planning Department. It is hoped those new plans may come forth by this Spring.

The latest print work used by the Ponte Vista at San Pedro Outreach Team illustrated a 1,395-unit project but it is not known what the final application will look like.

Mr. Misetich was the only candidate in the past election to have been a supporter of plans for Ponte Vista at San Pedro. While he claimed to me he hadn't been to a meeting of the Advisory Board his name was associated with, he didn't seem to feel it necessary to have his name and affiliation removed from the controversial project.

To be fair and open, I am a member of the Steering Committee of R Neighborhoods Are 1, the citizen-based group of volunteers who actively opposed, and continues to oppose, a large project consisting of condominiums along Western Avenue in northwest San Pedro.

I also currently believe that up to 831-units could be successfully built at Ponte Vista. This number reflects a dwelling density equivalent to The Gardens, the large condominium housing development almost next to the Ponte Vista site.

I wish Mr. Misetich would simply reflect that while an elected Councilman of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes, he should voluntarily refrain from any activity associated with our city and Ponte Vista at San Pedro. During the time Mr. Misetich belonged to the Advisory Board, our Council along with others in our city worked very hard against the very project Mr. Misetich was an Advisory Board member for and a supporter of.

I feel there are many other qualities Mr. Misetich can afford our city with his business knowledge and contacts in San Pedro. I do feel however, that it is in the best interest of our own city that Mr. Misetich not have any governmental dealings with Ponte Vista at San Pedro.

Rest In Peace and Thank You Mr. John McTaggart.

Rancho Palos Verdes lost one of its founders and also one of its greatest residents with the passing of Mr. John McTaggart.

He was a giant among those who served all of our residents and he represented our city with honor and dignity.

There is great sadness in the loss of a leader of our community and the only solice that I can find right now is that he was doing what I think he loved to do, representing us and trying once again sit on the council, when he passed away.

Mr. McTaggart was serving us on three committees even before and during the time he sought another term on our council.

So his service to our community continued long after he left the council and as our four-time Mayor.

Terri and I send our thoughts and beams of white light to Mr. McTaggart's family and friends and to all of those who knew of his service and his life.

Services are pending and you can check for further details on the Rancho Palos Verdes Web site at: http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/

Below, please read from part of the city's Web site.

John McTaggart
1930 - 2009

Profession:
Retired. Formerly Superintendent of Facility Operations, Hughes Aircraft Company

Community and civic activities and affiliations:

• President of California Contract Cities Association 2002-2003
• Alternate Member of Inland Empire Regional Composting Authority
• Board Member of MTA South Bay Sector Council
• County/City Liability Trust Fund Oversight Committee 1999-2003
• Rancho Palos Verdes City Councilmember since 1983 (Mayor 1985, 1991,1996 2002),
• Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commissioner 1977-83 (Chair 1977)
• South Bay Council of Governments (Chair 1994-96),
• California Contract Cities Association (President 2002)
• California Marine Affairs and Navigation Conference Board Member
• Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Task Force
• West Basin Municipal Water Association
• South Coast Air Quality Advisory Council (1981-88)
• Southern California Association of Governments, HCED
• MAX Policy Steering Committee

Primary area of regional concern and years of involvement:

John was the President of the South Bay Cities in 1994 when it was determined that there was a need for a more focused organization for certain South Bay cities. The South Bay Council of Governments, which included sixteen cities, was formed and John became its first Chair. Between 1994 and 1996 John served as Chair while the COG reviewed the SCAG Subregion Transportation Plan and worked on other joint projects involving liveable cities, drainage problems and transportation issues. The South Bay COG has become a major regional planning organization and a strong contributor to the Southern California quality of life.

Brief description of John’s accomplishments:

John began his involvement in affairs of government when he represented his homeowner's association as a member of the Board of Directors of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Advisory Council, which consisted of over forty homeowners associations. He was the President of the Palos Verdes Village Homeowners Association in 1973 when it, along with the original Save Our Coastline organization, was successful in the incorporation of Rancho Palos Verdes. The newly elected City Council appointed John to the Planning Advisory Committee which later became the Planning Commission. The General Plan was designed during the first two years after incorporation. John participated in that effort, where he worked on joint subcommittees with members of the Council. John served a total of ten years on both boards and was Chairman of the Planning Commission during the Coastal Specific Plan design and approval period.

In 1983, John was elected to the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. During his first term, John initiated a successful effort to get two million dollars from the State for landslide stabilization. Prior to and following his election to the City Council, John served on the South Coast Air Quality Management District Advisory Council for seven and one-half years. Presently, he serves on the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Task Force as a representative of the League of California Cities. John has represented RPV on the West Basin Municipal Water Association since 1984.

John has been a member of the Rotary for 19 years, formed the first homeowners association in his neighborhood, formed a Boy Scout Troop in 1964 and was its first Scout Master.

Short summary of how John made a difference in the quality of life in Southern California:

John McTaggart's service to his neighborhood, City, the South Bay and Southern California has been continuous since 1964. Whether addressing problems of solid waste disposal and recycling, airport expansion, Sheriff Department liability issues or transportation, when the tough issues need discussion and resolution, John is always there. He is always informed, never misses a meeting and is always a major force. He is not merely a joiner, or another occupant of a chair, but is always outspoken and aggressive in helping to shape our quality of life. He is an example of the ideal citizen who cares about his neighborhood, his City and Southern California and is willing to work all day every day in any capacity, with recognition or without, simply to make life better for us all!

Looking Towards the Future

I talked with newly elected councilman Mr. Brian Campbell last night and he assured me that he will work with eastern R.P.V. and the Eastview area residents and businesses all through his first term. I found that very refreshing.

I did make some comments during the 'Comments not on the Agenda' period at last night's council meeting. I talked about how the least experienced candidate garnered the most number of votes. I hope that individual will learn from Mr. Campbell how to represent all the residents of our city.

One of the biggest issues in our future actually may seem like a tiny issue in other areas.

IF Marymount College goes forward with their Facilities Expansion Project, a traffic signal is planned for the intersection of Palos Verdes Drive East and Miraleste Drive.

Local residents and many of us who use that intersection are NOT fond of having a traffic signal placed there.

As a former member of our city's Traffic Safety Commission, I can write that a signal has been warranted there for years.

I have traveled through the intersection and made turns during the height of school traffic in the morning and at the end of the school day. Yes, it is a tough intersection to get through during those times.

But many of us find that during all other times of the day, a traffic signal seem very unnecessary there.

If the majority of residents really don't want a traffic signal at that intersection, that may be something to work with city staff on, before taking that issue to the council.

Some residents feel that some business areas along Western Avenue need sprucing up. Being that I live above the Western Plaza area of shops with a long parking area, I understand what many are talking about.

Last year we saw improvements at The Terraces which brought about new canopies for the stairways.

Perhaps residents interested in working towards having improvements done along Western Avenue may want to work with the Chambers of Commerce for the peninsula and San Pedro as a preliminary activity prior to taking matters to staff and the council.

There are opportunities to volunteer on the Planning Commission and the committee overseeing the storm drain issues. That group was established when the Storm Drain User Fee was voted in and the oversight committee was mandated.

I don't pay the fee and I think residents who pay the fee would be the best representatives on that committee, versus those of us who aren't required to pay the fee.

I feel the most important near future matter for us on the east side of Rancho Palos Verdes is the finding by the Accreditation Group as to whether Marymount College is granted status to become a four-year institution.

It is my feel that Marymount becomes a four-year institution, they will move quickly to try and change their current Facilities Expansion Project to include on-campus housing that the College removed from existing plans.

I think if Marymount College is not granted four-year status, they may not last as a college.

There are plenty of eastern Rancho Palos Verdes residents who use Palos Verdes Drive East to access Palos Verdes Drive South.

The lower San Ramon and Tarapaca Canyon areas are a real concern for these travelers, if landslides cause Palos Verdes Drive East and 25th Street in San Pedro to become impassable.

While that area is not really in eastern R.P.V., it could be an area that causes potential traffic issues on our side of The Hill.

The lower San Ramon/Tarapaca and Marymount issues should demonstrate to residents on the east side of our city that we are truthfully connected to the rest of our city.

If transportation routes are damaged or altered in ways we don't like or want, that affects all of us.

Right now the Ponte Vista at San Pedro project is still under consideration, basically behind closed doors.

An update report to the Los Angeles Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled for November, by the Los Angeles City Planning Department's team working with the current Ponte Vista at San Pedro development team.

More than one 'fly on the wall' told me that we probably won't see new plans coming out for the project until the first quarter of 2009.

It is also thought by many that the current idea for 1,395-condominiums on the site, will be lowered. We have no real clue yet as to what the new total may be, though.

I post a weekly piece on my www.pontevista.blogspot.com blog. In the past many months I include items that may or may not be related to Ponte Vista, but try and deal with local area items on the east side of R.P.V. and the San Pedro area.

When I served in the U.S. Air Force, I had occasion to visit Luke A.F.B. in Arizona.

I learned there and from other sources about the site on the top of The Hill.

The group that was stationed at the Radomes and other equipment at the site on the top of San Pedro Hill was a detachment from a Group located out of Luke A.F.B.

Back when I served and it still may be the case today, the detachment was part of a Tactical Air Command Group for the fighter defense of the west coast of the U.S.

It seems when 'the enemy' was seen using the radars on the top of The Hill, fighter jets based at Luke A.F.B. in Arizona would scramble to intercept the bombers and (hopefully) shoot them down.

When I was young there was a radar devise that was visible from my home and it was shaped a bit like a banana with a hinge in the middle.

When the steel thing was working it would pivot up and down fairly fast at its middle and it looked scary from a little boy's view, I remember.

My friends and I used to hike up to the site long before the houses were built on Crest Road and we walked around the fence line of the site.

I think with a near future post, I will write about the area east of Western Avenue that is now part of our city. I had fun there, too.

Oh Well

My two preferences not only lost, my first choice turned out to be Rancho Palos Verdes voters (the extremely few that bothered to vote) last choice.

I can certainly congratulate newly elected council member Mr. Brian Campbell.

I hope his Real Estate knowledge and skills will serve our residents well. He is a stand-up gentleman.

The TOT increase measure I voted Yes on fell by 148 votes. Unfortunately, only 5,530 voters voted on that measure out of a registered voter number of 27, 022.

This brings up a real problem for those who believe in democracy and have even defended it with their service in the military and sadly, with their lives.

It appears that only less than 21% of the eligible voters in our city bothered to mail in absentee ballots or go to the polls.

That is about 33% more than voted in 2007 for three spots on the council, but democracy still is not represented well with voters turning out is such low numbers.

That is shameful, disgusting, and disheartening no matter what side of the political spectrum someone is on.

That type of turnout sometimes allows extreme voters and machines to put candidates into winning positions.

When someone supports a development that is opposed by so many of his neighbors in Miraleste and an majority or residents in Eastview, that becomes a problem, I feel.

When some one's campaign distributes probably very misleading mailers, that too, is a problem.

When someone claims their feet bled walking 30 of 37 precincts in a city the L.A. County Recorder only states the results for the 18 precincts the city actually has, might that cause one to pause?

When the least experienced candidate receives the most number of votes in this election, that really says something, doesn't it?

It means a machine was built using many dollars to misinform potential voters and guarantee a base of voters who wish to make more of a political statement than to actually improve the governance of our city, I feel.

This has unfortunately come to pass in Rancho Palos Verdes. The candidate who has served Rancho Palos Verdes the least among the seven candidates and the only candidate to serve as Honorary Mayor of a community within the city of Los Angeles, received the most votes.

Oh well.....

A Bit Of Humor From Tea Baggers

I like funny things.

Currently, there are rants by Republicans and conservatives about having as many as four lawyers on the city council for the next two years.

So while surfing the Web, I came across the South Bay Tea Party blog.

Now for those of you who don't know what 'tea bagging', it is what goes on a quite a few tea parties, but not usually out in the open.

I would suggest if you don't know about tea bagging, you should look it up yourself.

Anyway, I looked at their site and was quite amused at a particular quotation near the very top of the site which has members who do not want up to four lawyers sitting on our council.

"It was John Adams who said "Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right...and a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the characters and conduct of their rulers."

This quote, copied and pasted directly from the South Bay Tea Party was written by our Nation's second President. He would probably not have been our second President if he had not been something else first and foremost.

Can you guess what that is. Let's say it together, shall we? Ready? 1! 2! 3! A LAWYER!

The very same folks who don't want more lawyers on our council use as a primary quote on their site, something authored by a lawyer?

Now folks, THAT is funny!

More Notes and Information Concerning The Election

This is a collection of random notes and other information about the coming election.

Mr. Brian Campbell sent out an Email to lots of folks.

Here is a portion of what I found in the Email that I hope you find important:

"Slate mailers. Whether you agree with them or not, my campaign did not authorize my name to be used in any of these mailers and we did not pay for them. I didn't participate in them primarily for the simple reason that I didn't want to have our message diluted by being included with other campaigns and elections. The organization that printed them is not at fault either. This was a mistake made by the Bank that our campaign uses in mistakenly paying the printers before we had told them that we would not participate in the mailers. The Bank has admitted that this was their fault. The printers immediately pulled our name off all but a few that were inadvertently mailed out. To the credit of the other campaigns, they have done what I have over the past few months with many of them, and given us the benefit of the doubt, as has the Daily Breeze."

Please disregard Mr. Campbell's name for any of the mailers described and please think about the other candidate(s) who would actually support those mailers.

__________________________________________________________

It seem the Republican Party of Los Angeles is threatening two candidates in this election.

You can read it via the link below:

http://www.insidesocal.com/southbay/2009/10/rpv-republicans-dress-up-as-de.html#comments

__________________________________________________________

Many conservatives are saying that they don't want more lawyers on the council.

It seems many of them think all lawyers are left of conservative. I don't think that is true. Wait, I know it is not true.

When conservatives don't get what they want, who do you think make up the first profession many conservatives go to when they feel wronged? Now, let's all say it together......1! 2! 3! LAWYERS!

It seems that RPLAC may use.....What is that profession again? Oh, that's right, LAWYERS if they decide to file anything with the FPPLC.

And if anybody challenges Mr. Misetich's endorsement by the Republican Party of Los Angeles County, who do you think that group will race to, if it happens. I know you know the answer. Let's say it together, one more time....

LAWYERS!
__________________________________________________________

I have changed my opinion as to whether Mr. McTaggart should drop out of the race because of the problems with the prospect of the possibility that Mr. Anthony Misetich gets elected.

I would rather folks vote for Mr. John McTaggart rather than for Mr. Anthony Misetich.

We don't need troubles coming out of this election and I don't see how that would not happen if Mr. Misetich receives either of the two highest vote counts.

__________________________________________________________

I have a map of Eastview showing the precinct numbers and I will try to post the results by Eastview precincts as quickly as I can after the election.

__________________________________________________________

Here is my last review of all of the candidates, combined.

Jeff Lewis is my first vote. He has shown skilled leadership as the current Chair of the Planning Commission, the second most important group of deciders in Rancho Palos Verdes.

He has demonstrated talent during some very tough times that Planning Commission has had.

Paul Tetreault has also worked very hard and long as a member of the current Planning Commission team. He gets my other vote for a seat on the council.

He has demonstrated leadership in many areas and I think he will bring a calming, structured, and thoughtful addition to the council.

If I had a third vote, I would vote for Jim Knight. He is also currently a member of the Planning Commission and if you look at his Web site, which I link on this blog, you will learn of his great interest in and concern for the residents, businesses, and environment of Rancho Palos Verdes.

A fourth vote, if I could have one, would go to Mr. Brian Campbell.

He is a member of the Republican Party and he is probably the most conservative gentleman I have really considered voting for.

He is a stand-up honest candidate who was brought into the fiascos and fray not of his choosing.

He and I have our differences, but if you are of a mind to vote for a conservative rather than a candidate more towards the center or the left, please vote for Mr. Brian Campbell.

Mr. Campbell served on the General Plan Update Committee and that is a very difficult and time consuming effort that will eventually pay off in an even better Rancho Palos Verdes.

Mr. Craig Mueller and I do not agree one bit about the TOT increase, but he would certainly make a great council member if he gains enough votes.

Mr. Craig Mueller served for years on the Planning Commission. Mr. Mueller served on the General Plan Update Committee where he also was its Chair.

Mr. Mueller would also make a great councilman, in my opinion, if he garners enough votes to take one of the two seats.

Mr. John McTaggart served on our council for 20 years. Mr. John McTaggart served as our city's Mayor four times.

Mr. McTaggart currently serves on three committees that either directly or indirectly support the residents and businesses of Rancho Palos Verdes.

It is true that I have suggested more than several times that Mr. McTaggart should drop out of the race to allow two others the opportunity that he had for so many years.

The problems with the seventh candidate have made me rethink my former stance.

Rancho Palos Verdes would be well served if the outcome of this election does not provide future problems for the city and its residents. I believe strongly that electing Mr. McTaggart or any of the other candidates mentioned above, would NOT become a problem that could end up in hearings or other legal issues.

I may have afforded some ugliness into this election by mentioning Mr. Anthony Misetich's involvement with Bob Bisno and Bob's plan to build 2,300 condos across the street from homes in Rancho Palos Verdes.

I feel very strongly that any candidate trying to represent residents of Rancho Palos Verdes must not have the bad baggage of following someone who wanted to over develope an area so close to our city.

I think it was foul that Mr. Misetich worked for a plan that was fought by thousands of Rancho Palos Verdes residents.

You may know that as a Board member of R Neighborhoods Are 1, I do have knowledge of the numbers of Rancho Palos Verdes residents who signed the petition forms attempting to block Bob Bisno's and his Advisory Board members from over building in northwest San Pedro.

So when I write that there were "thousands" of residents of Rancho Palos Verdes who signed the petition, I am not making anything up. More than 11,000 signatures were collected on the petition forms and Rancho Palos Verdes residents made up a substantial number of those signatures.

It would not be unfair to call it a litmus test. The issue of Bob Bisno and his supporters coming in with plans that would devastate several communities, makes me and others feel that any Rancho Palos Verdes resident who supported Bob's plans does not deserve to be elected to our city council.

But Ponte Vista, sadly, is just one issue.

A blogger for The Daily Breeze wrote about Mr. Misetich's campaign attempting to possibly mislead voters into believing Mr. Misetich is something other than what he really is.

How honest is it for a candidated endorsed by the Republican Party of Los Angeles County to attempt to pursuade voters by sending out a mailer with four Democratic Presidents pictured on it?

How honest is it to provide a mailer that states Mr. Misetich would; "Protect neighborhoods from overdevelopment and increased traffic" when it is a documented fact that Mr. Misetich served or still may be serving on one of the Advisory Boards set up by Bob Bisno's organization to actually bring overdevelopment and a dramatically huge increase in traffic to more than one community?

How honest is it to claim to keep to the campaign promise of; "Never try to confuse or mislead voters" when you have your campaign pay for mailers that claim that you are a solid Republican while you attempt to attract voters using a mailer that states; "Please use our Democratic Voters Choice slate when you go to the polls"?

How honest is it when mailers Anthony Misetich endorses carry the misleading ridicule wording; "Democrat leaders"?

That term has been used by conservates, many far-right neocons, and Republicans as a slur on Democratic leaders.

While I do applaud Mr. Misetich's stand that more opportunities be provided by residents willing to serve on committees and commissions, I do not think that is any real reason to vote for him.

Mr. Misetich's baggage will follow him beyond November 3 and I do not feel our city and its residents need to carry any of that baggage.

At least one current city councilman has weighed in on Mr. Misetich's misleading mailers and may be suggesting that Mr. Misetich's campaign broke a portion of the State Constitution.

I feel, as a resident of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes, I have the right to question the mailer from the Republican Party of Los Angeles County, perhaps with the Los Angeles County District Attorney.

I don't know if our City Attorney would get involved if asked to by council members.

But it is Misetich baggage our city and its residents simply don't need or probably want.

Candidates do make some pretty dumb mistakes. Sometimes they say things they then have to defend and certainly regret.

___________________________________________________________

I am comforted that voters have six real, decent, and qualified candidates to earn two seats on the council.

Please consider:

Mr. Jeff Lewis

Mr. Paul Tetreault

Mr. Jim Knight

Mr. Brian Campbell

Mr. Craig Mueller

Mr. John McTaggart.

Please do not provide baggage our city does not need and please do not vote for Mr. Anthony Misetich.
___________________________________________________________

Please take a gander at: www.therelevantstage.com for great entertainment values that I hope you will enjoy for the rest of this year and all through 2010.