Asks why incumbent candidate has election signs posted outside district
To the Editor:
I know it is an election year so campaign signs do not bother me at all. In fact, it was interesting to see one of the congressional campaign supporters holding one under a street light last week at 6 a.m. at 83rd Street and Lincoln Boulevard in Westchester, perhaps while waiting for rush hour traffic.
That’s dedication. But what bothers me is when a candidate running for Congress, for example, keeps having her staff put signs in areas she does not represent. For example, last month Rep. Jane Harman’s people apparently put up two signs on a fence by the La Vista Motel in Westchester.
Someone must have pointed out that this area was in the district where Bruce Brown and Rep. Maxine Waters are running. I just chalked it up to un-focused enthusiasm. The signs later went down.
Then I just noticed about ten Harman signs posted on fencing along Jefferson Boulevard at the intersections of Campus Center Drive, Village Drive, McConnell Avenue and Beethoven Street: That’s way too many to be unintended!
But they were all located in the Playa Vista section assigned to District 35, where the Brown/Waters contest is going on. Ironically, Harman’s District 36 contains parts of Playa Vista north of Jefferson, and I drove around a few minutes and there were no signs there.
I just think that a candidate, staff members and volunteers need to be clear to us that they know where their coverage area is. It doesn’t instill confidence in me if they accept sloppy work.
So I find out who is running for what and where by accessing district maps on the Internet and reading my sample ballot.
I don’t mind campaign signs during elections, but they should be put up correctly.
Lynn Bokach, Playa del Rey
Says article on constituent input on Waters missing comments from opponent
To the Editor:
Did not The Argonaut wonder why Rep. Maxine Waters would call for an ethics corruption trial before the election when it and its presumed headlines would destroy her chances of winning among thoughtful voters after all details would be made public day after day?
Her Argonaut comments, to any rational person, were an obvious ruse since the delay was allegedly pre-arranged by the Democrat chairwoman of the House Ethics Committee to try to hold on to a sinking incumbent’s seat that is now in the national spotlight as a competitive race.
Interesting that there was no information from the opponent himself in an interview or posted in specific statements on the Bruce Brown Web site. If the Argonaut was on a tight deadline as was expressed to the campaign’s communications director, its reporter could have done this or waited a week longer to properly source his story by talking with the person best able to react to the probe, Brown.
How interesting that the article, at 1,200 words with only 125 devoted to the Brown side, fits perfectly now as the lead article on Waters’ Web site. Unbelievable!
Maureen Johnson, Playa del Rey
Says meeting on LCP amendment needs to be in Marina, not downtown
To the Editor:
The county Regional Planning Commission has scheduled an important town hall meeting on at 9 a.m. Wednesday, Nov. 3rd in downtown Los Angeles. Does the Planning Department really think that the interested Marina del Rey residents who attended its earlier Marina meetings in growing numbers will be able to attend this meeting on a work day or does it really want to lose us?
This Local Coastal Program (LCP) amendment is enormously important because it seeks to allow five huge and diverse development projects. The process is also dangerous, providing a precedent for future development.
With one amendment the county planners will win the right to give away public parking lots, lots that are supposed to be public parks if underutilized for parking. Parking lot FF on Via Marina will permit 126 additional units to 400 more at the current Neptune Apartments (136).
The other four projects include a 19-story hotel, a five-story active senior residence on the Oxford Lagoon parking lot used by boaters, as well as a large shopping center at Palawan and Admiralty ways and boat storage at very high fees to replace single, small craft slips.
All these developments are possible with one stroke of the amendment pen and there is possible opposition by the California Coastal Commission. Doesn’t this warrant a meeting here in the Marina at a time when all interested and affected residents can attend? Yes.
Lynne Shapiro, Marina del Rey