Says LMU recycling facility affecting their quality of life

To the Editor:

It is the responsibility of every person to make and keep our environment whole so it sustains the quality of life now and for future generations. I am committed to this goal. The McConnell Quality of Life Group [obeythe] is committed to this goal.

Loyola Marymount University’s “green friendly practices” negatively impact the lives of citizens adjacent to the school on its eastern border. The debris from the green waste processing carries over into the community as fine particles of dust. We breathe this dust into our lungs and have developed allergies that further complicate our physical well being.

The grass clippings from the “dog run” on 80th Street between Loyola Boulevard and Gonzaga Avenue is also treated as green waste? Little children cannot play in their backyards freely when LMU processes its green waste. Green comes with a price for some, our quality of life.

The recycling of waste water impacts my life. The pumps run 24/7 and have robbed me of my sleep many nights. I have asked that they research putting this machinery on timers so that at night the pounding stops, but nothing has come of this request.

The processing of waste continues behind my garage just 12.5 feet away from my property.

LMU is in the business of making money. Has anyone asked how much money the university is earning from recycling and waste processing?

I and my neighbors await your investigative journalism with open minds.

June Durr


Approves of Santa Monica police bulletin warning of ‘self-described pedophile’

To the Editor:

As Gary Walker’s article about Jack McClellan [The Argonaut, August 9th] notes, McClellan is a “self-described pedophile” who sought out national attention. McClellan got the celebrity he so desperately wanted andÝnow finds himself in the cross-hairs of public and judicial scrutiny at his own hands — actually at his own mouth — a fact about which he can hardly complain with any credibility.

The “parent with mixed feelings” mentioned in Gary’s article is concerned that McClellan’s rights were violated because “he’s never molested a child,” a conclusion presumably reached because McClellan has no criminal record and has denied committing such acts.

But look no fartherÝthan the recent multimillion-dollar settlements with various Catholic archdioceses to be reminded that numerous priests molested dozens of children over the years, andÝthose priests had no criminal records either.

Of course, McClellan wouldn’t admit having molestedÝchildren because he knows that would have resulted in his immediate arrest.

Regarding the bulletin circulated by the Santa Monica Police Department, McClellan’s public statements about his attraction to young girls, and his stalking and photographing of likely victims,Ýconjure images of a ticking bomb that could explode at any moment.Ý

The police department justifiably felt an obligation to warn parents. Had it not done so, there would have been a public outcry if McClellan had gained access to and molested a child because the child’s parents were unaware ofÝthe danger posed by McClellan.

Steve Hyman

Marina del Rey

Has many ‘key questions’ about recent Venice Beach improvements

To the Editor:

While Councilman Bill Rosendahl and Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky wereÝdancing at Venice Beach on August 2nd to celebrate “improvements,” someone should have been asking some key questions.

Why did this project take so long to finish? It was scheduled to be done in the “winter of 2006.”

What were the cost overruns on this project and who absorbed those costs? Who was following up on this long long-term project?

Why are the wonderful new unisex bathrooms at the Venice Boulevard parking lot on Ocean Front Walk still closed to the public? Who approved the construction of these restrooms and what problems still exist to prevent them from being used? What architect in the county or city government designed them so they couldn’t be used? When will they actually be finished? Will they be used this summer?

Why did we need new parking kiosks? Of what value are they to the public? Reduced parking prices? Better parking flow?

Why is construction not complete yet at either the Washington or Venice Boulevard lots?

What exactly did we spend $6.2 million for? Can anyone point out the value received for the money?

It seems politicians love the photo op and take advantage of that but have no concern for the actual project results. It is a shame that the county government is as wasteful with our dollars as the federal government seems to be.

It also seems that The Argonaut should be asking these questions as well.

Ron Gregg

Marina del Rey

Points out role of CLARE Foundation in success of homeless ‘therapeutic justice’

To the Editor:

We applaud Santa Monica’s Community Court, the City’s most recent effort to deal with homeless people in a way that is humane, intuitive and draws on a consortium of human service agencies whose collective partnership has shaped the future for Homeless Community Court.

Christina Hanford’s article, “Santa Monica’s Homeless Community Court pilot program is providing ‘therapeutic justice'” [The Argonaut, August 2nd] captures the ways in which this initiative has met with enormous success.

There is more to the story, however. Without the CLARE Foundation and our social service partners, it is unlikely that the “vicious cycle” and “revolving door” epidemic would have much hope of improving. Our therapeutic process, based on the social model of recovery, gives people the tools to live successful lives.

CLARE and its partners have implemented programs that have been responsible for the changed lives of many homeless and addicted people.

We celebrate the success of the court and appreciate the partnership between the city, the CLARE Foundation and the other social service providers in Santa Monica.

Nicholas Vrataric

executive director

CLARE Foundation

Santa Monica