Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.


Expand Messages
  • euphoric52
    Yoko Saxon of City Clerk s office has confirmed that Camerford appeal to City PLUM committee is being heard on Tuesday, April 29, 2 p.m. , at present it is
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 20, 2008
      Yoko Saxon of City Clerk's office has confirmed that Camerford appeal
      to City PLUM committee is being heard on Tuesday, April 29, 2 p.m. ,
      at present it is item # 11 on the agenda.

      The best thing we can do is appear in person, fill out a speaker card,
      and either speak or cede time to others on our side.

      Petitions are OK, but individual letters that show an understanding of
      the situation are better. Jane Usher's points can be the template for
      your letters.

      We need someone to volunteer to coordinate the letters and personal
      appearances. I can't because I'm flying to Florida the day of the
      hearing. Perhaps Karen Gilman would help us out.

      Watt has made overtures expressing an abstract willingness to
      compromise, but my personal opinion of the overture is skeptical, in
      part because this PLUM process and time frame make it nearly
      impossible to explore whether or not an acceptable compromise is
      possible, and in part because we aren't the only residents who feel

      It would be great if someone could talk to Eric Garcetti about this.
      The project is in his district. But it's easier to get in to meet the
      Dalai Lama than it is to talk to Eric ("the Smugmeister") Garcetti.
      All that we know is that he has signaled his support for the
      developer's appeal. He seems to be one of the paternalists in power
      who believes the citizenry is a little too comfortable, and needs some
      "tough love" in the form of greater density than allowed by current
      zoning so that the resulting inconvenience will force us onto buses,
      hybrids and bicycles, all for the greater good. The fact that
      upzoning lines the pockets of developers, who then may use a small
      portion of the windfall to contribute to future political campaigns,
      simply hasn't occurred to Mr. Garcetti, who is of course not
      interested in using political contributions to seek higher office.

      Our opponents try to mis-frame the issue as one of growth versus
      no-growth. That's wrong. We support growth. The conflict is between
      planned growth that is part of existing law (which we support), and
      politically calculated gifts of exemptions from zoning to future
      campaign contributors.

      I advise against voting for someone who thinks you are too
      comfortable. I don't remember Garcetti running on the "Make L.A. Less
      Pleasant" slogan. Apparently, that is his new mantra. He needs a
      wake-up call.

      Vince Cox
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.