Bicycling in Seal Beach
As an avid bicyclist I found the article about the step-up in bicycle laws enforcement (Sun Newspapers, May 16) a little offensive.
It seems no matter what it is lately government/ Big Brother keeps getting bigger and bigger despite the common thought it needs to be smaller. The article says that the step-up in enforcement is for safety.
I can not honestly see how that is true. Sure are there always those bicyclists, pedestrians, and drivers that violate the law and the spirit of the law so why do the majority of people who follow the rules need to be punished? The truth of the matter is that the step-up is just lip service to the community to a non-existing problem.
Even if it were it won’t be enforced.
Fisherman are not supposed to have more then one fishing pole in use off the pier but the do. Overhead casting is not allowed but it happens.
Fisherman are not supposed to cut their bait on the pier railing but they do.
Fisherman are not supposed to leave their trash and fish scraps on the pier but they do. People are not supposed to smoke on the beach or the pier on the beach but they do. The speed limit in a residential area and on Main Sreet are 25 mph or less but that law gets broken constantly.
Cars drive in the bike lanes even though they are not supposed too. Drivers are supposed to come to a complete stop before the crosswalk lines but they do not.
Ever heard of the “ California Rolling Stop?” When is the last time any of these laws/ordinaces were enforced? I walked down to the pier today on Memorial Day it was busy. I saw all of these laws and codes being violated and not a single enforecemnet officer monitoring to see if these codes were being broken on Main Street or the pier.
I am pretty sure pedestrians and bicyclists have the Right of Way because they both are smaller then cars.
I could not even begin to come up with a number for the times I have had a close call with a car be it walking or cycling in Seal Beach.
The simple truth is that many times drivers are not looking for people crossing the street or riding their bikes for fun or to school or work. With the same token if you are walking or cycling don’t just step out into the street without looking.
We live in a small beach community, “ Mayberry by the Sea “ as it is called so often. So why do we not treat as such ?
I have even had more then one near miss involving city vehicles, including SBPD, that were speeding in residential areas without cause.
I’m just curious in our small community where so many people at 7:15 a.m. and 2 p.m. travel to school to drop off or pick up their children at McGaugh. Are the police going to camp out and give parents and kids tickets who ride on the side walk or travel a block or two going the wrong way? Is this really “Mayberry by the Sea?”
Lets just look out for one another and be aware of our surrondings.
Jack Straw
Seal Beach
Socialism at it’s finest
Our state taxes us beyond reason to pay for welfare, median income residents and frivalous expenses. The state of California forcing a median income site in Seal Beach is an example of Socialism. Dictating to voters what we have to do.
It used to be the majority vote made the decision, now it is the minority rules!
We all know the elected officials in Sacramento are not concerned about the voice of the residents, it comes down to who lines their pockets. It is about time our elected officials of Seal Beach stand their ground behind the residents.
Doesn’t Leisure World—a fine retirement community—qualify for a median income location? If so, doesn’t this satisfy the dictating requirements?
Tom Hetherington
Seal Beach
All that Jazz
On behalf of the 73 students who are members of Los Alamitos High School Jazz I, Jazz II, and Jazz III, under the direction of John Rush, thank you to The Shops at Rossmoor for having these musicians perform at an outdoor concert Friday, May 24.
A wonderfully large crowd came out to support these high school groups, and it was fun to see people of all ages enjoying big band jazz.
Jazz really is a genre that brings generations together; a highlight was seeing little preschoolers dancing on the sidewalk, and, who knows, someday one of those little kids may want to join the jazz band because of a tune they heard played at The Shops at Rossmoor.
Annette Rygh, president
LAHS Jazz Band Booster Club
Dollar Tree value
Main Street has many unique shops and I try to shop “Seal Beach” whenever I can.
I have discovered another unique store in the Leisure World Shopping Center—the Dollar Tree Store (next to Roger Dunn Golf).
I recommend this store to bargain shoppers everywhere!
I stopped by recently because I needed party supplies—paper plates, napkins, etc., for a teacher appreciation lunch.
I needed a plastic serving bowl. Another paper/party supply store in Lakewood had plastic bowls for $12.99. The Dollar Tree had the exact bowl for $1.
The manager, Irene, welcomed me and it is obvious that she takes great pride in a clean, well-organized, well-stocked store.
You will be pleasantly surprised with their merchandise—please check out the Dollar Tree store.
Kathy Courtemarche
Seal Beach
Yes on Measure A
I am one of the earliest participants in the grassroots movement against the ProLogis “Toxic Truck Terminal.” Eye catching, isn’t it?
As a Cypress resident my earliest recollection of the ProLogis development came by way of a flyer left on my doorstep on or around April 1, give or take a few days. I, like many Cypress residents was shocked and appalled that a “Toxic Truck Terminal” was being built where we were told by petition signature gatherers was going to be a senior assisted living facility and associated support facilities, i.e. medical offices and the like.
This early movement turned into a collective group of both Cypress and Los Alamitos residents in need of direction.
The group “Citizens for Responsible Development, Cypress, CA,” commonly referred to as CFRD, was created and Steve Mauss was elected to direct the group along with George Pardon as assistant director.
Steve accepted the position under the condition that members would conduct themselves in a polite, responsible, and fact based manner.
Now obviously when dealing with an issue such as ProLogis and even the upcoming voter issue of Measure A, emotions can run a little high.
But those emotions should not be used to influence ones decision or vote when they’re not based on fact.
Long hours, days, and weeks of fact-based research along with meetings and negotiations between the interested parties have been spent to create an environment palatable for residents of both communities. Not too long ago a comment was made by a Los Alamitos resident member of CFRD eluding to the “fighting” that’s been going on for 20 years between the Los Alamitos residents and their City Council.
It makes me proud to see what two individuals giving direction to CFRD have accomplished in a little over a month.
It’s because of these accomplishments that a YES vote on Measure A is going to ensure that a ProLogis like facility will never be built on the golf course land south of Cerritos between Denni/Lexington and Moody.
Bob Render
Cypress
Measure A is Not Measure L
Unfortunately, some people are still drawing comparisons between this year’s Measure A and last year’s Measure L. Measure L is the ballot measure that Cypress residents approved last year that was marketed by many as a project that would bring us Senior Housing and other related facilities. The Measure L initiative language allowed a lot more project options and one of the options is being pursued currently by ProLogis with the proposed business park.
Since the public became aware of the ProLogis project, a lot has changed.
While the Measure A initiative language has options similar Measure L, the property owner has agreed to deed restrictions that make Measure A a great development for Cypress. The early concern that Measure A could bring a significant increase in trucks is no longer true. Warehousing and distribution are specifically excluded through deed restrictions in any of the areas under Measure A.
The early concern that Measure A may not include over 30 acres of housing is no longer true. Measure A will bring over 30 acres of new housing along Cerritos Avenue, a 5-acre parcel that will either be a new park or a neighborhood friendly commercial project, and an 11 acre business park that will be located near Costco.
There are even concerns about the ProLogis project that are no longer true. As a result of concerns raised by the Citizens for Responsible Development, ProLogis has dramically reduced the number of truck bays. ProLogis has committed that their development will not be a truck distribution center. ProLogis has even agreed to consider retail businesses in the building along Katella Ave which would further reduce truck bays. Consideration of the retail component would necessitate a left turn lane and signal into the property from the east bound lane along Katella Ave. The left turn lane and signal would require approval from the city of Los Alamitos which, to date, hasn’t been approved.
Early on, it was fair and responsible to draw comparisons between Measure A and Measure L. This is no longer appropriate. Anyone who continues to make such comparisons doesn’t know the facts about the significant changes that have occurred.
I was one of the early No on Measure A advocates. Given the deed restrictions proposed by the property owners and approved by the Cypress City Council, I am voting Yes on Measure A.
In last week’s letters to the editor, one writer recommended that you ask me if you have questions about Measure A or Measure L. I would welcome your questions. My email address is thepardons@sbcglobal.net. It is important to me that you know the truth.
Vote Yes on Measure A on June 25. It’s good for our city.
George Pardon
Cypress resident of 23 years
Bait and Switch
In 1987, the citizens of Cypress determined that they wanted the Los Alamitos Race Track area to be zoned for open space.
Against the wishes of the property owners and the Cypress City Council, the community voted in Measure D.
It zoned the LART for open space, and took control of the zoning for the property out of the hands of the city of Cypress and into the hands of the voters. In 1989, the then property owners attempted to rezone with voter approval the area. It lost in a stunning defeat.
When the new owners purchased the property, they knew the zoning and the restrictions.
But, in 2012 the new owners decided to make an attempt to change the zoning.
The petition signature gathers went about telling people that the area to be rezoned would be used for a senior living facility. But that is not what the 150+ page legal document the people were voting on said. Measure L was a classic bait-and-switch. From the way the signatures were gathered, to the way the 150+ pages changed the zoning, and then qualified the zoning change with a use not normally permitted in the express zoning.
Now Cypress residents are being told that they can vote for new housing on the north end of the property. Heck, they will even get a park. Some Cypress residents have “negotiated” a title restriction to be enforced by the city. But the reality is that all that is being asked is for the residents to give up what was fought for in 1987—the right to control the development and keep open spaces in Cypress.
If the measure is approved Cypress City Council will again have the ability to change the zoning at will. They can choose not to enforce the “negotiated” title restrictions. They can have the exact control that they had prior to the 1987 passage of Measure D. Control to give a developer everything they want and need, all while not protecting the open space or the community.
Voting “No!” on Measure A will not hurt the citizens or the city of Cypress. It will leave the open spaces preserved and will leave control in the hands of the people. It will ensure that the people will control what gets developed, if anything. It ensures that developers who pay for City Council campaigns don’t run roughshod over the residents of the community. People keep on saying “Well, development is going to happen, and we negotiated a good deal.” But the truth is that development doesn’t have to happen, and a 160+ page document that was so flawed that it required special negotiations (that may not even stand) after it was already placed on the ballot is not in the best interests of the community.
Over the Memorial Day weekend we honored those who fought for America, her values and for justice. In Cypress in 1987 there were those that fought for justice and for the values of the community. In 1989 those same citizens were outspent five and a half to one, and they still won because they stood up for community values, and for justice. In this election you can honor them, and the values and justice they fought for, by ensuring that their legacy of open spaces and voter control of development continues by voting No on Measure A. No to additional traffic clogging our streets. No to additional pollution. No to another bait-and-switch. No on Measure A.
J.M. Ivler
Los Alamitos
No on Measure A
The old saying goes, “Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me.” George Pardon has described how he was fooled twice by the Cypress City Council and the racetrack land owner.
The first time Mr. Pardon and the voters of Cypress were fooled was the passage of Measure L in June 2012. Promises of senior housing, a 160-page ballot measure not provided to the voters, and silence by the Cypress City Council, virtually guaranteed passage of Measure L. The result, a 156-truck door warehouse distribution project and no senior housing. Shame on the racetrack landowner and Shame on the Cypress City Council.
George Pardon describes the faults of Measure A: “…the potential of being a significant and unwelcome burden to our community… we were told the intent of Measure A was primarily single family housing and neighborhood commercial but the initiative told a different story…“The Measure A 160-page initiative has very similar language to last year’s June 2012 Measure L…”
The second time George Pardon and his co-hort Steve Mauss were fooled was in their acceptance of deed restrictions to limit Measure A. These restrictive covenants were voluntarily offered by the landowner with “enforcement” to be provided by the same Cypress City Council who remained silent to the public on Measure L. These “restrictions” will only be effective if Measure A passes. So why not just vote no and eliminate the need for these changes to Measure A? Shame on you George Pardon and Steve Mauss!
The need for deed restrictions to “change” Measure A is a glaring admission by the city council and landowner that the initiative is flawed. If Measure A is flawed as described by George Pardon in his letter, then it should not be passed. If the City Council cared one bit about the people of Cypress, they would withdraw their support for the ballot measure, and provide education and information to the public about the measure before the June 2013 election. The landowner could even withdraw the initiative.
If Measure A passes it is binding on the city council and will include all of the negatives described by George Pardon including warehouse and distribution next to the homes on Cerritos. The deed restrictions on the other hand are not binding on this or future city councils. They were approved by a vote of the council and they can be voided by a vote of the City Council now or in the future. Who would sue … the landowner … a resident, George Pardon and Steve Mauss, ask them?
The only question is, will the voters of Cypress be fooled twice?
Vote NO on Measure A.
Art DeBolt
Los Alamitos
Measure A is crazy
I, too, thought a “wilderness park” on the old Golf Course’s “back 9” holes was a crazy idea until Lois showed me recent photos of the gorgeous lakes there.
Then I did some research on how much money the golf course and race track owners stand to make on the zone changes proposed in Cypress’ Measure A.
There’s an easy way to find out by looking at the track owner’s 2003 “land swap” with Cottonwood Church. The track owners essentially swapped 29 acres with Measure D’s PS zone for 17.9 acres which were not restricted to PS by Measure D.
That was 61 percent more land – both parcels on Katella. Take off Measure D, make a 61 percent profit instantly.
Put another way, Cottonwood Church got 38 percent more land by taking land with Measure D’s PS zone in place.
In last year’s Measure L, Cypress voters took Measure D’s restriction off the 33 acres now slated for a ProLogis facility for nothing but a promise of a continuing care senior’s facility.
Now Cypress voters are being asked in Measure A to take off the Measure D restriction of 46.8 more acres in return for a promise to build a gated community on 30.7 acres of the old golf course’s “back 9.”
That’s a total of 79.8 acres removed from Measure D’s PS zone.
The Cottonwood deal established a formula of “donating” 38 percent of the land with Measure D’s PS restriction. Thirty eight percent of those 79.8 acres would be 30.32 acres, less than half an acre of what Measure A’s supporters claim will be locked up behind gates.
That also happens to be the land where Lois Waddle envisions a beautiful wilderness park, with the lakes unlocked for all to visit and enjoy.
Lois Waddle isn’t crazy.
But Cypress’ voters will be if they approve Measure A.
Dave Emerson
Los Alamitos
Facts Over Fear
I read with interest the letters to the editor from Los Alamitos residents Dave Emerson and Art DeBolt. Both were clear examples of “fear versus fact” because they use demagoguery in place of truth and reality. Allow me to explain:
Mr. Emerson lays out a case for blocking Measure A because he wishes to essentially “force” the current owner of private property to give up highly-valuable land to use as a park. Where would the park be located? In Cypress, of course. Who will pay for maintaining the park? Cypress residents. Where is Emerson from? Los Alamitos. The rationale for extracting parkland concessions from the current private owners is based upon an altruistic action by them to help the city of Cypress and Cottonwood Christian Center close a deal. Residents will remember that this action allowed the Costco project to be completed, which has turned out to be of very high value to shoppers from all surrounding communities. But take notice: The land grant has not been turned into a park. It is not costing us, the residents of Cypress, anything to maintain. What will that land become? Only time will tell, but it is not a park.
Mr. DeBolt’s letter was the ultimate act of using incorrect statements and words such as “shame on you” to push a brand of activism that has poisoned politics in the city of Los Alamitos for years. It adds nothing new to the discussion, and offers no solutions (Just saying “no” is not a solution). Let’s replace the misinformation with facts:
The deed restrictions were not “voluntarily” offered by the landowner. They were proposed as mitigation of concerns voiced by residents represented by Citizens for Responsible Development in Cypress. Residents found the language in Measure A to be too broad and wished to gain guarantees from the landowner and the City of Cypress that what is being proposed is what will be built. This was achieved through hours of good-faith negotiations between the parties in a spirit of unity and truthfulness.
And yet, Mr. DeBolt, using inaccurate statements, suggests that the parties involved should feel shame.
Mr. DeBolt asserts that the deed restrictions are not binding on this or future city councils. This is a FALSE statement, as verified by three separate attorneys, one of which was independently engaged by CFRD.
The deed restrictions and the restrictive covenant agreements flow with the property, regardless of the zoning changes in Measure A, or any other Measure that may be proposed later. They are recorded by the County and flow forward to all future owners and city councils. Any Cypress resident can file a demand in court that the city of Cypress enforce the deed restrictions. Apparently, Mr. DeBolt does not know this. He suggests that you ask me. I hope he reads my answer because it is based upon law and fact, not fear and demagoguery. In fact, I encourage everyone to take Mr. DeBolt’s advice: Ask me. Here is my email address: steven.mauss@gmail.com
Perhaps most troubling of all are Dave Emerson’s and Art DeBolt’s attempts to bring Los Alamitos-style politics to the city of Cypress. I do not believe they represent the majority of the good citizens of Los Alamitos, whom I have found to be quite ready for a new spirit of unity and reconciliation in their city.
Now is not the time to divide, blame, and destroy the reputations of those operating in good faith to remedy concerns. It’s time for the entire community to support truth, honesty, and unity by voting Yes on Measure A. Doing so will bring the benefits of beautiful housing along Cerritos, funding for schools and parks, and additional protections for all of us—even residents of Los Alamitos.
Steven K. Mauss
Cypress
Leisure World vote
Please help get everybody their vote in Leisure World Seal Beach. The election process in at least Mutual No. 3 is fradulent. I have first hand knowledge and experience of this fraudulent election process. Seal Beach Mutual No.3, a California Corporation.
1. There should be one ballot per share of common stock per apartment unit.
431 Apts = 431 Ballots
2. I heard that President Linda Stone announced not everybody is getting a Ballot.
3. I have never received a ballot for our apartment.
4 Are the ballots mailed to the legal party address on file in Stock Transfer?
5. There are many LW residents that are not the legal party on file yet live there.
6. The Legal party may or may not live there, or have an address outside of LW.
7. This illegal practice eliminating votes, especially those who are too infirm or had their Certificates of Capacity filed in LW fh their Legal party under CA law.
8. I called our GRF rep Shirley Reimers and said I had not received our ballots. You can’t trust this election. Do it over and give everybody their lawful vote.
Paul C. Ballard,
Seal Beach Leisure World
The opinions expressed in Letters to the Editor are not necessarily those of the Sun. The Sun welcomes Letters to the Editor. Letters should be 300 words maximum. Letters should be e-mailed, signed by the author and include the author’s address and phone number (the latter two are for verification, not publication). The Sun reserves the right to accept, edit, or reject letters for any reason. Unless otherwise indicated, all letters sent to the Sun are understood to be intended for publication. E-mail letters to: dennis@sunnews.org.
