Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Reminders

Please remember that the next meeting of Councilwoman Janice Hahn's Community Advisory Committee for the Ponte Vista project begins at 6:00 PM on Thursday May 10, 2007 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel, in San Pedro.

I am not quite sure what will or will not happen at the meeting. Mr. John Greenwood the chair of the committee asked for some more information from the Department of Transportation. I imagine that there may be more attempt to make and pass recommendations, but that process had some problems at the last meeting, and I think there will need to be some revision by the committee members, to find a better way to deal with public comments from those who wish to be heard on individual recommendations.

Please also remember the first meeting and rally in support of folks who demand that the site remain with its current (R1) zoning is scheduled for Wednesday May 16, 2007 at 7:00 P.M., at the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium Auditorium.

There are only 287 permanent seats inside the auditorium and I encourage everyone to guess how many times the auditorium would have to be filled to equal the added number of daily trips on Western Avenue, created by Bob's current plans.

Already the plans for the meeting are coming together and folks who come to the meeting will get to meet in person, some very well known, but not that often seen members of OUR community who care very much about us and want to help R Neighborhoods Are 1 achieve its goals.

Get ready for a surprise or two and bring your smiles, chuckle generators, and giggle machines. Unfortunately, we are going to have to provide some very scary facts and ask everyone some extremely difficult questions, they can only answer.

The meeting won't last all evening, kids are welcome, nobody will be hanged in effigy. No curse words will be used, but some pretty foul facts will be revealed.

The LAUSD School Board will add a new member from our area after an election on Tuesday May 15. I urge you all to help add Mr. Neal Kliner to the board. He has my vote and I hope votes from all correct thinking community members.

Also concerning our beloved LAUSD, there will be three meetings, with the final meeting being a vote by the entire Board of Education concerning the two new high schools proposed for this area. The first meeting is May 10, with the facilities committee.

The big meeting is scheduled for May 22, 2007 at 333 S. Beaudry, 1st floor, Los Angeles.
During that meeting, the members of the Board are to decide whether to go ahead with plans for SRHS #14, and SRHS #15. The meeting starts at 10:00 AM and the public is allowed to speak to the assembled members. Folks may call (213) 241-7002 to find out if the Board has set a specific time for this matter.

Individuals interested in speaking at the Board meeting, must call and register before 5:00 PM on 5/22/07.

If you read this blog regularly, you would have read my recommendations about where SRHS #14 should be placed (nowhere near Ponte Vista) and my recommendations about what SRHS #15 should look like.

Now another point.

I have now omitted comments about Linda D'Ambrosi. After speaking with some extremely ardent supporters of keeping Ponte Vista with its current zoning, they thought I was being a bit too tough on Ms. D'Ambrosi. I don't feel I was being all that bad, but in their honor, I will no longer put her quote inside her name.

That being written however, I am not going to let her slip by with her personal attacks on two sitting CAC members without my comments. Linda claimed during her comments that she has lived in San Pedro all of her life and her family has made a lot of money in that community. Fair enough Linda, but you don't live in San Pedro right now and you haven't lived there in some time. Learn the facts, and stay truthful.

Should you again launch into personal attacks and continued name calling, I will use this blog to again let everybody know that if you are like other supporters of Bob Bisno's current plans, you are no one I would enjoy dealing with and your continued comments deriding R1 supporters sets an example that leads many of us to feel that most supporters don't know all the facts about the Ponte Vista development and they are following someone who does not have the best interests of OUR community in his own vision.

Linda D'Ambrosi, you have set a poor example for folks claiming to support Bob Bisno's current plans. Shame on you!

As we are all still seeing, Bob has not made any changes in his current plans, we are still waiting for the pricing structure Bob used in his Guest Column and promised to us by Elise Swanson, and any real movement by folks who claim to support Bob Bisno, to call for Bob to begin negotiating with anyone as to the real numbers of units that should be built at Ponte Vista.

Of course, and like I have written, it may be too late for Bob's supporters to stop or even slow the R1 movement, no matter what anyone thinks about R1, NO COMPROMISE.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am not sure who you think you are fooling or if all the people who read this are idiots. People for and agianst read this blog are ready to enter into reasoned and smart debate. While attempting to paint yourself as even handed and a fair debater on the subject you debase it with personal attacks whihc you find smart and witty.
Your continued use of Linda "Bob Bisno will save San Pedro" D'Ambrosi is insulting and is a personal attack. Just because you dont think that it is does not make it so. You do what many have done befor you by attacking the messanger and not the substance of the message.
Pehaps you think you are are writing only for those who already agree with you. At that point you are preaching to the choire. I guess that makes you a moot point huh.

Anonymous said...

R-1 yesterday, R-1 today, and R-1 forever. The citizens of San Pedro, RPV, and Lomita are not fooled by Bisno's spin, phony polls, and silly ads.

mellonhead said...

Today we had the Cup Caper. About 11AM this morning someone used plastic cups shoved into the holes of the Ponte Vista chain link fence on Western Ave. to spell out "NO PONTE VISTA". It lasted about 20 minutes before it was taken down by 3 PV people who walked out of the south gate on John Montgomery Dr. It was on the fence next to the Ponte Vista sign opposite Ave. Aprenda.

Anonymous said...

If you say something stupid over and over, you deserve to be called on it.

Anonymous said...

Mellonhead,

Oh how very mature; littering, damaging the environment, and vandalizing someone else's property. How mature. I guess this is what you people consider civil, acceptable behavior. I won't even go any further since it is obvious you people have no social conscience whatsoever.

Ted Carlson

Anonymous said...

Linda D'Am for LAUSD school board! "Saive publick edukashun" in Peeeedro.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 8:30pm - Good for you. Thank you for pointing this out. For a while now, I've thought it was just me who was see the bias.

Anonymous 10:56pm - blah, blah, blah

Anonymous 6:50am - how very mature. You rate right up there with mellonhead. It's obvious you are not one of those 50% who graduated from high school. I'm surprised you can post up at all with having to use the word recognition. It is a wonder that you can read.

mellonhead said...

Anon 148AM "Ted Carlson" and Anon 1147AM Don't pick on the mellonhead. he's innocent-for the most part.

M Richards said...

Howdy Anonymous 8:30 PM,

I think I will repeat what you wrote and then comment on several parts.


"Anonymous said...
I am not sure who you think you are fooling or if all the people who read this are idiots."

Anonymous 8:30 PM, you have read this blog. Do you believe you are and idiot?

"People for and agianst read this blog are ready to enter into reasoned and smart debate. While attempting to paint yourself as even handed and a fair debater on the subject you debase it with personal attacks whihc you find smart and witty."

I would enjoy entering and continuing reasoned and smart debates and discussions with folks who have all different points of view on the subject. So far I have been called a "ranting elitist", a "lunatic" and many other slurs, by folks who disagree with keeping the current zoning that is legally found at Ponte Vista.

Bob has done absolutely nothing to meet any sort of description of being even-handed. This blog is written by someone who has no obligation to be even-handed, as far as debating the issues. You probably have your opinions, I have mine. If you don't like my opinions, you are always welcome to start your own free blog.

If you believe that my use of the quote in the middle of the individual's name is wrong, then perhaps you don't believe Mr. Bisno is really planning a development that will benefit OUR community. The person who made the quote also leveled personal attacks on two members of the CAC during a meeting in which both of those individuals were not able to respond to the personal attacks in a their own defense. If you truly beleive it is quite alright to attack persons who are not able to defend themselves, then, I am sorry for you.

The person who made and repeated the quote and made the attacks, claimed she was a successful real estate person who has lived in San Pedro all of her live, except for the fact that she doesn't live in San Pedro now and she made references to the money she has made in San Pedro, before she moved out. It seems to me that person should have thought better before she uttered words that brought a great deal of laughter from many folks, including some supporters of Bob's current plans. I have been attacked on all sides of the Ponte Vista issue, and by both supporters and opponents of Bob's current plans. If I can take the heat, I believe anyone making such an outrageous comment should be able to stand a little heat. Please remember, I have not called that person any names, that I am aware of and I think supproters of her's, if she has any, might want to advise her that sometimes words should be measured before being blurted out.

Oh, and another thing, the word is spelled "which".

"Your continued use of Linda "Bob Bisno will save San Pedro" D'Ambrosi is insulting and is a personal attack."

Please tell me how repeating a quote a person made three times is insulting, and more specifically, a "personal attack". I did not challenge her intelligence, morals, thought processes. I didn't call her any names. I believe persons who believe I am insulting the person just because I use her quote as part of her name, actually have a problem with the quote and perhaps the person who made it, and/or the manner it was made.

The quote was her quote. Defenders of her should deal with it and either stop reading this blog or admit that it was probably a comment that most supporters don't really believe. Do you think Bob Bisno is going to save San Pedro? Please sack up and tell us the truth.

"Just because you dont think that it is does not make it so. You do what many have done befor you by attacking the messanger and not the substance of the message."

Now REALLY! I not only did not attack the messenger,(I merely repeated the words she used), I don't believe the message is even worthy of attacking other than pointing out that an avowed supporter of Bob's current plans made a statement of that kind and it looks like she is the only supporter with the guts to say what she said, mean what she said, and doesn't hide behind the propaganda that Bob continues to put out.

"Pehaps you think you are are writing only for those who already agree with you. At that point you are preaching to the choire. I guess that makes you a moot point huh."

Anonymous 8:30 PM, if you take some time and read through parts of this blog you will read some great and thought provoking comments from folks like Tom Field, Skip Robinson, and yes, even Michael Meacher. All three of them disagree with me and I bet all the folks on the R1 side of the aisle. This blog is quite unlike Bob's Web site, because not only does it allow for two-way conversation by folks who disagree, but it allows all points of view to be read.

Bob continues to preach a sermon to the "choir" that has absolutely no room for compromise, change, and real discussion. I feel all of the followers of Bob's current plan, either really believe in Bob's plans or they are not willing or able to attempt to get him to discuss options, in any real sense.

Janice Hahn, during the first meeting of the CAC stated what she has stated time and time again; there are not going to be 2,300 condominiums at Ponte Vista. If opponents would join with supporters to get Bob to put his current plans aside and really start a negotiation process, then perhaps we can all get back together and work to make this community the best place to live, possible.

As long as Bob continues to hold onto his current plans than there really is no reason for people supporting R1 to demand anything other than;

R1 NO COMPROMISE!
mw

P.S. Now I have found that I am being called a "moot point". Will the name calling ever stop!

Anonymous 8:30 PM said...

Dear Moot Point,
Thank you for finding my faulty transcription or typo if you will of the word “which” which was meant to be which. Or did I mean Witch? And for the point I do not think I am AN idiot or "AND" idiot as you call me. That was an awesome personal attack and turn of phrase. Very witty I'm sure. Indeed.
You once again defended your bad behavior of the personal attacks with more personal attacks now on me. You then went on to once again attack the credibility of Linda "Bob Bisno will Save San Pedro" D'Ambrosi and not the substance of the arguments. Yes I will concede that “Bob Bisno will Save San Pedro” is an exaggeration but you use it as your only attack on the woman and hence it is a personal attack. As long as we are on the topic of exaggerations NWSPNC does not speak for 50,000 anything when they san no to Ponte Vista, People will make it to work on time if Ponte Vista is approved at 2300 units, and the people who work for Bisno are neither “High Paid Whores” or deserve a “…bullet in the head.” All of these were claims made by the R1 rabble.
I have read your blog. At least twice now you have accused Bisno of not allowing open debate on the issue because its not on his web sight.

“Bob has done absolutely nothing to meet any sort of description of being even-handed.”

Lets not forget that it is Bob Bisno that is paying for the room, food, and drink presented at the CAC for which opposition are not only granted an opportunity to speak on the issues but are also given seats on the CAC its self. I think it is fair to say that he is giving the opposition more than an adequate opportunity to speak.
At the end of your response:

“If opponents would join with supporters to get Bob to put his current plans aside and really start a negotiation process, then perhaps we can all get back together and work to make this community the best place to live, possible.”

You then conclude with:

“R1 NO COMPROMISE!”

Which is it? Negotiation or “No Compromise!” Add not under any obligation to make a consistent argument to the list of things you are not under any obligation to.

Love Always,
Anonymous 8:30 PM

M Richards said...

Here we go again!

I guess I am going to have to keep doing this until this person stops commenting or learns to read what I have written a bit better.


"Dear Moot Point,"

See, again these folks who seem to support Bob's current plans continue to call names.

"Thank you for finding my faulty transcription or typo if you will of the word “which” which was meant to be which. Or did I mean Witch? And for the point I do not think I am AN idiot or "AND" idiot as you call me."

Yes I typed "and" instead of "an" but what you failed to realize is that I didn't call you any name, I simply asked you if you thought you were an idiot.

"That was an awesome personal attack and turn of phrase. Very witty I'm sure. Indeed."

I hope you know the difference between a question and a statement, because if you had read my question all the way to the "?" (question mark), I was simply asking you a question.

"You once again defended your bad behavior of the personal attacks with more personal attacks now on me. You then went on to once again attack the credibility of Linda "Bob Bisno will Save San Pedro" D'Ambrosi and not the substance of the arguments. Yes I will concede that “Bob Bisno will Save San Pedro” is an exaggeration but you use it as your only attack on the woman and hence it is a personal attack."

Well actually I could "attack" Ms. D'Ambrosi for her personal attack on me during a CAC meeting. I did not have the chance to respond to her derogatory comments during the meeting. Since I have decided to remove her quote from her name, I shall not waste my time and thoughts on what she has done in the past. I could point out her mistatements of facts, but why bother, now.

And now you seem to write that Ms. D'Ambrosi exaggerates. Thank you for your opinion on this matter.


"As long as we are on the topic of exaggerations NWSPNC does not speak for 50,000 anything when they san no to Ponte Vista,"

Where in the world did you come up with that last statement? You are most correct in that portion of your comment. The Board of Directors represents folks who live in approximately over 20,000 residences in their area. I have no idea how many folks live in the area, but all eligable stakeholders had a chance to vote for members of the Board, and in the last election, the candidates who opposed Bob's current plans overwhelmingly won seats on the Board.

It seems you are attacking the northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council. Are you also attacking the two other groups of directors of the other two Neighborhood Councils that overwhelmingly oppose Bob's current plans?

If you are, why haven't you run for election on a Board of Directors if you live in one of the three areas where the three N.C.s have stakeholders?

"People will make it to work on time if Ponte Vista is approved at 2300 units, and the people who work for Bisno are neither “High Paid Whores” or deserve a “…bullet in the head.” All of these were claims made by the R1 rabble."

So now you have to continue to revert to more name calling. Is your cause so desparate that you need to continue to lower yourself?

Perhaps you didn't care to know that I did my very best to feed a whole pie's worth of crow to the person who wrote those bad words, and had you been reading this blog just after those comments were published, you would have read my stern condemnation of the author's use of such foul words.

You probably didn't care to know that I wrote to Elise Swanson and talked to Bob because those words were so offensive.

But here you go again, attacking folks who demand the current zoning remain on the entire Ponte Vista site.

Now here's a clue PAL, I am not one who is calling for R1 on the entire site! Had you read this blog a littel more in depth, you would find that I favor a Senior Housing section that would require some of the property to have a higher zoning density than R1 allows for. I am sorry that you didn't take the time to read more carefully.


"I have read your blog. At least twice now you have accused Bisno of not allowing open debate on the issue because its not on his web sight."

Have you read my entire blog? There is no place on Bob's Web site for discussion that would remain visible to viewers of that site. If no real discussion or debate is found on his site, who do you think makes the final decision on what the site holds?

"“Bob has done absolutely nothing to meet any sort of description of being even-handed.”

Lets not forget that it is Bob Bisno that is paying for the room, food, and drink presented at the CAC for which opposition are not only granted an opportunity to speak on the issues but are also given seats on the CAC its self."

Again you expose yourself for not knowing the facts about how a developer goes through many different processes in order to seek approval of "specific plan zoning" I have written extensively about what Bob's requirements are and if you choose to read the posts involving the processes, perhaps your ignorance on this particular subject will not appear again, on this blog.


"I think it is fair to say that he is giving the opposition more than an adequate opportunity to speak.
At the end of your response:"

Bob Bisno is required under established guidelines to provide for public comment. He is not being beneficial to anyone other than himself in the type of processes he is using. He is paying for something he wants, and what is wrong with that?

"“If opponents would join with supporters to get Bob to put his current plans aside and really start a negotiation process, then perhaps we can all get back together and work to make this community the best place to live, possible.”

You then conclude with:

“R1 NO COMPROMISE!”"

Now Anonymous, I am going to reprint what I wrote exactly as it appeared. Please read it one or ten more times, very carefully;

As long as Bob continues to hold onto his current plans than there really is no reason for people supporting R1 to demand anything other than;

R1 NO COMPROMISE!

Now, Anonymous, where does it appear that I am demanding R1 on behalf of myself? Did you read the "people supporting R1" part?

Go right ahead and look back at some of my more recent posts and you will find me defending folks who demand keeping the current zoning at Ponte Vista, but I challenge you to find where I am demanding on the part of me, for R1 throughout the site.


"Which is it? Negotiation or “No Compromise!” Add not under any obligation to make a consistent argument to the list of things you are not under any obligation to."

Well, I think Bob should have listened to Janice Hahn last August when she said that there would not be 2,300 condominiums built at Ponte Vista. I also think Bob had plenty of chances to help keep our community together and begin talking with reasonable individuals about a reasonable, responsible, realistic, and respectful number of units at Ponte Vista, instead of cementing his current plans into concrete and telling all of us what "will be" at Ponte Vista. His arrogance with his statements, when no living human actually knows how many units will be built at Ponte Vista, boggles this high-school educated brain.

How many times do I need to repeat myself, that I am seeking a compromise and I feel Bob has needed to sit down and negotiate for a long time? For many months I truly did not believe that folks demanding R1 all over Ponte Vista stood any chance. Bob's intransigence in continuing to "demand" that his current plans be approved, is making it easier for the folks who are demanding that all of Ponte Vista remains R1, much easier.

Bob is actually making my job, Tom Field's position, and many others who don't want 2,300 units but would be willing to sit down and talk, so much harder.

Now anonymous 8:30, how about you and me having a friendly little debate about Bob's current plans and the impacts those plans would have on OUR community? I bet you have read as much of the DEIR as I have and learned as much as I have about the project. So why don't we set up a time and a place where we can have folks gather and listen to both of us, to find out how many folks really support Bob's current plans?

Now one last thing, Anonymous. For the folks who demand that the Ponte Vista at San Pedro site keep the zoning it currently has, (I am not one of them) they want R1 NO COMPROMISE!

I also find your "Love Always" to be offensive and extremely disingenous. I doubt you know me very well. I don't usually associate with folks who like Bob's current plans HOWEVER, I like many of the folks I feel don't share my opinions and my wife has a very good friend who is not only a supporter of Bob's current plans, but married to a wonderful fellow who is a co-president of at least one of Bob's Boards.
MW

Anonymous said...

why do you MW make and distribute "no compromise" buttons?

M Richards said...

Good question Anonymous 8:15 AM, and a fair one, too.

I have a hand button making machine. If someone comes to me with an idea for a button that they want made, and I agree to make them, I do.

You have never seen my face with any "R1", "R Neighborhoods Are 1", or "R1 NO COMPROMISE" near it, and with me wearing any of those buttons. I do not wear those buttons and, as of now, don't plan to.

I support the vast majority of the folks who demand that Ponte Vista remains with its current zoning throughout the property, even though I don't necessarily agree with that opinion for myself.

My postition can be read throughout this blog and your question demonstrates that you know my position, and I really appreciate it when folks realize what my opinion is, whether they agree with are not. so thank you for that.

If I were to wear the buttons and then call for the Senior Housing section that I am calling for, it would be perfectly correct to call me a hypocrit. But I don't feel that I am a hypocrit for aiding those who seek to keep the site as it is currently zoned as long as I also reveal that I don't necessarily share all of their opinons on the subject.

I am considered the "oddball" of the group and I am still getting pestered to move all the way over to the R1 side, but as long as I feel the way I do, I will keep getting hounded and criticized by all sides.
MW

Anonymous said...

MW,
Janice Hahn announced publicly at a community meeting the other night that she has seen no good reason to change the R-1 zoning at PV. So I would ask that you really stick to R-1 and don't just "split the difference" etc. You have much support.

M Richards said...

Thanks Anonymous 11:01PM,

See, even Janice Hahn puts me in the hot spot. but I don't mind.
As long as I still feel that some seniors in OUR community really want some type of section devoted to seniors, I don't know of a better place to put it. I think because Janice has said what she has said, I could call for a smaller Senior Housing section. I feel there are a number of members of OUR community who would buy on of the units, and Bob should be required to provide ALL mitigation in order to have the Senior Housing section, that it might be the best result for all of us.

Of course, along with the Senior Housing section, there would be single-family, detached housing on lots of not less than 5,000 square feet in area.

Perhaps 700 Senior Housing units that I have been supporting is too high, now that I know what Ms. Hahn is thinking. Perhaps we all must adjust our numbers if we are seeking compromise proposals.

As much as many of the R Neighborhoods Are 1 are trying to get me to go with strictly R1, I still hold out for a Senior Housing section of some size. Perhaps I will consider 400-units to be the best number for Senior Housing units. I'll think on that number for a bit.
MW

Anonymous said...

Pardon me if you have addressed this before MW, but what exactly does "senior housing" mean?? My undertanding is that it is not for elderly parents or grandparents etc., but as currently defined, means those 55 and older...not that "old" ! Bascially those who don't want to deal with kids around.

M Richards said...

Thank you Anonymous 10:54 AM,

Bob Bisno's 575 Senior Housing units will be for persons, one of which, at each unit being 55-years of age, or older. Also There is limited amounts of minor humans that may reside in the section and Bob has laid out that they would be limited to needing the residents to provide living assistance to the minor child or an adult, not capable of living on their own.

Bob did not say how young the adult who is not required to be 55-years of age or older qualifying adult would need to be to be able to live in the section.

It is quite conceivable for a 62-year old male to buy a unit in the section and marry a much younger individual and have that person move into the section. What happens if the older male finds the younger wife pregnant? Would he have to sell his unit? That is a question Bob has not answered?

I have heard many older supporters of Bob's current plans state that they want units in a segregated site to be away from children.
MW

Anonymous said...

To all the R1 haters:
Can ANY of you please tell us what good will ever come out of any other density other than R1? Can you? Please? Convince me. I'm on the fence.

Anonymous said...

No takers. Okay then. R1 No Compromise, nobody can convince me otherwise!

"Ted Carlson" said...

Hey anonymous 10:22 and 10;07, I was busy picking up my maid from the border where she was taken and I couldn't get back to you until now. Give me a break will ya. It's not easy leaving a golf game to have to drive all the way to the border in my Hummer to pick up Lucia so she can cook and clean for me since my wife left me.

Now about density, why in the heck are you complaining? San Pedro is not as dense as Santa Monica. Why can't we have folks who will shop and buy stuff so my lease holders can make more and I can charge more in rents on the business property I own.

There are going to be many more cranes in the harbor and their drivers need a place closer to where they work so they can come home at lunch time and have a nooner with their wives or girlfriends.

Density schensity, get over it!

There will be building at Ponte Vista and 37 units per acre is less than other places in L.A. If you don't like density, move to the Dakota's

Im sick and tired of all you ranting elitists telling good folks like me what needs to be in your community. Buddy, its my community too and if you don't like that, then move!

I know I lied when I wrote that I was an R1 supporter in the More last Saturday. Real R1 supporters don't seem to have the guts to lie like we do. So quit your belly-aching and get over it.

M Richards said...

Ted,
I didn't appreciate your sarcastic letter to the editor in Saturday's More San Pedro and I don't appreciate your sarcasm on this blog.

It looks like supporters of Bob's current plans are lowering themselves to the lowest common levels to try and keep Bob's current plans floating.

Bob has continued to be unwaivered by any comments, suggestions, pleas, demands, or questioning by anyone about his current plans and I feel his supporters have to try and prop his current failing plans up to ease their own feelings that they may have been duped by a smart salesman who won't tell them the tires on the used car he is trying to sell them are bald and ready to burst.

Your attempts to make you look like an R1 supporter have failed to convince anybody that you are nothing but a sad supporter holding on to the last breaking straws of your developer's plans.

I hope I don't read any more of you sarcasm or any criticizing of R1 or R Neighborhoods Are 1 on this blog. If you don't like what you read here, just go away....
and take Bob with you!
MW