The increasing number of character assassination type letters and ads in recent editions of the local newspapers is very disturbing. It is unfortunate that individuals choose to write these kinds of letters instead of having the courage of their convictions to enter the race as Roy van de Hoek and other candidates who have been maligned have.
To oppose the excesses of an establishment, civil disobedience may be the only course of action. The Boston Tea Party comes to mind as an example, was well as the Selma march and Rosa Parks. The methods used by Roy van de Hoek to challenge the actions of authorities were no different than those used by others in the past. In his case, however, environmental protection was the cause, not civil liberty, which, in today’s development frenzy environment, is as much of a major cause for concern. Malibu could do worse than elect a maverick who would present an alternative view.
Considering the aggravation and cost activities previous candidates incurred opposing and defeating frivolous FPPC charges, Roy made a prudent economic decision when he elected to pay the fine rather than undergo the harassment and greater cost. Malibu needs council members who can make these kinds of decisions.
The Malibu Times and Mr. Ahern could put their investigative talents to better use to benefit the community by determining what really triggered AB988 during this current City Council’s watch so that kind of action can be avoided in the future. The consequences of Roy van de Hoek’s transgressions are piddling compared to the effect AB988 has and will have on the Malibu community,
Efrom Fader