Well, the dirty politics are starting as usual. I can’t believe that anyone could be so uncaring and vicious in light of the fact that Harry died just last Saturday. You would think that anyone that worked so closely would want to take part in a memorial, especially as Harry was a thinking and kind person.

I have talked to many people who were shocked at the unkind words. All we want is a reasonable City Council who will consider the welfare of all the community.

Jane Hemenez

Warning! Leopards do not change their spots.

In reinventing himself, candidate Jennings has put forth a new persona.

For those who care about Malibu and do not want to see Malibu overdeveloped, be very cautious and think twice if you are considering voting for Mr. Jennings.

When Mr. Jennings sat on the council previously, he was a consistent advocate for large development interests. As I attended the many land use hearings, here is some of what I observed firsthand:

Civic Center: Mr. Jennings voted to have the Specific Plan of approximately 1,200,000 square of development go to an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) without even an attempt at scaling back the size and scope of the development.

Trancas Field: At Trancas, the surrounding community wanted Trancas Field to be designated one house per five acres. Jennings wanted higher density of 2-acre zoning and supported a failed motion to that effect. At five acres, 14 homes would be allowed on Trancas Field, at two acres, 35 homes would be allowed.

Lunita Pacific: All councilpersons except Jennings voted against the 38 Lunita Pacific condos, declaring it a health and safety hazard to Broad Beach. The developer sued. It was Jennings, House and Harlow that voted not to appeal a court case that was “winnable” on appeal, thus allowing the developer to go forward with 38 condos. For the record, there was never a proposal for six houses before the City Council for its approval. This is pure propaganda.

Candidate Jennings would generally couch his vote by saying that if we don’t do what the developers request, we will be sued. This was Mr. Jennings’ modus operandi.

With the exception of Lunita Pacific, all of the above denials did not result in lawsuits. If House or Jennings had the conviction to appeal, there could very well be one home being built where the Lunita condos are today.

Remember, tigers do not change their stripes, nor leopards their spots.

Patt Healy

on behalf of

Malibu Coalition for Slow Growth

It is with a distressing sense of resignation and troubled curiosity that I read a prominently featured article concerning the Sierra Club endorsement of Carolyn Van Horn and Walt Keller in the upcoming city elections.

This endorsement is a clear demonstration of the way things happen in our town where cronyism and selective values have become an accepted part of political life.

Fact: Joan House is the only incumbent candidate who supported the appeal of the 146-room Adamson Hotel. Had the appeal been granted the hotel would have been limited to 106 rooms, which the EIR referred to as the “Environmentally Superior” recommendation. Joan House believed that a hotel over twice the size of Malibu’s current largest hotel was enough for our town. Not so for Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller.

Although both candidates now say they voted for the smaller number of rooms, the truth is that Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller voted to allow the larger project which permits removal of eight acres of endangered coastal scrub supposedly “mitigated,” according to Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller, by the retirement of 30 acres of unbuildable land located well outside the city limits. In addition, Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller granted the project grading of 119,000 cubic yards where the city code permitted only 1,000 cubic yards. Still, Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller get the endorsement.

Fact: Joan House is the only incumbent candidate to vote in favor of the Malibu Lagoon Septic Study which demonstrated that residential septic systems were not a significant factor in lagoon pollution. Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller voted against this important piece of environmental legislation. Still Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller get the endorsement.

Fact: Joan House is the only incumbent candidate who voted for an environmentally sensitive six home settlement of the 28-unit Portshead Project. Still Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller get the endorsement.

Joan House’s list of endorsements includes those of Former Mayor Jeff Kramer, Dr. Jeff Harris, and Bill Littlejohn all of whom are strong environmentalists.

Question: Why would the Sierra Club ignore Joan’s clear and positive environmental record?

Fact: Ms. Van Horn’s close friend and advisor Marcia Hanscomb was one of the three Sierra Club selectors. Yes, the same Marcia Hanscomb for whom Ms. Van Horn sought a $25,000 city grant.

One last important fact: This rigged endorsement will not change Joan House’s clearly demonstrated commitment to environmental issues. What separated her from Ms. Van Horn and Mr. Keller is this. When it gets down to voting as a City Council member, Joan House keeps her word and is proud to tell the truth about her voting record.

Elliott Megdal

STOP is a PAC that was registered last week to defeat several front-running candidates. If past elections are any indication, a video or CD will likely be in your mail boxes soon, but too late for any response from those it will attack. Videos have been effective in the past, but the community of Malibu deserves better than expensive fear-mongering commercials that attack, lie and mislead.

I have not seen the video but I am sure it will attempt to cast me and others as “pro-development schemers” who care nothing about increasing traffic on PCH, protecting wetlands or our environment. I have been castigated already as “dealing with the devil” for having sat on a council-majority approved ad hoc committee for 11 months with the Malibu Bay Company. In fact, Tom Hasse and I were doing everything that is humanly possible in the negotiation of words — pushing, pulling and cajoling the Bay Company to provide amenities for the city via a development proposal.

The development proposal is only an option for the community’s consideration, not a done deal. I have said all along that this proposal should be brought to the public for its approval. I also support a thorough Environmental Impact Report.

The truth behind the video is that the initiators are motivated less by a desire to serve the whole community but more by a desperate attempt to maintain control over the Malibu City Council and its commissions so they can continue to dictate their personal, as well as political, will.

Now, you must ask yourselves, what is the truth? Is Joan House a pro-development sellout? My response to that is — if I were, I would not have been given the endorsements of people like Jeff Kramer, Harry Barovsky, Leon Cooper, Frank Basso, Bill and Fini Littlejohn, Les Moss, Sherman Baylin, Mary Frampton and Fran Pavley, to name just a few. These local political and environmental activists have always fought for the protection of the environment and slow growth.

The bottom line is this. It’s time to stop name calling and fear mongering. Let’s work together toward solutions of the problems that we now face using the resources that we now have. Imagine what we could accomplish if we could but work together.

Joan House

city councilwoman

Save Malibu for Malibu. I heard these words this weekend on television under the presentation of a political campaign by Councilman Keller of our city of Malibu. What came to mind when hearing those words was, what does Save Malibu for Malibu mean? Who are you saving our fair city for? After nine years on the Council, the city of Malibu is getting deeper and deeper into one crisis after another, and the people of Malibu are being left out of this mix. We do not have the following: A new City Hall Building, resurfaced roads, meeting rooms, a nice hotel (with all the trimmings), senior citizens/teen center, sheriff’s station, disability ramps (for sidewalks) and more. A city needs services provided to its citizens by the City Council.

After watching some televised political forums (PACs and the Malibu Township Council) I have come to the conclusion that three of the candidates are saying the same thing and appear to be willing to work together for the sake of the citizens, the numerous projects (that are now in the pipeline) for the council to act upon in a reasonable efficient manner. The three candidates that would be an asset to the community are Jeff Jennings, Joan House and Ken Kearsley.

Remember, there are six candidates for the three City Council positions. It is up to you to put the three who will be able to complete each project in an effective manner with city staff and interagency (county, state and federal), so reasonableness is returned to this small metropolis.

Remember this is our city. Vote on April 11, 2000, with me for three candidates who will accomplish this tremendous task of putting the city on a positive, reasonable, achievable plane.

Marilyn Santman

Regarding the letter last week criticizing Malibu Homeowners for Reform, Julie Steinberg’s comment “When I looked at the public benefits they are giving, I didn’t see any benefits for me … I’m not a senior citizen, nor a teen …I don’t have kids. So what’s my benefit? All I see for me…” This “me only attitude” is contemptible. Malibu would be a richer place without people who are zealous about ensuring that the lives of children, teens and senior citizens are not improved. This is such an immoral position that one has to wonder how they became so selfish that they are proud to announce it and flaunt their lack of civic mindedness, compassion or concern for their neighbors.

The letter has several false allegations that confirm the author was writing political copy. Our licensed contractors are experts in the building code and believe Malibu homes would be safer if the city applied reasonable state standards and if building department inspectors had a friendly relationship with the public. The current antagonism between the two has only produced widespread bootlegging. We believe it is possible to restore the positive communications between homeowners and inspectors that existed before Proposition 13 when cities began treating permits as a source of revenue to make up for tax shortages.

Regarding the old “developer” attack, this reform movement has a vitality of its own and is far removed from developers. As the founder of Malibu Homeowners for Reform, my only previous political experience was as a community organizer for Treepeople for five years where I devoted my time to planting trees in schoolyards and neighborhoods all over Los Angeles and raising funds for tree planting. When I began hearing friends’ stories of the city’s Gestapo tactics against them for minor code issues, I rallied to their defense. Being a part of this effort and the outpouring of public support have confirmed my belief that we can have a beautiful environment in Malibu and still respect people’s right to privacy in their homes.

Anne Hoffman

Timing in elections, as in real life, is everything. I said, not long ago, that I would never again contribute anything to your Letters to the Editor section, unmindful of the admonition, “Never say never.” Perhaps I should have said I would limit myself to one each millennium — unless sorely provoked. But let us get back to the subject of timing.

Jeff Jennings, as a notable example, is a master of timing. Jennings, shortly before the April 1998 Malibu election, filed with the California Fair Political Practices Commission a complaint regarding the Malibu Citizens for Less Traffic newspaper ads about his and other council persons’ voting records on development issues. Next, he went to the press with his complaint just before election day — early enough to gain maximum political advantage and late enough to prevent effective response.

Two years have now passed in the FPPC investigation of Jennings’ 1998 election complaint. No charges have ever been made, and late last year the original FPPC investigator was removed from the case. But the file in this long dormant investigation, which the FPPC should have been able to wrap up with perhaps two months (not years) investigation in 1998, remains technically open. This, most convenient for Mr. Jennings, enabled him once again to make political use of his 1998 election complaint two years later, less than two weeks before the April 2000 election.

Does this chain of circumstances provoke any concern or suspicion? In my view, especially sinister and frightening is the chill on exercise of First Amendment rights to exchange information and opinions on public issues and the boost to Jennings’ political campaign caused by Big Brother California FPPC’s threat of prosecution of Malibu citizens posed by its expressed interest in investigating associations of people and the specific wording and factual accuracy of ads place by them respecting local Malibu issues. Who appointed the California FPPC as thought police over Malibu’s city elections, anyway?

Artfully timed, but much cruder (they are not lawyers, after all) is the March 30 Malibu Homeowners for Reform’s reprehensible piece of hate literature, which is too full of new deliberate falsehoods for detailed item by item response in these last days before the election. I’ll just take one, the lead item in MHR’s March 30 ad.

Charge: “Van Horn has an illegal, unpermitted second kitchen in her home.”

(Based on city of Malibu letter to council candidate Carolyn Van Horn, dated November 2,1993, requesting removal of second stove.)

Fact: The stove was promptly (in a matter of days) removed in 1993, and was replaced by a hot plate, permitted in the “Granny” portion of the premises then used by Carolyn’s mother, which are now occupied by Carolyn’s legally blind son. Any honest objections?

Do the good but mean-spirited folks at MHR really expect anyone to believe the Malibu Code Enforcement Officers took no action for over six years? Would you buy a used car from anyone so free with the truth? Following the advice of people like this as to who you should vote for could cost each of us in Malibu a lot more than what one might lose on an MHR used car.

Art London

I am writing to ask for your support for Jeff Jennings, candidate for Malibu City Council. I believe him to be a man of high honesty and integrity who symbolizes the kind of community I want to live in.

When I moved to Malibu seven years ago, I was a young mother of two, following my husband, Mike, to his new position as principal of Malibu High School. It was an exciting opportunity, but I had doubts about the move. I was concerned about raising my two little boys in what I perceived to be a shallow, materialistic town. However, I found Malibu to be a warm, close community with many families who hold their children’s education and quality of life to be of the utmost importance. I felt fortunate to be able to send my two boys to Malibu schools and participate in sports and other community programs. I met Jeff Jennings in his role as a leader in starting the high school and serving on its governance council through good and difficult times.

In 1997, my younger son, Sean, died suddenly in an accident. I was overwhelmed by the outpouring of friendship and support that came from many in Malibu who didn’t even know us. Jeff and his wife, Kris, were among those who offered support. I was more convinced than ever that this was home, that I would never find a more caring community.

However, I have been dismayed to find that city government has not reflected these values of care for children and families. I have been appalled by less-than-honest election tactics and representatives who appear to look backward to some “ideal” Malibu of old that no longer exists. The “new” Malibu is vibrant and alive with children and young families filling our schools and parks. With the opening of Point Dume Marine Science Elementary School, where I currently teach fifth grade, our former community center has had to restrict its programming, affecting children and seniors, and further restricting our park space. Jeff has been in the forefront in advocating a new community center that would serve not only seniors and children but our growing population of teens in need of a safe place. These youth, although not voters, are a constituency we cannot afford to ignore.

The kind of bickering and animosity that has characterized city government does not reflect the values of neighborliness and community that I know to be those of my fellow Malibu citizens. I believe that Jeff Jennings does embody those values and has proved that in his many civic activities, including helping to found and lead the high school to its current status and in his service to the Malibu Little League and AYSO. He has been unfairly labeled as “pro-growth” because of his attempts to be reasonable, fair and effective with people of diverse interests. His reputation as a mediator and leader is unparalleled.

We 0need a council member who looks forward to the future and has the skills, intelligence and honesty to make good decisions for everyone. Please join me in supporting Jeff Jennings on April 11.

Kelley Matthews