MAILBAG - March 23, 2000

Huntington Beach

ON MEASURE I AND PLAYING FAIR

I have been voting for many years, and I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed

games like those played by the No on I group.

The weekend before the election, they sent out a flier. Inside it asked:

“Which side are you on?”

The No on I side listed 71 names, including the Huntington Beach Union

High School District and the Westminster School District. The Yes on I

side listed two groups -- Crest View United and the United Food and

Commercial Workers Union.

Let’s see -- more than 20,000 names were needed to get the measure on the

ballot. However, No on I folks could only list two groups? Guess they

think we’re all stupid, huh?

Your headline last week (March 9) said it all: “Wal-Mart wins”

Not the city of Huntington Beach, not the schools, the police, fire or

lifeguards.

Wal-Mart wins.

Winning fair is OK. Sometimes the winners don’t play fair.

Enough said.

MEASURE I LOST BUT THE CITY GAINED

To all those who supported Measure I: Thank you. On behalf of everyone in

Save Crest View, thank you for your vote. To all of our volunteers who

phoned voters, walked precincts, donated money, spoke at community

meetings, put up signs and did all the tasks associated with the

campaign, thank you.

Measure I may not have been successful at the polls, but the city still

gained something very important. The people citywide who worked to get

Measure I on the ballot showed us that if we think the City Council has

made a mistake, we don’t have to just sit back and accept it. Instead,

Crest View United demonstrated that we can take the issue to the people

of the city and let them decide.

The city has also gained some new citizen activists from this issue.

These people will stay active in the community. More activism on the part

of the regular folks in our city will only help improve Huntington Beach.

DON’T SELL BURKE

We object to the selling of the Burke school site in Huntington Beach

unless the land use would be for a community park. Sale for further

housing development would mean the need for more classroom space to

accommodate the new incoming families -- defeating the decision to tear

down an existing school site.

A better use would be to rent the facility, as has been done in the past,

and temporarily convert the school playgrounds to community soccer and

baseball fields, which are badly needed for our youth.

Part of the building, if not rented, could be converted to a community

meeting center for youth activities, classes for adults, etc. The school

and fields could then be easily converted back to school classrooms and

playgrounds when the school is reactivated as the makeup of the families

occupying the homes in the area changes.