Editor:
On Sept. 25 I attended a PTC meeting because of the fate of two valuable legal parking spots located on an easement (3.5 feet of dirt) on our street. The city had sent out the legal letter notifying homeowners of the meeting and options. Basically, the homeowner does not want anyone parking on the easement located on the front of their property and the person across the street did not want parking spaces as it was inconvenient for her to pull into a driveway. People have parked there for many years despite attempts to discourage by using different tactics.
At the meeting there were eight (two were questionable) signatures on the no parking petition including two from Village Laguna. For yes for parking there were 14 signatures.
PTC had a memo from Public Works saying that parking paving was easy and inexpensive and the city was ready to go. PTC also seemed confused about options 1 and 2. One member said “we can’t remove these two spots; that would create precedence,” one abstained from voting, another said it was a good idea as it would cost nothing. These points were brushed aside quickly by two other committee members. The end result was to create a no parking zone forever. This seems to contradict need for parking spaces in our city and more importantly ignoring the majority of votes.
Vote-by-mail ballots are in the mail. Do you want to select a few who are members of Village Laguna (PAC aka mutual benefit corporation) to drive this city or do you want your voice heard? Mr. Zur Schmeide and Jon Madison have tried to distance themselves from this group and rightfully so. Choose carefully.
Ganka Brown, Laguna Beach
