Recalls Assure Voters Stay in Control

* Your editorial (“Recalls: A Waste of Time, Money, Votes,” Oct. 22) is very misleading and favors those being recalled.

A book on recalls put out by the [California] secretary of state clearly says that if the people are dissatisfied with their elected officials they may recall them. The opinion you gave was your own and shows bias.

Secondly, the council members being recalled are not able to run again, due to term limitations. Why should we allow them to stay in office and do further damage to the city?

Thirdly, on the night they approved this warehouse, only three people spoke in favor of it while, in effect, 650 opposed it, and they would not even give us the courtesy of continuing the matter for two weeks. They voted that night; tell me, do you find that fair?

Revenge has no part in this matter as you assume. This recall is to let present and future members of the council know that we are not going to sit by and let them do as they want, without scrutiny.

DON WESLING

Cypress

* To [headline] an editorial “Recalls: A Waste of Time, Money, Votes” just isn’t true in Cypress. The exercise of the recall process helps to enforce accountability by reminding our elected officials that the voters are their masters! The citizens who have spent the last 14 months and countless hours working very hard on the recall would never consider it a waste of time. We believe that the citizens have the right to hear both sides, not only what our elected officials, city staff and land developers would want them to believe.

No one wants to see the abuse of public authority. When elected officials stop listening and representing the people who elected them, and are only listening and representing special interest groups such as landowners and developers, it’s time to have elected officials removed from office. The stakes to wait until the regularly scheduled election were too high for the people of Cypress. How could we leave the city in the hands of the elected officials who have gotten us into this mess?

We have wasted no money. Our grass-roots movement has raised all of our funds from the people who live in the city. Some of our fund raising includes: recycling, garage sales, solicitation of funds from our neighbors and dances. The three City Council members targeted to be recalled have the land and business owners and developers to support them. They have very deep pockets and do not want to see the present City Council replaced at any cost. Should our city be run by outside interest groups or elected officials that listen and represent their constituents?

What the past year has taught me is that you can’t always trust the people who have been elected to represent your interests. The recall in Cypress is not just about a mammoth warehouse and distribution center, it is about accountability on each and every decision that is made by our elected officials.

KATHY SIMCOX

Cypress

* I strongly disagree with The Times’ contention that the voters should have to wait for the expiration of a public official’s term before we can rid ourselves of them. The affected municipality will know when to get rid of their elected officials, not The Times. Think of recall as a gun under your pillow. You hope that you never have to use it, but if the need arises, you’re glad it is there. Recall has been a part of our state Constitution since 1911.

Take the case of Dana Point. The citizens have just turned in petitions to recall council members Harold Kaufman and Karen Lloreda, both instrumental in the formation of the City of Dana Point [in 1989]. They sold us on cityhood, promising us that as a city we could control our own growth, and the city would protect us from the county, who would surely sell us out to the developers.

The first thing the new city did was create a redevelopment agency. This would have allowed them to bulldoze the entire Lantern District, and then resell our homes and businesses to the same developers they swore to protect us from. The public outcry was so intense that they had to back off, but we knew we had a problem.

Over the overwhelming protest of their constituents, the City Council approved a plan to develop the historic Dana Point Headlands with a 400-room hotel development, parking structures, condos, and strip mall. The citizens gathered enough signatures to put the Headlands project to a vote, where it was defeated by a landslide.

The straw that finally broke the camel’s back was [the council’s] vote to put a $1.2-million lighted sports complex in a residential neighborhood. The neighbors of this massive project are rightfully incensed.

How else can the citizens protect themselves from uncaring and irresponsible or dishonest representatives but to recall them?

JACK ROBERTS

Dana Point