Festival needs to be open about the...

Festival needs to be open about the future

Methinks the Festival of Arts executive director doth protest too

much. In his recent op-ed blitz to Laguna Beach publications, Steve

Brezzo blames local news media for having “misinterpreted and

misrepresented the actions of the board.”

Yet despite being graciously given by those same outlets the

opportunity to set the record straight, Brezzo chooses to ignore the

very issue that caused all the ruckus in the first place. Under cover

of an epic euphemism, he reduces the board’s recent decision to

pursue licensing of Laguna’s treasured Pageant of the Masters

nationally and internationally to three words: “untraditional funding

sources.”

Yet he and some board members have spoken enthusiastically to the

press about the alleged financial rewards to be reaped by helping

other cities mount their own versions of the Pageant. They extol the

virtues of using Pageant staff to oversee such productions, which

undoubtedly have the potential to cheapen the annual Laguna Pageant,

siphon off patronage and cause untold financial harm to Festival of

Arts exhibitors and to Laguna and Orange County businesses that

depend on the Pageant’s tourist revenue for a sizeable amount of

their income.

The swift and intense reaction of artists, members, volunteers and

patrons -- which can most politely be described as outrage --

apparently caught Brezzo and the board by surprise. This is amazing,

coming as it did a scant three years after the bitter battle to keep

the Festival and Pageant at home in Laguna. Yet rather than re-think

the wisdom of this decision, the board gave little more than lip

service to stakeholders’ concerns and questions during a board

meeting and special artists’ meeting, and instead decided in yet

another closed session vote to pursue a relationship with ICM.

If, as Brezzo says, the press has misinterpreted or misrepresented

his or the board’s actions, he -- and they -- should have had the

courage and moral fortitude to explain in writing to the press and

its audience exactly what is meant by “nontraditional funding

sources.” If licensing is such a good idea, why not publicly share

the reasons with the rest of us, instead of keeping it a closely

guarded secret to be discussed only in closed sessions of the board?

And why not actively solicit and honestly consider widespread input

on the matter?

It is not enough to pat us on the head and assure us that the

Pageant will remain in Laguna Beach. That’s akin to politicians

promising not to raise taxes and then creatively lightening our

wallets with a series of brand new “fees.”

We have already lived through and dealt with a Festival board that

insisted on a culture of secrecy, doublespeak and ill-conceived

money-raising schemes. Most of us have supported and trusted the

current board members over the past few years and would like to give

them the benefit of the doubt. But that’s difficult to do when public

outrage is ignored and what for many is an unthinkable course is

pursued regardless.

Someone once said “sunshine is the best disinfectant.” Let’s hope

the board opens the blinds and sheds the necessary light on this

watershed issue before it’s too late.

ANITA M. MANGELS

Laguna Beach

Don’t speak too soon on Dip House

I am responding to Councilman Wayne Baglin’s comments at the July

15 City Council meeting regarding the “Dip House.”

Baglin states that this area is “not a riparian habitat area” but

is a “highly degraded site” of “nonpoint source pollution” and if it

were to test this area would find a large amount of phosphorous.

Well Baglin, just as Mono Lake has become a toxic cesspool from

being an agriculture sewer for Central California, it is unbelievable

that so many species of animals, having been forced out of their

normal living areas due to development, have managed to survive.

Considering the amount of development that has occurred on both sides

of Bluebird Canyon, from the birds down to bacteria, Bluebird Canyon

has become an important, urban entity for survival of many of our

local species. Dip House property included.

It is also courageous of Baglin to refute the multitudes of

mainstream literature available, that scientists spent lifetimes

establishing, which contradict his statements. It is no secret that a

basic tenet for maintaining a healthy community is through watershed

management due to the “alluvial filtration” of just that -- “nonpoint

sources of pollution.”

It is also no secret that Heavy metals and nonpoint sources of

pollution are directly linked to increased rates of neurotoxic

disorders and cancers in human populations. If this site is a

potential health hazard, I don’t understand why the city did not

require more testing be completed to determine exactly what these

hazards are, so that they can be addressed?

I am even further concerned that the city did not require that a

nonpoint pollution control program be implemented as part of the

contingency for future development in this area. Multilevel

government agencies are attempting to address these issues and so

does our vision process. Why is it that council failed to?

Two watersheds drain more than 600 acres of land that converge and

form a flood plane at the Dip House parcel. Baglin’s recommendation

for this project was to have “drought tolerant plants be a part of

the landscaping requirement.”

Drought tolerant plants in this flood plane? Baglin, really! I

believe this comment pretty clearly emphasizes council’s need to hire

the right people to do the necessary studies to gain the important

information we need to maintain a safe and livable community.

DEBBIE HERTZ

Laguna Beach

Recall clearly a waste of taxpayers’ money

While I’m not a particular fan of Gov. Gray Davis, I don’t feel

there are sufficient reasons for a recall and that it will be a

gigantic waste of money (“Chasing down the muse,” July 11). This

should be going to fund the expenses of the state, which is so badly

in debt.

In reality, the shortfall is caused by the passage of Proposition

13 and those who voted for it because it has limited property

taxation. The state’s deficit and many of Davis’ difficulties

governing can be attributed to this situation.

Otherwise what we have is a dirty partisan political party

struggle, which does not nor deserves condoning by putting the

governor out of office. Sticking the people of California with the

bill of a recall election at this time is obscene.

ANDY WING

Laguna Beach

The Coastline Pilot is eager to run your letters. If your letter

does not appear, it may be because of space restrictions, and the

letter will likely appear next week. If you would like to submit a

letter, write to us at P.O. Box 248, Laguna Beach, CA 92652; fax us

at 494-8979; or send e-mail to [email protected]. Please

give your name and include your hometown and phone number, for

verification purposes only.