(Correction to April 9 Letter to Editor)
To the Editor:
I have two errors in my April 9 letter to the editor. The first is that instead of rezoning El Dorado, the owner has applied for a subdivision tract map. The second was a misinterpretation I made of the State law. The following sentence: "Those who don’t buy their lots will continue with paying their rent with the addition of their share of the park maintenance fees." is not true. Only residents who buy their lots will have to pay a monthly park maintenance fee. I am sorry for these errors, as I always try to be accurate. Call it a "Senior Moment" if you like.
Dave Roegner
Fillmore

To the Editor:
Roy Payne claimed that I am misleading the public by saying that the Measure I Initiative had been debated for a couple of years because it didn’t come on the scene until the summer of 2008 with very little pubic debate since it was cooked up over someone’s kitchen table – all while on my high horse.
The Initiative was the product of countless meetings of a large group of people for over six months at two different churches that all Fillmore citizens were invited to participate in. It was reviewed by a legal team and when the final version was completed it was presented to the city council in October of 2006. Hundreds of Fillmore voters reviewed and signed the petition. Proponents and opponents to the Initiative made their arguments in public. The petition was rejected by the City because of an oversight in the requirement of noticing it in the legal section of the newspaper. It was presented to the city council again in September 2007 and hundreds of voters again reviewed and signed the petition with more debate. After hearing all the arguments, for and against, in November 2008 (a couple of years later) the voters overwhelmingly passed the Initiative known as Measure I. I’ll let the readers decide who is misleading the public.
Good for council member Conaway for supporting the implementation of the Initiative but it should be made clear that the two council members he referred to didn’t oppose the implementation just the large expenditure to redo the EIR which they feel is unnecessary and their desire to have the public involved from the get go which the motion did not include.
We can look forward to more fabricated political attack pieces from Conaway, Payne, Farrell, Cuevas and friends.
Bob Stroh
Fillmore

To the Editor:
With all the Presidents Stimulus money going around, I was wondering why the city of Fillmore hasn’t tried to hall some of this money in. I believe that we are just as entitled to some of this cash as some of the larger cities in the county. Ventura and Simi Valley are sure getting their share, so why aren’t we?
I got some interesting information from my Simi Valley source regarding what was available out there. She is the same source that used to live in Fillmore until she moved closer to her work in Simi Valley. For those in the city that have forgotten, she is the one that told the city where to apply for funding for the bike and walkway along the railroad tracks. Of course she was never given the credit for finding the money for those funds but that is typical Fillmore—the big important (in their own minds) take all the credit.
To make a long story short, she pointed me to: www.stimuluswatch.org/project/by_state/CA that lists all the city stimulus money handed out in the state. It is an eye-opener and it makes me wonder why Fillmore is sitting on their hind ends when this cash is available. Using Simi as an example, a lot of money was being used for road improvement. (God only knows that many streets in Fillmore could use some improvement.) But the main thing that one notices is that Simi drew stimulus funds for their sewer and water treatment system.
So why is Fillmore paying through the nose when this money is available for projects like ours? Why are the citizens paying from $75 - $90 per month for building this system when these funds are available from the Feds and can cut our costs? Why has the city not applied for these funds that can save the citizens and businesses money on sewer and water along with other city projects? Being the poorer of the communities in the county the Democrats would have a field day taking credit for saving the common folks on such projects in the “Last Best Small Town.”
Perhaps it is time for those that think they are in authority to take their thumbs out of places where the sun don’t shine and start trying to get some of this money and save the overtaxed taxpayer some money. Another thing to think about is that this stimulus money is in fact taxpayer money so why shouldn’t we demand our just share of what we have already paid in taxes?
See it by clicking here
Terry Timmons
Fillmore

To the Editor:
On April 14, Finance Director Barbara Smith forwarded to me and City Attorney, Ted Schneider, by email her notice of retirement. Ms. Smith indicated in her notice that she has been advised by the pension representative that her remaining until July 1 would bring no additional retirement benefit to her. As a result, May 14, 2009, will be her final day with the city. Ms. Smith has also indicated that she values her privacy and has requested that there not be any public honor or acknowledgment of her 23 years of service.
As Mayor, and on behalf of the City Council, well wishes and heartfelt thanks are extended to Barbara for her work, service and support she has extended to the council and community of Fillmore.
Patti Walker
Mayor, Fillmore