Letters to the Editor

January 27, 2006
Sharing my feelings To the Editor:Sometime in 1974, we decided we didn’t have enough to do with four children under the age of 8, and replied to an ad for Avon Representatives. We were hired.On January 23, 2006, we will send our last order to Avon. It’s time.Over all the years with Avon, we have most certainly seen changes and had adventures along the way.‘Way back in the ‘70s, the catalogs were mostly filled with cologne, makeup and jewelry. Now Avon customers can purchase almost anything except furniture.In the “old days” we had territories -- several blocks in a section of town. Now a representative can sell to anyone, anywhere. We have received orders from, and sent product to, customers as far away as Tennessee.Why is this 73-year-old quitting? Life has just become too busy, what with our duties as Queen Mother of a Red Hat Society group, singing with the senior Ventura Choraliers, driving people to doctors and errands and, believe it or not, there is the possibility of an album in the works with our accompanist. It all takes time - something that becomes more precious as we grow older.Will we miss selling Avon? Probably. Most assuredly we will miss our wonderful customers, who have become very dear friends over all these years! We can only hope they will remain a part of our life!And, believe it or not, we know we will miss the “have to” of being an Avon Lady. There’s something almost warm and fuzzy about knowing that every other Monday we need to call all our customers for possible orders. It was a familiar routine -- “Hi, it’s your Avon Lady. I’m just checking to see if you need anything. No? That’s OK. How’s everything at your house?”Because of this Avon business, we’ve been in almost every corner of Fillmore and a good portion of Santa Paula. We’ve been greeted by children who raced from the front door to yell, “It’s the Avon Lady!”We’ve sat through boring meetings, been “taken” a few times by people who wrote bad checks or had no intention of paying for an order, and we’ve won a few awards along the way.We won’t ever forget the help given to us by Jennie Cole in Santa Paula, and the girls at Salem Communications in Camarillo and others who came through to help us “make President’s Club” last year.Thank you, to ALL our customers!And then there’s our Darling Daughter Kathleen, who more than once filled in while we traveled and who shuttled product back ‘n forth from Fillmore.Now, as we clear out the catalogs, pamphlets, business records and product overwhelming this home, we are left with one final thought:It’s been a great ride!Dorothy LynchFillmoreNo on Adams Canyon – againTo the Editor:In 2000 Santa Paula voters put in place the City’s Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB) with Measure I, excluding Adams Canyon from development. In 2002 the vast majority of Santa Paula voters upheld the CURB line against a developer-sponsored effort to expand the boundary with Measure F. Now the same Arizona developer (the Pinnacle Group) has purchased the special election to expand the CURB and develop Adams.Adams Canyon was placed outside of Santa Paula’s growth boundary for many good reasons. Those reasons still exist today.
1. There’s No Plan – The developer is asking us to move the boundary, based on a carefully worded initiative that doesn’t require them to fulfill their promises. More specifics must be provided to justify moving the boundary for such a massive expansion.2. It’s Too Big. The developer is asking us to expand the growth boundary 6,578 acres (10.2 Square Miles). That is 1,100 acres more than the original Adams expansion area. It’s just too big.3. Too Much Too Fast – Santa Paula has already approved a major development within the Boundary in Fagan Canyon. We should focus on the proper development inside the growth boundary, before we allow such a major expansion. Adams Canyon plus Fagan is too much too fast.This 6,578-acre Adams expansion is not in the interest of Santa Paula, does not represent wise land use, and only threatens our community’s small town charm.I encourage Santa Paulans to Vote No on Pinnacle’s effort to bust the growth boundary to develop Adams Canyon.Mike MillerSanta PaulaCompromiseTo the Editor:Signatures on the Fagan Canyon referendum have been certified as sufficient by county election officials.The Santa Paula Council has given this Texas developer nearly everything that his heart desired. There is need for real negotiation with any developer. Those who questioned the project were sometimes allowed to speak but were never really heard. I wrote the council a letter proposing an alternative of 1,000 units along with a development similar to the inn that supplies 700 jobs and over one-third of Ojai’s income.There was no discussion, and I did not even receive the courtesy of a reply. Many others also proposed alternatives and were ignored. All points of view deserve honest consideration.Assuming that the city will not seek to evade the petition of referendum on another technicality, council members have only two realistic choices on February 6. These are:1. Place the issue on the ballot and let the voters decide.2. Rescind approval of the project and then work with the developer and those who sponsored the referendum to negotiate a responsible compromise.Whatever its outcome, a contentious election will leave a large number of citizens dissatisfied and is likely to result in killing the project.Real compromise is a far better alternative. Compromise offers council members and city staff an opportunity to remain involved. The people of Santa Paula deserve it.The Fagan decision is perhaps the most important in the history of Santa Paula. If ever there was a time for statesmanship, now is the hour.Delton Lee JohnsonSanta Paula

Site Search



Call 805 525 1890 to receive the entire paper early. $50.00 for one year.