Dear Editor,
I was very excited to check out the latest edition of the Ladera Times (January 2012), when I got to page seven and noticed the Lunch Specials listed.
However, there was no name, address, phone number or any other contact information stating what restaurant was offering these “Lunch Specials”.
If that was my restaurant, I’d be asking for my money back! Just thought you’d like to know.
Julie McDorman
Ladera Ranch
(Editor's Response: Trust me, our advertiser, Selma's Pizzeria, let us know about the ad, which I assumed was camera-ready and plugged it into the January issue without reading the accompanying instructions. Of course, we didn't bill Selma's for that ad, and we're running their February ad for free to make up for my stupid mistake.)
Dear Editor,
I don't know who Rick Grubbs is but I applaud his willingness to take a stand against your repetitive political commentary in your Editor's letter (Publisher's Message).
No where in your Ladera Times mission statement (which follows) does it state you are a political publication.
Either amend what you are dedicated to so we all know you are a political magazine or please, for Pete's sake, keep your opinions to yourself.
I am tired of opening the community newsletter and having to dredge through political commentary to read about the Ladera community. I can only imagine that others' feel the same way and also are missing out on news about Ladera.
Shannon Smith
Ladera Ranch
Ladera Times Mission Statement
Ladera Times is dedicated to:
Covering community news, activities, school news, sports, family events,
and related stories in Ladera Ranch and its immediate environs;
Serving as an advocate for the safe, productive, enjoyable, and sustainable
development and use of community parks and facilities;
Publishing news stories and features that support the inherent concepts
of family values, health, welfare, and safety, good consumerism and
citizenship, and energy conservation;
Providing a voice for members of the residential and business communities.
Dear Jim,
It was absolutely our pleasure to participate in your radio talk show ("Open Mic" on OCTalkRadio.net from 2-3 pm every Wednesday). Thank you very much for inviting us and if you ever need anything, please do not hesitate to contact me or Lance (Deputy Sheriff II Lance Christensen, School Resource Officer).
I will put together the information sheet with our contact information for the Ladera Times.
Sergeant Nancy Wilkey
South Investigations
Juvenile Services Bureau
OC Sheriff's Department
Dear Jim,
Thank you for taking the time to meet with us today. If you ever need anything or have ideas of how we can be more effective with-in our community let me know.
We have a few town hall type open forums coming up if you want to attend see
below dates. Your feedback would be of great value.
Lance Christensen,
Deputy Sheriff II School
Resource Officer
(Editor's Note: Goggle "Open Mic with Jim Schmitt" and click on "OC Sheriff's Juvenile Services" to hear what every parent needs to know about teens in Ladera Ranch.)
Hello Jim,
I wanted to thank you for your help in getting our information and article out. I am out of town currently and haven't seen it personally yet but we have had great comments by our associates and customers. Thanks again! We hope you have a safe and very Happy NewYear.
Sheri Sandler
Ladera Ranch
Owner of Ollie and Jax
January 2012
Dear Editor,
A fellow Laderian informed me that you published my letter to you from last month.
If I recall the letter correctly, I was guilty of the same political droning that I was complaining to you about.
It was certainly not my intent to add any political discussion to your magazine. On the contrary, the whole point of my letter was, "why muddy what appears to be a nice community magazine with your polarizing political views that probably anger a majority of Ladera residents like myself?"
In sincerity, I stayed true to my word and threw your magazine away the moment I saw that for a brief second you tried, and miserably failed, to give us a non-biased, non-politicized letter from the editor and will continue to do so until I can open the first page and see a nice, non-political, topical, community-themed letter from the editor like a community magazine should have.
Although in hindsight, I wish I had looked for the letters to the editor and been shocked – and likely embarrassed – by my name in print behind the politically-charged rhetoric of my own!
Rick Grubbs
Ladera Ranch
(Editor's Note: First, readers who submit letters to the editor should know that, unless otherwise stipulated by words to the affect "Not for Publication," the editor is free to and is likely to publish the letter.
Second, you say with sincerity that, "true to your word," you tossed the Ladera community newspaper without reading it because you don't like the editorials. If you prefer to remain ignorant about what goes on in our community, so be it.
You imply you know what a community newspaper should publish. You purport to speak for "a majority of Ladera residents." And you take one more swipe at last month's editorial . . . all of which is your opinion published in the Ladera Times. Apparently you fail to see the irony!)
Dear Editor,
I feel compelled to respond to last month’s letter by Rick Grubbs, who basically told the publisher of the Ladera Times that he needs to "shut up" when it comes to expressing political views but then continued on his own political tirade, slamming every Democratic leader since Carter for our nation’s current economic troubles.
Grubbs blamed the 2007 housing meltdown on Carter’s 1976 administration, threw Clinton in for good measure and said that Obama is out to kill small businesses and coddle public employees.
As ridiculous as all of those statements are, I found that last one the most offensive (and no, I’m not a public employee – I’m a small business owner). However, I was taught and still believe that being a teacher, a nurse or a firefighter is an honorable profession and I have read enough economic books to understand that it wasn’t public employees who decimated our nation’s economy.
And just to set the financial record straight, according to the Congressional Budget Office, President Clinton inherited a $292 billion deficit and an unemployment rate of 7.8 percent from Bush Senior. Eight years later, Clinton left office with our first federal surplus since 1969 ($236 billion) an approval rating of 65% (the highest end-of-term approval rating of any president since Dwight D. Eisenhower) and an unemployment rate of 4.2 percent.
Having a Republican-controlled Congress the majority of his time in office, it’s clear that Clinton’s impressive record was a direct result of Democrats AND Republicans working and voting together to move the economy forward.
On the other hand, eight years later, Bush left office with the highest deficit in our country’s history ($1.2 trillion), an approval rating of just 22% (the lowest level since Gallup began tracking more than 70 years ago) and unemployment was back up to 7.8 percent. President Bush had a Republican-controlled Congress six of the eight years he served which makes it pretty absurd to blame Democrats for that dismal economic record.
Do I believe things are going swimmingly three years later under President Obama? No. Do I think Obama has made errors in judgment with regards to the financial situation in this country? Absolutely. But I also believe that he’s spent the past couple of years attempting to work with a highly partisan Congress who would rather see this country fail than support him and his efforts to get us out of this mess.
Personally, I’d love to start a real dialog on how we move forward to elect more centrist leaders, how we stop blaming the other side, admit that things work best when we pull together in the same direction and agree that good ideas come from both sides of the aisle. Only when we demand that candidates from BOTH parties commit to working together to focus on solutions rather than political posturing will we see our economy and our country move forward.
Lori Vandermeir,
Ladera Ranch
December 2011
Dear Ladera Times,
As a new resident in Ladera Ranch, I am disgusted that the editor of the Ladera Times is given a weekly forum in which to rant on with his crazy leftist ridiculousness.
Until this guy is forbidden from turning what appears to be a nice local periodical into a political throwaway, I will not be reading it and I urge others to do the same.
Maybe if the local small business owners who Obama’s administration is ruining get no return on their ads, Mr. Schmitt will keep his anti-business, pro-Obama rantings to himself and make the Ladera Times into a peaceful local news forum, free of bias and politics.
Mr. Schmitt, are you better off today than when Obama took office? Exactly, neither is anybody else, unless you include public and private sector union employees who are continually coddled by the left on the taxpayers’ dime.
And I am sure you will somehow blame the republicans like every other leftist, "When Obama’s policies continue to fail, let’s just blame Bush." Brilliant.
The editor must have forgotten that the start of the housing collapse began with arguably the worst president in modern times, Jimmy Carter, and his "Afforable Housing Act," which allowed those who could not truly afford homes buy them anyway.
The house of cards was further weakened by Clinton and boy oh boy, who could forget brilliant work of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd? Convenient memory, Mr. Schmitt.
Big government solves all problems, doesn’t it?
Rick Grubbs,
Ladera Ranch
(Editor's Note: The Ladera Times is a monthly, not a weekly, and the publisher's editorials are confined to page 2. There are 47 other pages in this issue alone devoted to 100% Ladera Ranch news that Laderians can't get anywhere else, including a forum for residents, such as yourself, to express opinions. As a new resident, you may not be aware that the newspaper has been a very strong supporter of local businesses.)
October 2011
Dear Jim,
Your editorial alleging Republicans were bullied into signing a "no tax pledge" missed an important point. The pledge is a definitive and open way to express a candidate’s principles.
The pledge has two components: opposition to an increase in the marginal income tax rate; and opposition to any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.
These principles do not prevent officials from supporting revenue neutral measures or fees for services, or from further reducing taxes.
Candidates and elected officials began taking the pledge in 1986 under the leadership of Ronald Reagan.
With President Reagan’s support and endorsement, Americans for Tax Reform and a broad-based coalition of groups, including businesses organizations and taxpayer groups throughout America, asked candidates for public office to sign the "Taxpayer Protection Pledge."
According to the Americans for Tax Reform, as of June 1, 2011, 236 members of the House of Representatives and 41 members of the Senate have taken the pledge.
In the past, almost all candidates for the Republican presidential nomination have signed the pledge.
The self-restraint promised by signing a "no tax pledge" and taking a stand on "routine" increases in the national debt ceiling, are positive steps to focus the attention of the America people on the need for self-restraint in both taxes and spending.
Unrestrained spending and years of phlegmatic leadership concerning spending priorities and lack of controls have contributed to the escalation of the U.S. debt.
Standard and Poor’s projected that by 2015, the U.S. net general government debt level will be $14.5 trillion (79% of 2015 GDP).
In just 10 years, the debt is projected to reach $20.1 trillion (85% of 2021 GDP).
This puts America at a disadvantage compared to many of our peer nations, Canada, France, Germany and the U.K. Their debt burden is already lower than that of the U.S.
In contrast to the U.S., their debt burden will begin to decline, either before or by 2015, according to a report of Standard and Poor’s.
There are candidates, among those who have signed the "no tax pledge" that know how to get things done in a bi-partisan environment. Support those who have the courage to define fiscal and economic policies to free the flow of capital.
Elect those who demonstrate the leadership skills needed for tax reform, and to thoughtfully change and prioritize spending on entitlement programs.
Elect leaders who can simplify, coordinate and consolidate regulations enabling business expansion and the creation of more jobs in the private sector.
There are several candidates for president, as well as candidates for other elected offices, that have these qualifications.
In the coming 14 months, it is more important than ever for voters to get information from a variety of sources and then decide whom to support.
Chuck Gibson
Ladera Ranch
Dear Sir,
Oh yes, you are wrong! how stupid are you to make a comment regarding the patrol officer accidentally shooting up the community? They just didn't went to Walmart and purchase a gun (see letter directly below). Well then, do we take away cars from the community because they may accidentally hit someone even though people in this community speed all the time?
I remember a couple of years back, a female worker was attack at knife point at the Coventant Hills club house she held on to the attackers hand while he tired to stab her in the morning of 4 of July 08-09. Skater boarders attacked a security officer at the skate park in which the officer refrane from drawing his sidearm. I have taken my sons to the skate park several times you have nothing but teenage thugs in this community.
I believe the only thing your board did was make the security officers in this community targets and jeopardize their safety at night. I have spoken to station 18 deputies in the area and they agree with me. Further more, I agree with Mr. (Col.) Oliver Grant (Ret.) on his view.
Frank Velasquez
Ladera Ranch
Sir,
Several weeks past, I appeared at a Ladera Ranch LARMAC open and public meeting and expressed my concern with the proposal to disarm our contracted security company. .
I left after speaking but have been told you also spoke and stated that what I expressed as my opinion, you characterized as "wrong." If this is accurate, I must take strong exception with your comment.
First, let me state a part of my personal ethos by quoting the great diplomat and philosopher Voltaire: "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend top the death your right to say it."
I disagree with your opinion, but I would never say you were "wrong," as making a statement as such implies and presupposes the person making it is morally, ethically, intellectually and factually superior to the one he is pronouncing judgement on.
This is the ultimate in conceit and arrogance. As most folks of your ilk with a liberal mind set see things, anybody with a different opinion is always "wrong."
You just couldn't say you disagree with me; I had to be "wrong."
But take heart, Mr. Schmitt, men like myself, my father and my son have and will continue to deploy to any war zone in the world to protect your right to judge me "wrong," and we were damn proud to do it.
I would suggest for your review the great speech by Dr. David Grossman (Lt. Col, U.S. Army retired) "Of Sheep and Sheepdogs."
Dr. Grossman relates there are two kinds of men, sheep and sheepdogs.
You, sir, are a sheep. I, a sheepdog. The sheepdog cares and protects the flock (sheep). The analogy of society and the warriors who protect that society is riveting, despite one's personal mind-set. Sheep tend to be defenseless and will die in place when attacked. Even their lives are not worth the effort of them making any defense. The sheepdog, however, will give his life for the sheep in their defense. The following are excerpts from Dr. Grossman:
"Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.
"I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me, it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from predators.
"Then, there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the flock without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world an d they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial."
Let me also state I personally believe there are two kinds of men extend in American society. The first kind looks at the events of September 11, 2001, and says he is glad he was not on any of the flights that were taken over by Islamic terrorists (because he would be dead). The other kind of man says he is angry he was not on any of those flights (because, ostensibly, the terrorists would be dead). I consider myself this kind of man, you I consider to be the latter.
You state you would rather see every house burnt down in Ladera Ranch rather than have a weapon pointed at them. A somewhat unrealistic, altruistic, and parochial point of view lacking any foundation or adherence with the principles of common sense and rational thought. (Kindly notice that I didn't say you were wrong.)
I also believe and may be so bold as to opine you are probably of the persuasion that believes in the removal of individual freedoms for the sake of security. As Benjamin Franklin stated: "Those who will trade freedom for security have neither."
What seems to me to be a contradiction in terms is folks such as yourself, while refusing to defend themselves and/or have neither the ability, mind-set, or will to do it, always rely on other men to do it for them; yet while so doing, demand that their protectors not be armed.
This makes no sense even to the most uninformed persons. This is what you want our security officers to be, unarmed and unable to do nothing more than be another victim? Would you restrict a surgeon from using a scalpel to save a life only because it is sharp and can actually cut? What constipated thinking.
I would also opine that you, like a sheep, are as frightened of the sheepdog who protects you as the wolf who wants to slay you and your fellow sheep. After all, we too are "dogs," we look like wolves, have teeth, growl and can and do attack the wolf and protect the defenseless sheep.
You sheep would have our teeth removed and reduce our ability to defend the flock, just because you are afraid of us, and apparently everything and everyone except of course big brother government, whom you believe will protect you from all misfortune including the misfortune of being yourself.
It's easy to judge when one has led a sheltered life viewed from the lofty heights of an ivory tower with no real life experiences to draw from other than what we learned in school or reads in papers such as yours. A limited mind-set to be sure.
In closing, I would also refer you to history which serves as a moral and ethical lesson in this matter. Pacifism, while a noble concept, in reality has never brought change or maintained the status quo of any society or nation and has only emboldened more thugs and wolves to eat more pacifists.
I leave you with this somber but extremely telling quote from an Englishman from the 18th century, still applicable today and germane to this letter:
"War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his personal safety is a miserable creature and has no change of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill, 1806-1873
I remain your obedient servant,
Col. Oliver Grant (retired)
U.S. Marine Corps
(Editor's Response: First let me say that I do genuinely honor you and your family's service to the country. People who put their lives in harm's way to provide the safety and security of others are true heroes.
Second, you wrote a two-page, single-spaced letter to express your deep offense at my stating you were "wrong," which seems a bit over the top. But then you proceed to refer to me in every derogatory term you can think of from sheep to cowardly, to unpatriotic, etc.
I did say you were "wrong" but your informant didn't listen closely to what I had said. You argued to keep the Castillo Private Patrol employees armed because you felt safer knowing armed guards were protecting you, your family, and the residents of Ladera Ranch.
You further made reference to the comfort you took in knowing that Covenant Hills was an armed-guard gated community. However, your belief that the Castillo Private Patrol employees are there to provide security for the residents is "wrong." And, while Covenant Hills is a gated community, the Castillo employes are there to manage the vehicle access gate, not to provide security for the residents of Covenant Hills. LARMAC retains Castillo Private Patrol solely to protect the homeowners association property, such as the clubhouses, pools, parks, and so on.
I stated that I would rather have all of the LARMAC clubhouses burn to the ground than have one of the private patrol employees accidentally shoot a child or an adult. I hope you'll agree with me that the life of one resident is worth more than all the clubhouses put together. Quite a different story from what your informant told you, wouldn't you agree?
I do want to point out that, as a former LARMAC Board member, I m a friend of Tony Castillo, owner of the security firm, and hold him and his agency in the highest regard.
And finally, I take exception with the demeaning way you castigated me while self-aggrandizing yourself. You don't know me, sir, and you certainly don't have a clue as to what type of person I am, what principles I follow, or what I have done to preserve your liberties.
December 2010
Dear Mr. Schmitt,
Today I read the Ladera Times for the very first time and thought what a great publication. I found the articles to be very relevant and appropriate for a community newspaper, highlighting the daily life in the small town that my family and I call home.
I thought, AT LAST, a publication about friends, neighbors, business, charity and the good and maybe not so good about what is happening very close to our home.
Along those lines, I would like to congratulate you on the work you do creating a very nice publication. My only concern would be about the political nature of some of your editorial pieces.
I read your Tea Party editorial and found it to be very "biased and misrepresentative" as the Tea Party is 99% about "out of control government spending" and 1% about the issues Tea Party haters choose to highlight.
Journalists who highlight the negative 1% of any organization on equal footing with the 99%, do not end up informing the public with the truth as good journalists should, they merely become tools of one side or another.
If you as a publisher wish to push the socialist agenda, I would say that is your constitutional right.
My concern is that leftist and socialist propaganda always seems to get presented as "middle of the road" journalism and, as in this instance, (is published) in supposedly unbiased publications.
Quite frankly the
Ladera Times is the last place I would want or expect politically ideological messages – whether from socialists or conservatives.
National politics in the Ladera Times seems as inappropriate as Car and Driver Magazine doing a op-ed piece about Social Security.
In my humble opinion, such controversial topics just do not belong in a niche magazine or newspaper.
Mr. Schmitt, I would respectfully recommend that maybe some worthwhile community editorial topics, rather than national or state politics, would be more in-line with the spirit of your fine publication.
I understand you have a popular talk radio show (Wednesdays from 2–3 pm on www.OCTalkRadio.com) and perhaps that would be the better venue to cover the more controversial political topics of the day.
Sincerely,
Ron Vollmond
Ladera Ranch
November 2009
Jim,
I am a Ladera resident of almost 10 years and my jaw just about dropped when I read your message.
This is not the "change" people voted for. We did not vote to be turned into a European-style socialized democracy, and to write those off who disagree with this joke of a President as hate-filled and mean-spirited is insulting.
I want my kids to grow up with the opportunities I have had, not to rely on the government for anything, period. Health care is not a right and they know this.
They also know our government answers to us, not the other way around.
It scares me that people with the same opinions as you actually live in Ladera. I’m certain it’s the minority though. I don’t know one person in my community who agrees with socialized medicine or the takeover of the private sector.
This was the first and last time I read your paper, but I wish you luck anyway.
Matt Robinson
Ladera Ranch
(Editor’s Response: You obviously didn’t read the editorial closely. I never said most of the things you attribute to me. Re-read it: October 2009 Publisher's Message. Where we really disagree is, I believe every human being should have a right to good, affordable health care. Why don’t you? Oh, and how can you speak for the change people voted for if you yourself didn’t vote for the change?)
Hi Jim,
I wanted to let you know that I am very pleased with the Ladera Times and what it has done for my business.
It really has helped generate sales and get the word out about my new store.
I have tried several other newspapers and magazines and I feel I have gotten the most out of your publication and not much at all from the others!!
I look forward to continuing business together! Thank you for all of your help!! Have a great weekend!!
Barbara Godfrey
Nutrishop, Mercantile West
Ladera Ranch
Jim,
I am a Ladera resident of almost 10 years and my jaw just about dropped when I read your message.
This is not the "change" people voted for. We did not vote to be turned into a European-style socialized democracy, and to write those off who disagree with this joke of a President as hate-filled and mean-spirited is insulting.
I want my kids to grow up with the opportunities I have had, not to rely on the government for anything, period. Health care is not a right and they know this.
They also know our government answers to us, not the other way around.
It scares me that people with the same opinions as you actually live in Ladera. I’m certain it’s the minority though. I don’t know one person in my community who agrees with socialized medicine or the takeover of the private sector.
This was the first and last time I read your paper, but I wish you luck anyway.
Matt Robinson
Ladera Ranch
(Editor’s Response: You obviously didn’t read the editorial closely. I never said most of the things you attribute to me. Re-read it: October 2009 Publisher's Message. Where we really disagree is, I believe every human being should have a right to good, affordable health care. Why don’t you? Oh, and how can you speak for the change people voted for if you yourself didn’t vote for the change?)
Hi Jim,
I wanted to let you know that I am very pleased with the Ladera Times and what it has done for my business. It really has helped generate sales and get the word out about my new store.
I have tried several other newspapers and magazines and I feel I have gotten the most out of your publication and not much at all from the others!! I look forward to continuing business together! Thank you for all of your help!! Have a great weekend!!
Barbara Godfrey
Nutrishop, Mercantile West
Ladera Ranch
Dear Jim,
I wanted to take a moment to write a note of thanks for suggesting I increase the size of my ad and stay in the paper a second time because repetition is the key to advertising.
My Mobile Salon Services business has doubled in just two months and two adds. I am so appreciative! I feel a long relationship forming with Ladera Times.
Best Regards,
Michelle Glass
Ladera Ranch
Thank you Jim!
Katie’s family and I very much appreciate the exposure you have given to Katie’s battle and the related donation information.
All the best,
Scott Neamand
Ladera Ranch
(Editor’s Note: See cover feature story on Katie Hawley in the September 2009 issue of the Ladera Times.)
August 2009
Dear Editor,
I am totally disgusted with Mr. Schmitt’s Republican-bashing editorial in your July (2009) issue. I guess we can add Jim to the list of members of the Obama-Messiah-Media.
I will be organizing a grassroots boycott of your advertisers. I will also spread the boycott plan to fellow neighbors on the Fourth of July. I will phone, email, and personally inform each owner and manager at all of your advertisers that I will boycott their businesses until they cease placing ads in your publication.
By the way, I am a Libertarian and not a Republican but I find Mr. Schmitt’s ultra-partisan rants completely out of line. He is obviously a huge Obama, Reid, and Pelosi cheerleader.
Greg Ewing
Ladera Ranch
Dear Jim,
I am sure you identify with Walter Cronkite: A man who indeed stood fast in time "to improve the lot of others," who’s "tiny ripple" once spoke of now encircles our vast reservoir of life, for "that’s the way it is" Walter Cronkite. Thank you for embracing us; we shall miss you.
Timothy M. Petersen
Ladera Ranch