Kaufman demanded an investigation to determine if displaying campaign signs in a political
campaign was a breach of campaign finance law. He demanded that Ossenmacher and Netzley
refrain from voting on Hennessey's expansion because because "there may be a conflict of
interest." Never mind that Hennessey's has bailed out the plaza. There is this inconvenient
document called the First Amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing free speech. Besides,
didn't the owners of the Dana Point Headlands (a holding company owned by the Chandler
family, editor) put up $20,000 to buy Kaufman's seat on the Council in 1994? Didn't Dana Point
United funnel another $10,000 in developer money to assure Kaufman's election?
Applying Kaufman's logic, he should be prohibited from voting on the Headlands project, any
time share projects, any dealings with major oil companies, etc. because these are the people
who put him in office, and I demand that Councilman Kaufman be investigated for his dealings
with these out of town special interests. There may be a conflict of interest.
Harold's patrons should have a talk with him about his outrageous behavior at these televised
public meetings. If he is posturing for the next election, he is going to have to clean up his
tactics if he expects to continue to serve his wealthy sponsors.
Jack Roberts
(Mr. Roberts is a respected, longtime Dana Point resident)