Since when is a petition drive controversial?

Since when is a petition drive controversial?

The Acorn’s response to my letter (regarding the petition to allow the voters to decide on the growth issues of their city) stated that 85 percent of the voters did not sign the petition. Therefore, the petition was controversial.

Less than 85 percent of the registered voters of Agoura Hills did not vote in the recent city council election on Nov. 2. (Note: The election was Nov. 6.)

The petition "turnout" was greater than the voter turnout for the city council election!

It is not unusual (even though very unpatriotic) for less that 15 percent of voters not to vote. It is also not unusual for a petition to have only the required amount of signatures.

Therefore, the petition is not controversial for that reason.

The only thing controversial is that the city council of Agoura Hills obviously does not seem to want to let the people decide what will be built in their city.

Is this still America? Isn’t this the country where the citizens and the people, not just the elected officials (who were only elected by a very small percentage of registered voters) are allowed to decide the future of their city?

The question remains: Why are so many members of the city council so vehemently and viciously opposed to allowing the citizens and registered voters the right to decide?

Terese Schwartz

Westlake Village