Klessig needs to explain things

The Acorn editorial from last week quotes Philippa Klessig, the incumbent running for reelection to the Westlake Village City Council, as having justified her abhorrent behavior in rejecting Jim Bruno as the mayor last December, by calling her decision "good government."

Please explain to me when it became "good government" to continue divisive rancor a month past the voters' decision on the Lowe's initiative, which had split the city, and on which the residents spoke loudly of their rejection of the measure she supported, instead supporting Jim Bruno's position overwhelmingly?

Why would it be considered "good government" to break with a city's long-standing, 25-year tradition without giving any official explanation to justify such a break?

Why should it be considered "good government" or even good policy, for that matter, to effectively intimidate those who might disagree with you on the issues, by effectively smearing them as not acting in the interests of "good government" when representing the interests of the majority of a city's residents? And to do so publicly and in front of their family?

Philippa owes the residents who disagreed with her position on the Lowe's matter, who supported Jim Bruno, and who still admire his honesty and integrity, and the Bruno family, a believeable explanation and an apology. Until then, it will be difficult to hear anything else she may have to say. Cheryl Tabbi Westlake Village