COLUMNIST HAS ABILITY TO STIMULATE THINKING.

I have been reading James Bemis' Sunday commentaries in the Simi Valley section of the paper for years. They always have a fresh perspective.

His last two columns, ``Real Heroes found on Memorial Day'' and ``Multiculturalism-based teaching harms education,'' made me realize this paper needs him up front.

Bemis has a profound grasp of the tremendous cultural issues affecting our society today and a unique ability to explain them in a few concise sentences. His writing always makes me think and draw upon my own life observations in order to weigh the validity of what he is saying.

- Chris Larson

Simi Valley

Simi quality of life at stake

I am a member of the Executive Board of Neighborhood Council No. 3 in Simi Valley.

Recently, we heard a proposal regarding the City Council's directive that a General Plan amendment be considered to allow for an increase in allowable density for multifamily housing (with an affordable component) outside the valley floor from 10 to between 30 and 40 units per acre.

After listening to the presentation by a city case planner, the Executive Board of Neighborhood Council No. 3 voted to deny the proposed amendment as presented. N.C. No. 3's board vote reflected the voice of the people. In fact, as I canvassed my neighborhood while handing out the fliers inviting the public to this meeting, I did not encounter one person who was in favor of the idea, with most people vehemently opposed to the notion of high-density development in our hillsides.

After our vote was taken, Mayor Bill Davis stated his belief that such an amendment was a good idea because it would provide needed multifamily units in keeping with the 80/20 mix of single family/multifamily units as directed by the General Plan. He stated further that there is a shortage of multifamily units for rent in Simi and that the City Council sees this shortage continuing well into the future if nothing is done to mitigate the problem soon.

An argument I have heard from City Council members who support the idea of increasing the number of apartments in Simi Valley is that our young people, having flown the nest, need a place in town to live. The current market is either too expensive or the waiting lists too long. Thus they are forced to find digs outside Simi. This probably is a fact that cannot be denied, but neither would it be remedied by building high-end (i.e. luxury) apartments in our canyons, which certainly would command high rents.

Those who may qualify for subsidies from government agencies would most likely not be the offspring of middle-class Simi Valley residents, but rather families of low-income renters.

If the city wishes to build apartments for low- to moderate-income renters, let's build such apartments within the valley floor areas where one would expect to find apartments. An option would be to rezone land currently designated for commercial improvements, to allow for high-density apartments. Leave building in the canyon areas at a planned density of a maximum of seven single-family units per acre, per the current General Plan.

The voting records of the Neighborhood Councils that have heard this proposal and carefully considered what it means to Simi Valley speak for themselves: Neighborhood Council No. 1, unanimously against; No. 2 voted 7-1; and No. 3, 10 against and 1 abstention.

Don't let Simi Valley become another San Fernando Valley! If you can attend the June 23 Planning Commission meeting when this issue will be discussed, please do so and voice your opinion. There are two things at stake here: the quality of life in our hillsides and canyons, and the quality of life in Simi Valley as a whole.

- Heidi Dauwalter

Simi Valley