We are sending you this E-mail as you have requested to be notified concerning ValleyVote
See our Website and all the Updates are archived on our site.
See ValleyVote's 3-25-00 Newsletter
Redevelopment: Agency and Padilla argue move would better focus northeast area proposal. Citizens panel will consider trim.
By PATRICK MCGREEVY, Times Staff Writer
Faced with opposition and limited resources, city
officials recommended Friday that a proposed 6,835-acre redevelopment project in
the northeast San Fernando Valley be cut by up to half.
Community Redevelopment Agency administrator Jerry
Scharlin said his recommendation could change after he asks a citizens advisory
panel to comment Monday.
But Scharlin and Los Angeles City Councilman Alex
Padilla agreed in principle at a meeting this week to reduce the overall project
in order to better focus on those neighborhoods that are truly blighted and that
can be helped by redevelopment.
Padilla said he definitely supports eliminating
the following sites, as Scharlin recommended:
* Nearly 2,000 acres in the Hansen Dam recreation
area that is not available for commercial development.
* About 300 acres of vacant land owned by the
county and maintained as water-spreading grounds.
* The 189-acre county-owned Whiteman Airport.
* The 63-acre former General Motors plant in
Panorama City, which was largely unused when originally proposed for inclusion
in the redevelopment program but has since undergone a $100-million development
into a retail center.
* Property being developed by Galpin Motors in
North Hills.
Padilla said he probably will support the elimination of the Panorama Mall and a portion of Lake View Terrace from the plan. "I support a scale-back of the project area," Padilla said. "Part of the criticisms or arguments against redevelopment in this project have been that it is too large. Some people perceive it as a land grab." "If we scale it back in a way that makes sense, we are becoming more targeted, more focused and in the end more effective," Padilla said. "The manageability of a project is a significant factor in its future success." Scharlin said the cuts could amount to between 40% and 50% of the current proposed project area.
Even cut by half, to about 3,400 acres, the new project area would be by far the largest redevelopment area in the city, dwarfing the 2,817-acre central city area. As a result, it will continue to face opposition from some Valley activists who say the CRA has failed elsewhere and wasted millions of taxpayers dollars in the process. North Hollywood attorney Glenn Hoiby said the scaled-back project is still "excessive" and he said it should be further pruned to no more than 500 acres.
Opponents said they are concerned that all property tax revenue generated by increasing land values is diverted from police, fire and other public services to the redevelopment agency, which uses the funds to subsidize further development. For that reason, some critics, including Jim Leahy, former member of a local citizens advisory group, have said the CRA wants to use the Valley project to help fund the financially anemic agency. In the last three years, property tax revenue that fuels the agency's work has dwindled, forcing the agency to cut its staff from 350 to 190 employees.
CRA commissioner Keith Richman said he supports the change. "I felt the original proposal was too large and I felt it needed to be scaled back significantly," the Valley physician said. Caron Caines, chairwoman of the 23-member local advisory committee, also agreed. "I completely support it," Caines said. "There are definitely areas that should be excluded. It makes a lot of sense. Having it so big and diffused makes it impossible to have any focus."
In addition to the opposition from some quarters to the larger project, the agency also faces financial limitations that could hinder its ability to properly staff a massive new redevelopment project area while also maintaining service in the existing 31 project areas. Scharlin said redevelopment law, which strictly defines what blight is, will force some areas to be dropped. "It's simply a product of trying to be clear about what blight is and what fits with the clear intent of the law and trying to be realistic about where we can make a difference," Scharlin said of his new proposal.
The Department of Neighborhood Empowerment is holding workshops and commission meetings to encourage public input in how neighborhood councils are formed. This is the schedule for the San Fernando Valley area:
* Chatsworth, Porter Ranch, Granada Hills, Knollwood and Northridge areas. Workshop only, 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. March 29, Oliver Wendell Holmes Middle School, 9351 Paso Robles Ave, Northridge.
* Mission Hills, Panorama City, North Hills, Van Nuys and north Sherman Oaks areas. Commission meeting 5 to 6 p.m., workshop 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. April 18, Ķid-Valley Regional Library, 16244 Nordhoff St., North Hills.
* Arleta, Pacoima, Sylmar, Sunland-Tujunga, Lake View Terrace, La Tuna Canyon, Shadow Hills and Sun Valley areas. Commission meeting 5 to 6 p.m., workshop 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. May 16, Northeast Valley Senior Center, 11300 Glenoaks Blvd., Pacoima.
* Canoga Park, Winnetka, Woodland Hills, Reseda, west Van Nuys, Encino and Tarzana areas. Workshop only, 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. June 14, Sherman Oaks Center for Enriched Studies, 18605 Erwin St., Reseda.
* Sherman Oaks, Studio City, Toluca Lake, North Hollywood areas. Workshop only, 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. June 28, CBS Studios, 4024 Radford Ave., Studio City (parking off Colfax Street).
By KEITH E. WEAVER
"Congratulations," they say. "This will never work, Keith, but good luck anyway."
I hear sentiments like this since my appointment to the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners, a new panel charged with promoting participation in local government by developing neighborhood councils. The board, along with the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment, is among the first visible changes brought by passage of the revised Los Angeles City Charter. Since Mayor Richard Riordan named me to the panel last year, almost every "congrats" has been coupled with condolences. Frankly, I'm not surprised by those skeptical of the potential for neighborhood councils; I too was once a skeptic.
When I read the charter before its passage, I couldn't help thinking, "Great--more bureaucracy. That's exactly what the city needs. After all, don't we already have homeowners and business groups?" I had real reservations. But once I started to think about solving the disconnect people feel from city government, and the function of a neighborhood council compared to the specific focus of a business or homeowners group, the concept didn't seem so farfetched. I've realized that neighborhood council concepts are already working well in parts of Los Angeles, as are councils in cities in other parts of the country.
For example, Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas' 8th District Empowerment Congress and Councilman Hal Bernson's 12th District Citizens Advisory Council are both examples of what neighborhood councils could be. Both organizations have worked on issues from public safety to community development. Even though these groups don't have formal decision-making authority, their all-inclusive nature makes for a powerful lobbying entity when working toward a common goal.
Los Angeles is extremely diverse in every area, from level of affluence to culture. We cannot employ a cookie-cutter approach to facilitating participation in local government. The architects of the new city charter didn't provide a restrictive definition of what neighborhood councils would be. Councils are required to include all neighborhood stakeholders: homeowners, renters, students, business interests, schools, places of worship and community-based organizations. But beyond that, the charter doesn't give the board or Department of Neighborhood Empowerment any directives in terms of how many neighborhood councils there will be, their size, or how they will organize. They don't even have to adhere to council district boundaries. These decisions will be made by the residents of Los Angeles at-large with input from the department.
On March 9, at the first of many regional workshops to provide community input on development of the neighborhood council plan, about 250 people (excluding city officials) showed up from the Pico-Union area. Discussions were spirited about what matters most. Participants began to define their neighborhoods and address how the councils should be structured. Many were surprised to learn that they actually control this process. They began to inculcate power, activism and pride, which, I am convinced, will lead to better neighborhoods across the city.
Are neighborhood councils the answer? I don't think there are any easy or quick-fix solutions to empowering neighborhoods. Los Angeles is unique and the problem of people feeling disconnected from government isn't specific to local government or to Los Angeles or California; these issues affect the entire nation. Proponents of Valley secession might argue that breaking up the city is the answer. But even if the Valley secedes, the result would be the creation of the fifth-largest city in the nation.
The bottom line is that we need to empower people to define their neighborhoods and decide what's important to them, regardless of city size. The Board of Neighborhood Commissioners and the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment are designed to do just that. You have nothing to lose by getting involved in the development of the neighborhood council plan and neighborhood councils. Anyone can sit idly by and scrutinize what's wrong with Los Angeles. The bigger challenge is to get involved. After all, it is your voice, your neighborhood and your city. I invite you to make a difference.
Keith E. Weaver, a Resident of Sherman Oaks, Is a Member of the Los Angeles Board of Neighborhood Commissioners. he Is a Community and Government Affairs Manager for Kaiser Permanente
Redevelopment: Vacancies on advisory panel are filled and first meeting is held since contentious election.
By MARTHA L. WILLMAN, Times Staff Writer
PACOIMA -- Plans for a massive redevelopment project to attack blight in the northeast San Fernando Valley got back on track Monday with the reorganization of a citizens advisory committee. Meeting for the first time since a contentious December election, committee members filled three vacancies on the 23-member committee, then elected a four-member executive committee to guide the group's work.
The committee had been derailed since September,
when membership had dwindled to five. More than 40 candidates competed in the
subsequent election to fill 18 seats, leaving three of the seats undecided
because of multiple tie votes.
Several committee members had earlier suggested
that the redevelopment proposal be dropped because it appeared to have little
backing from the community. However, Los Angeles City Councilman Alex Padilla,
who represents the northeast Valley, urged that the committee be reactivated.
"Sometimes we need a hammer," Padilla
said at Monday's meeting. "We need positive change in the northeast Valley.
We need the tools. Sometimes we need the hammer to drive the right nail into the
stud."
Redevelopment critics complained that Padilla engineered an outpouring of pro-redevelopment voters, but the councilman said that he was simply trying to promote public participation. Two years ago, the Community Redevelopment Agency proposed formation of the city's largest redevelopment project area, covering 6,835 acres. The plan calls for spending about $490 million over the next four decades to spur development in an area that includes parts of Sylmar, Pacoima, Arleta, Sunland-Tujunga, Lake View Terrace, Sun Valley, North Hollywood, Mission Hills, Panorama City, Reseda and Van Nuys.
Under state law, a Project Area Committee consisting of residents, business owners and others with a stake in the community can recommend specific areas of blight and the proposed scope of a redevelopment project. The committee, however, serves only as an advisory board, with the ultimate power lying with the CRA Board of Directors and the Los Angeles City Council.
The committee consists of factions both for and against redevelopment, but the December election resulted in a majority of seats going to pro-redevelopment advocates. However, even some of those who won election and support redevelopment said the plan needs to be scaled back.
Elected Monday to fill the three contested seats on the committee were Joe Lopez, representing Harrison Sports of Pacoima Tracy Lovejoy of Waste Management of Sun Valley and Caron Caines, an attorney with San Fernando Valley Neighborhood Legal Services. Elected to the executive committee were Caines, Carol Silver of the Sun Valley Chamber of Commerce, business owner Arthur Sweet and homeowner Yolanda Fuentes.
Padilla called economic redevelopment in the northeast Valley "my highest priority. From Sylmar to Sun Valley to Pacoima, there is a critical need for improved housing, more businesses, and new jobs." He said that with the action Monday, the committee "can now officially begin to move forward with recommendations for redevelopment."
When a redevelopment zone is formed, property values are frozen. Government subsidies and other incentives are used to spur new development, replacing blighted areas with new housing, office buildings and business projects. As property values rise with new development, the incremental increases in tax revenues are earmarked specifically for use in the redevelopment zone and used to encourage still more development. The incremental funds continue to build throughout the life of the zone, such as the 40 years proposed in the northeast project. State rules restrict the use of portions of the fund, such as the 20% which must be set aside for housing.
Opponents argue that such projects--there are 31 in Los Angeles--divert tax revenues that could otherwise be used for police, firefighting, schools and other services. Proponents say that without the funds, blighted areas will continue to deteriorate