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.
Redevelopment: Full council expected to approve motions to delay northeast Valley plan and to disband the group that oversees it.
By ANNETTE KONDO, Times Staff Writer
A Los Angeles City Council committee voted Wednesday to put the brakes on an ambitious redevelopment project in the northeast San Fernando Valley, approving a motion to disband the elected group that oversees the program. The committee's action is likely to put an indefinite hold on a plan to put 6,835 acres in a redevelopment area for developers to buy and build on blighted properties. But it will not kill the proposal.
Placing most of the blame on the city's Community Redevelopment Agency, Councilman Alex Padilla said he lacked confidence that the agency would adequately supervise the project, and said the CRA was "not ready to take on the job." Wednesday's vote by the council's Housing and Community Redevelopment Committee follows several weeks of tumult within the northeast Valley community and among Project Area Committee members who were elected to oversee the project. Earlier this month, the PAC voted to disband after failing to end divisive bickering over the proposal.
The full council is expected to approve both of Padilla's motions, to dismantle the Northeast Valley PAC and to remove the potential use of eminent domain on residential properties in the project. On the committee, Councilmen Nick Pacheco and Nate Holden voted for both motions; Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg was absent.
CRA Administrator Jerry Scharlin did not address the council panel, but after the meeting he said Padilla's comments were "a little unfair" and described redevelopment projects as a lightning rod throughout the city. "This is a very difficult political environment with secessionists and naysayers," Scharlin said. "It's truly an area that needs help, but instead of focusing on that issue, it becomes a political football." [community members have stated the failure to provide the northeast its far share of services by LA City caused the problems]
CRA officials believe this would be the first time a PAC has been disbanded before a redevelopment project was approved by the City Council. A dozen people spoke at Wednesday's hearing, with those for and against Padilla's motions roughly evenly split in the audience.
Caron Caines, the PAC chairwoman and an attorney at San Fernando Valley Neighborhood Legal Services, said she watched as her group's meetings eroded into bitter disagreements, even one fistfight, with little progress made on the project. She thought the committee, on which she has served since 1997, should be dissolved. But another PAC member, Arthur Sweet, from the Sun Valley Chamber of Commerce, saw the PAC as the first step toward improving blighted areas--and suggested focusing on four or five smaller sections of the northeast Valley instead of a broader area.
Despite those concerns, Padilla was confident the proposed project "still would remain one of the largest redevelopment areas in the city." Before voting, Pacheco stood firm about the committee not using the word "moratorium" in its recommendation to the council, because he said the influential Valley Industry [and ValleyVote] and Commerce Assn. wants all CRA projects halted while a secession study is being conducted.
"I think that is crazy," Pacheco said. "I think the city should continue doing its good work in the other areas that have been benefiting from redevelopment projects." Secession concerns, Padilla said, did play a role in his decision to delay the project because redevelopment might complicate the process of municipal divorce.
On that issue, a VICA official said its organization viewed the CRA's projects as possibly hurting the secession study underway. No current legislation allows the transfer of debt or revenue from a redevelopment project to a newly formed city, said Scott O. Schmidt, VICA government liaison director. "Until this issue is resolved, we don't want to go indebting citizens of Los Angeles or a new city," Schmidt said.
By Rick Orlov, Staff Writer
Dogged by personal and political controversy, Councilman Alex Padilla announced Tuesday he would abandon plans for a 6,800-acre redevelopment project in the northeast San Fernando Valley and seek a two-year moratorium on any future projects. Padilla, whose involvement in the project prompted a former worker to file a formal complaint with the city Ethics Commission, said he has come to believe the project is not viable because of problems within the Community Redevelopment Agency as well as practical political considerations.
"I would be naive to say that the politics of secession hasn't played a role in this," Padilla said in an interview. "I have not taken a position on secession and want to wait for the (Local Agency Formation Commission) study to come out. "In two years, we should have a better idea on what the study will show and where the secession movement stands."
Padilla, whose decision won praise from critics of the project, will introduce the moratorium proposal today. Normally, a council member's decision would kill such a project, but Eastside Councilman Nick Pacheco threatened to fight Padilla, saying he was playing into the agenda of the secession movement and other project opponents.
Last week, directors of the Valley Industry and Commerce Association, a leading business group, adopted a resolution asking the city to block any new CRA projects until the LAFCO study is completed or a public vote is taken. That is the same position adopted by Valley Voters Organized Toward Empowerment, the secession movement organization, earlier this year.
"It seems to us to be a reasonable step since the cityhood study will be based on the current year's budget," said Bob Scott, VICA local issues chairman. "It doesn't seem fair to create a new redevelopment project at this time with so much uncertainty."
Valley VOTE Chairman Richard Close called Padilla's new position "a sound approach." "What we didn't want to see was a redevelopment agency forced on what could be a new city with money being siphoned off by downtown," Close said. "If there is to be redevelopment, it should be decided by the new city."
The project has been marked by controversy from the time it was first proposed by former Councilman Richard Alarcon, with strong opposition being voiced from around the Valley about the size of the project, use of eminent domain powers and the fact that property tax increases generated by it could go to the CRA for use elsewhere.
Since his election, Padilla has put himself in the middle of the battle to get the project moving. Last year, he worked with community groups to organize a caravan of buses to bring residents to meetings to elect a pro-redevelopment CRA advisory board. Two weeks ago, he found himself subject to a complaint filed by former aide David Cervantes, who accused the councilman of using city staff to campaign on behalf of some board members.
Cervantes on Tuesday accused Padilla of trying to deflect attention from the complaint and called for the councilman's resignation. "In my opinion, Padilla's call for a two-year moratorium is a cynical slight of hand designed to divert attention from his and my former office's illegal taxpayer-funded campaign," Cervantes said.
Padilla denied that the complaint had any bearing on his decision. "None of that had anything to do with my thinking," Padilla said. "After traveling around, I came to the conclusion that this agency was not prepared to do the job. After all this time, they had one person devoting one-quarter of his time to the project.
"And this project was flawed from the start. I think it was too big and then, unfortunately, people resorted to scare tactics saying the CRA would take away their homes. That's why I introduced a measure that would ban the use of eminent domain." At the same time, Padilla said he believed the area continued to need economic revitalization and said he will be working through the federal empowerment zone and other programs to try to create more jobs.
However, not all officials were in support of Padilla's proposal. Pacheco, who represents eastern Los Angeles and is chair of the council's Housing and Community Redevelopment Committee, said he would oppose any moratorium.
"This effort (by VICA and Valley VOTE) is about more than the CRA," Pacheco said. "They have their own agenda. I'm not saying we should use the CRA everywhere, but only where it's an appropriate tool for economic development."
Redevelopment foes who have been at odds with Padilla for months over the project rejoiced Tuesday upon learning of his decision. "The homeowners and business owners of Pacoima's prayers have been answered," said redevelopment opponent Michael Trujillo, who was involved in a physical scuffle at a recent meeting about the project.
Redevelopment critic Glenn Hoiby called the move "good for everybody." "I'm pleased that he has listened to the community and followed the lead of people that have had experience with the CRA," he said. "I certainly think it will be of benefit to the Valley at large."
Planning: Members split over northeast Valley redevelopment proposal. Some vow to continue meeting to oppose the project.
By PATRICK MCGREEVY, Times Staff Writer
Los Angeles City Council members formally began the process Friday of disbanding an elected committee that oversees creation of a controversial redevelopment program in the northeast San Fernando Valley, but some on the panel threatened to continue meeting, even if the group is not sanctioned.
Councilman Alex Padilla, whose district includes the northeast Valley, was joined by Councilman Nick Pacheco in submitting a motion to the City Council on Friday that would disband the PAC. Padilla acted after the Project Area Committee voted 12 to 4 last week to quit because members were hopelessly divided over the proposal to put 6,835 acres in a redevelopment project that would allow the Community Redevelopment Agency to help developers buy and build on blighted properties.
"The PAC voted to disband and I am simply carrying out their wishes," Padilla said. "My commitment is to make sure there continues to be public input and a community participation process." However, redevelopment agency opponents on the losing side of the PAC vote said Friday they are making plans to continue meeting on the redevelopment proposal, fearing that otherwise Padilla will appoint a "rubber-stamp" advisory committee to push the controversial proposal through. "We have decided to stay on and hold another PAC meeting to continue with the work," said Victor Carreon, a member of the committee. "We feel we represent the community. I don't want to turn this over to some rubber-stamp group."
Dick Symonds, another member of the panel, said keeping a PAC in operation is essential to make sure the public is involved in the process of deciding whether to go forward with redevelopment. "We want the people to know what is going on," he said.
Symonds said the PAC vote to disband was not legal, but city officials said the council can legally eliminate the panel. A small group of PAC members, including Symonds and Carreon, said they have proposed that the panel meet Monday night, but CRA officials have refused to call the meeting as an official session because it does not have the backing of the PAC executive committee, which supported disbanding." By definition of the PAC's action to disband, they canceled all future meetings," said Bob Fazio of the CRA.
Carreon said the group is prepared to hold meetings on its own, even if it is not officially sanctioned by the city. Caron Caines, who chaired the PAC, said she has refused to sanction additional meetings. "I can't stop a meeting from happening but I won't be there," she said.
Padilla dismissed those proposing an unofficial PAC like the one that has met for more than a decade in Hollywood. The councilman said he will soon set up a new way for residents of the northeast Valley to participate in approving the redevelopment project. "That would be the official public input process," he said.
The motion to disband the panel was sent to the council's Housing and Community Redevelopment Committee, which Pacheco heads, to be considered along with a separate motion that would prohibit the Community Redevelopment Agency from using its power of eminent domain to force homeowners in the area to sell their properties for development.
A PAC is required only if the redevelopment agency has the power to take residential properties, [But not required to take all other type of properties] Padilla said. Caines said she is hopeful that a less formal process will allow for a more civil debate on the future of redevelopment. "We weren't getting anywhere," she said. "We weren't doing anything to benefit the community."
Tearing apart the citizens advisory panel for redevelopment in the Northeast Valley has proved to be a full-time job, it seems, for Councilman Alex Padilla and his staff.
At least, that’s the charge now being made by a former Padilla staff member. David Cervantes, 42, who was hired as an aide in September 1999 and recently fired, has filed a formal complaint with the city Ethics Commission charging misuse of city time and resources in a successful attempt to rig election of a pro-development advisory council. It’s just the latest twist in a tortuous tale on trying to turn a huge chunk of land in the economically depressed Northeast Valley into a prosperous, thriving community.
The road to prosperity has been a hazardous highway for Padilla since he became enmeshed last year. During the December election of a new citizens advisory panel to oversee the process, Padilla was accused of busing dozens of people to elect his slate of candidates.
Padilla’s explanation that it was merely an innocent get-out-the-vote campaign was generally accepted, although with raised eyebrows and a lot of resentment from opponents of the massive redevelopment project. But Padilla didn’t stop there. He took on outspoken critic - North Hollywood attorney Glenn Hoiby - and got Hoiby thrown off the panel for writing a letter to nonprofit groups warning that the law prohibits tax exempt organizations from actively supporting political candidates.
Now, it’s Padilla’s turn to answer tough questions about whether he and his staff acted improperly. He has so far refused to do so despite numerous requests, referring questions to a spokesman who says all the work done by staff to get control, the Project Area Committee was done on their own - not the city’s - time. Maybe. Maybe not.
But the latest charges are troubling and supported by several other people involved in the controversial redevelopment project. The public deserves a thorough review by the city’s Ethics Commission of whether the councilman’s staff conducted potentially illegal political campaigning on city time and at taxpayer expense.
We are not convinced, based on its past performance, that the Ethics Commission has the political will to get to the bottom of whether Padilla’s staff violated city ethics rules barring public employees and officers from using city resources for campaign activities.
Or will this be a city whitewash to gain control of tax revenues for the next 40 years and keep the crippled and discredited CRA in business just a little bit longer?
Trying to revitalize an area that desperately needs more jobs, better housing and more business is one of the most important needs of the entire San Fernando Valley.
But far from bringing the community together, Padilla has further alienated residents and if possible, created even greater mistrust of the city’s true intentions in taking thousands of acres of private land for the largest redevelopment project in city history. He can do better.
By Alexa Haussler, Staff Writer
Taxpayer advocates and redevelopment critics voiced outrage Wednesday over allegations that Los Angeles City Councilman Alex Padilla's staff misused city resources to campaign for candidates for a redevelopment board in the northeast San Fernando Valley.
"The allegations are very serious," said Jon Coupal, president of the statewide Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. "If the allegations (prove) true, then the councilman would be subject to both civil and criminal liability."
New questions about Padilla's role in the election were raised Wednesday in a Daily News article based on interviews with a former member of his staff and with candidates who ran in the election to the citizen advisory council for the Community Redevelopment Agency project.
David Cervantes, a former member of Padilla's staff who has filed a formal complaint with the city Ethics Commission, charged misuse of city time and resources in the advisory council election.
If Cervantes' allegations -- which also were partially supported by two former candidates for the redevelopment area's Project Advisory Committee -- are true, they raise questions about whether Padilla's staff violated city ethics rules barring public employees and officers from using city resources for campaign activities.
Padilla has refused repeated requests for interviews on the subject. His spokesman denied any impropriety, saying staff members worked for the election of a pro-development slate late last year on their own time.
Coupal, an attorney, said Padilla also might "be subject to repayment under California law to the extent that he directed and participated in a plan by which taxpayer funds were used for political activities." Others expressed support for Padilla, saying if the claims are true, the actions might have resulted from a rookie mistake by the 27-year-old councilman, the city's youngest.
"He's a hard-working, intelligent councilman who's going to be good for the Northeast Valley," said Richard Close, chairman of Valley Voters Organized Toward Empowerment, which has pushed for a study of Valley cityhood. "I think what happened is because he's young and (inexperienced), rather than that he just doesn't play by the rules."
Critics of the redevelopment project were less generous. "I think he is disregarding the trust that was imposed on him and he should resign," said Glenn Hoiby, whose election to the PAC was overturned by the city when objections were raised by Padilla and others. "He's totally disregarding the best interest of his community at large."
Cervantes claims Padilla's staff spent working hours, drove city cars and used city phones and materials to push a slate of pro-redevelopment candidates.
By Harrison Sheppard and Alexa Haussler, Staff Writers
Embroiled in controversy over his role in a Northeast Valley redevelopment project, Los Angeles City Councilman Alex Padilla now faces questions about whether his staff used city time and resources to sway an election for the project's advisory panel.
A former Padilla aide, David Cervantes, told the Daily News in a series of recent interviews that Padilla staffers spent dozens of hours each week making telephone calls and walking the streets of the San Fernando Valley on city time, campaigning for candidates in favor of the proposed Community Redevelopment Agency project.
"I went to businesses. I'd give them fliers produced in the office that said, 'Come to the election, vote for these candidates,' " Cervantes said. "I'd tell them these candidates are supported by Councilman Padilla." Cervantes filed a formal complaint Tuesday with the city's Ethics Commission. He said he was fired last month after he mentioned to another staffer his concerns about possible illegal or unethical campaigning in the election.
His allegations, partly supported by two candidates for the advisory panel, raise questions about possible violations of state elections laws and the city's Code of Ethics, which prohibits city officers and employees from using city time or resources to conduct campaign activities.
Padilla refused several Daily News requests for comment, referring questions to spokesman David Gershwin, who denied the allegations. Gershwin said the staff was conducting information campaigns about the election, but not in support of any specific candidates. "During office hours and on city time, city employees were informing residents about the election and informing residents about the election only," Gershwin said.
The two former candidates said in interviews that members of Padilla's staff approached them during the workweek to discuss the election. "Padilla's deputies came and visited me at work, basically wanting me to jump on board their slate," said Henry J. Magid, the owner of AMR Industries and former Project Area Committee candidate who was not elected to the panel.
Businessman Victor Carreon, who was elected to the Project Area Committee, said two members of Padilla's staff -- a man and a woman -- came to his office during working hours and invited him to meet with the councilman in Padilla's Pacoima field office. He accepted the invitation and spoke with Padilla and his staff at nighttime in the field office. "They assured me I would get elected," said Carreon, who owns Rainbow Lighting and Furniture in Pacoima. "The assumption was . . . I would surely get elected and they would make sure."
Cervantes said at least seven Padilla field staffers were mobilized to support a slate of candidates in favor of the controversial Community Redevelopment Agency project. The Project Area Committee, a citizens group advising the CRA, was elected in December after Padilla arranged for buses to be donated by Laidlaw, a city contractor, to carry dozens of area residents to the election.
With complaints running high in the community over the size of the redevelopment area -- more than 6,800 acres, although there was talk of cutting it in half -- and the CRA's power to take property, the committee voted last week to disband itself because members felt they weren't accomplishing anything. Some redevelopment foes accused Padilla of orchestrating the move because several of the candidates he supported voted in favor of disbanding.
The objective of the panel, made up of homeowners, renters and business people, was to shape the Valley's biggest redevelopment project and then advise the CRA and the City Council.
The project has drawn intense debate. Proponents say it will breathe new life into the area, but opponents argue it will line developers' pockets without helping the community. Padilla supports the project, saying it would revitalize depressed areas in the district, which includes Pacoima, Sun Valley and Sylmar. Gershwin, Padilla's chief spokesman, said the staff mounted an information campaign about the Project Area Committee election, but was not told to support specific candidates.
He said the staff was "briefed as to what was permitted and what wasn't permitted under city election law." He added that many staffers live in the district and used their weekends and possibly lunch hours to campaign. "But none of it was done on city time or using city resources," he said. "It was public notice -- just like there are outreach efforts made for countywide, citywide, national and statewide elections," Gershwin said.
Cervantes, 42, volunteered on Padilla's council campaign and was hired as an aide in September 1999. He supplied the Daily News with a letter from Padilla on City Council letterhead dated May 12, his final day, calling Cervantes a "conscientious and hardworking member" of the staff.
The staffers received their instructions from their supervisors, not from Padilla directly, Cervantes said. But he said they were given a quota of hours to spend calling and visiting potential voters and were told to write up weekly reports of their activities that were forwarded to the councilman, Cervantes said.
Different staff members were given different fields to focus on, he said. For example, Cervantes and two other staff members were told to talk to businesses in the area. He recalled strolling up and down Sepulveda Boulevard before the election, passing out fliers with candidates' names, and taking down phone numbers of those with whom he spoke.
John Magraw, manager of Golden Gate Self Storage on Sepulveda Boulevard, recalled Cervantes coming in with a map of the redevelopment project area and talking about specific candidates. But Magraw also characterized the visit as more focused on voter turnout. "He may have been attached to a specific person, but to me it was a get-out-the-vote effort. Yes, he did offer the name of the person that he was supporting," Magraw said.
Officials with the Ethics Commission and City Attorney's Office declined to speculate whether the alleged activities violated state and city election laws. According to an Ethics Commission pamphlet, state law prohibits city officers and employees from:
Using or authorizing of the use of city offices, stationery, telephones, vehicles, equipment or any other city property for any campaign activity.
Engaging in fund-raising or other campaign activities during hours when they are paid by the city to do city business.
Don Spivack, CRA deputy administrator, said Project Area Committee elections are governed by state redevelopment laws, which are separate from city election laws. But he said he is unsure whether such activity would violate city ethics policies. "If the ethics code comes in, it's because they are city employees, not because of the fact that it's a PAC election. That's strictly an Ethics Commission issue," Spivack said.
Robert M. Stern, an attorney and president of the Center for Governmental Studies, said city money should not be spent to elect candidates for elections run by a public agency. "There shouldn't be undue advantages in terms of city money being used for candidates," Stern said. "I don't think that city resources should be spent on electing people, even to a neighborhood council, and I do think if there is money being spent, there should be disclosure."
The city's ethics codes and state campaign laws should prohibit such activity, Stern said. "We don't know whether the laws apply today, but clearly if this has happened, the laws in the future should apply," he said.