Advertisement

Rebuttal to last week’s commentary defending City Hall move

In response to Sheri Morton's op-ed on the new City Hall (which was in response to my commentary the previous week), I will try to address each issue briefly but directly.

To begin, I did not say that the decision to move City Hall was made hastily. I did say that the financial transaction was completed last year. If my understanding of the sequence of events is incorrect, I apologize.

Advertisement

Second, I have visited City Hall on numerous occasions — Planning Commission meetings, personal business registration tasks and City Council meetings. At no time did the space allocated seem cramped — old and dingy, yes, but not insufficient to the task. Appropriate, in my opinion, for a town the size of La Cañada Flintridge. If my guess (and it was a guess) of "a couple million (dollars)" to renovate City Hall was off the mark, it would be interesting to know what the estimate was.

I also applaud our City Council for keeping La Cañada solvent. Like Ms. Morton, I do not believe that the council members run for office for the money. Notoriety and status and, yes, almost certainly because they love La Cañada as much as Ms. Morton and I do. But I stand by my opinion that our council members share a common thread with all politicians — a belief that they must pass new ordinances or make significant "improvements" (capital and otherwise) or risk being regarded as irrelevant.

Advertisement

In closing, I am not interested in competing with South Pasadena in a race to the bottom. And I have to ask: Was there any thought given to using Sport Chalet's bankrupt properties as the venue for the Oakmont Senior Center? Plenty of room, green space and access to local businesses — almost a match made in heaven.

Bob Lang

La Cañada Flintridge

Advertisement
Advertisement