Bryant-Vanalden Plan Faces Rising Protest : 2 VIEWS ON COUNCIL PROPOSAL

Northridge homeowner association leader Charles M. Culver led a petition drive on behalf of Councilman Hal Bernson’s proposal to evict tenants in the Bryant-Vanalden neighborhood of Northridge in order to make way for renovation of the area. Culver, who lives half a block from the complex, is a retired director of contracts for an aerospace corporation. These are excerpts of an interview with him by Times Staff Writer James Quinn.

Q Where do you think these people, if evicted, are going to find a place to live?

A If they’re paying $350 and better a month, they will find some place to live. My goodness, there are other areas, and when I use the term other areas it’s even elsewhere in Northridge. I would like to make another point here. Because of the high percentage of crime that exists here and has existed for a number of years . . . I kind of describe it as rather a unique situation, and that unique situation probably required a unique solution, and Councilman Bernson seems to be the first person that’s come along that was willing to try to do something about it.

Q Homeowners have mentioned undesirable elements in the neighborhood. Who and what are these?

A Well, it’s not undesirable elements, it’s the element of crime and the fact that it was well established that the source of the basic part of the crime is known. In our case, we have been burglarized three times. Every house along Parthenia Street from that corner to this corner has been burglarized. Crime is the basic thing we are concerned about. . . . And when I am talking about crime, I am not talking about just household burglaries, I’m talking about assaults, I’m talking about the number of murders that have originated in that area (the Bryant-Vanalden neighborhood). That little concentrated area is the highest source of crime in the Devonshire Division. We have drug trafficking down there. Prostitution has become rampant. We had people assaulted and slashed and et cetera. . . . Undoubtedly, there are nice people down there and there’s probably a criminal type of element that is terrorizing their own community. We hear gunshots and everything else. I just simply want to say there is nothing racist in any way, shape or form about this because this this already a multi-ethnic neighborhood that consist of blacks, Hispanics, Orientals, as well as whites. We are middle class at best, and we just recognized that, hey, we got a real problem down here.

Q If you perceive this largely as a crime problem, why can’t drastic policing efforts be made? A They already are mounting, to the extent they can, massive police efforts, foot patrols on Friday and Saturday evening. The drug traffickers simply disappear when they see the LAPD swinging their batons and their badges . . . and they come out when they’re 50 yards down the alley.

Councilman Ernani Bernardi, who strongly opposed fellow Councilman Hal Bernson’s measure, labeled it racist and said it was tantamount to “advocating our own apartheid policy.” This is an edited text of an interview with Bernardi by Times Staff Writer James Quinn. Q On reflection, do you think it was a bit extreme of you to characterize Bernson’s proposal as apartheid, meaning separation of the races? A Not from all the evidence that’s been presented. . . . This was intended to evict everyone who lives in the apartments. The report (by the council’s Government Operations Committee) specifically spelled out a different class of people. How are you going to interpret that when that’s written right in the committee report? You are going to evict all the tenants and bring in a different class of people. How do you classify people? Blacks, whites, Asians, brown, red, yellow?

Q Wasn’t that a reference to a different economic class?

A It didn’t say economic class. . . . Well, I would assume it also has that in mind, a different economic class. But it was specifically referring to a different class of people. And the class that is in there now is apparently average working people that are probably low- and moderate-income status.

Q What hope can you offer to residents living near the Bryant-Vanalden neighborhood who have complained to Bernson? A Actually, this is a condemnation of the effectiveness and the efficiency and the objectiveness of the mayor and City Council of the City of Los Angeles. In that report, there are 500,000 people in the City of Los Angeles who are living in circumstances, particularly with the crime situation, in equal or worse crime situations. Now what are we going to do? Are we just going to move them out? We have an obligation to insist that these absentee slumlords keep those properties in proper order.

Q Councilman Bernson says he has done everything he could think of in that regard, and this is the only solution he has been able to come up with.

A If that’s the case, then what do we have city government for? What do we have building and safety regulations for? What do we have the Police Department for? And what do we have the city attorney for? We’re just not doing the job. Does that mean 500,000 people who are living in equal or worse situations, does that mean that we are going to have to uproot all of them? I think that’s a cop-out.

Q Traditionally, council members don’t intrude on issues affecting a fellow council member’s district--such as Bernson’s proposal. Why have you departed from that tradition in this case? A If I think that what happens in Bernson’s district impacts in my district, impacts citywide, and where there are matters that impact citywide, I have an obligation to speak my piece.