L.A. Council Rejects Canoga Park Plea on Sidewalk Fees

A group of indignant Canoga Park homeowners went home even more so Friday after the Los Angeles City Council rejected their appeal for relief from assessments of up to $2,200 to repair sidewalks damaged by city-owned trees.

The council voted 10 to 1 to require the 18 homeowners to pay the full cost of work that was done in 1980 as part of the city’s program to repair sidewalks in areas where alleged “trip-and-fall” accidents prompted claims against the city.

Councilman Howard Finn dissented, saying he would not vote to charge homeowners for tree damage as long as the city-owned trees are left in place to cause more damage.

Picus ‘Anguished’

Expressing “anguish” over the decision, Councilwoman Joy Picus, whose district includes the protesting homeowners’ neighborhood, voted with the majority because of what she described as the frightening fiscal implications of letting the homeowners off.

In response to questions from Picus, an official of the city’s Public Works Department said it would cost the city up to $150 million to repair the city’s damaged sidewalks.

The city has the power to assess property owners for such work under the state’s Improvement Act of 1911.

In the mid-1970s, the city repaired sidewalks at its own expense but stopped doing so when the sidewalk repair program ran out of money.

The policy of making property owners pay for sidewalk repairs was resumed in 1980 because of rising payments for injuries, city officials said.

Owners Told to Pay

At that time, 2,700 property owners were sent notices to have their sidewalks repaired or pay the city to do it, officials said.

Assessments against 1,700 residents who let the city do the repairs weren’t issued until 1983.

The 18 residents of Lena Avenue in Canoga Park, among the first group to receive the assessments, filed appeals. They said they heard nothing more from the city until their cases recently came before the City Council.

Their hopes were raised when San Fernando Valley Councilmen Finn and Ernani Bernardi called the homeowners “victims” and asked the Public Works Committee to review the city’s sidewalk repair policy.

On Tuesday, however, that committee voted unanimously to recommend enforcing the assessments.

Bernardi was absent Friday.

Seek Legal Advice

After losing their battle Friday, several of the homeowners said they will consult a lawyer.

“The issue is not how much it is going to cost,” said John Hiland, who said he was assessed $1,428. “It’s that the city is responsible.”

During a hearing, Hiland and five other Lena Avenue homeowners said the damage is being caused by mulberry trees planted with city approval by the developer who built their homes in the 1960s. Since then, the homeowners said, that species has been removed from the list of approved sidewalk trees because their roots tend to damage sidewalks.

They said the trees, which stand on the city-owned strip between the sidewalk and the street, are beginning to cause new cracks in the sidewalks.

“We are now approaching a situation where the repairs will soon have to be done again because of the continued growth of the root systems,” Lena Avenue homeowner Richard Grossman said.

‘Cannot Pay It’

Homeowner Esther Capucola, near tears, told the council that, as a single head of household, she cannot afford the $2,200 assessment she received.

“The city says to me, ‘I cannot pay.’ Well, I say back to the city, ‘I cannot pay it either,’ ” Capucola said.

“I am more than sympathetic,” Picus responded. “I, too, have sidewalks that are beginning to rock because of the trees.”

However, foreshadowing her decision, Picus elicited from a city official statistics on the cost of sidewalk damage.

Norman Giard, chief of the city’s Street Use Inspection Division, said it would cost $27 million just to remove the trees whose roots are now buckling sidewalks. The trees’ removal could cost up to $62.5 million. To repair a backlog of about 150,000 broken sidewalks throughout the city would cost $120 million to $150 million, he said.

Giard said property owners could elect to pay the the bills over a five-year term at 6% interest. On an assessment of $2,200 that would be about $40 a month.

“The amount you are speaking about really frightens me because I don’t know where it’s coming from,” Picus said. “I really would do anything to be able to help these folks. But there really is no way of doing it because we would really be obligating ourselves to the expenditure of enormous amounts of money.”

Obligation to Others

Picus also said she felt responsible to those who have already paid for the sidewalk repairs.

She mentioned an elderly widow who had hired a contractor to do the work and “felt good about the fact” that she was making her sidewalk safe.

“If we were to let these people off and pay for them, then it’s only fair she be refunded the money that she put out,” Picus said.

Finn said he thought it was ridiculous to repair the sidewalks without taking out the trees.

“It’s like having a hole in the roof and it’s raining and you patch the ceiling, but you leave the hole in the roof,” he said. “We should be talking about getting rid of every one of those trees that are causing this problem.”