Park Plan Upsets Residents Who May Lose Homes

Several residents near the southern edge of Bell Gardens Park say they were surprised to learn one day last month that their homes may soon be the target of a fleet of bulldozers.

As part of an ambitious citywide redevelopment program, officials are going ahead with a long-awaited, $1.4-million expansion of the park. The project, officials say, would give the 2.9-square-mile, densely populated blue-collar city much needed open space and help improve the quality of life.

But to residents on the north side of Florence Place, the project also means that their homes would be demolished to make way for the expansion, which would add 2.357 acres to the 13.7-acre park.

“We were shocked. It’s really bad,” said Francisca Gonzalez, one of about 30 homeowners and tenants on Florence Place who say they were first informed about the project when they received a letter dated March 18. The letter told the residents “that the city intends to purchase your property to expand park facilities.” It did not include notice of any public hearing.

The letter and the appearance two weeks later by city-hired appraisers from Los Angeles-based Huguet & Associates have angered residents who complain that officials decided to proceed with the park expansion without first giving them the opportunity to object publicly.

City officials say, however, that residents were notified according to legal requirements. Several public hearings were advertised in local newspapers and on a City Hall bulletin board. Of five Bell Gardens residents who spoke at a public hearing during the council’s April 11 meeting, three opposed the plan, according to city records.

But Gonzalez, who speaks only Spanish, and several other residents interviewed said they did not know about any hearings on the park expansion. “It just surprised us,” she said.

The three-unit apartment building in which Gonzalez lives is one of the 14 assorted single-family homes and apartment buildings that the city is appraising before making offers to buy.

Other residents say they had the same experience. “We heard nothing. We just got this letter,” said Carlos Savino, 63, who bought the three-unit apartment building in which he lives 12 years ago when he emigrated from Italy with his wife and handicapped son.

“They do this to us, but they don’t tell us,” Savino said. He said he is refusing to move and has hired an attorney to fight the city.

City Manager Claude L. Booker said the City Council’s approval of his plan to expand the park by demolishing the homes is based on a study conducted almost five years ago that showed there is not enough open space to accommodate the city’s population of 37,000.

“There have been ongoing conversations about this for a long time,” Booker said. But until this year, the city lacked money enough to finance the project, which he now calls “a priority issue.”

“Let’s face it. We’ve got a high-density city and the kids have no place to run in,” Booker said.

Funding for the project through the city’s redevelopment agency was authorized at the City Council meeting April 11. The $1.4 million allocated for the first phase of work would allow the city to purchase the six single-family houses and eight apartment buildings bordering the park on Florence Place and relocate tenants living in the apartments.

The money will be used to subsidize rents during a three-year period for tenants who are forced to pay more when they relocate, Booker said. He added that the project could get under way by fall.

Bell Gardens Park, largest in the city, is bordered on the south by the row of houses and apartments along Florence Place, a row of houses along Emil Avenue to the east, Suva and Loveland streets to the north and Perry Road to the west.

In later phases, city officials plan to expand the park eastward beyond Emil Avenue, thus creating a four-block-wide green belt between the park and Suva Intermediate School. Eventually, a total of 35 lots now occupied by single-family and multifamily housing would be bought by the city and turned into open park space.

Robert T. Dickey, community services director, disputed the residents’ claims that they were not given a chance to oppose the project. Besides the letter, the project has been brought up at several City Council meetings, he said, and another public hearing could be scheduled if offers made by the city beginning this month are rejected by any of the property owners.

“They will be notified of a public hearing if we are not able to settle with everyone,” Dickey said. He declined to speculate about whether the city would cancel the project in the face of further opposition.

But residents interviewed last week said they are not satisfied with promises of additional public hearings because they fear it is already too late to block the project.

One retired homeowner, who asked not to be identified, complained that action taken by city officials shows they have made up their minds about taking his property and will use eminent domain procedures if necessary.

State eminent domain law gives local governments the authority to take private property, after paying owners a court-approved fair price, for any purpose that will benefit the public interest.

“What are they going to give me (for the house)?” the homeowner asked. “I just know I’ll have to rent for the rest of my life. Houses are so expensive now. It ain’t a question of letting them (buy the property). If they want it, they’ll take it.”

Dickey acknowledged that eminent domain procedures are a possible avenue for acquiring the property if residents refuse to sell. But he added that city officials intend to make “fair offers” based on the appraisals, and he does not anticipate organized opposition.