Favoritism Charged Over Court Site

Regarding the Chatsworth Courthouse and the proposed Allegretti site, there was no “good faith” shown by the county court to Allegretti & Company.

The court and Board of Supervisors’ vote to expedite the site selection was a farce. The stated reasoning (that it was to save money because it was costing them dollars to wait) was a preposterously ironic joke, considering that the Allegretti site was offered at no significant carrying cost to the county until January, 1992.

We, Allegretti & Company, can hold the site for the county for one full year essentially for free, because it has been leased for that period (even though now vacant due to the lessee’s recent move to Arkansas), while Haagen’s deal demands significant financial carrying costs beginning in January of 1991.

Now you can understand why the big hurry to get the board approval vote in late December of 1990.


Supervisors Dana, Hahn and Schabarum’s brazen act ramming this sordid business through, despite all the factual and moral evidence against it, turns my stomach.

Their only real questions to the court and county administrator were to elicit other county officials’ recommendations of support to bolster their favoritism to Haagen, while ignoring requests for a true competitive bid process, the Allegretti site vs. the Haagen site. Further, they ignored the residents’ call for public hearings and an environmental impact report (which should compare the two sites)--both actions that were promised but not delivered by Supervisor Antonovich.

These actions by the board sum up to yield an obvious conclusion of favoritism to Haagen and corruption in county government.