Mandate of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy

As you say in your editorial “Conservancy Should Keep Its Focus Local” (Dec. 18), the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy should put its own house in order before spending money elsewhere:

* The conservancy’s surprising expenditure of $3.9 million on the north edge of the Valley at the very time it is crying poverty at home raises enough questions to fill a book.

* Claiming it did not have enough money to buy the Soka property, the executive director recommended a compromise so onerous that the public turned out in droves to express outrage. The conservancy followed up with mean-spirited letters to our elected representatives suggesting that since they supported the purchase of Soka, they should find the money.

* Subsequently the conservancy pulled out of an agreement to buy a parcel in the Fryman Canyon-Wilacre-TreePeople park complex in Studio City, causing a hole in the park.

* There are ongoing discussions about defaulting on the Canyon Oaks purchase in Topanga, and everyone who uses the mountains is terrorized by the prospect of the conservancy selling off their favorite parkland to raise money.

The conservancy strikes out at the public for its own troubles, accepting no responsibility. And the self-proclaimed “crisis” may divert public attention from the longstanding management problems while we attempt to find yet more money to throw at the problem. The conservancy needs to come back home and bring the money with it.

SUSAN GENELIN

Studio City

* In response to your editorial (Dec. 18), which supports restricting Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy park acquisitions to the Santa Monica Mountains, I wish to offer the following comments.

The acquisition of Wilson Canyon in the San Gabriel Mountains was funded by Proposition A, through the agreement and cooperation of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy and Assemblyman Richard Katz. Additional acquisitions of parkland through Prop. A can be anticipated in other areas, and they will not deprive funding for projects in the Santa Monica Mountains.

The Santa Monica Mountains are not the conservancy’s official principal mandate. All areas within the conservancy’s statutory sphere of influence have equal priority. This sphere includes mountains around Los Angeles and around parts of the Simi, Santa Clarita and San Fernando valleys. For various reasons including wildlife corridors and the presence of special environmental and recreational areas, the conservancy’s jurisdiction has been expanded during the past 12 years.

Discretionary funds should be used to secure some parklands peripheral to the Santa Monica Mountains. For instance, through an official feasibility study, the proposed Santa Clarita Woodlands Park in the Santa Susana Mountains has been approved for a California state park. The area has huge numbers of five species of oak trees, big-cone Douglas firs, and 10 forest (tree) plant communities not occurring elsewhere in California.

DON P. MULLALLY

Granada Hills