Council Hostile to Ahmanson’s Hostile Bid for Great Western

The hostile bid by the H.F. Ahmanson Co. to take over Great Western Financial Corp. gained a new enemy this week, when the Los Angeles City Council voted to formally oppose the bid.

At the request of Councilman Hal Bernson, the panel also asked the city’s pension funds, which own stock in Chatsworth-based Great Western, to refuse to sell their shares to Ahmanson.

Bernson said he had confirmed rumors that Ahmanson, which owns Home Savings and Loan of Irwindale, would close Great Western’s headquarters, eliminating 3,000 jobs in Chatsworth, and shut down 200 branches, putting 1,200 more jobs at risk.

“There ought to be some antitrust laws about this,” Bernson fumed after the council vote.

Separately from the council action, Bernson, whose district includes Chatsworth, asked all Great Western stockholders in Southern California to refuse to participate in the takeover.

Ahmanson officials expressed surprise at the move, contending that even their rival for Great Western, a Washington-based thrift that has agreed to come in as a so-called “white knight,” would probably close the headquarters.

“We had no warning that this action was going to be considered,” said Madeleine Kleiner, Ahmanson’s chief administrative officer.

Kleiner disputed the contention that 3,000 jobs would be lost, saying that some employees would be absorbed into Ahmanson’s other operations and that part of the Chatsworth facility might be kept open.

Bird Shot Councilman Richard Alarcon, tired of listening to the neighbors’ roosters every night at his Sylmar home, is pushing an ordinance that would limit noise from farm animals.

Alarcon has not yet explained how he expects to keep them quiet, but presumably the City Council committee charged with developing the ordinance will think of something.

“Apparently we have noise ordinances against dogs and other kinds of animals but we don’t have anything that covers roosters,” Alarcon said.

The councilman said his neighbors on the next block have about 50 roosters. They’ve tried everything to keep them quiet, even putting up covers over their perches that “look like little condos.”

But nothing has worked. And the pesky birds are true early risers, crowing as early as 2:30 in the morning.

“Apparently the only thing you can do is have LAPD enforce disturbing-the-peace laws,” Alarcon said. “And that’s too much of a burden for LAPD.”

The answer, he said, seems to be some sort of bird psychology--making the roosters think it’s not yet time to crow.

Failing that, the city could make the owners responsible if their animals are too loud.

Free Style One of the lesser-known--and admittedly, less sexy--benefits of having a seat on the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is the power to waive fees at special events for the public.

It is one of the more efficient forms of constituent service because many of the organizations granted exemptions are nonprofit groups and the similarly civic minded.

A typical gathering would involve, say, the Girl Scouts or a Boys & Girls Club, a chamber of commerce or a religious organization.

Usually, parking and other fees forgiven by the supes usually add up to only a couple hundred of dollars. Each is placed on the consent item of the agenda, so technically each supervisor votes for the waivers. For a supervisor to raise an objection to such an item would be considered poor form.

This week, however, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky raised a few eyebrows when he waived thousands of dollars from parking and other fees for events scheduled during the next several months.

The Los Angeles County Office of Education saved $2,400 in parking fees, courtesy of Yaroslavsky, for its Learning Summit scheduled at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion in June.

Next, the good supervisor forgave $600 worth of parking fees for the Congregation Kol Ami’s annual dinner-dance on May 17 at the Music Center.

Zev then came to the aid of attendees of opening ceremonies for Public Health Week, scheduled next week at the Chandler Pavilion, when he recommended that $2,340 in parking costs be forgotten.

The list goes on. Four-hundred and sixty-eight dollars in parking fees for attendees of the Public Health Foundation’s essay contest at the Chandler Pavilion Saturday; $1,000 for a health fair in the Hollywood/Wilshire area and for monthly volleyball clinics at various beaches throughout the county.

Finally, the coup de grace: $4,095 for people attending the Public Health Awards luncheon at the Chandler Pavilion this month.

Total cost: $10,435.

Yaroslavsky’s camp argues that because he is board chairman, community groups are apt to come to him when they want fee waivers. And although Yaroslavsky spokesman Joel Bellman argues that the waiver money is practically pennies among the county’s billions, the largess might soon come to an end.

It seems that Supervisor Gloria Molina wants the waiver money taken from the sponsoring supervisor’s discretionary fund--instead of the current system of taking it directly from the public till.

Discretionary funds are given to supervisors to dole out just about any way they see fit: to favorite community groups, to the police, to give their staff bonuses or for a variety of other things.

Bellman, Yaroslavsky’s spokesman, said his boss doesn’t like the idea of paying for fee waivers from personal accounts. “Either way, it’s still taxpayer money,” Bellman said. Besides, the spokesman concluded, “no one’s ever complained about this.”

Battle Axed Imagine a boxer who has been knocked out twice by the same fighter but is thinking about entering the ring again.

In this scenario the bruised and battered warrior is the Community Redevelopment Agency, which for four years has been trying to raise a $750-million spending cap on a redevelopment project in downtown Los Angeles.

The man who has repeatedly backed the CRA into a corner is scrappy former City Councilman Ernani Bernardi, who argues that the project will only benefit expensive high-rise projects for rich businesses.

The spending cap was the result of a 1977 settlement of a lawsuit brought by Bernardi against the redevelopment project.

But by 1993, the CRA was nearing the spending limit and went to court to alter the agreed-upon limit.

In October 1995, a Superior Court judge ruled that the court did not have the authority to overturn the settlement without the consent of all parties. The CRA appealed and lost--twice, most recently on March 19.

The state second appellate court rejected the latest appeal, calling the agreement “forever binding and conclusive.”

Nonetheless, the CRA is considering whether to appeal again, this time to the California Supreme Court.

Bernardi said the city has already spent up to $500,000 in legal bills on the fight and would only be facing another defeat if the battle is renewed.

“I think it would be irresponsible for any attorney to look at this decision by the appellate court and try to appeal it,” he said.

Stay tuned.

*

QUOTABLE: “The cynicism out there about government is incredible. It’s going to kill democracy in this country. And this city is going to fly apart.”

--Attorney David Fleming on why he believes in city charter reform