Sherman’s National Parklands Bill Is Not Out of the Woods Yet

The U.S. Senate this week approved an unprecedented $699-million appropriation to purchase new parcels for national parklands.

But don’t go strapping on your hiking boots just yet. The money, which is generated by revenue from offshore oil drilling leases, is in jeopardy because environmentalists are urging President Clinton to veto the appropriation bill due to several provisions that they find objectionable.

Specifically, those provisions allow some of the money to be spent on the repair of highways near national parks and on operations costs for four federal land management agencies.

All of this has Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks) concerned. It was Sherman who wrote the amendment to have Congress spend the $699 million this year.

(An additional $270 million was also approved under a separate measure that is not in jeopardy. This additional money will provide $1 million to expand the Backbone Trail in the Santa Monica Mountains.)

But if Sherman’s bill is vetoed, he fears that the $699 million will get caught in another nasty partisan battle in Congress and will be spent in a way it was not intended: to help offset the federal deficit.

Since 1981, most of the money intended for the purchase of parkland has been used to help balance the federal budget.

To prevent that from happening again, Sherman proposed that Congress unleash the $699-million chunk of money in one year instead of doling it out in smaller amounts over a five-year period.

Sherman worries that Congress may not be so generous toward the national parks if the bill returns to Congress for another round of debates.

“While we wait to balance the budget, we are losing many opportunities to acquire and protect environmentally sensitive lands and areas that are critical to our present and future recreational needs,” he told a congressional hearing.

Clinton has until next week to veto or approve the bill. The word in Washington is that his staff is split on the measure. Sherman is crossing his fingers.

Did You Hear the One . . .

It’s no secret that the power brokers at City Hall are not tickled about the so-called secession movement in the San Fernando Valley.

Because the secession effort forces them to face the fact that there is a loud chorus of voices unhappy with the representation they receive, most lawmakers privately wish the entire issue would die a quiet death.

But Los Angeles lawmakers are not just privately praying for the movement’s demise--they are now publicly mocking it. This is evident from the latest joke passed from mouth to ear around the marble corridors of City Hall and the County Hall of Administration:

Question: What is the difference between a puppy dog and a Valley secessionist?

Answer: The puppy dog eventually stops whining.

Tax Ax

Fed up with the Internal Revenue Service? Who isn’t?

After recent emotional testimony in Washington from frustrated taxpayers who have been stung by the much-hated collection agency, Congress is considering a bill to reorganize the IRS and place it under the oversight of an independent board.

But some lawmakers are going further: They are calling for the elimination of the IRS code, that set of taxing regulations and guidelines that can fill a telephone book.

A petition was recently circulated in Washington, calling for the elimination of the code. It has been signed by 120 senators and representatives, including nine from California. All but one of the Californian lawmakers are Republicans.

Among those is freshman Rep. James Rogan (R-Glendale).

The petition, which is being circulated by the National Federation of Independent Business, calls for the elimination of the code by Dec. 31, 2000. The business group, which has 600,000 members nationwide, wants the code replaced with something “simpler, fairer” and that “rewards work and savings.”

Kristin Hogarth, a spokeswoman for the group, said its members have not decided whether that new system would be based on a national sales tax or on a flat income tax.

“We are just trying to get the debate going,” she said.

Don’t worry. In Washington, that doesn’t take much.

Board Games

With a hastily written letter and the stroke of Mayor Richard Riordan’s pen, the San Fernando Valley got a new voice on the powerful Metropolitan Transportation Authority last week.

But it seems the Valley can attribute its new voice to conflicting schedules and spur-of-the-moment decision making.

Here is how it happened:

Last week’s MTA meeting was running long, as usual, and Riordan, who currently chairs the much-maligned board, was late for another appointment. Normally, the pro tem of the board would take over the leadership of the panel, while Riordan’s alternate would vote on the mayor’s behalf.

But earlier in the month, Riordan promoted his alternate, Councilman Hal Bernson, to the position of full member of the board. Bernson, who represents the northwest Valley, replaced another Riordan appointee, Carol Schatz, who had resigned.

But when Riordan promoted Bernson he apparently failed to name a new alternate for himself.

As last week’s meeting was growing long and Riordan was trying to get away for his appointment, he was caught with a predicament: If he left without having an alternate fill his place, the MTA would not have a quorum to continue.

His solution was to have his staff hastily write a letter naming his transportation aide, Jaime De La Vega, as his new alternate. De La Vega is from Woodland Hills.

Riordan signed the letter and the Valley got a second voice.

*

QUOTABLE: “I’m not a vulture like some people. I’m not looking to kick anybody in the tail to get a little recognition.” --Councilman Hal Bernson, in asking Mike Hernandez to step down

from his City Council post.