Territorial Disputes Mar Park Funding

Backers were jubilant when Proposition K, the city of Los Angeles’ $750-million parks measure, unexpectedly passed in 1996 by the narrowest of margins.

Supporters saw a chance to put right years of neglect of city parks, particularly in the inner city. But that was before tough decisions cropped up about who would get the money, and when.

Today, jubilation over Proposition K is giving way to a heated conflict--one that flares along ethnic and ideological lines--over the measure’s purpose. City Councilman Mike Hernandez, the author, said he is concerned that wealthier areas such as the San Fernando Valley will seize the advantage at the expense of eastern and central parts of the city.

Fueling the controversy is a proposal backed by the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy to borrow as much as $10.5 million from future Proposition K revenues by issuing bonds to acquire pristine mountain land in Mandeville and Sullivan canyons near the Getty Center.

The 1,700-acre tract is partly owned by Herbert Boeckmann, an influential Valley car dealer and member of the city’s Police Commission.

The conservancy contends that it is the last untouched mountain tract it can acquire within Los Angeles city limits. Buy it now, or it may be too late because land prices are soaring, conservancy officials say.

“There is a finite amount of open space in the city, and it’s only going to get worse,” said City Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski, a proponent of the borrowing proposal.

But Hernandez and Councilman Richard Alatorre contend that the conservancy purchase would eat up money for youth programs in south and east Los Angeles.

“The Santa Monica Mountains are beautiful. But, see, the kids in the inner city are lucky if they will be there even once,” Alatorre said.

The proposal is especially irksome to Hernandez, who wants the measure to help equalize the distribution of park resources throughout the city.

In fact, areas of the west San Fernando Valley have five times more acreage of neighborhood parks per person than much of southern, central and eastern Los Angeles.

Hernandez and Alatorre, who represent the eastern part of the city, say they are open to a compromise that would include borrowing. But they question whether the mountain purchase is truly of regional value.

Proposition K is a tax assessment, not a bond issue, and does not include provisions for borrowing. The measure is separate from Proposition A, a large Los Angeles County parks bond measure of 1992 and 1996. Although the county’s measure includes $62 million for acquisitions of open space in the Santa Monica Mountains, Proposition K specified only a single purchase, that of Deervale Canyon in Studio City for $5 million.

But an additional $20 million was set aside for unspecified open space purchases, money that Conservancy Executive Director Joseph T. Edmiston said should be committed now for adjacent Mandeville and Sullivan Canyon properties before they are developed.

“The market there is going through the roof,” he said, “and God is not making any more mountains.”

Supporters said the whole city would benefit from the purchase.

“It’s like the beaches--it’s available to everyone,” said Amanda Susskind, a member of one of the citizens committees that recommended priorities for Proposition K projects.

Not so, said Tammy Membrano of the Barrio Action youth center in El Sereno: “It’s easy for maybe middle-class families to say let’s go for a bike ride in the Santa Monica Mountains. First, they have a car. Then they have bikes,” she said.

Barrio Action has some funding in the proposed Proposition K budget, but not as much as it sought. Money for such nonprofit groups and small neighborhood parks are priorities of Hernandez that he fears may be sacrificed to suburban parks projects.

Issuing bonds to pay for the purchase now has advantages, say city officials. For one, it could help balance what is perhaps an unavoidable bias of Proposition K--that it tends to favor multiple, smaller projects rather than single big-ticket proposals.

This is because expenditures of Proposition K, which amount to about $25 million per year, are decided every two years by local committees of citizens from each council district, leading to pressure for the money to be spread with some evenness across the city.

But opponents note that there may not be enough bond proceeds to fund all the proposed projects now vying for the money, said Tom Grant, senior administrative analyst with the city.

Besides the conservancy, the Griffith Observatory and the Los Angeles Children’s Museum have submitted costly proposals.

Then there is the issue of paying interest amounting to several million dollars over five or 10 years, which could deplete funds for other projects.

Perhaps most galling to opponents is the idea of spending more than half of the limited funds in Proposition K designated for open space on a single large purchase in the Santa Monicas.

Competition for the money is intense. Grant applications are stacked 12 feet high in city offices and represent nearly $200 million worth of requests--13 times the sum available this budget cycle.

A joint committee is scheduled to discuss Proposition K spending at 3 p.m. today at City Hall.