Parks Dispute Is About Who Gets the Green

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

Two years later, Proposition K jubilation is giving way to a heated conflict over the measure’s very purpose. City Councilman Mike Hernandez, who wrote the measure, said he is concerned that wealthier areas such as the San Fernando Valley will seize the advantage at the expense of the east and central city.

Fueling the controversy is a proposal 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 Bert Boeckmann, an influential Valley car dealer and member of the city’s Police Commission.

The conservancy contends the land is the last untouched mountain tract it can acquire within city limits. Buy it now, or it may soon be too late, since 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, who has proposed borrowing $25 million from future Proposition K revenues for bonds to fund additional projects now, including the conservancy purchase.

But Hernandez and Councilman Richard Alatorre contend the conservancy purchase would eat up money for youth programs in South and East L.A.

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

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

Areas of the west San Fernando Valley have five times more acreage of neighborhood parks per person than much of south, central and east L.A., according to city officials.

Both Hernandez and Alatorre, who represent East L.A., 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, passed in 1996, is a tax assessment, not a bond issue, and does not currently 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, Deervale Canyon in Studio City for $5 million.

But $20 million was set aside for unspecified open-space purchases, money which conservancy Executive Director Joseph Edmiston said should be committed now for adjacent properties in Mandeville and Sullivan canyons before they are developed.

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

Supporters said the whole city would benefit from the purchase.

“It’s like the beaches--it’s available to everyone,” said Amanda Susskind, one of the members 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 lets 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 Hernandez’s priorities, ones 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 out 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 annual expenditures of Proposition K, which amount to about $25 million a year, are decided biennially by committees of citizens from each council district, leading to pressure for the money to be spread with some evenness across the city.

But opponents point out that if the city decides to float bonds for $25 million, as Miscikowski has proposed, 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 Park Observatory and the Los Angeles Children’s Museum have also submitted costly proposals.

Then there’s the issue of paying interest amounting to several million dollars over five or 10 years, interest that 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 that are 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.

Among the programs turned down for grants in this year’s expenditure plan is the Jeffrey Foundation in West L.A., a nonprofit group that provides some of the only day-care slots in the region for disabled children, mostly minorities, many of them poor.

“God love the mountains, but I’m trying to get money to fund real needs, not esoteric needs,” said Alatorre.

Miscikowski, though, said she is confident a compromise can be worked out, perhaps involving funding interest payments from other sources.

A joint committee headed by City Councilman Mike Feuer is scheduled to hold a hearing on Proposition K spending at around 3 p.m. today in Room 340, City Hall, 200 N. Spring St.