Northeast Valley and the CRA

Now I know what CRA stands for: Community Ripped Apart.

As a long-time property and business owner in the northeast Valley, I have a stake in the future of our community. I ran for office, was elected as a member of the Project Area Committee (PAC) and, with an open mind, eagerly sought to learn how redevelopment was going to benefit the area, my neighbors and me.

What a joke.

I have seen and heard only months of bickering, hidden agendas and misleading statements by the CRA [Community Redevelopment Agency] and now realize that the CRA is being forced upon the people, whether they like it or not.

Some of us feel it’s a con job. They take our tax money, and there is no commitment as to where it is spent. There is the threat of eminent domain for the benefit of outside private developers and no rights to protect against it.

Other community members believe the CRA will improve their lives and neighborhoods.

A market in my neighborhood opposes the CRA. Some former customers don’t stop there anymore because these customers support the CRA.

At our last PAC meeting, on June 5, 300 of my neighbors were shouting for and against the CRA, and there was a fistfight that had to be broken up by police. Finally, members of the PAC faced off against each other and voted to abolish their own committee.

Since the CRA has been brought in, we are a Community Ripped Apart. CRA, please go away and leave us alone.

VICTOR CARREON

Simi Valley

*

The Times reports that the PAC for the northeast Valley CRA project voted to disband itself because it was “hopelessly gridlocked.” The gridlock was and always has been caused by PAC members who were handpicked by [City Councilman Alex] Padilla, the councilman for the district.

When Padilla and the CRA realized they couldn’t control the PAC’s every move, they orchestrated the sham that the PAC wanted to “disband” itself. That was step one.

In truth, the PAC can’t legally disband itself, so Padilla will now ask the full council to “follow the wishes of his constituents” and cast a real vote to get rid of the PAC. That’s step two.

Clever scheme. Now the PAC will be gone and Padilla and the CRA are off the hook as the ones who silenced the community’s only voice. That gives them full rein to do anything they want with no oversight from anyone.

WALTER N. PRINCE

Northridge

*

Freshman Councilman Padilla continually pays lip service to the importance of community involvement, but when the people of his district don’t agree with the agenda of his politically connected associates, he does the following:

He rigs a PAC election so the advisory panel represents his views.

He disbands the PAC he created when they don’t represent his views.

And now he will ram the entire northeast Valley project down the throats of his constituents, even though a large number do not agree with his views.

It has to be assumed that the ambitious MIT grad is intelligent, so the question must be asked: Why does he continually spend political capital for a cause the people of his district don’t want?

Padilla is headed toward political bankruptcy if he continues to pay off his political debts on the backs of his constituents.

WILLIAM SERRATO

Panorama City

*

I attended the northeast Valley’s contentious CRA meeting June 5 and listened in horror as Councilman Padilla tried to inflame the crowd of 400-plus by claiming “outsiders” are trying to prevent the CRA confiscation of $1.1 billion in northeast Valley property taxes over the next 45 years. Most of the crowd didn’t believe a word he said, as shown by the boos and catcalls.

And as one member of the elected PAC sarcastically told Padilla, “The only outsiders here are from the CRA.”

Shame, shame, shame on Alex Padilla.

MARY ANN GEYER

Sun Valley

*

One wonders what possible motive Councilman Padilla could have had to throw oil on an already burning community issue.

One wonders if the events were planned by the councilman and the CRA to discredit the PAC. I believe this was poor leadership from the councilman and bad advice from the CRA. However, this may have been the intended result!

Leadership would have required the councilman to meet with the parties and lay out a plan to help the community now. He would have done his homework and studied the record of the CRA in Los Angeles.

Leadership would have welcomed help from “outsiders.” The outsiders, as he calls us, are all trying to give the community the benefit of our experience. We would like to tell the community that nothing will happen for at least five years while the CRA does studies, reports and then more studies and reports.

Can the community wait five or 10 years for improvements, or do they want help now? A city is a blending of many communities and we need to all work together. We have common goals and shared needs.

Our North Hollywood PAC spent over two years working on our plan, not six months.

The East Valley PAC violated the Brown Act by voting to disband. This motion was not on their agenda. The city attorney present should have told the PAC that their vote was illegal. The North Hollywood PAC knows all too well, the Los Angeles city attorneys do not give PACs good advice.

We thank The Times and Patrick McGreevy for their continuing reports on the activities of the Los Angeles redevelopment agency.

MILDRED WELLER

Member, North Hollywood

Project Area Committee;

President, North Hollywood

Concerned Citizens

*

Councilman Padilla is again trying to dupe his constituents of the northeast Valley about the CRA threat to take their homes. Padilla claims he can stop the CRA from condemning hundreds of homes by making a City Council motion to prevent the CRA from doing just that. The problem is, his motion won’t matter. . . . What the council giveth, the council can taketh away.

The only true way to stop the CRA is to get rid of the CRA--then both the homeowners and small business will be safe.

As long as the CRA is allowed to keep taking, we will never be safe from their loopholes.

KATHIE AAMODT

Reseda

*

After seeing the results of CRA activities in North Hollywood, it’s difficult to understand why any part of Los Angeles would want to be subjected to the CRA.

Although the agency claimed that substantial progress has been made in revitalizing its office neighborhood at the Vineland Avenue / Burbank Boulevard intersection, the agency office was sold for $188,000 (gross), or only $4,000 more than it cost in 1985.

The North Hollywood PAC demanded comparative information of prospective office sites, and the amount of new office space desired, versus before. That was the PAC’s prerequisite for the move.

But the CRA staff completely ignored the demands and moved into the most expensive office space (the Academy building) in the project area.

Does that sound prudent for any agency, especially one that has recently had to slash the size of its staff citywide and is in jeopardy of defaulting on its Bunker Hill Bonds?

VICTOR N. VIERECK

North Hollywood

*

Who will the lightning strike?

Councilman Padilla’s request to the CRA shows he is beginning to hear the outcry from voters in his district. Hearing the outcry is a good first effort but he needs to listen to the message along with the noise. We don’t want the CRA in the northeast Valley. . . . We hope that he learns soon that he is being beguiled by the CRA and that they have made him the lightning rod.

CESAR MORALES

Sylmar