I support the Crescenta Valley Water District’s rate increase, and so should you. The increase is required to not only offset the increased cost of imported water, but mostly I believe it is important and prudent to continue to invest in the maintenance of the CVWD water system and prevent disruptions from the failure of old pipes or pumps.
The CVWD should be supported in their efforts to care for our community’s most important resource, our local groundwater, as well as our water and sewer infrastructure.
We had a huge power outage in Glendale on April 27, around 2:45 p.m., and when it came back on we had another outage. When it finally came back on for good I went around my house checking my appliances, etc. My washing machine, less than three years old, would not come back on. It had a full load of wash in it and the door was locked.
An appliance repairman informed me the machine’s computer was “fried.” He ordered a new one. On May 3 he came back and, while installing that computer, he realized the washer had two computers. When he told me the cost of the repair, I decided not to have him do the work because I could buy a new washer for the same price.
I called the city to get a damage claim form. A person by the name of Mary Velazquez answered the phone, was very helpful and emailed me the form immediately. I printed the form, along with a copy of my old purchase order, my new purchase order and a copy of the repair estimate. I hand-delivered it all to the City Clerk’s office on May 16.
Two days later I received a letter from an assistant city attorney stating they had received my claim and it would take up to four weeks for my claim to be processed.
On June 6 I received a letter from the city attorney saying my claim was denied and that Glendale is not legally liable for the damage.
If Glendale is not responsible for its power outage that caused my damage, who is? Maybe me, for living in this once great city.
Richard E. Jenkins
The Glendale Planning Department and the Design Review Board have been approving projects that clearly violate the Comprehensive Design Guidelines approved by City Council on Nov. 29, 2011.
One such example would be a proposed two-story 5,400-square-foot development on Cumberland Terrace, a neighborhood containing only single-story homes that average 2,442 square feet. A quick neighborhood walk-through would make it clear that the scale and mass of this home violates the design guidelines.
The approval decision by the DRB compelled me to exercise my rights according to the California Public Records Act. I filed a request to review all email correspondence between the developer and all city employees. Seventeen days after my request, I received files for review.
From what I did receive, it appears that Roger Kiesel, senior planner for Glendale, showed favoritism toward the developer by providing tips that could potentially deceive decision makers. Moreover, the files appeared incomplete and referred to attachments found nowhere in the DRB case file.
When presented with this information, the city attorney’s office, in particular Yvette Neukian and Michael Garcia, ran interference.
Neukian’s excuse was that IT only retains two weeks of backup records once an employee has deleted an email. She further stated that because Kiesel produced some emails from his “sent” folder, my request was satisfied.
But what about the emails that weren’t saved in Kiesel’s sent folder?
Emails are records, and records must be retained by the city for two years by law.
Why is the planning department not maintaining complete records?
Why is justice being obstructed?
Where there is smoke, there is fire.