 Now that the Los Angeles City Council has wiggled its way out of a long running lawsuit by shelling out $9 million to purchase the site of a 24-home subdivision in El Sereno to use as park land, there are some Angelinos wondering whether or not this was really a victory for environmental justice or something more insidious.
The report in the L.A. Times lays out the backstory:
The developers of the property, Monterey Hills Investors, sued the city last year after the council demanded a new environmental review of the project, planned for a site known as Elephant Hill.
Councilman Jose Huizar said the city would borrow money in the short term to pay for the 19-acre site. Over the long term, he said, the city will seek state funding to help defray the cost.
"This is an environmental justice victory because proper environmental review was not conducted" on the planned subdivision, said Huizar, whose district includes El Sereno.
A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge had a different view, ruling in January that the council had no authority to order Monterey Hills Investors to perform a new environmental impact report on the project.
In the wake of that ruling, attorney Ben Reznik, a City Hall lobbyist who represents the developer, vowed to seek damages of at least $8 million, saying the city's actions postponed completion of his client's project until after the collapse of the region's real estate market.
...
As he prepared for the damages phase of the case, Reznik gave notice that his client intended to depose Huizar, Councilman Ed Reyes and possibly employees in the mayor's office, according to a report obtained by The Times.
The Elephant Hill project has been debated for years. But the fight reached a critical stage two years ago when the council voted to block the city Department of Building and Safety from issuing a permit that would allow the developer to grade the site.
The city attorney's office sided with Reznik, warning council members that they lacked the power to seek more review. But Huizar sided with neighborhood activists and the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group that argued El Sereno needs more undeveloped hillside space.
On Aug. 12, the council instructed the city's lawyers to negotiate a purchase of the site. Although the developer was attempting to build on roughly 14 acres, the council agreed to buy an additional five acres that were not part of the original project. The Mayor Sam Blog has asked some interesting questions in the wake of the Times story: Environmental justice victory or suspicious dealings? Can you see the political rats running for cover? Smell the onerous stench of political deceit?
Not too long in the past, El Sereno and CD 14 activists can remember an certain "CD 14 public official" who was heard telling the concern Elephant Hills activists that he thought that losing this lawsuit was possible, but moving forward was the "right" course of action. That when the cost of the 14 acre parcel was around $6,000,000 dollars. But was doing the right thing the only consideration for Huizar? Consider these facts.
Reznik, who has held campaign fundraisers for Huizar and other city elected officials, had no comment on today's vote, saying the settlement had not been finalized. As he prepared for the damages phase of the case, Reznik gave notice that his client intended to depose Huizar, Councilman Ed Reyes and possibly employees in the mayor's office, according to a report obtained by The Times.
Hmmm, maybe the likes of Huizar and Reyes with the possible Mayor Villaraigosa's staffers in the mix, use the city treasury to "cry uncle" or was this part of an grand charade to improve the profit margin on devalue property, to help a political donor?
This deal reminds me of a microscopic version of the failed "Las Lomas Project". Replace Dan Palmer with Ben Reznik, Councilman Richard Alarcon with Councilman Huizar and David Hernandez with Elva Yanez. But sadly, there is no local version of Councilman Greig Smith to cry foul over this blantant misuse of public dollars. Then I seem to remember that the likes of Councilman Reyes and Huizar were supporters of the Las Lomas Project, as this passage reminds us. "Our city attorney has said that if we fail to move forward, he believes we are in great jeopardy of being sued," said Councilman Richard Alarcon, whose San Fernando Valley district borders the Las Lomas site.
Alarcon voted to keep the project alive, along with council members Ed Reyes, Jose Huizar, Herb Wesson and Bernard C. Parks.
Strange how Alarcon, in his support of the Las Lomas Project, sounds so much like Councilman Huizar in his support of the Elephant Hill settlement.
Then there is this simple fact for CD 14 open space advocates to ponder. With the $9,000,000 dollars that Huizar is proposing to give his campaign contributors for the Elephant Hill acreage, you could have an completed Ascot Hills Passive Park and Hazard Park Wetlands Restoration, with money left over for some of the Elephant Hills property. Read the blog post in full, here.
Then of course we have Councilmember Jose Huizar's take on Elephant Hill, a far rosier picture - Here is the press release:
Councilmember Huizar Wins Council Support to Acquire Elephant Hill Site for Open Space Decades-long battle ends after Huizar urges City to settle lawsuit over Elephant Hill, a win-win scenario that avoids costly damages and acquires 19 acres of hillside property in El Sereno for preservation as open space LOS ANGELES (Nov. 3, 2009) - Councilmember José Huizar led the Los Angeles City Council to vote today for a settlement that allows the city to acquire 19 acres of prime hillside property in El Sereno, which will save millions of dollars in litigation costs, preserve the hillside property for open space and finally put to rest a decades-long controversy in Northeast Los Angeles. "This is a victory for everyone," said Councilmember José Huizar following the Council's vote. "For the residents of El Sereno, they can breathe easier knowing that their beautiful Elephant Hill will be protected against quite possibly dangerous development. It was a tough fight and a long time coming, but in the end Elephant Hill will be safe from development and will remain a treasured open space that will bring joy to many future generations." In the 1980s, a developer first proposed to subdivide the El Sereno hillside property commonly known as "Elephant Hill." Controversial from the outset, the proposed development triggered community concerns when a similar large-scale development project in nearby Monterey Hills caused widespread subsidence and property damage in the late 1980s. That case, the Eaton Crest project, was the longest land subsidence jury trial in LA County history - lasting 10 months and ultimately costing the City $65 million to settle with approximately 700 property owners whose properties were damaged as a result of an ill-located hillside development. Councilmember Huizar took issue with the Elephant Hill proposal because there were substantial changes to the project since it was originally approved back in 1993 and he thought that the impacts of those changes could not be known without further environmental review. The grading area had expanded, additional parcels were added, roads were realigned and subsequent evidence had come to light about significant subsurface water and potential sinkholes. Although the proposed project was approved in 1993, the developer did not actually move to build until 2006, when Councilmember Huizar heard the community opposition to a nearly 15-year old Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and led the City Council to withhold a B permit for the project until the developer completed a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR). The developer, Monterey Hills LLC, ignored the Council's direction and sued the City. In January of this year, the Court ruled that the City erred in its decision but did not grant the developer's request to compel the City to issue the B permit. The developer's attorney sought $25 million to $35 million in damages. Council today voted to acquire the litigated 14-acre property, plus an additional 5 contiguous acres for approximately $9 million. "We are pleased that this matter has settled and that the City will be saved from costly litigation," said Assistant City Attorney Susan Pfann. "We are happy to have helped the City Council accomplish this settlement. Your thoughts?
|
