Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Letters to the Editor regarding Las Lomas

Usually I glance at the "PEOPLE'S RANTS OP-ED PAGES" of the "LA OBAMA TIMES" as I prep it for "LITTER BOX LINING". Today was no exception, but as I was moving my attention towards Jonah Goldberg's latest missive on Liberal lunacies, two letters to the "PEOPLE"S EDITORIAL BOARD"caught my attention.

A small amount of you may know that the "LA OBAMA TIMES" has editorialize against the lunacy that is the Las Lomas Project.

Yet the likes of the "ZORRO MARXIST" and Las Lomas Developer Dan S. Palmer felt compelled to engage the editorial board in an attempt to change their opinions.


Re "Dumb growth," editorial, Feb. 21The Times is correct that there are lots of questions regarding the Las Lomas development. However, the city attorney opined on two occasions that Los Angeles is legally required to process the Las Lomas permits. To not process the application, as recommended by The Times, could put taxpayers on the hook if there were a lawsuit.

Currently before the City Council is not a question of approving the project but whether the developer should pay for the processing. My motion ensures that taxpayers are not saddled with this cost -- but does not force "the city to reopen proceedings to annex the land and to approve the development."

Las Lomas is a long way from approval. Only after an environmental impact report and public vetting will a decision be made. But to stop processing the application now, after the city accepted the fees in 2002, could cost the taxpayers millions.

Richard Alarcon

Los Angeles City Council District 7

Tag teaming is Dan S. Palmer,
As the developer of the Las Lomas community, I believe that The Times missed the boat with its editorial. The Times may dismiss the city's legal obligation to process Las Lomas, but the city attorney's office has not. Two opinions from the city attorney indicate that the city is obligated to process the project.

While the editorial mentions concerns such as traffic congestion and smart growth, it ignores other project benefits such as the creation of 9,000 permanent jobs and $22 million in annual tax revenues to the city, among many others. All of these concerns and benefits are what the city's environmental review process is designed to comprehensively analyze. Only when this review is complete will decision-makers have the facts needed to evaluate Las Lomas.

Dan S. Palmer Jr.
Santa Monica

Taking liberties with Palmer's last sentence, the same way he takes toward property ownership issues, when the review of this project is completed, no dirt will be turned on your reckless plans for Las Lomas.

Labels: , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said:

Another typical day in our sanctuary city and gang capital of the world. And you thought Tijauna was dangerous? When will SP-40 finally be repealed.



Children affected by a school lockdown after a nearby gang shooting learn that even their world isn't always safe.

Third-grader Monic Santana has stopped playing in the yard at Aragon Avenue Elementary since a man was gunned down late last week at the edge of her school's front lawn.

She's scared, she said. And she has to watch out for her younger brother, Salvador, 7, who said he worries "that they're going to get me and kill me."

Even as school officials struggled Monday to provide a sense of security for children in Cypress Park, a 50-foot patch of grass was all that separated second-grade classrooms at Aragon from the rose-and candle-strewn memorial to Marcos Salas, shot 17 times in a flare of gang violence. He later died.

February 26, 2008 10:12 AM  

Blogger Mayor Sam said:

Here's the rub.

Las Lomas won't be built as Palmer envisions.

Something will be built there whether it's 250 homes or 500 homes and whether it's Palmer or someone else.

If the city doesn't process the application a lawsuit will be settled that makes the Tennie Pierce settlement look like chump change.

Money that could be used for police. Parks (not Bernard, the kind where kids play). Streets. Money that will have to be replaced by yet another Prop X tax.

If LA does not act, Santa Clarita will annex the land; or at the very least it remains with the County.

So when Las Lomas flops and something else is built there control - as well as the millions in property taxes - will go to Santa Clarita or the County.

Its best if LA takes control.

Cause the last people Santa Clarita will listen to is the Sylmar Neighborhood Council.

Take control, deny the project and then put the destiny under your city. Not an elected county king or another city that sees Sylmar's best use as a place to drop off their homeless.

February 26, 2008 10:13 AM  

Blogger Jack Hoff said:

Not sure that I would have gone on the record with this as CM Alarcon has.

What "millions" could it possibly cost Angelenos in lawsuits if Mr. Palmer's 2002 application is false as currently alleged?

February 26, 2008 12:39 PM  

Blogger Valley Doll said:

As a former Fresh Princess of Sylmar ...

(I am a Sylmar High Alum, Class of '82, where I came in second place (WTF?) to SHARON TINKLE when it came time to vote for "Most Likely to Succeed." Sharon Tinkle?? HA! I don't see Sharon Tinkle's name under the list of contributors at Mayor Sam's! Sharon Tinkle doesn't get to hang out with Sexy Beasts like Northridge West Neighborhood Council's Wayne Adelstein or hawt Mayoral Candidate Walter Moore or dreamy writers like Joseph Mailander and Edward Headington and my own lovely Mayor Sam. And does Sharon Tinkle have Zuma Dogg on her speed dial?! Pshaw! Sharon Tinkle, WHO? ::deep cleasning breath:: well ... looks like I can cancel this week's therapy session! wOOt!)

... I can speak with some frame of reference; development in Sylmar is already bursting at the seams, and now they want to tack on even more in an area that cannot bear the burden, both traffic wise, air-quality wise and infrastructure-wise? Oy.

Please do not let Santa Clarita annex that land. They suck.


ps. sharon, i'm only kidding. you rock! i guess. whatever.

February 26, 2008 1:56 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

According to a Daily News article last week, this Palmer guy doesn't even own half the land, he's only got a lease with option to buy from an old couple. The article made the old couple sound afraid to comment, under some gag order from Palmer, and Smith I think was speculating that Palmer may be trying to swindle them out of this land for his own gains.

I don't like being threatened, and if the city feels threatened by this Palmer guy to settle or else, like Alarcon clearly does, and the way he's treating the old couple, it tells me there is more to dig for before anything is decided.

But taking control of the land and denying the huge development sounds good. How likely is it that Alarcon would let that happen?

February 26, 2008 2:37 PM  

Anonymous Kim said:

What money is Dan Palmer going to sue us for that will make the Tennie Pierce settlement look like chump change?

The right to process an application on a piece of property that belongs to the County?? Seriously?

Las Lomas sits in unincorporated County. This proposed project would have to go through LAFCO. So Palmer sues us for not letting him fast-track his project through. So? What's that worth, you think?

I'm baffled by that comparison to the Pierce settlement because I think it would be a pretty bogus lawsuit. Oooh, he threatens to sue and L.A. backs down. Bad idea.

You've got Joe up there admonishing Gail Goldberg for processing permits at the same time you are ready to withdraw and start quivering and crying about money that Palmer may or MAY NOT win in a threatened lawsuit. He has sued city's before... We should at least wait and see how much he sues for.

One day, L.A. must start defending itself against rogue developers who are doing EXACTLY WHAT GAIL Goldberg is fighting against and I will quote her. So please support us and the City by starting here because it's a good a place as any I've seen.

In April 2006, Los
Angeles City Planning Director Gail Goldberg said..."In every city in this country, the zone on the land establishes the value of the land. In Los Angeles, that's not true. The value of the land is not based on what the zone says or what the plan says. It's based on what that developer believes he can change the zone to. That is disastrous for this city. Disastrous. Zoning has to mean something in this city."

I think she's exactly right. She can see the problem and she knows how to fix it.

Kind of like Hillary!

Miss everyone...

February 26, 2008 5:41 PM  

Blogger Mayor Sam said:

On, Fernando! On, Fernando!
Plunge right through that line!
Run the ball clear down the field, boys
touchdown sure this time. (rah rah rah)

On, Fernando! On, Fernando!
Fight on for her fame
Fight! Tigers! - fight, fight, fight!
We'll win this game.

S - F - H - S

Class of 82 rocks!
Sylmar sucks!
Kennedy sucks!
Granada Hills sucks!
Chatsworth sucks!
El Camino Real sucks!

February 26, 2008 7:18 PM  

Blogger Mayor Sam said:

The value of the land should be determined by the free market. Just like the value of anything else you buy.

Soon we'll have the city telling us how much we can sell our house for, who we can sell it to and what it can look like.

Oh - I think we're closer than think.

Some of you folks should read Ayn Rand. Or start with something easier like Adam Smith.

February 26, 2008 7:22 PM  

Blogger Red Spot in CD 14 said:

That was good Mayor Sam. Right up there with "BIG O ROLANDO" and "LIL O VILLAR" in terms of spirit.

February 26, 2008 7:25 PM  

Blogger Mayor Sam said:

237 you are dead on. And so is Valley Doll. Santa Clarita does suck and why we would trust them is beyond me (the city not the people who live there necessarily). They have no concern for the people of Sylmar; as stated before by others they simply do not want the border of LA to touch theirs.

Alarcon can not be trusted. But neither can the County of Santa Clarita. Regardless if Alarcon took down his pants and cheered for Dan Palmer, with the right pressure the City will give Alarcon a thumbs down and deny the project. I know for sure Smith, Greuel and LeBong would make sure it was not approved.

The County MAY not allow Palmer to build, but that won't stop the next developer to great the palms of Antonovich and the members of the Santa Clarita City Council. Better to put it under the control of the people you vote for.

The city should process the application and annex the land. Then cut the development back AND collect the taxes for LA. Yea I hate saying that but Las Lomas does not make sense in many ways and there are better battles to fight for truth, justice and the American way.

February 26, 2008 7:34 PM  

Blogger Mayor Sam said:

Correction that should have said

Alarcon can not be trusted. But neither can the County OR Santa Clarita.

February 26, 2008 7:34 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What nobody here gets is that when the water study for Las Lomas is done it will be determined that they need LA's water in order to move forward. No water, no development. Palmer knows this and that is why he is fighting for the LA to process his application.

If he applies to Santa Clarita or the LA County he will only be able to build 10% of what he wants to build, because state law says that you have to have a water supply.

LADWP has excess water, at this time, and Las Lomas can take our water and build a monsterosity on the hill and call it utopia. Meanwhile, in the future our rates will go through the roof because of this self-inflicted water shortages.

If the City Council falls for this then they are stupider than dry dirt Palmer wants to builds on.

No DWP water means the project will not pencil out and it will not be built, period.

February 26, 2008 10:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Mayor Sam whoever wrote that about the water is lying.

Santa Clarita is serviced by Lake Castaic which in turn has four water companies.

The parts of LA County outside of the City of LA is serviced by MWD which sells water to LADWP and is the richest government agency in the state.

You are correct, Palmer will not build Las Lomas. It's too big and its questionable it can be pulled off.

As someone who once served in Santa Clarita I am aware of connected developers who want to build on the Las Lomas site. If Palmer is defeated bet they're in the wings.

Check the contributions to members of the City of Santa Clarita Council and LA County Supervisors.

February 26, 2008 11:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Shady Politicians and Developer Contributions
Developers are among key contributors to re-election campaigns for local politicians.

Now that the Santa Clarita Open Space Preservation District has been approved by the property owners within the City of Santa Clarita, let's take a look at how local politicians (mainly those representing Los Angeles County, but also our City of Santa Clarita representatives) are being paid to make decisions in favor of the developers.

First of all, let's be up front about the fact that the developers are the largest contributors to the re-election campaigns for the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. According to the Los Angeles Times, "It has been more than a decade since any of Los Angeles County's five supervisors faced a serious election contest, but that hasn't curbed their appetite for campaign cash."

February 27, 2008 12:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Suggest you do check the contributions to Bob Keller.

February 27, 2008 12:15 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

One thing you've got to be aware of: Dan Palmer signed documents under penalty of perjury. The problem is that the things he swore were true are starting to come to light as not true, both at the city and the county.

Should the District Attorney move forward and indict Palmer, then everything starts falling apart. Should Palmer settle with the DA and it turns out his City of LA information isn't true, you can say bye-bye to any lawsuit his team of lawyers wants to throw at the City of L.A.

February 29, 2008 1:35 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Las Lomas is dead. We in the
valley don't need Hillary Norton's
type of family values in our community.

March 04, 2008 11:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

enough of the Orozcos pulling levers in city hall in back room deals for Las Lomas. Learn from the Sleishman Hillary scandal.

March 04, 2008 11:40 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Both Hillarys are losers and among the most disingenuous and phony people around. Keep your husbands away from her.

March 07, 2008 6:19 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

As a fellow Sylmar '82 grad, I'm-a wonderin' who this Valley Doll gal is.

December 11, 2008 4:20 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home