Support the Griffith Park Cultural Historic Monument effort
HELP BRING LANDMARK STATUS FOR GRIFFITH PARK HOMEGRIFFITH PARK LANDMARK APPLICATION FACES FIRST CITY COUNCIL TEST TUESDAY, JANUARY 13
In late October, before a standing room only crowd, the Cultural Heritage Commission voted to recommend landmark status for Griffith Park. The news was greeted with jubilance citywide. But it's not over yet and next week the nomination enters the homestretch. First stop is this Tuesday, January 13 at 2 p.m. , Room 350 City Hall,200 N. Spring Street. The City Council's Planning & Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee will debate whether or not to send the matter to the full council for an up or down vote and, as we saw on October 30th, a strong public presence can affect the outcome.
Please be there, but if you cannot, you can definitely help influence PLUM members by e-mailing them your individual message of support forthe designation (see addresses below). If you belong to an organization that supports the nomination, please include that, too and cc your communication to councilmember.labonge@lacity.org
Your advocacy has and will continue to make a difference!
Chair, Councilmember Ed Reyes: councilmember.reyes@lacity.org
Councilmember Jose Huizar: councilmember.huizar@lacity.org
Councilmember Jack Weiss: councilmember.weiss@lacity.org
Labels: ed reyes, griffith park, Griffith Park Historic Designation, jack weiss, Jose Huizar, plum, tom labonge
Posted by Petra Fried in the City @ 1/12/2009 12:30:00 PM
11 Comments:
Representatives of the Autry Museum have been attacking the monument nomination, possibly to curry favor with Councilmember Tom LaBonge. It is suspected by some that LaBonge does not support the monument status. At the Commission hearing, LaBonge proclaimed his support for the nomination but it remains to be seen if Jack Weiss, Jose Huizar, and Ed Reyes have been lobbied by LaBonge behind the scenes to throw a monkey wrench into the nomination.
If Weiss, Huizar, or Reyes start making funny arguments at the public hearing, voters will know that LaBonge is likely behind it.
William Delvac of Latham & Watkins will likely again argue that the monument status should not be extended to the City parkland currently leased by the Autry Museum. Autry now has 4 hired lobbyists reporting payments to the City Ethics commission in its effort to obtain permits to expand the Autry Museum building on public land so that it can move the Southwest Museum off land privately owned by Autry to Griffith Park. If Delvac argues against the entire monument status, he may be trying to curry favor with LaBonge for when the Autry Museum expansion item comes before the City Council.
Hopefully the Council won't try to put lights on the statue!
Why did Zooma Dog disrupt Wendy's event this weekend. I was there, and it's not conjecture.
If he thinks ruining other peoples events is going to make people vote for him, he's sorely mistaken.
Zooa, I think it's fine if you disagree with Wendy's ideology, but she is a lovely woman and all you were out of line in going there to disrupt and draw attention.
You had no business going there if you weren't going to listen to her express her views. Drawing attn to yourself was disrespectful to everyone who wanted to hear her out.
It is tough to get people to believe you had any other motive, given your behavior at some meetings. I think you are very entertaining and a good person. But you should give other people a chance to talk about views even if they are different than yours.
You are a nice gentleman. Wendy is a lovely person. I don't know if she was ever mean to you, but you should rise above if it that is the motivation.
Mayor Sam, why haven't you written anything about the LA Times cost going up to 75 cents as of today?
This blog is getting bogged down with comments about Zuma Dog, instead of things that are more important, like this. Eventhough the LAT is a very troubled paper, there should be more time devoted to things like this, than about Zuma Dog or Home Depot.
LA Observed wrote about this subject hours and hours ago.
Naming Griffith Park a monument would fit so nicely with how things currently operate in Los Angeles.
Take a look at this history:
In 1882, Colonel Griffith Jenkins Griffith acquired 4,071 acres of Rancho Los Feliz. The Lick estate still owned the southwest portion of the rancho and there developed the Lick Tract, which later became a part of Hollywood. Griffith was a successful mining engineer and businessman. He made a fortune in mining and real estate. He was a short, rotund man, and was a chronic alcoholic. He was seldom sober and while intoxicated, he was often delusional. He was pompous and he pranced around like a proud peacock. Griffith never served in any branch of armed forces in the United States, but he was given a courtesy title of "Colonel" from influential friends in the California National Guard. The title remained a permanent fixture to his name.
In 1884, Griffith sold water rights to the Los Angeles River to the city of Los Angeles for $50,000. Up until that time the city had free use of the river. Since the river coursed through his property, Griffith decided to capitalize upon the circumstances. On December 16, 1896 Griffith showed a change of heart when he donated 3015 acres of Rancho Los Feliz to the city of Los Angeles to be used as a park. Many of Griffith's opponents considered the donation to be a bribe to avoid paying an outstanding tax debt. City officials were hesitant in receiving the immense gift and delayed accepting the deed to the land until 1898. This land became Griffith Park, at the time the largest municipal park in the country.
In the summer of 1903, Griffith was involved in a bizarre attempt murder scandal. Griffith had many prejudices. One of his biased opinions turned into a paranoid obsession. He was fearful and despised the Roman Catholic Church. He believed church officials were conspiring to kill him and take his land. These feelings often peaked while he was inebriated. Strangely enough, his wife, Christina Griffith, was a devout Catholic. Christina was descendant of the Verdugo family, who owned Rancho San Rafael.
Griffith and his wife were vacationing at the Arcadia Hotel in Santa Monica when Griffith went on a drinking binge. In a drunken stupor, Griffith accused his wife of plotting with the pope to have him poisoned. In their room, he fired a pistol at his wife wounding her in the head. Christina was able to escape with her life when she jumped from a balcony and fell two stories to the roof of a veranda below. She suffered a broken leg and lost one of her eyes as a result of the ordeal. She was rescued by the hotel owner. Griffith denied guilt and stated that his wife accidentally shot herself.
Officials were willing to dismiss the incident as a mere domestic dispute and did not file charges. The Verdugo family insisted that Griffith be prosecuted. They hired the ex-Governor of California, Henry T. Gage, as lead prosecuting attorney. Griffith was convicted of assault and sentenced to two years in San Quentin State Prison. He only served one year of his sentence.
Make Griffith Park a monument to Los Angeles's history of corrupt politcs - a history that continues to this day. Isn't a member of a prominent Los Angeles' politcal family currently facing murder charges?
What! LA Observed wrote about the LA Times? WOW! That doesn't happen very often!
What does that have to do with it? It is relevant, since so much is written here about the Times.
You continue to have a mean-spiritedness in your sarcasm mayor sam.
Meanwhile, your protectionist new position about our beloved zuma dog is something you should extent to all people. Everyone is subject to attack on this site, and if he receives that protection, so should others, including the Mayor, Wendy Grule, and others.
Now you're funny!
Mayor Sam,
Where is your balance, man?
The balance is here - post something.
Tom LaBonge... I have to feel sorry for him. He is unable to realize his dream of micro-management of Griffith Park. We need to turn out in force today and later when this item goes to City Council in order to keep the mania of Tom in check.
We must express outrage if LaBonge turns coat and opposes the monument status or if Weiss, Huizar or Reyes take weird "compromise" positions that impairs the monument nomination. This is no-brainer and it takes someone with no brain on Council to oppose it.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home