This special meeting was because we did not maintain a quorum at our April 16 meeting because of the Easter holidays and Passover

Election of Officers

To refresher your memories, only the directors elect their officers which is in the same in of all versions of a our bylaws.

Certification

Our application for certification was filed want November of 2001 and has languished at  DONE for nearly three years.

DONE's first demand was too remove all stakeholder rights except possibly to elect a Board every two years.

In our application we followed DONE's instructions which was to form a counsel, develop bylaws and than asked for certification which is exactly what we did.

We used the language from the charter for the rights of the stakeholders which DONE refused to allow us have in our bylaws.

Even though we've provided data showing our proposed change bylaws (which were later approved) which removed all stakeholder rights in December to DONE they still refused to schedule a certification hearing until the July 8th 2003.

Northridge Pool

One of the of most important issues to the community is a fair share of the city's revenue as services. A number of board members are quite interested in that the issue of the closed Northridge Park pool be placed on the May agenda This pool is extremely important for those families that cannot afford private pools.

Outreach

DONE has been less than helpful in outreach. to publicize of meetings. For the May meeting we intend to provide flyers at each school in our area

if any of you can make a few hundred copies  and those of you who cant  we're requesting donations of funds to pay a for the photocopying expense

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20951~1338975,00.html

Done deal

Neighborhood council bureaucrats system is tainted by corruption charges

4-20-03 Ever since the Van Nuys Neighborhood Council held its election back in February, the body has been plagued by allegations of scandal. Now those allegations are starting to stick.

A League of Women Voters investigation -- commissioned by the city Department of Neighborhoods -- into the election has substantiated many of the losing candidates' charges. Some winning candidates engaged in improper electioneering, poll workers neglected to get proper identification from many voters -- and worse.

The League of Women Voters' L.A. chapter has also concluded that racial politics tainted the election by trying to advantage Latino candidates.

Worst of all, officials from the city's Department of Neighborhood Empowerment -- which is responsible for overseeing neighborhood council elections -- might have played a role in the corruption. 

According to some of the disgruntled candidates, DONE staffers, most notably Rita Moreno, sided with the winning candidates and rigged the process to prevent challengers from getting a fresh hearing.

The league found enough merit to those charges to recommend a new vote, one overseen by an entirely different set of DONE staffers. That's the only way, league Executive Director Julie Rajan says, "to ensure the appearance of some integrity."

But DONE prefers to squelch criticisms that raise serious questions about the very legitimacy of the entire neighborhood council system.

General Manager Greg Nelson first tried to obstruct the release of the league report, then denied that DONE had ever formally contracted with the league to make it. After that, he dismissed Rajan's verdict as "recommendations from one person."

Those recommendations, Nelson says, are now "subject to reactions from people who want to edit it, who want to add to it or subtract from it."

But what people would that be?

It took an outside organization like the league to conduct this investigation because no one in city government -- least of all at DONE -- wants neighborhood councils to be anything but be a fig leaf covering up the failures of City Hall.

Neighborhood councils were supposed to be the great deliverer of local control to L.A.'s communities. But when city officials drew up the new City Charter, they rendered the councils impotent, denying them adequate money or authority.

Then, as though to ensure that the councils would never amount to anything, they created DONE, an agency that has done its best to make sure the councils don't really do anything.

Many neighborhood council activists have complained from the outset that DONE has set up rules and controls that keep many stakeholders out of the process.

The mayor and City Council have rested their case for community empowerment on these advisory neighborhood councils. If they really have any commitment to community empowerment and openness in government, they need to call DONE officials on the carpet in a public meeting and get to the bottom of this scandal.

 Copyright © 2003 Los Angeles Daily News Los Angeles Newspaper Group

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200%257E20954%257E962997,00.html?search=filter

Local councils languish

By Beth Barrett Staff Writer

10-31-02 Advisory neighborhood councils have struggled to get off the ground more than three years after voters approved charter reform because of bitter squabbles among rival groups, city-imposed rules that bar the town-hall system and policies that generally limit the number of seats residents are guaranteed.

Critics say Los Angeles' fledgling effort at grass-roots reform through the councils suffers from minimal funding and city officials' insistence on structures that could favor narrow or special interests over neighborhood residents' interests.

At the heart of the delay is a debate over representation. Several critics who are affiliated with councils that failed to be certified by the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment are among those who contend that neighborhood residents are underrepresented, while seats are reserved for those who work, own commercial property or are involved in nonprofit or other service efforts in the neighborhood, regardless of where they live.

"That's amazing. You couldn't have that for a legislative seat," said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a Los Angeles nonpartisan group that researches campaign finance and elections.

"That's highly unusual -- to allow someone to serve on a neighborhood council who doesn't live there. It kind of goes against representative government. 'Neighborhood council' implies 'neighborhood.' ... At least they should live in the neighborhood."

In all, the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment has certified 55 councils covering about one-third of the city, including 18 certified in the Valley. Only three have actually elected council members in the Valley and are officially operational.

The department's general manager, Greg Nelson, defended the system as prohibiting any single category of stakeholder from getting a majority on a council unless city officials find there are extenuating circumstances.

"Neighborhoods are more than the people who live there," Nelson said. "It includes the people who contribute.

"That was the whole purpose of the system of neighborhood councils: to go beyond the traditional system (in which) you have to be a resident to have a vote or interest," Nelson said. "Neighborhoods are made up of all kinds of people: people who own businesses, who own property, nonprofits. They become extremely important to the neighborhoods."

The three functional Valley neighborhood councils -- Woodland Hills-Warner Center, West Hills and Canoga Park -- have very different structures, although their leaders said the majority of those elected live in the neighborhoods.

Woodland Hills-Warner Center has a 21-person elected council, with 17 members living in the neighborhood, although, in theory, up to two-thirds could live outside it.

West Hills had open elections in which all 25 council members could have been neighborhood residents. As it turned out, 23 live in the neighborhood. The council includes at least five business owners.

"We didn't have any designated seats. ... We felt that would be too divisive for a residential community," said the council president, Charles Gremer.

Canoga Park, which guaranteed residents eight of 25 seats, ended up with about 20 neighborhood residents, said its temporary chairman, Don Evans.

Richard Close, president of the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association and a supporter of Valley secession, said the city set up a system that "minimizes the impact of the residents who live in a neighborhood."

"You have people making decisions for neighborhoods who return home at night to San Marino or Beverly Hills who don't have to live with the consequences of their actions and recommendations," he said. "It's an unfair system."

But others in Sherman Oaks disagree.

"We don't want another homeowners group," said Jill Banks Barad, chairwoman of the Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council. That council, along with the Studio City Neighborhood Council, was certified Tuesday. The Sherman Oaks council's bylaws guarantee that neighborhood residents will hold at least one-third, or seven, of the 21 seats. "We need to be inclusive of every stakeholder."

Bill Christopher, president of the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment's board of commissioners, said "stakeholder interests are broader than the residential population base" in many cases.

"The ordinance and plan set up a broader consensus of community, not just a residential viewpoint," Christopher said, adding that currently "institutional or business viewpoints can be (held) hostage to more organized residential bases out there."

Mayor James Hahn, in a recent interview, told the Daily News he believes the councils eventually should get more power, but wants to see them up and running first -- a process that at the current pace could take several more years.

"Before the general managers (of city departments) present their budgets to me, I want them to listen to the neighborhood councils first," Hahn said. "I want input from the neighborhood councils: What do you think about the general manager of Recreation and Parks? Is the job of Rec and Parks being done so well you think the person deserves a raise, or do they deserve a pay cut?

"I want (neighborhood councils) to be involved in decision-making. Even though (they're) only advisory, at some point in the future we might want to look at (their) having some actual decision-making power over some decisions."

A review of the certified Valley councils shows that in most cases neighborhood residents are guaranteed only a minority of the seats. Paul Waters, coordinator of the Studio City Neighborhood Council formation committee, said the city staff discouraged one set of bylaws that was weighted more toward residents.

"I understand part of this is that the neighborhood councils are supposed to be an accurate representation of the wishes of the community, ... to assure there is no single voice," said Waters, a nonresident who serves as executive director of LA/Valley Pride. "They're not supposed to be 'son of residents associations' or 'son of chamber of commences."

Working the system

Residents of Granada Hills who fought expansion of the Sunshine Canyon Landfill saw a recipe for special interests to exert undue influence in the "diversity" promoted by the city staff.

The Granada Hills North Neighborhood Council succeeded, however, in getting approval for bylaws that essentially limit the landfill operator, Browning Ferris Industries of California, to a single seat on the 19-member panel.

The council had to "jump through all kinds of hoops," Mary Edwards, a longtime activist, said. "They (city officials) wanted to be 'all-inclusive.' That could lead to bringing in people from other areas (to) dominate. A 'stakeholder' could be someone who worked in the district on Operation Sparkle day."

City department head Nelson called Granada Hills North's plan "real marginal," but said it was approved to "accommodate" the community.

Competing plans

So far, the department board has resisted town-hall forms of governance.

Walter N. Prince, acting president of the Northridge Community Council, said a general assembly vote would be the best way to involve stakeholders, while minimizing special interests' influence. "It eliminates the problem of people with local problems trying to lobby amateur board members."

The Sunland-Tujunga Neighborhood Council also is pressing for the town-hall format, said its chairman, Ken McAlpine. "The town hall encouraged participation to the greatest degree."

Christopher, president of the department board, said the city attorney found town-hall-style councils could not be held accountable in the way the ordinance writers envisioned.

The board last week certified the Arleta Neighborhood Council, a breakaway group from the original council.

Robert Edwards, chairman of the now-disbanded Arleta Neighborhood Advisory Council, said his group lost out after it proposed electing two people from each of six regions within Arleta.

Edwards charged city officials with selecting, instead, a council whose members are a collection of representatives of "clubs." "All these clubs are vested interests, and their interests depend on population density and growth in Arleta, which is 85 percent single-family (home) residents." 

Copyright © 2002 Los Angeles Daily News Los Angeles Newspaper Group