Canyon Crest: Did Mayor Schweitzer Bogey the Hole on a Fundraiser?

I didn't mention this in my summary of last night's Brea City Council meeting concerning the appeal of the Canyon Crest housing project because I wanted to focus on citizen comments at the hearing, but there was an interesting matter that came up during the regular public comment session in the Redevelopment Agency portion of the meeting.

In short, a citizen expressed concern that a mailer for a golf tournament fundraiser to support the city museum had Mayor Don Schweitzer's name on it as a major supporter and gave the information that RSVPs were to be directed to Brian Rupp, the Shopoff Group's project director for the Canyon Crest development proposal. While the resident plainly stated that she was not accusing the mayor or anyone else with intentional wrongdoing, she questioned how it looked in terms of appearances. The City Attorney was asked to give his views on the matter and said there was nothing illegal, which is all very true, about the mailer. Then, after each council member rushed to defend the Mayor, an interesting distraction occurred. Some council members actually stated that, because they were all heavily involved with non-profits, any suggestion of impropriety that would lead to calls for recusal on matters involving those groups would render much city business impossible.



On the face of it, it all sounds reasonable. But, there's a fundamental and obvious problem with the argument. The Shopoff Group is a for-profit business with a potentially lucrative deal of a highly controversial nature pending before the council. As a commentor on this blog noted, the chairman of the board of the city museum is also the chair of the Planning Commission, which earlier this year narrowly approved (3-2) the Canyon Crest project. It just seems to me that there was a very simple and equitable way to have dealt with this.

The Shopoff Group has every right to be a contributor to the museum project (though we all know, whether we wish to acknowledge it or not, that as soon as this project is quashed or when it is built, Shopoff will be gone, unless there's another project to be had in town). Why, though, did the RSVPs have to be directed through Mr. Rupp? For the sake of appearances, it would have been a more politic decision to have had someone else handle that.

After all, these kinds of issues wind up becoming, in many cases, fodder for media coverage that the parties involved too often would just have rather avoided. Incidentally, the Mayor publicly stated that, at no time during thhe planning for this fundraiser, did he talk to Mr. Rupp about the Canyon Crest project. I suppose we'd have to take him at his word and, not being a Brea resident, I'm really in no position to testify on that score.

Still, why bring unnecessary and preventable scrutiny? Why not keep a respectable distance between elected officials and parties interested in a highly charged matter now before the council (and only recently heard before the Planning Commission)? Why run the risk of putting forth questionable appearances?

Actually, what I'm more interested in was another statement of this resident that $1 million was offered by Shopoff to Hills for Everyone, a group at the forefront of the Canyon Crest opposition. Was this another "investment in community building" or, as was insinuated by this speaker, an attempt at bribery? If anyone out there is privy to this and cares to share it, I'd be interested to hear more (who wouldn't?).

The reality, though, is, whatever this fundraiser mailer might or might not mean, the council has to subjectively decide the appeal based on whether they feel Canyon Crest serves the citizens of Brea more than it does the Shopoff Group. Just as it probably wouldn't help Barack Obama to hammer away at John McCain's connection with the Keating Five scandal from 20 years ago, even if in defense of groundless attacks about his "palling" around with former Weatherman William Ayers, it probably does not help the Canyon Crest opposition to put too much attention on this mailer and its appearance of questionable associations and distract from the direct and very substantial issues about the absolute unsuitability of this proposed development for Brea and Carbon Canyon.

Canyon Crest Project at Brea City Council, Round Two

Well, it appears there will be at least four, possibly five meetings of the Brea City Council relative to the controversial Canyon Crest project in Carbon Canyon. This 165-unit gated, "luxury" development would be built on over 350 acres on the north side of the canyon and dramatically alter it for a looong time.

After the appellant and applicant had a chance to address the council on 16 September, last night (a few hours ago, actually) was the time for public comment. Next meeting, Tuesday, 21 October will be a chance for the appellant and applicant to address the public comment, but, because a council member will be out, a special meeting for Wednesday, 29 October will be called for the council to ask questions of the two groups and possibly vote then, though that action could be delayed to another meeting.



Being that it's late, I'll make only some general commentary on the proceedings last night (a few hours ago, actually). First, there were surprise commentaries from folks outside the immediate area, including Yorba Linda, Hacienda Heights, and a sizable contingent from Silverado and Modjeska canyons. These latter were on message about wildfire risks in canyon settings and, even if we admit that a newer project like Canyon Crest would consist of homes better equipped to deal with fire, the sheer force of Santa Ana wind-driven fires and difficulty of access for emergency vehicles competing for space with evacuees are points that cannot be ignored. Nor did a new wrinkle that did not appear at the Planning Commission meeting or in the appellant's statements three weeks ago: the problem of obtaining fire insurance in high-risk zones, especially after last fall's devastating fires, such as the massive Silverado blaze.



Also surprising was that, by my count, there were 8 people who showed up to speak in support of the project. Still, it is worth noting that most had some business connection (a man who works with builders, a representative for Bobby McGee's restaurant, a business owner who spoke in favor of [unrestricted?] property rights), almost none of which spoke to any detail about why the project was so good, other than saying in very general terms that they approved.



This can be juxtaposed with the twenty-odd persons who spoke against the project, and, as was the case at the Planning Commission hearing, usually did so with great specificity and passion. One supporter basically invoked the "American Dream" as embodied in the desire to move up to better housing, as if that was the sole criteria for the dream! She also made sure to mention that she lived on hope that the economy was going to improve and trusted the council would also act on hope. I was also sure to remember the guy who invoked property rights and seemed to indicate that there should be no government-imposed limits. Now, I could be wrong about his message, because it was so vague and brief, but there has to be some limitations, otherwise Brea and most other cities wouldn't have general or specific plans, hillside ordinances, and other "socialistic" means to deny the poor property owner, especially insignificant, little entities like the Shopoff Group or, say, Shell/Aera, their birthright to unfettered development. As I said at the meeting, all you have to do is look at Moreno Valley (or most of Corona, or Menifee, or Temecula, or Murrieta, or . . .) to see what can happen when development is allowed to run amok. The stunning thing about Moreno Valley is that they've done this twice (first in the late 80s/early 90s.)

Finally, there was the local pastor who basically came right out and said that the council should only look to the staff for guidance on making decisions, implying that, because there are some citizens who can get unreasonable with elected officials (as if that never goes the other way around), the latter need not take heed of the former. It bears noting, however, that the opposition to Canyon Crest has uniformly behaved very well. Sure, there were some pointed comments, usually at the developer, and some cheering and clapping, but nothing like the free-for-alls that take place at lots of council meetings. As I said after the Planning Commission meetings, Brea residents were almost exclusively composed, reasonable, rational, substantive, respectful and just a real credit to their town.

But to have a man who stakes a claim as a real community-minded guy to just come out and say that the council should work exclusively with staff to make decisions is really stunningly misguided as to the role of the citizen in a democracy. Is it more efficient to make unilateral (or quasi-bilateral, if city staff are to be seen as separate from the council in the government hierarchy) decisions without consulting your citizenry? Of course. But, is that desirable? The answer ought to be: no, no, a thousand times no. This gentleman at least had some company this time, as he was the only supporter, if half-heartedly, of the project at the Planning Commission meeting.

When you take substance, depth, and specificity and weight the scale of the twenty or so opponents of Canyon Crest with the eight or so supporters, there really was no contest. The strangest of the support comments had to be the representative from Bobby McGee's, who made her proxy comments as briefly as humanly possible and promptly disappeared. The reason for the support: McGee's evidently believes the potential well-heeled residents of Canyon Crest will save the restaurant in its losing battle with Claim Jumper. Another supporter rested his argument solely on the idea that, in conflicts over housing developments like this one, the opposing issues will simply be resolved and that's more or less it.

So, if these were supposed to have constituted ringing endorsements for the project, in which supporters showed a real enthusiasm for the project and elucidated all the wonderful things this project was going to provide the city, than the vague, brief and uninspired comments offered are telling. By contrast, as I said above, opponents offered detail and passion, which, I suppose, would bode well for an upholding of the appeal.

Therein lies the crux and we'll have to wait through another six or so hours of meetings to see if the council is ready to make their decision. I just want to say again that the speakers who came in on a presidential debate night, no less, and gave of their time to offered mostly well-phrased, detailed, respectful and restrained opposition are a real credit to their city and community. Regardless of what the council ultimately decides, these citizens (in the true meaning of the word as involved) should be very proud of the work they've done.

Let's just hope that it is rewarded!

Smart Car Caravan on Carbon Canyon Road!

As I write this, several souped-up coupes have roared by on Carbon Canyon Road through Sleepy Hollow with their modified tailpipes bellowing belligerently off our canyon walls. An apt introduction to an amazing sight on the road yesterday (Sunday) morning.

Literally, several dozen perky little Smart Cars, forming a phalanx of fuel efficient vehicles on their way somewhere to the east, rolled down the road. More and more of these French-made 106 inch, 2300 lb, 1 liter, 3-cylinder, 70hp midgets are appearing on our highways and byways.



It's easy to see why when it comes to mileage. The American models (which, of course, are less efficient than the European counterparts) are rated at 33 mpg city and 41 mpg highway. For eleven years, I drove a 1 liter, 3-cylinder, 55 (yeah, 55!) hp Geo Metro Lsi convertible that averaged over 40 mpg, so I've driven something somewhat comparable and survived (by comparison my Toyota Prius seems like a asphalt scarring behemoth with its 70hp gas engine coupled with a 44hp electric motor and Corolla chassis!)



What is probably scaring off a lot of folks from the Smart Car, though, is the fear that the car might be pulverized in an accident with a Chevy Aveo much less anything larger. The NHTSA rates the car at three stars for passenger safety, four for the driver, five for side impact front (wonder why there's no rating for the side impact rear :)) and three for rollovers. The IIHS has a good rating for crash offsets but nas not tested its "bumper bash" capabilities. (Oops, there go the coupes I just mentioned screaming back on CCR eastbound!) The vehicle does have driver, passenger and side airbars, traction and stability control, and four-wheel antilock brakes, so, at least for driving on streets, the car would appear to be worth consideration for most commuters.



Then again, if we reduced the number of gas guzzling monsters on the road, maybe the size of the Smart Car wouldn't be so much of an issue. The reality is: whether its the economy or global climate change (no matter the causes), Americans are going to have to make significant lifestyle adjustments in so many areas.

When it comes to transportation, the single passenger model is just way outdated anyway, so mass transit will have to be a bigger part of the solution. Meantime, we need to drive more efficient vehicles, be they internal combustion gas, hybrid/plug-in, compressed air, hydrogen fuel cell, whatever. In 1925, an oil industry trade magazine pointed out that, even though European cars were far more fuel efficient (see above on the Smart Car once again), Americans were not about to give up their desire for power. 80+ years later, little has changed, but it's going to have to.

That's why it was cool to see forty or so Smart Cars making a little/big statement on Carbon Canyon Road yesterday.

Canyon Crest Appeal Hearing Tomorrow Night!

This is it, everyone (who might be reading this)! Tomorrow night, Tuesday, 7 October @ 7 p.m. at the Brea City Hall council chambers is the second round of the public hearing for the appeal of the Canyon Crest housing development approval by the city planning commission.

I know the second presidential debate is on at the same time (I'll be setting my DVR for the debate), but this issue is of pressing importance to anyone who cares about Carbon Canyon. Public comment will likely take up the entire evening and it is time to impress upon the council that this project is not wanted.

The economic meltdown of the last several weeks has likely changed the dynamics of when this development is built, but, if the appeal is denied, there will be an approved project that can carry over far into the future. The developer may well sell the property with its certified tract map and approved plan and this thing could get built years from now.

With all due respect to former council member Bev Perry, who filed this appeal and who said that there may be a good project for the site, but this is not it: there isn't a good project for the site, ever! Developers have had enough of our region on which to build and we're now paying the price with traffic, overburdened schools and other services, and, now that we're in a drought, a dwindling water supply. How the council can ask its residents to cut water use by 10% and approve this water-guzzling project is beyond reason. So is adding another 1,650 cars that will take a road rated "F" for its overcrowdedness. So is removing 1,800+ trees in an oak and walnut woodland setting, of which too little has survived the ravages of nearly unimpeded development over decades.

The council should have the courage to side with its residents, who simply DO NOT want this project, and affirm the appeal, rather than align itself with a developer who only wants what those of its ilk desire: to make money (or sell the project to do so) and move on to the next development. The best interests of Brea are reflected in the reasonable, rational dissent of its residents not in the sweet nothings promised by the developer and the council needs to hear that.

Please show up and lend your support to those fighting this project!

Chino Hills State Park Visitor Center Started!

For those of you who've driven down (or up) Carbon Canyon Road the last few weeks and seen the flurry of activity there next to the regional park, there is a Chino Hills Discovery Center being built for Chino Hills State Park.

Work actually began a few years ago with some clearing of old citrus trees, but has started again with the complete removal of trees and the general clearing of the land.

From what I can tell, the funding for the center, which is to accomodate up to 100 visitors, may partially be from Proposition 40, "The California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks and Coastal Protection Act of 2002" (don't you just love these legislation names?). In the act, there is some $12.5 million for "park entrance and facilities" that has been appropriated year to year since the act's passage and there is an one for that amount for the current 08-09 fiscal year.

There is, however, said to be some substantial funding from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California in exchange for the California Department of Parks and Recreation providing an easement for an access road to the Diemer treatment plant, which is located on the crest of the hills above Yorba Linda. Because the city of Yorba Linda rushed through a development plan for housing on land formerly owned by oil giant Shell and its development subsidiary, Aera Energy Corp., the main access road used since for decades is now part of the housing tract, and, guess what? The neighbors are complaining! So, why not build another road over on the Carbon Canyon side, because, after all, no one lives there. We just have a public park and what's a little slice of that in the service of a precious resource like water (a mini example, perhaps, of the debate over drilling for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge?)! Anyway, for more on the MWD road, check out the Hills for Everyone website (see the links bar of this blog.)

Other than that, I have been unable to find anything about the project on the California Parks and Recreation website, aside from the listing of appropriations for Prop 40 and a listing for a state parks interpreter job opening that mentions the center. There is also a vague mention of it on the website of the Chino Hills State Park support group, the Chino Hills State Park Interpretive Association.

I'm a little surprised that there hasn't been any significant publicity or information about the project in the media, which isn't to say that no one has tried to pitch it.

Incidentally, an interesting potential dynamic to the Discovery Center has been at issue at other state park projects in recent years, most notably in my experience, Pio Pico State Historic Park in Whittier. This is that, although there has been bond money to do "bricks-and-mortar" projects, such as new construction, restoration and preservation, and the like, we all know that Governor Schwarzenegger, as the budget crisis was worsening earlier this year, proposed shutting down dozens of state parks. What this means, as our economic downturn is finally being admitted now to be a recession and one that could last longer than any in our history, is that there may not actually be the funds to staff and maintain the work that's been done. This has largely been true at the Pico park and could happen at the Chino Hills Discovery Center, as well. This all, obviously, remains to be seen.

At any rate, the planned completion date is sometime in 2009, so, if all goes well on the construction, you should start seeing the "bricks and mortar" coming in fairly soon, dependent, I suppose, on whether our drought continues or not!

Carbon Canyon Crime Capsule #2: 1958 Manhunt for Murderer of Ontario Police Officer

In February 1958, Russell Grower, a 34-year old Ontario police officer, was working with two detectives on a minor case of burglary, in which automobile tires were stolen from several service stations and hidden in, of all places, a vacant ranch house in Soquel Canyon. After the officers knocked on the door of the building, a man inside yelled "I haven't time to talk to cops" and then fired a shot from a handgun. Grower went down with a wound to the head and the detectives, from Pomona and Montclair, returned fire. The suspect, however, ran out the rear of the building and disappeared into the heavy brush. Two unnamed officers tried to track the murderer down but lost his trail after a mile.

By evening, nearly 200 officers from four counties descended on the area and sealed off any escape route convinced that the wanted man was hiding on the ridge separating Soquel from Carbon canyons. Initially, news reports indicated that the man "was routed out of a brush-covered culvert near a roadblock manned by Highway Patrol officers," which would obviously be Carbon Canyon Road, the state highway under the jurisdiction of the CHP.

Later, though, another article stated that he was found "in the home of Mrs. Lucille Squire" in Sleepy Hollow. The report continued that he'd entered the home about midnight "and apparently fell asleep in a first-floor bedroom." Mrs. Squire was said to have discovered the man, who had a .38 caliber revolver with him evidently stolen from the Soquel Canyon ranch house. The account concluded by stating that officers combing the nearby hills were called in and took the man into custody.

A third article, however, lauded the heroism of Bill Squires [the surname being corrected,] Lucille's husband, who had stopped in at the Sleepy Hollow Cafe earlier in the evening, asked why it was so empty, and was told that a manhunt was on for the murderer of officer Grower. This version stated that Squires went up the hill to his two-story home and that the family went to bed with nothing seeming amiss. At 11:30 p.m., however, Mrs. Squires woke her husband to say that she'd heard a sound in the house.

When her husband investigated, he found a man sitting on the living room couch smoking. According to this article, the figure was that of a man, bearded and slightly wild-eyed, his wet shoes and socks and pants lay on the floor, and he was covered by some clothing belonging to the Squires children. When Squires asked the man if he was lost, the reply was that he was tired. Thinking fast, he asked if the visitor wanted a beer, which required a visit to the community store a block away. While he hated to leave his pregnant wife behind to walk down the hill to the store, Squires thought this the only way to alert the authorities. After a few minutes, during which the police were called, he returned with the beer and engaged in small talk with the lean, wild-eyed intruder, who offered that he'd recently picked cotton in Mississippi and Texas. Ten minutes later, the police arrived and quickly captured the man. Nine hours had elapsed since the murder.

When caught, the suspect identified himself as Jeff Davis and said he was from Mississippi. There was no indication in the articles from the Los Angeles Times that anyone understood that the murderer was referring to himself using the name of the former president of the Confederacy during the Civil War! The suspect was then taken to Patton State Hospital, in San Bernardino for observation. When he signed in, he identified himself as Lester Dean Bonds, a 35-year old native of Mississippi and was raised in Arkansas, where he graduated in 1945 from a vocational school in Clinton (yes, Clinton, Arkansas!) some sixty miles north of Little Rock. It turned out that Bonds had been sent to Patton six years before for threatening a bartender and escaped in January 1953 before being captured in nearby Highland. In the course of that incident, however, he wounded two deputies by stabbing and using a boulder (yes, a boulder.) Bonds had, strangely, served in the intelligence unit of the Air Force before suffering a mental breakdown and being committed to a veterans' hospital and a series of other hospitals. After his release in 1954, he went back to Arkansas, but his mental illness continued and he was sent back to a veterans facility two years later. In the fall of 1957, he was released to his family's custody and then left their home and drifted back to California.

According to one source, Lester Bonds died at age 73 in 1986 in Alameda County in northern California, but there seems to be no information as to whether Bonds was convicted of the murder, which was then a capital offense potentially bringing a death sentence, or sent to a mental institution instead. Twenty-five years later, there would be another incident involving an escaped murderer in the Chino Hills area: the notorious Kevin Cooper case of 1983.

The information for this incident came from the online archives of the Los Angeles Times and from a Times blog by Larry Harnisch called the "Daily Mirror."

Noise is Pollution, Too

I generally don't like to offer up too many "rant" posts in succession, as I seem to be doing now with the road closure and the Canyon Crest ones, preferring to mix in some history or descriptions of canyon neighborhoods and so on.

BUT, I have to say that last night (or earlier this morning) between 1:15 and 1:45 A.M., there were at least three times when cars came speeding AND roaring through the canyon. Now, this is hardly news to anyone who lives along or near Carbon Canyon Road. It happens on a regular basis.


But, it reminds me of something that I think too few people, including those in authority, think about: Noise is pollution, too.


Obviously when I moved here 4 1/2 years ago, I was aware that traffic was heavy, particularly during commute hours. I am also a light sleeper, which is my problem. Those first few nights, when the cars started to roll on through, starting at about 5 a.m., I couldn't sleep and really wondered if I'd made a bad decision moving to a house that sits right next to the road. Eventually, though, you get used to the traffic, when it is at a certain level of noise.


The problem is the heavy trucks, the cars with modified exhaust systems, and the motorcycles with the massive pipes. I've heard people, like a co-worker, insist that the latter need those pipes so they can be heard on the freeway and not be hit by inattentive drivers.


Sorry, that may be a nice fallback, but the truth is: people, whether they are driving cars, trucks, or motorycles, with loud exhausts have them because they like the sound. In many cases, I'm certain they enjoy making sure that everybody else can hear them loud and clear. The extra added benefit in the Canyon? The sound careens off the canyon walls and amplifies. And, yeah, it is my problem that I'm a light sleeper, that's something I have to deal with. Fair enough.

But, when some of these vehicles approach or even surpass the decibel level of, say, aircraft or factory equipment at full blast or the ravings of talk-radio prophets, that's a societal problem. Unreasonable noise is pollution and it has its effects. Maybe someday we'll have to transport ourselves around using electricity, air compression, hydrogen and other fuels that inherently have to be quieter.

But, I'll bet my bottom dollar (which, given where the economy is, may be all that I'll have left) that people will be clamoring and working really hard to modify their exhaust systems to replicate the good old days of roaring tailpipes so they can announce their presence to the rest of us. Something to look forward to.

And, to all of you who feel compelled to send us who live in the canyon your regards and compliments via tailpipe, thanks. And, make sure you get your hearing checked on a regular basis.