L.A. CORRUPT IN CLAIMING VALLEY INFRASTRUCTURE.

Byline: J. Kevin Murphy  LOCAL VIEW

THE rules of the secession game are being set by selnterested fools. The pontificating by County Counsel Lloyd W. Pellman needs to be immediately challenged. It is likely that the actions of the city and county of Los Angeles are in violation of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act by their selnterested collusion and assault on the initiative rights of the voters of Los Angeles.

I became a part of the land-development business in the San Fernando Valley in 1957 when the developed south end of the Valley didn't extend much beyond Balboa Boulevard and the dense north end of the Valley stopped at Bob's Big Boy at Sepulveda Boulevard.

The state highway to the west was eucalyptus-lined, two-lane Devonshire Street, which ended at the Roy Rogers Golf Course.

Porter Ranch had not been dreamed of, and the Cagney and Hope ranches were grazing land. Ranches and citrus groves dominated the West Valley.

The city of Los Angeles did not develop the San Fernando Valley. From the Mullholand-Chandler days, the San Fernando Valley was developed by entrepreneurs such as the Roven Speigal group, Harlan Lee, Spielman Fond, the Zuckerman family, George Heltzer and hundreds of other private developers.

In many cases, the city had no claim to these lands, and it had to go through the annexation process so the city might expand its taxation base.

The city did not build the infrastructure. The developers did. The land for schools was donated - after coercive blackmail. Additionally, school fees were assessed. The parks were dedicated to the city, and fees were also assessed.

Every inch of curbs and gutters and all of the street paving were installed by the subdividers over the sewer systems and storm drains that they constructed. Remote-access stretches not owned by the developer were nonetheless improved by the developer.

If homes were built on unpaved streets, assessment districts were set up, and the residents paid for the improvements. Developers passed the cost of their individual projects on to the homeowners, the business professionals and peddler occupants of the properties.

The people who live in the Valley have bought and paid for the Valley, and the city is now attempting to assert squatter's rights over property that has been and remains viably occupied.

Under moral standards and in equity, the conduct of the city officials is corrupt. The reason the citizens of this city want to escape these clutches is just such conduct.

Business divestitures take place every day. The process includes appraisal, share determination of investment in the ownership stake, depreciation and reserves, and an equitable and mutually acceptable payment for the agreed benefit of both parties.

The greed of the city is clear.

The inane assertion that the city has exclusive ownership of the Valley is clearly immoral. The property upon which my home rests, which I improved in 1962, does not belong to the city of Los Angeles. Nor does the access to my property. The city is a mere trustee and caretaker of that which the property owners have permitted city officials to covet.

City leaders, come to your senses, or we will see you in court.