Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Happenings: Art Must Go; Bags Can Stay

There were three controversial items facing the City Council tonight[1]: art for the Newhall roundabout, a plan for Rivendale Park in Towsley Canyon, and a potential plastic bag ban. Despite a little friction about whether a large amphitheater is appropriate for Towsley, there was general consensus this evening.  All agreed that artists can’t be trusted to design the right sculpture on their own and, more importantly, that a ten-cent tax for paper bags is more loathsome than the problems created by plastic bags.  When it comes to the environment, Santa Clarita remains, as always, decisively ambivalent.


While I was late to tonight’s City Council meeting, at least I made it.  That’s more than can be said of Frank Ferry.  If you’re an enterprising young reporter and reading this, do me a favor and figure out how many meeting’s he’s attended this year; has it even been half?


Artistic Intent


My tardiness meant I arrived in the midst of the discussion about art for the Newhall roundabout. Not everyone claimed to know the right thing to put in the roundabout—they just knew the two current proposals were wrong. After considerable discussion by the City Council, it was decided that more money, more explicit artistic direction, and more opinions are needed before proceeding. Mayor Bob Kellar wondered about the feasibility of an online poll, and conducted an informal hands-up poll among tonight’s attendants.  Councilmember TimBen Boydston talked about the poll on Santa Clarita Letters to the Editor (FB group) showing strong support for the planting of an oak tree.  He frequently referenced that and other SCV online communities and their discussions of the roundabout art, prompting Councilmember Marsha McLean to say, “On some of the blogs, you don’t have the most positive people and they kind of just make fun of this whole thing.”


Oh Marsha.


This was one of those rather informally resolved issues going back to commission. It sounds like Mayor Pro Tem Weste and Councilmember McLean have plans to promote fundraising for a sufficiently grand piece of art, more community input and work from staff will be sought, and despite these efforts, I daresay they will decide on a sculpture that still can’t make quite everybody happy.


Creatures of the Night


Rivendale Park is the oddly-shaped piece of land the City owns at the edge of Towsley Canyon.  After community meetings, staff prepared a proposal for something to do with the site: 300 parking spaces, large lawn, a somewhat vaguely defined “Native American Area” (some called it a village), restroom, and an amphitheater that might accommodate 1200 Claritans.  This is still very much a proposal.  As of yet, funding for the project is needed as is CEQA review and the like.


The most supportive public speakers represented tribal interests or the Shakespeare Festival, an annual event that would no doubt delight in the amphitheater. Gavin Dugan said he hopes the American Indian enclave of the park will “show some local and native pride.”  He said that he’s spoken to members of many tribes who have expressed interest in the idea of a cultural museum so conveniently near the freeway, and he wagered a big project could bring out “a checkbook of a size you would be blown away by,” noting the many billions of dollars earned annually by SoCal casinos.


Not everyone was thrilled.  Cam Noltemeyer, Wendy Langhans, Dave Morrow, and Lynne Plambeck all expressed concerns about lighting from the amphitheater and the traffic such a facility would draw.  Both the human disturbance and increased traffic could harm wildlife foraging or travelling through this critical connection between mountain ranges.


Councilmember McLean thought that the amphitheater could pose such a problem that it should be removed from the conceptual master plan. McLean would actually get into it a bit with Rick Gould, who claimed that everyone at the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy had given the project their blessing (McLean was skeptical of this, asking for written verification that the SMMC was OK with the amphitheater facility).


Boydston and Kellar were in agreement on the project concept, which they thought would lead to a valuable addition to the community. “This is a concept” stressed Mayor Kellar. Boydston made some rather poorly reasoned remarks about the impacts of the amphitheater on wildlife, suggesting, in essence, that since our City already impacts wildlife, a little more disturbance wouldn’t be so bad.


Ultimately, the concept was approved with what McLean called “a little asterisk” to require special scrutiny of the effects of the amphitheater on wildlife activity and movements when and if the project receives funding to be built.


Teaching the Way


A potential ban on plastic bags will not move forward—at least not for the forseeable future.  This was a topic that’s been on Councilmember McLean’s mind for years now, and she took a bit of time to explain her position.  She first complained about plastic bags drifting on roadways and getting caught up in one’s car. She mentioned the problems with trash, the wide availability of reusable bags, and said, “I think plastic bags are insidious […] people get used to a certain thing and they don’t like to change.”


The public was not unanimous in its opinion about the ban.  Sandra Cattell said that just as it made sense not to give people heroin even though they may want it, it didn’t make sense to allow people to have plastic bags even though they want them.  Brian Baker, contrarily said that he had moved out of Los Angeles to escape “nutty politics”, and yet here they were.  He was “flabbergasted” such an item could come before the Santa Clarita City Council.


The Council had a number of options to consider, but City Attorney Joe Montes said that it could be problematic to ban plastic bags without also imposing a tax on paper bags.  Because paper bags have been found to be more environmentally harmful than plastic ones during CEQA review in other jurisdictions, a ten-cent tax on paper bags is usually required to “mitigate” the harm by dissuading more people from buying paper bags.  A woman representing grocery interests supported this ten-cent fee, but Councilmember Boydston thought it was just a sneaky way to boost profits (the City made me charge you for the bag!).  Indeed, Boydston and Weste found that a ten-cent tax on paper bags was unacceptable, and it outweighed their concerns about plastic bag use.  Even before Mayor Kellar spoke (“Too much government!”), it was clear that no ban would be passing this evening.


Instead, the City will keep its course of educating people about the benefits of reusable bags.  There wasn’t even really a motion, just a resigned realization by McLean that her dream of a plastic bag-free SCV will not be realized.
[1]Here's the agenda. You're oh so very welcome.

No comments: