We all need to come together to protect that land from more urban sprawl and "development". The only development we should consider is planting and preserving the naturescape we all enjoy.

The Chatsworth Reservoir has been designated as a nature preserve by Anthony Bielenson and Hal Bernson back in the 80's. Those of us who live adjacent to the property in Chatsworth clearly desire to keep the land in its current state which is a benefit to the community as a whole. The West Hills Council really needs to step back on this one as the majority of the preserve is in CD 12. The real questions is when will the Santa Monica Conservancy purchase the land from the DWP? Moreover, the only good uses on the West Hills end are the helicopter watering station and maybe a DWP inspired solar energy collection station at the east end of the reservoir.

This article is wildly detached from reality. There is no desire, stated or otherwise, by the West Hills Neighborhood Council to steal any part of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve from you. Nor is there any support in West Hills for developing the Preserve in any way.

Rather than engage in "land grabs," we have sought proper recognition of boundaries that are set forth in the bylaws of both the Chatsworth and West Hills Neighborhood Councils. These boundaries are also recognized by the city of Los Angeles.

In fact, in my testimony before the City Council Redistricting Commission I laid out specific options regarding the Nature Preserve and rejected those that would put all of the Nature Preserve in one district while placing Chatsworth or West Hills in another.

Contrary to the absurd claim in this article, nobody in West Hills has ever said anything about "the highest and best use of the property" in the Chatsworth Nature Preserve. We are united in preventing any development in this precious remnant of open space.

In light of these facts, I am astonished by the falsehoods that are presented in your article and appalled by the irrational statements and events that it purports to describe.

You could have fact-checked your reporter's assertions with a simple telephone call. It's unfortunate that you didn't.

There is a term, called, "Laches," which means if you did not assert a claim within a reasonable amount of time, you are equitably barred. Since the consensus is that the area remains as a nature preserve, why does West Hills, which is really Canoga Park, care? The reservoir is protected under an agreement between Congressman Beilenson and Councilman Bernson. I have never seen the name Picus in any of the agreements regarding the reservoir since 1983. Seems to me that your so-called testimony, which would be pre-empted by the passage of time and other factors, is a non-factor given the aforesaid consensus.

Leigh, now you're trying to argue by way of insult. West Hills has been an officially recognized community of the city of Los Angeles for 25 years. Our Neighborhood Council was founded in 2002 and is the first certified NC in the San Fernando Valley.

We exist, whether you approve or not.

As for my "so-called testimony," I asked that both Neighborhood Councils be treated fairly in the drawing of the council district boundaries. That is a perfectly reasonable request for respect, and I don't see how it merits a response filled with reckless falsehoods as described in the article above.

It's what people do when they can't rely on facts or logic to support their case.

I think I stated my case adequately. If anyone wishes say something intelligent in response, I will be available to continue the dialogue.

I live in Canoga Park and I know Daniel Brin, and he's not well liked because he always has to get the last word in, and show you how pathologically "smart" he is. I'll prove my point in his next post. (I'm psychic.)

Well impersonal attacks are out of the question!

Leigh..You are 100 percent correct in everything you stated. Obviously there are some out there that do not comprehend that Chatsworth Lake, Chatsworth Nature Preserve means like...duh...Chatsworth. As the CNC member who raised the motion to support the L.A.F.D. helispot supporting all air operations including LA County and Ventura C.F.D. as well with a helispot within the lake property, the Council's focus was on providing everything necessary like a fast, safe, thought out and efficient water loading operation to the water dropping air units to save life and property during wild fires and disaster. Whether you live in the City, County, neighboring Ventura County means and meant nothing to us. Like again, duh, neighborhood..the good folks of Chatsworth are not short sighted in helping those in need, regardless of where it is. It is not, was not a mistake and we do not regret anything. The Neighborhood Council system has never quite fired correctly on all cylinders since its inception therefore a minor " by law " statement is rather insignificant when the mountains are on fire and pushed by 80 MPH winds. We are all fortunate that New Mexico, Utah, Arizona, Oregon and all our statewide Fire Department brothers and sisters who arrive under Mutual Aid to save us in time of need, do not share the short sighted view of these or this obviously wanna be politician to parse the unimportant and obvious, whether your from Owensmouth, Canoga Park, West Hills it does not matter.

Dear Dan: Of course the Chatsworth Neighborhood Council has the right to “support” anything it wishes to support. But as you deliberated and voted to “support” the helispot in West Hills, you failed to inform LAFD Capt. Wendell Smith, who was in charge of the project, that you had no standing to speak on behalf of the people who live and work directly adjacent to it.

The people who live along Fallbrook Avenue and work at Corporate Pointe in West Hills didn’t vote for you. They don’t even know who you are. So it strikes me as presumptive and even arrogant that you pretend to have spoken on their behalf.

Our Neighborhood Council only learned about the project through Saul Daniels’ article in the Chatsworth NC newsletter, and when I informed LAFD Capt. Smith that the helispot was in West Hills, he expressed surprise. We eventually heard Capt. Smith and passed a resolution in support of the helispot, but that is beside my point. If I hadn’t read Saul’s article and immediately contacted Capt. Smith, the stakeholders of our community would have had no opportunity to learn about the project before its construction, let alone express their concerns, opinions and ideas.

This is why Neighborhood Council boundaries are more than mere “bylaw statements.” They ensure that folks who are affected by city actions have a place where they can speak their minds, and they determine who is able to elect the representatives who speak to the city for them.

As for your "Chatsworth, duh" statements, I wonder whether you would conclude that, because of its name, British Columbia is part of Great Britain and New England is part of England, and that government policies in those regions should be dictated out of London? Closer to home, should what goes on in the park called Hancock Park in the Fairfax District of Los Angeles be decided by the folks in another neighborhood that also goes by the name of Hancock Park?

Brin.... Bite your tongue amigo. Obviously you did not catch my point. We voted on a helispot in Chatsworth Lake, period, to serve all our neighbors. Just because you were not up on current events is not my problem nor concern. The safety of the entire neighborhood(s) was and is our concern, not your political aspirations. Perhaps you should attend our meetings to be better informed on Chatsworth Lake issues and events. As you know, CD 12 is currently delineated by Roscoe Blvd whether you like it or not. As for my stakeholder status in West Hills, you have no idea whatsoever what I own, where I work or who on Fallbrook Ave. knows me. Also, it is a shame that Capt. Smith had to listen to all your nonsense while just simply trying to sell a great idea to save lives and property of all Angelenos, City, County or otherwise. Obviously again, my guess is that you are more than likely letting all these Neighborhood Council " Advisory Board " issues go to your head and ego, as it is more than apparent that the common sense and public safety portion of your elected advisory role has long flew the coup. Or I am sensing a individual who is possibly seeking name recognition through whatever ( in this case just plain stupid ) means necessary to attempt a probable ill fated political run for CD # 3 ? My advise would be to pay much closer attention to West Hills issues and not worry about Chatsworth ( Duh, I wonder where that is located ) Lake or Chatsworth Lake Nature Preserve issues.

Thanks Saul.....that is EXACTLY what was stated. Unfortunately though in this small time Trojan Horse, REDISTRICTING is the real issue inside and/or perhaps even personal political aspirations......

Saul, I don't know what he told you, but Capt. Smith had no idea that the helispot was in West Hills until he appeared at our board meeting (at our request) months later. That's when I informed him of the fact. He asked for a map and I gave one to him. Maybe he had some idea that West Hills existed somewhere south of the reservoir and eventually he'd get around to talking to someone down there. You'd think that the subject of jurisdiction would have come up during his appearance in Chatsworth, but obviously it did not.

As for you, Dan L. Huffman, I assure you that you have not been elected by people in West Hills to represent them in matters concerning their neighborhood. I also assure you that I have no aspirations for higher political office. You'll have to take my word on that.

Dear Chatsworth NC,
It is quite unfortunate that your NC and the West Hills Neighborhood Council (WHNC) meet on the same night. I tried to attend your land use committee meeting in December - and I believe that it was cancelled. I tried to attend your January Board meeting because ours was cancelled - and so was yours.
I have worked with your former President - Judith Daniels and other members of your Board including Diana Dixon - Davis.
As Dan Brin stated - West Hills is celebrating the 25th year of its existence. And people chose at that time what portions of the City would become a part of West Hills.
At the Redistricting meetings, and at our own Board meeting, the majority of the Board and community members have indicated that they want West Hills to be completely whole and in CD 3.
Before Councilmember Englander was elected, he met with the WHNC Planning Committee to discuss what his vision is for the Chatsworth Nature Preserve.
The WHNC has an Environment Committee which I currently chair.
That committee met last year in March to discuss the many different community opinions on what the future use of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve should be.
Since the majority of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve does fall within West Hills, the
WHNC would like to include it in the Council District that they would like to be in.

To Chatsworth NC -
Finally, I set up a tour of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve last Spring with the LADWP for WHNC Board members. I invited the Chatsworth NC to join us on that tour.
This was at the time that the Wetlands Project was going into the Nature Preserve, and I was concerned about the Wetlands Project relative to the existing helipad.
Each community has a hub. For West Hills Emergency Preparedness, our hub is the 911 Center, the LAFD Fire Station 106, the Topanga Police Station in nearby Canoga Park, and the helipad in the West Hills portion of the Nature Preserve.
If there is ever a major disaster in the City of Los Angeles, the 911 System and these services in West Hills will become the hub for first responders.
I have worked with the LADWP and the LA City Parks and Recs Department to make sure that the Chatsworth Nature Preserve is protected. I have even made an effort to find additional water for maintaining that property.
I have absolutely no clue why the Chatsworth NC is making accusations about the WHNC. Members of your Board have been invited to my Environment Committee meetings.
I would like the Chatsworth Neighborhood Council President to contact me please. He knows how to get my emails via DONE. He can also get it from a number of his Board members.
I have worked closely with a number of NCs. West Hills is a part of the Canoga Park - Winnetka - Woodland Hills - West Hills Community Plan. I believe that these NCs want to remain whole in CD 3.

Chris, you are mistaken. There was no motion and no vote by the West Hills Neighborhood Council to include the entire Nature Preserve in CD 3. If that is what you propose, you are speaking for yourself and no one else.

Here is the text of my prepared testimony before the Los Angeles City Council on Feb. 4 (I gave a copy to commission member David Ford before the meeting. While I didn't have time to read the entire statement, Mr. Ford asked me questions that essentially enabled me to complete it.):

I’m Dan Brin, a board member of the West Hills Neighborhood Council, and I’m here to talk about the Chatsworth Nature Preserve, which was formerly known as the Chatsworth Reservoir. As you probably know, in spite of its name, around 80 percent of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve is in West Hills. The northern 20 percent is in Chatsworth.

Now, it would be great if the commission would draw a boundary line through the reservoir along the Nordhoff Street median. Then the two communities can exist happily in two separate districts, CDs 3 and 12.

Unfortunately, it appears that your software won't permit dividing a census tract -- and the reservoir comprises a census tract, albeit one with no residents.

So, here are the other options:

(continued in next message)

(continued)

Option 1. Put West Hills in with Chatsworth in the 12th District. This is what the commission is recommending in its draft map. However, nobody in West Hills seems to like this idea (we took a poll at last Wednesday's Neighborhod Council meeting and there wasn’t a single person there who voted for that idea).

Option 2. Put Chatsworth in with West Hills in the 3rd District. I don’t expect the folks in Chatsworth are happy with that idea, either.

Option 3. Put all of West Hills in the 3rd District except for the entire Chatsworth Reservoir, which would be in the 12th. That is an unacceptable and intolerable option for the people in West Hills.



Option 4. Put all of Chatsworth in the 12th District except for the entire Chatsworth Reservoir, which would be in the 3rd. The people in Chatsworth wouldn’t like THAT.



Finally, Option 5. Keep the boundary between the 3rd and 12th Districts right where it is, along Roscoe Boulevard. Both communities will be happy. West Hills will keep having twice the representation on the City Council and we don't have to worry about splitting the reservoir. 


In fact, many people in West Hills support that option, and I strongly suggest it to you today. Thank you.

Wrong-way Roe, your WHNC has done nothing for Chatsworth. So butt out. Don't waste our time with your senseless ramblings, please.

Dan Brin: the Chatsworth reservoir is a repository for Rocketdyne wastes, just review the city and county maps and become familiar with the drainages. Contaminants such as Hexavalent Chromium, Dioxin, Thorium from the thorium reactors, Di-n-Butylphthalate, Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, Carbon disulfide, Acetone, Tuluene, m & p-Xylene, Uranium from nuclear fuel, Lead, Arsenic, Mercury, Antimony, Cadmium, Vanadium, Barium, Beryllium, Molybdenum -- all are found in the soil and/or groundwater of that old DWP drinking water reservoir. The stuff simply flows off the Rocketdyne hill above from today's Boeing/NASA/DOE property and also seeps in via the aquifer and by way of seasonal springs. Dr. Thomas Mack out of USC Public Health has a study available at your public library: Within Dr Mack's extensive work, are the cancer clusters for the county that clearly depict high rates of cancers in the immediate areas around the Chatsworth Reservoir. The question still yet to be answered is how many innocents received this tainted water in their taps in years past, and why hasn't the City released these records? That would be a more productive use of WHNC's time rather than engaging in monotonous rancor with your neighbors at CNC. Just a thought...

Sol Weiss

Sol, Dr. Mack spoke at length about his studies at a recent meeting of the West Hills Neighborhood Council. He reported that he found no evidence of cancer clusters in the area. Not that this is relevant to the discussion at hand.

As for "engaging in monotonous rancor with your neighbors," that is exactly what I'm here to protest. The article that launched this exchange was an ugly and nonfactual report that strongly implied that West Hills was coming to seize the Nature Preserve in order to build hotels and golf courses on it. I objected to these falsehoods and was met, for the most part, with name-calling and other attempts at insults.

Dan,

The vote of the West Hills Neighborhood Council was to keep the community whole within CD 3. That was the majority vote. At no time did we ever support being exclusively in CD 12. Our representatives from CD 3 - Ron Rubine, and our representative from CD 12 - Semee Park - were present to hear that vote.
Yes, it is my opinion that the whole Nature Preserve should go to CD 3 because the largest portion of it is within the community of West Hills. I agree with you - if there is a way to divide the census tract that has no population at Nordhoff - I am all for that. However, ithe map should place all of West Hills and that population of West Hills up to Nordhoff within CD 3.
We are asked to justify why our neighborhoods are contiguous, compact, and communities of interest.
While we are contiguous with Chatsworth - and I have a lot of people I consider friends on their NC - we do not have real any relationship with the rest of CD 12, and it will not make us compact.
I would like to support you in that the article was very negative regarding the WHNC. However, I have spoken to a Chatsworth NC member who has stated that they believe that the reason that we are asking for the Nature Preserve to be in the same area with West Hills is to develop it.
I know the person that they are referring to. And I disagree. No one that is involved with the WHNC that I know of and who is also involved with Redistricting LA, is interested in developing the Chatsworth Nature Preserve.

Chris, you're absolutely right that West Hills is united in opposing any development in the Nature Preserve. I was disputing your statement, "Since the majority of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve does fall within West Hills, the WHNC would like to include it in the Council District that they would like to be in." This is your position, but it is not the WHNC's. At any rate, it is an unproductive proposal, as the folks in Chatsworth (obviously) would object to it.

It's also not necessary. In our straw poll, 13 people advocated putting all of West Hills in CD 3, while 10 people agreed with me that keeping the current council district boundaries would be preferable. Keeping the current boundaries would let the majority of West Hills remain in CD 3 while avoiding any messy issues with Chatsworth.

The current revised maps from the redistricting commission put West Hills in CD 12, which also avoids the messy issues, but in a less satisfactory way.

Dan, seize the opportunity to get it right for future generations. At its current state, I would not permit youngsters to roam a so-called polluted "nature preserve". CD3 + CD12 ought to fight for a proper cleanup while it is actively being discussed. Option 6: force the polluter to buy up the Chatsworth Reservoir property; have the polluter clean the reservoir/land/lake and accompanying drainages properly to a rural cleanup standard as certified by the state; then, and only then, return it all back to the people. Testing and sampling over several seasons would obviously be required. Drawing district lines without discussing the underlying problem of the so-called contaminated "nature preserve" is bad politics. And, yes, my earlier comment is actually germane to the discussion as common sense has it.

Check out Dr. Mack's book from the library. Thyroid cancer in women is very high in this section of the county, see for yourself. Other cancers as well. Experts have chimed in from other places too. The contaminants found at Chatsworth Reservoir (mentioned previously) similarly have a role in causing cancer. Bottomline: clean it before drawing a line around it!

Dan,
We took a vote as a Board. A "straw poll" of the audience does not count. Either way, the majority voted to be in CD 3. And I have discussed this with other West Hils residents that want to complain about being put into CD 12.

To Sol Weiss:
I have a BS in Health Education. I have read - I own - Dr. Mack's book on "Cancers in the Urban Environment." As Dan said, Dr. Mack did a presentation on cancer incidence in West Hills in December 2010. The Power Point defines cancer and what a cluster is. He did not state that there was any elevated thyroid cancer in West Hills. That has been a statement of earlier studies. Nor did he correlate any cancer in West Hills with any particular site. I don't know if links work here - but his Power Point is on the West Hills Neighborhood Council website. It is on the Public Health Committee page at the bottom. I am the Public Health Committee Chair of the WHNC.
As far as the Chatsworth Nature Preserve goes, the area that was studied for the Wetlands project was not found to be highly contaminated. I did a Public Records request a few years back for sampling in the Chatsworth Nature Preserve. The document can be found on the LADWP website. The wetlands project will be "clean" before they do any planting.
As far as a "polluter goes' for the Chatsworth Nature Preserve - that would be hard to prove. The property receives urban runoff from a number of hillside areas, from the former Hughes property, and "Rocketdyne" does not have a direct pathway according to the maps for watersheds that were posted by the county after one of the recent fires.
Where are you getting your data regarding the contaminants from the Boeing / DOE/ NASA property having these contaminants?

Mr. Weiss, I would like to refer you to the federal EPA who has been sampling AREA IV of the Santa Susana Field Lab. Are you aware that Uranium and Thorium as well as Radium and Radon are all naturally occurring in the soil and rock all around the San Fernando Valley? This information regarding radon can be found on EPA maps for radon in Los Angeles County.
We also have elevated naturally occurring arsenic in this area.
Metals can be naturally occurring as well - which is why the EPA and DTSC have done "Background Studies" for both radionuclides and chemicals. We do not have the complete results of all of those studies, but the proposed "Look Up Tables" for radionuclides - which indicate which ones and at what levels those radionuclides are naturally occurring are on the Santa Susana Field Lab DTSC webpage under "What's New".

Brin...Be glad that I don't come over and grab a seat at WHNC. You'll have to take my word on that. Rowe...I do not speak for CNC. However Thank You for being honest and letting the cat completely out of the bag. I stated earlier that this was not about a Helipad but rather Redistricting and perhaps politics. Though I fully understand the confusion and unhappiness associated with a NC located within two different CD's, a land grab, though earlier denied, is exactly what WHNC has in mind to rectify your dysfunctional borders at the expense of Chatsworth. Chatsworth recorded itself in 1886.. a tad bit earlier than West Hills. The Lake is located within Chatsworth, the pipes to serve it are under Chatsworth and it bears the name. Inasmuch ( though I do appreciate Brin's options ) as yourself, myself, Dan Brin has little or nothing influence wise and zero authority in the decision process of the redistricting game, why not now wait and see just what this commission comes up with ? This discussion was supposedly about a helipad. But in the meantime, these on- line conversations stand as proof to the authenticity of the Chatsworth Round Up article and to the Feb. CNC Land Use article published by Patch. As Brin stated earlier in this post..." this article is wildly detached from reality" there is no desire stated or otherwise..to steal any part of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve......blah blah blah......completely untrue. Thank you for the insight.
Therefore, I rest my case.

Mr. Huffman, Your artful use of ellipses make it appear I said things I did not say. I actually said this: "This article is wildly detached from reality. There is no desire, stated or otherwise, by the West Hills Neighborhood Council to steal any part of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve from you. Nor is there any support in West Hills for developing the Preserve in any way."

Both statements are completely true:

1. "There is no desire, stated or otherwise, by the West Hills Neighborhood Council to steal any part of the Chatsworth Nature Preserve from you." A comment by one person, speaking on her own, does not comprise a "stated desire" by the WHNC. Besides, she does not advocate removing any portion of the reservoir from Chatsworth's jurisdiction and putting it in West Hills' jurisdiction. I wish I could say something equivalent regarding Chatsworth's intentions regarding West Hills' boundaries, but, judging from your comments and those of others in this forum, I can not.

2. "Nor is there any support in West Hills for developing the Preserve in any way." This comment stands, as nobody has even tried to contradict it -- which might explain why you omitted it through your use of ellipses.

The fact is that Anthony Pardines and Saul Daniels could have avoided the unpleasantness of the past few days if they investigated the facts and reported them accurately instead of passing unfounded rumors on to the public.

Very interesting thread and now that people have stopped throwing rocks, educational. A Heliport for Fire danger and command center sounds quite reasonable (Hey lets put it closer to West Hills, we in lake Manor hate Helicopters) . Further development, no on 2 counts. We don't need more malls or more tracts. Imagine the watering of greens. I am sure Golfers eyes bulge driving by, but cool your jets. As to the pollution in the preserve. The tragedy of the Largest Nuclear melt down in US history, and draining of millions of rocket cleaning chemicals into our aquifers here in the Valley by a 1950's short sighted Red Menace government is now history. I was a 10 year old boy playing outside with all my other friends in Woodland Hills in 1959 watching the red glow in hearing the huge rumble. We liked it ! Cancerous chemicals Is a fact. Cancer cluster figures are not clear, but don't dig a well here my friend. Although there is plenty of water below in this dry land, it is ruined for the next several thousand years. Again great long term thinking !! The property SSFL is now divided into Boeing (NASA) and DOE (who is handling the Nuclear waste) . There will be a NASA DOE Meeting on March 27th where they will be taking questions (West Hills may not have heard of this they only tell us folks who live here) Please attend. http://go.usa.gov/QDl.

Brin.I need no artful ellipses to read what yourself and other WHNC members have written. I do not speak for Chatsworth, only for myself. It has been made perfectly clear in this forum that the West Hills version of Angry Bird is being played out on these pages and that your opinion alone supposedly represents West Hills. I think not. I entered the conversation on your absurd comment regarding the Helipad. I make no apologies period. I would venture to guess that the Chatsworth Neighborhood Council may even agree with me, though I do not speak for them. The Chatsworth Round Up article contradicts your statements completely. When a member of WHNC mentions " its highest and best use " and we both know who that was, yes, I am sure it sets off alarms, rightfully so, with many people. I was not and am not in that conversation therefore more of my artful ellipses. Your testimony and proposed options again, in themselves, contradict your words posted here and confirms Chatsworth Patch's story. Considering that we disagree on many points and should end this, I do however agree that your use of words such as " steal " is more than a appropriate description in this case, in the event that your proposals, testimony and options actually trump the words that you have written here. This of course, leaves all of us with the question of just who is the Angry Bird and just who is the Green Pig, as it is crystal clear from all this chatter, just where and what the Golden Egg is. Enough said.

My words will speak for themselves, as yours will for themselves. I invite readers to review this entire conversation and form their own conclusions. Good day to you, sir.

I agree with Sol Weiss. As far as the Dr. Mack study as presented to the WHNC, bladder cancer cases were still higher than the number expected. Bladder cancer has been high in census tract 1132 since the 70's and is second only to lung cancer among the workers at the Santa Susana field lab. A large concrete diversion channel was built to carry runoff from Santa Susana in the late 60's to the river and away from the reservoir--probably 20 years too late. Bonnie Klea

This blog was supposed to be about whether West Hills residents want to be wholely in CD 3 or in CD 12 or split. West Hills is not trying to do a land grab. It just is trying to include what are considered the boundaries of its community in the appropriate district.
If you read the testimony of some West Hills residents that live north of Roscoe, they have stated that they feel orphaned because only about 10 % of West Hills is currently in CD 12. It therefore does not get the same attention of the CD 12 representatives that Chatsworth enjoys. This is not anything personal against the current Councilmember - who is a very nice guy.
West Hills would just like to remain whole for appropriate representation. My colleague Mr. Brin may disagree with me, but I did read a great deal of the transcripts from the hearings, and particularly read the testimonies of those who have attended the meetings who live in West Hills.
Again, our line is drawn from the intersection of Nordhoff across the Nature Preserve to around Woolsey Canyon Road.
There are no current plans to develop the Nature Preserve. The helipad already exists in the West Hills portion of the Nature Preserve - access via Fallbrook - right behind Corporate Pointe.

Chris,
It seems you are ignoring the fact that the Chatsworth Nature Preserve is under the jurisdiction of the DWP and that there was a deal brokered in the eighties to preserve the land as is, which means no 'best use' scenarios. There will never be any golf courses, soccer fields, or the like. The Helispot is on the east end of the land and is actually a plus in fire protection and obtaining regular fire insurance for those who live nearby in Box and Woolsey Canyons, who are situated outside the city limits. The preserve should be left alone with occcasional Earth Day limited excursions. It might be nice to have this area as an environmental lab for remote view by schools as well. Inobtrusive cameras could provide schools and researchers with various views of the preserve for example.
The important thing here is that there is no reason for West Hills to be involved. I do not believe that Joy Picus had anything to do with the Bernson-Beilenson agreement to preserve the area, which is now pretty much devoid of deer and foxes. I understand that BFI is also contributing money to expand the wetlands. I trust West Hills NC can focus on issues that really concern its constituency including the percholates that have ventured downstream into West HIlls as well as remnants of heavy water used at the clean up site in Woolsey. Please focus on the fact that the Chatsworth Preserve is DWP property and not controlled by the city per se.

This whole conversation reminds me of a quote by Shakespeare; "...a tale told by an idiot, full of noise and fury, signifying... nothing!"

Unless I miss my guess, we all want the same thing... NO DEVELOPMENT in the CNP. Period. DWP is not a very good steward of the property. They've said the CNP is worth @ $500million to them. They're here to make money, period. Not operate a nature preserve. I can show you where the poor management practices are destroying the habitat there.

Perhaps we can spend our energies on something more productive than sending insults across what, from my from my living room window, is something we should unite to protect.

John,
I think that you and many of the others on this blog are missing the point. The point of this article is that the CITY OF LOS ANGELES is being redistricted. According to the Redistricting Commission, they believe that they cannot divide a census tract.
The Chatsworth Nature Preserve is in an unpopulated census tract.
West Hills is just trying to keep all of its population together - which go to Nordoff across the Chatsworth Nature Preserve to around Woolsey.
The issue here is not about how well the LADWP manages the property; it has to do with the critieria for Redistricting - which begin with being contiguous, compact, and a community of interest.
While the WHNC has worked with the Chatsworth NC on issues related to the Nature Preserve and the Simi Hills, we have more in common with Canoga Park and Woodland Hills because we share services such as Police, Fire, Hospitals, Libraries, Schools, Freeways, Bus lines, the Orange Line, Pierce College, etc.
We go to movies in Woodland Hills, shop at the Topanga Plaza which is Canoga Park.
We have been in CD 3 for as long as I can remember - and we don't want to be in CD 12.
Have you looked at the Redistricting maps - what has West Hills got in common with places like Granada Hills? We are much more involved with our neighbor NCs.
No one is trying to develop the Chatsworth Nature Preserve - you were at the meeting that we had with Mitch Englander when our WHNC Planning Committee met with him in November 2010.

Actually, there are people trying to develop the CNP. My point is we should be working together, instead of trying to fuel animosity between each other.

You guys fight all you want, I'm going to work.

Dear John,
As I have stated in my previous posts - I have a good relationship with a number of people on the Chatsworth NC. I am not fighting with anyone.
Again, you misundertand an action taken by a committee of the Chatsworth NC that is not communicating with the West Hills NC. I believe that the best thing for the Chatsworth NC to do is to have their President communicate with our Board related to Redistricting. Again, this issue is not about whether the property is held by the LADWP, Parks and Rec, etc. This issue is about the line being drawn for West Hills down Nordhoff to keep West Hills whole - and under CD 3.

I am not insulting anyone - I am trying - to clarify what was stated at a Chatsworth NC meeting. West Hills just wants to protect its community.

Mr. Rowe I find your statement " Are you aware that Uranium and Thorium as well as Radium and Radon are all naturally occurring in the soil and rock all around the San Fernando Valley? This information regarding radon can be found on EPA maps for radon in Los Angeles County.We also have elevated naturally occurring arsenic in this area.Metals can be naturally occurring as well - which is why the EPA and DTSC have done "Background Studies" for both radionuclides and chemicals. We do not have the complete results of all of those studies, but the proposed "Look Up Tables" for radionuclides - which indicate which ones and at what levels those radionuclides are naturally occurring are on the Santa Susana Field Lab DTSC webpage under "What's New"." To be disingenuous and an unnecessary attempt to obfuscate.Stop watching the debates on TV. There is no scientific question of gross environmental corruption beyond naturally occurring substances in the area as a result of work and experiments from the late 40's to early 70's. Frankly Sir, this makes me doubt the sincerity of your claims that there are no plans to develop the Preserve by WH.

Chris Rowe I just looked at your photo and my sincere apologies Pardon the prefix

Ms. Rowe speaks for herself and only herself. Nevertheless, her statements reflect her honestly-derived opinions based on a great deal of research. You can disagree with her conclusions, but I don't believe it is appropriate to question her sincerity.

Also, while I am deeply annoyed by her counterproductive statements in this forum, I assure you that Chris Rowe in NO WAY supports development of the Nature Preserve. She is as adamantly opposed to such a thing as you or anyone else you might know.

And why would we want development, anyway? We love our suburban/rural lifestyle as much as you do. You should have seen the hell we put the developers at Corporate Pointe through a couple of years ago.

#1.....It would be completely naive for anyone to believe that there is not, was not and will not always be, someone lurking, colluding, scheming,scamming, inquiring and just plain planning on buying this property. Why ? A half a billion to LADWP and a billion plus built out. Greed. Thats why. Dirty dirt or not. Kettleman City, California would gladly accept all it may contain.
#2...My Ouija Board is telling me that all there is left for us to do now is unroll the Welcome to CD 12 banners for West Hills. Finally West Hills will be a whole community in one district and the Nature Preserve will be off of their bargaining table. Perhaps I should request the CNC Land Use Committee or perhaps Chatsworth Patch to fund a little reception for them, have some coffee and cake together and discuss our possibly contaminated little pond, the dream of square council districts, imaginary lines and its highest and best use (quote unquote) all of which that we ( collectively ) have little or no final say whatsoever in. I would personally like to see it just cleaned up, if necessary, preserved, left alone and left where it is, in Chatsworth... though the LAFD Helipad was and is a great improvement for the safety of everyone on the western rim of the valley. Thank You Chatsworth Neighborhood Council.

Perhaps, but West Hills will continue to assert its proper jurisdiction and continue to make its voice heard in matters affecting the Nature Preserve.

We have all noticed.......with wild comparisons comparing West Hills to British Columbia, Canada, New England and London and you failed to mention Gettysburg ? Welcome to CD 12 Mr. Brin Point made and case closed. Enjoy your evening.

Actually, with references to the bylaws of the Chatsworth Neighborhood Council and the West Hills Neighborhood Council, as well as the official maps of the City of Los Angeles. Thank you for the welcome and good night!

you know what would be so nice for the area and everyone is missing some points here, have the army of engineering fix the dikes, fill the lake back up, have a park for boating day camping, bird watching etc..., since DWP ownes the land on the far east side of the lake wind mills would be great for power comsuption for the surrounding neighbor hood, since we do have a lot wind up here. Make the land work not just sit there..I think if everyone put their heads together and made this wonderful piece of land a real place for everyone to enjoy. Not to mention if it was filled with water, what it could do for us during the fires.

After the City Council votes today on new district boundaries, the issue probably will be moot, but for the record I'd like to report on the West Hills Neighborhood Council's first -- and only -- official vote on the subject of City Council boundaries.

At its monthly meeting on March 7, the Board of Directors of the West Hills Neighborhood Council endorsed a motion to keep the boundaries AS THEY ARE, with Roscoe Boulevard serving as the borderline between Council Districts 3 and 12.

As I said before, there was NO policy or desire by the WHNC, "stated" or otherwise, to move the entire Nature Preserve into CD 3. Such a thing was never even considered.

The above article isn't just wrong. It is reckless. It is defamatory. It is destructive to the relationship between two communities.

ardyne & Dan Brin,

12 acres+114 acres+384 acres=510 acres, the amount of surface area within the Rocketdyne boundary that impacts the Chatsworth Reservoir, one way or another. Known as Woosley Canyon Drainage, Eastern Drainage, and Happy Valley Drainage, respectfully, stormwater and subsurface flows from them are tainted with BOD5, Chloride, Cu, CN, Fe, Mn, (NO2 + NO3) as N, Pb, TCDD, TDS, TSS ... and more. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board repeatedly fines the Rocketdyne polluter for effluent limit exceedances to the tune hundreds of thousands of dollars. Monitoring wells perch above the reservoir in Woosley Canyon with something like a 50,000 year TCE cleanup effort this community currently faces. Inside the unsightly razor wire you see while cruising Valley Circle is shallow water table and sediment of Chatsworth Reservoir that retain Rocketdyne contaminants such as Hexavalent Chromium, Dioxin, Thorium from the thorium reactors, Di-n-Butylphthalate, Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, Carbon disulfide, Acetone, Toluene, m & p-Xylene, Uranium from nuclear fuel, Lead, Arsenic, Mercury, Antimony, Cadmium, Vanadium, Barium, Beryllium, Molybdenum...to name but a few.

The place is a repository for Rocketdyne wastes, much still left either undiscovered or deceptively undisclosed. Years of illegal dumping of radioactive wastes were a common occurrence at Rocketdyne, as we today witness the aftermath as it makes its way to the Chatsworth Reservoir.

Does anyone around CHATSWORTH Lake have any idea what ever happened to the very large herd of deer that used to reside within the DWP fences ? There must have been 150 plus....though they are excellent jumpers, a ten foot high fence with topwire and locked gates would have proved impossible for the elderly. Did DWP unlock the gates and let them meander out ? Were the herded out ? How many years ( 15 ? ) has it been since they were seen grazing and sleeping under the oaks ?