According to Wikipedia generic “heart disease” is the leading killer in the United States, accounting for 25.4% of all deaths in the US. So its rank as the number one killer of both men and women in LA County is hardly surprising.

But who would have thought homicide and motor vehicle crashes account for the #2 and #3 causes of premature death respectively for men in LA County? Do men get into that many crashes in LA County that it ranks as the #3 killer of us? Apparently so.

Sadly, homicide ranks as the #1 killer of blacks and Latinos in LA County, according to the report. Lung disease is the #2 killer of whites behind heart disease, followed by motor vehicle crashes. As the report notes, risky behavior contributes heavily to these causes of death.

Speaking of health and motor vehicles, there’s another aspect to the report that applies to us here locally. I don’t think Santa Clarita is more or less obese than any other community, but the report notes that obesity “is one of the greatest challenges facing Los Angeles County” and that, taken together with diabetes, “threatens to halt and even reverse the gains in life expectancy we’ve achieved.”

As many planners and so-called new-urbanists have argued for years, increased obesity rates are a direct result of suburban, car-friendly and pedestrian-unfriendly development (see this 2003 NYT story “As Suburbs Grow, So Do Waistlines” for a sample). And this report takes that same line, arguing that city planners and decision makers ought to “increase access to safe places for residents to walk, bike, play and exercise” and “incorporate health considerations in General Plans, transportation plans and redevelopment activities.”

And I think “incorporating health considerations” is one thing the City of Santa Clarita (and arguably Newhall Land with Newhall Ranch) is trying to accomplish with its “valley of villages,” ped-friendly concept. Of course one SCV man’s ped-friendly, jobs/housing balanced development is another man’s high density OVOV nightmare (that they moved here to escape from!) so therein lies the crux of the matter.

This is one of the reasons I choose to live in Newhall and one of the reasons I’d live in Valencia: they are relatively walkable compared to other areas of the SCV like Stevenson Ranch. And this report backs that idea up: living in walkable communities contributes to a healthy, more active lifestyle.

Are all developments inherently bad?  Is it possible to pave nature in a responsible way, perhaps even balance out some of the irresponsible development in SCV?

The concept of Newhall Ranch is a live/work/play community, facilitated by local jobs and smaller homes in what is known in developer parlance as “high density”  (synonymous with “multi-family residences”: typically condos, townhomes, zero lot line or patio homes).  The project will likely take at least two decades to complete.

Some have been quick to draw comparisons between Newhall Ranch and Valencia; while both are Newhall Land communities, the two share a number of differences.

Master Plan	1960′s	1990′s
Size	15,000 acres	12,000 acres
Open space	4,500 acres	7,800 acres
Homes (at build out)	24,000	20,885
Residents	60,000	60,000
Jobs (est)	60,000	60,000
SFR:Multi-family ratio	65:35	40:60
Trails	30 miles	50 miles
Landscape	Mostly non-native; fescue	Native, drought-tolerant

The high density plan:

• Lowers the price point for NR homes, which translates to lower commute times
• Makes the project more proftable
• Allows for more open space and more walkable villages
• Mitigates a chunk of the environmental concerns

Since land is a fixed cost, packing more homes in a tighter space results in a higher return for the developer. In recent years Newhall Land has migrated to a higher mix of multi-family units.  With the exception of West Hills, all of their recent villages are primarily high density.  For example, Entrada, NL’s nascent village adjacent Magic Mountain will feature 1,232 multi-family units vs. 408 SFR, a 3:1 ratio.  Newhall Ranch will continue this trend.

High density housing also satisfies a price point that should create a more attractive live/work balance.  That stands in sharp contrast to Valencia, whose homes generally have values that demand higher incomes than this valley can support.

A byproduct of nearly all development involves changing what Mother Nature intended (check out SCVTalk’s photo montage for a glimpse of the property today).  However, in dedicating a huge chunk of permanent open space, paying specific attention and care to the Santa Clara river, targeting 51% water recycling, planting native/drought tolerant landscape and building primarily high density homes (which make efficient use of space, use less water and are cheaper to heat/cool), Newhall Land deserves credit for environmental sensitivity.  NR’s environmental impact report (EIR) is the largest and most extensive in CA history.  Clearly, Newhall Land has learned lessons from the usual cast of opposing characters: I can’t think of a development on this scale more sensitive to environmental issues.  The average Newhall Rancher will have a smaller carbon footprint than the rest of us Claritans.


However, the environmental mitigations won’t matter if NR fails to attract reasonably paying jobs and an educated work force that desires high density living.  Failing that, residents will join the rest of us on 5 freeway for a job beyond the dreaded Newhall Pass.  I would be more optimistic if mass transit were an essential component of the project–despite providing right-of-way for Metrolink, there is no guaranteed light rail, something we lamented earlier this year.  But if Newhall Land continues its success in attracting more local jobs, perhaps that won’t matter.  Without a sustainable source for job growth–a research institution, for example–that success is predicated on a pro-business stance from the City, enterprise-zone status and an unfriendly business environment in Los Angeles.

If we trust Newhall Land and their plan for Newhall Ranch, this will be a great addition to our valley.  If it doesn’t quite work (jobs don’t materialize; high density doesn’t resonate), the results could prove to be a serious drag on our transportation and water infrastructure.

If he weren’t so blinded by anti-City rage, NAFF might realize that what the City wants to do is essentially privatize the operation of our public library system by outsourcing staff to a privately-held, for-profit library services company in Maryland.

Under the city’s preferred scenario, those highly skilled, educated and -yes!- unionized library employees in the SCV would either get the boot and have to work at other LA County Libraries or leave their jobs and apply to work for the private corporation, ending their time on the public dole.

This outcome, it seems to me, would be a most favorable one for a conservative guy who has appeared at Tea Party rallies holding “GREEN IS RED” signs and who drives around town in a Hummer with an anti-Jane Fonda bumper sticker.

But because the library seizure is proposed by the City (which he -without irony- attempts to tar with Obama’s Hope ‘n Change mantra) it’s toxic to him, and so he sides by default with public unionized library employees.

The folks who have a real, honest beef with the direction of the SCV need a better spokesperson than Not a Ferry Fan.

-Aldo Leopold

I’m conflicted on Newhall Ranch. On the one hand, I probably wouldn’t have an affordable home in this nice community if it weren’t for Newhall Land’s Valencia development. In fact, the Santa Clarita Valley would be little more than a backwater land of inchoate, thoughtless developments if it wasn’t for Newhall Land and their high quality “master plan” which shaped the landscape of the SCV decades ago. This fact gives Newhall Land credibility to develop Newhall Ranch in my mind.

There’s also this other feeling I have as someone who has lived in the Western United States all my life. It’s in our nature as westerners and Americans, as beneficiaries of Manifest Destiny, to expand and to grow. On a gut level, I look at the landscape of Newhall Ranch and I think to myself, “It’s not doing much now. Let’s make it productive and build something great” which is pretty much the story of how the Western United States -and the Santa Clarita Valley- grew and became prosperous. And I admire Newhall Land’s ability & vision to take that risk and to create something out of nothing.

On the other hand, I tend to think that developments like Newhall Ranch (and Valencia for that matter) may be obsolete. With global climate change, increasing fuel costs, difficulty in getting water, and ever-increasing traffic, is there a market for far-flung suburban development in 2010? How about 2020 or 2050? Oh sure, Newhall Land promises that the Ranch will be different, it will not be sprawl, it will be built with local jobs available, but is that really the case? They also promise that much of the land back there behind Magic Mountain will be left as open space, but isn’t it all open space now? Why change it?

I had all this in mind as John B. and I asked to go on tour of the SCV’s back country, the property Henry Mayo Newhall and his sons received from the Spanish. It’s gone by many names over the years: from Rancho San Francisco to Portrero Valley to all the new names Newhall Land wants to apply to the various communities it hopes to build starting in a few years.

John and I wanted to document the landscape before it gets developed and we wanted to learn whether Newhall Ranch is feasible in an economic sense and responsible in an environmental sense. This post will feature photos of that back country with detailed captions; John will follow up with his more specific thoughts on what Newhall Land is planning later.

Hope you enjoy.

Our tour started in some pepper fields just south of Highway 126. This area will be the site of Landmark Village, the first development in Newhall Land's 21,000 Newhall Ranch project

Our tour was hosted by two Newhall Land developers. They helped us visualize where each development would go, and emphasized the amount of open space NL will preserve

One of the concerns SCOPE and a myriad of others have expressed about Newhall Ranch is that it will impact the river. The two developers we were with were quick to point out that Landmark Village development won't be that close to the river; they compared the proximity to what is currently built in Bridgeport, where there is several hundred feet between the riverbed and the streets

We spotted a lone coyote patrolling the fields as we entered the Ranch, a not-so-subtle reminder that this is a largely wild landscape

To get to the back side of Newhall Ranch, you have to cross some locked gates and cattle guards. Looking at the territory on a map, you get the feeling that it's a really large space, but once we were actually back there, it felt significantly more constrained by the hills and mountains. And yet you couldn't help but feel that this is what parts of Santa Clarita must have looked like before Valencia

A shot of what is called Potrero Valley, which is the site of Newhall Ranch's last (and possibly largest) Potrero Village development in Newhall Ranch. As you can see, even in the back country there is no escaping Edison's electrical lines and towers

From parts of Potrero Valley, you can see evidence of the SCV, which was rather disconcerting. We drove so far back into the ranch we thought we were miles from the SCV, but in reality, Stevenson Ranch (developed by NL's rivals) was just over a ridge

In the center of Potrero Valley is a rather strange little series of buildings. Keep in mind Newhall Ranch is an "active ranch" as NL reminds everyone; these buildings are used by authentic cowboys as they go about their authentic cowboy business. Yes. Authenticity in the SCV at last!

Another shot of the buildings on Potrero Canyon road

John B. skillfully shot this 360 degree panoramic photo. Click to enlarge

Cattle freely roam much of the territory back there, hearkening back to Newhall Land's earlier core business. Does anyone remember when we used to see cattle grazing where West Ridge is now?

In addition to cattle ranching, the Ranch is used for other purposes too. Both petroleum and natural gas are extracted in Newhall Ranch (the equipment above has to do with natural gas production I'm told). These wells will be capped off eventually as homes are built (interestingly enough, one of the plans to deal with excess chloride in the Santa Clara River involved dumping chloride down these wells)

This home is still used by cowboys and ranchers. It was built in 1945 for Barnsdall Oil Company, according to SCVHistory.com

SCVHistory.com Link

This building was once used by oil and gas employees. I think it is largely abandoned now and sits near the southern edge of Potrero Valley

This photo was taken from the top of Potrero Canon Road on the southside of the valley. Just a mile or so down the road from here is Mentryville. In other words, we had driven on back-roads all the way from Highway 126 back to Pico Canyon Blvd. Eventually this may be a major thoroughfare

I was. I’ll let Laurie Ender tell the story:

As part of the City’s initial research on the issue, it was noted that under city management, library services could be enhanced without raising taxes or fees.  Some of these enhancements include increasing hours at the Canyon Country Library and the Old Town Newhall Library by nearly 20 percent each (to match the hours at the Valencia Library); increased local control of library services and programs and better tailoring them to the specific needs of area residents; and opening all of the local libraries on Sunday.

There’s a lot to talk about here. First of all, there are two separate issues.

1) Should the City of Santa Clarita take over the three County libraries in Santa Clarita? And 2) How should the City manage the libraries if and when it does take them over?

On the first question, the math seems irrefutable. The City says we’ve been sending $6m+ every year to the County, and they don’t spend all of it here on materials and staff. In fact, last year, some $416,000 went to the County and didn’t come back. The City estimates $14 million in special library and property tax revenue has been lost in this way since 2003.

What can the City of Santa Clarita do with that extra money? Ender and the others say they can expand service hours and programs. More bang for our buck.

So, on its face, it appears to be in our economic interests to take over the libraries.

As to the second question, there is little doubt that the City would privatize the operation of the libraries. They do that in virtually every other service-oriented operation they run (the Transit system, for example, is run by a private corporation).  It’s likely they’ll look to Library Services & Sciences Incorporated,  a Maryland-based for-profit library management company that got its start in the hey-day of Ronald Reagan’s privatization push.

By some accounts, LSSI has saved local library systems from total ruin and failure. The company moves in, usually offering existing librarians a job (albeit it at a lower salary and without a pension), reforms the system, and turns a small profit.

But other LSSI contracts aren’t so clear cut. Library Journal.com reports that when LSSI took over Calabasas’ County library, it launched a volunteer initiative in order to save on personnel costs, cynically using the public’s goodwill to save money on human resources. In Finney Kansas, LSSI took over the library there, decreased staff spending on highly trained MLS librarians by 9% and cut spending on materials too.

And, as the City points out in a FAQ, experienced and trained local librarians -employed by the County- wouldn’t automatically keep their jobs under the City’s new management. They’d have to apply to work for the private corporation, and they’d lose whatever benefits and pension they had under the County system. Either that or they can transfer somewhere else in the LA County system. What a raw deal for the Librarians who live in and have served this community for years.

Whatever the City is planning, it’s obviously been at this for awhile. Shortly after Ender’s article ran, the City launched SantaClaritaLibrary.com, a slick new website devoted solely to selling this idea to the public. It features comparison charts of local library hours before and after the City’s hoped-for takeover. It has a list of articles about library privitization from organizations as diverse as the International City/County Managers Association to the conservative Hudson Institute.

Speaking as someone who still loves libraries and would kill for more hours (especially on Sunday), I’m intrigued by this idea, but I’m not sold. The City’s FAQ leaves a lot to be desired; I don’t think they could guarantee, for instance, that our local libraries would be able to check out materials from other Los Angeles County Libraries. And would the county end library programs at our three libraries? And what’s with the jumbled brainstrom in the last paragraph of the Financials page that says the $25 million budgeted for the new Newhall library could go somewhere else, like a new Valencia public library?

Finally, there’s a matter of trust, but not just any old trust, I’m talking about the public trust. Knowledge, information, literature and education materials belong to the public, to we the people. Libraries are the warehouses of that free information.

I guess what I’m saying is that I don’t trust the City of Santa Clarita more than the County of Los Angeles Public Library just because the City is local. This isn’t like other City/County issues; the LACO Public Library is well-regarded and is overseen by its own board. They run a good system and even when library dollars escape the SCV, they still get spent on other parts of the system.

This should be an interesting debate come August 24, when it will be on the City Council’s Agenda.

Our family has a personal connection to Coppell, Texas where we lived for just short of two years between 1994 and 1996.  The then 25,000 person bedroom community sandwiched on the northern approaches to DFW airport boasted McMansions where upper middle class professionals used leverage to increase their consumption and enjoy all the trappings of suburbia, including excellent public schools and a fine parks and recreation system. The best comparison in the SCV would be portions of the Westridge tract and some recently built areas of Stevenson Ranch.

We did not enjoy living in the DFW area in general and Coppell in particular so much so that we fled the area in June of 1996 to take a job with Price Waterhouse in Los Angeles.  Through the generous relocation package provided by PW we showed up at a corporate apartment on Dockweiler in Newhall in June of 1996 for a one month stint having never been to the area (not once).  At the end of the 30 days we would move into a rental house in Northbridge and enroll two of our remaining three children in Helmers Elementary (the youngest would attend there as well), ultimately purchasing the tract home in which we still reside in November of 1996.  One can only imagine how undesirable we felt Coppell was moving out here sight unseen just two years past the earthquake and four years past the Rodney King riots.

What did we find undesirable about Coppell?  All of the residents of American suburbia to one extent or another, fueled by a certain prosperity doctrine that springs from some churches and right of center politics, gather edification from career, what we own, and how well our children are doing.  We rely, probably too much, on these things to provide our happiness.  Coppell had this disease on steroids.

As the story of the elected official Jayne Peters came out slowly, the reasons behind the murder-suicide become ever more disturbing.  While the family had suffered the death of the father two years earlier and the financial stress this wrought, it appears that the trigger of the murder-suicide was a bogus graduation gift and college admission.

Late reports indicate in June of this year the Mayor used a City credit card to rent a new car and present it to her daughter as a graduation “gift.”  Over the summer the Mayor’s daughter told everyone she was going to the University of Texas at Austin (the equivalent of admission to one of the higher tier UC schools) and had the rental car packed up to attend orientation.

The situation unravelled on Monday (7-12) when law enforcement believes that the Mayor shot her daughter to death with a handgun borrowed from the Mayor of a neighboring City, and returned the rental car to the next city over and walked home (about a four to six mile walk).  The next day (7-13) the Mayor would take her own life leaving many notes, including a hand written DNR note near the body.  The University system in Texas and TCU, another school the daughter planned to attend, revealed that no application had ever been filed for the girl, not even the common application required for admission to ANY public institution in Texas.

Any rational person will agree that the problems detailed in the various stories of this family did NOT merit the outcome (think of people in our own community who have perservered over much worse trouble), so I am left to wonder how much of this darkness exists behind the doors of the tract houses in parts of our own community, just on the edge of eruption.

A YIKES! UPDATE

My Nebraska Bride finally focused on this story and she realized that 15 years ago she participated with Jayne Peters in the Coppell Early Childhood PTA (Mom’s Club) and that our own daughter played with Corinne Peters.  Oh my goodness!

NAFF’s latest video provides a good summary of Tuesday night’s council meeting and confirms, to me at least, that the rage over the Mayo expansion, the G&L donations, the campaign contribution changes and a myriad of other issues and problems has reached critical mass and boiled over.

It’s taken quite a while to get to this point. Let’s review where we are and how we got here.

For years we’ve heard from TimBen Boydston, David Gauny and others on that side of the camp that something is sick in the City of Santa Clarita. They (Boydston more than Gauny) have alleged, along with many others, that the City’s Staff and its Manager (Ken Pulskamp, or as Bruce McFarland calls him, “The Don”) have too much power and influence over City affairs, over development and such. They allege that, contrary to the natural structure of a Council-Manager form of local government, it is Ken Pulskamp who is calling the shots and directing the Council to do things.

Oh sure, it’s probably more subtle than that, this group would say. It’s not like Ken Pulskamp calls up the City Council and tells them how to vote. It’s more like KP and the professional City Staff exercise an inordinate amount of influence by determining what rises to the Council’s attention, and they, as a result, get what they want.

Which isn’t always what the people of Santa Clarita want, at least according to TimBen Boydston and David Gauny.

So what about this theory? Well, consider this from the City staff’s point of view. These people are professionals, having trained for years in their respective disciplines. They went through what by all accounts is a pretty rigorous hiring process. They obtained certifications, credentials and advanced degrees specific to their disciplines and to local government and, what’s more, many of them live here as well. They win awards. Magazines write about them. They’re justifiably proud of their accomplishments.

The City Council, in contrast, only works part time and has a few weeks off during the summer. Some of them are pretty adept at the technical odds and ends of city planning, finance, and perhaps traffic and transportation. Few are probably adept at engineering or interfacing with other technocrats in other segments of government. The bottom line is they are part time citizen representatives, and they depend on the staff for professional and informed advice because, let’s be honest here, they’re largely clueless when it comes to running a city. But they love showing up at ribbon cutting ceremonies.

The staff, meanwhile, is interested in furthering their local government careers. They read the planning and transportation journals, they attend society meetings and conferences, they educate themselves further. In general, they know their stuff, they want to do a good job and put some cool projects on their CVs.

And -this is key- no professional planner thinks generic, low-density suburban projects have a real future in our community or elsewhere.

And so, as technocrats are wont to do, they think big and dream up big plans. Like One Valley, One Vision. Like the Non-Motorized Transportation Plan. Or the North Newhall Specific Plan. And a dozen other large-scale, multi-year planning efforts that, in their considered opinion, rationally address the economic and infrastructure challenges facing Santa Clarita in the years and decades ahead.

And Ken Pulskamp is their voice to the City Council. I repeat that: Pulskamp is not just in charge of the staff, he is the public face of the staff.

Which is why the Gaunyites and Boydston camps hate him so much. Because they look at these big plans and think, “Holy shit! The City staff is remaking us brick by brick into the San Fernando Valley! They are planning to bring another 250,000 people* here! What about we the people?”

To some extent, I see their point. Is it right for a City Manager to not just implement policy, but to formulate policy as well?  After all, Ken Pulskamp is not elected by the people, but Bob Kellar is. Shouldn’t policy making be left up to the elected officials?

In our case, I’d argue that the City staff and Pulskamp can and should attempt to formulate policy for the reasons I cited above. The City staff is professional, educated, and knowledgeable. We should consider their plans, opinions, and knowledge.

Why? Other cities do it. In a 1997 survey of City managers, the International City/County Managers Association reported that 80% of City Managers think they should be involved themselves in policy formulation. What’s more, a 2001 survey of City Councilmembers in Council-Manager cities revealed that a majority of elected council members considered the City Manager to be a very important part of the policy formulation process.

On the Council side of things, a National League of Cities study in 2001 reported that Council Members of cities with populations between 75,000 and 200,000 spent only about 25 hours per week working “on council related matters.” My bet is that number would be even lower in Santa Clarita. Does anyone honestly think the five of them spend 25 hours a week working on policy matters related to Santa Clarita?

I can send you the sources I cited by email if you like (they are not linkable), but the point is this: many cities depend on their staff and management to formulate policies. The elected leadership, in contrast, has neither the time nor the chops to really create successful policy in all circumstances. This is the reality, and it’s not just in Santa Clarita.

And so there you have it. The vocal and boisterous discontent  we saw at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting is a direct result of the City of Santa Clarita’s Council-Manager form of government. It is a form of government that relies heavily on a full-time, professional staff to not just manage city affairs but also to create responsible policy for the entire city.

And the discontent is also a direct result of having part time Councilmembers who lean, in a big way, on the City staff for ideas to solve problems.

This feels undemocratic to some. It feels particularly undemocratic when 100 people show up in the Council Chambers and are ignored.

But guess what? This structure works for most of us, at this time. Life is pretty good here. I think we under-represent some segments of the population and I’m tempted by the idea of Districts, but by and large, I see the City staff making good-faith efforts to plan for the future of the SCV, to grow it economically in an era of rising gas prices and increasing environmental awareness. Whereas Gauny and Boydston see Mayo as a canary in the coalmine, I look at a revitalized Old Town Newhall with a Metrolink station, a community center and a new library and see smart planning paying off. Whereas Bruce McFarland claims The Don is ignoring the will of the people, I see a survey that says most people are happy and want more local jobs, businesses, and things to do (I also see a lot of silly people claiming traffic is a problem and the City, as a whole, cowering in the face of that absurdity).

So in the end, Boydston and Gauny camps are right. The City manager & staff do push policy**, but it is, by and large, good policy that most of the community probably supports.

* The Signal headline that has made more NAFF videos than any other is the one that says SCV will someday have 400,000 people. NAFF and his pals think that’s what the City staff are doing: trying to build out the SCV so that an additional 150,000 people move here. The reality is the staff is responsibly thinking about a future in which 400,000 people, of their own volition in a free market, might want to call the SCV home. And they are planning for that in a rational and logical way.

** And yes, I suppose you could say the staff have an interest in having the people they like on the City Council, because the councilmembers have shown themselves to be amenable to the staff’s good policy

For months, I’ve sat on the sidelines and dutifully paid $50 per month to Culligan for the exchange tank service that softens our water.

This week on my ‘staycation’ I happened to see the Culligan truck visit more than 2/3 of the homes on our street.  The serviceman quickly exchanged new tanks for old, left our community presumably on his way to Sylmar to process our excess calcium.

Each truck carries a only few dozen of these tanks, and each home on our block has 2-3 tanks apiece.  How many trucks do Rayne and Culligan have servicing SCV households? How many trips do these trucks take up and down the hill?  How much are we shelling out to these exchange tank companies?

And for those who aren’t writing $50 checks every month, rest assured, you’re paying extra for the privilege of hard water.  It’s murder on your pipes, sprinklers, fixtures, appliances and just about anything that has the ultra-hard water passing through it.  Some SCVTalk readers have shared horror stories of hastened replacement schedules for everything from regulators to dishwashers.  Ultra-hard water is an expensive nuisance, and we pay one way or another.

Valencia Water Company has at least done something about the hard water problem.  In late 2008, they released a salt-free system that could one day be scaled (no pun intended) to all SCV residents — not just VWC customers.  It was big news in the water tech world.

400 residents of the community near Copper Hill Drive and Decoro have had the pre-softened water for nearly two years.  I’ve heard mostly-positive reviews on the water treated by the system, ranging from “great” to “still needs some softening.”  Cancelling out the anecdotal outliers, I’d bet the results put the pre-softened water in line with what we’d get from most other utilities.

So, where’s ours?

In April, Michael Alvord of VWC spoke with The Signal’s Jim Walker and provided an answer:

“We figured that if we expanded the treatment plants to serve all of our customers, it would increase the average bill $5 to $6 a month,” Alvord said.

Considering the troubled economic times, this didn’t seem like a good idea. “We’re sort of in a holding pattern,” he said.

Right.

So instead of paying $50 a month (or some equivalent in replacing hard-water damaged fixtures), we could be paying $5-$6 a month?  But in these economic times, why would we want to save money?

HEY VWC, SOFTEN THIS WATER!

And my high expectations are reasonable. Consider how high they’ve set  the crisis management bar in the past: They won recognition for their rapid response to the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. They were the go-to source for fire news in 2003 and 2007, when massive wildfires threatened Stevenson Ranch and Canyon Country. They’ve coordinated effectively with local, state and national firefighting resources multiple times, letting firefighters make camp at Central Park and speaking with one voice to the media. And in 2007, when a massive semi truck pileup in the tunnel on the 5 freeway resulted in four deaths and the closure of Interstate 5 and the Newhall Pass, an Assistant City manager was there, on scene, coordinating the City’s emergency response and handling public relations. I lived through each of these things and have been proud of how professional, timely, and prepared they were.

But they were obviously not prepared for a situation like Sunday night. “But Jeff, the fireworks show has been held at that location for 15 years, and never once did something like this happen,” you say.

To which I reply that past performance is not an indicator of future performance, one of the cardinal rules of risk management. And when you stuff 25,000 people into a finite area, shoot off fireworks, and leave 50 mph roads open, you have to think of risk management.

Monday morning quarterbacking maybe. But their response since the mass casualty incident has been equally deplorable. They’ve been almost completely silent, caught off-guard and unprepared. There hasn’t been a single statement from City Hall or our elected City Council people, not even a statement of condolence for the victims (apart from a small quote in the Signal). The Sheriff’s Station has been way more forthcoming than City Hall, appearing on camera to local media outlets and talking to the press. But all we get from the City is a sentence or two in The Signal even though this was their fireworks show, their event and their responsibility.

Can you imagine the Mayor of Los Angeles hiding out after something like this? Should we give a pass to our City just because it’s smaller?

It’s a shame, and we’re all going to pay the price when this goes to court and the plaintiffs’ attorney asks City officials what they did before and after the event.

Keep to yourself on this. If you have an ounce of respect for others you will wait for an accurate outcome to the investigation. The driver is my friend and i have heard her story and i have read the posts here. Thank you to those of you who are praying for her. It has not been easy on her. There’s always two sides to a story and she deserves her peace for time being. Be a good citizen and keep to yourself. If this were your daughter every single post you were to read here would anger you.

If this were my daughter? How about if the dead woman was my mother? Or wife? How would I feel then?

Shades of Chelsea Arcos here.

Remember her? Chelsea Arcos was a 19 year old Saugus High grad who drove drunk on Interstate 5 back in 2006. On her way home from a party, she slammed into two motorists on the side of I-5, killing them both and dragging one of them a mile or two down the freeway under her Toyota truck. When she finally stopped, she reportedly told the arresting officer that her father was LAPD and would get her out of the trouble she was in.

She got eight years in state prison for vehicular manslaughter. There were comments similar to the reader’s above on SCVTalk back in 2007.

If I had faith that the City and the Sheriff’s Station would do right by the victims, I might shut up. But I don’t. And so, no,  I will not keep to myself. Nor should those who witnessed this and are justifiably upset about what happened.

The City of Santa Clarita has apparently decided to clam up, obviously worried about its liability and lawsuits. So take it directly to them: call or email the City Council and demand that the Sheriff’s Station release the names of the drivers and conduct this investigation in as open and transparent way as possible. Demand to know why there was very little law enforcement around prior to the crash. If there is no privacy for the deceased woman’s family, there ought to be no privacy for the drivers either.

The only thing that stopped this incident from turning into a total massacre -like the 2003 Santa Monica Farmer’s Market crash- was a goddamn traffic light pole. It very nearly came to that, with seven or eight injuries and one fatality.

Is it starting to sink in what happened on Sunday night yet?