GOOD NEWS AND BAD NEWS FOR GRIFFITH PARK

BY CAROL HENNING
Co-Chair, Editorial Board

First, the good news: On August 11, 2009, the Autry Center announced to the L.A. City Council's Board of Referred Powers it was withdrawing our proposal to build an expansion of the Autry's building in Griffith Park. The reason given was the expensive and virtually endless official delays to which its plans were subjected. The Autry complained that it was under constant threat of costly litigation such that any attempt to proceed with the expansion planned at the Autry's Griffith Park campus would be an ill-advised diversion of financial resources. One may wonder about the state of these financial resources. In any case, community activists-including the Angeles Chapter's Griffith Park Task Force-can feel that their hard work paid off.

The Chapter Executive Committee, citing its existing policy against taking of park land for nonpark purposes, opposed expansion of the Autry Museum in Griffith Park. Neighborhood councils questioned the need for, and impact of, the Autry expansion. Friends of the Southwest Museum fought to keep their historic institution viable. Nonetheless, it seemed that the Autry's Final Environmental Impact Report would glide easily past the Board of Referred Powers. The hearing attracted such a large crowd that it had to be moved to City Council chambers. Even then there was standing room only when activists, hardly believing their ears, heard the Board of Referred Powers decline to approve the Autry's Griffith Park expansion lease amendment, final EIR and variance requests, accepting instead Councilmember Huizar's surprise proposal that action be deferred until the Autry's lease with the city could be rewritten to contain assurances the Southwest Museum would be restored and operated as a fully functioning museum. The Autry declined to play, deciding to quit the game. Their decision, they pointed out, followed upon the latest delay in the political process for approving their expansion.

Community activists have not been as successful in their quest to retain an adequate number of park rangers. 24 neighborhood councils plus other citizens' groups have passed various motions in favor of having more than 40 rangers on duty and having rangers as peace officers. Currently there are 24 rangers to serve 12 regional parks, and soon there might be fewer rangers.

Sierra Club members, especially those who lead regular evening hikes in Griffith Park, know how important the park rangers are in responding to all kinds of incidents in the park. Rangers know the territory they patrol. Griffith Park, for example, is large and complex. It supports diverse plant and animal communities and is heavily used. Protecting, preserving and policing such a park is a job best performed by rangers, but they are being demoralized and stripped of their authority. The public wants safe parks, kept safe by a full staff of rangers who are authorized to perform a full range of park ranger duties. If cutbacks in the Park Ranger Division worry you, write to the Department of Recreation and Parks or to your council member.