Monterey Park, where are you going?
Frequently, I hear accusations of bribery, observe traffic problems, businesses changing, concerns about store signs, controversy in choosing a new police chief, chaotic City Council meetings, citizens being denied the opportunity to address an issue and now the council's plan to reduce building--after, long after the issue should have been resolved. ("Monterey Park Rejects Plan to Change Zoning in Residential Areas," Times, April 27.)
Some of the council members' solutions are to downzone property, change property definitions and other thoughts. Are there more equitable alternatives? Personally I can't afford the losses that would occur if the present plans were adopted. And, I wonder how many other Monterey Park property owners (I have owned property in Monterey Park for 29 years) can afford to lose the value of their property. I can't and I feel that some council members are impervious and insensitive to their constituents and to the losses that could occur if any of their present plans are implemented.
Why does the council have "continued meetings" or "recessed meetings" about issues that drastically affect property or people without adequate notification. Posted notification is legal but not always adequate. Is there something to hide?
