Norton Halper

Ferrell's article on the role played by Hollywood Chamber of Commerce leadership in the initiation and formulation of the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan is an accurate assessment. Prior to this article, most major news coverage of the plan only made mention of a "clean up" campaign for Hollywood Boulevard. No mention was ever made of the literally hundreds and hundreds of acres of residential property subject to eminent domain for the next several years. No mention was made of the justified concerns of both the Los Angeles city Planning Department and L.A. County staff over the adverse environmental and financial impacts of the plan.

Norton Halper showed how someone can beat City Hall with nothing but sheer determination, intelligence and courage. Halper, who died last month, did not shower politicians with campaign contributions and free meals. Retired and in bad health, he operated from his modest Hollywood home as a gadfly, rousing officialdom from complacency by focusing an unforgiving spotlight on grandiose and destructive schemes.

Katz and Ryavec display an appalling degree of deceit and misinformation regarding criticism of the Hollywood Redevelopment plan. No one is criticizing plans to redevelop Hollywood. The criticism is regarding the basic unfairness toward adversely affected residents and merchants and the blatant circumvention of the checks and balances that were to make the redevelopment process a fair and equitable one. While it could be a fact that blighted areas generally do not redevelop themselves, the CRA knowingly included non-blighted properties in the project area boundaries for the purpose of capturing tax increment money that would have otherwise gone to the usual taxing agencies.

Is Loss to the Community The death of Hollywood's Norton Halper on July 9 is a real loss to many residents of this city who have been threatened and intimidated by the awesome power of the Community Redevelopment Agency. Norton was a quiet, behind-the-scenes man who gave thousands of hours of his time each year to advise bewildered property owners, businesses and tenants who woke up one morning to find themselves on the CRA's hit list of properties to be condemned in the name of redevelopment.

Regarding David Wharton's article, "Police Make Clean Sweep," (Times, Oct. 18), we believe that the victims of this street sweep did not willingly ignore signs, as stated by city officials, but that the signs (where posted) were not at all adequate in that they did not state the date, hours of enforcement, or the reason. Parking enforcement manager Chuck Devereaux is quoted as saying "these cleanups are common in various districts." But on a Saturday and a Sunday? At 6:30 a.m.? A Mr. Lui of the Street Maintenance Bureau stated to us that he had "never heard of a street-sweeping on a Sunday morning in 30 years of working for the city".

Norton Halper showed how someone can beat City Hall with nothing but sheer determination, intelligence and courage. Halper, who died last month, did not shower politicians with campaign contributions and free meals. Retired and in bad health, he operated from his modest Hollywood home as a gadfly, rousing officialdom from complacency by focusing an unforgiving spotlight on grandiose and destructive schemes.

This being Los Angeles, it isn't surprising when readers send videos to the paper instead of writing letters. They suspect that people here won't react to anything they haven't seen on a television screen. And so Norton Halper, one of my more persistent news sources, sent me two videos reporting on the latest development in his long-running campaign against the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency, the city's powerful slum-clearing government-within-a-government.

Is Loss to the Community The death of Hollywood's Norton Halper on July 9 is a real loss to many residents of this city who have been threatened and intimidated by the awesome power of the Community Redevelopment Agency. Norton was a quiet, behind-the-scenes man who gave thousands of hours of his time each year to advise bewildered property owners, businesses and tenants who woke up one morning to find themselves on the CRA's hit list of properties to be condemned in the name of redevelopment.

Norton Halper, a retired antique dealer whose tenacious battle to stop the city's planned redevelopment of Hollywood made him one of the most feared and respected gadflies at City Hall, died in his home Friday of a heart attack. He was 59. Halper had been in poor health for years, having suffered two previous heart attacks and the amputation of both legs because of diabetes.

Two community activists in Hollywood have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to require the California Supreme Court to hear arguments in a lawsuit that aims to block the $922-million Hollywood Redevelopment Plan. Plaintiffs Norton Halper and David Morgan have long contended that the city-approved redevelopment plan is illegally written in a way that favors big business interests over those of the many small business owners and residents.

Norton Halper, a retired antique dealer whose tenacious battle to stop the city's planned redevelopment of Hollywood made him one of the most feared and respected gadflies at City Hall, died in his home Friday of a heart attack. He was 59. Halper had been in poor health for years, having suffered two previous heart attacks and the amputation of both legs because of diabetes.

This being Los Angeles, it isn't surprising when readers send videos to the paper instead of writing letters. They suspect that people here won't react to anything they haven't seen on a television screen. And so Norton Halper, one of my more persistent news sources, sent me two videos reporting on the latest development in his long-running campaign against the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency, the city's powerful slum-clearing government-within-a-government.

Katz and Ryavec display an appalling degree of deceit and misinformation regarding criticism of the Hollywood Redevelopment plan. No one is criticizing plans to redevelop Hollywood. The criticism is regarding the basic unfairness toward adversely affected residents and merchants and the blatant circumvention of the checks and balances that were to make the redevelopment process a fair and equitable one. While it could be a fact that blighted areas generally do not redevelop themselves, the CRA knowingly included non-blighted properties in the project area boundaries for the purpose of capturing tax increment money that would have otherwise gone to the usual taxing agencies.

Regarding David Wharton's article, "Police Make Clean Sweep," (Times, Oct. 18), we believe that the victims of this street sweep did not willingly ignore signs, as stated by city officials, but that the signs (where posted) were not at all adequate in that they did not state the date, hours of enforcement, or the reason. Parking enforcement manager Chuck Devereaux is quoted as saying "these cleanups are common in various districts." But on a Saturday and a Sunday? At 6:30 a.m.? A Mr. Lui of the Street Maintenance Bureau stated to us that he had "never heard of a street-sweeping on a Sunday morning in 30 years of working for the city".

Ferrell's article on the role played by Hollywood Chamber of Commerce leadership in the initiation and formulation of the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan is an accurate assessment. Prior to this article, most major news coverage of the plan only made mention of a "clean up" campaign for Hollywood Boulevard. No mention was ever made of the literally hundreds and hundreds of acres of residential property subject to eminent domain for the next several years. No mention was made of the justified concerns of both the Los Angeles city Planning Department and L.A. County staff over the adverse environmental and financial impacts of the plan.

Two community activists in Hollywood have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to require the California Supreme Court to hear arguments in a lawsuit that aims to block the $922-million Hollywood Redevelopment Plan. Norton Halper and David Morgan, the plaintiffs in the suit, have long contended that the city-approved redevelopment plan is illegally written in a way that favors big business interests over those of the many small business owners and residents.