Answers to "Environmental Surveys"

By Barry Michael Seybert

Barry's answers to surveys sent to all the Candidates

1) Do you support or Oppose Washington Mutual Bank's Ahmanson Ranch Development project?

OPPOSE - Ventura County will get the tax base from the new community but the majority of the traffic flow will be into the West SF Valley. The property has a lot of beauty to it and is part of a wildlife corridor that should be preserved and protected. The property is home to several endangered species.

2) Do you support requiring that a new traffic study be conducted by the developer of Ahmanson Ranch?

YES

3) Do you support requiring that a new, up to date, complete environmental impact report be conducted to ensure that Washington Mutual fully disclose all the impacts of the Ahmanson Ranch development?

YES

4) Do you support the acquisition of the Ahmanson Ranch property by a public agency such as the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy?

YES

5) Do you support stronger enforcement of the California Environment Quality Act?

YES

6) Do you support stronger enforcement of the Clean Water Act?

YES

7) Washington Mutual Bank plans to send treated sewage from its planned Ahmanson Ranch development through Malibu Creek and Malibu Lagoon, emptying in the ocean at Surfrider Beach. Do you support or oppose this plan?

OPPOSE

8) If you win the election, what if anything will you do to stop the development of Ahmanson Ranch?

I will try to persuade Washington Mutual that it's in their best interest in community relations and customer loyalty to abandon development plans through City Council. Have the new city join in the fight to stop the development. Work on reducing traffic flow on Victory Blvd west of Valley Circle to the county line fence down to a single lane in each direction.

9) Describe your involvement in environmental issues in the past?

I have been on the Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Board for over 10 years. We help determine the placement of bike lanes, paths and routes throughout Los Angeles. We work with MTA, Cal Trans and federal funds to improve and promote bicycle commuting as a viable alternative means of transportation.

I am on the board of the West Hills Neighborhood Council and seconded the original motion by our board to support the fight against Ahmanson Ranch.

I co-chaired Councilwoman Laura Chick's study of the Burbank # Chandler right-of-way as a bikeway and transportation corridor.

When developers wanted to pave the southern end of Reseda Blvd to Mulholland Dr. and build homes along there, I joined with other concerned citizens and formed "Friends of Caballero Canyon". We were successful in working with the developer to set aside land and deed it to the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy as part of Topanga State Park. We also prevented the paving of Reseda Blvd to Mulholland Dr. This would have potentially created the beginning of a push for Reseda Blvd to continue through to Pacific Coast Highway which was on maps as a pending project at one time. This would have created traffic and smog through the Conservancy property.

In order to open the State Parks to Mountain Bike use, a group of Mountain Bikers formed the "Mountain Bike Unit". The riders would ride in the parks and assist the Park Rangers to promote safe mountain bike riding. They are also in radio contact to the Rangers and are trained in First Aid and Search and Rescue. When Malibu State Park first opened its trails to Mountain Bikers, I was part of the Mountain Bike Unit there.

As a student at Kent State University in Ohio I was involved in a "Tent City" for almost a year on the campus. We were camped out to protect "Blanket Hill" and the old Oak Trees there from bulldozers who were attempting to remove the hillside for a new Gymnasium. We were protecting the hillside for its beauty and also for its significance in the remembrance of May 4th (1970). My tent was the second tent pitched on the hillside and I was one of the founding members of this Grass Roots group.

I have been involved in Earth Day projects and promoting Recycling for as long as I can remember back to elementary school. I have also been involved with tree planting.

I have been an avid hiker and enjoy nature photography, camping, bicycling, off-roading and sailing. I follow the rules of packing out anything I bring in and not tearing up the land with my truck or mountain bike.

I have also served on the Woodland Hills / West Hills Neighborhood Planning Committee under Councilwoman Laura Chick.

I firmly support the efforts of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. I want to see safe corridors created and maintained for the animals that live around us in the hills. I believe that those of us living in the hills (I am one too) are living on their land and need to respect their right of survival.

There is vacant land inside the Valley and there are areas in dire need of revitalization that developers should proceed to build on. The remaining natural land surrounding the Valley needs to be protected, not just Ahmanson Ranch. We need this land protected for the wildlife, for the fresh oxygen it produces, and for the simple relaxation it can bring as a get away from the hectic city life.

10) Do you pledge to do everything within your power to stop Ahmanson Ranch from being developed?

YES

North Valley Coalition:

1) Would you require that all city trash go through a Material Recovery Facility or be similarly processed for maximum recovery before it is deposited in a landfill?

Yes. Recycling income would create an income above the additional costs. This would additionally provide more jobs. We could possibly use a recycling program to provide jobs to the homeless to get them back into a stable environment again. Trash to energy should be looked at to see if it's feasible to do financially and environmentally. It could reduce our dependence on D.W.P. and provide power back to the "grid".

2) Would you support a policy that at the end of current contracts no trash from the new city will be deposited in landfills, where any portion of that landfill in the valley?

Personally, I support no trash landfills within the Valley. I would not renew an agreement with Los Angeles to use any Valley landfill. The Valley would have to find a viable alternative site like Eagle Mountain, and weigh the options. No one wants a landfill in their backyard, but if we can minimize the dumping through recycling, biomass energy, and other means, we might be able to create a safer landfill that can eventually lead to a re-use of the land. Stopping the dumping will not make the landfill vanish. We need to work on making it an environmentally safer location that may be reclaimed.

3) Would you support a policy that no low level radioactive waste be deposited within the new valley city?

Yes. I would also fight for the removal of any currently existing within the valley, including those located at Rocketdyne.

4) Would you require that all EIR's be prepared by an independent reviewing agency, selected by the city and paid by the proponent?

Yes.

5) Would you expand the notification on pending large projects to require notification be sent to any residential are consisting of 30 homes or more closest to the project and within a 500' radius of that point?

Yes. Any residence (even if under 30 homes) has the right to voice their opinion of what is going into their neighborhood as it may impact their way of life or their property value. I have brought this same issue up in my Neighborhood Council. The 500-foot radius should begin at the first residential unit closest at any given point around the project.

6) Would you support the denial of permits to heavy industries, whose activities could result in any additional air quality degradation?

Yes. Our air quality is bad enough. We need to attract more business and industry back into our area but we must not jeopardize our health in doing so.

7) Would you limit the number of times the new city could adapt a finding of overriding considerations to no more than one a year?

No. I would support a one-year time line for overriding considerations to be placed into effect per project. Within that year, an extension could be obtained if the city felt it necessary to grant one following procedures set down in Question 5.

8) Would you support new ordinances to prohibit new billboards and phase out existing ones?

I would support prohibition of new billboards but I would leave a decision like this up to the local communities to be decided through Neighborhood Councils. Some areas may want to create a "billboard zone" so that they can reap the tax dollars generated by the sponsors and billboard owners. These fees should stay within that community earmarked for community improvements.

9) Would you provide funding for the construction and maintenance of all streetlights in the new city?

Streetlights should be funded and maintained through tax dollars. Some neighborhoods may continue to opt out of having streetlights to maintain their more rural atmosphere. Builders of new developments should provide streetlights if they are creating the streets or no streetlights currently exist except when a community has decided against streetlights. The city then would maintain them and could provide particular streetlights for them to install.

10) Would you establish a compliance committee that would review and set standards for the aesthetics of all new cell towers proposed for construction in the new city?

Cell tower location approval, construction and design should be decided upon through Neighborhood Councils or a local Planning Advisory board. Multiple use towers should be encouraged. Notification as discussed in Question 5 should be used.

11) Would you demand that any existing above ground high power electrical transmission lines be phased out and put underground?

As power lines need to be replaced, they should be placed underground. When a street is being trenched, provisions should be installed to accommodate any overhead lines if the lines cannot be moved at that time. This is not only an aesthetic issue, it also is a safety issue and should reduce the chance of outages from weather or accidents.

12) Would you require that when streets are being trenched for cable or other major utilities that above ground power and telephone type utilities be relocated underground?

When feasible to do at the same time or if the existing lines were scheduled for replacement within a year. Provisions should be installed whenever a street is dug up for future placement of all above-ground lines to be relocated underground. A minimum length of the construction zone should be set to trigger this requirement.

13) Would you expand the comment period for Negative Declaration to at least 60 days?

Yes. Following the guidelines of notification set in Question 5 for residences and expanding it to include any businesses in the affected area as well within a simple 500-foot radius.

14) Would you support expanding Neighborhood Councils from advisory to one that has decision making powers?

Neighborhood Councils represent the cross section of the community they serve and their board members are very interested in making their community a better place. They should be given much more power to make decisions for their community. Their meetings should be the "Neighborhood Townhall" and their decisions should be considered like those of a local "Congress". The local Councilperson may approve or veto their decision. The Councilperson's office should also attend their meetings as a non-voting board member.

15) Will you expand recycling efforts to include apartments and multi-unit complexes?

Yes. Any private trash collection licensed to do business within the Valley City should provide recycling. The city could train recycling staff through a rehab or grant program suggested in Question 1. The private collectors could then hire from the city program allowing the city to rehab more individuals. This would also create a job market and work experience for those very much in need of getting back into a productive society.

16) Would you put a cap on fundraising for elections?

Yes. Caps provide a more balanced playing field allowing anyone with desire to seek office rather then only the wealthy or well connected. This current election is a good example of a cross section that would normally be kept from seeking an office because they don't have deep pockets.

16A) Will you include a soft-money cap?

Yes, at $500.00

17) Would you require that someone who is working for the new city to wait 5 years before returning as a lobbyist or consultant?

No. Because those being forced out by term limits may still be able to provide a lot of positive guidance for the city as a consultant or a lobbyist for the city. I would favor a waiting period to become a private lobbyist that is hired to influence Valley City officials.

18) Would you require that all council people keep a complete and available record of any meetings concerning projects that will come before them?

Yes. Accurate records, minutes and meeting notes should be kept.

19) Would you require council members to recuse themselves from voting on a project, when they have received more then $50 from the proponent of that project, or from someone who has been employed by the proponent within the last three years?

Yes. This is ethically the right decision. I believe the Ethics Commission specifies this policy under "Form 700".

20) Would you make you or your staff available to meet with representatives of communities outside of your own council district?

Yes. The Councilperson must represent their district but they also are a representative for the entire city and should make themselves and / or their staff available citywide or beyond.

21) Would you support a "Bad Boy" ordinance?

Yes. There are enough companies out there seeking to do business with the city that the city can stipulate that it will not do business with a company or individual with a criminal conviction. A time limit may be used to determine eligibility on lesser offenses that are not connected with the nature of the contract. An exemption may be made for those in a grant or rehab program as suggested in Questions 1 and 15 with limitations.

22) Would you create incentives for business to provide flexible schedules for workers?

I would hope that the business would find it beneficial to allow flexible schedules for workers without the city providing incentives. The employees themselves would provide the incentive by being better and more loyal employees. I would not be against considering an incentive plan.

23) Would you support a proposal that limits traffic on Balboa Blvd from areas outside of the new city?

It would be better to make all roads leading into the valley "toll roads" so we can collect from $1.60 to $3.50 per car like Orange County or New York does. Valley residents would receive free passage. This would create a "use tax" that could add to our tax base and let us recoup the millions downtown Los Angeles has taken from the Valley without providing services. Seriously, we cannot restrict traffic flow on major streets as it would only compound the current freeway gridlock. It's bad enough that we need to restrict some residential streets so these neighborhoods are not gridlocked. We could restrict left turns during peak times which might create enough of an inconvenience to deter the street traffic. This might also allow the center turn lane to become an additional driving lane during that time period similar to what is done along Highland in Hollywood.

24) Would you create incentives for business to have employees work from their home electronically?

I would hope that business would see the benefits of allowing this without a city incentive. I would not be against considering a small tax incentive for employees doing this full time.