Not Corrupt!

The other day I typed “Los Angeles Second Most…” into Google, and Google, as is Google’s wont, finished my sentence for me.

Now Los Angeles might well be the second most populous, the second most affluent. Los Angeles has the second largest school district. Perhaps LA County is the second most prone to earthquake. 

No! Google says that the Los Angeles area is the second most…CORRUPT!

Ours has been named the second most corrupt area in the country, second only to Chicago.

Actually Google didn’t say that; University of Illinois at Chicago Political Science professor Dick Simpson and colleagues released a report that said so, back in February of 2012. The fallout continues twenty-one months later. Google presented me with hundreds of articles on the subject, far more than I choose to count. Some articles call out the City of Los Angeles, others the county of Los Angeles, and still others seem to indict practically all of southern California.

Is that true?! Well, then, no wonder honest public officials are not beating a path to our neighborhood. Could it be that there aren’t any straight-arrows in office?

I do not want to believe it! I do not want to believe that Michael D. Antonovich is out to collect all the loot he can. I do not want to believe that he is scheming to displace neighborhoods just to put his name up all over the region as a creator of green space.

I want to believe that the California Department of Fish and Game, Oasis Park, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy and Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) just happened to close off our passage in the same year, just by coincidence. See, if I can believe that, then I can believe that they are compassionate and reasonable people, who, as soon as they realize the great inconvenience and losses they have caused, will act immediately to restore our right-of-way.

So NO! Don’t say CORRUPT, because then I can never convince any of them to move to the side of justice, no matter how carefully I write! If corruption was their motivation, then I would have to be fearful of my own government representatives.

Please somebody convince me that nobody has done squat to open our historical access to the world only because somebody made a mistake, somebody didn’t know, somebody is working on it.

Well, here, this feels good: Norm Hickling, deputy to Michael D. Antonovich, is working on it. Norm has been working on it for nine long years; but oh dear, Norm has not found a single correctible mistake.

Well, thanks for trying.

Here, let me try a logical argument on the railroad. Norm says the railroad is key.

A US Department of Transportation Secretary’s Action Plan (May 2004) advocates closure or consolidation of unneeded railroad crossings.  The emphasis is on “redundant” and/or “particularly hazardous crossings.”  The crossing in question is neither.  The report suggests closures “with no other adjustments to the road network,” or, “in other cases short extensions of access roads.”  Neither is the case for this closure.

 In 1994, the report states, there were 110,000 private highway-rail crossings, and “most private crossing accidents occur at industrial/business crossings.”  According to information in the report, the probability of an accidental death in any one year at a rural crossing is miniscule.   

In a logical discussion, then, we would assure SCRRA officials that we understood their desire to comply with that action plan, but that our crossing was not unneeded, not redundant, and not particularly hazardous. We need it, there is no other crossing we can use, and the crossing has been accident free since anybody can remember, except (to be fair) for one lady on foot who attempted to flag down a freight train fifty years ago.

The railroad guys say, “We have looked at that crossing and the curves are so tight you can’t see very far.”

Then we say, “And yet there have been no accidents. You see,” we say, “in the canyons, trains are forced to travel at a very slow rate, and the chance of an accident is correspondingly reduced. We may not be able to see far down the line, but we have more than enough time to see the train coming.”

And the railroad guys say, “Hmm. We see your point. It still makes us nervous, though.”

And we say, in the spirit of compromise, “Maybe there is a way to put up a flashing light. Would you like a flashing light?”

But apparently the railroad guys don’t want to talk to us. Michael D. Antonovich, who sits on the rail authority board, could, in light of the argument above, be extremely persuasive. We are beginning to face up to the fact that he will not do that, and we will need someone to persuade him.

But we still hold out hope. So don’t tell us anyone is beyond reach. Don’t tell us any of these people are corrupt!

Come Save the Day!

I just hung up from an ominous and very scary phone call. As a result I am setting aside the post I just finished writing and starting anew.

The whole thing puts me in mind of a story from my past. When I was thirteen and fourteen back in New Jersey I had a cute little girlfriend named Linda. I was aware that she had a former boyfriend from a nearby town known to be the home of tough guys, but I didn’t worry about that. Well, maybe I worried a little bit.

One day two guys from that town somehow accompanied Linda and me into my very home. My parents were not home. Stupidly unafraid, I probably invited them in. One of the guys went off to talk to Linda, and the other, bigger and older than I, sidled me off to our living room.

“Stay away from Linda,” he warned. “If you see Linda any more I am going to knock all your teeth down your throat.” Those who know me know that I remember the words of others quite well, and these were words to remember.

I am not a fighter. I am easy meat for anybody that wants to beat me up. So what did I do? I kept seeing Linda. I did break up with her a couple of years later, but for reasons that had nothing to do with those tough guys, whom I never saw again.

Now I find myself really afraid of some really tough guys. That phone call was scary.

But I think I’ll keep seeing Linda.

I realize that Michael D. Antonovich can pull some really mean dirty tricks on me if he chooses to. Well, hell, cutting us off from our homes was a pretty dirty trick, wasn’t it? I can’t say Michael Antonovich was directly involved in that, but I definitely believe that his influence has been far more negative than positive, as far as my family’s and neighbors’ quality of life is concerned. I have been told by many people that he is very likely behind much of the loss of our access. That phone call this morning put fear in me, but it also convinced me again that powerful, self-interested officials of Los Angeles County and the State of California are well-equipped to strip us of everything.

So why am I back? Because I know the difference between right and wrong, and I know that if I stop seeing Linda just because a hoodlum from the next town told me so, I will still lose everything, plus my self-respect. I was minding my business, teaching mathematics to the youngsters of our county, when all of this started in 2004. I did absolutely nothing to bring this on myself, and nor did any of my neighbors. So, despite your phone call, and you know who you are, I intend to continue seeking wide-spread public support for our cause, because that is our only salvation.

But no, of course I will not divulge the name of the caller. I’m not stupid.

I’m just an old guy who can’t fight, and surely those who did our neighborhood wrong are fully aware of how powerless we are. Our only hope is that someone who can fight, someone who is tougher and meaner than Michael D. Antonovich and certain officials of the State of California—or at least can’t be destroyed by them—will step forward and open up our access to our homes.

Our hero doesn’t have to be meaner, although the people trying to ruin our real estate values may think she or he is, for taking away their spoils. But I would prefer to be championed by someone nicer.

I am put in mind of my father, who never took my side against bullies. He believed that though I was younger and smaller and outnumbered, I should go back to that playground and get my basketball back. Okay, we are not looking for that kind of father. We are looking for someone who gets it, and who sees the need to assist innocent, unassuming folk such as me, my family, and my community.

Mighty Mouse, where are you?

A Gallery of Rogues

This is a summary of the role of each of several agencies complicit in the legal isolation of the Briggs Road community.

There are two routes from black top to our community. To landlock us, it was necessary to close both. The historical access started at Soledad Canyon Road, crossed the Santa Clara River over a pair of culverts, ran through Oasis Park on existing park roads, crossed the Southern Pacific Railroad (now used by Southern California Regional Rail Authority, i.e. Metrolink) on a paved at-grade crossing, and continued on dirt road to our neighborhood. 

The “Back Way” is on Southern California Edison’s easement road. It starts at Agua Dulce Canyon Road, crosses a small piece of property owned by Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, an agency created decades ago by the California Legislature, and continues on for five or six (depending on where one lives) miles over a miserable dirt road.

• ·         Rancho Agua Dulce LLC, new owners of Oasis Park, began the nightmare by blocking Briggs Road residents one day in August, 2004. Paul Novak, deputy for Los Angeles Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, appeared to save the day and managed to get the route open.
• 
  
• ·         That December, a flood wiped out the culvert in the Santa Clara River—not a rare occurrence. The owners of Oasis Park refused to allow residents to repair the bridge, and so we began to use the back way. Meantime, on behalf of the Briggs Road community, the title insurance companies took Oasis Park to court for a legal easement, and after a lengthy battle, won an Easement by Necessity in court. 
• 
  
• ·         However, by now the California Department of Fish and Game had decided that even if Oasis Park had to allow residents through, they were prohibiting replacement of the culvert, on the grounds that they were protecting an endangered species of fish, a subspecies of stickleback trout that lives only in the Santa Clara River. Other abuses, up and down the river, were ignored by Fish and Game. As far as we know, only the residents of Briggs Road were forbidden to cross the river. And…
• 
  
• ·         Just to make sure, Metrolink also barred use of the long-existing crossing, threatening handcuffs and jail. Dozens of other crossings remain open.
• 
  
• ·         The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy bought the last bit of acreage through which the back way crossed. It was a tax sale, but the County of Los Angeles somehow failed to notify the community of their chance to prevent themselves from being sealed off. When approached by the title companies to negotiate legal passage for Briggs Road residents, Conservancy representatives became abusive and refused even to consider accepting payment of some $700,000 for an easement.
  The Conservancy vowed that there would be no building permits issued in the area, easily enforced because no landowner could claim legal access to his or her property.
• 
  
• ·         All this time Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy was buying up properties as owners gave up on ever building their dream homes or just enjoying owning a piece of bare California land.
• 
  
• ·         The City of Santa Clarita also began buying properties, as the County of Los Angeles assisted with funding. Possibly embarrassed by the placement of Stevenson Ranch, a tract of homes just west of their western boundary, Santa Clarita may be intent on avoiding a similar humiliation to the east.
• 
  
• ·         Norm Hickling, deputy for Michael Antonovich, has been acting as go-between and some-time advocate, though it is increasingly apparent that the word “acting” is the most appropriate. Observers with experience of the man assert that Mr. Hickling is motivated only by the wishes of Mr. Antonovich, and we can be assured he has little intention of assisting this community.
• 
  
• ·         Further, again based on anecdotal reports from those who have seen him work in other contexts, Mr. Antonovich is widely believed to be working solely for his own benefit, and depends on Mr. Hickling to intercept any mud tossed his way. All we know about any of this is that in almost ten years Mr. Antonovich’s office has accomplished no visible progress in opening the Metrolink crossing, despite his position on the board of same. Nor has he or anyone in his employ made any headway in re-establishing the river crossing. Not to mention the back way.

So that’s the cast of characters, as best we know. If you go back into past postings, you can find more fleshed-out stories for most of these. There are a couple of stories yet to bring out.

If this were a bank robbery or some kind of street crime, and only one of these outfits held a gun and pulled the trigger, all would be charged with the offense. We learned that in high school. Readers have emailed their concern that a focus on one of the perpetrators of our nightmare might be letting others off the hook. No, every single member of the list above is an eager participant, should be regarded as such, and thus held responsible for the part it plays in this heartless collusion. A posting can expand on only one of them at a time.

It is amazing that among all these complicit participants, not one single person has had the guts or the simple decency to stand up for what is right. But I have yet to meet anyone outside of this issue who is not horrified by the actions of these Southern California public offices. I dare not begin to express the disdain of the larger community for those people.

Just as reprehensible, not one representative of any of those agencies has had the common courtesy to come forward and attempt to justify the actions of his or her office. Perhaps they realize that if they did so, the world would soon discover that their arguments are specious and absurd. We can only interpret their silence as voluntary participation in a self-serving scheme.

We would like to find one, even just one California public official with a sense of ethics evolved enough to support our righteous cause.

Do you know one?

No Guts No Easement

If you go to the State of California Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy webpage, you will read there that “Through direct action, alliances, partnerships, and joint powers authorities, the Conservancy's mission is to strategically buy back, preserve, protect, restore, and enhance treasured pieces of Southern California to form an interlinking system of urban, rural and river parks, open space, trails, and wildlife habitats that are easily accessible to the general public.”

Their mission is to cooperate with other public agencies to secure land. There is nothing in there that says they will do it ethically, or even legally. It does not say that private ownership of land will be in any way respected. Yes, they could buy land back—from a huge, powerful organization—but there are other ways to push out the little people.

Early on in the course of our community being cut off from the world, a Los Angeles County official assured us that eminent domain was not part of the plan. We were comforted. Little did we know that this official was telling us that the spirit of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was to be violated, that we would receive nothing for the loss of our property values, that we were to be besieged by the State of California until we gave up our property for nothing, because we would eventually give up paying our taxes for land we could not use. The Conservancy would buy our land back in a tax sale.

A friend told me recently to be careful, that the agencies cutting off this neighborhood’s legal access to the world were run by powerful, dangerous people.

Really? What might they do? Ruin my property values? Physically close off the only reasonable route to black top, a route that has been successfully acquired legally twice? Force me and my family to traverse five and a half miles of a rough and treacherous dirt road going out from and coming in to our property?

Should I worry that these dangerous people have worse tricks to perpetrate? I can only hope that, if I am taken out of the picture, another will take my place. The first time our easement was won in court was by folks of our parents’ generation. Our generation has won it, but only to be cut off by other means that some find very suspicious. Our children, and others of their generation, appear to be stepping forward.

Am I in some sort of danger? Surely there is a lot more bad stuff “they” could do. Maybe if "they" do something bad enough it will actually motivate a public official with competence and a conscience to actually do the right thing. But let’s hope that no more damage than we have already suffered is necessary.

Anyway, it makes you wonder: who else, besides the inhabitants of the Briggs Road community, might fear the actions of our besiegers?

Their mission statement does say that the State of California Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy works “Through direct action, alliances, partnerships, and joint powers authorities.”

Could it be that Michael D. Antonovich and his deputies, good men all, have been muscled into a very uncomfortable position by the much more powerful State of California? They have a lot to lose. I don’t know for sure, but I’ll bet anything that they still have access to their own front doors. What if they and their families had to drive a horrific dirt road in and out every day? That thought would be enough to frighten anybody. It sure upset us, anyway. And those guys have even more to lose.

Previously I argued that intelligence stood on the tripod of brains, heart, and courage. I claimed that it was not courage that was lacking in our besiegers. But could Mr. Antonovich and his deputies be motivated by fear? Is guts the missing component of character? Guts to turn around and tell California that “this is wrong and I’m not having any part of it?”

Of course none of us have any idea, but we do have a hard time accepting the possibility that Mr. Antonovich and his deputies are as humanly limited as all of this is making them appear. But maybe? Who knows? Anyway Occam’s razor suggests that it is highly unlikely that all of those people are motivated to strangle a neighborhood .

When the truth is withheld, as it is here, all sorts of theories spring up. Anything is believable. It’s only human nature. By not openly and honestly defending their actions, the City of Santa Clarita, the County of Los Angeles as represented by Mr. Antonovich, and the Conservancies run by the State of California all indicate that they have little confidence that their motives could stand public scrutiny.

On the other hand, if the City of Santa Clarita is really only about green space, and is willing to trash the property values of eleven families as collateral damage, then let that be acknowledged—and please, let there be one, just one public official with a conscience stand up and say, “But that is wrong.” My personal favorite is to see Norm Hickling turn into a hero. I hear from various sources that I should give up that hope, but I can still dream.

Similarly, if the State of California is really concerned with the well-being of all animals (except the human animal), and is willing to wreck the finances of eleven families as collateral damage, despite the laws of the land and common decency, then let them openly say so—and please, let there be one, just one national magazine or media outlet that has the guts and conscience to stand up and say, “This is not right.”

If anyone knows what altruistic goal Mr. Antonovich might be pursuing in so weakly pretending to defend this community, please tell someone.

If you don’t see another post here in a few days, call the cops. If they won’t do anything, come looking for me. 

Shrewd or Soft-hearted?

Intelligence without Sympathy

A friend tells me that he respects the people who have maneuvered our little neighborhood out of legal access to the world. They are intelligent, he says.

I disagree.

To my way of thinking, an intelligent person is evolved in three primary arenas: head, heart, and guts. To pull off the kind of trick that was sprung on the Briggs Road community, as strong as the perpetrators might be in two of those forms of intelligence, they have to be severely deficient in a third.

They have to have guts, you gotta give them that. This was a gutsy—you might say brazen—thing to do.

Perhaps their second strength is mental. I find that intelligence of the brainy persuasion, especially when coupled with guts but deficient of heart, is more in the category of the shrewd, clever, cunning, or conniving. On Briggs Road our first inclination has been to assume that we are dealing with an intelligence of this nature. Throttling a powerless little neighborhood certainly appears heartless. And how do we persuade someone with lots of brains and little empathy? Well, not by appealing to their sympathy.

My purpose in pointing out the cruelty of cutting off an access that would hurt no one is not to persuade the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, California Fish and Game, Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, or whichever of the conservancies to which Norm Hickling alludes. You see, if in fact their hearts are atrophied, our appeals to their higher feelings just go unnoticed. The Golden Rule is just words to one without compassion. They might care for their own families and tribes, they might even go to church, but they are incapable of following the dictum of the Dalai Lama: Be Kind. Or of Christ: Love thy Neighbor.

No, I am appealing to your ethical capacity. Those of you who have a balanced intelligence will have the brains to understand what is going on, the heart to care, and the courage to do something about it—even if all that you do is post a comment here or urge others to follow this blog.

There is a plethora of historical figures whose deficient sentiment allowed them to perform beastly acts. And many of their acts were beastly—which means not so intelligent after all. The tripod of intelligence requires all three legs. If any one leg is missing, the structure topples. I hope to show in a future post that cutting off the Briggs Road community is ultimately a dumb thing to do, even by the standards of the cunning.

Sentiment without Cognition 

 It is entirely possible, on the other hand, that our fear and inconvenience—and great loss of property value—are the result of the actions of extremely caring people. We do not often consider that, but it could be the case. 

We have daily experience in California of the ill-conceived products of the do-gooders who care so much about us. They erect a traffic light at every intersection where some unfortunate hurried soul might venture into danger. Then, when some mean people run those lights, they install cameras to protect the rest of us. There are so many regulations whose purpose is to thwart unscrupulous businesses that not only those businesses have been chased out of the state, but so also have many of the good ones. And how many entrepreneurs have been discouraged from even starting up?

An actor, who may even be involved in one of the conservancies, has boasted in interviews about building part of his house with soda bottles or some such. True, this keeps those bottles out of landfills, but then so would recycling them. And now those bottles are out of the cycle, and more resources are required to replace them. The net result, when you factor in the better good that might have followed an appeal to recycle, is actually negative.

To have heartfelt concern without a brain can lead one to thoughtlessly callous acts.

Does our fate lie in the hands of thinkers such as these? Is the whole close-access-to-Briggs-Road scheme just a debacle of dumbness?

Well, you decide.

We have heard two explanations for the actions of the State of California conservancies: 

1. A developer was planning to fill the area with houses, and 
2. Wildlife needed a migration corridor. 

            In an earlier post I quote County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich’s deputy, Norm Hickling, as emailing: “That issue [of development] no longer exists, as the City of Santa Clarita, along with large financial support the County of Los Angeles, purchased the developer’s property.” 

             So forget the threat of wall-to-wall houses. If California persists in turning our homes into bare land, it is not out of kindness.

What about the migration corridor?

Take a look again at our non-copyright-infringing hand-drawn map—which you can verify elsewhere:

The area in which we live is a cul de sac as far as roving animals are concerned. Fleet-footed animals are hemmed in by Soledad Canyon Road and the railroad to the south, and by the California 14 freeway to the north—not by a few isolated houses. These two barriers to animal migration continue in parallel from their western point of intersection in eastern Santa Clarita (not shown) to their eastern point of conjunction east of Acton (not shown). Some animals roam freely in this area, and we do not stop them. But what, we wonder, would migrating animals do? Would they run laps from one end of this “preserve” to the other?

Antelope Valley, so named for its former occupants, is today devoid of those animals because the railroad was built through the middle of the plain and the antelope would not cross the railroad. There are no antelope in our region either. We’ve got the railroad and the freeway.

Could any public official really be so dumb as to imagine that our houses or our dirt road pose the real obstruction to these animals? And if the habitat of a smaller animal is not inhibited by the railroad or the freeway, there is obviously plenty of room for both them and us.

But is there any point to trying to persuade someone who is all heart that theirs is a flawed approach? No matter how carefully thought out, a logical argument makes no sense to some people. I’ve taught math for many years. I know there are people who just cannot think—or, more likely, refuse to make the effort.

We are appealing to your cerebral intelligence. Those of you who have a balanced intelligence will have the brains to understand what is going on, the heart to care, and the courage to do something about it—even if all that you do is post a comment here or urge others to follow this blog.

There are many hundreds of you out there—I see the numbers. But we need our oppressors to see your strength, and a simple comment “I’m on your side!” would serve that purpose.

What Does the Man Say?

As promised, I emailed Norm Hickling to request more specific information about who was behind the push to landlock the Briggs Road community. “What is not clear,” I wrote, “especially now, is who or what agency now opposes our acquiring legal access to our homes.”

Mr. Hickling replied on November 14:

“One conservancy has had concerns in the past because one of the largest single properties was owned by a developer. That issue no longer exists as the City of Santa Clarita, along with large financial support the County of Los Angeles, purchased the developer’s property and have assigned it to another conservancy to keep it open as open-space. This was a major step in mitigating this issue.

“However, a rep from the original conservancy still required a submittal payment to provide access. I understand that person is no longer with that organization, so based on a meeting I had with my colleagues yesterday, will be approaching the conservancy again to try and work through this issue and change minds. I should have an update on that very soon for you.

“Crossing the Railroad is another issue that I am addressing and trying to find a solution, if one exists.” 

Norm Hickling

We want to be open-hearted, trusting people, but it is very difficult to know whom to trust or believe. We have been lied to and yanked around so much over the last decade, that we find ourselves distrusting everyone. My motivation in asking the question above was to narrow down the range of some of that suspicion. Losing so much trust is quite painful, so if I could have a better idea of who the good guys and bad guys were, I would be more comfortable.

The information about the conservancy and the thousand acres, if true, is encouraging—but we’ll believe it when we see it. We have been encouraged before, and led to anticipate a solution. We let our guard down, only to be dropped with no real progress toward an easement.

Actually it was the railroad crossing that I was most curious about when I wrote to Norm Hickling. Recall that our very own Los Angeles County Supervisor, Michael Antonovich, sits on the board of the very railroad in question, and that Norm Hickling is his deputy. These men have had almost a full decade, ten long years, to address the railroad crossing question, so we find it difficult to believe that they may find a solution soon. Reinstating that century-old crossing may have turned out to be too difficult for Mr. Antonovich to accomplish, even though he is one of the main players and his deputy is working diligently in our favor.

We would prefer to access our neighborhood by the much nicer and much shorter road that crosses the railroad.

So why might Mr. Hickling have reason to suggest that at long last he and Mr. Antonovich have an idea of how to open the railroad crossing? Unfortunately, I asked too broad of a question. I wanted to know just who was thwarting the efforts of these gentlemen, but I still do not have an answer.

I do have a theory, which I will post soon. I don’t really believe either of these men to be so incompetent.

A Powerful Sea

Sometimes I reflect on the great, arrogant public entities that have fallen by the wayside, victims of their own hubris. Sure, we think about Napoleon, and then Hitler, invading Russia. But there are numerous other examples right here in our own country. Lyndon Johnson was dissuaded from campaigning for re-election by, among other things, a vocal youth movement. Voting with their feet and their wallets, the People have rejected Detroit, Montgomery Ward, Sears, A & P, not to mention scads of lesser politicians. Right now California is suffering the beginning of a major exodus, motivated by the rules and laws that treat the populace as if they were the ignorant and corrupt ones. When I visit other states I am surprised to hear them remark how Californians are flooding in.

It seems so obvious to those of us on the outside looking in. What happens to those powerful organizations and people? Are they not pained by the disapproval and animosity of the populace? Maybe they are unaware of it. Maybe they don’t care. Do they care when finally the walls tumble around them and the world sees them for what they are? Or do they just move on to the next conquest?

“Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites, — in proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity.” (Edmund Burke)

Fair enough. Let’s all ask ourselves whether our appetite or our moral judgment motivates us. Is it just too greedy for a neighborhood to want a right of way restored that harms no one and has been supported in a court of law?

If only we knew the reasons for others to oppose this community’s legal access to the roads of Los Angeles County, we could honestly assess the ethics of one position over the other. None of the reasons given so far are remotely believable, but if they are in fact the honest intentions of those who would choke this neighborhood to death, we reject them as insufficiently honorable.

Based on the kind of response I personally experience from people all over Los Angeles County, our major opponents in this little drama are well known and actually—no, I am going to say it—actually despised by an astoundingly wide spectrum of Californians. I wouldn’t wish on anybody the reactions I see, which far surpass my own. It’s one thing to disagree with a person, agency or party politically, but these forces have tapped into something more threatening, more personal. And it’s not just here. The other day I told our story to a lady from Texas. If ever, ever anything I do ever generates such a look of horror and disgust on the face of a respectable person, may I find a deep hole to crawl into.

Well, enough about that. Let’s talk about you. During a social upheaval that helped change American policy, there was a saying:

 “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.”

And then there’s this:

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Mistakenly attributed to Edmund Burke, but a pretty good quote.

If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Yup. Briggs Road is not the only community suffering, at least not according to what people are saying to each other. Perhaps each pocket of the County that has issues feels that they are so vastly overpowered that there is nothing they can do. Well, that’s true—as long as each of us floats comfortably, for now, in that vast sea of indifferent citizenry. It doesn’t have to be that way. A sea is powerful when it moves.

There are so many of you! It is heartwarming to know that you are visiting and reading. Let’s hear your reaction to our predicament. And let’s hear your story.

Who’s Been Workin’ on the Railroad?

In 2005 Metrolink closed our paved at-grade crossing that had been safely used for a century, and thus effectively choked off the small Briggs Road community from their only reasonable outlet to the world.

Who is Metrolink? Sitting on the Southern California Regional Rail Authority or SCRRA board is our very own Los Angeles County Supervisor, Michael D. Antonovich. Here is information provided on the Metrolink website:

"MTA Chairman and Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich represents Los Angeles County on the SCRRA Board of Directors. Antonovich also serves on the SCRRA Operational Oversight committee.

"Elected to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors in 1980, Supervisor Antonovich has served on the Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board of Directors, including a prior term as chairman from December 1994 to July 1995. Antonovich also is a current board member for the South Coast Air Quality Management District. A former member of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, he also served on the County Supervisors Association of California and was appointed to the U.S. Delegation to the United Nations International Conference."

This man is no dummy, and no weakling.

His deputy is Norm Hickling. Norm is working in our favor, so one might wonder how it is that he or Mr. Antonovich has been unable for eight years to reopen a railroad crossing. Granted there are complications, but can this simple kindness—to restore access to their homes for eleven families—really be that difficult for so competent a public official?

In a recent email, Mr. Hickling says about the railroad crossing: “These are the issue[s] I have been trying to address. The key in this particular case has been the railroad crossing[.]

Norm Hickling
Supervisor Antonovich Antelope Valley Field Office
1113 Ave M-4, Suite A
Palmdale, Ca 93551"

One of the younger residents replied:

"As I am understanding the flow of email going to and from you to us, the main issue you state seems to be the crossing of DOT 750878A, the crossing of Burke/Briggs Road and the SCAX (SCRRA) railway. It's described as a "Private At-Grade Crossing." I looked up our inventory list at safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeOfSafety [Federal Railroad Administration - Office of Safety Analysis]. I am also attaching a copy just because it was hard to find and any documents we can provide for you I'm sure will be welcomed. On the same website you can also look up accident reports. I could understand being held to a different standard if our crossing had had some accidents or any incidents. Imagine my surprise when there was none! Since this does bring to light how the Briggs Road [community] seems to be being targeted by LA County or the SCRRA, I would like to know why. In a report, they state that there are 50 private at-grade crossings on the Antelope Valley to Los Angeles route alone! What is going on with those crossings? 

"The document containing that statement is outdated because the only documents describing SCRRA's position of at-grade crossings I could find from www.metrolinktrains.com is from October 11th, 1991. I will attach it as well.  However, also in that document it states that 'Upon the request of a county transportation commission, the Southern California Regional Rail Authority Board will consider exceptions on a case by case basis.' How can we proceed with this?

"Again, Norm, we appreciate that you are on our side and are glad that someone is fighting for us. I know that having an open dialogue is important to us and is also important to you being a public official and representing your community and not letting them be overrun and unfairly targeted. Our thanks is never-ending. In that light, please let me and everyone else know anything we can do to help you out in gathering information to make the right steps towards a resolution. We recognize that you are a very busy man and our little community is just one of other issues you are working to address and we would jump to do anything we can to further the progress of this issue and work with you on it. 

"Sincerely,

Julia Rhys

Resident of Briggs Road since 1988"

A case by case basis!

Whom is Norm Hickling attempting to persuade to restore our century-old right to passage? I’ll ask him and report back here.

Meantime, this is your opportunity to practice civic involvement. If we all sit back and watch instead of taking the simplest of actions, government can go against you too while you are not paying attention. Is California’s treatment of this small community okay with you? It’s easy to get involved and, if all you do is write a note or comment, it’s risk free!

George’s Story: They Crushed my Nest Egg

            I was a single parent two weeks shy of thirty when I moved to Southern California in 1975, looking for a fixer-upper on a piece of land where I could have some quiet and enjoy the country. That piece of land did not have to be forty acres, but the house of my dreams came with that size parcel, between Santa Clarita and Palmdale, California.

The home, nestled in a little canyon, is tucked under an immense sandstone formation, and faces a pretty 4000 foot mountain two and a half miles to the south.  Built by a retired stone

mason, the walls are rock, eighteen inches thick.  The building is ingeniously oriented so that the sun does not rise over the eastern hill before ten on a summer morning, and it sets behind the western ridge by four. At night a cool breeze flows down the canyon—and through our dwelling if we open the windows.

Hell's Angels and vandals had abused the house pretty badly. All the glass had been shot out and the window frames were gone. Renters had stapled plastic over the openings. You could see daylight through the upstairs ceiling here and there. This was a genuine fixer-upper.

I had lived in 30 different places, if you count college dorm rooms. I intended to live here only a year then move back to Cleveland, but I fell in love with the place and committed to it. Soon my dream was to grow old here, to retire here. The property would be my nest egg. If the area built up and got too crowded, then I could sell and take my nest egg to buy elsewhere.

The original dirt road to my house is a mile and a half long. It begins at Soledad Canyon Road and runs through Oasis Park. In those days the camp was managed by Bill Jameson, one of the owners and a pretty good singer. On weekends The James Boys entertained park campers and visitors with real live country music. Bill was very friendly, and often even babysat my son when I had doctors’ appointments or other obligations to which I could not take a child. I knew that I had no easement through the park—none of the residents on “the Hill” did—but I did not worry about ever being closed out by Bill or the other owners.

I married Ann in 1984. With my two and our two, four children have grown up in that little stone house.

I certainly did not expect to live here all that long. But I did, and meantime Bill Jameson moved back east and the park was sold. The great irony is that when the third set of owners got serious about closing the way through the park, it was not they but Metrolink, California Fish and Game, and Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy (another California agency) who effected the legal closure.

At the moment, Briggs Road residents have physical access to their homes, but it is a pretty insecure feeling that the way could be closed at the whim of the Conservancy. Metrolink and Fish and Game have already had their whim. I had intended to build a better house on my property, since the old one is vulnerable to earthquake, but no building permits are possible now, and stricken property values make it just about impossible to salvage any equity for down payments anywhere else nearby.

Other stories will follow. Meantime please show you care with a comment.

And please subscribe.

Four Blockades

Our little Briggs Road community has two access routes to the outside world. Our primary (at least until it was blocked) route is a mile or two long dirt road that crosses the Southern Pacific Railroad, runs on existing roads through Oasis Park, a (former) trailer park/campground, and crosses the Santa Clara River over a large culvert to meet Soledad Canyon Road. The back way is a five or six mile long torturous dirt road that ends at a locked gate at Agua Dulce Canyon Road. It is a miserable, jarring drive, very slippery in the rain, always rough.

In August 2004 the residents of Briggs Road headed home to find their passage through the defunct trailer park obstructed by men who threatened to shoot them. Los Angeles County sheriffs enforced the re-opening of the passage, but when the culvert washed out in a flood the new owners of the park took advantage of the opportunity to refuse to repair the river crossing.

Many months and tens of thousands of dollars later, the courts ruled in favor of the Briggs Road community and established an easement along the existing roads in the campground/park. But in the meantime California Fish and Game prohibited the replacement of the culvert, despite the existence of many other culverts in the area. Metrolink prohibited use of the paved at-grade crossing, and threatened handcuffs and jail to those who attempted to cross. And, the coup de grâce, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy bought the small property at the end of the back way in a secret deal. There is no other route in or out; the terrain is too rugged. Our eleven homes are legally landlocked.

Here is a hand-sketched map of our area. The blue line is the river. Briggs Road is the thin black wiggly line. Our properties are very approximately indicated with green patches. This

is all public information, and if you wish to see a map with better detail, you should have no trouble finding one online.

When you think about the judge’s ruling for an easement by necessity through Oasis Park, you realize that if any of the other obstructing entities were private, the courts would favor an easement and allow us legal access to our homes. Instead, we are powerless against agencies of the County of Los Angeles and the State of California.

In future posts this blog will fill in many astounding details about each of the four blockades mounted against our community—none with any believable justification. We will invite you to ask your own questions of the authorities, to see if you can do any better than we have to ferret out a reasonable explanation.

Our only hope is public opinion, expressed clearly and vociferously. Our only hope is for you to participate with a note or a phone call, just as we would do the same for you if you found yourself victims of a capricious predicament. Information on how to do that is coming soon. Meantime, please comment.

And please subscribe.

Our Plight is Your Plight

Our little rural community of eleven families and numerous bare-land owners has been struggling for the past nine years to survive. First closed in by admitted criminals, we are now legally landlocked by public agencies of the County of Los Angeles and the State of California. We have been fed lies after lies after lies, but have never been given a believable reason for the official maneuvers that have reduced our property values by 80% and more.

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States asserts “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” So consider this measly way around eminent domain: landlock thousands of acres of property, wreck their values, and sit back and wait for everybody to give up, move away and stop paying taxes.

We have tried every remedy we can think of. The Title Insurance companies won a lawsuit over one piece of the necessary easement, only to be confronted by three more blockages created by agencies of Los Angeles County and the State of California. We will be recounting strategies we have tried, in posts on this blog. We anticipate that readers will suggest others.

We Americans are recovering from a hard kick to the heart. A realization has been forced upon us, in a strikingly rude way, that our elected representatives do not represent us, that they are not at all concerned with the welfare of the American People.

It doesn’t matter what your politics are. Maybe you support the idea of universal health care, maybe you do not. Maybe you believe in rights for the as-yet-unborn, maybe you believe in a woman’s right to control her own body. Maybe you insist that guns be controlled, maybe you hold to our right to bear arms.

It doesn’t matter! And it doesn’t matter what our elected representatives believe. You don’t enforce your opinion by making trouble for the American People.  

Like it or not, we are all at risk together. If the recent shutdown did not demonstrate that, then you might as well stop reading. But the rest of us, the vast majority of the American People, now recognize that too many elected representatives have found too many ways to abuse their power. If we can’t change national politics right now, we can start in our neighborhoods.

Most abusers of the public good scurry for cover when the light goes on. We beg your participation as follows:

1.       Our story is too long to tell on one page. We will tell the story in regular installments on this blog. We ask you to follow, comment, and subscribe.

2.       At some point, and it might not be long from now, you will understand the injustice of our plight. We ask that when you do, you do more than just read. Jot a note or an email to let our oppressors know that you are on to them. Turn others on to our blog.

3.       It is important that all of us realize that this abuse of power and neglect of the People’s well-being is epidemic. If we can demonstrate that informed, participating citizens have the wherewithal to shame public officials into decency, we win a victory for all. We expect that other cases all over America will come to light and be brought to our readers’ attention. We pledge to study and support the causes of others and ask that our readers do the same.

Think of all the good that united Americans have accomplished! National policies have changed. The very consciousness of the People has evolved. When I was a kid in New Jersey, the idea of a Black or female bus driver was unthinkable, just to pose one astounding example. Together we can do amazing things. These are the grass roots.

Please subscribe.