West Hills and Canoga Park

I have just concluded reading Patricia Klein’s interesting and informative article on Canoga Park (July 12). This article makes two factors painfully evident. First, the boundaries of West Hills, as unilaterally established by City Councilwoman Joy Picus, are not properly located and, second, her decision in establishing the boundaries was politically motivated.

The homes in the area west of Shoup share one thing with the remainder of Canoga Park. These homes are in the flatlands. Conversely, they share a number of factors with the homes in West Hills. Specifically, the character of the homes, the price range of the homes and the socioeconomic level of the occupants. Also, many homes in West Hills are in the flatlands.

It is apparent that Councilman Hal Bernson recognizes these factors, as evidenced by the portions of his district included in West Hills. It is unfortunate that the boundaries Picus established are not consistent with boundaries correctly established by Councilman Bernson.

Since West Hills, contrary to the name, does not include flatlands as well as hills, the inclusion of this additional area would be appropriate. The few residents of this area who objected to this inclusion, consistent with your statements, may elect to call themselves whatever they wish, including “Canoga Park.”

Canoga Park has always contained a great diversity of neighborhoods. Those unfamiliar with the area believe that all of the “better neighborhoods” have been carved out of Canoga Park and are now called West Hills. This perception is reinforced by Ms. Klein’s article. Picus’s statement that Canoga Park is the “quintessential suburban American town. . . . It represents the essence of the California dream that ordinary people who didn’t aspire to great wealth could come to California” certainly does not help this misperception. There are certainly people of great wealth and expensive homes both in West Hills and the area west of Shoup.

Ms. Klein’s article also indicates that the perception of Canoga Park as having good and bad areas is not limited to those unfamiliar with the area. The comments of the Los Angeles Police Department detective and Councilman Bernson’s aide indicate those familiar with Canoga Park also view it as having good and bad areas. These statements also imply that only the bad areas remain in Canoga Park.

The fact that Picus’ decision was politically motivated is evident from Ms. Klein’s article. She indicated that the West Hills Property Owner’s Assn. and the Canoga Park Chamber of Commerce have joined together. Each, for its own reasons, does not wish to see any expansion of West Hills. Each has substantial political clout in the West Valley. One would not expect a politician to heed the wishes of an unorganized group of her constituents when two such well-organized special interest groups advocate a contrary position. I am sure the last thing Picus would like to do would be to antagonize either of these groups. This is especially true with respect to the Canoga Park Chamber of Commerce, which she initially upset by allowing the creation of West Hills.

My neighbors and I are more than willing to take whatever steps are necessary to establish that Picus’ constituents residing west of Shoup desire to be included in West Hills.

JAMES C. FEDALEN

North Hollywood