Spin

Posting from: Tucson, AZ

Every once in a while I'm faced with a really good example of how essentially the same story can be manipulated into completely different things when told by different folks. Here's the latest.

Scroll down a little for an article called
A Patch of Green

My writing pad and pen attracted a garden organizer, a well-spoken, fedora-wearing young man who gave his name as Tezozomoc. He led me through the acres to the plot his father once farmed, pointing out along the way traditional fruits and vegetables and medicinal plants that the mostly low-income, Latino gardeners have cultivated: chipalin, chayote squash, guajes (a tree bean), huantxontle (whose seedy flowers taste like cauliflower), the anise-like oja de santissima. Banana leaves clattered around us in the breeze. Tezo knew his facts by heart: 347 families eat from these gardens, which provide a form of family and community recreation in a district with the lowest amount of open space in the city. “There’s no drinking here, no vandalism, no graffiti; for over 12 years the gardeners haven’t taken a single penny from the city,” Tezo declared. “We pay our for own water, portable toilets and dumpsters.” Then, he told me the long, complicated, at times murky, story of the land.

Back in 1986, the city purchased the land from developer Ralph Horowitz (yes, the same Ralph Horowitz who just bought it), effecting that long-ago sale through eminent domain in order to build the massive LANCER trash incinerator and recycling plant. Environmental justice activists protested, and the incinerator idea was abandoned. With the help of the Los Angeles Food Bank, which sits across the street from the garden, local gardeners cleared the rubble of old buildings off the property and began working the land in 1992. Meanwhile, Horowitz protested the 1994 sale to the Port Authority, claiming he had right of first refusal in the event of any sale. He took his objection to court several times, only to be told he had no legal claim. Nevertheless (and this is where the murkiness comes in), at some point — at a time difficult to ascertain, since, said Tezo, “it was never disclosed to people like myself” — Horowitz repurchased the land from the city for only a few hundred thousand dollars more than he sold it for in 1986. In short order, the Food Bank was told that the farmers would have to vacate the premises to make way for warehouses and soccer fields. Throughout this transaction, the farmers, the people using the land, received no notice that anything was afoot.

Sounds like a shady deal went down cutting out the little guys unfairly in favor of a good ole boy developer who got a nice little favor from the city, doesn't it? That's a pile of the hot and steamy stuff, I thought to myself.

But wait. There's also this:
TEZOZOMOC

CityBeat: What’s the history of these gardens?

Tezozomoc: The land was originally taken by eminent domain by the city of Los Angeles to put in an incinerator in South Central. That was during the ’80s. The plan was defeated, and then the land laid fallow. After the uprising in 1992, Mayor Tom Bradley [dedicated] the land for use as community gardens. The Los Angeles Food Bank started to use the land.


[CityBeat:]But now someone has a claim to this land?

[Tezozomoc:]The size of the garden is 14 acres. It’s in the industrial zone over there, so right now it’s easily worth about $15 million. Originally, Mr. Ralph Horowitz and his real estate development company was given $4.7 million for it. In 1994, the land was under the Department of Public Works and Riordan sold it to the Port Authority for $13.3 million. Around 2000 he was sued by the state of California; they basically challenged the Port – they couldn’t make that kind of a transaction. Horowitz claimed that he had a right of first refusal, so he sued the city of L.A. based on that, and then the courts basically said, well you really don’t have a case. Then all of a sudden around 2002 the city settled with Horowitz.

But wait- there's a bit more to the story:
Daryl Hannah Released After Tree Protest

Owner Ralph Horowitz had said he would sell 10 acres of the land to the farmers for $16 million, but the farmers -- even with the support of the mayor and celebrities -- had been unable to come up with the asking price. When they did come up with the money at the time of the eviction, Horowitz refused to sell.

"I'm not real happy with this group," Horowitz told NBC Los Angeles station KNBC. "Even if they raised $100 million, this group could not buy this property. It's not about money. I don't like their cause. I don't like their conduct. So, there's no price that I would sell it to them for.

"Where does this kind of 'you owe me' mentality end? How good is that for America? What they should have said to the taxpayers of LA and to me is, 'This is a gracious country. Thank you for letting us have our garden here, but we realize our time is up. We've had our 14 years.'"

and more:

Horowitz said in a telephone interview he was paying $25,000 to $30,000 a month in mortgage and other land costs.

"We've made, in the last three years, enough of a donation to those farmers," he said. "I just want my land back."

"The gardeners don't make the rules. They don't violate court orders at their will, promise to get off the land and not get off, demand that they be given the land for free. There's an end to this type of thing," he said.

Horowitz accused the farmers of ingratitude, saying they had sued him and their supporters had picketed his home and office.

Horowitz also said the city had provided alternate locations for the gardeners and most had left. In a statement, City Councilwoman Jan Perry also said many gardeners had moved to new garden sites.

and more:

The roots of the dispute go back to the 1980s, when the city forced Horowitz to sell the land to for $4.8 million for a trash-to-energy incinerator. The project fizzled and the city turned the land over to the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, which allowed people to begin gardening there after in the early 1990s.

Horowitz sued to get the site back and the city settled in 2003 by selling it to him for $5 million.

Garden supporters took legal action, but ultimately the state Supreme Court decided against hearing the case. At that time, Horowitz offered to sell 10 acres of the land for $16.3 million to a trust set up on behalf of the farmers. The group failed to raise the money before the purchase option expired May 22, and Horowitz got the eviction order.

Horowitz said he intends to find tenants for the land and will not sell it to any gardeners or their supporters. "This one they're not getting," he said.

So wait a minute- the city forced this guy to give up his land at essentially a price they had chosen, proceeded NOT to use it for the stated purpose because of community opposition, and eventually sold it back to the guy they'd stolen it from. And the gardeners who have been using it free of charge for over a decade are pissed so they are harassing and suing him?

Reminds me of this Mark Twain quote I recently posted:

If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man.

I don't blame him one bit for refusing to sell to these people at any price if this is the way they've treated him.