Two Valley city council members have filed a motion to give neighborhood councils the ability to appeal projects in their areas, a move that would give the advisory boards a sizeable boost in clout while raising questions about whether they can handle the expanded role. The motion filed April 24 by council members Wendy Greuel and Jack Weiss would allow the city’s nearly 90 neighborhood councils the right to review and petition tentative tract maps, parcel maps, specific plan exceptions, conditional use permits and variances. Because the advisory panels currently have no official power in planning or land use decisions in their districts, supporters of the neighborhood council system say the motion is a major win. “It’s an issue of fairness,” said Jill Banks Barad, president of the Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council and an organizer of the 29-member Valley Alliance of Neighborhood Councils, which helped author the motion. “Every other city agency city council, mayor, planning department and any other interested person in the city has the right to appeal. We should too.” The additional role, however, has raised the ire of some business groups that contend many neighborhood councils aren’t equipped to handle the additional responsibilities. “I’m not sure most neighborhood councils would be able to look at complicated public policies objectively,” said Brendan Huffman, president of the business advocacy group Valley Industry and Commerce Association. “It’s being received with concern from the business community.” Motion would heighten power Created in 1999 as part of the city charter reform, the all-volunteer councils were designed to function as neighborhood-specific boards that make recommendations to city agencies, council members and the mayor about their individual communities. While the boards receive $50,000 in city funding every year, the charter stipulates that the councils have no official vote in the actual operation of government or approval of its functions. As it reads now, the Greuel-Weiss motion would rewrite a portion of the charter and allow the councils to appeal a lower body’s decision concerning planning and land use decisions in their areas. Greuel spokesman Ben Golombek said the action was intended to illuminate exactly what role the advisory bodies have. “Councilwoman Greuel decided to sign on to council member Weiss’ motion because it asks the city attorney for a legal clarification of the neighborhood councils role in planning issues in the city of Los Angeles,” he said. “She believes legal clarification of this issue is necessary in order to more efficiently conduct city business.” There is some question about the specific language and its legality, issues that will be addressed in a feasibility study currently being prepared by the city attorney’s office. It should be ready by late this month. That clarification is needed because many councils already have sizeable power in their districts. Case in point is the northern portion of the Valley, where the Sylmar, Pacoima and Granada Hills North councils recently raised questions about a proposed 136-bed expansion of Providence Holy Cross Medical Center in Mission Hills. The project required only a mitigated negative declaration, but the councils, backed by environmental groups and labor support, argued that the scope and size of the $143 million project warranted a full environmental impact report. Eventually, they took the case to the Planning Commission, which delayed the project for two months while it considered whether a full EIR was needed. Lee Bauer, who serves on the zoning and land use committee of the neighboring Mission Hills Neighborhood Council, said the action proves that the councils have a large sway in their areas, even though his group took a different approach and took their concerns directly to the hospital. “We got together and then suddenly it was different type of relationship, a personal type of relationship. They saw what we wanted,” he said. That type of relationship shows that neighborhood councils can work effectively as a liaison between the city and developers, Bauer said. “They addressed our concerns,” he said. “They’re good stewards of the community.” But Huffman questioned whether all councils are as careful, especially since many have grappled with ethics violations and election rules problems. “There’s so many of them,” he said. “Some do, some don’t.” Huffman argues that giving councils more power oversteps the charter’s original mission, he said. “Their role was intended as advisory. If they’re giving authority to make motions to the city council and appeal decisions, that’s more than advisory,” he said. Bauer agrees that some councils might misuse the right to appeal, but noted that the system of checks and balances makes sure no board has a final say. “You still have to justify an appeal. The decision is left up to the Planning Department,” he said. “You know as well as I do there are going to be people out there who are going who are abuse it. But I have faith in the neighborhood councils. They’re trying to become voices for the people in the community.”