DESIGN BOARD MEMBER DRAWS PUBLIC IRE
By Jason Wells
Glendale News Press, CA
Nov 15 2007
Vartan Gharpetian’s involvement with group pushing property rights
may lead to investigation.
CITY HALL – At least two City Council members confronted Design Review
Board No. 1 Chairman Vartan Gharpetian on Tuesday night after he called
critics of his involvement in a private property rights association
liars and discriminatory.
Gharpetian has been the target of critics at numerous recent City
Council meetings who have said that, as a reviewer of commercial and
single-family home design, his involvement in the Glendale Property
Owners Assn. LLC – which asserts on its website that view and privacy
protection ordinances may "further restrict and negatively affect"
property rights – represents a conflict of interest.
Gharpetian’s comments on Tuesday were his first given in public on
the matter since news of the group became widely known, and he has
so far refused to speak to the media.
"I joined the commission system to serve the city, and that’s what
I did," Gharpetian told the council. "I don’t have a conflict. Don’t
assume things. Get your facts in order and then make judgments."
But a review of state and local records shows that Gharpetian voted
to approve a 6,100-square-foot, single-story commercial building
on South Central Avenue owned and presented by Artak Dovlatyan –
who in state records is listed with Gharpetian as a co-manager of
the association – just 10 days before filing papers to form the
association. advertisement
Design Review Board No. 1 unanimously approved the project – which
would require the demolition of an existing building at 919 S.
Central Ave. – at its April 19 meeting, where Dovlatyan presented
the project for review, according to city staff reports.
Ten days later, Gharpetian filed papers to form the Glendale Property
Owners Assn. LLC, and in July amended the company’s structure to
include Dovlatyan as its co-manager, state records show.
Calls made to Dovlatyan were not returned Wednesday.
City Atty. Scott Howard said he did not know enough details about
the men’s relationship or circumstances of the timelines to determine
whether a conflict of interest existed, but that on its face it had
"piqued" his interest.
"That might be something we need to look into," he said.
Dovlatyan is listed as the vice president of Glendale-based Specialized
Realty, and in city documents as owner Abstract Holdings, Inc.
Councilman Dave Weaver, who is currently charged with nominating a
possible replacement for Gharpetian’s seat on the Design Review Board
in about a month, said on Wednesday that financial ties between
Gharpetian and Dovlatyan would be key in determining whether a
financial conflict of interest existed.
"If they were willing to form a limited-liability company, it would
seem to indicate a very good relationship, and that relationship
would had to have existed prior to April," Weaver said.
While proving legal conflicts of interest can be difficult, Howard
said, the threshold for City Council members removing a commissioner
is relatively low since they all serve at their pleasure.
Councilman Frank Quintero and Mayor Ara Najarian said it was too soon
to tell whether a conflict of interest existed and cautioned against
jumping to conclusions.
Even though a close friendship might raise the perception of a conflict
in making an unbiased decision, in a close-knit town, where everyone
seems to have extensive contacts, officials need to use caution in
determining where to draw the line, Howard said.
But on Tuesday, Councilman John Drayman called Gharpetian’s defense
of his participation in an association that has so far remained silent
"absurd."
"No one seems to know what the devil is going on here," Drayman said.
Since the association is a limited-liability company, it is
not subject to the same level of transparency as tax-exempt
organizations. Gharpetian has refused to reveal the identities of
its board of directors, saying they prefer to remain anonymous.
And until Quintero pressed him on Tuesday to reveal the true purpose
of the association, Gharpetian had refused to stray beyond vague
references to the group’s online mission statements.
On Tuesday, Gharpetian said members of the group pay a $25 subscription
fee for a service that would notify them of possible changes to the
city’s zoning codes or development regulations.
"What is wrong with that?" he asked the council.
For most on the council, nothing. But in October, Gharpetian’s
colleague on the review board and fellow association member, John
Cianfrini, said the group was organized to counteract the influence
of the city’s 19 homeowners associations, and that it was made up
mostly of developers, architects and other building professionals.
Those comments have been at the center of criticism from homeowners
who feel membership in such an association would be unethical for
Design Review Board members.
A door hanger prompting north Glendale homeowners to "save" Brand
Library by signing a petition and joining the association has also
drawn criticism from residents and historic preservation advocates
who say the move amounted to a "bait-and-switch" tactic to increase
membership.
Drayman took Gharpetian to task Tuesday night for the door hanger
that the association distributed, part of which included "Save!!
Brand Library" in large, bold typeface with instructions directly
below to join the association online – which costs $25.
To date, library officials and Glendale Historical Society members
– who have been actively involved in preservation efforts at Brand
Library – say no one from the association has contacted them about
their drive, which in of itself seems overblown, said Arlene Vidor,
president of the historical society.
The City Council has appropriated more than $4.5 million for the
upgrades the door-hanger fliers claim are at risk of not being
funded, including seismic retrofits. A request for $2.75 million
to fund cosmetic upgrades and a service area reconfiguration at the
library is under consideration as part of ongoing capital improvement
funding talks.
"To me, this urgent-sounding message about the Brand Library sounds
like a ploy to get people’s names and addresses since the seismic
upgrade is in process," Vidor said. "To go to the extreme step of
door hangers with an urgent message is highly misleading."
Drayman agreed, and rejected Gharpetian’s assertion that his group
spent $7,000 on the mailers as a way to do something positive for
the community.
"What does this mean, ‘Save the Brand Library?’" Drayman asked as
he held up a copy of the hanger. "There’s been no indication that
money will be deferred or spent in any other way than to improve
the library."
Gharpetian insisted that the perception of the door hanger as a
"bait-and-switch" trick was wrong.
Still, with a possible investigation from the city attorney’s office
looming and Gharpetian’s seat up for reappointment in 30 days,
Drayman said a determination could ultimately rest with the court of
public opinion.
"This isn’t the court of law," he said. "I guess timing is the
question."