Candidates Spar Over Roxbury Park Overhaul

Beverly Hills City Council hopefuls met at the fourth and final Wednesday at City Hall.

While incumbent and challengers and have tended to agree more often than not, land-use issues caused a slight stir on the dais. 

The evening's questions centered around how candidates would deal with city finances and proposed development projects. The latter raises quality-of-life concerns for residents, but also generates much needed tax revenue and economic growth.

Gold absorbed barbs for his support of a project to overhaul .  

Krasne struck first when she bluntly phrased her position on the $14 million plan for park improvements and a gymnasium that will double as a banquet facility.

"It sucks, there's no nice way to put it," said Krasne, who claimed the project would more realistically cost nearly $40 million when the final bill is actually tallied. "If you believe anything other than that, you're delusional."

Bosse, whose chairmanship of the Planning Commission has become a campaign mantra, said she opposed the Recreation and Parks project because of increased traffic and parking problems that would likely impact residents who live near Roxbury Park.  

Krasne and Bosse also discounted Gold's observation of the need for more public basketball courts, given the number of existing outdoor courts in the community's parks and high school.

Gold called the banquet facility mention a "distraction," focusing instead on Beverly Hills' lack of indoor basketball courts and the park's overdue need for a makeover.

"I don't know how you call the banquet facility a 'distraction,'" Bosse retorted. "This is the problem with having people on the council who have not been on the Planning Commission."

Bosse highlighted her commission-borne prowess for mediating the quality-of-life debate and accused Gold of not having enough experience to properly decide on development projects.

"I won't take the crack about the Planning Commission personally, but I do serve on other commissions," said Gold, who sits on the Recreation and Parks Commission and has also chaired the city's Traffic and Parking panel.

"A gym is something this community needs and wants," he said. "We don't have a decent gymnasium that our kids can use other than [Beverly Hills] High School."

This final public forum provided candidates an opportunity to reiterate their positions on many issues that have come to the forefront during this year's election campaign.

Topics included unanimous opposition to an , choosing quality of life over revenue with regard to development projects, a shared commitment by all three candidates to re-structure fire and police without degrading the level of service that public safety employees provide, as well as a range of issues tied in some way to the city's bottom line.

Ken Goldman and Howard Fisher from the Beverly Hills Southwest Homeowners Association and Christopher Biehl, who represents stakeholders in the city's southeastern neighborhoods, chose an unconventional debate format that began with an isolation booth of sorts.

As the other two remained out of earshot, one candidate entered Council Chambers, delivered an opening statement and responded to a series of questions from the three moderators.

Then the candidates joined an audience Q&A session followed by a debate round that let them react and respond to each other. Candidates saw none of the questions in advance, Goldman told the audience.