CommentsCORRUPTION WATCH-Periodically some Angelenos become upset with their councilmember and want to recall him (or her). Last year people in the Valley wanted to recall Councilmember Krekorian and many people in Hollywood want to recall Councilmembers O’Farrell and Ryu. But recalls are notoriously unsuccessful.
The common element in recent recall efforts is voter dissatisfaction with the City’s secretive land use policies that harm local neighborhoods. LA land use policy includes streets and mass transit; one of the foremost functions of any local government is to provide public streets -- every urban area must have roads. Without them we would all be land locked into our individual parcels, unable to travel without the permission of other land owners.
Land use and transportation needs involve raising taxes, such as the 12 cents per gallon gasoline tax increase which just went into effect on November 1, 2017. Whatever numbskull thought it was wise economic policy to add 12 cents per gallon all at once should be fired for gross incompetence. It is economic and political malfeasance to make such a huge jump. It should have gone into effect at one cent per month. That way people could more easily adjust to the increase and it would not provoke a public backlash.
So now, some are organizing efforts to repeal the newest gasoline tax hike. This is happening at the same time voters are complaining about streets that are in disrepair.
A Stitch in Time Saves Nine
It seems that as soon as we tug at one thread of the political fabric, other things begin to unravel. Take the current effort to recall Councilmember Mike Bonin. The Recall Bonin group cites his support of Vision Zero, the City of LA’s faux campaign to reduce traffic deaths in Los Angeles by making traffic congestion unbearable through the installation of curb extensions and bike lanes, that will simultaneously reduce the number of vehicle travel lanes.
Voters, however, are not innocent. They have had opportunities to vote against these policies, yet they voted for them. If voters did not want bike lanes in major streets, they should not have voted for Garcetti or Bonin or O’Farrell. They also should not have voted against Measure S. It is hypocritical for people to complain when they vote in corrupt officials who ignore the public good by catering to special interests.
If voters did not want their city to have the worst traffic congestion in the world, they should not have voted for Garcetti so many times since 2001. While his familiarity with the truth may be questionable, he has been truthful about his infatuation with Smart Planning, a policy that requires extreme densification of Transit Oriented Districts and pouring billions of dollars into mass transit, subways and light rail (e.g., trains on the streets and trolleys) as well as bike lanes.
Much has been written in CityWatch and elsewhere about the dangers of bike lanes in major streets, and how children especially are adversely affected by toxic exhaust emissions, much as they have been by cigarette smoke or lead paint or asbestos.
What Did Bonin Do Wrong?
We are now facing the political problem of recalling leaders who have enacted policies that voters previously supported, but now oppose. Councilmember Mike Bonin received about 70% of the vote in a community which was already complaining about excessive density, bad traffic and gentrification. But how was Councilmember Bonin to know that underneath that overwhelming voter endorsement would be a rejection of his plans?
At the same time, voters rejected Measure S which attempted to place a modicum of constraint on the City Council’s aggressive plans to increase densification in which bike lanes are a crucial element. Elections have consequences. When the voters vote Yes for densification; Yes for bike lanes; Yes for more traffic congestion and No for limits on all of these things, then they should not be surprised by the results.
So, exactly what did Councilmember Bonin do wrong? The statement by Kim Brooks on the Recall Bonin website seems typical:
“I endorse the Mike Bonin recall because he has caused a complete nightmare for commuters and businesses…”
Should Voters Rectify their Mistakes?
Should voters be allowed to change their minds after they see the result of their votes? The legal answer is Yes. As long as people follow the proper procedures for a Recall, their culpability in causing the mess is not relevant. Philosophically, however, one might say that it isn’t cricket to change the rules after a Councilmember has been elected. But should we allow him or her to serve a full term so that Los Angeles traffic, which is already the worst in the entire world, can become significantly worse making travel anywhere in the Basin via car impossible?
Will a Recall Solve Anything?
What will be the benefit of recalling Councilmember Bonin? The Recall will not stop LA City Council’s criminal vote trading system in which any item a councilmember places on the City Council agenda passes unanimously due to the secret vote trading agreement causing each member to vote Yes. This is why 100% of projects under consideration by the council are passed unanimously. If Bonin is recalled, whoever replaces him will have no choice but to participate in the criminal vote trading system. The new councilmember might not propose any item placing bike lanes in CD 11, but he will have to vote for bike lanes in the other 14 districts and for every other corrupt measure placed on the City Council agenda.
There Is No Land Use Law in Los Angeles
Revising community plans and writing special plans is a waste of time. The Vote Trading System ignores whatever law it wishes. It does not matter what zoning requires; it does not matter what a community plan mandates; it does not matter what a specific plan prohibits; the only thing that matters is what the City Council wants and decides. There is no actual land use law in the City of Los Angeles.
Because there is no actual land use law, recalling Bonin is futile. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Richard Fruin has ruled that the City of Los Angeles does not have to follow the Brown Act and the City may violate Penal Code § 86 which criminalizes the form of bribery where Yes Votes are purchased by promises of return Yes Votes. According to Judge Fruin, the City Council is above the law, and thus, it can make its decisions in secret, contrary to the Brown Act. When he ruled that the City Council’s behavior is “non-justiciable,” he was saying that intra-council bribery is OK.
Recalls Will Do Nothing
When a government is beyond the control of the courts, society is then governed by the whim of men and not by the rule of law. Changing the councilmembers will have zero impact on corruptionism at LA City Hall. Its Vote Trading System is sacrosanct. Just ask Judge Fruin.
(Richard Lee Abrams is a Los Angeles attorney and a CityWatch contributor. He can be reached at: [email protected]. Abrams views are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of CityWatch.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
