LOS ANGELES

HUMAN TRAFFICKING LA STYLE--As the FBI mobilizes to crack down on Bay Area sex trafficking in the weeks leading up to Super Bowl 50, community leaders met at California State University Northridge last week to tackle sex trafficking in the Valley. Just hours after the event, the Valley Bureau Human Trafficking Task Force apprehended and arrested several suspects now charged with pimping and pandering. LA Council Member Nury Martinez joined LAPD and federal investigators on the undercover sting operation in Van Nuys that led to the arrests. Martinez was present in the sting’s final hours and during the arrest and investigation. 

Late last year, the LA City Council led by Martinez created the Valley Bureau of Human Trafficking Task Force to end decades of prostitution and trafficking along the Sepulveda and Lankershim corridors. “With the help of law enforcement and many resources within LAPD, we were able to dismantle a large and complex prostitution ring,” said Lieutenant Marc Evans of the Operations Valley Bureau and head of the task force. 

The task force worked with LAPD Major Crimes, Foothill Vice, Detective Support and Vice Division, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security on the investigation and arrest.   

“Valley residents are fed up with seeing young women put up for sale on our street corners,” said Councilwoman Martinez.  “As the only woman on the LA City Council, I take it very seriously and personally that I be the voice for these young girls and all women who are victims of human trafficking.” 

Thursday’s arrests were the result of the exceptional coordination of both local and federal law enforcement agencies.  The investigation focused on a brothel that had four locations.  Search warrants were served at those four locations throughout the valley on Thursday evening, including two in the Sixth District that is represented by the council member. 

According to Kim Roth, executive director of Strength United, California has emerged as a magnet for sex trafficking of children. San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego are among the nation’s 13 high intensity child prostitution areas identified by the FBI. 

Up north, the FBI opened a Human Trafficking Operation Center last week, coinciding with the start of Super Bowl week. A trial run in October resulted in the rescues of six children in the Bay Area, the youngest victim at 12 years old. 

High-profile events like the Super Bowl are lucrative opportunities for sex traffickers and criminal activity, according to Michele Ernst, a spokesperson for the FBI. “It’s market and demand,” she says. 

Betty Ann Boeving, the executive director and founder of the Bay Area Anti-Trafficking Coalition estimates that less than 10 percent of those in the sex industry choose to participate. “Most are being forced against their will. Many are underage girls. This is the business of rape for profit,” she says. 

“I’m looking forward to shining a light on human trafficking in the Valley,” said Councilwoman Martinez. “We will raise awareness on all possible solutions going forward.  I’m committed to fighting human trafficking in the San Fernando Valley.” 

The efforts led by Martinez and others will hopefully continue to expose the problem of human trafficking in the Valley, as well as on a national and global scale.  

ACTION INFO--Strength United is a comprehensive social service organization that operates through CSUN’s Michael D. Eisner College of Education.  It provides 24/7 support and crisis intervention, along with long-term counseling, victim advocacy and prevention-education programs to individuals and families affected by domestic violence, sexual assault, child maltreatment and other crimes.  

Compton’s STAR (Succeeding Through Achievement and Resilience) Court, which provides referrals to specialized services for underage victims of sex trafficking.  

Journey Out works with survivors of human trafficking.   

(Beth Cone Kramer is a Los Angeles-based writer and writes for CityWatch.)

-cw

MY CAMPAIGN COMMON SENSE-Madeleine Albright once said, “I'm not a person who thinks the world would be entirely different if it was run by women. If you think that, you've forgotten what high school was like.” 

I should be a Bernie Sanders voter. I’m left of most. I embrace his positions on just about everything. He’s running a positive, inspiring campaign, mobilizing and organizing. Pretty much everyone I love and respect is “feeling the Bern.” 

It’s taken me a long time to get here. I’ve never particularly liked Hillary or Bill Clinton (except for that one time when I got to hear him speak in person at whatever convention was in Los Angeles – the one where he introduced himself walking down that long, long corridor – Oh, my!)

In 2004, after hearing now President Obama speak at that convention and thinking I was the only one hearing him at that hour, whatever that hour was, I became an early, enthusiastic Obama supporter. I was so inspired by his candidacy that I hit up then Councilmember Garcetti to help get 17-year old Steven Butcher to Montana to work the primary and to Westmoreland County in western Pennsylvania for the general election – exciting, positive campaign experiences that’ll last a lifetime! 

But I am also old enough to remember 1980. My first plane ride across the country to register voters for Barry Commoner and to collect signatures to qualify the Citizens Party for the ballot in Virginia (“No-Fuck” is the correct pronunciation of the city named Norfolk; back then, we had to send people to the county registrar on Tuesday afternoons, the only time folks could register to vote) and then in many other states. We were young and it was so much fun! 

I can’t believe I was shocked at Ronald Reagan’s election the morning after that Election Day. Working to re-elect President Jimmy Carter would’ve been a much better use of that kind of youthful exuberance, and I rue the political work I did that season. 

This election feels like 1980 to me. 

Stephen Breyer is 78; Antonin Scalia is 80; Anthony Kennedy is 80; and Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 83.

“Everything Planned Parenthood has believed in and fought for over the past 100 years is on the ballot,” said Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, announcing their first ever primary endorsement. 

This year, SEIU has it right: “Hillary Clinton has proven she will fight, deliver and win for working families,” said SEIU President Mary Kay Henry in a statement announcing the endorsement from the 2-million-member union.

All things being equal -- this is where I’ve come to on this election. I understand things are not equal and I’m not even sure what it means. For me? I guess it means Why the Fuck Not? All things being equal, let’s elect a woman, qualified, experienced, tested, mature, smart, and wise. Why the hell not?

I agree with Joan Walsh (The Nation, “Why I’m Supporting Hillary Clinton, With Joy and Without Apologies,” January 27, 2016): “I’m tired of seeing her confronted by entitled men weighing in on her personal honesty and likability, treating the most admired woman in the world like a woman who’s applying to be his secretary.” 

Responding to Sanders’ misstatement lumping Planned Parenthood in with “the establishment,” Walsh calls on decades of feminist history: “Yes, Planned Parenthood and NARAL have worked hard to become respected political players in the last 30 years, because the women they represent need political clout, not just services. But I’m old enough to remember when feminists were told that our issues -- ‘cultural’ issues like abortion and contraception -- were costing Democrats elections, so couldn’t we pipe down for a little while? Now we’re the establishment?” 

Brendan Quinn lists Clinton positions I support in the Blue Nation Review, April 13, 2015:

• She’s pro equal rights for LGBT Americans
• She opposes using “religious freedom” to justify cutting access to healthcare and discrimination
• She understands economic inequality – and wants to fix it
• She thinks anti-vaxxers are stupid
• She supports gun control
• She knows the criminal justice system in this country is broken
• She wants to fix Citizens United
• She supports other women in the climb towards equality
• She supports American Workers
• She’s Pro-Choice 

I’m voting for Hillary Clinton in 2016. 

All things being equal -- us grammas gotta stick together. Like Secretary Madeleine Albright says: “"I think there is a special place in hell for women who don't help other women."

(Julie Butcher writes for CityWatch, is a retired union leader and is now enjoying Riverside and her first grandchild.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

EDUCATION POLITICS-The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) has carried on a disingenuous and premeditated war for the last ten years against thousands of expensive high seniority teachers. This has occurred while their union, United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), has done nothing to defend them -- something they are obligated to do and have the power to do under the LAUSD-UTLA Collective Bargaining Agreement. And now, the self-dealing UTLA "Power Slate" leadership running the union has the chutzpah to ask for more dues, even as it continues to sell out its membership by colluding with LAUSD administration to attack senior teachers. 

In 2006, then LAUSD head of Office of Risk Management and Insurance Services Director David Holmquist -- now Chief Legal Counsel for LAUSD -- laid out in the Health and Welfare Benefits: Retiree Health Actuarial Valuation Update and Retreat Preview Presentation to the Audit, Business and Technology Committee how senior teachers salary and benefits were pushing LAUSD into the red he subsequently decided to go after them. Over the next 10 years, Holmquist systematically targeted senior teachers while UTLA leadership hasn't lifted a finger to help them. This group accounts for 87% of all teachers who have been hit with false charges and prematurely forced out of their careers.

Instead of bringing one unified legal action in defense of these senior teachers (as UTLA has power to do under the LAUSD-UTLA Collective Bargaining Agreement) UTLA instead divided up the claims of these similarly targeted teachers. UTLA is paying their law firm, Trygstad, Schwab & Trygstad, to walk these teachers through the dismissal process, encouraging many to take early retirement and without advocating on their behalf as they had the power and legal obligation to do. (see below) 

2008-2011 LAUSD-UTLA Collective Bargaining Agreement 

ARTICLE V

GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE

1.0 Grievance and Parties Defined: A grievance is defined as a claim that the District has violated an express term of this Agreement and that by reason of such violation the grievant's rights under this Agreement have been adversely affected. Grievances as defined may be filed by the affected employee or by UTLA on its own behalf or on behalf of an individual employee or
group of employees where the claims are similar. On filing a grievance on behalf of a group, UTLA need not specify the names of the employees, but must describe the group so that the District has notice of the nature and scope of the claim. 

Instead of defending its rank and file, a union's primary function, UTLA leadership converted a substantial part of its strike fund into political contributions without notifying the membership or any of the committees. And then they pleaded poverty. 

Since even before the administration of UTLA President Warren Fletcher, UTLA leadership has habitually lied, saying that it carried member defense insurance with a company that was actually no longer in business. They even campaigned for ratepayers to join the union by assuring them they would be covered by this insurance policy that never existed. 

Initially, UTLA was self-insured when the number of LAUSD targeted teachers was small, but over the last 10 years with literally thousands of teachers being targeted for removal by LAUSD, UTLA has continued to do absolutely nothing to defend these predominantly senior teachers. Instead, they have allowed teachers to be systematically targeted and removed on false charges by LAUSD. This continues unabated to this day. 

If a hike in dues was necessary to defend teachers, why did UTLA leadership wait 10 years until thousands of senior top salary teachers had been targeted and removed by LAUSD? All this did was empower LAUSD administration to go after even more senior teachers, cutting significantly the dues that could have been collected by UTLA. 

Why was this allowed to happen? Simply stated, there has been no continuity of leadership advocating on behalf of teachers’ best interests. The union’s law firm, Trygstad, Schwab & Trygstad, has been allowed to run UTLA for 43 years without any written agreement between them and the union. Officers come and go, and like a mirror image of LAUSD leadership, UTLA's entrenched bureaucracy keeps selling out its members. 

If the present proposal of 30% dues increase becomes policy, future increases could be instituted without rank-and-file voting. Without this agreement, were national affiliates to raise dues in the future, UTLA could still at that time conduct a vote of the entire membership so they could determine whether they wanted to have their dues raised or not. This provides leverage to ensure that their affiliates would have to provide sound rationale for any dues increase. It would also provide leverage to UTLA leadership, who could pressure affiliates into advocating a clear message to justify the need for a dues increase. However, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association in May, as expected, defendant CTA will undoubtedly seek to raise dues on UTLA members later this year. One should never give up a right to vote - as UTLA is now asking its membership to do. 

This current vote on raising UTLA dues includes an online option, but to date UTLA has not allow delegates to vote via online voting options (in violation of the online voting initiative,) since this would encourage greater rank and file participation and the likelihood that the raising of the dues proposal would not pass. 

Furthermore, the decision to use an outside vendor to conduct the vote was done secretly by the Board of Directors, and the House of Representatives was never informed or allowed to weigh in on that decision. Traditionally, any election run by an outside vendor must also been overseen by the UTLA Elections Committee -- yet the Board of Directors unilaterally decided to exclude the Elections Committee. 

For months, UTLA leaders have been claiming that it can't buy group legal insurance for housed teachers, because UTLA can't offer differing services to each affiliate. This claim, on its face, is false, since each affiliate already offers differing discounts on auto, travel, and other insurance services -- these services are not and have never been identical. UTLA has not responded to this criticism, which was pointed out months ago. 

It has been well publicized that UTLA aspiring leadership met secretly with then Superintendent John Deasy at Drago Restaurant in the middle of the last big UTLA election. UTLA Power Slate leaders have claimed this meeting was to discuss problem principals, an explanation that, on its face, doesn't make sense. Why meet at Drago and not LAUSD or UTLA? And why was former President Fletcher intentionally not told about the meeting? It seems more likely the meeting was to agree to delay talk of a pay raise in exchange for allowing candidates time off to campaign during school hours. As a result, a pay raise was delayed for an extra year -- money directly taken out of teachers pockets as UTLA leadership colluded with management.

It is also worth mentioning that for years UTLA leaders were reimbursed by UTLA for money they paid into the State Teachers Retirement System (STRS) -- in effect, allowing them to double dip and they did not report this on their taxes. UTLA leaders claim this policy is no longer in effect, but there is nothing in writing to support that assertion. 

Adding more self-dealing to the fire, UTLA continues to claim that it fights the "charter privatizers." But right now former UTLA President John Perez and UTLA Staff Member Michael Bennett serve as the Board President and Vice President respectively of Montague Community Charter School. To date, UTLA has not disclosed their compensation levels and whether or not they are receiving any additional compensation from other outside entities such as the California Charter Schools Association. On a related note, both were former UTLA Officers who benefited from the STRS kickback. As Mr. Perez was a UTLA leader for over 10 years, he received over 10 years of this kickback. 

In general, UTLA has continued to operate with an air of secrecy; it doesn't even disclose to members how they spend money. In fact, in 2015, at a UTLA House of Representatives meeting, one member asked, at the microphone, for more detailed budget and expense information -- more than the four page document provided to elected members of the House of Representatives. 

At the time, UTLA Treasurer Arlene Inouye, a member of the Union Power Slate stated in response, at the microphone, "If we provide that to you, we might as well be giving that to the district." What is UTLA so afraid of? If they want a 30% dues increase, the, at a minimum, shouldn't they tell us right now how they have been spending – or not spending -- our dues money? If UTLA is responsible, why not celebrate that by operating transparently -- and asking LAUSD to follow UTLA's example. Instead, UTLA is silent about district waste and contracts, and is even under federal investigation into how they may have misappropriated money from the strike fund: 

National affiliates have done a terrible job over the past twenty years advocating for public education, which is why we find working conditions to be what they are today. Their big solution is to organize a "walk in" in February, another do nothing photo op. In Detroit, on the other hand, rank and file teachers are organizing sick outs without the support of their union leadership. We need to start fighting affiliates cozying up to privatizers, union-paid holidays disguised as host conferences, bloated bureaucracies, spending millions on meals and travel, and now they want to give themselves even more money. 

Under these circumstances, do you really want to give a blank check to UTLA and their national affiliates who have stood by for years allowing professional teachers to be savaged by LAUSD and districts like it around the country? I urge you to vote no. 

(Leonard Isenberg is a Los Angeles observer and a contributor to CityWatch. He was a second generation teacher at LAUSD and blogs at perdaily.com. Leonard can be reached at [email protected]) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

TRANSIT TALK--In my circles, there has been a lot of discussion swirling around Wednesday’s Los Angeles Times article, “Billions spent, but fewer people are using public transportation in Southern California,” by Laura Nelson and Dan Weikel. 

The Times’ authors cast a disparaging light on recent downturns in ridership: “Despite a $9-billion investment in new light rail and subway lines, Metro now has fewer boardings than it did three decades ago, when buses were the county’s only transit option.” The article further asserts a number of causes for declining ridership, including “a changing job market, falling gas prices, fare increases, declining immigration and the growing popularity of other transportation options, including bicycling and ride-hailing companies,” and also immigration patterns and new drivers licenses for the undocumented. 

The internet has already responded to the Times: 

• Steve Hymon at Metro’s The Source, responds citing national trends and touting transit’s promising future, though Hymon ultimately concludes that Metro can do better. 

• KCRW’s Which Way L.A.? hosted a discussion with Loren Kaye, Denny Zane, and Brian Taylor. Taylor blames a lack of agreement on policy goals that results in a “distorted” system that favors cheap car travel. 

• Railtown author Ethan Elkind notes that the Times graphic misleadingly emphasizes Metro’s 1985 peak ridership.  

• Jarrett Walker criticizes the Times for identifying an “accelerating” trend out of what is actually “very noisy” but largely flat ridership data. Walker emphasizes that the current one-year decline in ridership is not a “trend” yet; labeling it one is presumptuous. 

• Matt Tinoco at LAist echoes Elkind and Hymon and questions the role of changing demographics, including gentrification in L.A.’s core.  

• Eric Jaffe at CityLab points to new research that disputes the article’s claim, made by transit critic James E Moore that, “It’s the dream of every bus rider to own a car.” 

At yesterday’s Metro board meeting, CEO Phil Washington asserted that transit ridership is cyclical and that LA’s decline is in line with national trends. He also stated that he would be responding via a planned Times guest editorial. 

There are a lot of keystrokes already stricken on this, but, nonetheless, I’d like to weigh in with some ideas and some questions, and to further hear from SBLA readers on what you think. Like the Times list, I don’t think that there is one smoking gun cause, but plenty of interacting and overlapping factors that influence ridership.  

Overall Investment – Transit vs. Cars

My first thought upon reading the article was to blame declining ridership on a disparity of investment between transit infrastructure and car infrastructure. The U.S., California, and Los Angeles continue a long pattern of spending huge budgets to support driving, and not so much for transit. Governmental regulations, including parking requirements, also require massive private investment to serve cars, with little to no provisions for transit. 

Collectively, we pay people to drive, and so people drive a lot. I am skeptical that even Measure R’s significant transit investments will move LA County toward a greater transit share because Measure R also provides billions of dollars for highway and road expansion. 

Yonah Freemark touches on these disparities in his study showing that light rail investment did not increase transit mode share. Freemark concludes: “But spending on new lines is not enough. Increases in transit use are only possible when the low costs of driving and parking are addressed, and when government and private partners work together to develop more densely near transit stations. None of the cities that built new light rail lines in the 1980s understood this reality sufficiently. Each region also built free highways during the period … These conflicting policies had as much to do with light rail’s mediocre outcomes as the trains themselves — if not more.” 

Compared to steep bus ridership declines in neighboring Orange County, Metro’s success in keeping ridership declines minimal can be seen as a success story. Metro was able to stave off more severe service cuts and greater fare increases due to Measure R. This brings to mind the futility in the Red Queen’s statement to Alice in Wonderland: “Now here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.” Metro is expanding rail transit (and highways) as fast as it can, but its bus service remains largely unchanged, and therefore declines as public subsidies prioritize other modes. 

Too Soon To Judge Measure R

The Times article does review earlier events, but the article names and critiques Measure R (2008) and a future R2.1 which is expected to go before voters in November, 2016. It is possible to be critical of Metro’s priorities, but probably not Measure R itself. At least not yet. There is a long lag time for massive capital projects, so the rail that Measure R is building is just not done yet. The first Measure R-funded rail line will open in March, and the second opens in May. 

Metro has been operating under earlier sales tax measures – Prop C (1990) and Prop A (1980). There is a longer-term case to be made that when Metro focuses on rail building (since the mid-1980s) that other modes suffer, more on this below. 

Buses Matter – Fares and Service

The unacknowledged elephant in the room is Metro bus service. The Times notes correctly that 75 percent of Metro’s ridership is on the bus. Overall transit ridership has been largely flat since Metro began building rail in the 1980s, despite three successful property tax measures. The Bus Riders Union and others have shown that huge capital projects tend to divert Metro resources away from their core bus service. 

The Times acknowledges this in this quote from Brian Taylor, the director of UCLA’s Institute of Transportation Studies: “There’s been lots of focus by transit agencies on shiny new things, sometimes at the expense of bus routes which serve the primary constituencies of transit agencies: low-wage workers….lots of resources are being put into a few high-profile lines that often carry a smaller number of riders compared to bus routes.”

Since at least 2008, when Measure R passed, the push to expand Metro rail has meant that bus service has been flat, slightly declining through twice-yearly “service adjustments” and declining slightly in proportion to population growth. Especially since 2008, Metro’s top priority has been an accelerated rail construction schedule. This has, as I say, sucked the air out of the room. Bus service has declined slightly since 2008 (with no new rail mileage yet), resulting in a corresponding slight decline in ridership. 

If Metro is not going to expand its bus service (I wish it would, but that will take political will), then it will need to run bus service as efficiently and effectively as possible. Public transit expert Jarrett Walker stresses the importance of running a frequent service network, which will “serve more people without more money.” This is exactly what Metro is planning to do this June, with its Strategic Bus Network Plan. There are a lot of details still to be finalized, but that should be a small positive step forward for bus ridership. 

Another huge bus ridership factor is fares. Metro’s peak ridership periods correspond to periods of low fares. The last year of declines is in part attributable to September 2014 fare increases.  

If Metro’s goal is solely to expand ridership (and it isn’t) then Metro needs to go back to basics and pay as much attention to its core bus service as it does to its “shiny new” rail service. It is not possible to lower fares and greatly increase service, but if the agency is prudent fiscally, it can and should incrementally grow its bus service, keep fares as low as possible, and reap increased ridership. 

Gas Prices

Metro’s budget analysis showed very little correlation with gas prices. Other analyses finds a greater correlation. With gas prices currently in unusually strong decline, this previously weak factor is likely helping pull ridership downward, too. 

The Future of Metro Ridership

Metro ridership is in decline due to a host of factors. Some of these are outside Metro’s control, including gas prices and national transportation funding. Some of these are controlled by Metro, including fares and service. 

The leadership needs to come from the top, Metro’s board of directors, and its CEO. Phil Washington makes a very promising statement in the Times article, telling the reporters, Metro’s goal is to convert 20% to 25% of the county’s population into regular transit riders. 

Unfortunately, according to Census data (specifically, American Community Survey data), LA County transit commute share hovers just above 7 percent. Metro should be setting mode share goals (what percent of transit riders do we want?), reporting on them, and tailoring investments to realize goals. This is difficult to change abruptly, with lots of road funding embedded in Measure R, but the agency does have discretionary funds, and can shape the next sales tax measure with Washington’s stated goal in mind. 

(Joe Linton is the editor of StreetsblogLA.  He founded the LA River Ride, co-founded the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, worked in key early leadership roles at CicLAvia and C.I.C.L.E., served on the board of directors of Friends of the LA River, Southern California Streets Initiative, and LA Eco-Village.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

SPORTS POLITICS--When I was growing up in Mexico, I rooted for a scrappy, financially troubled soccer team named Atlético Español that ultimately broke my heart by being relegated to a lower division and fading out of existence. I envy Mexican friends who can still root on the same teams they did as kids (and as I am still able to do in the NFL—Go Steelers!).

The power of sports fandom can at times seem irrational, especially to those who, blessed with an immunity to this potent virus, can utter those devastatingly inhumane words: “It’s just a game.” As the novelist Nick Hornby wrote in the opening of Fever Pitch, his wonderful memoir of growing up an Arsenal fan in England: “I fell in love with football as I was later to fall in love with women: suddenly, inexplicably, uncritically, giving no thought to the pain or disruption it would bring with it.”

Sitting in a Phoenix sports bar watching the Carolina Panthers utterly dismantle the Arizona Cardinals in the NFC Championship Game, I witnessed this pain of which Hornby spoke, and which I had felt in my core the previous week when the Denver Broncos knocked my Steelers out of the playoffs. The atmosphere in the bar went from celebratory to funereal over the span of two quarters. By the end, we were at a wake, talking in hushed tones, awkwardly reaching for some reassuring words of consolation for each other.

“Well, they had a good season” sounded a lot like the variants of that line you often hear at funerals: “He led such a full life.” At least no one said: “It’s only a game.”

So why the depth of passion among so many sports fans? Part of it, to be sure, is our appreciation and love for the sport being followed, and that sport’s central role in the sliver of our lives we can devote to leisure and entertainment. But I think that is only the tip of sports fandom’s iceberg.

The depth of our passion and commitment as sports fans comes from our sense of identity, how we connect to our past selves, and how we remain connected to the meaningful places in our lives, and to the people around us. Sports fandom, like religion, is fueled by nostalgia and a yearning for permanence in a world that is inherently impermanent.

Which is what makes the disappearance of Atlético Español so traumatic for me—the fatal version of the disruption alluded to by Hornby, alongside the pain. When I tune into Liga MX and see so many of the other teams Atlético used to play against still around, it’s as if I’ve been edited out of a picture I thought I was in, as if the moorings tying me to my childhood in Mexico have been irreversibly cut.

Back in America’s version of football, many people are stunned that, after a deluge of scandals in the last couple of years (brain injuries, star players involved in off-field crimes, allegations of cheating, franchise owners eager to bilk cities for sweetheart stadium deals), the NFL’s ratings continue to spike. Ratings for this past regular season and playoffs are up from a year ago, at a time when audiences for almost everything else keep fragmenting.

When NBC launched Sunday Night Football in 2006, the telecast ranked ninth in primetime ratings for the season. Ever since 2011, Sunday Night Football has been the undisputed primetime leader. A remarkable 14 of the 15 most watched TV shows last fall were football games, and the six highest-rated broadcasts of all times are Super Bowls (the M.A.S.H. 1983 finale is clinging to the seventh spot).

The NFL has done a brilliant job of leveraging fans’ nostalgia and desire to remain identified with the places they’ve moved away from. Hence the need to keep franchises in places like Green Bay and Buffalo, even if many of their fans cheer them on in warmer climates, and for a business model that makes all franchises competitive.

Parity means most teams will have moments of glory, enough to deepen an entire generation’s engagement with their ancestral NFL tribe. But the league puts its long-term success at risk when it lets teams move around for short-term gain, as it recently did when it allowed the Rams to leave St. Louis for Los Angeles.

We live in an age when we share fewer narrative threads in common, and when fewer narrative threads endure throughout our lives. Holidays help, including the upcoming observance of Super Bowl 50. I remember my mother in her later years turning on the NFL on Sundays to have games on in the background, because she liked to hear “the sounds of fall,” or because it connected her to her son if the Steelers were playing, or to her beloved Boston if it was the Patriots.

The Star Wars cultural phenomenon springs from a similar nostalgia and yearning for recurring shared narratives in an age of impermanence. Its fandom feels sports-like. I took my 11 year-old son to see The Force Awakens on opening weekend, with a lump in my throat at the realization that he is the exact age I was back when the first (or fourth, if you insist) Star Wars came out. Naysayers who complained that the plot of the new film too closely mimics the original Star Wars completely miss the franchise’s appeal. I don’t begrudge successful Steeler seasons because I have seen them before; I thrill at quarterback Ben Roethlisberger and wide receiver Antonio Brown following in the footsteps of Steeler greats Terry Bradshaw and Lynn Swann. And so it is with Rey’s journey echoing Luke Skywalker’s.

We all yearn to tap into these stories and memories that have defined us. As the Red Sox-obsessed protagonist in the Hollywood adaptation of Fever Pitch, played by Jimmy Fallon, asks his less-devoted-to-Fenway girlfriend:

Do you still care about anything you cared about years ago?

(Andrés Martinez writes the Trade Winds column for Zócalo Public Square, where this column was first posted. He is also Zocalo editorial director and  professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism at Arizona State University and a fellow at New America.)

-cw

LA WATCHDOG--Although the mayoral primary for the City of Los Angeles is over 400 days away, two credible candidates have surfaced to challenge Mayor Eric Garcetti in the March 7, 2017 election. While their chances of ousting an incumbent who has hauled in over $2.2 million in campaign contributions through June 30, 2015 are remote, they will certainly raise questions about Garcetti’s record of kicking the can down the road over the last 31 months.   

The first to announce his intention to run was Mitchell Schwartz, a Democratic fund raiser and a committed environmentalist who is concerned that the City is not dealing effectively with the homeless epidemic, increased crime, our failing streets and deteriorating infrastructure, and out of control real estate development.  

Steve Barr, the founder of Green Dot Charter Schools, is also considering a bid as he is frustrated by Garcetti’s unwillingness to address the mess at LAUSD out of fear of offending the politically powerful, campaign funding teachers unions. 

Even though the election is more than a year away, it is not too early to start holding Mayor Garcetti accountable for his lack of progress in solving many of the pressing issues facing our City.  

In August, the Los Angeles Times gave Garcetti a Gentleman’s C, saying that he “remains as appealing and articulate as ever, but his inclination to avoid tough or controversial decisions is undermining his ability to address the very serious problems facing the City.” 

In July, Columnist Steve Lopez of The Times also went after the “smooth at the podium” Garcetti for “waffling” on a number of key issues facing our City, including our streets and sidewalks, real estate developers, mansionization, and, of course, our Department of Water and Power.

Garcetti will also have to address the financial issues facing the City, including how the budget deficit over the next four years ballooned to over $400 million as a result of the new labor contract with the civilian unions.  

The Mayor has also failed to develop a financial and operational plan to efficiently repair and maintain our lunar cratered streets and broken sidewalks despite his “Back to Basic” promises. 

Equally disturbing is Eric’s failure to endorse the recommendations of the LA 2020 Commission which called for an “Office of Transparency and Accountability” to oversee our cash strapped City’s finances and a “Commission on Retirement Security” to review our City‘s retirement obligations in order to develop “concrete recommendations on how to achieve equilibrium on retirement costs by 2020.” 

There are a number of ballot measure facing our waffling mayor, including the reform of our Department of Water and Power which will require voter approval of the $220 million Transfer Tax, the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative that is opposed by campaign funding real estate speculators and developers, the County’s proposed half cent increase in our sales tax to fund even more transportation projects, and a possible $100 million bump in our real estate taxes to finance the City’s homelessness plan, an amount that approximates the increase associated with the new labor contract with the City’s civilian unions. 

Garcetti will also have to tell the voters if he is willing to serve as mayor until 2022 if he is reelected or whether he will be out on the election trail if he runs for Governor or Senator in 2018. 

Hopefully Mitchell Schwartz, Steve Barr, and other qualified candidates as well as the press will ask the tough questions and demand concrete answers over the next 400 days. 

Let the debate begin. 

(Jack Humphreville writes LA Watchdog for CityWatch. He is the President of the DWP Advocacy Committee and a member of the Greater Wilshire Neighborhood Council.  Humphreville is the publisher of the Recycler Classifieds -- www.recycler.com. He can be reached at:  [email protected])

-cw

PLATKIN ON PLANNING-Concerns over LA’s mounting infrastructure problems are everywhere. Is it structures that will fail in El Nino floods? Coastal facilities that cannot withstand the rising seas caused by climate change? Sidewalk repairs that will cost $1.5 billion? A proper urban forest whose bill is close to $1 billion? 

Or is it street repairs estimated to cost $3 billion?  Several billions of repairs scheduled for LAX? Or is it $15 billion to repair century old water mains and sewer pipes that burst with alarming frequency? Perhaps it’s the 405 Freeway widening that cost about $1.3 billion? The $250 billion in across-the-board infrastructure categories that are certain to fail within minutes of “The Big One”? 

The answer is that this and much, much more is the basis for LA’s growing infrastructure and public services crises. Furthermore, these crises extend into public facilities such as fire stations, libraries, and schools – structures that can hopefully be replaced before they become unusable or even crumble, much like the recently shutdown apartments at the Pacific Beach in San Francisco. 

These are some of the reasons why the Hollywood United Neighborhood Council presented a panel discussion on the linkages between infrastructure and the Los Angeles city budget at its Wednesday meeting. 

Hopefully other CityWatch writers can give us the lowdown on what Zev Yaroslavksy, Kevin James, and Ron Galperin had to say on this topic. Until then, I will write about what they should have said, but probably did not. 

Established process to link infrastructure and budgeting: To begin, Los Angeles, like all California cities, has an established process for connecting the planning, construction, maintenance, and monitoring of public infrastructure to the City’s budget. On paper, at least, it begins with the city’s legally required General Plan. In its entirety, its different elements should address all infrastructure categories. Furthermore, some cities also prepare an optional, Public Facilities and/or Infrastructure Element to make sure nothing is left out. Once upon a time LA did prepare these optional elements -- but that was in the 1960s. Fifty years later, those elements are ready for the planning museum. 

In addition, all General Law cities in California must monitor their General Plan through an annual report. Los Angeles, which is a Charter City, is not subject to this State requirement. Nevertheless, LA has legally committed itself to a comparable monitoring program and annual report through the General Plan Framework Element and its Final Environmental Impact Report. For those who care to look, the contents of this mandated report are described in great detail in the Framework’s Chapter 9, Infrastructure and Public Services.  All of the city’s infrastructure categories are listed there, as well as specific instructions on how the City should monitor each of them through its annual report. 

Since the General Plan, especially Chapter 9, carefully describes and analyzes LA’s anticipated infrastructure capacity and needs, it should be the guiding North Star for any discussion of infrastructure and budget. As most of know, however, LA’s General Plan desperately needs updating, especially the elements and chapters dealing with infrastructure and public facilities. Instead of infrastructure, however, the current, minimal General Plan update process focuses on zone changes for private real estate projects through appendices to new Community Plans. 

How infrastructure and budget should be linked: This is what the Los Angeles City Charter actually has to say about the General Plan, and it reinforces the State of California’s requirements that this document must carefully address infrastructure and public facilities, including the role of each City Department.   

Sec. 554…The General Plan shall serve as a guide for:

   (1)   The physical development of the City;

   (2)   The development, correlation and coordination of official regulations, controls, programs and services; and

   (3)   The coordination of planning and administration by all agencies of the City government, other governmental bodies and private organizations and individuals involved in the development of the City. 

While we know the Department of City Planning must prepare the different elements of the General Plan, these documents must then be subsequently reviewed and approved by the City Planning Commission. The final step, the City Council’s review and adoption, is really a prelude to the next steps, which are the implementation of the General Plan and then the monitoring of the rollout and impacts of the General Plan. 

In terms of implementation, each City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is one form of implementation. According to California’s new, draft General Plan Guidelines: 

“Many cities and counties prepare and annually revise a 5- to 7-year capital improvement program (CIP). The CIP projects annual expenditures for acquisition, construction, maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement of public buildings and facilities, including sewer, water, and street improvements; street lights; traffic signals; parks; and police and fire facilities.” 

The CIP should, therefore, be considered an important implementation program of the General Plan: 

“Capital facilities must be consistent with the general plan (Friends of B Street v. City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 988). The network of publicly owned facilities, such as streets, water and sewer facilities, public buildings, and parks, forms the framework of a community. Although capital facilities are built to accommodate present and anticipated needs, some (most notably water and sewer facilities and roads) play a major role in determining the location, intensity, and timing of development. For instance, the availability of sewer and water connections can have a profound impact upon the feasibility of preserving agricultural or open-space lands.” 

To ensure consistency with its General Plan:

“Each year the local planning agency is required to “review the capital improvement program of the city or county and the local public works projects of other local agencies for consistency with their general plan” (§65103(c)). To fulfill this requirement, all departments within the city or county and all other local governmental agencies (including cities, counties, school districts, and special districts) that construct capital facilities must submit a list of proposed projects to the planning agency (§65401).65103.” 

After this annual review is completed, City Planning should then submit it to the City Planning Commission (CPC) for review and approval. It is the CPC’s job to confirm that the Capital Improvement Program is, in fact, consistent with the General Plan. In LA, however, their load has been considerably lightened because the Planning Department does not appear to have undertaken any reviews of the City’s capital projects, including those consolidated into the CIP. There is, therefore, no staff report for the CPC to consider regarding infrastructure. Case, unfortunately, closed. 

Capital Improvement Program: Applying all of this information to the City’s budget, which is prepared by the City Administrator’s Office and the Mayor’s office, is the next link in the chain. But, how would this even be possible, if the City Planning Department and the CPC do not comply with State requirements to review and approve the City of LA's Capital Improvement Program? This document compiles the separate capital budgets of each of the City’s departments that either construct or maintain the city’s infrastructure. 

The planning and related budgetary challenge is to therefore integrate these totally separate capital budgets into one comprehensive document. Since most cities suffer from a “silo” phenomena in which each City department has, in effect, a separate planning, budget, and monitoring process, we cannot underestimate the role of City Planning to integrate this material together through the General Plan’s elements, annual monitoring reports, and annual CIP evaluations. 

To be clear, the three annual infrastructure reports that City Planning prepared in the late 1990s should not be confused with either of the two reports that the City Planning Commission and the City Administrator’s Office need to make detailed connections between municipal infrastructure and municipal budgeting. 

To begin, the CIP review report is not simply an inventory of infrastructure projects. It compares those budgeted projects to the General Plan’s growth forecasts, including scheduled and necessary maintenance, as well as changes in user demand. Whatever their other virtues, the old reports never touched on these issues.

In addition, the General Plan Framework obligates the City Planning Department to prepare another report for the City Planning Commission. This annual monitoring report could include the previous CIP report, but it also needs to review the General Plan’s demographic assumptions for population, housing, and employment. And it also needs to inventory and evaluate the roll out the programs that implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. 

While this is a tall order, it is exactly what is necessary if LA’s planning process is to comply with the law and serve as a guide for the City’s budget, including how it addresses infrastructure and public services. Without this information, the city is, essentially, flying blind. 

Consequences of poor planning: How could the City Planning Commission possibly assess the city’s infrastructure needs without the annual monitoring report mandated by the General Plan Framework? In addition to a report on municipal infrastructure, that report should address maintenance schedules, changes in user demand for public infrastructure and services, available infrastructure and services to support private development, the rollout of General Plan programs, the success or failure of these programs, and any changes in the General Plan's underlying demograpahic assumptions. 

This is certainly a tall order, but over a century ago, a famous American architect and city planner, Daniel Burnham, spelled out this challenge with a quote that has withstood the test of time. 

“Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably themselves will not be realized.” -- Daniel Burnham 

(Dick Platkin is a former LA City Planner who writes on local planning issues for City Watch. He also serves on the boards of the Beverly Wilshire Homes Association and the East Hollywood Neighborhood Council Planning Committee. He welcomes questions, comments, and corrections at [email protected].) Cartoon: LA Daily News. Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

GUEST WORDS-In the City of Los Angeles, apartment buildings built before October 1, 1978 are under rent-control. All across Los Angeles there are people living in one-bedroom apartments paying around four hundred dollars a month in rent when, in reality, the fair market value of that apartment is twelve hundred dollars a month or more. As of 2016, the citywide average fair market value rent for a one-bedroom is $1,950. 

Around the year 2000, the Los Angeles Housing Department decided that landlords are a great source of revenue for the City. All of the sudden, landlords were under attack by the LAHD. Housing inspectors would visit apartment buildings and cite landlords for the most minor code violations such as little bits of peeling paint. And the city started collecting lots of money from landlords. 

If the city is limiting a landlord’s cash flow through rent-control, it is very hard for that landlord to pay the mortgage, the real estate taxes, the utilities and then, after all those expenses, properly maintain the building. But the housing department was not concerned about what was fair because they started to prosecute landlords; many went to jail for not spending money they didn’t have and were even held back from collecting. 

As the years went on, it became common knowledge among landlords that one could go to jail and lose one’s property if the LAHD came after them via the City Attorney’s Office. Once landlords saw the writing on the wall, they started selling their properties in large numbers. These older properties were gobbled up by developers who in turn evicted the tenants, tore down these older buildings and built condos that would generate a higher cash flow. After selling their properties here, landlords began investing their money in cities that were business friendly. Since 2000, more than 200,000 affordable housing apartments (older buildings) have been torn down and replaced by expensive units. 

The tragedy here is the many of LA’s working poor, the elderly on fixed income, the disabled and families on public assistance were losing their low-rent apartments. Once a person loses his or her four hundred dollar a month apartment, and that person cannot afford to pay at least double or triple that rent he or she will become homeless. 

So now the City of Los Angeles wants to raise $100 million to fix a problem caused by the LAHD. If you own any type of business or if you own real estate, there are people in City Hall planning to create a new tax or fee that will take more of your money away from you. You need to be aware of what they are discussing in the Budget Committee and the Housing Committee. If they start taking your money to clean up their mess, you must remember them and vote them out of office in the next election. 

If you want to receive updates on this matter, so you can call LA City Councilmembers directly and tell them your opinions. Also, for more information check with The Fair Housing Coalition 

(Bill Hooey is President of The Fair Housing Coalition in Los Angeles. His email is: [email protected].) Photo: KABC News. Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

EASTSIDER--First, hats off to Chen (a landlord) and her attorneys, Rosario Perry, Steven Coard and Lisa Howard for legally proving what we all knew to be true -- Airbnb’s are illegal in LA City residential zones. They took this case all the way through the Appellate Division, no inexpensive undertaking. As a result, the Appeals Court Decision is certified for publication; it is now case law for the City of Los Angeles. 

Of course, this is Los Angeles City where nothing is as it seems. The fly in the ointment is mostly City Attorney Mike Feuer who has consistently refused to prosecute Airbnb zoning cases. Under the Charter, he gets to make the call -- not the Council Offices and not you or me. One can only hope that Airbnb has already given mightily to his next election campaign. 

So now, Mr. Feuer has a choice: to enforce or to pretend to enforce. Based on his prior actions, I’m afraid he will continue to put impediments in the way of enforcement, citing excuses such as, “we can’t prove it,” or, “there is not sufficient first hand evidence by a city employee” -- and so on. As a result, I give him a vote of no-confidence since he has refused to take on any of these cases. Clearly, he has the legal authority to do so. And thus the moniker, “Feckless Feuer.” 

Courtesy of the City Charter, here’s how it works. In most large cities, a separate attorney handles legal advice for the elected body; another attorney functions as prosecutor. In LA County, you have the District Attorney who prosecutes and the County Counsel who acts as legal advisor for the Board of Supervisors. Makes sense. 

But in Los Angeles City, of course, that would make too much sense, so instead we have a situation where the Office of the City Attorney is both prosecutor and legal advisor to the LA City Council, as well as to the Mayor and city departments. 

Historically, the City Attorney’s Office has a symbiotic relationship with the Council in the way it performs these two functions. They are all part of the elected officials “together” club. But this has not always been the case. Mr. Feuer’s predecessor, ’Nuch’ Trutanich, was famous both as a loose cannon and for publicly refusing to do the City Council’s bidding. I loved him because he shed a bright light on who inside City Hall had power over what. He made for great stories! 

Unfortunately, in the case of Mr. Feuer and Airbnb, I suspect that the City Attorney and the City Council are in quiet agreement not to prosecute short-term rental cases. That way, the Council gets to pretend that they want to enforce the zoning laws -- which we all know is a farce, since they only do that when it helps developers – and instead, blame inaction on the City Attorney who then gets to adopt a bogus policy to tank these code violations. He can tell the council exactly what they want to hear: “No prosecution on zoning cases because we can’t win because…fill in the blank.” 

In support of my jaded outlook, let’s see who actually made the motion to adopt rules and regulations (including taxation) of short-term rentals (aka Airbnb): Council President Herb Wesson and Mike Bonin. Hmmm. Herb never met a dollar he didn’t covet and he’s an absolute master at behind-the-scenes dealing. The motion was seconded by CD 11’s Mike Bonin. As Bill Rosendahl’s Chief-of-Staff, he has been involved in the district for a while…even as Venice turned from a cool neighborhood with affordable housing into a strip of Airbnb hotels. 

Mr. Bonin wasn’t too interested in this problem until the axe had already fallen on all the under-represented renters. So it’s fair to question how vigorous his advocacy will be now -- other than to move forward in obtaining taxes from all the dot.com app folks. 

Even though Mrs. Chen and her attorneys did us all a service by proving that the Emperor has no clothes, there are at least two ways that Feuer can still do us in during the process of enacting a Short-term Rental Ordinance. First, his weapon of choice to date, as previously discussed, has been to decline to prosecute violations of the zoning regulations. 

Second -- and get ready for this one -- it will be the City Attorney who will handle the actual drafting of the short-term rental ordinance. Anyone want to guess how many ways there are for him to “fix” the issue by exempting Airbnb from any liability? 

You can help, though, because sooner or later, there will be a draft ordinance that magically appears and will be vetted through the Council Committees. So ignore the summary information and read the Ordinance language! The details of what’s really going on will be buried in there somewhere. 

Show up at hearings, write or email your Councilmember. Generate so much heat that even the Los Angeles City Council will have to listen to its neighborhoods. Maybe then they will have to represent the citizens, instead of outside special interests. 

Stay tuned. 

(Tony Butka is an Eastside community activist, who has served on a neighborhood council, has a background in government and is a contributor to CityWatch.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.) Photo: LA Times.

REPORT FROM SKID ROW-As a homegrown Angeleno, I’m proud to see my fellow Angelenos have the conscience and desire to make sacrifices to help those of us who are down on their luck. Unfortunately, I can’t understand why these same Angelenos “go unconscious” when it comes to discussing the “Homeless Count.” 

Exactly why do you count homeless people during the Homeless Count? The common answer seems to be, “Because I want to help the less fortunate.” 

In hopes of furthering the conversation, we need to probe the topic a little deeper. 

Let’s start by establishing that if you volunteer to count the homeless, you’ll find that the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) and all of its employees and non-profit community partners will be getting paid to stand around and watch you do their jobs for them. 

Think about it. What would they do if nobody volunteered? You guessed it, they’d have to do it themselves. 

As a Skid Row resident and community activist, I have to question why LAHSA counts homeless folks in the middle of the winter instead of in the middle of the summer when homeless persons and families step out from their nooks and crannies and become more visible – something that automatically helps create a more accurate homeless count. 

You may remember a few years back how ridiculous Home for Good’s questionable marketing scheme called “Walk with Kobe Bryant and End Homelessness” sounded. Yet every year, tens of thousands of folks truly believe they’re doing the right thing. We in Skid Row sadly shake our heads as we watch folks “go unconscious,” thinking they can somehow “walk” and another person’s homelessness will magically go away – and they don’t even “walk” in Skid Row or in places where homeless people live! 

We contacted Kobe Bryant and told him not to taint his legacy by taking part in this fallacy. He listened and no longer participates. 

We’ve also been extremely outspoken about the numerous flaws in the Homeless Count. Why is it that this used to happen only every other year, something that strongly suggests that there’s no sense of urgency whatsoever? This year they will begin counting the homeless every year. We are making a difference in how “they” operate. 

Another flaw in this system is that the Homeless Count has occurred during the last week of January, but the actual numbers usually weren’t released until October. We complained about this and in 2015 they released “early indicator stats” much sooner. Think about it: the homeless you count who are living in tents on the sidewalks, in encampments under freeway overpasses or in abandoned houses or other deserted areas in January, probably won’t be there in October of that very same year. So what’s the good in counting them? 

It’s just plain lazy for Angelenos to brag about how they “helped” count the homeless -- as if this makes a difference. But exactly how does this make a difference? And what happens after you turn in your clipboard? Right, you go home -- ironic indeed! Yet the homeless remain homeless and once again you’re “allowed” to clear your conscience. 

LAHSA staff gets paid to create this “escape from obligation” for you. It’s a win-win for everybody except for the homeless folks continuing their struggle to survive. Wow. 

The Homeless Count has taken place every other year since 2005, which means there have been six counts total to date. 

Last year’s count concluded that there has been a 12% increase in all homelessness in LA County since 2013. Yet, how many new low-income housing units have been built in the interim? And how many homeless folks have been “helped” out of homelessness since 2013? Exactly. 

Will the Homeless Count show an increase or decrease this year? Let’s look at it this way: If there aren’t any new low-income housing units coming online, how could the “count” show a decrease? 

The only way this year’s Homeless Count could show a significant decrease in numbers is if the non-profit “community partners” evict recently housed folks in big numbers to make room for the current homeless folks. And since evictions are not counted, we have no way of getting to the bottom of this. Just know that this concept creates an ongoing cycle which benefits everyone who collects paychecks connected to homelessness. 

If you’re counting and not asking these probing questions, you will end up being part of the problem. You need to ask yourselves exactly why you count the homeless? And who are you helping?

(General Jeff is a homelessness activist and leader in Downtown Los Angeles.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.)

WHOSE ROADS ARE THEY ANYWAY?--Sixth Street in Mid-City Los Angeles is, plain and simple, a dangerous street. From Fairfax to Rossmore, it’s four lanes with no center turn lane and few left turn pockets. Motorists use it as an alternative to Wilshire and, as most of them are typical scofflaws, they speed, swerve, and blow lights with abandon. Several pedestrians have died on that stretch, many have been injured and light poles have been regularly knocked down by out-of-control cars. It is common to pass by debris fields indicating a recent wreck -- all along this stretch. 

I know this. I live on a block abutting Sixth Street and, most days, I travel it several times a day, usually on foot or by bike, sometimes in a car. I have seen bodies lying in the street. I have seen drivers speeding at over 70 mph on this neighborhood collector. 

The city’s approach to Sixth Street has been unequivocally hypocritical: a road diet has been planned for it -- but only from Fairfax to La Brea. One LADOT engineer I spoke to about this several years ago stated that, east of La Brea, Sixth was “too narrow” for a road diet..

But yesterday, during a personal survey of the road, I noted that the entire stretch from La Brea to Rossmore forbids parking entirely, thus making that segment of the street effectively wider. 

In other words, it would be very easy to install a 4-to-3 road diet with bike lanes on the entire distance from Fairfax to Rossmore, and thereby win the road design trifecta by: 

1) Slowing speed-demon drivers with a narrowed lane space

2) Moving the numerous left-turning drivers out of the way of through-travelers 24/7

3) Providing an alternative to driving by making bicycle travel more comfortable through the district 

Road diets, as has so often been shown, will often increase the average speed of motor traffic on a street, even if incrementally; and it will vastly increase its throughput of foot and bike traffic. This is no longer a matter of hope or conjecture; it has been measured repeatedly. Average speed is what counts. Peak speeds between traffic clots mean nothing – that is, except danger and delay. 

So what is happening with Sixth these days? Ha! The road diet has been put on hold because of fears that subway construction on Wilshire will send “too much traffic” over to Sixth. Yes, rookie Councilmember David Ryu has wrapped himself in the mantle of term-out Tom LaBonge by declaring that cars shall be your only god in the Miracle Mile. So he continues to hold back a simple painting project that could add capacity to this deadly street while preventing the carnage that has become typical in my neighborhood.

It’s a damn shame, especially in a city that loudly proclaims its adherence to the principles of Vision Zero. 

Perhaps Ryu and the rest of the council’s Neanderthals think that that means zero cyclists on the road with no one ever crossing the street on foot. You could be excused for thinking so. This “malign neglect” of Sixth Street is but one more example of LA’s backwards thinking.

(Richard Risemberg is a writer. His current professional activities are centered on sustainable development and lifestyle. This column was posted first at Flying Pigeon.)  Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

GUEST WORDS--Westwood Boulevard 2.0: where bicyclists ride in their own lane beside wide and smooth sidewalks, shaded outdoor patios surround fully occupied restaurants and shops, and exercise stations, small library stands and charging docks stand on street corners.

This upgrade is possible. Mayor Eric Garcetti put in place the “Great Streets” program in order to recreate and take advantage of an often-underrated asset in Los Angeles, our streets. In April 2014, Westwood Boulevard was one of the first 15 streets chosen to receive grant opportunities and access to different resources through the mayor’s office in order to get quick improvement results. The opportunities are smaller in nature — like free-standing exercise stations or parklets — but ultimately do contribute to a street’s overall appeal.

But these projects are set back and held off because different departments involved do not list Westwood Village as a priority. This is especially true of two institutions: the Westwood Neighborhood Council and the Westwood Village Improvement Association, also known as BID.

Currently, BID is working with the WWNC in bringing to life an up-to-date boulevard central to their community, but the latter is holding the former back and not aiming to reimagine a better Westwood.

The “Great Streets” program is not being taken advantage of as it should be. Westwood community leaders are hindering improvements that could potentially revive the Village. These institutions should work to find compromises that could recreate Westwood Boulevard as a distinct street in Los Angeles.

Westwood Village used to be the go-to spot after dark, with its numerous theaters, playhouses, restaurants and shops. Today, locals dressed for a night on the town would trip and fall on their walks down the dimly lit and cracked Westwood sidewalks. The bar scene is weak, with Santa Monica and West Hollywood grabbing all the limelight. And vacancies line the streets, with homeless individuals using the abandoned storefronts’ roof for shelter.

Yet even given this, some are hesitant to change. Jerry Brown, president of the WWNC, said that he does not think that Westwood Boulevard should have been chosen as a “great street” and that the council does not have any specific proposals with regards to making a better boulevard, besides basic upkeep such as fixing sidewalks and tending to the vacancy issue.

This means that BID is limited to practical plans due to the WWNC rejecting its more creative ideas. While the plans do address specific issues on the boulevard such as these cracks and vacancies, these plans do not reimagine it into the one-of-a-kind boulevard that it could be.

Instead of shutting down these ideas, WWNC should be open-minded to the idea of temporary implementation of the projects, so that they can later be assessed as successful or not.

And this isn’t something new. In the past, WWNC rejected BID’s proposal for a bike lane, even when presented in the context of this initiative, on account of traffic and safety concerns. Additionally, it rejected a compromise for share arrows, in which signs would be put up to remind drivers and bicyclists to share the road.

Addressing maintenance, as the WWNC wants to do, is only part of the problem. Westwood Boulevard is the gateway to what used to be a popular Mediterranean-themed village. The goal of any Westwood officials should be to bring back the city to what it used to be.

To deny Westwood Village’s heyday period and not aim to go above and beyond in restoring such a history is unfair to the citizens who elect these leading officials, as well as the students who live within and around the village itself.

The effects of the “Great Streets” program peek in and out of Westwood Boulevard’s image, between Wilshire Boulevard and Le Conte Avenue. A solar-powered bus bench with a USB charging station, newly painted crosswalks and installed parking meters for bikes were all added with the help of the program and the mayor’s office.

This initiative is an opportunity to breathe new light into Westwood Boulevard, and possibly, the entire Village.

Shani Shahmoon writes for the Daily Bruin… where this piece was first posted.) Graphic credit: Kelly Brennan/Daily Bruin

-cw

EDUCATION POLITICS-The annual commemoration of the life of Dr. Martin Luther King -- a national holiday that most employers except the government ignore – is marred by a glaring disconnect between the rhetorical “feel-good” civil rights dream of Dr. King and the stark underachieving reality of Black America. This is accentuated when juxtaposed with the incessant illegal behavior of local, state, and federal legal authorities who do little to address the injustice imposed on Black communities. 

Some injustices are a result of civil negligence, resulting from an unintentional act or omission when there is a duty to act. Worse, however, is criminal negligence that results when there is a clear and unambiguous illegal action such as what happened in Flint, Michigan with the city's water supply. This happened because of a reckless disregard of an easily ascertainable truth, namely, when the city connected the Flint municipal water supply to the known polluted Flint River, something that amounts to assault, battery, and probably worse criminal acts. Until those responsible for this see the inside of a prison cell, these actions to save money will continue unabated, no matter how many people of color have their lives destroyed in the process. 

It doesn’t matter whether we are talking about the execution-style killing of a non-threatening criminal subject caught on police video in Chicago (and covered up for over a year by public officials including Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, who was more concerned with his re-election than seeing that justice was done,) or Michigan Governor Rick Snyder’s appointment of Emergency Manager Kevyn D. Orr, who, while charged with saving Flint, a city in fiscal despair, wound up poisoning it with a polluted water source not fit for human consumption. These cases and myriad of others like it will never result in long prison terms for such criminal behavior. 

What adds insult to injury is that the American ruling class is never held accountable for its crimes. An additional affront is the fact that our corporate-dominated government will have to pick up the cost of this ever increasing criminal behavior – behavior that those guilty of these crimes should be forced to pay for both monetarily and criminally. 

Building a Belmont High School on an irremediable toxic waste dump is soon forgotten as long as innocent predominantly Latino children are the ones who go to school on the site. And O'Melveny and Myers are not held accountable for their conflict of interest in representing both LAUSD and the developer of this public works project designed to screw the public. Yes, fundamental to all of these public scandals are the conflicts of interest – cases where the career and financial well-being of a few powerful people is systematically placed over the needs of the public. The only fiduciary duty these government leaders seem to have is to themselves, their corporate cronies – and never the public. But has it always been this way? 

And of course, the granddaddy of these kinds of illegal and dangerous schemes, in terms of their sheer magnitude, remains the credit default swaps and sub-prime scams. The corporate criminalsin those cases not only got the government to bail them out; they got them to pay their bonuses. 

(Leonard Isenberg is a Los Angeles observer and a contributor to CityWatch. He was a second generation teacher at LAUSD and blogs at perdaily.com. Leonard can be reached at [email protected]) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

MY TURN-History does repeat itself. This is why scholars and smart politicians review episodes in history to help them find answers for today's challenges. Even though the issues we face today may appear different...they are just basically the same with some new twists. 

Given all the chatter surrounding the California Coastal Commission and its effort to discharge its current manager, I thought I'd talk with one of the Commission’s initial proponents, former City Councilmember Joy Picus. (Photo: ribbon cutting ceremony at Griffith Observatory in 2006) 

The California Coastal Commission was a grass roots effort initiated in part by the American Association of University Women, League of Women Voters and other civic organizations. They gathered enough signatures to get Proposition 20 on the ballot in 1972 and it passed. Picus was one of the more involved activists. The main goal was to save the California coastline from over-development and to preserve its beauty for future generations. This early interest in the environment would play an important role during her public life. 

Proposition 20 gave the Coastal Commission permit authority for four years. Then the California Coastal Act of 1976 extended the Coastal Commission's authority indefinitely. This state authority controls construction along California’s 1,100 miles (1,770 km) of shoreline. The Commission is composed of 12 voting members, 6 chosen from the general public, and 6 appointed elected officials. The panelists are neither paid a salary nor a stipend for their work; it is a very political body with various degrees of interest in preservation. 

Picus was a native of Chicago and started her political science studies at the University of Wisconsin. She and her long-time husband, Gerald Picus, a physicist, then moved to Woodland Hills in the San Fernando Valley. 

She became active in the Parent-Teacher Association and League of Women Voters and served as president of the Valley branch of the American Association of University Women. She was also employed for three years as community relations director for the Jewish Federation Council. 

In the late sixties and early seventies women were pretty much relegated to the" back benches." Picus, like many other women, was influenced by Betty Friedan's 1964 book, the Feminine Mystique. 

Her political career began in 1973 when she challenged the incumbent City Councilman, Donald Lorenzen, in LA Council District 3. Lorenzen won in a tight election that demanded a recount; the vote was 27,575 for Lorenzen and 27,027 for Picus...a matter of 548 votes. 

She took on Lorenzen again, and though he kept referring to her as a "wild-eyed environmentalist”... she won! "The big surprise was that this middle class democratic woman beat the incumbent in a district that voted 80% for Ronald Reagan," Picus told me. 

She was the first woman to hold a City Council seat in the San Fernando Valley. District 3 covered the southwest corner of the Valley, including Woodland Hills, Tarzana and parts of Encino, Canoga Park and Reseda. 

She remains the longest serving City Councilmember... a total of sixteen years. Because term limits came into play soon after she left office, that record of longevity still holds. 

I asked her what it was like being a female politician in those days. She said that there were several women on the City Council during her sixteen years. She became accustomed to the double entendres and occasional outright propositions by both city officials and the public. A recall campaign against her was started by the fire and police unions since she was thought to be "anti-labor." But she said that she was able to have a collegial relationship with most of the men and the women went out of their way to help each other. 

In 1981, the Los Angeles Times wrote about District 3: 

“Although the district is largely white and middle class, it is complicated and anything but homogenous. A study in contrasts, it has expensive ranch homes in Woodland Hills that are minutes away from shack-like dwellings in Canoga Park, a largely Hispanic barrio dating from the early 1900s.” 

Picus became a "hero of local conservationists" since she pushed builders to provide more open space for parks. She also supported transportation projects, called attention to the need for waste recycling, and opposed oil drilling in the Pacific Palisades. 

Those were heady days in Los Angeles politics that produced more than its fair share of political scandals. Armand Hammer, the multimillionaire industrialist, wanted to drill oil off the Pacific Palisades Coast. But the Palisades had always had a strong community organization and they convinced Picus to fight the drilling. When it came up before City Council it passed 9 to 6. The big surprise was that the new Mayor, Tom Bradley, vetoed it. In order to over-ride the veto, they needed ten votes. 

She recalled fondly that all of the sudden she became very popular and was invited to all the Armand Hammer social events; everyone was putting pressure on her to change her vote. He finally stopped inviting her and drilling off the Pacific Palisades never happened. 

Developing policies and programs on behalf of working parents and their children was another priority for Picus. She authored the city's Child Care Policy, which made Los Angeles one of the first cities in the country to hire a full-time child-care coordinator. 

She also spurred the opening of a child-care center for Civic Center employees in Downtown Los Angeles, financed by the city and federal governments. In 1989, she persuaded the City Council to create preferences in city contracts for companies that offered child-care benefits to their employees. 

The City Hall South Children’s Center was named the Joy Picus Learning Center in 1996. 

Picus was named "Woman of the Year” by Ms. Magazine in 1985, a result of her successful drive to include an historic "pay equity" plan in the city's collective bargaining agreement with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME.) She was the only politician to receive the award that year. 

Also known as "comparable worth," the effort refers to upgrading pay rates for jobs that were paid lower wages because they had traditionally been held by women. The magazine credited Picus with "helping bring about a $12 million pay equity agreement between the City of Los Angeles and 3,900 of its employees, most of them women." 

According to an old Los Angeles Times interview, Picus was dubbed by some as a "Mary Poppins," because of the " 'flighty impression' she sometimes conveys." She replied that her "preparation for political life came from activities primarily with other women," and so in the beginning she was not "taken as seriously" as were the men. She emerged, the reporter wrote, "as a woman of enormous ego and drive, with tremendous energy and determination." 

Today Joy Picus remains active and involved. She is still serves on the boards of several civic and cultural groups. She keeps track of what goes on in the City politically. She notes that some of the things she and her colleagues tried to change are still status quo. 

The point of this article is to not just revisit the past, but to remind our City Councilmembers that great things have been accomplished in the past by prior City Council colleagues. 

The job is not just about fixing potholes or passing zoning changes – it’s about having the vision and persistence to tackle the big challenges. And much more than worrying about the next election! 

As always comments welcome…

(Denyse Selesnick is a CityWatch columnist. She is a former publisher/journalist/international event organizer. Denyse can be reached at: [email protected]) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

GELFAND’S WORLD--This is the next in a series of articles about emergency preparedness. We stress the attempt to bring the public up to a level of preparation that will be required should we have to deal with a major earthquake. 

The Emergency Preparedness Alliance met again last weekend, this time to discuss disaster communications. Some of what we heard involved technical sounding stuff like the organization of two-way radio networks. Some of it involved learning about sending emergency messages up and down the line through organized chains of command. 

It turns out that there is plenty of room for us civilians in the emergency communications process, provided we make the minimal effort to get an amateur radio license. We learned about programs that train people in as little as a day. There is also the Family Radio (FRS) system which does not require a license, and will be ideal for getting emergency messages out over a range of perhaps a few blocks. The goal is to have a few thousand of us equipped at the FRS or ham radio level so that we can provide ultra-local eyes and ears in the event of a true emergency. 

We then considered an everyday example of emergency communications and their intersection with the emergency response system. The example we heard about is the 911 phone system. In particular, we heard about some of the issues that 911 operators have to deal with. A lot of the time, they take calls from people who are not very good at communicating clearly and tersely in times of stress. That turns out to be most of us. 

We considered the 911 operator because the emergency telephone connection is an example of one node of a complicated system of interacting parts that will also be a crucial element in responding to a larger disaster. The system that starts with your 911 call includes phone operators, ambulances, police, fire fighters, and hospitals, just to mention a few. In short, it represents part of the system that we will have to ramp up when problems are widespread. 

But the daily travails of the 911 operator illustrate in microcosm the sorts of problems we might face on a much wider scale if a real disaster should hit. 

Where are you?

Yes, I know you're at home. What's the address?

Yes, I know it's your mother. What is the problem? 

These are the sorts of conversations that 911 operators get into. There is a certain amount of information that is critical for the responders to have before the system can do anything for you or your sick mom. Your location is obviously one of those things, but some people have a difficult time getting the information across. This is particularly true when the emergency is away from the caller's home address. "I'm on Sepulveda" is the beginning of an answer, but it's just a beginning, because you could be in the San Fernando Valley or you could be in Westwood. "I'm on Sepulveda about half a block north of Vermont on the Westside" is better. 

What is the age, condition, and gender of the sick or injured person? These are particularly important data to get across, but most people don't know to explain in detail at first. They have to be walked through things point by point by the operator. And that's just the start because then the operator has to put the right people in motion. 

These points were explained by Jonathan Zimmerman, who works with the LAFD Auxiliary Communications Service. In conversation, we agreed that training the public in how to explain things to the 911 operator would be of help. It wouldn't have to be extended training, just a bit of advice about taking a deep breath and summarizing to yourself the most important points to get across. It will be almost like that old journalistic formula, "Who What When Where Why." In describing an automobile accident that just occurred on La Cienega and Olympic with two people possibly injured, you've already got most of it said, and you are only a few seconds into the call. 

The same advice applies to major disasters. There won't be time for idle chatter. 

Emergency Communications under conditions of disaster 

Now imagine having to ramp up the 911 system by a factor of hundreds because lots of people need help. Buildings are collapsed. Gas mains are leaking. This will require participation by civilian volunteers. We won't have the equipment and phone lines that the 911 system has, so we will have to use our own hand-held radios (or whatever else we have). 

The most important lesson that came through in this week's session was that getting a communications system like this up and running will require having the right kind of organization. It will also involve training us volunteers in how to participate in that organization. 

Let's get specific. Imagine a serious earthquake, and further imagine that you become aware that one or two of your neighbors are injured badly enough to require medical attention. The information comes to you because you are the local volunteer radio operator. You summarize the information in the fewest number of words and tell it to the next level up, which will be at your local fire station. The local fire station contact can then send you help if it is available, or if not, your message will be sent further up the line to a regional center. 

You, the local volunteer, will take the place of the 911 emergency phone system in the event of a major, region-wide emergency. You will work with an efficient and effective chain of other volunteers and well trained professionals. 

In this way, local problems that can be handled on the spot will be dealt with immediately. Problems which require more substantial efforts will go further up the chain. At the top of the chain is the Emergency Operations Center, which will be dealing with citywide issues including logistics and capabilities. The people at the top of the chain will have access to statewide and national aid. 

An important consideration for state and federal agencies will be knowing just where in your neighborhood to send critical help and supplies. That is another reason that the local (you and me), regional (professionals such as the LAFD and LAPD) and citywide responders are so important. 

(Bob Gelfand writes on culture and politics for CityWatch. He can be reached at [email protected]) 

-cw

EAST LOS ANGELES--Salesian High School, an all male Catholic school in Boyle Heights, and also the Ruth Webb Pre Physician Assistance Society in the City of Alhambra both held sock drives for donation to Homeless Health Care Los Angeles (HHCLA) for the homeless in the region of SEW: Silverlake, Echo Park, Westlake, Pico-Union, Chinatown, and Korea Town. 

During the month of October 2015, both junior and varsity teams engaged “on a quest to collect and donate as many pairs of new socks to benefit the homeless communities,” read their outreach poster. 

Thus, parent Cynthia De La Cruz coordinated a sock drive with the football teams for the homeless in collaboration with (HHCLA). 

“Our 85-member football team wanted to reach out to the homeless in an effective manner seeing that homelessness is a big issue facing our city,” said Ms. De La Cruz. 

Parent stated that her son David De La Cruz was a key figure in initiating the effort. David “Googled” homeless agencies in the area and “HHCLA came about.” Upon the coach’s approval, “they ran with it. The boys and their parents went to family, friends, and neighbors and asked for new sock donations,” said De La Cruz. 

“The response was overwhelming! We collected over 550 pairs of socks,” she said. The socks were presented to HHCLA at the last Varsity Football home game. “It’s always nice to give back to the communities,” said Ms. De La Cruz. 

SEW Lead Street Outreach Specialist of Americorps Hope for the Homeless Xavier Puente said that socks help to create a direct service to the homeless community because they help reduce the risk of contracting a severe (foot) disease. “Socks provide comfort during these winter cold nights as well as provide a means of engagement to a population that has been reticent of receiving help,” Puente said. 

Puente added that though socks might appear as a minuscule donation “in resolving the concerns of homelessness within the County of Los Angeles, it's a great step forward in helping to engage an extremely marginalized community to services.” 

This effort “will eventually lead to helping someone manage their challenges and connect them to a housing opportunity,” he said. 

                  Photo of sock drive collection by Ruth Webb Pre-PA society 

The second organization that held a sock drive for the homeless was the Ruth Webb Pre Physician Assistance Society in the City of Alhambra.

This cohort comprised of undergraduate and graduate students meet monthly to work on community based projects and provide access to health related projects within the community. Group’s objective in this case was to help HHCLA to engage clients and help alleviate homelessness within the community. They collected 540 pairs of socks for HHCLA during the last months of 2015. 

Leslie Howard coordinator of the program said that he was very proud of the group, “they’re very dedicated to service.” 

Homeless Health Care Los Angeles, SEW Regional CES, Coordinator Monica Quezada said that Street Outreach Staff uses socks and hygiene kits specifically towards outreach efforts. 

“We go to the LA River bed for example, to engage and to built a rapport with the homeless. We introduce ourselves and tell them we’d like to help them get off the streets. This is more than just giving a gift,” said Ms. Quezada. “I see homeless with foot blisters and dirty socks. My staff gives them hygiene kits and in them we put socks.” 

“Socks go a long way for us; they help built trust,” she said. 

Quezada stated that even after when the formerly homeless individuals are permanently housed, a few have returned and asked if I remember the time when I gave them a pair of socks. “Of course,” I say. 

“This is the kind of relationship and trust that we create around socks,” she said.

(Connie Acosta is a member of the Echo Park Neighborhood Council and a former secretary of the Los Angeles Neighborhood Council Coalition (LANCC)).

-cw

EDITOR’S PICK--“Badges? We ain’t got no badges. We don’t need no badges.I don’t have to show you any stinking badges”— Mexican bandits to Humphrey Bogart in The Treasure of Sierra Madre 

For long, dreary months CNN, MSNBC and most other news channels have violated me by refusing to report anything other than what’s easy, boring and accessible, the lunatic primary races.  Aside from the Flint water poisoning scandal and snow storms outside their offices, that’s it.

So, because I need sometimes to get a whiff of the real world’s oxygen I step outside my door into the sweaty, chattering, roach coach world of Durango, Chiapas, Jalisco, Michoacan and Zacatecas – home states of the immigrant workmen and women– gardeners, tree trimmers and dry wallers, nannies and housekeepers – who way outnumber Anglos any weekday in my neighborhood.   They work fiercely hard and depart at sundown in their pickups.  We don’t know their names except they work cheaper than the original, now-aging Japanese American gardeners whose own kids prefer white collars to leaf blowers.

In any real sense Los Angeles is a Mexican town – sorry, Donald! – with an added mix of Central Americans looking for jobs or dodging MS13-style murder or both.  In LA alone there are tens of thousands of Mexican gardeners; on building sites round my corner “American” is a foreign language.  Without them southern California would implode.

Their home country is two-and-a-half hours down the I-5 South of San Diego to Tijuana, Baja California and deep into Cartelia.   But as far as most of my mainstream news outlets are concerned Mexico might be located in Tibet or at the bottom of the Bermuda Triangle.   I know more about Mosul in Iraq or Kiev in the Ukraine than I do about anything south of my border.

What I do know is that  Mexico is North America’s ISIS, a raging war with itself.

And that the drug cartels are effectively Mexico’s shadow government, exerting control at every level from village to Presidential palace.  98% of murders go unsolved, few people report crime to the police who themselves may be the criminals.

All I have to do is flip over to a Spanish-only TV channel and even without knowing the language it’s perfectly clear who actually runs the country.  Images tell the story.  Multiple beheaded corpses and bodies hanging from bridges, thousands of youngsters “disappeared” (43 in one small town Iguala alone), uncountable mass graves, 100 local mayors assassinated in the past decade.

We shrug.  “Oh, Mexico – what can you expect? corruption is as old as the country itself,” and ignore the inescapable fact that the Sinaloa, Zeta, Los Rojos and Knights Templar drug rings are moving on from shaking down government to boldly taking over the apparatus.  Their own mayors, their own governors and police chiefs.

Forget the Hollywoodized “capture” of El Chapo.  Some triumph! Every time our DEA and Mexico’s “elite Marines” nab or kill a “kingpin”, it gets worse because his underlings splinter into even more predatory gangs.  That’s how we spend our $300 million a year in “drug war aid” to the fabulously corrupt Mexican federal government which turns over much of the money to municipalities which are forced to hand it over to the criminals.  Thus, our epidemic craving for cocaine, heroin and Mexican weed, and our “war on drugs” tax money, feeds the head-choppers and torturers.

Although star TV anchors like Rachel Maddow and Anderson Cooper have abandoned their posts by ignoring the al-Queda-like war in our nearest southern neighbor, no blame to the Mexican media whose reporters, editors and photographers daily risk their lives just by going to the office.

If you work as a Mexican journalist you accommodate to the sicarios, the hired (often teenage) killers, or pay a terrible price not only yourself but your family.  So you check with the gangsters first who brazenly have their own media directors.  Some drug bosses love publicity, and some will burn you alive for it. 

In the past ten years four journalists have been killed at El Manana,one of the leading papers along the US-Mexican border that must print different editions for different places depending the good or bad will of cartel psychopaths like El Chapo.  Grenade and fire bombings are routine; likewise kidnappings.  

Self censorship is like a Kevlar vest, as necessary to a reporter as armor is to a battlefield soldier.  At least 88 journalists have been murdered since 2000, and more to come.

Come on, Rachel and Anderson, get off your duffs and do some leg work on the Syria so near to us, so far from God.

(Clancy Sigal is a screenwriter and novelist. His latest book is Hemingway Lives.  This piece was posted first at CounterPunch.org.) 

-cw

REMEMBERING LOUIE (1961-2016)-On January 17, after a long fight with diabetes and its devastation, Luis (“Louie”) Manuel Moreno suffered a fatal heart attack, leaving family and friends throughout Boyle Heights and the communities of East Los Angeles and the family of LA city workers with a hole the size of Louie’s heart. 

Councilmember José Huizar responded on Instagram: “I am lost for words in hearing of the passing of Louie Moreno. He was a dear friend to all and never backed away from the opportunity to help others, especially our youth. His passion for empowering our youth through sports and education helped motivate many people in Boyle Heights and on the Eastside, including myself. You will be forever missed. Rest in peace, brother… #BoyleHeights” 

Louie loved his daughter, Teresa Michelle Moreno, and she loved him. “Can't sleep. I just miss you so much daddy when I used to cry for you when you left for work or when I hid in the car and said I'm going to work with you. Daddy, you are and always will be my everything always and forever,” said Teresa, sharing the news of Louie’s passing on social media. 

Louie was proud to be a city worker and he took his city service very seriously. It defined him and drove him to do more. 

I knew Louie Moreno. Every day, for so many years, Louie’d greet me with his friendly smile. And if Louie had a union question, it meant 100 other city workers had a question. It was never about him. It was only about “we.” 

Louie showed up after every earthquake. And on 9/11. Like thousands and thousands of public workers – government workers – Louie showed up and served and smiled. 

Eddie Santillan must be the head of all City Hall parking by now. He met Louie in 1985 when he started working for the City. “Dad knew him from a summer youth program back when Art Snyder was the Councilman,” Eddie recalls. “Louie was a good man, a good friend, my best friend. He never stopped, even when his health fell apart, he was always out, working to do good, with the kids, his gig at Steven’s, his sports show, whatever good he could do. He wanted to show the kids that there’s so much out there, so many opportunities. Nothing could stop Louie.” Eddie added sadly, “He never asked for help.” 

Eddie and Louie worked together throughout the years, at security, special events, Council District 14 activities, whatever needed to be done – in City Hall and in the community -- always for the kids. 

A 1980 graduate of Roosevelt High School, Louie Moreno loved giving back to all of the communities of East Los Angeles and to his beloved Boyle Heights. Rough Rider Forever.    

Mayor Sam’s Scott Johnson sums it up with the voice of a compadre: “For decades, Louie's endeavors in promoting the positive, mentoring values in sports, saw him give selflessly of his time in supporting the … Boyle Heights Wolfpack Pop Warner Program, the El Sereno Stallions, the annual East LA Classic between Roosevelt and Garfield…while himself teaching those same values on the field of play to community youth, including someone who would become Boyle Height's current City Councilperson.” 

For years, Louie hosted a public access “Sports Rap Up” program and Channel 35 local sports program, aimed primarily at LA kids. He emceed and DJ’d countless community events, helped organize an annual toy giveaway supporting hundreds of Ramona Gardens children, Movie Day at the old Edwards Theater in Alhambra, Council Office activities, and union gatherings.

Louie is mourned and missed by the LA32 Neighborhood Council, the Community Police Advisory Board (CPAB) of Hollenbeck, city officials and city workers, visitors to LA City Hall…so many.

Like Eddie said, “Louie never stopped.” 

From the Los Angeles City Council draft adjourning motion (CD14) honoring the life of Louie Moreno:

“More than anything, Louie loved his community. Louie’s goal for this year was to become Honorary Mayor of Boyle Heights. I think many of us always saw him that way anyway. No title necessary. 

“He was truly a community ambassador and by far one of the most faithful servants Boyle Heights and the eastside has ever seen. 

“Louie Moreno was a loving son, father, nephew, and friend who taught us all, no matter how rough things get, life is beautiful. Even as Louie’s health declined, his spirits remained positive. On the day before his passing, he reminded us all to smile.” 

Funeral services are set for Saturday, February 6 at 11:00 a.m. at St. Mary’s Catholic Church, 407 S. Chicago St., LA 90033 followed by a reception at Steven’s Steak House, 5332 Stevens Pl., Commerce 90040. 

Louie’s friends and family have set up a GoFundMe page to help honor Louie with a funeral and send-off befitting his life of service and love. Here’s the link: https://www.gofundme.com/mckqjj2k. Please do what you can! 

(Julie Butcher is a retired union leader, enjoying Riverside and her first grandchild.)

JUST THE FACTS-I began my employment with the City of Los Angeles in December 1967. While attending college, I became as a student worker with the Los Angeles Police Department. Following that, I moved onto the Police Academy in August 1968 and continued working with the LAPD for 33 years. That’s thirty-three years on the streets of L A, working a variety of assignments including Patrol, Detectives, Traffic under cover assignments, being a Protective League Director and beyond. How do my experiences compare to the current employment situation within the City? 

First of all, both salary and hard to find pension and health benefits have significantly improved over the years. Replacing comp time is cash paid for overtime. The rotary phone and typewriter were replaced by the push button phone, cellphones and computers. Instead of Liquid Whiteout, we have the backspace bar on the computer keyboard. Replacing carbon paper is a printer that will print multiple copies of a document in a variety of colors. Cars that used to lack air conditioning are now adequately equipped with dependable air conditioning. 

As society has changed and advanced, so has the role of local government and the jobs and benefits that local government provides. But when is it too much? It appears that the limits have not yet been reached for LA City employees. The most recent benefit being tossed around City Hall by two councilmembers (one under an inquiry by the FBI and the other an anti-gun advocate,) is the four weeks of paid time off for maternity leave. Employees can currently use their vacation and other accumulated time to bond with their child – one month off with full pay. 

As the father of two grown sons, I know the challenges of parenthood and the financial impact on the family. While it’s a nice benefit to have four weeks of full pay for those bringing that bundle of joy into the world, should the taxpayers be saddled with this added cost … a whole month of full salary? It’s something to think about when the City that just raised your water and power rates and is working on increasing the local sales tax to help provide the basic services we’ve all been paying for over the years. 

Homeless count 

I have been writing about the homeless population in Los Angeles for a number of months. Calling attention to this situation and the negative impact it has on our neighborhoods is a matter that has not seen significant improvement at City Hall. We hear about millions of dollars being directed to remedy the situation, but little, if anything, has been done. The same homeless population while empty promises to improve the situation continue to be made. In order to get a first-hand view of the matter, I will be participating in the Homeless Count on January 27 and will report my findings in a future article.

(Dennis P.  Zine is a 33 year member of the Los Angeles Police Department and former Vice-Chairman of the Elected Los Angeles City Charter Reform Commission, 12 year member of the Los Angeles City Council and current LAPD Reserve Officer. He writes Just the Facts for CityWatch. You can contact him at [email protected]) Photo: Huffington Post. Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

THIS MUCH I KNOW--The California coastline has inspired artists, poets, rock lyricists, and any of us who have taken a drive up Highway 1, the spectacular panorama of mountains peering above crashing waves. The Coastal Commission has an over 40-year legacy of protecting the coastline, despite the attempts of developers and their lobbyists to encroach by weakening or even eliminating the commission. 

But the protection of our unspoiled coastline may be at a turning point as pro-development interests attempt to oust Dr. Charles Lester, the Executive Director of the Commission. Dr. Lester has refused to resign quietly, calling for a public hearing, which will be held February 10 in Morro Bay. 

The reasons for the attempted coup are vague. As one commissioner stated off the record, there’s a “growing sense that there are management issues.” Lester, however, has helmed the Commission during an impressive list of accomplishments, including increased transparency and recently received permission to levy penalties against individuals who violate the Coastal Act’s access provisions to the tune of $11,500 per violation per day. 

Lester has a solid report card from fifty environmental and social justice groups for his interpretation and enforcement of the Coastal Act. A coalition of representatives from the NRDC, Heal the Bay, and dozens of other groups made their feelings known in a letter they sent to commission chair Steve Kinsey and state leaders. 

The Coastal Commission serves as the zoning board for the 840 miles of coastline. Established by voter initiative in 1972 and made permanent by the legislature through the adoption of the California Coastal Act of 1976, the 12-member board is appointed by the Governor, Speaker of the Assembly, and the Senate Pro Tem. 

Just what’s at stake? A proposal to build 1,100 houses in the coastal zone in Southern California is before the commission right now. At $1.5 million per ocean view house, there’s nearly $2 billion at play. Developers regularly challenge coastall staff rulings, empty their wallets to candidates, and hire teams of lobbyists to encourage commissioners to make exceptions to give their projects the go-ahead. 

The Coastal Commission decides on proposals for residential properties, hotels, energy production facilities and other projects that are worth billions of dollars, all without much transparency in the process. Hotel developers, for example, hire lobbyists who are classified as agents under law and don’t have to report how much they are paid, often donating to the campaigns of commissioners who run for local office. 

There are rules in place to protect against conflict of interest but there is potential for abuse, which makes attempts by the commissioners to take control of the agency from the staff even more troubling. 

Since taking the job in 2011, Lester and his staff’s expert opinion to deny coastal projects hasn’t pleased commissioners. In 2006, the commissioners denied 26 projects. During Lester’s tenure, the commission has turned down 24 projects over the entire four year period. 

Ironically, the group of commissioners attempting to oust Lester are Brown appointees and it was Governor Brown who signed the Coastal Act into law forty years ago. These appointees serve at-will appointments, unlike the eight commissioners who serve a fixed four-year term. The governor can replace them if he’s unhappy with them but has so far not stepped up to defend the commission’s independence under Lester. 

The California Coastline must not be up for grabs to the highest bidder. Governor Brown should not leave that as his legacy.

(Beth Cone Kramer is a Los Angeles-based writer and CityWatch contributor.)

-cw

PERSPECTIVE-The year 2016 will offer some local drama to Los Angeles, complementing the spectacle of the national elections. In what may be the most far-reaching ballot measure of this century, the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative will affect how the city does business with developers. The backers have targeted the November ballot. 

I sat down with Jill Stewart last Saturday to get some insight and clarity on the measure.  She is the campaign manager for the initiative who believed that its objectives were important enough for the good of the city that she resigned as managing editor of the LA Weekly to lead the effort. 

It is an understatement to say that anything to do with land use is a very technical subject; therefore, this article is only a start in understanding the complexities. I hope to discuss it further with Stewart and others. 

In her view, spot general plan amendments are creating congestion and reducing affordable housing.

Today, such amendments are granted on a piecemeal (spot) basis. They have led to spurious, disjointed development. 

She explained that this approach favored the financial return to a developer over the needs of the residents. Contiguous areas generally lose their character as a hodgepodge of architectural styles and transformation of demographics replace the harmonious nature of established neighborhoods, which is what happens current residents and businesses are banished. The high-density nature of these one-off projects almost assures congestion. Even when situated close to a major transit route, the occupants are unlikely to give up their cars in numbers sufficient to reduce traffic. If anything, there will be more cars as the neighborhood population increases. 

In addition, the number of affordable units are low in relation to the total. 

From my own experience, I have witnessed the displacement of middle-class residents as a result of projects with density bonuses granted under SB1818. The bonus is in return for the developer setting aside a few units as “affordable.” Unfortunately, the buildings which were replaced contained far more affordable units. For the record, the affordable units that were destroyed in my community were not substandard. They lacked the bells and whistles of newer units, but they were very livable and within reach of most budgets. Recently passed AB2222 closed the gap somewhat, but projects built under spot amendments are another matter. 

Stewart emphasized the importance of “significant areas” in determining how and if a General Plan amendment could be approved. Amendments must encompass an area which, as defined in the measure, has significant social, economic or physical identity. That translates to an entire community, district plan or specific plan area, an entire neighborhood council, or an area not less than 15 acres. 

She believes this allows ample leverage to address blighted areas. Carefully planned amendments could offer a coordinated revitalization process over wide swaths (as opposed to disparate projects.)

One controversial action, if the measure is approved, involves an up to two-year moratorium on amendments (unless required by the Department of Building and Safety.) A staff person for a Councilmember expressed concern if this should happen. He told me it would probably kill a major deal that’s in the early stages. 

According to Stewart, the moratorium is designed to allow a systematic review the General Plan (this review will be performed periodically as a requirement under Section 5 of the proposal.) It appears to me that this would amount to an undertaking which would likely attract the attention of every conceivable interest group with a stake in the city. The review could be as important as passing the measure itself. 

She indicated that the city’s current approach to development has pushed the working class farther out, created a boom-or-bust construction economy and replaced industrial zones with gentrified communities. 

Developers or their agents will not be allowed to prepare Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) under the measure’s rules. This will eliminate a blatant conflict of interest. Only the public’s lead agency can prepare the report, recovering the cost from the applicant. 

As I see it, the current system invites widespread corruption. There are simply insufficient checks and balances. Spot amendments can serve as the liquid currency of municipal political quid pro quo and create temptation some officials find irresistible. This is one reason why former mayor Richard Riordan is supporting the initiative.  

Councilmembers trade amendments for contributions. According to Stewart (and consistent with Riordan’s observations,) the net result of these deals are higher rents. So-called affordable units are priced starting at $3,000 per month. 

Stewart plans to develop a web of supporters representing a diverse cross-section of residents and interest groups to educate the public, collect signatures and otherwise promote the initiative. Her background as a journalist for a widely-read publication seems well-suited for reaching out to the many component groups of Los Angeles. She anticipates the full-court challenge the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative will face from elected officials and their allies. 

So much needs to be shared with the public. Case studies providing clear examples of what to expect would be most helpful. 

There will be much more to come on this subject, from any number of sources. Reform is needed; the initiative could be a catalyst to that end. It deserves our attention.

(Paul Hatfield is a CPA and serves as President of the Valley Village Homeowners Association. He blogs at Village to Village and contributes to CityWatch. The views presented are those of Mr. Hatfield and his alone and do not represent the opinions of Valley Village Homeowners Association or CityWatch. He can be reached at: [email protected].) Photo: Talbot Troy/Flickr. Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.