NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS

LA’S NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS … CELEBRATING 15 YEARS--To our 40,000 residents, West Hills is “here,” a scenic corner of the San Fernando Valley with wonderful schools, relatively little crime and pleasant parks. But to a lot of folks who live in the interior of the city of Los Angeles, we are “somewhere out there,” lodged on a distant precipice on the edge of the world. (Photo above: West Hills NC had largest contingent at Congress of Neighborhoods.) 

Except for coverage Chaminade Prep’s sports team, the Los Angeles Times only bothers to come out for the most sensational stories, like when a naked porn star with a samurai sword jumped off one of our spectacular cliffs. (Yes, this actually happened.)   

Thirty years after we split off from Canoga Park and became recognized as a distinct neighborhood by the city of Los Angeles, we still endure daily insults to our civic pride. For example, our California Chicken Café insists it’s in Chatsworth and our junk mail is still incorrectly addressed to residents of “Canoga Park.” 

One of our tasks as a Neighborhood Council is to overcome these slights and build a citywide reputation as a strong community. We still have a way to go, but at the risk of sounding immodest, I think we are making good progress. 

Oh, to hell with modesty. In its 15 years, the West Hills Neighborhood Council has led our community through a fundamental change in self-perception. Where we once had no particular idea of who we were, we have built a sense of West Hills-ness to the point where anything seems possible. 

The seeds of this change were planted 15 years ago on Jan. 22, 2002, when a group of intrepid pioneers incorporated as the first Neighborhood Council in the Valley and the ?th in the city. 

Chuck Gremer, leader of the West Hills Property Owners Association, became the first president of the West Hills Neighborhood Council. Four of the original 25 board members still serve. 

I appeared on the scene almost two years later, joining the board in November of 2013. There were 13 candidates for 13 positions and about 30 people voted, so my election was never in doubt. 

Chuck and the others in leadership had their challenges. They did their best, but I had the sense that the entire Neighborhood Council system was in chaos. 

Few were even aware of the Ralph M. Brown “Open Government” Act, and fewer still were knowledgeable of its arcane and sometimes nonsensical interpretations. Committees met in the homes of board members with no public notice. Several committees didn’t meet at all. 

Our treasurer launched into his monthly reports with angry attacks on the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment, which seemed incapable of paying its bills or delivering the funds that were promised for our operations. At one point, I’m told, the board threatened to disband if the city didn’t deliver on its funding obligations. 

Nevertheless, the West Hills Neighborhood Council worked on several fronts to build community pride and volunteerism. 

Working with the local Chamber of Commerce, we organized successful annual Fall Festivals, which continue to this day. We built relationships with city agencies and connected our stakeholders with them. We began a decade-long process to design and erect signs to post at major entry points to our neighborhood. And as awareness of our existence increased, turnout in elections increased as well. 

After Chuck retired, we were served by two excellent presidents, Ed Youngblood and Steve Lenske. During this period, we launched an ad hoc committee to explore possible environmental risks for building homes in Dayton Canyon (this was the genesis of our current Environment Committee). We also teamed with a local church and Shadow Ranch Park to create one of the largest annual community events in the Valley: the Eggstravaganza/Emergency Preparedness & Safety Fair, which recently has been (mercifully) renamed Spring Fest. 

Also during this time, we brought heads of city agencies and other speakers to our monthly Neighborhood Council meetings, generating higher community turnout and informing the public about civic issues. 

All of these developments had a cumulative effect. By the time I was first elected president in 2012, our Neighborhood Council was primed to move into full gear. 

Today I am proud to work with a board of workaholics that is second to none in the city. Our agendas are (almost) always posted on time and our committee meetings are filled with enthusiastic and passionate members and stakeholders. Meeting a quorum is never a problem. 

Together, we have embarked on the following projects and more: 

• Our Beautification Committee organizes monthly Community Cleanups that attract dozens, scores and even hundreds of volunteer weed-pullers and sidewalk-sweepers who are making West Hills an inspiration for neighborhoods across the city. In a presentation at City Hall on Jan. 14, the city recognized our work with a grant through its Clean Streets LA Challenge. (Photo left.) 

• Slowly and incrementally, we have built a communications program that again is second to none. Its elements include a sophisticated social media effort, a professional-quality monthly email newsletter, an excruciatingly comprehensive weekly community calendar, a well-maintained website, banners, flyers, bus bench ads and more.

• A special committee is making meaningful process toward establishing a community center and senior center for West Hills and surrounding communities. 

• Through the leadership of our Homelessness Committee, we have made grants to relief agencies, funded meals for disadvantaged families through schools and provided referrals to homeless individuals. We expect a large turnout from West Hills at the coming citywide Homelessness Count on Jan. 24. 

• We have designed a Emergency Preparedness Plan, developed a Map Your Neighborhood emergency response program and purchased kits for block leaders. Our Spring Fest continues to attract thousands of visitors every year to learn about public safety and how to plan for disasters. 

• We are arranging purchase of a large storage container to hold our growing collection of cleanup tools, promotional items, audio equipment and more. 

• Our Youth & Education Committee has organized an annual program of awards for teachers and support staff at West Hills schools. The WHNC also provides Community Purpose Grants to fund specific projects at the schools. 

• Our Zoning & Planning Committee has a successful record of working with stakeholders and developers to keep projects at sustainable levels and with design standards that are appropriate for their surroundings. 

• Our liaisons have a prominent role in the Neighborhood Council Budget Advocates, the Valley Alliance of Neighborhood Councils and other coalitions. We have a warm and productive relationship with the Neighborhood Councils of Canoga Park and Woodland Hills-Warner Center, as well as Councilmember Mitchell Englander’s staff at Council District 12. 

It’s a big agenda, but as I said, we have a board of workaholics, as well as stakeholders who fully share our passion for making West Hills an even better place than it already is.

We still get the cold shoulder from the L.A. Times and our junk mail is still addressed incorrectly, but fortunately we have the Los Angeles Daily News, which does a fantastic job of covering our community. And, as I have pointed out before, we are rapidly earning the respect of other communities, as well as the city’s political and managerial elites. 

West Hills is definitely “here,” and this fact is becoming impossible to ignore. 

As we celebrate our 15^th anniversary, the West Hills Neighborhood Council celebrates its past while planning for the future with a “can-do” attitude along with our sister Neighborhood Councils in the Valley and elsewhere in the city. 

As our slogan goes: “It’s our neighborhood. Let’s build a community!”

(Dan Brin is the president of the West Hills Neighborhood Council. Check out their good work here.)

-cw 

Tags: neighborhood councils, West Hills Neighborhood Council, community, edge of the world, Brown Act, Chuck Bremer, Canoga Park, Valley, 15 candles

HAPPY 15^TH BIRTHDAY LA NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS--I remember the first time I ever heard of my Neighborhood Council. A friend of mine wanted to run for a seat and needed an alternate … basically a Robin to his Batman. I knew nothing about what a neighborhood council was and assumed it was probably a place where people talk about things and write letters and spin their wheels a lot. Something I certainly did not have the time for. I only agreed to run with him since he promised my “Robin” duties would be minimal ... after all, things are the way they are and as the saying goes … you can’t fight City Hall. (Photo above: Seated:  Left to right:  Mary Kusnic, Shannon Burns, Aaron Rosenfield, Sarah Shaw, Terri Tippit, Lisa Morocco, Colleen Mason Heller
Standing (second row):  Rick Mendoza, Francesca Beale-Rosano, Barbara Broide, Brendan Kotler, Steve Spector, Jae Wu, Wendy Dox (alt.) Sean McMillian.  (Not in photo:  Eric Shabsis and Lisa Tabor))

That was 11 years ago. I could not have been more wrong.

I have proudly served now on the Westside Neighborhood Council since 2007. What I like most about this group is that we have a “whole community” view. NCs not only represent residents, but businesses, schools, non profits libraries and religious centers. We also support our local police and fire. At our meetings we hear about new developments, safety issues, upcoming school and non-profit events and of course a review of the latest City ordinances and policies. It really is a great way for regular folks to get a pulse on what is happening in their own neighborhoods and to voice their concerns to our council.

The most rewarding part of this group is to take the funding we receive from the City and apply it to where we think it is needed most in our community. While Council District 5 thoughtfully represents us, we can get into the nooks and crannies of our neighborhood and really address local needs.

Our funding requests run from books for the library to art supplies to the schools to tree planting on Pico Boulevard to a now annual community event called Pick Pico which showcases the businesses, non profits and schools in our neighborhood. This event is totally free to the public and last year we had over 6K folks come and Pick Pico with us. This small town fair is most welcome in this big city and it not only informs our stakeholders about our neighborhood, it brings us together as a community.

Since the presidential election in November, I feel a shift in people’s attitudes towards community involvement. Now more than ever, people are moved to engage, participate and contribute to our neighborhoods. People want to stay positive and want to find focus. The NC system is a perfect answer to this desire.

My grandmother always said, “The best gift you can ever give is your time”. I encourage everyone to seek out what moves them…what they believe in…and find the time to create real change wherever they call home in this great City of LA. There are 96 NCs waiting with open arms.

(Lisa Morocco is Westside Neighborhood Council Outreach Chair and Co-Chair of Pick Pico.)

-cw

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS--Parking and politics aren’t mixing well for Robertson Boulevard businesses, leaving some to question whether retailers have become pawns in the lead-up to the city’s March elections.

The recently opened campaign headquarters on Robertson Boulevard of Jesse Creed, who is running against incumbent Paul Koretz for a chance to represent the fifth district on the Los Angeles City Council, was followed with a surprise for the street’s other tenants: the removal of a two-hour free parking garage program some allege was taken away to stop Creed’s volunteers from using it.

Free parking is gold in Los Angeles, where gridlock and circling blocks to find an open metered spot is factored into all commute times. For Robertson Boulevard, it’s perhaps even more critical as some hope for a revival of the occupancy-challenged street. Offering the first two hours free in the structure — a common carrot in places such as Beverly Hills or Santa Monica — is seen as a way to woo people to the street.

“Free parking on Robertson is imperative to the success of the street and small business owners like us especially,” said Alissa Jacob, the cofounder and ceo of the multibrand concept shop Reservoir.  “We are competing with Beverly Hills’ free parking and have many customers who are incentivized to come here only if there’s available free parking for a portion of their time on the street. The street is really suffering, with many more homeless people than ever, and if the city doesn’t do something now to help businesses, then this street will continue to suffer and more businesses will shut down or relocate.”

At issue is what the city of Los Angeles calls lot 703, the parking garage it owns at 123 S. Robertson Boulevard. Between Dec. 15 and Jan. 15, the structure offered the first two hours of parking free. Business owners reported anecdotally a lift in foot traffic and sales during that time.

A two-week free parking program was approved for the holiday via a council motion, a Los Angeles Department of Transportation spokesman said. The motion was done as an incentive for holiday shoppers and will not be coming back, the spokesman also confirmed.

That’s a different story than what was told to Fraser Ross, the founder of Kitson and owner of the new boutique concept Kitross on Robertson Boulevard. Ross has attempted to work with the city since May beginning with Manav Kumar, deputy counsel to Mayor Eric Garcetti, before being shuttled to Garcetti’s senior director, William Chun. He was passed on to the office of councilman Paul Koretz, who oversees the fifth district where Robertson is located, and has since been working with John Darnell, district director for Koretz.

Darnell, according to Ross, said at the onset the free parking would be extended every two weeks before swinging to full-time in March. Ross had a free parking sign made after he said he was told the city couldn’t afford to make such signage.

“Why do I have to make signs for the city? I’ve got enough to do. I have to pick up the garbage, get the tree [on the sidewalk] trimmed, get the phone booth [on the sidewalk] down. When was the last time Paul [Koretz] has walked the streets of Robertson to see the problems first hand?” Ross said.

Darnell, Koretz and Koretz’s spokeswoman did not respond to requests for comment.

The sign’s lettering was slashed, by an unknown party, last week with the end of the free parking program.

“It looked like we possibly had his [Koretz’s] attention, but since Creed’s office [opening], I’m having difficultly talking to his office,” said one merchant on the street, requesting anonymity.

Ross on Monday started a petition to bring the free parking back and expects to get to 1,000 within a week. He also, per his style, dressed his store’s window with a hard-to-miss statement accusing Koretz of taking away the parking. “Pay for play. All talk, no action,” part of the window reads.

Creed, the incumbent running against Koretz for the council, said he moved onto the street because he had seen the thoroughfare languish and took up the space as a statement of what he said was solidarity with the other business owners. He called the sequence of events — free parking available when his headquarters moved in Jan. 1 and then no free parking Jan. 15 — “suspicious.” One other observation since his move onto the street few would argue with: “The merchants here are desperate for help,” Creed said.

“There’s no ownership and Mayor Garcetti and Paul Koretz were down at the march on Saturday and they’re saying stand up for your rights and fight the fight. Well, we’re fighting the fight against you [politicians],” Ross said, pointing to American Apparel, BCBG Max Azria Group, The Limited and other retailers shuttering doors. “I mean, come on. You can see there’s a problem in this brick-and-mortar retail business. You’ve got to invite people to stores and make common areas again.”

Instead, what people see are empty and sometimes dirty storefronts, some of that city-owned real estate.

Bob Esho, the owner of the optical and sunglass store Optx, has been on the street for some 15 years. He previously occupied the storefront, owned by the city, located next to the city-owned parking garage. He shared the space with a doctor who decided he wanted to exit Robertson in 2015. Esho said he asked if the city could re-write the lease, removing the doctor from the contract, and was told no one was available to redo the paperwork. He closed in July 2015 and inked a lease across the street a few months later at a building owned by a private individual.

Esho’s former space is still empty.

Nathan Sager, who owns Sager French Salon, has expressed interest in leasing Esho’s previous space on Robertson. It would have been a homecoming of sorts, with Sager French on the street for 17 years before relocating to Beverly Hills after losing its lease when the building underwent major renovations. Sager was told by Darnell he would have to apply for the space via a request for proposal process through the Department of Transportation.

The city expected the RFP to post by mid-August, according to e-mails between Darnell, Chun and parking and LADOT analyst Rene Sagles. Darnell followed up with Sagles in November, at which time he was told the RFP would be released the first week of December. On Dec. 2, a follow-up e-mail between Darnell and Sagles indicated what Sagles called a “small setback we need to resolve” and that the RFP would be out the following week. The RFP has not yet been posted.

“I don’t understand it,” Esho said. “Why wouldn’t you lease the space and have a tenant there paying … There’s no accountability. Who are you going to hold accountable for it? They will blame each other [at the city].”

And even as lease deals get inked, merchandising of the street’s tenants needs to be done with a more careful eye, Sager added, factoring in services and lessons learned from the street’s past boom and then bust.

“The street’s lost so much of the retail and we understand that you cannot support retail without services,” Sager said.

It didn’t help that big brands — Chanel, Ralph Lauren and Lululemon, among others — moved in years ago, boosted rents and later left with the recession and rise of competing streets offering cheaper prices. It wasn’t good for real estate and it wasn’t good for a street aimed at trendsetters and neighborhood shoppers, some would say.

“These people [big brands] don’t really look at recessions,” Sager said. “These people have an agency that is looking for them and what is the hottest location. None of these owners stand on the street and see what people are walking them. They have location scouters.”

“I’ve been here for 20 years. This street, I’ve never seen it so bad,” said Sylvia Diaz, owner of the restaurant Cuvée. “Any little thing we can get that would increase our business, I’m shocked that the city doesn’t get it.”

Diaz said longtime customers come in and regularly ask her what happened to the street, referencing the heyday when celebrities shopped there and tour buses rolled through. Today, she’s contemplating whether she should relocate following a rough six months capped by a November and December that were the worst months the business has had during its run on the street.

“It’s never been this bad,” she said. “I’m working harder. I’m trying to come up with new ways of drawing in business and it’s hard. I’ve never had to cut [employee] hours before. These employees of mine, it really breaks my heart.”

(Kari Hamanaka writes for WWD.com … where this piece was first posted.)

-cw

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS-----The effort to legalize street vendors is moving forward at City Hall.  The proposal has proven controversial in the past, with many residents as well as brick-and-mortar business owners opposed to the idea.  But most of the business owners and managers who were interviewed by The Eastsider were open to but cautious about the measure. 

“If it’s a taco stand, of course it’s competition,” said Miguel Perez, the manager at Acapulco restaurant on Sunset Boulevard, near Virgil Avenue in East Hollywood. But, “as long as [vendors] keep it nice and clean, that would fine.” 

Perez’s answer was typical among [business owners] but so was his surprise to hear that the city was considering the matter; Perez, like most of the other businesses owners and employees who were interviewed, had not heard about the renewed efforts to legalize vendors. 

The latest push comes as advocates are concerned that undocumented immigrants who are cited for illegal vending may face deportation under a Trump presidency. Under a proposal that came out last week from a Council committee, each block could have up to four vendors – two on each side of the street. Adjacent businesses owners would also have the power to approve their presence. The plan goes to the full City Council for review next spring. 

“I know people who are against vendors,” said Meghan Dhaliwal, a manager at Caffe Vita in Los Feliz. “But I think cheap street food is great.” 

Dhaliwal said vendors nearby probably wouldn’t create much competition with her store, since Caffe Vita doesn’t serve hot food. 

Christian Chavez, owner of Echoes Under Sunset on Glendale Boulevard in Echo Park, had heard of the recent vendor proposal and unabashedly supported it. 

“I got no problem with street vendors. They’re convenient,” said Chavez, whose business is primarily a comedy venue – selling drinks, but not much food. “So it’s kind of cool for us to have the street vendors.” 

He added that the vendors are clean and don’t take away from other businesses, since his neighborhood sees so many people. 

“Some people come out of a club or bar get something to eat and keep running,” he said.

The City Council is scheduled to take up the most recent street vendor proposal early 2017.

(Barry Lank posts at The East Sider where this report originated.)  Photo of Boyle Heights Vendor by Ana Facio-Krajcer.

15 CANDLES, 96 POINTS OF LIGHT--In his farewell address last night, President Obama called on American citizens to take concrete steps to create positive change - to be action-oriented, engaged, and to get offline and talk to one another. Luke Klipp, president of the Los Feliz Neighborhood Council and recent winner of Streetsblog LA's 2016 Deborah Murphy Award for Excellence in Advocacy (named after our very own founder), explains how you can get to work right in your own neighborhood. 

“Neighborhood Councils are the place where good ideas go to die.” That was me a few years ago, reflecting on frustrations serving on a neighborhood council that, at the time, was more interested in preserving parking spaces than in creating human spaces.

While neighborhood councils were created 15 years ago to better connect residents with their city government, oftentimes it can feel like they just stand in the way of progress. That said, I have since come to recognize the opportunities that these groups represent, and the ways in which people who care about walkability, bikeability, and street safety in their communities can create change on a micro-scale, albeit an important one, through their neighborhood councils.

Many neighborhood councils – though certainly not all – are ambivalent about or openly oppose the things that folks at Los Angeles Walks support: things like more and better-marked crosswalks, more stop signs, and slower street speeds. However, this is neither always the case, nor is it a done deal. As the strongest and clearest link to the constituents they serve, neighborhood councils are more responsive to citizen involvement than any other City function or body.

This brings me to why I’m writing this post and why you should care. In just my few years as an elected member of the Los Feliz Neighborhood Council, I’ve seen a sea change in our council’s approach to street safety measures and support for efforts to improve walkability and bikeability, as people who care about these things have shown up, spoken up, and gotten involved.

At a time when much of our world – at least nationally – has been turned upside down, local involvement is one of the best-available tools that we have to effect change.

I guarantee you that, while your neighborhood council may or may not be responsive to your concerns in the moment, if you stay involved, if you keep showing up, if you join a committee and/or run for a seat – you will effect change through your neighborhood council. You will get the marked crosswalk that your busy street needs. You will get your city councilmember to support new street tree plantings. You will get improved DASH service, or better public spaces, or new bike lanes.

But it takes time, it takes persistence, and it takes showing up. As someone who has sat through innumerable meetings hearing the same complaints about how there’s too much traffic and not enough parking; I can assure you that that voice of reason, the voice you can bring to the neighborhood council that says we must do better by our kids and our seniors and our businesses by improving our sidewalks and street trees and crosswalks – that is the voice that is so often missing and so often needed. 

It’s a new year, and we need you more than ever. There’s never been a better time to get involved in your community, and your neighborhood council is a great place to start.

You can find out which council represents you by visiting http://empowerla.org. You can also email me with any questions at [email protected]. Cheers, and happy new year!

(Luke H. Klipp is president of the Los Feliz Neighborhood Council. You can follow him on Twitter at @lukehklipp. This piece was posted at Los Angeles Walks and LA Streetsblog) 

Tags:

NEIGHBORHOOD P­­OLITICS--ECHO PARK – A cluster of classic, Spanish-Revival style bungalows on Echo Park Avenue could be demolished to make way for as many as a dozen new homes, according to city records. 

An application filed by the developer with the Planning Department seeks permission to carve up the property at 1456 Echo Park Avenue to build up to 12 single-family homes under the city’s small-lot development ordinance, which allows for more dense development of single-family homes. The project, proposed by Bixel House LLC, would require the demolition of 7 apartments and the removal of nearly 4,000 cubic feet of earth. 

This project of 3-story homes would have a big impact on this section of the avenue, where most of the surrounding one- and two-story buildings date back to the 1920s or earlier and there has not been much in the way of new construction during the past 30 years. 

The request to subdivide the property would be subject to public hearings and additional reviews. Stay tuned. 

Update: In response to the developer’s application, Councilman Mitch O’Farrell issued the following response through his spokesman, Tony Arranaga: “This proposal flies in the face of historic preservation and the Councilmember’s efforts at revising the Small Lot Subdivision ordinance …. In addition, the proposal does not align with the Councilmember’s goals to maintain the historic character of our Echo Park neighborhood.”

(This report was first published at The Eastsider)

-cw

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS—Vernon--State environmental regulators issued guidelines Thursday that will allow expedited cleanups of high-risk homes near the shuttered Exide Technologies battery-recycling plant in Vernon even before a full mitigation plan and environmental review are completed. 

The Department of Toxic Substances Control released a draft cleanup plan and environmental impact report for public review in December, with cleanup operations to mitigate lead-contaminated soil and properties near the plant anticipated to begin this summer. 

That schedule, however, sparked criticism from some residents and area officials who said some properties near the plant are at particularly high risk. 

DTSC officials said Thursday they will move forward with cleanups on a “case-by-case basis” at a limited number of properties “with high levels of lead in the soil and the greatest exposures to sensitive populations.” 

“We are utilizing all of the resources at our disposal to ensure that we are able to take action to protect the most sensitive populations impacted by the presence of lead in the soil from the Exide operations,” DTSC Director Barbara Lee said.

The agency plans to consider for expedited cleanup properties that have soil with lead levels of 1,000 parts per million or more. 

The agency will also consider cleanups at properties where a resident “has a blood-lead level at or above five micrograms per deciliter, which is the level used by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to identify children with elevated blood-lead levels.” 

The Exide plant permanently closed in March 2015. When Exide agreed to close the lead-acid battery recycling plant, it committed to pay $50 million for cleanup of the site and surrounding neighborhoods. Of that amount, $26 million is meant to be set aside for residential cleanup. 

Gov. Jerry Brown earlier this year signed legislation providing $176.6 million in funding for environmental testing and cleanup work in neighborhoods surrounding the now-shuttered plant. 

State officials said the funding would pay for testing of residential properties, schools, day care centers and parks within a 1.7-mile radius of the plant, and fund cleaning of as many as 2,500 properties with the highest lead levels.

(This report originated at City New Service.)

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS--LA City Council candidate Jesse Creed hosted a press conference to call for safety improvements on Westwood Boulevard. Creed is running for the Westside’s Council District Five. 

Creed declared that, due to more than 300 injury collisions over the past five years, Westwood Boulevard is “virtually a deathtrap.” According to Creed, despite Westwood being among the 15 mayoral Great Streets Initiative sites for the past two years, “virtually nothing” has changed. Due to high rates of collisions and death, Westwood Blvd. is part of the city’s Vision Zero High Injury Network, streets that experience more than their share of deadly crashes. Creed stressed that his priority is to “make Westwood Boulevard safe for everyone” and pledged that “one of his first actions as councilmember” will be to commission a safety study for Westwood. 

Creed was joined by Westwood residents, academics, and business leaders, all of whom called for greater safety features, including bike lanes, on Westwood Boulevard. Residents and business leaders criticized a lack of representation. UCLA professor Michael Jerrett, a bicycle commuter himself, criticized bike lane opponents as “putting peoples’ lives at risk.” Many speakers emphasized connections between UCLA, which is implementing a bike-share system this year, and Metro rail stations, including the existing Expo Line station and the future Purple Line subway station.

Creed is drawing a clear distinction between his platform and the record of Fifth District incumbent Councilmember Paul Koretz. Koretz quashed an earlier study of designated bike lanes for Westwood Boulevard,  and further undermined the city’s Mobility Plan by yanking Westwood from the city’s Bicycle Enhanced Network. 

(Joe Linton is the editor of StreetsblogLA ... where this perspective was first posted. 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.)

-cw

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS--According to Greg Monfette, of Tree Case Management, an arborist hired by the Larchmont Business Improvement District (BID), the ficus trees planted on Larchmont almost sixty years ago have outlived their welcome (photo above) on the street, and it’s time for them to be replaced through a process of rotational management.

The BID, a consortium of property owners on Larchmont, is trying to address the broken plumbing and sidewalks caused by the tree roots for several years. According to BID Co-spokesperson Rebecca Hutchinson, the BID needs to replace the ficus trees because it will lose its insurance if it gets sued one more time by someone who has been injured falling on a broken sidewalk. (Read the rest.) 

-cw

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS--Lauri Burns (Photo above, center), the founder and president of The Teen Project in Venice, reports that antibiotic resistant bacteria are not the only health threat incubating in the homeless encampments along Venice Beach. 

Alerted by the recent report by Lava-Mae of six – and possibly nine – apparent MRSA cases at 3^rd and Rose, Ms. Burns called the VSA to tell of her own experience with insects carried by the population. 

“I took a young homeless woman into my home for one night on an emergency basis and it resulted in an infection of sand mites that took over half a year to eradicate,” She said. 

“Both I and my boyfriend received bites for months, which were very painful,” she said. 

“We tented the house, we had exterminators back regularly, we washed the bedding every day,” she said, “but it still took a long time to eradicate the mites.” 

“I don’t think the public understands that the unsanitary conditions in which these people are forced to live, and in very close proximity, are a very favorable breeding ground for disease and insects.” 

“It’s a ticking time bomb and should drive more sanitation measures than we are currently seeing and quicker re-housing where the homeless can get away from these unsanitary conditions and get treated,” Burns said.  “The homeless people want a chance at life. They don't want to stay homeless.” 

Burns, who was homeless herself as a young woman, notes that eradicating disease and infection is the first priority for her clients at FREEHAB, the free drug treatment facility for homeless young women that she opened in 2015 in Sun Valley. Burns says the facility has hosted 442 women with a 90% success rate at getting them off drugs and keeping them off the street with both drug treatment and vocational training.

(The Venice Stakeholders Association is dedicated to civic improvement. The VSA supports slow growth, protection of the limits of the Venice Local Coastal Specific Plan, neighborhood safety, better traffic circulation, increased parking for residents, neighborhood beautification projects, historic preservation and protection of coastal waters.)

-cw

GUEST COMMENTARY--It’s hard to overestimate the enormous implications of the City’s total failure on New Year’s in Hollywoodland. The last remaining thread of trust in the City has finally been cut for most of us who live here. We have communicated to the City on numerous occasions about the lax (a very generous word) enforcement on top of Mt. Lee. Its response is always the same: we are wrong and they have it secured. Still, we thought that, at least on New Year's Eve, when the entire world increases enforcement and is on alert, extra care would be taken in our neighborhood. 

Instead, not only was there nothing extra -- there was nothing! How long does it take for someone to change the Hollywood Sign? Certainly longer than I imagine it would take to leave bombs there. And after an initial blast, a subsequent fire could have devastating consequences. The whole world would have seen what a farce the City enforcement is.

Since 9/11, it’s no longer a prank to change the sign. It’s a serious breach of security that threatens our lives and homes. 

Our previous councilmember, on his own, went against decades of precedent (when the top of Mt. Lee was off limits to the public for good reasons) and without studies, hearings or process, recently opened it up and created a new activity of "walking to the Sign,” inviting tens of millions of people to come up here. The present Councilmember has continued and thereby supports these policies. 

Anyone can come up here carrying anything -- huge backpacks used for weeks of camping, metal suitcases and various equipment. We've seen it. Everything is allowed. Nothing is checked. The lack of security takes one's breath away.

And what is atop of Mt. Lee? There are multiple terrorist targets and any one of them should the sound alarm:

• The famous Hollywood Sign known worldwide as a symbol of Western Culture, one of the biggest tourist magnets in Southern California.
• The emergency communication tower for first responders in the entire City of Los Angeles. 

• 8000 gallons of stored fuel.
• Hundreds of nearby homes built on narrow, winding substandard streets (so narrow that a resident died in a house fire because a fire truck could not get up the narrow street.) It’s a fragile neighborhood placed in a bottle neck surrounded on three sides by Griffith Park. 

• All of this in a very high fire hazard zone in the midst of a drought. 

These are incredibly easy, vulnerable targets -- all in one location. And the probability of hundreds or thousands of residents and visitors being stuck on gridlocked streets as they try to evacuate could be turned into a certainty by the placing of just a few vehicles at key locations.

At this point it has gone beyond ignorance, incompetency or neglect. Over and over again, the City has chosen to disregard our warnings. Over and over again, the City has shown that safety is not its top priority. It scrambles to react rather than to prevent. Such conditions would be unacceptable anywhere else. 

We need and are entitled to protection. The City failed us on New Year’s Eve and we greatly fear what the next failure will bring.

(Sarajane Schwartz is a 40-year resident of Hollywoodland, a founder of Homeowners on Beachwood Drive United, and a former president of the Hollywoodland Homeowners Association.

Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.)

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS--Controversial plans to build a massive housing, hotel, and retail project with a skyscraper on a parking lot in South LA was unanimously approved by the Los Angeles City Council Tuesday. More than 1,400 apartments and condos will be built, but many will be unaffordable for South LA residents 

City leaders have said the development, called The Reef, has the potential to transform the neighborhood, which has been overlooked by developers until now. It may bring job opportunities and quality restaurants to a neglected area, but it has drawn fierce opposition over fears it will drive up living costs and displace thousands of residents. 

Streetsblog LA has followed the plans closely and offered this critique today: While it sounds like “livability wet dream” it “caters to a well-heeled clientele;” it is “situated on the edge of a neighborhood that is both one of the poorest in the city and the most overcrowded in the entire country.” 

Los Angeles City Councilman Curren Price, who reps South LA, told the Los Angeles Times: “It is new … and we have not seen this in the 9th District or South Los Angeles and there’s certainly some uncertainty about it but definitely some excitement and enthusiasm.” 

With the city’s approval, physicians Avedis and Ara Tavitian will develop a parking lot and warehouse at South Broadway and Washington Boulevard with 1,444 condos and apartments, a grocery store, a gallery, a hotel with 208 rooms, outdoor plazas, and more than 67,000 square feet of shops and restaurants in buildings ranging in height from 77 to 420 feet. 

Opponents have speculated the city was swift in approving the project ahead of the implementation of a ballot measure approved by Los Angeles voters earlier this month that will require residential developers to make 20 percent of all condos and 11-25 percent of apartments in their buildings affordable. 

The Tavitian brothers agreed to designate just 5 percent of the 549 apartments for tenants earning very low incomes. (None of the condos will be designated affordable). But they did agree to pay the city $15 million for affordable housing off-site, but within Council District 9. 

But with The Reef, affordability isn’t the only concern. Streetsblog’s Sahra Sulaiman says residents fear gentrification in the neighborhood will make their lives more difficult in other ways. She quotes Alfredo Gama of the Central Alameda Neighborhood Council: “I get stopped by police going out to my car at two a.m. to get my books!” Then she writes, “How much more frequently would he and others like him be harassed once higher-income residents moved in and sought protection from their “suspicious-looking” lower-income neighbors?” Those types of tactics, she says, are not uncommon in gentrifying neighborhoods.

All images via Department of City Planning except photo of protesters - Credit: Angel Jennings / Los Angeles Times)

(Jenna Handler posts at Curbed LA ….where this commentary originated) Prepped for CityWatch by Dianne Lawrence.

cw

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS--"Do you hear me ... Do you hear me now?" How many times did one hear the Verizon ad man ask that question in response to obtaining adequate service? The Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) is now asking this of Councilman Mike Bonin.

Projects affecting Venice are being approved by the City and they have never been thru the Venice Neighborhood Council. (Photo above: Ira Koslow, president of the Venice Neighborhood Council.)

In August the VNC sent a letter to Councilman Mike Bonin asking him to present all current projects to the VNC rather than skirting the system. They did not receive an answer to the letter. In the December meeting, Matt Shaw presented a motion that all projects affecting Venice, in whatever state, be presented to the neighborhood council and "stop taking any actions until such time as our council and stakeholders have had a chance to voice our opinion on any and all proposals."

Councils Created to Provide Grassroots Input

The neighborhood councils were created by Charter amendment in 1999 to provide grassroots vetting and input to the governing bodies. "To promote public participation in government and make government more responsive to local needs by creating, nurturing, and supporting a citywide system of grass-roots, independent, and participatory neighborhood councils."

There are 96 councils and Venice, one of the first 4 or 5 to be certified, has outshone all councils with its professional participation and voting record at the polls. The VNC has the largest turnout of any neighborhood council each year.   Last year the governing body had to print extra ballots three times.  Other neighborhood councils visit the Venice council to see how it is done. Former Land Use and Planning committee (LUPC) Chair Challis Macpherson wrote the book on LUPC and taught other councils how it should be done.

The Board is Heavy with Talent

The people on the board are businessmen, attorneys, architects, professionals and some are retired professionals. They have all been trained to address a problem and provide solutions. Because of their broad backgrounds, many times the suggestions, solutions are varied prior to consensus. 

Ira Koslow, president of the Venice Neighborhood Council, says "I have been on the board a long time before becoming president. These people who have never served before just do not understand the lack of cooperation from the CD11 council office," he said. "I don't understand it."

Koslow, now retired, is no lightweight in the field of accomplishments. He worked 25 years in the music business as a talent manager with Peter Asher management. Before that he was an associate professor at California State University, Long Beach for four years. His last job was with the LAUSD where he was a math teacher for 10 years and taught economics for 12 and for five years was Dean of Discipline.

Examples of No Vetting

Koslow started reciting in rapid fashion the latest instances he could remember regarding the preempting of the Venice Neighborhood Council.

"Bonin brought an "ice rink" to be put at the park on Windward to the neighborhood council," he said. "No one wanted it. Then he wanted to bring it back thru the Venice council again. Normally, we do not hear a case twice but he said he had altered the plans enough for it all to be considered new. The Venice council voted it down again. Bonin then went over the Venice council to the California Coastal Commission and got it approved in spite of the Venice council members testifying against the project at the Commission hearing. Whatever happened to the project after that, we do not know.

"The three homeless projects--Westminster Senior Center, Venice Median, and Thatcher Yard have never been thru the Venice Neighborhood Council. Bonin claims that he had a town hall and that was sufficient. Hardly. Telling Venetians what he plans to do is not vetting a case.

"The Business Investment District (BID) that was so controversial and had to be redone, It never went thru the Venice council. Had Bonin not thrown in 25 percent of the city land, it would never have passed. Now the City has to pay $480,000 in fees.

"Lava Mae, the mobile shower service, was new to us. It was mentioned as a project but never presented with details until our December meeting when everything was a fait accompli. There are Board members who live on Third who could have given valuable input at some point.

"This is why we are here."

(Reta Moser writes for Venice Update] … where this perspective was first posted.) Photo credit: Yolanda Gonzalez.

-cw

15 CANDLES, 96 POINTS OF LIGHT- (Editor’s Note: This month marks the 15^th anniversary of the certification of Los Angeles’ first Neighborhood Council. CityWatch is celebrating with a multi-month celebration of introspective articles and view points on how LA’s Neighborhood Councils came about, how they’re doing and how their future looks. This perspective by Anastasia Mann is such an effort.)   

When I first read about the concept of Neighborhood Councils in the Los Angeles Times some 15 years ago, my first thought was "finally.”  

In my heart I knew that this idea was likely a direct result of the fervor for secession by the movements in Hollywood, The Valley and San Pedro. I was a secessionist.  

The reason these attempts at secession were defeated is because the entire voting populous of the city was able to vote. Had only the actual communities in question been voting separately, as in elections for city council representatives, etc., it's more likely the splits would have prevailed.  

(The passion for secession was born because the "city fathers" were only focused on Downtown. That still remains as issue for some today.) 

So the NCs were born to give the “stakeholders" in each geographical area more input into local government. More "say so.”  

I first served as Area 5 (Outpost) chair to Hollywood Hills West NC. The following year I was elected president, taking the reins from founder and first president, Dan Bernstein. Dan did the hard work. He had it rough. A bit of an unruly board in a system governed by a new city department barely getting its feet wet: The Department of Neighborhood Empowerment, aka: DONE.  

Our board has 23 elected representatives, which includes nine area chairs and ten issue committees, and five officers on the executive committee. We are the largest geographical NC among the 96 in the Greater LA Area.  

The get-go was slow -- not for lack of interest, but due to lack of training, direction and publicity via the city. And of course the continuous creation and application of rules that made no sense. A bit like kindergarten. An NC member across the opposite end of the city gets his hand in the "funding" cookie jar, then all us kids have to face the wall. Very frustrating. Trying to fund projects is like jumping through hoops on fire with the lion.  

But the good news is that we have indeed come a long way. The system is still riddled with red tape and an excessive number of rules which can be baffling, but today we are actually getting things done. Very good things. HHWNC has one of the finest boards that I have had the pleasure of overseeing in my entire 12 year experience. The resumes of our board members threaten any Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton could muster.  

From at one time having zero stakeholders attending our monthly meetings, we now have numbers ranging from 25+ into the hundreds. Yes. Hundreds.  

We've been blessed to have the cooperation and support over all these years from CD4, under both Tom LaBonge and David Ryu. Also from the deputies for CD13 and previously CD5. Moreover, we now have active participation from our State Assembly members for AD 46 and 50.  

We work closely with LAPD, LAFD and even DWP. We help to get streets repaired, city services improved, support schools, LAPD and Fire Department programs, our library, theatre arts projects.....and play a major role in planning and land use issues, particularly when it comes to density and major developments within our congested boundaries. We've had to battle controversies that include protecting Runyon Canyon from commercialization to controlling the out-of-control situation with the Mini Tour bus issues. We listen to developers as well as those opposed to them. 

We ask questions, request Improvements, meet over and over again until we can find consensus. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. But our rate of cooperation is very high. In certain limited cases we cannot beat City Hall, but that's another story. We try to protect historical heritage sites as well.  

Current issues facing and frustrating all our communities include homelessness, traffic, more traffic, party houses, the impacts from Hollywood Blvd on the adjacent residential units, crime (of course,) and more tour bus problems...on and on.  

But we are planting trees in Runyon Canyon, protecting the off leash dog privileges by keeping it a wilderness area and not a sports venue, getting pot holes and street lighting fixed, advising our city council reps on the quality of life issues facing our stakeholders. Every day there seems to be a new issue.  

Our board members each hold their own meetings to bring every imaginable issue to the full board table. That's four to 20 meetings per month! There are hundreds of hours being devoted to our communities every month. Most of the time, these volunteers go unnoticed and under-appreciated. The entire NC system and existence is still a mystery to most Angelenos. This must change.  

Unless the media gets behind what we do and gets the word out, the system may be doomed. The public must demand that we keep these volunteer voices active, loud and clear. Many members of the media have stepped up to the plate, like CityWatch; and KNBC with the Tour Bus Coverage; the LA Times with the 8150 Sunset "Gehry" project and Runyon Canyon; and the Beverly Press. They all have an interest in what we do. 

But our own story about what we do -- how and why -- still needs to be told. We should have everyone -- resident, business owner and employee, property owner or renter, club member and worshipper signed up as stakeholders within every single one of the 96 NC's. Numbers talk.  

We hear rumors that some city officials would love to eliminate the NC system. DONE (now Empower LA) is understaffed and overwhelmed. HHWNC is fortunate to have support from our Council District. But many NCs do not enjoy this sentiment; rather, they are faced with the opposite.  

The more everyone gets involved the better future for us all. Because, frankly, we are all in this together.

(Anastasia Mann is president of the Hollywood Hills West Neighborhood Council.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

TENANTS RIGHTS-Wednesday the Los Angeles City Council voted unanimously to adopt the Tenant Buyout Protection Ordinance. This was a culmination of months of effort by the Coalition for Economic Survival (CES) to win passage of this necessary tenant protection.

The need for the law came out of the growing tactics being used by unscrupulous landlords attempting to coerce tenants living in rent controlled units to move by offering them “cash for keys.” This then allows the landlord the ability to jack up rents once the tenant vacates the unit.

In addition, landlords are using these buyouts to avoid having to go through the Ellis Act Eviction Process or filing a Tenant Habitability Plan, two programs that provide tenants some safeguards against abuse. By avoiding these processes landlords can obtain higher rents without paying correct relocation amounts, providing tenants the legal amount of time to move, providing tenants temporary relocation housing while the building is being renovated, being limited in raising rents and being prohibited from re-renting the units for 5 years, depending on what their intentions are for the property.

CES Affordable Housing Lead Organizer Joel Montano, testifying before the City Council prior to the vote stated, “Many tenants don’t know they rights, believe they have no choice and opt to take the money and leave. The longer you delay, the more tenants will be illegally forced out of their homes. We urge your vote to pass this ordinance today.”

LA City Council Member Gilbert Cedillo, who chairs the Council Housing Committee, was instrumental in guiding the proposal, developed by Los Angeles Housing + Community Development Department (HCIDLA), though the Council to its eventual adoption.

The new law will do the following:

• Require that landlords provide tenants with a written disclosure notice of the tenant’s rights under the Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO) with regard to eviction and relocation assistance, including contact information for the HCIDLA landlord/tenant hotline.
• Allow tenants to rescind buyout agreements for any reason for up to 30 days after the agreements are fully executed.
• Further provide that agreements that do not satisfy the stipulated requirements may be rescinded by the tenant at any time.
• Require that landlords file copies of all buyout agreements with HCIDLA.
• Provide tenants with an affirmative defense to an unlawful detainer and a civil remedy for actual damages and civil penalties against landlords who fail to comply with the buyout agreement regulations.

(Larry Gross is the Executive Director of the Coalition for Economic Survival and an occasional CityWatch contributor.)

-cw

GUEST WORDS--As an immigrant myself, I understand the situation and appreciate the City's effort to protect the immigrant community by not actively participating in the federal's deportation effort but, if the City's intention is to protect the undocumented community, will the vending permits be issued "only" to them? Will the City be providing work permits in the form of vending permits? (See story, “LA Council Committee Moves Street Vending Legalization Forward”)  

How would they determine the cost and requirements for the permits? Will the County wave their requirements? Will the State wave their regulations? Street vending also generates "unreported" income, why would anyone pay for a permit that might force them to report the income and/or pay taxes? 

There is no easy solution to the problem but providing vending permits will only worsen the situation. 

The City cannot currently enforce those Municipal codes and City ordinances that prohibit Street vending, the County cannot monitor, regulate or enforce health requirements and the State is not even trying to collect sales taxes. What will be the plan to monitor and enforce those with or without permits? 

They are considering two vendors per block but what will happen when there are four vendors on a block? Vending permits will increase the number of street vendors, some will have permits and others will not! The City, the County and the State will still have the same "limited" enforcement resources, why would they want a bigger headache? 

Street vending is a custom in third world countries because they do not have social services. For the vendors it is the only way to make a living and for their customers it is the only thing they can afford with their salaries. Every elected official in city government promised to deliver a world class and a safer Los Angeles. Are they telling us now that a third world status is the best that they will do? 

Restaurants and stores pay rent, business licenses, occupancy permits, utilities, employees, payroll and sales taxes; they are expected to meet City, County, State and Federal labor, health and income reports requirements and liability insurance. 

Is it fair to them that street vendors pay less for a permit and use City Streets to conduct business at no cost and being a cash business, income and sales taxes are none existent! Will they City carry the liability insurance for those permitted vendors? 

If the city of Los Angeles, or any other city, wishes to help the undocumented population and act against federal mandates, they should just eliminate, within the city limits, the need to ask and/or prove immigration status at any job. The only thing needed should be the willingness and ability to do the work and the job opening! The federal government already provides them with a tax ID number for the purpose of filing income taxes and the City has already set a minimum wage within city limits.

((Edwin Ramirez is a long time activist and co-publisher of Pacoima Today.)

-cw

PLATKIN ON PLANNING-The opposition to the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative pawns itself off as a grass roots coalition, but it is, in fact, an astroturf organization funded by four major Big Real Estate players.  These large enterprises have a global reach, with billions of assets stretching far beyond their Los Angeles operations. 

• Westfield Group, based in Australia, owns and operates shopping centers throughout the world, including 38 malls in the United States. In Los Angeles their malls include Century City and Warner Center. 

• Crescent Heights, based in Miami, builds and operates up-scale commercial and residential projects throughout the United States, including the proposed Palladium high-rise tower in Hollywood. 

• Lowe Enterprises is headquartered in Los Angeles and invests in commercial and residential real estate projects throughout the United States. 

• Eli Broad, based in Los Angeles, has not completely moved on from insurance and tract housing to philanthropy and museums.  He did find time to donate $25,000 to oppose the Initiative. 

Last week CityWatch republished a Real Deal (real estate site) article, “How did LA’s Planning Process become such a Mess,” that went after the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative with a vengeance. But, this article was so filled with inaccuracies that my annotated notes had 31 separate corrections. Let me present the most egregious errors and corrections: (Anyone who wants to see the full 31 can shoot me an email at [email protected].) 

Claim: “The Neighborhood Integrity Initiative is an effort by NIMBYs to put the breaks on most development in Los Angeles.” 

Correction. NIMBY is a pejorative term used by Big Real Estate to smear their critics when they raise legitimate zoning, planning, design, and environmental objections to their mega-projects. The critics’ objections are based on violations of legally adopted policies, laws, and regulations. Furthermore, the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative only impedes a small percentage of real estate projects, about 3-5 percent, because they require parcel level legislative actions (e.g., spot-zoning) from the Department of City Planning and the City Council to turn illegal projects into legal ones. As for the rest, the Department of Building and Safety quickly issues building permits to 90 percent of applications because they are by-right projects. As for the remaining five percent of building permits, the Department of City Planning internally reviews and approves them since they do not require City Council legislative actions. 

Claim: “…The County’s zoning code itself has not been updated since 1946.”  

Correction: Location, location, location. The General Plan addresses the City of Los Angeles, not Los Angeles County. They share the name, Los Angeles, but that is it because the County’s General Plan only applies to unincorporated areas. 

Claim: “29 of LA’s 35 plans are currently more than 15 years old. Beyond money, updating the plan would entail heavy input from the community and approval from City Council.”

Correction: Thirty-five plans refer to the Community Plans, not the entire General Plan. But, short-staffing only explains some of the delays in updating the General Plan’s elements, including the Community Plans. A bigger part of the explanation is LA’s elected officials. They have little interest in planning since they view Los Angeles through a project-by-project, contribution-by-contribution lens.

A comprehensive, long-term perspective would gum up their system of campaign contributions, shakedowns, and political influence. 

Finally, the biggest impediment to timely updates was the City’s misuse of the Hollywood Community Plan update. Its not-so-hidden agenda was to promote real estate speculation, regardless of underlying demographic trends and public comments. As a result, the City lost three legal challenges, and the courts threw out the entire Hollywood update, its EIR, and its implementing zoning ordinances and planning amendments. Since the Hollywood Update was the up-zoning, up-planning template for the remaining 34 Community Plans, the Planning Department was left high and dry for many years as it regrouped from this major legal defeat. 

Claim: “Up until 1960, LA had a residential capacity of 10 million people … But as real estate politics shifted toward the stronghold of homeowners associations, capacity diminished. Between the 60s and the early 2000s, LA was effectively “downzoned” by 60 percent …”  

Correction: The one major planning and zoning program during the 1980s and early 1990s was AB 283. It resulted from local lawsuits and California State Assembly legislation that required the City of Los Angeles to ensure consistency between its plans and its zones. When this project concluded in 1991, the AB 283 staff calculated that LA’s amended zoning could accommodate another 5 million people. Several years later the General Plan Framework’s technical consultants confirmed these findings. They determined that Los Angeles had enough remaining commercial zoning (which can also be used for apartments) for all conceivable growth scenarios in the entire 21^st century. Their technical reports also reported that the build-out of the city’s residential zones would transform Los Angeles into a city of 8,000,000 people.

Since Los Angeles has had virtually no population gain over the past two decades, and only tiny amounts of down-zoning, the city still has sufficient zoning for all foreseeable growth scenarios. What it does not have, however, is the exact zoning that a few high stakes real estate investors require to build luxury high-rise towers at the most lucrative locations. 

Claims: “The Coalition to Preserve LA … believes a two-year moratorium on all developments seeking a zone change will light a fire under the Council.” 

Correction: The Neighborhood Integrity Initiative’s two-year moratorium is on General Plan Amendments, Height District changes, AND zone changes. But, 100 percent affordable housing projects would be exempt from the spot-zoning ban. After this two-year hiatus, legislative land use actions would then be allowed for entire Community Plan areas, Specific Plan areas, and for local areas that are 15 acres or larger. This approach is also consistent with the City of Los Angeles City Charter, which states that these legislative actions must be for geographic areas that have significant social, economic, and physical identity. Spot-zoning and spot-planning, therefore, does not conform to the City Charter. 

Charter Section 555 (a)   Amendment in Whole or in Part. The General Plan may be amended in its entirety, by subject elements or parts of subject elements, or by geographic areas, provided that the part or area involved has significant social, economic or physical identity. 

Claim: “While developers may be gung-ho for higher building capacities, density alone will not heal LA. It takes community discussions, which are easier when the rules are clear. The real need, planners say, is just a little bit of certainty, from which both community members and builders can benefit.” 

Correction: The Neighborhood Integrity Initiative provides absolute certainty by stopping legislative actions that allow mega-project developers to define their own rules for separate parcels, usually in tandem with their campaign contributions. But, as should already be obvious, Big Real Estate has NO interest in such certainty. It is anathema to them. They want total flexibility to build whatever they want, wherever they want, as long as it pencils out to their advantage. That is why they oppose the certainty created by the Neighborhood Integrity Ordinance. It also explains why they are spending vast sums to defeat it, including planting info-mercials in real estate trade journals and City Watch..

A LESSON: Is there a lesson in this list of corrections? Yes, the bigger they come, the harder they fall. Money can buy you lots of things, but so far, basic facts are not for sale.

(Dick Platkin is a former Los Angele city planner who reports on local planning issues for City Watch. Please send any comments or corrections to [email protected].) Prepped for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

15 CANDLES, 96 POINTS OF LIGHT--(Editor’s Note: This month marks the 15^th anniversary of the certification of Los Angeles’ first Neighborhood Council. CityWatch is celebrating with a multi-month celebration of introspective articles and view points on how LA’s Neighborhood Councils came about, how they’re doing and how their future looks. This perspective by Doug Epperhart is such an effort.)  

The first of Los Angeles’ neighborhood councils -- Wilmington and Coastal San Pedro -- recently marked 15 years since they were certified by the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners. This is the third CityWatch column I’ve written commemorating that anniversary. I looked back to see what I said in 2006 and 2011 as a sort of measuring stick plotting the progress of our local experiment in grassroots democracy. 

Ten years ago, I wrote, “Institutions, like children, need time to grow and mature. Whether the neighborhood councils are merely angels with dirty faces or little devils depends on your point of view.” 

Five years ago, it was, “Love them or hate them, neighborhood councils are here to stay.” 

It seems the councils turned out to be mostly well-behaved, if sometimes difficult, teenagers. 

At the beginning, the city’s fledging neighborhood empowerment bureaucracy focused too much on its own internal issues -- especially on how to prepare for certifying and serving the anticipated hundred or so councils. Too little attention was given to assisting those working to organize the councils. For instance, a sample set of bylaws would have been a great help. Some training in dealing with the bureaucratic process would have gone a long way in reducing volunteers’ frustrations. 

Back then, I recall telling more than one politician the councils didn’t need project coordinators to show up at meetings and read announcements; they needed clerks to fill out paperwork. Many councils still struggle with the intricacies of bureaucratic process. 

This was exacerbated by the money showered on councils after they had been around for only a year. The original $50,000 stipend was too much, too soon. Many councils tried saving the money which led to a “use it or lose it” rule requiring groups to spend the funds or see them taken back at the end of the fiscal year. Clearly, NC volunteers didn’t understand the culture of government. 

And, as any neighborhood council treasurer can tell you, the process by which funds are allocated to, and spent by, councils has been an ongoing nightmare. About the only difference now is you wake up a little sooner. 

Perhaps the greatest challenge was, and still is, the issue of defining each councils’ stakeholders. The charter language of “live, work, own property” is fairly straightforward. But, what is a “community interest” stakeholder? Originally, it was up to each council to decide if it would include these stakeholders and, if it did, define the criteria for participation as board members and stakeholders. Five years in, the neighborhood council review commission recommended, and the city council agreed, to require that all councils include this “other” category. 

Democratic governments derive their authority from the just consent of the governed. Usually, the “body politic” is defined as those who reside within the entity’s jurisdiction. Not so for neighborhood councils. Their universe of stakeholders is potentially infinite. At election time, this creates no end of complications for councils. More than anything else, stakeholder definition continues to be a problem for the neighborhood council system. 

The greatest benefit of neighborhood councils is the development of a cadre of passionate and informed community activists. Over the last 15 years, thousands have served on neighborhood council boards and committees. They’ve learned about the idiosyncrasies of their city government and its minions. For many, the experience left them disillusioned. But, many more remain engaged, serving their neighbors and working to improve their communities. Some have now entered City Hall as appointed and elected officials. 

Neighborhood councils were born in the midst of the secession movement as an experiment in grassroots democracy. Fifteen years later, those roots have taken hold and continue to thrive.

(Doug Epperhart is a publisher, a long-time neighborhood council activist and former Board of Neighborhood Commissioners commissioner. He is a contributor to CityWatch and can be reached at: [email protected]) Prepped for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

GELFAND’S WORLD--(Editor’s Note: This month marks the 15^th anniversary of the certification of Los Angeles’ first Neighborhood Council. CityWatch is celebrating with a multi-month celebration of introspective articles and view points on how LA’s Neighborhood Councils came about, how they’re doing and how their future looks. This perspective by Bob Gelfand is just such an effort.)  

Setting: The Board of Neighborhood Commissioners, Dec. 6, 2016, celebrating the completion of 15 years of the neighborhood council system. A recess from the official meeting allowed some of us old timers to be interviewed on camera by a city official. 

The interviewer said, "It doesn't have to be anything long. Three or four sentences would be fine." I tried. A few words came out. I asked for another take. Still not the story. I tried one more time and posterity will have to be content with my stumbling. It's just too much of a history to tell in 3 sentences or even 3000. So let me ask the cameraman to forgive me. Given time to think, I offer you a few basic themes that have emerged slowly from 2001 to the present. The first theme is borrowed from a Supreme Court justice's comment that the essence of the law lies in experience, not theory. Like Constitutional law, the essence of our neighborhood council story is based on experience, not just the wording of the city's Charter. 

In the absence of clear and adequate legal principles, we have to build and learn from experience. The original discovery by so many of us founders was that the city's Charter language establishing the neighborhood council system is ambiguous. The Charter language isn't even clear as to whether a neighborhood council consists of all the thousands of people within a district or is just the elected board. Note that city government has a defined structure. We have a City Council of precisely 15 people. For neighborhood councils, the language of the law refers to stakeholders, and they include all the people within the district and then some. 

This ambiguity can have serious consequences when it comes to real world functioning. For example, City Council members and city departments tend to invite a few neighborhood council presidents to small meetings, which misses the point of the whole invention of neighborhood councils. 

These issues didn't slow us down. As long as the city government was willing to ignore the ambiguities, we made the attempt to work within their induced confusion. 

There are other ambiguities which I've mentioned before -- for example the insistence that a neighborhood council must be diverse, yet must also be as independent as possible. This isn't as trivial as it sounds. At the December, 2001 meeting in which neighborhood councils were first officially certified, our founding president was asked to explain how we would achieve diversity. Considering that we had chosen to have our board members selected by a community wide election, it was hard to guarantee any such thing. Perhaps the commissioners recognized that they were walking into an ambiguity trap and backed off. Somehow, we got through the questioning and became official. 

Six weeks later, in February of 2002, we held our first board election and commenced to operate as the people's ears and mouth. It was a first for the City of Los Angeles, but it has been repeated across the city thousands of times since. 

The curious finding after all these years is that the ambiguity of the Charter language wasn't as much of a hindrance as it threatened to be. Somehow our council survived and along with many others, thrived. That should have been my first comment to the cameraman, even if it can't be expressed adequately in a single sentence. 

The next lesson is that everyone comes to the process with a different vision. The Charter language is like some sort of alphanumeric ink blot test. It has allowed thousands of people to read their own visions into building their councils in dozens, maybe hundreds of different ways. Not only is a neighborhood council put together out of competing visions, the primary vision that coalesces at one point will evolve into a different vision at another. 

In our early years, we were concerned with how our immediate neighbor, the Port of Los Angeles, treats our community. We made it our objective to push for reduced air pollution coming from the port's activities, as the port is responsible for a significant fraction of all diesel derived pollutants in the LA basin. Over these 15 years, the twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have reduced their contribution to the region's air pollution substantially. This is not something that is attributable to the neighborhood councils by themselves, but we played a role in the political environment, making sure that our elected officials understood that air quality is a priority to our residents. The harbor area neighborhood councils became a part of the civic conversation. More than that, they provided a nucleus for people to get involved in the process. 

Even as some of us thought about human environmental effects, some were involved with the region's economic health. Others (such as myself) were involved in supporting the cultural attributes of our extended neighborhoods. In San Pedro, several neighborhood councils have lobbied for city protection of a classic movie theater and other historic structures. We found that we are not alone. We notice that the people of Fullerton have been carrying on a preservation and restoration campaign for their own historic movie theater. 

As an aside, let me point out that a few historic theaters have been preserved, among them the Egyptian in Hollywood, the Fox in Fullerton, and the Warner Grand in San Pedro, whereas many other old time movie houses have either fallen into disrepair or been demolished. The spirit of the neighborhood council is to preserve structures and traditions that are central to the spirit of a community, even when doing so runs against the tide of local economics. This is a form of preservationism in its own right, an attempt to conserve specific things that would leave us culturally poorer by their loss. 

That might have been my second thought, the realization that protection of the classical urban structure is worth doing. In this, the neighborhood councils have joined a movement originally developed by organizations such as the National Trust for Historic Preservation and Hollywood Heritage, and are just a little bit removed from those who have preserved our national parks going all the way back to Abraham Lincoln. 

Given the chance to express just three thoughts, I would insist on spending my last thought on the flip side of the experiential coin -- the incessant internal competition within individual neighborhood councils and among adjacent neighborhood councils. Some refer to it as squabbling or bickering. Some critics point to the often excessive level of debate on more or less mundane issues. Some think of our propensity to verbiage as some kind of affliction of the ego. I think that those who insist on this view are, in their own way, rediscovering Ecclesiastes: All is vanity. The only difference is that our modern day critics are protesting that which the prophet viewed as eternal. 

Can we be trapped in our own vanity and destined to nothingness, as the prophet says, and still make things better in this, our own time and our own place? It's a decent question, but it applies to most things in life. If nothing else, our first one and a half decades have been quite the experience.

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

-cw

DEEGAN ON LA—(Editor’s Note: This month marks the 15^th anniversary of the certification of Los Angeles’ first Neighborhood Council. CityWatch will celebrate with a multi-month celebration of introspective articles and view points on how LA’s Neighborhood Councils came about, how they’re doing and how their future looks. This perspective by Tim Deegan is the first such effort.) 

“Secession”… a word that struck fear into the political heartbeat at City Hall fifteen years ago when the San Fernando Valley, Hollywood, and the Harbor area attempted to break away from the city claiming they were getting poor service from a city that they believed was poorly managed. 

Now, history appears to be repeating itself with the news that Venice, famous for its boundary-pushing beach vibe and lifestyle, with a boardwalk that is a tourist mecca ripe for gentrification, wants to leave the city. They’re calling it “Vexit.” 

“The wedge issue right now,” according to Venice Neighborhood Council Chair Ira Koslow, “is that what the city is choosing to do is not what people want to have done. We don’t have a say.” As an example, Koslow points out that, “Nobody was asked about a homeless plan by Councilmember Mike Bonin (CD11) that would put housing for the homeless in the Thatcher Yard, and a storage facility for the homeless across from Westminster Elementary school, as well as including a large chunk of public property in the BID process so it could be finalized. People are freaked out about Bonin’s plans. He needs to put us in the loop. We don’t feel like we’re being listened to at all.” 

Bonin’s office countered, “The size and type of housing in each proposal will be determined following the community input process that Mike has insisted the developers conduct.” The location of the housing and storage -- which is the community’s complaint (not the size and type of housing, especially their complaint about the storage facility for the homeless being across from an elementary school) -- does not sound negotiable. 

Several documents from Bonin’s office, including an Online Survey from December 2015, a March 29, 2016 Community Meeting where “first elements of the plan were introduced,” and a Second Community Meeting (September 8, 2016) provide another side of the story, but they may not be seen as solutions. As recently as six weeks ago, the community dispute was headline news in the LA Times. 

The feeling of being shut out, Koslow claims, is the opposite of the political engagement that Neighborhood Councils were designed to foster. It sounds like what the Valley, Hollywood and the Harbor were saying fifteen years ago before Neighborhood Councils were created to help give communities a voice. 

That “Vexit” is even being mentioned is a huge step backward for a city that has nurtured a Neighborhood Council plan to bring communities into the decision making process. 

NPR reported in an April 29, 2002 broadcast that, “Close to half the city's voters support secession ... three areas of the city, Hollywood, the Harbor area and the San Fernando Valley, consider breaking away, and it might actually happen.” 

Fearing the loss of a huge tax base, the city stepped in and fought back, avoiding seccession. Polls at the time suggested strong support for secession. Combined, the Harbor, Hollywood and the San Fernando Valley represented about half the population of the city. The Valley itself, with 1.5 million residents, would have become the nation’s sixth largest city at the time. 

Once the secession vote failed -- but because it was attempted -- Charter reform eventually led to a system of Neighborhood Councils with an important mandate. As stated in the LA City Charter, Section 900: “Purpose of Neighborhood Councils: To promote more citizen participation in government and make government more responsive to local needs.” 

Homeowner associations had always been the “go-to” community groups and still play a very important role, although they may exist in a NIMBY bubble, shrinking their influence when they are seen as being more interested in the property values within their HOA boundaries than in the community-at-large, which is the greater territory that a Neighborhood Council covers. The NCs fit somewhere between the HOAs and the City Councilmembers; they have an officially recognized “advisory” role to city departments and the Mayor. 

Like previous secession movements, “Vexit” would require a “yes” vote by both Venice residents and the rest of the city. Remembering how fiercely the city fought back against the Valley and Hollywood successions, it looks like Venice secession would be an uphill struggle. However, in today’s political environment, where anything can happen, the idea of a “Vexit” cannot be dismissed. Losing Venice would put a dent into the city’s tax base that is used to fund programs; it would result in a loss of lots of political power. 

In the 2002 referendum, a bare simple majority (50.72%) of Valley residents voted to succeed, but the city vote was two-thirds (66.97%) against it. In Hollywood, the spread was even wider: one-third of Hollywood voters said “yes’ to leaving, but three-quarters of the city voters said “no.” 

Fifteen years later, secession is again in the air. Whether or not “Vexit” happens this time around, the community is organized locally through its neighborhood council, and regionally through its membership in the Westside Region Alliance of Councils, a cooperative regional alliance made up of 10 Neighborhood and Community Councils. This represents a great leap forward from the Valley and Hollywood and Harbor movements. 

The eleven candidates (including incumbent Bonin) who have filed their intentions to run for the CD11 seat in the March 2017 primary could hit a nerve with voters by pledging to help fulfill the City Charter backed Neighborhood Council mission, “To promote more citizen participation in government and make government more responsive to local needs.”

(Tim Deegan is a long-time resident and community leader in the Miracle Mile, who has served as board chair at the Mid City West Community Council and on the board of the Miracle Mile Civic Coalition. Tim can be reached at [email protected].) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

REPRESENTATION RE-BOOT-I have said this before and Tony Butka has said it again recently, but I will now try it again: today’s Neighborhood Councils are “leaders” who are leading the NCs in the wrong direction.

Neighborhood Councils have lost sight of who they really are. Each NC is supposed to consider the local and city-wide concerns of everyone in that community. 

I usually agree with Bob Gelfand but this time his suggestion requires an opposing response. Bob knows that the original idea of NC representation was to include all the “stakeholders” concerned with each NC. The words "live, work or owns property" were put into the Charter to make each NC represent all the people in their communities. To “live, work or own property” means to allow non-residents (those who work or own property in an NC) to participate in all of the NCs they choose. I would even extend that privilege to non-residents who just find a given NC worth their interest. That is about as far as the concept of "inclusivity" can be extended. 

Personally, I have served on the boards of two NCs where I did not live, in addition to my “home” NC. I was interested in and worked on the local and the city-wide issues of all three councils. I tried to be the "poster-child" for the non-resident NC Stakeholder. 

NCs are not home owner associations -- although they often act like them. 

In most Neighborhood Councils, homeowners make up the majority of active stakeholders and board members. Their challenge is to invite and engage the interest and participation of renters, local (non-resident) property owners and local business owners and employees. Our 100 NCs have never been active or successful at "outreach" to these non-homeowners. All "outreach" attempts have failed to produce any meaningful "reach back." 

Bob Gelfand proposed and others have argued that the NCs’ stakeholders should be limited to the voters in their neighborhoods so as to have a closer relationship with their respective City Council members. That would require a Charter change in which NC participation would be restricted to residents only. That would not create better relations between the NCs and their respective City Council members.

An alternative way to make the NC neighborhoods align with their City Council members is to change the boundaries of the City Council Districts to match the boundaries of the NCs. 

However, the 2012 Redistricting Process showed that the City Council (led by Herb Wesson) did not want NCs to be geographically contained within specific City Council Districts. The Redistricting Commission was presented, and presumably considered, a proposal that would have rearranged the Council Districts in such a way that only a few NCs shared more than one City Council member. 

The Winnetka NC wanted to be in both CD3 and CD12. The Redistricting Commission (headed by Herb Wesson’s senior staff member, Andrew Matthews) ended up setting City Council boundaries that denied the suggestions of most NCs, putting over 40 of them in two, three and, even, four different City Council Districts. The most flagrant examples of that are: Koreatown which, in spite of its strong request to be in one City Council District, ended up having to deal with four City Council Members. 

Also, Tom LaBonge’s CD4 was gerrymandered to include the Larchmont Area, enough of the Los Feliz area to include Tom’s beloved Griffith Park and the Toluca Lake Area (which, coincidentally, is Andrew Matthews “home” NC.) West Hills NC which traditionally, emotionally and demographically was in Council District 3 (the Southwest San Fernando Valley) ended up in the dramatically different Council District 12 (the Northwest San Fernando Valley.) 

When the NCs address and act on these concerns, they will begin to realize the original vision of the 1998 Charter Reform. Most importantly, they will begin to truly represent all the people who are interested in their communities.

(Daniel Wiseman, M.D., is a long-time Neighborhood activist and an occasional contributor to CityWatch.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.