Chapter One
I'd suspected something was amiss for a while but until I heard the knock on the door I looked the other way like everybody else.
It was Saturday and there was a neighbor lady standing there. She held a piece of paper in her hand.
"Do you know what's happened?"
Bruno was going crazy, yowling and lunging at the screen door with the full force of that giant
head of his, 60 pounds of pit bull/shar-pei fury. Damn, I wish my wife
had never taken him in from the bushes just because she thought he'd
kill somebody.
"Shut up, Bruno," I yelled to no avail.
The woman was unfazed.
"You know that house they turned into a board-and-care facility five, six years ago. The one at the corner? It's been converted into three apartments with kitchens and baths. It's illegal. Did you see who's moving in? We can't get the city to do anything ."
I perked up. This was my beat. I stepped outside, yelled at Bruno one more time and said: "You've knocked on the right door, ma'm. My name is Ron. Maybe I can help."
She and another lady were going door to door with petitions. They'd been trying for months. It's an illegal conversion. It's got to be stopped.
I got the picture clear enough. Our tract of modest bungalows on the Valley floor was threatened. Quiet streets, no through traffic, no crime, nice people. The only time we see a cop is when our next door neighbor comes by.
"I'm busy," I told her. "We'll talk."
To be continued....
I'd suspected something was amiss for a while but until I heard the knock on the door I looked the other way like everybody else.
It was Saturday and there was a neighbor lady standing there. She held a piece of paper in her hand.
"Do you know what's happened?"
Bruno was going crazy, yowling and lunging at the screen door with the full force of that giant
head of his, 60 pounds of pit bull/shar-pei fury. Damn, I wish my wife
had never taken him in from the bushes just because she thought he'd
kill somebody."Shut up, Bruno," I yelled to no avail.
The woman was unfazed.
"You know that house they turned into a board-and-care facility five, six years ago. The one at the corner? It's been converted into three apartments with kitchens and baths. It's illegal. Did you see who's moving in? We can't get the city to do anything ."
I perked up. This was my beat. I stepped outside, yelled at Bruno one more time and said: "You've knocked on the right door, ma'm. My name is Ron. Maybe I can help."
She and another lady were going door to door with petitions. They'd been trying for months. It's an illegal conversion. It's got to be stopped.
I got the picture clear enough. Our tract of modest bungalows on the Valley floor was threatened. Quiet streets, no through traffic, no crime, nice people. The only time we see a cop is when our next door neighbor comes by.
"I'm busy," I told her. "We'll talk."
To be continued....
Ron Kaye is the former editor of the Los Angeles Daily News where he spent 23 years helping to make the newspaper the voice of the San Fernando Valley and fighting for a city government that serves the people and not special interests.
Twice in recent years, Los Angeles Magazine listed Kaye among the city’s most influential people, specifically in the area of politics. Kaye has been variously described in the media as the “accidental anarchist,” “the Patrick Henry of the San Fernando Valley” and a “passionate populist.” He is now committed to
carrying on his crusade for a greater Los Angeles as an ordinary citizen. Previously, Ron worked at the Los Angeles Herald Examiner,
Associated Press, Cleveland Plain Dealer and The Australian as well as papers
in Fairbanks, Alaska and Yakima, Wash. He also wrote for Newsweek magazine, The Guardian in London and the Naitonal Enquirer.
Anybody who would stay on your porch with that monster lunging at her has to be really committed to improving the neighborhood!
Bruno is a dog.
Bruno is your friend.
Take your friend with you when talking to city officials about illegal residential conversions.
If they can have armed guards to watch two "dangerous" citizens who come to read public records, then you can talk to the City armed to the teeth!
With nobody scoffing at laws more than our city officials, could you, Ron Kaye, please put up a permanent link or URL for the City Charter?
Although I'm pretty sure it would be boring as hell to persue and would make a better sleeping pill than reading material, it would provide easy reference (maybe) to what they are supposed to be doing as opposed to what they really are doing.
Having a live-in attorney voun't hoit either.
I would also like to see a permanent link to the oath of office sworn to by the mayor and every council member.
Thanks for considering this, SJS
This URL will redirect you to the LA Charter and Municipal Codes:
http://lacodes.lacity.org
>>
Wow Ron, you really are passionate...about yourself.
I sympathize with much of what's being said in this blog and elsewhere, but what I don't hear, is what ideas people have for bringing IN revenue -- if ALL development is bad, you're not part of the discussion on how to balance growth in some areas, the "transit corridors" the planners talk about, with the low-density areas people want to preserve.
Even if we agree that illegal immigration, which is mostly poor people who consume more in social services than they put into the system (which making life easier for a handful of wealthy people and companies), is negative and we don't need to create infrastructure for them as is happening, the fact is, we need tax revenue from well-planned developments and businesses. (The Daily News yesterday had an article on how most of the anchor babies of illegals were still poor, and quoted sociologists acknowledging that this sort of high birth rate was NOT going to make up for whatever ails our communities suffering from low birth rate -- we'd need an educated work force to accomplish that. But we keep OUT educated would-be immigrants, bowing to the illegal Latino lobby.)
There's the NO HOME Depot crowd, which has a unique case in a town which can only handle ONE big business, but what's the balance to their wanting to subject the rest of us taxpayers to lawsuits fighting them? (It's not like they can afford to pay for their own lawsuit.) And as for communities that DO file lawsuit after lawsuit themselves, what's their contribution to bringing IN tax revenue? Nada. Even a "liberal" city like Santa Monica has brought so much business into that town, that their traffic is horrendous, but they've got the money for social programs, as does West Hollywood. Neighboring L A communities still get the commuter traffic to those cities, but NOT the revenue they generate. Fact is, the less corporate tax revenue we have, the more you and I will have to pay in property and sales tax.
11:38 raises some good questions - ..."if ALL development is bad, you're not part of the discussion on how to balance growth in some areas..." etc. Firstly, because the city never follows existing land use laws, or is the process of updating them, or is being sued, it gets pretty difficult to be part of the overall discussion. Longterm planning is one thing. But, it's how the City continually handles short-term projects that causes the problems. So, let me just try to discuss what I have learned, based on my experiences. Secondly, I never view "all" development as bad. Development brings revenue, jobs, etc. However, you hit the nail on the head - it is about balance - balancing the needs and existing problems in a community against those of a developer who will build then move on, leaving the community with the good and the bad impacts. And, of course, generating revenue to fill those always "empty" city coffers drives the decision-makers whose interests aren't always in agreement wtih the impacted community. There is one the problems, the community is almost always at odds with its own city mostly because by the time we learn about the next great development, decisions behind the scenes have been made. Then, it is up to us to press for safeguards/protections and mitigation measures (like asking for traffic controls, etc.). (Obviously, this is the simplified "blog" version - there are always numerous dynamics at play).
As for the transit corridors - on paper, sounds great. But, take the instance of Ventura Blvd., wherein the Mayor promised it wouldn't be designated a "transit corridor." It never has been. So, he was true to his word. However (hey, you knew that was coming)when Ventura based activist groups learned that any street that has a rapid transit/red line bus service on it meets the "transit corridor" definition, we knew trouble was coming our way. Why> Because Ventura Boulevard has those rapid bus stops. Affected properties covers a large area -about 1500 sq. feet on a radius map. So, here you have a classic example of how the city plans - makes the laws first then deals with the consequences. Like high density projects smack against single family neighborhoods. Like high density projects that no longer have to provide adequate parking, can be taller than under existing laws, etc. (There is another lawsuit on this issue too).
Ellen, you're talking about the fact that AB1818 CHANGES the City's definition of Transit Corridor, calling a Transit Corridor anything within some 1500 feet of a Rapid Bus Stop. So the Mayor wasn't lying in his promises -- as even Jane Usher and the most unorthodox planners tell us, this AB1818 as a State Assembly bill (designed to unfairly target our city, as AB212 tried to do even MORE extremely) has changed the rules and definitions for the worse. Even Bill Rosendahl, perhaps the most left of the "old guard white-liberal guilt brigade" for lack of a better term (with Janice Hahn), wrings his hands in frustration as these AB1818 ties his hands in many cases.
HOW did that bill get by our City Council? I'm not sure it totally did -- there are members like Ed Reyes, Richard Alarcon and Cardenas who openly push for an 8-member majority to get high-density, low-income projects approved to build in ANY neighborhood. They were caught red- handed pretending not to know about Felipe Fuentes' AB212 which would have made this possible AND was aimed just at L A. These people are well-connected to our Latino Assembly members Fuentes and Padilla, and recently temporarily retired Cindy Montanez, who were behind this. So what really seems to be going on here, is a certain faction which is using STATE legislation to get past the cautions of Councilmembers who represent low-density communities. Sometimes community anger like yours is misdirected at the wrong people, AND the wrong kinds of development.
Unfortunately, our NC's and HOA's aren't equipped to be looking out for our interests at the Assembly level, when we don't even seem to have someone working f/t for our city doing this in Sacramento. As Greig Smith and Wendy Greuel and others have stated, that's where we've been at a disadvantage: not to mention, the Councilmembers who DO seem to know about these pro-affordable housing bills in advance, don't share this info with members who represent areas which would naturally oppose them. Reyes and his sidekicks openly state they're at odds with "the hillside federations and homeowner associations" who "care more about property values than about social values," of letting them move their projects into their areas. As an observer and long-time community activist myself in the flats of Brentwood, I'm as concerned as anyone about how "the city" has pushed almost into the ocean, but like it or not, we're part of the city dialogue and can't set up toll gates around ourselves.
Well, this aint exactly staying on topic - but, what's killing our 'hoods isn't limited to just one cause. And, the preceding commentary deserves further discussion.
The writer is correct. I was mentioning SB1818, which being litigated in the Court. As for what happens to transit corridors, they will probably show up in another set of laws, in anticipation of SB1818 being overturned.
And, I couldn't agree more that HOA and NC's (Neighborhood Councils) don't have the manpower to start lobbying up North. Yet, I suspect that it is only a matter of time before HOAs (homeowner or resident associations) start. First we have to take back Los Angeles...
As for Fuentes' bill - that was a nightmare. If approved, it would have removed local planning authority in one city in California. Ours! It's bad enough the public was caught off guard - but Council Members too? Fortunately, Feuentes withdrew the bill. For now?
So maybe it is necessary to keep a few toll gates up and operating because the city is pushing for infill development NO MATTER WHAT.
And, as for being part of the city dialogue, I can't but ask this question. Before a developer brings the project to the City or after? There is a big difference.
Sunland-Tujunga also has a "transit corridor" and is targetted for low-income growth (ie. low-income apartments along Foothill Blvd.). Somewhat similar to Ventura Blvd., Foothill Blvd has a Commuter Express busline to Downtown (ie. Line 409) which makes it targetted for SB1818 low income housing growth. It is targetted for slumville. Make no mistake and don't deceive yourself. These developments will turn to gang infested slums, as have occurred in others parts of L.A.
It's unfortunate that the Sunland Tujunga Neighborhood Council are either too stupid or too corrupt to confront this. The LA Planning Dept. has blatantly lied about it's intention. Some ST residents think that the new "timed" traffic lights were not put in for the Communter Express. They believe it was installed due to the good/friendly intentions of the DOT. Does my community believe anything said by L.A. Planning or DOT? They shouldn't. It's a sad fate.
The 11:38 Anonymous poster who wonders about ideas to bring in more city revenue needs to acquire some glasses. Open your eyes. Los Angeles is actively seeking to acquire the dregs of our hemishere. Villaraigosa and Bratton make pilgrimages to South America looking for them. V&B and their stooges are trying to make Los Angeles into the Day Labor center of SoCal. In effect, this is their intention. This will happen with SB1818 and low income housing. Big Businees sees this and is fleeing Los Angeles (ie. mostly everyone but the porn industry).
Solutions??? Again, open your eyes. There are plenty of viable solutions. Only problem is that V&B won't support them.
1:16 : AB1818 SAYS NOTHING ABOUT TRANSIT CORRIDORS. Contrary to your assertion, AB1818 does not make any mention of transit corridors. In fact, it's Los Angeles City who created this association with transit corridors in L.A. City's Density Ordinance. So, blame the City Council's Transportation Committee, ie. Wendy Greuel as the chief deceiver, for this abomination.
1:16, these are the facts.
8:17, Funny, but seems to me that the HOA's of the westside in particular have done an excellent job of driving off white-collar business. Case in point, MGM was set and signed to move all its operations to its new Century City towers, but the fighting of the local groups, "shaking down" some developers for almost $8 million (call it what you want, but that discourages developers and business) and going to war with its councilman led to MGM deciding to keep its Home Entertainment Division in Santa Monica -- specifically because it would need to grow and was a major job and revenue provider. That's only one of many cases, from all over town. These same people have fought the subway/Red Line, Expo Line II and everything for decades. Having moved here after living, studying and working in Paris, London and New York, the lack of mass transit is mind=boggling, but not as much as those who continue to deride it yet complain about gridlock. And oppose surface solutions to gridlock, too.
Personally, I would like to see more companies moving to places like South L A, but high-end companies are attracted to high-end development in prime areas of town; I'm not privy to why the CRA isn't or can't do more to attract business to those areas, but we read that Perry, Parks, Wesson all have problems -- even the close-to- Beverly Hills San Vicente/Pico area has been hard to lease out.
Your comment reflects frustration many of us feel with the demographics of this city and how illegal immigration and their birthrates have changed the city dramatically in the last two decades, not just the valley and midtown and Hollywood, but turned South L A upside down. But that blame game is only half the problem, you're not admitting to the adverse role people like you have had. This is what some people are finding even in Ron's misc. postings: when you attack everyone with a wide brush, everything and everyone in the city is bad, you're tuned out. Reading comments like yours just saps one's energy.
One thing the city/ planning dept. must do ASAP is update their General Plan; there was supposed to be an annual updating of population growth/ trends, transportation available, etc., based on which they issue building permits. However, the last one was done in 2000, for the year 98-99, so it's a decade outdated. There has been such an increase in our Latino immigrant population alone from birth rates, than the last decade has hardly been static. If it had, Reyes, Alarcon, Cardenas, Rosendahl would hardly be pushing for their "slums-in-the-making" as 7:59 fears, as much as they are, or trying these AB212 bills. (8:42, I heard the Planning Dept. advise CM's Rosendahl -- who's on Transportation Committee 00 and colleagues in Council on SB1818, so I wouldn't blame him or Greuel -- you're giving them too much credit for being omniscient and omnipotent.)
But we have no accounting of anything financial, either, like net cost to healthcare, schools, jails and law endorsement and other social programs from immigration in the last decade. That we won't see, for obvious reasons, but the annual updating of the General Plan is something a number of NC's and HOA's have been asking for.
I'm as much a NIMBY and anti-traffic as anyone, but I've come to believe that if we must have some density and attract business, better to do it in a high-end, "classy" way, in certain locations, than to be stuck with the other kind any and everywhere. (Like the person from S-T is dreading.) As for influx of illegal immigrants, we should continue to speak up, but unless the feds do something dramatic -- which is unlikely -- the high birth rates from the ones already here are a fact we can't avoid.
Thanks for the URL, anonymous 8:34.
8:52 I can't believe what you say. If you want mass transit then take the bus. The L.A. metros are a boondoggle, a dog and pony show. It'll only, ever, be able to transport a relative few. Your L.A. comparisons to Paris, London, New York are ridiculous. Those are tiny cities in comparison to L.A. The only real solution to L.A. traffic conjestion is to create an effective carpool system, primarily via freeways.
"Case in point, MGM was set and signed to move all its operations to its new Century City towers, but the fighting of the local groups, "shaking down" some developers for almost $8 million (call it what you want, but that discourages developers and business) and going to war with its councilman led to MGM deciding to keep its Home Entertainment Division in Santa Monica"
--- you are parroting the the City Council's devious PR machine. MGM is looking to the long, long term. It's not in their best, long term interest to locate in L.A. You are wrong about the reasons for MGM staying in Santa Monica. Do you really believe that "developer" concerns and losing $8 million dollar credits are truly keeping MGM Home Entertainment out of L.A.? HA, HA. What more is there to say? That money is chump change to them. BTW, is this the same reasoning that NBC is staying in Burbank, and not relocating to L.A.? Why not just "blame it on Bin Ladin".
Sorry 8:52, you were fooled from the start. BTW, if you wish to live or do business in South-central LA then do so. Good luck to you. The policing there stinks.
I've lived in L.A. most of my life. You're mistaken, yet again, about another thing. It's not the changes in the last two decades that has greatly degraded L.A. There's always been immigration in L.A. and it's not wrecked such havoc, and it's been working out fairly well. But since the Bush policies of the last 4 or 5 years, and particularly during Villaraigosa's term as mayor, there has been a noted change in the city's direction (not for the better, unless living in a city similar to Mumbai appeals to you... L.A. City Planners use it as a model).
7:27: sorry, but this is the kind of neanderthal "thinking" that created the current gridlock and other problems, and doesn't deserve listening to. "If you want mass transit, take the bus...the only real solution is to create an effective carpool system..." Then, every little group demanding $8M is "chump chamge" to every big company and of no consequence, since they have unlimited funds. (You and Janice Hahn see eye to eye on that one, then -- too bad business and Chambers of Commerce don't.) Then some jumbled blaming the Bush Admin. AND Antonio together, for our problems suddenly mushrooming within the last "4-5 years" (a little off with counting Antonio's time in office, not to mention that they're political polar opposites)... Crazy comps to the two of them developing like Mumbai, of which you're even more ignorant than Europe AND Los Angeles. SAD, but thank you for demonstrating the sheer idiocy of the opponents to Expo/subway, lest anyone wondered whether it's worth engaging you people any further.
9:18 Look who's regurgitating stale, old ideas. Subways catering to the few. Buses for the masses resembling a third world, "animal path" system. You City Planners haven't had a novel concept since the first freeway.
Try multiperson car usage... yea, carpooling. It will solve the gridlocked commute problem. Bus usage will only move the "gridlock" problem to the streets, where the problems are manifested by throngs standing at bus stops. Go back to Mumbai and look around. Would you want to live there?
1:12 = One of the Trogladytes Ron is gathering on Bastille Day to save the city? Lord help us FROM them. If you think anyone's going to do anything to keep your kind from leaving the city, don't hold your breath: we'll chip in for that bus ticket.
1:23 Buses are your thing!!!