Even as they were spending the city into a $500 million deficit four months ago, your City Council members came up with yet another bright idea to make your life better and the mayor wholeheartedly agreed: Every cat and dog in L.A. would have to be spayed or neutered, no exceptions without paying heavy penalties.
Of course, talk -- like City Hall's selective enforcement policies -- is cheap. In this case, they were so cheap in fact they provided no funds to enforce this law.
That should surprise no one since the city doesn't even enforce the requirement that every dog must be licensed every year.
Law-abiding citizens clearly are as much a rarity as city politicians who expect the laws they pass to be obeyed.
Back in May, Controller Laura Chick estimated there's only 125,000 law-abiding dog owners and as many as six times that many who are scofflaws -- which made people like my wife feel pretty foolish for obediently licensing Bruno, the beast she rescued from bushes before he killed someone.
In a city so cash-strapped it's imposed charges on just about everything honest people do and seeks to make them pay even more to save the souls of hardened gangsters, it seems like getting their dirty little hands on the $9 million a year lost from not enforcing the pet registration law would be enough motivation.
But no, this is L.A. and as Chick showed in an audit Tuesday absolutely nothing has been done to fund the mandatory spaying and neutering law for cats and dogs and the Animal Services Department has done nothing to educate the public or implement the law when the grace period ends in October.
"Though Animal Services is charged with enforcing the mandatory spay and neuter law, it does not intend to do so," Chick said in her audit statement.
In other words, it's up to you to decide whether you want to obey the law or not -- like just about everything City Hall does to selectively punish the law-abiding while letting the scofflaws do whatever they want.
I suppose some of you NIMBY types and middle-class malcontents have a problem with that. If so, why don't you post other examples of the city's SCOFF LAWS or selective enforcement.
Of course, talk -- like City Hall's selective enforcement policies -- is cheap. In this case, they were so cheap in fact they provided no funds to enforce this law.
That should surprise no one since the city doesn't even enforce the requirement that every dog must be licensed every year.
Law-abiding citizens clearly are as much a rarity as city politicians who expect the laws they pass to be obeyed.
Back in May, Controller Laura Chick estimated there's only 125,000 law-abiding dog owners and as many as six times that many who are scofflaws -- which made people like my wife feel pretty foolish for obediently licensing Bruno, the beast she rescued from bushes before he killed someone.
In a city so cash-strapped it's imposed charges on just about everything honest people do and seeks to make them pay even more to save the souls of hardened gangsters, it seems like getting their dirty little hands on the $9 million a year lost from not enforcing the pet registration law would be enough motivation.
But no, this is L.A. and as Chick showed in an audit Tuesday absolutely nothing has been done to fund the mandatory spaying and neutering law for cats and dogs and the Animal Services Department has done nothing to educate the public or implement the law when the grace period ends in October.
"Though Animal Services is charged with enforcing the mandatory spay and neuter law, it does not intend to do so," Chick said in her audit statement.
In other words, it's up to you to decide whether you want to obey the law or not -- like just about everything City Hall does to selectively punish the law-abiding while letting the scofflaws do whatever they want.
I suppose some of you NIMBY types and middle-class malcontents have a problem with that. If so, why don't you post other examples of the city's SCOFF LAWS or selective enforcement.
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 National Enquirer.
One that I won't follow is putting food scraps in a container they're going to give us for recycling -- I'm supposed to keep rotting food for a week somewhere, and keep opening it up to add more, and then the trash collectors open it up to dump into their truck, maybe spilling it... That's what sink disposals are for. Or try not wasting so much food.
Why do people put a lot more on their plates than they eat? That's not just an LA thing, but a national problem of waste -- and it has nothing to do with being rich or poor. Lots of the richest people I know believe in not wasting food. Who's going to want the job of enforcing this one, peeking into those foul things? Naturally, that's a Bill Rosendahl push, author of the "gold in the gutters" parking meter hikes. (Which I fear will discourage people from patronizing small shops in favor of the malls.)
The only place it makes sense: restaurants, caterers, etc. where they deal in large quantities. (Gavin Newsom in SF is pushing that, too -- when you can't think of anything useful to do...)
I hope the plastic manufacturers win their lawsuit in Manhattan Beach: forcing us to pay 25c for a plastic bag is an effective tax, since many of us recycle them for trash liners and dog and cat use. Plus no one will ever persuade me that I'm going to fit the 8 large bags worth of food I get on one shopping trip into a cloth bag, and then have to wash it each time. Mixing dairy and meat in one bag isn't kosher religiously or healthwise. What about the lost jobs?
Charging a few cents would be fine, though -- like in Europe, where about half the people bring their own plastic bags back or a net or cloth one. Paper bags take up more resources to manufacture. Why don't they just try pushing voluntary recycling before making it a law?
Bruno's a dog?
Oh my!!! Where to start. OK, the ordinary. Abandoned shopping carts are being left on city streets. Those carts are suppose to be picked up and brought back by one of several private companies. Sounds like an effective system, right. No, it's not. Too many carts are left on the streets of L.A. The carts must be reported to the "pick up" companies by the public. Much of the time, the abandoned shopping carts remain on the streets, unreported and unreturned. The system is ineffective.
Well, there's a law on the books to proactively keep the shopping carts on the supermarket lots. Municipal Code 41.45f says,
"(f) Notice. Each business establishment owning such shopping cart, shopping basket or other similar device shall place at each of its exits a sign notifying its customers and the general public of the aforesaid prohibitions. Such notification shall be placed in such a position and be of sufficient size and legibility so as to insure that persons leaving such places of business shall be fully informed of the prohibitory provisions contained in this section."
So, the supermarkets must have a sign at their exits notifying it's customers THAT IT'S ILLEGAL TO TAKE SHOPPING CARTS OFF THE PREMISES.
DO THE SUPERMARKETS HAVE THIS SIGN ON THEIR DOORS? NO, NONE OF THEM DO. Again, it must state that it's illegal to remove shopping carts from the premises. No other notices, such as "please tell us when you see a shopping cart on the street" are acceptable.
Is this an overly costly burden, putting a sticker on the doors? Of course not. Is there any department in the City or is there anyone in the LAPD willing to enforce this, or write a ticket. NOT A ONE. Can't this city get anything right.
BTW, were still waiting for Councilmember Cardenas to author a law to require that shopping carts have a locking wheel capability to disable the carts before they are pushed off the supermarket lot, with a law similar to the Glendale or Pasadena law of similar intent.
to earlier poster:
There is an ordinance to do that, require stores to have devices preventing removal from store lots AND with LARGE FINES for the stores.
It's only getting strengthened because of REVENUE GENERATING potential; all the reasons stated for the ordinance are more or less phony and a way to GET TO THE MONEY.
It's Par for the course, as Council plays it.
Chick's audit has some validity, but some of it is much ado about nothing too. If you think about it for a moment (it doesn't really take that long), it becomes obvious that MOST laws depend upon voluntary compliance, not some kind of mystical enforcement scheme, to do what they do.
Do we have enough police to stop every crime before it happens? Of course not. Does that mean most people commit crimes because they think they won't get caught? Again, of course not.
The City will eventually get its act together to tell more people about the spay/neuter law, more pets will be sterilized and fewer will be killed in the shelters. That's how it will work. Laura Chick's headline hustling on the matter will be forgotten soon enough.
Why do you have to wash the cloth bags every time you use them?
We began using them about eight weeks ago, mostly for the main weekly grocery shopping because we forget to take them during the week, and not one is dirty enough to be washed.
I like the cloth bags; they hold the groceries together even better than paper bags.
If dirty cloth bags are a real problem, there are ones that are all plastic or have plastic liners, which are easy to wipe down.
I REALLY HAVE to be anonymous on this one. I have a huge property and will ignore the 14-minute watering rule. It takes me longer than that to water the outdoor potted plants, and I have no lawn to water, just a bunch or huge hills. If they’re not kept green, they’re an eyesore and a fire hazard.
I HAVE AN ILLEGAL dog, and have ignored the dog license law since animal regs stopped coming around to check backyards for canines. It used to be pretty hard to deny having a dog when your quadruped is nipping at the heels of the inspector at the front door, or objecting to his presence with loud yips, howls and barking.
I might ignore the licensing, but they’ve all been inoculated, spayed or neutered, depending…
THE CITY SCOFFS at its laws governing illegal billboards, littering our property with unwanted advertising fliers and trash pickers who rummage through and steal from our curb-side trash bin.
When they steal from the blue bins, they are double dipping by theft from us and the city. Whatever is missing from the bins can’t be recycled, and the city loses the money they make from recycling cans, bottles and paper.
None of these are life-threatening, but they are pain-in-the-neck quality of life issues.
CONVERSELY, the biggest and most vital example of city scoffing is everything that’s done to make L.A. a sanctuary city, Special Order 40, protection of illegal aliens, and using the guise of civil rights to protect illegal aliens, especially the gang member variety.
FINALLY, I'm not a NIMBY because I don't want grubby people rifling through my trash cans, stealing from them and making a mess I have to clean up.
Nor am I a NIMBY for resenting people leaving unwanted ads in every nook and cranny on my property that I also have to clean up, or the wind blows away and liters the entire neighborhood.
I'm a NIABY on those: Not in anyone's back yard [or front yard].
12:28 says "There is an ordinance to do that, require stores to have devices preventing removal from store lots AND with LARGE FINES for the stores."
I doubt it. State the ordinance number and when it was enacted. And why doesn't ANY supermarket in L.A. have locking wheel shopping carts to this date, to my knowledge.
12:28 says "There is an ordinance to do that, require stores to have devices preventing removal from store lots AND with LARGE FINES for the stores."
I doubt it. State the ordinance number and when it was enacted. And why doesn't ANY OF THE LARGE supermarket in L.A. have locking wheel shopping carts to this date, to my knowledge.
12:28 says "There is an ordinance to do that, require stores to have devices preventing removal from store lots AND with LARGE FINES for the stores."
I doubt it. State the ordinance number and when it was enacted. And why doesn't ANY OF THE LARGE supermarkets in L.A. have locking wheel shopping carts to this date, to my knowledge.
5:48: Like I said, I take home on average 8 huge grocery double-bagged bags at once, tons of stuff from drippy milks and onions peels to bulk, raw meats -- I'm tired of little old ladies who shop regularly for one or two, or the singles who rarely cook, telling me over and over about the glories of and ease of stuffing it all into one cloth bag and why I'm just "wrong" and just haven't figured out, like they have, that my needs can fit tidily into one cloth bag.
You folks otherwise complain about nanny-government that micromanages your life, but can't grasp that families often stock up -- I really don't CARE when YOU do or don't shop, that you can stuff your items into one measly cloth bag, or even two, and if you never wash it.
The point is the current grocery store arrangement of offering double-bagging for heavy bags serves many people for a reason, and forcing on them some lifestyle change more suitable for an empty nest couple or singles, maybe someone who walks or bikes home with their items, is absurd -- it's actually more part of the thinking that we'll all happily move into high-density condos (of course with max. affordable housing for the poor) and take a bus or bike home from the market, with our one cloth bags.
If L.A's kitchen scraps program is like others I've seen, they want residents to recycle vegetable and fruit peels and the like. Not meat, cereals, wrappings, fats and dairy. The diverted wastes would go into your green bin or your copious compost heap which no doubt you will be starting this weekend. Other vector attracting materials would still go into your black curb cart or down your disposal.
As for grocery bags. I take four cloth bags loaded with goodies at one time into my meager abode. Cloth bags when they are well made are stronger and hold more stuff than either paper or plastic bags. You can wash them when dirty. I don't think we need a 'nanny state' but the cloth bags really do make all sorts of shopping easier and mean fewer trips from house to car and back again.
Ron, is there something you can do on this weblog to make an encyclopedia of the important laws L.A. City has on the books that it does not enforce? Let's start with traffic violations.
For Really Anonymous. Do you think 2 or more wrongs make a right? Don't dog owners have some obligation to pay for enforcement?
And the basket law. 99 Cent Stores have baskets with features that prevent them from leaving the lot. If you are looking for a test case, they would be a good source of information. When you consider who takes shopping carts away from a store this is the most politically incorrect law I've seen this city make in a long time
12:12, AGain, I don't give a damn what you do with your bags or ANYTHING. Stop trying to convince me that whatever the hell it is you do is "right." "Cloth bags make all kinds of shopping easier" is just a stupid statement and you're clearly a know- it- all busybody. Limit your pontificating to what you know about -- shopping carts at the 99c stores.
And Anonymous @12:46 attitude is typical of law breakers generally. The folks that think that government breaking the law entitles them to tailgate, keep unlicensed dogs, Etc and their response is the same IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!!! they say. Did you ever try to tell a parent about his or her kids bad behavior and get the IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!!! response? And that is why we need enforcement folks.
I don't care who uses grocery bags. and I said we didn't need a nanny state. But, the folks who feel they should be able to divorce themselves completely from society without consequences take offense anyway.
My reply was not just to Anon at 12:46. It was to a number of folks on this board. Consider bags but I don't beleive in forcing the issue. There are more important things going on for sure. Get an understanding of what you are paying for with waste diversion. Simple enough.
And if you want to preserve quality of life, form a neighborhood watch. When you see a crime, a violation of an ordinance that affects your neighborhood, REPORT IT. Your phone is your most effective weapon.
No, two wrongs don't make a right.
If they did, we'd have to commit a thousand or more wrongs to make a right with this city.
I could also call it a micro drop in the bucket of getting back some of the thousands of dollars that the city has wasted of my money.
Before you pull this holier-than-thou bull on people, how many times have you driven a little too fast or blown an amber light or thrown the wrong thing in the wrong trash can or dropped a scrap of paper on the ground and breathed a hugh sigh of relief that there wasn't a cop around to fine you?
And I do pay for enforcement that animal regs don't enforce. I pay it every April and December when I write a check for my property taxes. What planet are you living on, anyway.
And I've listened to convicts in prison give that same kind of reasoning. "yea, I did a robbery but is that worse that what the Government has done for years to (fill in the blank) Blacks, Chicanos, Indians, civilians in Viet Nam? Naw, you see government is a criminal too". It's rationalization and denial pure and simple.
And if I catch myself speeding I slow down. I don't justify it. I admit my behavior and correct it. I work to do better next time.
My bitch with lack of enforcement is the lack of SAFETY it causes and what it does to my check book and my time table. Not horseshit items the pol's bring up like the mylar ballons. I am talking about red light running, tailgating. The crap that causes accidents that keeps you and me paying higher insurance rates. The crap that causes accidents that cause the traffic tie ups that makes us late to meeting and late to work. The insanity that kills and injures our loved ones and friends. The spill over of other peoples carelessness. The spill over of other people's ENTITLEMENT TO BREAK THE LAW!!!
You got a problem with the Pol's VOTE THEM OUT! L.A. voter turnout for elections is disgusting. If you can do a better job than the people in office, have the guts to run.
You can learn more about licensing dogs at www.laanimalservices.com
Did someone actually mention that there are locking wheels on shopping carts at the 99c store, to stop carts from being taking off their premises. WELL, THAT'S A RELIEF!!!
I'm certain that'll make a big impact on the abandoned shopping cart problem. Maybe, the large supermarkets, Vons, Albertsons, etc. will be shamed into following their example. Yes, well soon see a huge, momentus change due to the examples of the 99c stores. Expect to notice the lack of abandoned shopping carts, soon, and the world will be a better place.
I've never been to a 99c store. It's on my long list of things to do.