The City Council as usual revealed a lot by showing what's important to them with a chamber full of community activists angered because they were about to be steamrolled by adoption of housing policy that would lead inevitably to the destruction of their property.
Toilets for day laborers, contracts for artists, sobriety at group homes wherever they are --- these were among the dozens of issues that got priority as the audience drifted away.
In the end, it was a done deal like all of City Hall's dirty deals: 13-0 with Tony Cardenas and City Attorney wannabe Jack Weiss absent for whatever reasons.
Through it all, there was a constant refrain that the Housing Element doesn't really mean anything, just a state legal requirement. What really matters are the Community Plans.
And just before the vote, Ed Reyes, the point man in this deceit, admitted the city is five or six years behind in amending the Community Plans.
To the point, Richard Alarcon blamed that inefficiency for the incomprehensible over-development without logic or adequate infrastructure that is going on all over the city.
What wasn't mentioned is the General Plan for the city which is constantly ignored and back room deals are routinely cut so that the the city's building, zoning, and planning policies, ordinances, and procedures have become meaningless.
That's why lobbyists and other political operatives earn millions getting entitlements for developments the wreck the quality of life in neighborhood after neighborhood and undermine the rules and regulations intended to protect them.
Case closed.
Toilets for day laborers, contracts for artists, sobriety at group homes wherever they are --- these were among the dozens of issues that got priority as the audience drifted away.
In the end, it was a done deal like all of City Hall's dirty deals: 13-0 with Tony Cardenas and City Attorney wannabe Jack Weiss absent for whatever reasons.
Through it all, there was a constant refrain that the Housing Element doesn't really mean anything, just a state legal requirement. What really matters are the Community Plans.
And just before the vote, Ed Reyes, the point man in this deceit, admitted the city is five or six years behind in amending the Community Plans.
To the point, Richard Alarcon blamed that inefficiency for the incomprehensible over-development without logic or adequate infrastructure that is going on all over the city.
What wasn't mentioned is the General Plan for the city which is constantly ignored and back room deals are routinely cut so that the the city's building, zoning, and planning policies, ordinances, and procedures have become meaningless.
That's why lobbyists and other political operatives earn millions getting entitlements for developments the wreck the quality of life in neighborhood after neighborhood and undermine the rules and regulations intended to protect them.
Case closed.
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.
No Home Depot in Sunland-Tujunga!
www.no2homedepot.com
Uphold the Specific Plan
In today's LA Times, there is an article about the Council readying to adopt another version of the infamous "Inclusionary Zoning" law which, over the past years, promised to undermine numerous city land use laws. In a nutshell, "IZ" requires developers to provide affordable housing units in every single multi-unit development in Los Angeles. Yes, it resembles another "affordable housing" law - the city's recently adopted controversial Density Bonus Ordinance. That law enables taller, bulkier buildings with less parking, and relatively little public notice enabling customary appeal rights for impacted neighbors. It appears the recipe for infill development, no matter what, is finally revealed.
Further, because there is little coordination between passage of city laws and implentation, i.e., the practical realities of "how do we do this or that, and what will it mean to this or that law..." creates more problems aimed at discouraging a challenge. It already takes the patience of Job to decipher existing city planning laws because the city has never studied cumulative impacts of their planning actions. Instead, they keep piling up laws like hotcakes, causing a sticky mess that ends up making it too easy to forget the existing community based planning laws were passed for a reason - to provide an equitable balance in bringing in the new without ruining the old.
"What wasn't mentioned is the General Plan for the city which is constantly ignored and back room deals are routinely cut so that the the city's building, zoning, and planning policies, ordinances, and procedures have become meaningless"
EXACTLY. That is exactly the problem. We have perfectly good laws, that protected our low-rise, low-density architecture for decades. We are being sold out by career politicians who grant one exception after another from those rules. Result? Over-crowding, excessive density, traffic jams, water "shortages," power outages and an abundance of ugly box-like apartment beehives replacing beautiful little houses with actual yards.
This is why developers contribute so much to career politicians' campaign funds: the developers can profit by ruining our quality of life -- and by receiving out tax dollars as "subisidies," thereby by violating us twice.
"What wasn't mentioned is the General Plan for the city which is constantly ignored and back room deals are routinely cut so that the the city's building, zoning, and planning policies, ordinances, and procedures have become meaningless"
EXACTLY. That is exactly the problem. We have perfectly good laws, that protected our low-rise, low-density architecture for decades. We are being sold out by career politicians who grant one exception after another from those rules. Result? Over-crowding, excessive density, traffic jams, water "shortages," power outages and an abundance of ugly box-like apartment beehives replacing beautiful little houses with actual yards.
This is why developers contribute so much to career politicians' campaign funds: the developers can profit by ruining our quality of life -- and by receiving our tax dollars as subsidies for their projects, thereby violating us twice.
Oops. Sorry about that. : )
ALERT ALERT ALERT They've screwed us, again!!! Didn't anyone read the Baseline Mansionization Ordinance (BMO), recently enacted into law June 29, 2008? THE FOX IS GUARDING THE HENHOUSE!!! L.A. Planning is the shill of developers.
Read the ordinance...The BMO was downloaded here:
http://www.thefoothillsforum.com/forum/download/file.php?id=1017
The intent of the BMO was to lessen the visual impact of new residential houses by requiring more open space on the lot. The new house's footprint can only be placed on up to 25% of the lot size, according to this BMO. So to compensate (of course) if you can't build out then you must build up. They allow the new houses to be taller (up to 33 feet height, and taller with a variance) and they also promote the use of basements. Thus, these tall, new houses are a problem. They will block the views of neighbors.
But they say, this ordinance is suppose to be for NON-HILLSIDE residences. IT'S A LIE. THEY WROTE THE ORDINANCE TO APPLY TO HILLSIDE RESIDENCES, TOO. TUJUNGA is on a hillside. Many residences have an incline of 25%. This BMO will promote new housing which will block our beautiful city views, with new, tall, constructed houses. We are at risk of having our city view blocked by future, too tall housing, all due to this ordinance.
BTW, there are other locations in Los Angeles which had it's designation changed from Hillside to Non-Hillside. You will also see this problem. You are located on a hillside, yet, they new residetial housing will be built higher and higher. It will block your city views!!!
Read the memo and which were changed to non-hillside:
http://www.thefoothillsforum.com/forum/download/file.php?id=1021
DOESN'T ANYBODY CARE?????
ellen vukovich,
It's not difficult to understand these ordinances. It's clear what the Planning Dept is trying to do. Turns out, we've had so many citizen issues, in Tujunga, concerning these new ordinances which should have been brought to court against L.A. City. But, one or two individuals aren't going to shell out $10K for attorney's fees, out of pocket, to fight a zoning issue that's a future concern.
And frankly I must say, I wouldn't rely on the Neighborhood Councils for much of anything, except being led by the nose by the Councilmember.
What might do a better job at penalizing violations would be to impose some extreme caps on the amount of money that can be raised or kept if already with a war chest, oopps, "campaign fund."
Following the idea to persuade compliance in disclosure of community property in a divorce, where one spouse tries to hide community assets and it is discovered, the penalty can be forfeiture of the entire asset to the other spouse. There is no 50-50 split then, it all goes to the other side for trying to keep it all.
So if these ethics violations really are going to be seriously enforced, you need to hurt them where they feel it- by lowering fundraising caps and imposing some forfeiture of campaign funds to finance something other than the offender.
In the Huizar example, paying money out as a fine doesn't cause much more than a flinch and he's back to his tricks under current law and the job is done. You can't un-ring that bell.
Compare that to having a stricter law that really could deter such fast and loose operations. Since most politicians equate job security with campaign funds on hand, losing some of this and imposing a lower cap as well would prevent their special interests funding sources from replenishing to the prior levels.
Real reform needs to be done by some entity that's NOT part of the problem, and I can't easily imagine who that might be.
Let’s face reality and agree that politics revolves around monetary contributions. The developers and special interest groups dominate our politicians which is an accepted form of democracy. However, this does not mean that constituents should not be informed as to what groups are making these generous contributions and determine their dividend.
I encourage Mr. Ron Kaye, with his exemplary journalist background, and the assistance from concern constituents, to expose the root of the politicians decision making to the general public because the news papers just touch on the surface of the contributions. “Connect the dots…and see how Antonio and City Hall sell you out.”
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s Ballot Measure Committee, visit CA Secretary of State Website. Mayor’s Committee for Government Excellence and Accountability – Filed on 7/31/08.
Visit Link:
http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1283003&session=2007&view=electronic
Why? Why are private enterprises, such as Lowe's and Home Depot being force to have day labor sites?
Have they invited the day laborers to squat on or near their property? If anyone should be forced to do anything, it is I.C.E. that should be haunting the day labor sites.
If the illegal alien constituency on the City Council won't call in I.C.E., then LAPD should be arresting all the laborers for loitering and hauling them off to jail by the busload.