The coalition that fought Measure B to a stalemate — residents, business and labor — is the coalition that can change LA.
I know it’s an alien concept, this old-fashioned idea of democracy, and has never taken hold in the entire history of LA.
But it’s an idea whose time has come. There is no other way. Runaway spending that created a billion dollar budget deficit, billboard blight, a real solar energy plan instead of Measure B and all the B.S at City Hall are just a few of the issues that must be faced immediately.
The quality of life in our city has declined and our problems have only gotten worse during a generation that began with hope with the election of Tom Bradley as mayor and the collapse of the right-wing oligarchy known as the Committee of 25.
Almost overnight, LA went from a conservative, anti-union town to a liberal, union-dominated town. Subway and rail lines got built and downtown got rebuilt but something went wrong along the way as the cost of city government soared out of control and the quality of services declined.
What we got is what I’ve ironically called a failed experiment in municipal socialism. Development without planning led to worse traffic congestion, poverty soared, neighborhoods deteriorated, gangs took control of vast sections of the city, the school system failed.
Richard Riordan rode a groundswell of discontent into the mayor’s office and brought together a new elite, a new establishment that promised to “turn LA around” by hiring more police, fixing the schools, creating good jobs.
But the civic culture that coalesced around Riordan was no match for the political forces that had gained so much power, for the demographic changes that were taking place. He turned LA around but could not really get it moving forward and so the discontent of the people once again surfaced.
Efforts at reforming the City Charter were largely taken over by public employee unions, resulting in a mashup of powerless Neighborhood Councils and blurred lines of authority between the mayor and City Council.
That’s when the San Fernando Valley rebelled and sought to secede and form its own city — the nation’s sixth largest, safest, richest and most integrated. It never stood a chance.
A new power structure had evolved, the Committee of 225, as I’ve sarcastically called it. The elite civic culture was weak, communities divided by race and class, Fortune 500 companies and major banks were gone. Power came to be held by lobbyists, consultants and influence peddlers who fed the political system with campaign cash and fed off it with contracts and sweetheart deals.
“Pay-to-play” flourished under the lackluster leadership of Mayor James Hahn and has become rationalized into a political machine under the leadership of the politically-ambitious Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.
And so we are now at the turning point in the history of LA. We have become an old city with an aging infrastructure. We lack the political will to make the hard decisions needed to revive our economy, fix our schools, solve our problems.
That’s why what happened in the campaign against Measure B is so important. It was a symbol of everything wrong with our city government: Back room deals, lack of honesty and transparency, profiteering by narrow special interests without regard to the public interest.
Everyone wants clean energy in a city with the nation’s dirtiest air and dirtiest power plants but residents, business and labor came together and stood up to the machine and stopped what was nothing more than a blank check for graft and corruption.
We must build on that foundation. We must rebuild our civic culture. There can be no excuses for sitting on the sidelines any longer.
There’s a lot of work to be done. At the grassroots level, Neighborhood Councils need to talk less and act more to bring together residents and business, service clubs and churches and then join nearby NCs to form coalitions that can put real pressure on Council members.
Civic, business and labor leaders need to stop accepting crumbs from the table of power and stand up for what’s right for the city.
And Council members need to stop going along to get along and find the courage to speak the truth and refuse to approve anything they doesn’t serve the people’s interest.
Nothing but the greed of petty little people holds this machine together. It will crumble in the face of a broad-based and inclusive movement that gave everyone a seat at the table of power.
Only then will we able to find the common ground and begin to solve our problems and make LA the great city it could become.
Adding my two cents after reading Ron’s comments seems a little futile, but here goes.
One immediate solution rests in our hands. Literally. Making sure people vote on May 19th. For local issues, people have to accept that their vote really does count. Serious challenges to longstanding land use and billboard laws face the new city attorney (and that’s the mini-list!) and we must have someone who will look after our interests first.
For those in the 5th District and 2nd Districts, it appears we wil be returning in May and early fall to find replacements for Jack Weiss and Wendy Greuel. Fortunately, the same coalitions that Ron mentions are growing in those areas. CD2 groups are hard at work seeking candidates that will serve our interests first. For the 5th District, we’ve got two candidates that represent both sides of the coin in a District that has a long history of making interesting choices. Hopefully, Jack Weiss will debate Carmen Trutanich (stay tuned!).
As for the Neighborhood Council system, it’s time they cross over to the dark side. Throw the tea ($50,000 yearly payments and the Brown Act requirements, etc.) overboard and join with the other community groups (Chambers, HOAs, etc.) in this fight to save Los Angeles. So long as the Neighborhood Councils remain under DONE, they can never be as effective as they should and could be if they didn’t have to worry about what downtown will say and do.
Can you imagine if all activist sides joined forces with the ex-NCs what that would say?
And, if my wild idea isn’t wildly accepted (which I don’t expect) at least it’s worth considering!
Adding my two cents after reading Ron’s comments seems a little futile, but here goes.
One immediate solution rests in our hands. Literally. Making sure people vote on May 19th. For local issues, people have to accept that their vote really does count. Serious challenges to longstanding land use and billboard laws face the new city attorney (and that’s the mini-list!) and we must have someone who will look after our interests first.
For those in the 5th District and 2nd Districts, it appears we wil be returning in May and early fall to find replacements for Jack Weiss and Wendy Greuel. Fortunately, the same coalitions that Ron mentions are growing in those areas. CD2 groups are hard at work seeking candidates that will serve our interests first. For the 5th District, we’ve got two candidates that represent both sides of the coin in a District that has a long history of making interesting choices. Hopefully, Jack Weiss will debate Carmen Trutanich (stay tuned!).
As for the Neighborhood Council system, it’s time they cross over to the dark side. Throw the tea ($50,000 yearly payments and the Brown Act requirements, etc.) overboard and join with the other community groups (Chambers, HOAs, etc.) in this fight to save Los Angeles. So long as the Neighborhood Councils remain under DONE, they can never be as effective as they should and could be if they didn’t have to worry about what downtown will say and do.
Can you imagine if all activist sides joined forces with the ex-NCs what that would say?
And, if my wild idea isn’t wildly accepted (which I don’t expect) at least it’s worth considering!
From ZumaTimes.com: Zuma Dogg captures Los Angeles Unified School Board (LAUSD) President Monica Garcia parking her CA EXEMPT State vehicle in the red “no parking” zone. As you can see she is talking on her cell phone. Although the video cut out, she also drove away while continuing to speak on the hand-held cell phone. And that is drycleaning hanging up in the back seat. I wonder if the car is also used as her personal valet vehicle. Maybe picking up drycleaning is part of the job. But parking here, close to this intersection, where cars would have to drive around the vehicle, close to the stop sign — and pulling away into traffic while holding the phone sets a bad example to parents and students.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ3xjNhyQa0
Zuma Times
http://zumatimes.blogspot.com/2009/03/monica-garcia-lausd-president-busted.html
For those of us that went to school in the LA Unified when it did teach and educate, instead of pandering to test scores and students were held back if necessary and everything wasn’t so politically correct, we all learned about “Constitutional Conventions”. When the states decided that a revision was necessary, they would meet, decide what was needed and then present it to everyone for vote.
Maybe it’s time for a “City Charter Convention” (C3 for short), where the Citizens, neighborhood councils, groups of all types (education, industrial, environmental, business, religious, social services and don’t forget the Arts) meet and take the time to really delve into what’s wrong, what mistakes that need to be addressed and then present the ten or twelve most imperative revisions to the voting public and change things.
Never should the City Council have been allowed to change the Charter by disobeying the State Constitution by putting two unrelated subjects in one voting measure to con the voters, as in the 2007 fiasco called Prop R, or lie to the public as in Prop S, or bypass the required procedures/protocols as in Prop B. Or how about the semi-annual report to the City about the status of “all” infrastructure systems, that has yet to be submitted. (It’s still in “draft form”, therefore unpublishable and secret.) Never should this have occurred. The powers that be have used the weaknesses in the Charter, to their benefit. Always mum about those weaknesses, because they might need to use them again. Say in a couple of years the Council might want a fourth four-year term extension.
A C3 is possible, probably the most difficult question to ask: Is it too late to Save Los Angeles??
Hey Ellen, keep throwing out ideas, you never know when one or a variation on the theme will stick.
I think it’s also time for the Valley to try to break away again from our thieving Big Brother over the hill.
…our thieving Big Brother over the hill.”
Don’t kid yourself. There are just as many — if not more — thieves, pimps and whores in the City Hall machine who hail from this side of the hill as there are from the other side.
Nor does the Valley have a corner on caring members of the community who aspire to replace the machine with something better.
The goal here should be to unite communities across the city, not divide them. That may not play well in your klavern. But the sooner you get over the moat-and-drawbridge mentality and start working to unite with your neighbors rather than fence them out, the better…
8:56 is right that “…unite communities across the city, not divide them.”
Hate to say it, but unless a miracle occurs, breaking away will be hard to do. If you guys will recall, the entire City voted in 1999 to give the Valley cityhood. It didn’t have to be all inclusive (Valley and City voting). But in order to get the measure on the ballot, legislative action from Sacramento was required. The end result was that a deal was cut, opps, a law was passed saying make the entire City vote (thus almost guaranteeing the effort would fail).
And to now try and find another sponsor to push for a new law favorable to the Valley voters is probably impossible. The City needs the Valley’s tax base.
No matter the outcome, it brought the Valley together. It would be nice to conclude that we finally got an equal share of services, etc….but, we didn’t!
There is probably a good deal of unappreciated cause-and-effect here. Am I in the minority in believing so?
I was never involved in sucession. But then I had to attend a meeting at 8:30 AM at City Hall – an hour and a half drive.
Think about it – if we had only to go to the Van Nuys City Hall Building instead of downtown. Look how much time our representatives from the West San Fernando Valley would save if they weren’t in their cars at least 3 hours a day.
Think of the traffic congestion that would be relieved on the 405 and the 101.
When my kids were in school, I would see kids in t-shirts in the winter wating for buses at about 6:00 AM. I wondered why their parents let them out of the door without a coat.
As the school buses left schools like El Camino Real, I knew that some of those bused in kids would be on their buses for at least an hour more.
We now have a 911 Center in the Valley. We have the new Topanga Police Station.
I think that if there was a school board that was smaller and geared to the local communities – and was revolved around the principals, the teachers, and the parents – the quality of education would improve.
I would love to have a “C3″ discussion. But I don’t think that the City Council pays any attention to the NC’s now.
“Measure B” has shown us what we can do – but what is our most important issue?
That is for the community to decide. And I think that key word right now is Budget or Unemployment of 12%.
To Chris Rowe and others, maybe Ellen and Sandy:
The fact that the Neighborhood Councils and Chamber of Commerce’s (et all) are not paid attention to by Spring Street, is possibly because the City Charter is unclear and weak in actually giving them responsibilities that they too must address. The one thing the City Council and Mayor does not want is accountability and the requirement to have to answer for their actions.
You might say that they do……..”every four years at re-election time”!! However, if election time is purposely timed so that only 15ish% shows up (if we’re lucky), then they are not answering for their actions. The primary voters that show up are those folks/groups that will benefit directly: unions, special interests and those related to those interests. Question to you all: if the City’s election had been held last November, instead of this March, what would the difference have been in the outcome? Or maybe the election should be held two years after national elections (along with the State)? Not at some time which 1) everyone is tired of the campaign process and 2) adds additional costs. The City Charter could be changed to address that weakness.
Or for example to address areas that the Christopher Commission had recommended in the early 1990′s: the Chief of Police should not endorse any candidate for election. Yes the Chief is a citizen and a voter, but should he be in uniform on TV in 30 second spots telling us that there is only one candidate for “this” office? What he says at home on his front porch while drinking a brewsky is his personal business. But what he does/says in uniform in paid-for campaign ads is not personal business.
How about event fee-waivers? Mr. Kaye has an article today (Tuesday) about that very subject. If any organization has an event, I would expect to pay something at the door or gate for entrance. How much does the Council waive a year? Millions? That would be an interesting Budget line-item.
The semi-annual City infrastructure up-date report, is ten years past due. (I’m guessing here, but I’m close.) No one gets punished, no one looses their job. Why hasn’t the Council/Mayor demanded the report…NOW! OK, we don’t know the status of our infrastructure, so go ahead Mr. Developer and build those two 40 unit projects. And yes, give us 2 affordable units in each project and you can also eliminate 15 parking spaces. That will encourage those tenants to use our rapid transit system.
I would imagine that every one-in-three knowledgeable Citizens of Los Angeles has some idea of a possible rule change for the City Charter to address. This would be the purpose of a City Charter Commission…C3! If the Commission needs some legal advise, that’s where the Noel Weiss’s, Mr. Berger’s, and Walter Moore’s come in to play. I’m sure there are a few legal minds that wouldn’t mind spending a Saturday-a-month for say 6 months to assist in reviewing thought-about ideas. Take the top 30 ideas, let all of the Neighborhood Councils, from City wide, vote for the top ten and then get the signatures to put them on the Ballot.
If…and I mean “IF” the Citizens of Los Angeles then saw a change that benefited the City in general. In the way it was operated and governed. In the way elected Officials actually respected their Constituents. Another C3 would soon be on the horizon.
There is timely essence to Ron Kaye’s mantra below.
“There’s a lot of work to be done. At the grassroots level, Neighborhood Councils need to talk less and act more to bring together residents and business, service clubs and churches and then join nearby NCs to form coalitions that can put real pressure on Council members.
Civic, business and labor leaders need to stop accepting crumbs from the table of power and stand up for what’s right for the city.
And Council members need to stop going along to get along and find the courage to speak the truth and refuse to approve anything they doesn’t serve the people’s interest.”
And Ellen V. adds…
“As for the Neighborhood Council system, it’s time they cross over to the dark side. Throw the tea ($50,000 yearly payments and the Brown Act requirements, etc.) overboard and join with the other community groups (Chambers, HOAs, etc.) in this fight to save Los Angeles. So long as the Neighborhood Councils remain under DONE, they can never be as effective as they should and could be if they didn’t have to worry about what downtown will say and do.”
As one of the leaders of the NCM (Neighborhood Council Movement) in the early 90′s, working with Tom Hayden and Greg Nelson, Ron’s mantra was part of our creedo. Our goal was not to increase participation in the decision process. The inital word “advisory’ in the language of the Charter was a poor compromise. DONE was born out of ADVISORY.
Ellen makes the point that the problem is DONE. I think DONE is the symptom of the desire to be liked or admired trumping the desire to accomplish worthwhile change.
In the hillsides on both sides of Mullholland we share common features and common handicaps. These unite us. We live in Paradise. Yet we technologically handicapped by hills. We have plenty, yet we fear the growth of crime and the budget shortfalls in police services.
We want what we want when we want it, yet we don’t want too many neighbors building retaining walls and ever increasing mansions.
We want representation that helps us understand and achieve a better quality of life, yet for many educated voting is an onerous chore.
I agree with Ellen about the 19th of MAY, 2009.
This is an important election. Ellen is working on a forum as I am. Stay tuned. Who becomes City Attorney and CD5 Representative will have a lot to do with Billboard blight, mansionization, and the type of development and traffic improvements to come in the next 4 to maybe 8 years.
A good planned blog site, placing it in the helpful source sections of my website.
I like this web site because so much utile stuff on here : D. – You can tell German wine from vinegar by the label. Mark Twain 1835 1910
Sometimes i wonder about why society has become just like this. It’s just depressing
. I’m gonna go consume a beer and unwind now! i’m sorry if i got everyone down.