Recently in Community Activists Category

The limits on freedom of speech are clear enough: You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater and you can't reveal the movements of ships and troops at a time of way.

The limits on the access to government information is quite different.

What's so amazing about local government, and every other level as well, is how officials not only kept information secret from the public but themselves as well.

The City Council, for one of a thousand examples, didn't know that when they tripled the trash fee in the name of full cost recovery of services to the public, they exempted thousands of households at a cost of tens of millions of dollars.

For its part, the LAUSD has refused every entreaty for years to examine the data from standardized tests to see what they could learn about the success of classroom teachers in raising the scores of their students over time.

Publication by the LA Times of how 6,000 teachers' students scored on tests and the questions that raised about performance have sent the unions and education lobby into a tizzy.

Their cry is that test score performance is only part of the information needed to evaluate how well a teacher is doing.

That's true of course but the unions have fought vigorously for years any kind of valid method of "stulling" teachers using subjective standards based on observation and objective standards based on tests.

What the Times' data shows is that some teachers consistently at the bottom with the students in the classes scoring worse than others and that some teachers consistently produce students who show improvement on tests.

It could be that in many cases the best performing teachers are simply teaching to test and doing nothing to really educate their children.

It could also be that many at the bottom are saying to hell with the tests, the kids need their minds opened up, their imaginations sparked to life, to learn to think and comprehend. It could be that the children they teach have better outcomes over time than those who score well on tests.

But without the data and rigorous examination about what is going on and what works and doesn't and for whom, it remains an example of how our public officials prefer the blissful state of ignorance -- as long as they can keep us ignorant to.

For years, local agencies have done their best to keep salary information secret -- a wall that has been chipped away at by the media and blogosphere.

It's only now when the scandals in Bell and Vernon have raised the public ire that LA city and county officials have posted searchable databases with positions and salaries.

Of course, they withhold the names as much as possible even though they are public information under the law and the Constitution and are available online elsewhere in many cases.

For all the promises of transparency, our local government agencies do their best to keep as much information secret as possible or to make it as obscure and hard to understand as possible.

Politicians and bureaucrats have armies of people to make sure that even when information is made available, it is spun to delude and confuse the public.

Openness and transparency in all matters of government is one of the four pillars of the LA Clean Sweep movement (lacleansweep.com).

We need volunteers -- lawyers and people with good research skills -- to step forward to help us become a clearinghouse of information City Hall doesn't want us to know.

We intend to vigorously use the California Public Records Act to get the information the public needs to know to understand what is really going on at City Hall.

Knowledge is power and the name of the game in reforming City Hall and creating a balanced and inclusive public culture is power.

The community will never have the kind of responsive and responsible city government it yearns for without better knowledge and better people in office.

 

EDITOR'S NOTE: Earl Ofari Hutchinson interviewed me Friday about LA Clean Sweep on his radio show on KTYM 1460AM. You can play or download the show by clicking here.

LA Clean Sweep took a major step forward on Sunday with about 100 people showing up for professional training to make them more effective as activists and candidates for public office.

 

Everyone who was there came away feeling they had learned valuable tools that will aid them in the struggle to elect candidates to city office who will put the public interest first - a point emphasized by remarks by City Attorney Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich during a 30-minute appearance.

 

Trutanich was elected last year in no small part by support from the same coalition of community activists who help Paul Krekorian win the CD2 seat and defeat Measure B, the solar energy boondoggle.

 

He made is clear in his remarks that given the political culture of City Hall, its subservience to special interests and the budget crisis, have made public service a challenge every day to do what he believes is right for the city as a whole and its people.

 

The event was not without its moment of controversy.

 

Matt Robbins of the nonprofit American Majority that trains Tea Party activists began the training programs for activists and candidates for city offices with a lengthy presentation on the group's view of U.S. history and how it led to the failure of our governmental institutions today.

 

It is based on a very fundamentalist view of the Constitution as outlined by James Madison and John Adams - not Thomas Jefferson - and blames Teddy Roosevelt and the Progressive movement at the start of the 20^th century for federalizing the government.

 

It is a viewpoint that did not sit well with some activists, myself included who believe in Jeffersonian democracy and think Teddy Roosevelt was our greatest president for breaking up the monopolistic cartels and taking the most beautiful lands in America out of private hands by creating the National Parks.

 

An emotional argument ensued that threatened to disrupt the event - an argument that does to the heart of City Hall political machines attacks on Clean Sweep and the misgivings of many activists who share Clean Sweep's goals to get involved.

 

It is no small matter and we must get past it or we will remain divided and powerless while our city officials put the future of the city at risk by slashing basic services, subsidizing unwanted developments with tax dollars and turning a budget crisis into a catastrophe.

 

Clean Sweep's goals are clear and simple. We are trying to bring together people from all over the city regardless of their political views to work in common cause for a greater Los Angeles and to create a new spirit of LA that unites people no matter what their backgrounds or economic condition or political beliefs.

 

We don't have to agree on anything except the need for dramatic change because our city government has failed us.

 

We need new leaders who owe their elections to the people in their district, not the dirty money provided by special interests, officials committed to fiscal responsibility and providing the core services that make a city livable for all its people, to rebuilding the aging infrastructure to create a healthy economic climate and healthy neighborhoods.

 

A new political culture at City Hall where elected officials and the bureaucrats see themselves as servants of the people - not their lords and masters - will not be without its conflicts over policies and programs.

 

Officials with honesty and integrity and reflect the values and interests of the communities they represent will quarrel and conflict our in the open where the public can learn the facts and understand the arguments. They will reach compromises or one side or another will prevail issue by issue.

 

They will not vote unanimously 99.93 percent of the time as our current City Council does without meaningful public debate because the consensus is built in the privacy of back rooms outside the public view.

 

It was a heated and scary moment at Sunday's Clean Sweep meeting but Nick Dalton-Pawle of the Sun Valley Neighborhood Council somehow found the words that quelled the fire of conflict.

 

Nobody walked out and the meeting got down to the basic tools of how to work effectively for change and in the end everyone felt they had learned something about how to work more effectively for their goals, and hopefully how we can all work together for the goals we share.

 

It came down in the end to a choice: Will we break apart and remain a conquered populace because we disagree with or even find abhorrent the views of some on some issues or stand united on the common ground where he can win power and begin the hard job of building a better city for all.

 

This is the choice we all have to make, rich and poor and everyone in between.

 

We will not stop the City Hall political machine from its course of destruction if we got lost in all that divides us. We must find our way to the light of unity.

 

If there's another way, any other way, let those who attack Clean Sweep bring it forward.

 

EDITOR'S NOTE: Activists in Northeast LA have been fighting for years to get the LA Community College District to deliver on its promise to build a satellite campus in the community.   One of the commitments in the LACCD bond issue was to transform the old Van de Kamp bakery into a college site. Instead, the city has moved in decided to take control of the property for other purposes. In this open letter and in a letter delivered today to the LACCD board (NoticetoSue.PDF), the coalition's attorney, Daniel Wright, announces the intention to sue to block this misuse of funds.

By Daniel Wright

Next Sunday, LA Clean Sweep -- the voter movement to elect a clean slate to City Council -- will offer professional training to potential candidates and activists who are ready to go to work to end the cycle of failure and bring responsible government to Los Angeles.

Experts in political campaigning will teach you the skills you need to win elections and fight City Hall on the issues that you carry about to protect you neighborhoods, your jobs and your business. The session for activists run from 8:30 a.m. to noon Sunday Aug. 29 at the Mayflower Club, 11110  Victory Blvd., North Hollywood. Training for candidates for the March 2011 City Council elections and the 2013 city elections run from 1 to 5 p.m.

Click here (CSTrainingDayFlyer-1.pdf) or go to lacleansweep.com and click on events for the details. The trainers are providing their services for free and all proceeds from the event will help fund LA Clean Sweep's efforts to inform voters and mobilize forces for reform.

For too long, the concerned residents in all parts of the city have fought their own separate battles against the powerful forces that run City Hall and control our elected officials. LA Clean Sweep. The skills you will learn from this program will help you to work together with people in every part of LA and beat the lobbyists and special interests and help elected candidates who will stand up for the public interest.

Our city officials have been overspending for year,  and even in the face of financial crisis, are making things worse without facing the fundamental issues. Libraries and parks are closing, cuts in the Fire Department are jeopardizing public safety and we are now paying the full cost or many core services in addition to soaring rates, taxes and fees.

The cycle of failure must be broken. It will only if you get involved and get the know-how to fight back successfully against the powerful entrenched interests of City Hall.

We need a new spirit of LA, one that brings together every region of the city, breaks down the barriers of ethnicity and economic status, and celebrates the freedom of possibilities of what should be the greatest place on earth.

Hundreds of activists from every part of the city have worked to develop basic ideas that we can rally around to restore credibility to our city's leadership and fix what is broken so we can move forward together:

Here's what LA Clean Sweep stands for:

THE PLATFORM

Issue No. 1: Clean Up City Hall

L.A. needs a change of leadership. We must elect candidates who demonstrate a firm commitment to promoting the public interest, not special interests. Candidates must commit to end the practice of giving subsidies, waivers, below-cost deals, tax breaks and other special treatment to politically connected individuals, public officials, organizations and businesses.
So that no actions of government are hidden from the public, candidates must commit to enforce and enact open access laws. Slush funds and office holder accounts need to be eliminated. City Hall must never sell, lease or otherwise dispose of public property without obtaining fair market value for it. City Hall must treat all people with dignity, fairness and equality.

 

Issue No. 2: Fix the Budget

City spending is out of control. The city needs to live within its means.  Candidates must commit to support a City Charter amendment to limit the annual increase in city government spending to the rate of growth of inflation and city population. In good economic times, revenues that exceed the expenditure limit should be saved in a rainy day fund. This would allow the city to maintain essential services in an economic downturn.
Elected officials have a history of borrowing against future tax revenues to finance special interest economic development projects. Candidates must commit to stopping this practice, including all projects funded through the Community Redevelopment Agency. Candidates must commit to supporting compensation for city employees that is affordable and sustainable. Without these changes, additional taxes and fees will put an increasing burden on residents and force severe cutbacks in city services.

Issue No. 3: Focus on Core Services

City Hall lacks focus and wastes money. Time that could and should be spent on critical problems is instead frittered away on self-serving resolutions and other minutiae. Candidates must commit to focus on core services: Police, fire, other public safety services, street and sidewalk maintenance, sewage, trash, water and power, parks, libraries, and land use planning. Elected officials should not spend their time or taxpayers' money on matters unrelated to the delivery of core services. 

Issue No. 4: Power Sharing

Government is formed for the benefit of the people, yet City Hall routinely ignores the peoples ' legitimate concerns. Candidates must commit to work with Neighborhood Councils and bona fide community groups on land use, economic development and other local issues. Candidates must commit to redrawing City Council district boundaries to align with established communities. Gerrymandering of council boundaries must end.
.
Contribute your time, your passion, your money. Go to lacleansweep.com. Los Angeles will not change without you getting involved.

A city's General Plan lays out the broad guidelines for all new developments that are then refined through community plans that provide detailed rules block by block so that residents and developers know exactly what is allowed and what isn't.

That's the theory anyway and in practice it works that way in many towns.

In LA, however, the General Plan is a meaningless hodgepodge that is vague and contradictory much to the delight of planners, developers and politicians because they can do whatever they want wherever they want.

Even in those rare cases when the community outcry is great enough, the City Council has its own practice of going along with whatever a member wants in his district even if they know it will be hard on the community. To challenge this practice would cause the other 14 members to gang up on the troublemaker and block everything in his or her district.

These are the reasons the neighborhoods in much of the city are deteriorating and community resistance is growing. NIMBYism, after all, is a sane response to powerlessness.

One of the few tools the public has for upsetting this destructive system is the requirement in many cases for environmental impact reports. But now, in the first test of new Planning Director Michael LoGrande's leadership, even that requirement is under threat.

Barely a week ago, activist Joyce Dillard sounded the alarm when she discovered the Planning Department was proposing a sweeping change to the General Plan that could eliminate the need for any EIR in the future.

The proposal is for a "negative declaration" on the need for an EIRl for the "adoption of Citywide Urban Design Guidelines ("Design Guidelines") as an Appendix to the General Plan Framework Element for Multifamily Residential, Mixed-Use, Commercial and Industrial land uses."

urbanguidenegdec.pdf designrchecklist.pdf

"The purpose of the Design Guidelines is twofold: to implement the design values in the 10 Urban Design Principles, a part of the Framework Element, on individual projects; and to consolidate basic Design Guidelines common throughout most Community Plans in one document, allowing
individual New Community Plans to provide tailored, neighborhood-specific Design guidelines. The Design Guidelines will establish design expectations for new development based on Citywide goals, policies and objectives. The Design Guidelines will illustrate ways for individual projects to promote walkability, maintain neighborhood form and character, and promote creative infill development solutions. The Design Guidelines will apply to all new developments and substantial building alterations that require discretionary approvals..."

Just like LoGrande's glib banter about smart growth, the guidelines sound like a progressive step but residents who have taken a keen interest in planning suspect it's just another way of trampling on their interests and concerns.

The process has a lot to do with that. Little notice was given of such a radical change and the public has been given only four weeks to respond to the proposal with the deadline for input Aug. 25.

What's even more amazing is that there isn't a proposal at all. The public is supposed to respond to something that doesn't exist, that will only be written after public comment is closed.

Lucille Saunders of the La Brea Coalition and Cindy Cleghorn of PlanCheckNC and the Sunland-Tujunga Neighborhood Council met Thursday with Michelle Sorkin, the planner in charge of this project, to find out first-hand what is going on. You can set up a meeting too by calling Sorkin at (213) 978-1199 or you can fax your comment to her at (213) 978-1226.

Saunders' report on the meeting was sent out under the headline:

Report on Urban Guidelines Neg Dec Meeting:  A FLAWED PLANNING PROCESS

Trust Me...the Planning Department

She described the process as a "travesty," like asking someone: "How was the dinner you'll eat tomorrow night?"

"Trust in the Department of City Planning (DCP) means the department will tell you -- make the decision -- before you have the opportunity to know the facts yourself ... We cannot trust the process which is fundamentally fatally flawed.  It is this process which must be changed. It simply is not planning."

Sorkin was told the process is "backwards," asking people to comment before the proposal is written. Her answer: "We always do it this way."

"Trust us, they imply ... But experiences have taught us once the Staff Report has been written--and that process unanimously recommends the Commission accept the decision (Just trust us!), terms are rarely changed."  

The Planninig Department is in a great rush to push this through by holding three informational public meetings on Aug. 30 and 31 and then the guidelines will go to the Planning Commission and the City Council to be rubber-stamped.

This is exactly what so many planning experts feared when LoGrande was appointed to succeed Gail Goldberg because he lacked real qualifications for the job beyond an obedient nature to carry out orders methodically and expeditiously.

Planning is too important to be done this way. The state of the city too fragile. City Hall's credibility is too low to act in such an imperious way.

EDITOR'S NOTE: This article was written for Nina Royal's North Valley Reporter.

What started 18 months ago as a David vs. Goliath struggle between ordinary citizens against the DWP and its IBEW now appears to be within eyesight of being on an even
playing field.

A massive effort to keep those organizations from taking $4 billion out of
the pockets of ratepayers for a phony solar energy plan has gained momentum to radically reform the nation's largest municipal utility and elect better people for a
great Los Angeles.

On the upside, we have seen the City Council reluctantly stand up to the mayor's effort to raise electricity rates by up to 28 percent.We have also seen this same council escalate its battle over the DWP for an independent Rate Payer Advocate and change the makeup of the Board of Commissioners to free it from total political control.

Charter reform measures that would achieve those changes are expected to go on the ballot in March at the same time that the seven even-numbered Council seats
are up for election.

The L.A. Clean Sweep reform movement (lacleansweep.com) is mobilizing people across the city to fight for citizen control of theDWP. Their goal is to also help
elect new people to the City Council...people who have integrity and honesty and will stand up to the pressures at City Hall to go along with policies and programs they
know are bad.

A new study entitled "Money and Power in the City of Angels", by the Center for Governmental Studies, shined the light on so much of what is wrong at City Hall. The study found that 99.93 percent of all Council votes were unanimous -- a shocking fact that shows just how controlled the Council, how lacking in independence of thought, and how submissive members are to the directions they are given.

The reason it's that way is because anyone who dares to show the courage of their convictions will be isolated and unable to achieve even the smallest needs
for their district.

Here are some other facts the study uncovered: Incumbents in 2009 raised a combined total of $5.3 million in private contributions, compared to challengers' total of $285,000, a ratio of over 19-to-1. In addition, the study reported: "Independent expenditures made
by unions, corporations, and other entities comprised about $1.77 million and were concentrated in races for open seats."

In plain language, those who hold City Hall offices owe their elections to unions, developers, contractors and the flow of money that comes through lobbyists.

It's a vicious circle in which the only interest that doesn't count is the public interest. That's why fees, taxes and rates keep going up and the city keeps moving closer to
bankruptcy with libraries and parks closing, other core services being slashed, even as those residents who have any financial resources are having to pay the full cost of
what services they do get, from ambulances to tree trimming to sidewalk repair.

The "Money and Power" study recommended that contributions to candidate controlled ballot measure committees should be subject to the same limits as contributions
to candidate committees, and the information on contributions and expenditures should be put up online like those for candidates themselves.

It also called for banning lobbyists from "acting" as intermediaries who can deliver campaign contributions from their clients to officeholders or candidates that they
have registered to lobby.You might remember that City Hall fooled the public into believing that lobbyists contributions were banned by the ballot measure that sneakily
gave the Council a third term instead of being limited to two terms.

The study's recommendations are sensible enough.But laws and rules don't mean much when the people who write them and those who enforce them who are all part of a monolithic political machine.

The fight to fix L.A. is about power itself. Until strong and independent candidates are elected to office that are committed to and beholden to the voters nothing will change.

Join the L.A. Clean Sweep movement and get involved.It's going to take an army of ordinary people to change the political culture of City Hall and bring every segment of the community to a seat at the table of power.It can be done. It depends on you...

Oops, There Goes Another $1.3 Million Thanks to DWP's Bungling and Indifference to the Public

The State Court of Appeals flat-out rejected the specious arguments put forth by the DWP in a case involving a $1.3 million jury award to a motorist nearly killed because utility workers didn't give a damn about public safety or the waste of water from a leaking water main..

Despite numerous complaints from citizens and police, DWP officials allowed the water main to leak down the streets in Woodland Hills for two months without doing anything about until on a cold night in January the water turned to ice and a motorist skidded on it and then got hit by another skidding vehicle.

The DWP's Defense is that its officials didn't know water freezes at 32 degrees or that it could get the cold in winter. Read the full opinion of the court and have a laugh -- or a cry.

Yikes, Does LaBonge Have a Clue to What's Going On?

Read the Councilman's Full Newsletter and Ask Yourself If This Is Leadership?
Bicyclists Look Toward the Future with LaBonge
On Saturday, Councilmember LaBonge and the Los Angeles Bicycling Coalition spoke to an audience of over 60 cyclists about the future of bicycling sharrows, lanes and boulevards in Los Angeles. The day kicked of with a ride down the 4^th Street Sharrow. Read more here.

Councilmember Emcees Ceremony as ADA turns 20
Tom was the master of ceremonies for the 20^th anniversary of Americans with Disabilities Act (Act) on Monday. The celebration included special performances and speeches by actress and comedian best known for her role on 1980s hit television series "Facts of Life," Geri Jewel, and from AMC's "Breaking Bad," R.J. Mitte. Read more here.

Los Angeles -- the city of sprawl and no planning or bad planning -- long ago became a city of limits, a city that had filled its vast open spaces with homes, businesses and factories and wore out its infranstructure.

Smart growth became a necessity a quarter century ago, yet the city continued to regard every project on a case by case basis where political influence played a more important role than the value of projects to the quality of the city's life and economy, much to the displeasure of many.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa held a press conference Monday and spoke directly to these concerns, promising -- as ke did five years ago -- a new era in city planning that respected the neighborhoods while expediting developments that meet the highest standards.

The occasion then was the appointment Gail Goldberg as planning director, a position she surrendered weary from the endless battles with the mayor's staff..

Monday's news conference, heavily attended by pro-development interests and a handful of reporters, was to announce his appointment of Michael LoGrande as her successor as LA City Planning Director.

Many planning experts and current and former city planners question LoGrande's qualifications since he is not a certified planner and has worked in various roles in city planning for barely a dozen years. They also questions his work ethic and his commitment to smart growth and full, open and inclusive processes in all aspects for city planning.

Here's everything he had to say at today's press conference:



Here's the mayor's announcement where he makes a commitment to smart growth:

In the city of Bell, residents finally rose up and threw out the bums who were ripping them off.

In Venice and Eagle Rock, residents mutter about what so many in the San Fernando Valley still yearn for: Seceding from LA and forming their own cities.

The CRA keeps on looting property taxes that could be used to keep libraries and parks open and giving it away to bring sweatshops to town and subsidize well-connected developers to build projects that nobody wants.

The DWP quietly goes about buying up land near downtown, as Joseph Mailander reports in the LA Weekly, on speculation to serve the mayor's fantasy of a clean tech corridor, whatever that means, in a city with half a million unemployed or unemployable low-skilled workers.

But today we celebrate the triumph of our political leadership: The far-flung subway and light rail system that isn't a system at all.

It was plagued with corruption and catastrophe during its construction, cost $8 billion and has failed to get more people to use public transit.

Twenty years too late, the LA Times finally gets around today to reporting just what a fiasco it is, quoting transit experts Tom Rubin and James Moore on what they have been telling the world all along: The rail system was built at the expense of the bus system, destroying the critical links that make transit systems effective while driving up fares.

The result is more traffic congestion and lower ridership despite a 20 percent increase in the county's population.

Yet, the mayor in his desperation and delusion is staging a dog-and-pony show for the TV cameras today near Staples Center -- where else? -- to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the opening of the Blue Line between downtown and Long Beach.

The real reason is to promote himself and his plan to build more rail lines, mostly on the hopelessly congested Westside.

The problem with that is the same problem with the whole rail system: It is making the cost of public transit even more expensive and forcing even more cuts in bus service that are needed to connect passengers from train stations to where they want to go.

The only facts you really need to know are that bus use doubled in the 1980s when fares were cut in half and that the construction cost per passenger of the Orange Line Busway across the Valley was a fraction of the cost of the subway and light rail per passenger. In addition, took only three years from conception to operation, not a decade.

Richard Riordan, when he was mayor, understood that the only reason we were building a rail system instead of a transit system that works was to feed the contractors and unions that funded the political system with campaign cash and gifts. .

Only, the Valley, that poor stepchild of the city, got a busway from his efforts and we're now moving forward on more subways and light rail to feed the contractors and unions instead of going back to the drawing board and figure out how we get more people into public transit because it gets people where they want to go at a cost that gets them out of their cars.

That isn't going to happen until we take a lesson from the residents of the city of Bell and throw the bums out.

JOIN THE LA CLEAN SWEEP CAMPAIGN (lacleansweep.com) TO ELECT BETTER PEOPLE FOR A GREATER LA

Set aside for the moment, if you can, the incompetence, venality and indifference of most of our elected officials and focus on the citizen oversight that the commissions are supposed to provide to protect the public interest.

Commissioners are in charge of every department and their job -- in theory -- is to insulate the bureaucrats from improper political influence and set policy for them.

In reality, they have become part of the problem, nothing but political appointees of the mayor, serving at his pleasure, doing his bid and taking their marching orders from the mayor and his staff who work board meetings making sure they obey orders.

There is no independent civilian oversight as evidenced by the fact that only two  notable commissioners have resigned in protest in recent years.

Jane Usher, who has turned around the civil law unit in the City Attorney's office in the last year, quit as president of the Planning Commission over the failed billboard policies of the mayor and City Council. Nick Patsaouras quit as president of the DWP Board in a policy fight with the mayor and now is leading the charge for creation of a Rate Payer Advocate to protect the public interest.

The DWP rate hike fiasco has prompted some Council members to call for a change in how the commissioners are appointed -- a move that would require a Charter change and opens up a fuller discussion of how all commissioners are appointed.

Today, most appointments are made by the mayor subject to Council approval.

Many people are named to commissions because they are heavy contributors who help keep the leaking City Hall machine running. Many others are made for purely political purposes to bring one segment of the community or another aboard the same machine's self-serving agenda. And some are nothing but nepotism like Richard Alarcon's daughter serving at a six-figure salary on the Board of Public Works.

Rarely is anyone appointed because of their independence, commitment to the public interest and their expertise in their area of responsibility.

The result is a political system that is lopsided, tilted overwhelmingly in favor of the elected officials and beholden to the mayor and Council -- not the voters and taxpayers.

The city is in deep trouble financially. The gross mismanagement of city affairs is being exposed on a daily basis. City Hall has lost its credibility.

Change is now possible for the first time in decades.

One of the highest priorities for those working to reform City Hall should be to change how commissioners are appointed to all the oversight boards, most of which have five members.

The mayor simply has too much power.

A simple solution that would find popular support would be to allow the mayor only one appointment and give the Controller, City Attorney and the Council one each.

The fifth commissioner should be chosen by the Neighborhood Councils.

This would at least create some semblance of balance and actually empower the Neighborhood Councils in a way that City Hall has fought since their inception.

We don't need commissions that are simply going to roll over to the orders of the mayor and Council. We need people who will stand up for what's right, not sign off on what's wrong.

The Council has opened up this discussion. Let's see if they mean by putting on the ballot a sweeping reform that will bring every segment of the community to a seat and the table of power where the competing interests can fight about policies and programs from a position of equality.

Is that too much to ask for in a democracy?