CityWatch, Feb 21, 2012
Vol 10 Issue 15
NO ONE IN LA EVER TAKES THE BLAME - Mayor Villaraigosa, the 11% Mayor who could balance the budget with his frequent flyer miles, has a long tradition of empowering a rotating cast of Deputy Mayors and General Managers in an effort to distance himself from his legacy of non-performance.
The City Council, completely impotent in its ability to direct city staff, resorts to motions ordering studies and reports as tools of coercion and then settles for the City of LA tradition of dividing the spoils by 15, regardless of need or relevance.
Commissioners, appointed by the Mayor, posture and pontificate, sometimes with acknowledged irrelevance and sometimes with significant political power but most often with Mayoral direction and benign neglect. Claims of significance are often challenged by reality.
General Managers, also appointed by the Mayor, find themselves caught between a term-limit restricted Mayor and a Civil Service hard place. Critics claim that they often serve as simple cannon fodder and Mayoral expeditors.
Navigating the treacherous press conference waters of LA’s City Hall operations are the “clients” who make the city run, the developers, builders, architects, engineers, transportation specialists, land use lawyers and consultants who advise the Mayor and his team.
Consider the latest dust-up at LA’s Department of Building & Safety (LADBS).
First, a local community member games the LADBS and initiates almost 200 Fence Height complaints against his neighbors, resulting in fees, fines, and penalties that then draw threats of garnishment, liens, and other legal action.
Then Council President Eric Garcetti intervenes and introduces a Council Motion that proposes solutions. He also sends a letter to LADBS General Manager Bud Ovrom “asking” him to hold all cases in abeyance while the issue is resolved in City Council.
Four months later, Bud Ovrom finds himself in hot water when Code Enforcement Bureau Chief Dr. Grace Harper, a 33 year veteran of LA’s civil service, simply rejects Garcetti’s request without notifying him, responding with an explanation, or even acknowledging receipt.
“It’s simply illegal for our department to hold code enforcement cases in one area in abeyance while still pursuing cases in the rest of the city,” Harper explained, “because that would result in charges of selective prosecution.”
While the irony of responding to charges that complaint driven code enforcement results in selective prosecution was lost on Harper, she defended her department’s actions by referring to their legal mandate to investigate all complaints but could not identify any statute or code that supports her position.
As for Ovrom, formerly the Deputy Mayor responsible for two of the city departments currently under Federal investigation, he finds himself navigating tough political waters. He has the Mayor on one side who simply needs to get to the end of his term, he has a City Councilman on the other side who needs to show the world that he is a credible candidate for Mayor, he has the Feds behind him investigating his department, and he has a retaining wall of civil service protected lifers in front of him that know he will soon be gone and it will be business as usual.
Off to the side are the “customers” who are the “business as usual” and they are known as the Development Industry Advisory Committee (DIAC). From Latham and Watkins to Gensler to California Home Builders to Englander, Knobe & Allen, these are the folks who meet regularly with Deputy Mayor Matt Karatz and GM Bud Ovrom to steer the ship.
Meanwhile, Councilman Eric Garcetti has tendered a City Council President-to-General Manager request that flatly gets ignored, he has trusted Council District staff who reassure him that all is well, and he has dismissed complaints from the community because he naively thinks the system is working.
It isn’t.
The Mayor’s office accepts no responsibility for the upside-down priorities that classify the developers and consultants as the “customers” while balancing the budget on the backs of the people who invest in homes and businesses in the community.
The Commissioners are hardly representative of the public, serving at the Mayor’s pleasure (and sometimes at his displeasure), typically handling consent agendas filled with fodder for press releases.
The City Council is tolerated by Departments that still divide the city into 15 regions, assigning a “handler” to each Council District to keep the politicos at bay by dispensing constituent treats equally. These buckets of asphalt and hot-spot support activities keep City Council incumbents seated and sated.
The General Manager is a political hire, serving at the Mayor’s pleasure. Sometimes the Mayor sends in a Deputy Manager to take over as GM to calm the troops in the wake of a disaster or Federal corruption investigation. Deputy Mayor Jaime de la Vega left City Hall and walked across the street to take over the LADOT and Deputy Mayor Bud Ovrom left City Hall to “handle” Villaraigosa’s attempt to “build our way out of this recession!”
Councilwoman Jan Perry looks at the revolving door of political impotence and complains that the problems stem from term limits. She points out that it is impossible to have a long term vision for the City of LA if all the work must be done in two mayoral terms.
Perry notes that term limits destroy any institutional memory and empowers lobbyists who have been around for a long time, elevating their insight and guidance in value.
Meanwhile, LA’s Code Enforcement is a General Fund activity, one that is subject to the Mayor’s cost recovery mandate, resulting in a predatory relationship with the people the City of LA is supposed to serve.
It is against LA’s municipal buck-passing landscape that the public must ask some tough questions:
Why is the LADBS rejecting requests from the public to participate on the LADBS and Planning advisory committees while Primestor Development, KPFF Engineering, California Home Builders, and RA Build Commercial LL enjoy unfettered access?
It’s because they see the developers as the client and the public as an obstacle.
Why won’t LA Deputy Mayor Matt Karatz and General Manager Bud Ovrom find the time to meet with the public, the residents of Los Angeles, the nearly four million people who are the reason for City Hall?
It’s because they know that there is no penalty for ignoring the public.
How does Eric Garcetti hope to position himself as a credible candidate for Mayor if he can’t get the GM of LADBS to acknowledge his communications, if he can’t get LADBS to accommodate his request for an abeyance, if he can’t get his staff to keep him informed of the reality on the streets, and if he can’t solve a simple Code Enforcement problem in his district.
He can’t, because he is unable to establish himself as LA’s “The Buck Stops Here!” candidate.
(Stephen Box is a grassroots advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net. You can also find him on Twitter and on Facebook.)
Showing posts with label code enforcement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label code enforcement. Show all posts
Monday, February 20, 2012
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
CityWatchLA - District 2 Leaders Set Demands for Council Candidates

Community leaders from throughout Council District 2 gathered this past Saturday and positioned issues such as Community Plans with teeth, Building & Safety enforcement, and Parking Policy as the foundation of a platform that will be used to frame the upcoming City Council Candidate forums and debates.
Neighborhoods from throughout CD2 were represented as local voters gathered and hammered out a list of quality-of-life issues that they want established and developed during the campaign for the open City Council seat.
The opening list of topics hit three dozen and then continued to grow during the breakout sessions before the group refined and combined and established a basic platform of positions that they hope will be the beginning of a basic framework of an issues-based campaign.
Community Plans, Code Enforcement, Parking, Open Space & Recreation, the Budget, Transportation, Mass Transit, Solar Energy, the DWP, the City Charter, and the Neighborhood Council's relationship with the City and with the City Council were the final topics to make the cut. The specific actions are listed on the CD2 Vision Platform document which community members indicate will be the starting point for robust conversations during the campaign.
It was obvious during the Saturday morning brainstorm session that the neighborhood representatives agree on the broad strokes but that many of the specific nuances are unique to individual communities. Through it all, it was apparent that there is a shared commitment to working together to developing an issues-based campaign and a real dialogue with the candidates based on commitments to the community and to the platform.
At the end of the day, there was general consensus and the hope that two things had been accomplished; first that the CD2 Vision Platform would create an opportunity for Candidates to stand squarely on the issues as they position themselves in the campaign and second, that the election would then be the beginning of a working relationship between the seated Councilperson and the community, one that is based on the commitments made during the campaign and a mutual desire to improve the quality of life for everybody in CD2.
As for next steps, the sponsors of upcoming forums and debates have expressed hope that the CD2 Vision Platform will frame a robust dialogue between candidates and voters and that the ultimate result will be a positive working relationship between the prevailing candidate and the community that develops into even more ambitious commitment to improving the quality of life in CD2.
Attached is the CD2 Vision Platform plus a roster of upcoming Debates and Forums:
Council District 2 Vision Platform
● Community Plan
Candidate shall ensure that community plans and specific plans are enforced and updated every 5 to 8 years with input from Neighborhood Councils and Community Organizations including but not limited to thorough assessment of infrastructure mitigations and cumulative effects.
● Building & Safety
Candidate shall ensure enforcement by the Dept. of Building & Safety all applicable laws, regulations, building and safety codes in a prompt manner with the appropriate fines and follow up including but not limited to reporting offenders to the City Attorney.
● Parking
Candidate will implement realistic project based (not street based) parking requirements for all projects with realistic expectations of what public transportation access is available to the actual project. (not within radius)
● Open Space & Recreation
Candidate will establish an interconnected valleywide/citywide long term vision for recreation, open space, trails and public space by consulting and interacting with constituents and, when necessary, outside professionals.
● Budget
Candidate will implement Performance Based Evaluations and require Departmental Spending Accountability Reports throughout the City of Los Angeles.
● Transportation
Candidate will establish a baseline of current traffic/transportation resources/challenges for CD2 and develop a plan that addresses future growth and the cumulative impact of future projects.
● Transportation Planning
Candidate will Incorporate Traffic/Transportation Planning in community Planning with focus on cumulative of development in CD2 and adjoining CD's.
● Mass Transit
Candidate will provide an accurate report of current projects in CD2 and commit that future transit spending in CD2 more closely reflect the CD2 contributions to the transportation system.
● Solar Energy
Candidate will implement multifaceted Solar Energy plan with competitive bidding, transparency, technological diversity, stakeholder choice of installer and product.
.
● DWP
Candidate will stop pass through of monies to City Council General Fund.
● City Charter
Candidate will acknowledge and defend the rights of Neighborhood Councils and enforce the Charter mandate to have the NC's involved in the process.
● Candidate will develop and sponsor an amendment to require the Mayor to produce and the City Council to approve a balanced 3 to 5 year Plan. This is in addition to the Annual Budget.
● Neighborhood Councils
Candidate will meet regularly with NC's and HOA's and Community Groups in CD2, collectively and individually.
● City Council
Candidate will introduce a City Council resolution directing all city commissioners, at the start of each meeting, to verbally declare any conflict of interest issues with that session's agenda.
Equestrian Communities CD2 Candidates Forum
Sponsored by the LA Horse Council
Tuesday, Aug 4, 6:30pm
All Nations Church
10000 Foothill Blvd
Lake View Terrace
Info: 818 353-3467
~~~~~~~~~~
Sunland-Tujunga CD2 Candidates Forum
Saturday Aug 8
Meet & Greet 1-2 pm Forum 2-4:30 pm
North Valley City Hall
7747 Foothill Blvd
Tujunga
Info: 818 438-7076
~~~~~~~~~~
Valley Glen Neighborhood Association &
Laurel Grove Neighborhood Association &
Valley Village Homeowners Association
CD2 Candidates Forum
Tuesday, Aug 18 @ 7pm
"Meet & Greet" start @ 6:30pm
Laurel Hall School
(Oxnard/Radford, east of Laurel Canyon)
~~~~~~~~~~
Neighborhood Council
Valley Village
CD2 Candidates Forum
Wednesday, Aug 26 @ 7pm
Colfax Elementary
Info: www.myvalleyvillage.com
~~~~~~~~~~
The Sherman Oaks
Homeowners Association
Wednesday Aug 19
"Meet & Greet" start @ 6:15pm
candidate debate start @ 7:15pm
&
Wednesday Sep 16
"Meet & Greet" start @ 6:15pm
candidate debate start @ 7:15pm
Notre Dame High School at Woodman & Riverside
~~~~~~~~~~
The Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council
Monday, Sep 14 @ 6:30pm
Sherman Oaks
Elementary School
Info: (818) 990-4002 or jbbarad@roadrunner.com
~~~~~~~~~~
Park[ing] Day LA
Friday, September 18, 2009
CityWide in a park(ing) space near you!
~~~~~~~~~~
For more CD2 info:
For even more CD2 info:
Labels:
budget,
building and safety,
candidate,
city council,
citywatch,
code enforcement,
community,
community plans,
mass transit,
neighborhood,
open space,
parking,
recreation,
solar,
transportation
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


