Bicycle Awareness: For Those in Power, Ignorance is Still Bliss!

CityWatch, Oct 21, 2011
Vol 9 Issue 84

RETHINKING LA - Law enforcement officers are fond of quoting the popular standard "ignorance of the law excuses no one" when dealing with the public but when faced with an accusation of scofflaw behavior, suddenly ignorance is a solid defense.

The LAPD officers responsible for the blocked Bike Lane pictured above are going to have a hard time explaining why they were out shopping on Sunset Blvd instead of protecting and serving, but as for the illegal parking job, it’s not their fault. They merely need to plead ignorance and then point to the DMV.

After all, the DMV’s “Wilco Tango Foxtrot” interpretation of the California Vehicle Code specifies “You may park in a bicycle lane if your vehicle does not block a bicyclist and/or there is not a "No Parking" sign posted.”

From the top down, the State of California and the City of Los Angeles need to get together and embark on an education program directed at those in charge, those responsible for operating this state and this city.

Between the DMV’s car-centric creative interpretation of the law and the CHP’s complete ignorance of the rules of the road as they apply to pedestrians and cyclists, [link] it is apparent that the real opportunity to make our streets safer for everybody is to start with those in power.

Last year, the LAPD developed a Bicycle Awareness training [link] program for its officers that firmly established the rights of cyclists on the streets and replaced “ride to the right” with “ride where it’s right” as the principle for lane positioning.

Bike Activists were given the opportunity to participate in the development of the program and the Cyclist/LAPD Task Force was optimistic that the Bicycle Awareness training would have a significant impact on the streets, turning LAPD officers into partners, not adversaries.

Unfortunately, the mandate to participate in the training program was not as significant as the promises made to the cycling community and it is now easier to find officers who have never heard of the program than it is to find officers who have participated and who understand the concepts.

Just last week, a LAPD Supervisor responsible for special events went into a tirade over “cyclists who impede traffic by taking up the whole lane” and “cyclists who ride side by side.” The street that he was referring to, San Fernando Road, has two lanes in both directions with a left turn pocket in the center. This LAPD Supervisor needs to engage in some Bike Awareness training before he spreads any more mis-information about cyclists and “impeded traffic.”

The DASH bus operator pictured here was headed north on Vermont Avenue when he came up behind me and my wife as we rode our bikes in the curb lane. Instead of dropping behind us to pull to the curb, this guy honked from behind, then pulled alongside on our left, “asserted” himself and moved to the curb in the direction of his bus stop.

His willful violation of CVC 27001(a) and CVC 21750 clearly demonstrate that this “professional” bus operator is either ignorant of the law or a scofflaw, in either case, unfit for service.

The City of LA’s Department of Transportation is responsible for operating a fleet of 400 buses that provides 30 million trips per year aboard the DASH, the Commuter Express, Cityride, Shuttles and Charter services.

Simply training the operators of those 400 buses on the rights of cyclists would make the streets safer but that Bicycle Awareness program never made it out of the hands of the LAPD.

Passing a cyclist is no cause to honk, in fact it distracts the cyclist at the worst possible moment, in this case as the operator is about to illegally and unsafely force the cyclist from the road in violation of the prohibition against “interfering with the safe operation of the overtaken vehicle or bicycle.”

Complaints to the LADOT typically result in an obtuse explanation of the Byzantine network of contractors who operate the LADOT’s transit system, one that allows the City of LA to avoid responsibility for educating its bus operators on Bicycle Awareness. (link)

LA County’s Metro is the largest operator of buses in the region and it still has a training manual that instructs its operators to sound the horn for “cyclists and other road hazards.”

The Metro’s Chairman of the Board is LA’s Mayor Villaraigosa and LA controls three other seats which are filled by City Councilman José Huizar, Richard Katz, and Mel Wilson. In other words, the City of LA has a tremendous impact on the operation of the Metro and a tremendous responsibility for its performance.

Perhaps it’s time to share the LAPD’s Bicycle Awareness program with the Metro!

LA’s Department of Water & Power moves a lot of equipment through the streets of Los Angeles, relying on a combination of staff and contractors to operate its fleet of trucks.

The incident pictured here is still being debated by LA’s policy makers and City Attorney, resulting in a clear demonstration of the need for greater education and an understanding of the rules of the road. Are crosswalks an extension of the sidewalk? If so, can cyclists ride in the crosswalk? If not, how do we explain the Orange Line Bike Path?

Through it all, once the debate is put aside, the important thing to remember is that the City of LA operates huge pieces of equipment on local neighborhood streets that are surrounded with homes, populated with families, and filled with pedestrians and cyclists who have as much right to the streets as the professional vehicle operators moving the City of LA’s equipment.

LA is a company town and our neighborhoods are Hollywood’s backlot. That’s one of the things that makes LA such a magical city.

But the people who issue film permits don’t seem to realize that a Bike Lane is a traffic lane, that it is not simply an extension of the parking lane. Most importantly, Trucks that are 8’6” wide don’t fit into a parking lane that is 7’ wide. [link]

The City of LA issues film permits and retired LAPD officers in uniform provide traffic control for the film shoots begging the question, “Who is responsible for their training and education?”

The film shoot pictured above should have lane closure and traffic control so that cyclists riding downhill on Sunset get the same respect that motorists would get if the lane ahead were closed.

Some of the greatest threats to a cyclist have nothing to do with the operators of large vehicles and everything to do with those responsible for repairs and maintenance. [link]

Detours that appear with no warning, manhole covers that aren’t flush with the surface of the street, cracks between asphalt and cement bus pads, gutter pans that aren’t flush, poorly positioned water mains, divets from special event equipment, and drain grates that run parallel to the curb are all deadly road hazards for cyclists.

For all the promise of Eurotopian Bikeway engineering, the real opportunity to engineer our streets for cyclists is to start by educating those responsible for maintenance and repair of our streets on the needs of cyclists and on the difference between a Hummer and a Huffy.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has embraced cycling as a viable mode of transportation and has committed to supporting cyclists with the full force of his Mayoral authority, directing City of LA department heads to partner with him in making LA a Bike Friendly city.

If he is serious about his commitment, he’ll make Bike Education a priority and he’ll start by educating the City Family on Bicycle Awareness, from the LAPD to the DWP to the LADOT.

Imagine 40,000 City of LA employees going about their business with a new sensitivity to how streets work, to the rights of cyclists, to the repair, and maintenance of streets so that they are safe for everybody.

For all the talk of “40 miles a year” of Bikeways improvement and millions of dollars in Measure R money, the real opportunity to move LA forward immediately is to embrace Bike Education, for cyclists, for motorists, for the LAPD, for the engineers, for the policy makers and the pothole fillers, so that the people who use the streets understand how to integrate cyclists into the traffic mix.

(Stephen Box is a grassroots advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net .)

Should Austin Beutner Serve as Mayor Again?

CityWatch, Aug 23, 2011
Vol 9 Issue 67

RETHINKING LA - Austin Beutner is a relative newcomer to LA’s political landscape but he has probably spent more time acting as Mayor than any of the other declared and potential candidates, having served as the de facto Mayor during Villaraigosa’s tour of distraction.
Beutner’s official title was First Deputy Mayor and Chief Executive for Economic and Business Policy, a role that paid $1 per year and came with the added responsibility of reinvigorating the Mayor’s office, if not the Mayor.

Operating just below political radar levels, Beutner has avoided the minefields of City Hall while collecting insider victories that balance out his candidate’s resume, creating just enough contradiction to maintain his status as “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.”

As the Interim GM for the DWP, Beutner stated boldly that hiring insiders was what got LA into trouble, that it was time to go national and to hire an industry professional, which he did when he hired Ron Nichols.

But when it came time to hire a GM for the Department of Planning, Beutner saw no need to look further than City Hall where Michael LoGrande stood in the wings, an insider who was coronated by Beutner and showered with accolades that included “He’ll speed things up!” Critics referred to this move as “out with the planner, in with the expeditor.”

Claiming kinship with LA’s small business operators, Beutner maintains a straight face as he points to his 30 years of experience in the private sector, first in Smith Barney’s Mergers and Acquisitions group, then as a partner in The Blackstone Group, and more recently as the co-founder of the investment banking firm Evercore Partners. His clients at Evercore included other “small businesses” such as General Motors and AT&T.

While his professional accomplishments are memorialized with significant personal wealth, it is his track record in City Hall that he holds up as evidence of his street cred. In addition to initiating a three-year business-tax holiday for firms that move to LA, Beutner makes much of his ability to tackle bureaucracy, pointing to his success in cutting in half the time it takes to permit a restaurant.

This claim to both ends of the economic spectrum, from macro to micro, is tempered by reality, one that sees LA’s practical unemployment hover in the high teens while the cafe in my neighborhood gets cited for having outdoor tables. Not because they block the public right-of-way or because they violate some ADA standard, but because the restaurant owner can’t afford the city permit.

It’s here that Beutner pushes back, pointing out that while he accomplished a great deal in his time on the inside of City Hall as a change agent, his short term on the inside was no match for a generation of bad practice and a culture of regulation at the expense of the people.

When pushed on the topic of Transportation, Beutner falls back when confronted with Complete Streets legislation, Bike Plan implementation, and other insider-speak, claiming that he looks at results not policy. “When I worked at City Hall, I sometimes commuted by bike from the Westside and the simple truth is, it doesn’t work.”

Beutner points at Santa Monica Boulevard and the bike lanes that end at the on-ramp to the 405 as evidence of a City that lacks a long term transportation strategy, not just for implementation of transportation innovations but for the missed opportunities to position transportation as economic drivers.

But as a bike commuter with an acute sensitivity to the streets, Beutner misses the opportunity to address the policies necessary to move LA forward, instead simply dismissing LA’s abysmal track record in supporting cyclists on the streets as “a terrible way to run a community.”

For a bike guy who actually refers to LA’s economy as a community of small business owners, Beutner gets macro quite quickly, positioning Metro’s sourcing of electric buses and the DWP’s sourcing of wind turbines as an opportunity for LA to take a leadership role in sustainable industries.

Tempering this big-picture claim to the sustainable high-road is the recent story of a small business operator in Hollywood who failed to secure permission from the city to install electric charging stations for his proposed electric car share program. At one point, a representative from the Mayor’s office suggested that the businessman simply go to work for ZipCar.

To be fair, Beutner was only in City Hall for a little over a year and the failings of City Hall and the Mayor are tough to pin on anybody other than the voting public who continues to tolerate mediocrity.

Beutner claims that his skill set was developed in the private sector, talents that his critics dismiss as more appropriate for the predatory environment of Wall Street than the delivery of City Services to Main Street. He responds by stating emphatically that “City Hall exists to serve the needs of the constituency!” and his ability to bandy insider details of City Hall covers for his shortcomings when discussing legislation and policy.

Pointing at the DWP’s antiquated COBOL-based billing system as evidence that any talk of a smart grid is just talk unless the City of LA starts at the foundation with a citywide commitment to integrated communication and management of information. He continues by pointing to the absurdity of LA’s departmental autonomy, resulting in systemic disconnect and a failure to standardize systems for the city as a whole.

When it comes to neighborhood councils, Beutner is diplomatic, saying “They can and should play a vital role in our government. It’s time to take stock and to see what would improve the system.” While this is hardly a vote of endorsement, he gets credit from local community leaders for engaging them in the creation of a Rate Payers Advocate committee where they found him “articulate, intelligent and willing to consider innovative solutions.”

He also proved to be diplomatic, maintaining peace with the IBEW’s Brian D’Arcy, a move that may have avoided a Pyrrhic battle but one that also failed to demonstrate his hand-to-hand skills as a political “change agent” capable of reforming City Hall.

Again, to be fair, Beutner had a boss when he served at City Hall, and while he claims that it is the role of City Hall’s leadership to ask the people of LA “How can I help?” the reality is this, the Mayor has bosses too. The question is, if elected who will Beutner serve?

As a cyclist who rides with Velo la Grange and who claims street cred as a bike commuter, Beutner’s time in the saddle has failed to resonate in a loyalty to his fellow wheelmen or in any support for last year’s CicLAvia. Demonstrating the continued dichotomy of his candidacy, Beutner’s claim to fame as a rainmaker in LA includes bringing a Chrysler dealership to downtown and a BMW dealership (also a campaign contributor) to town and a partnership with the Felix auto dealership that provides LA Trade Tech students with paid internships. So much for his talk of sustainable transportation and a shift from an automobile-centric bias.

Austin Beutner attributes his journey from the private sector to his current role in public service to his experience after sustaining a serious injury while riding a bike. As he lay in the trauma ward, he contemplated his epitaph and decided he didn’t want it to say “This guy made a lot of money and had a lot of success on Wall Street.” Beutner decided then that he had something to give and he changed his course, heading to City Hall and now campaigning as a candidate for Mayor.

Herein lies the rub. Can Beutner relate to the people of LA?

Los Angeles is filled with average people who, if they found themselves in similar circumstances and woke up in a trauma ward, wouldn’t spend much time contemplating the meaning of life but would instead be focused on financial pressures. One of the most common causes of bankruptcy is the crushing burden of medical bills and one of the most significant challenges to public health is the expense of medical care.

Austin Beutner has demonstrated that he gets the machinations of City Hall, that he recognizes the deceptions of the budget alchemists, that he understands the need for strong leadership, that he knows the local economy is depressed, that unemployment is unacceptably high, and that he is a change agent of incredible optimism.

His challenge is that he needs to demonstrate to the people of Los Angeles that he understands them, that they are the bosses, that they are the reason for City Hall, and that he will be serving them if elected as Mayor of Los Angeles.

(Stephen Box is a grassroots advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net.)

CityWatchLA - LA: A Complaint Driven City

CityWatch, Oct 22, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 84

What a difference a complaint makes! Actually, it took a series of relentless complaints, but the dormant City of LA excavation site on the sidewalk of Hollywood Boulevard has been "tidied" and there seems to be some DWP activity, giving hope that someday soon the site will return to normal.

To recap, the City of LA took a sidewalk on Hollywood Boulevard out of compliance, left it in a dangerous state, and then debated departmental responsibility to the point of absurdity. Eventually, the DWP showed up and is now the proud owner of an excavation pit on the most famous boulevard in the world. (See video)

This simple exercise in frustration bears witness to the brutal fact that the people of Los Angeles live in a complaint-driven city, not a standards-driven city. This approach to the delivery of services and enforcement of standards is beyond inefficient, it's frustrating, it's divisive, and it wastes valuable assets. Most of all, it simply doesn't work.

1) Not everybody knows how to complain. City Hall has designed the process so that simply calling attention to "a big messy hole in the sidewalk" requires patience, fortitude, and an insider's knowledge of the many departments that have some authority over the streets of LA.

To take it further, participation in a City Hall Committee, Commission, or City Council meeting is limited to those proficient at navigating the agenda, the rules, and the process.

Even then, public comment gets limited to 60 seconds, items go forward without comment because the opportunity took place in another meeting, the agenda is rearranged, and City Hall continues to turn gold into straw.

2) Not everybody has the time and energy to complain. Today's call to 311 took two attempts, the first one reached an overloaded system and the second resulted in a journey that lasted 42 minutes. All to get back to the beginning.

A trip to City Hall can consume a day. A bit of prep, some travel time, navigate the Committee, Commission, Council schedule, wait for the agenda to advance, jockey for that magic moment when the public gets to speak to an audience who is transparent in their collective desire to scream "Next!" and then the long journey home, only to find that nothing has changed.

3) Not everybody can overcome the obstacles. Well meaning people care about their communities but they give up, simply to survive and because the cost of overcoming the obstacles is too great.

City Hall is a system that responds to complaints but then the leaders of our city disqualify people for complaining.

It's a system that requires the participants to fight, to complain, to increase the volume in order to increase the delivery of services which are delivered until the murmuring goes down and then they stop.

It's demoralizing and even the hardiest quit and withdraw. This is the cycle that takes our neighborhoods down, allowing for the decline that in turn prompts more complaints. It's a declining cycle and nobody wins.

4) Those who are elected to complain on our behalf spend the best part of their time (99.93%) being agreeable, and when it's their turn to stand up on our behalf, they turn their backs on the people they are supposed to serve.

When AB766, the Safe Streets Bill, was in the Assembly, I was there to support it. The City of LA had staff in the room but they were silent.

When AB 2531, the Kelo legitimizing bill, worked its way through the process, the City of LA did nothing to protect the people of LA. The bill was eventually vetoed by the Governor while those who purportedly represent the people of LA went back to the Kelo drawing board.

Does the public have to be excellent at navigating the system while the professionals are forgiven for their mediocrity? Apparently so, because time after time the public is disqualified from the process for coloring outside the lines while those in office work aggressively to work around the Brown Act, to complicate the public process, and to design a bureaucratic labyrinth so complicated, even the staff get lost. It's an insider's game and the public is excluded. Make some noise, get a pothole filled, now go away.

All of which begs the question, what's the alternative?

The National League of Cities (NLC) recognizes cities with outstanding programs that improve quality of life with Awards for Municipal Excellence. Among the 45 programs that were highlighted during 2010 was the Neighborhood Code Compliance Program (NCCP) which was created in response to a community call for a shift from a a complaint-driven process to a pro-active process.

The NCCP was credited with replacing the tension and conflict of a complaint-driven code enforcement process with a positive partnership with the community that encouraged "ownership responsibility, volunteerism, and confidence in the city."

Communities around the country are embracing the efficiency of a standards-driven operating style that embraces a systemic commitment to the delivery of city services. Successful programs vary widely in structure but they have one thing in common, they all treat the residents as partners, not as noisy rabble in need of a Toastmasters Class and a lecture on process.

If the City of Los Angeles is to take its place as a Great City, it will be as the result of embracing a standards-drive approach to the delivery of city services.

LA will move forward when it embraces the public as partners in improving the quality of life in the neighborhood. Most of all it will operate efficiently and effectively when it works for the people, not against them.

As for City Hall, it could use a concierge. Embracing the service model instead of the fortress model would mean that the public would be welcomed, offered assistance even if they ask incorrectly or haven't read the rulebook.

As for Hollywood Boulevard, the site has been tidied up and one might argue that it was now ADA compliant. Of course the recent rain turned the dirt into mud but for now, it's very tidy mud.

It's progress. I'll take it. But we've got a long way to go!

(Stephen Box is a grassroots advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net. Disclosure: Box is also a candidate for 4th District Councilman.)

CityWatchLA - LA: A City at War with Itself

CityWatch, Oct 19, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 83

When departments within the City of Los Angeles fight with each other, their warlords take the struggle for turf into local neighborhoods and the streets of LA become battlefields where quality of life is written off as collateral damage. The casualties are the residents and business operators, because city attorneys work overtime to minimize departmental liabilities. On battle scarred Hollywood Blvd., locals navigate this eight foot excavation pit that bears witness to the no-man’s land that separates city departments from collective accountability and the responsible delivery of city services.

Weeks have gone by and the pit sits as a quiet reminder that the City of LA can take a sidewalk out of compliance and then simply drive away, violating its own standards and demonstrating the need for greater connectivity at City Hall.

The pit's origins lie in the Fire Department's construction of Regional Fire Station #82, a 32K square foot facility funded with $30 million of Prop F money that is 18 months post-groundbreaking.

The effort is administered by the Department of Public Works and involves Contract Administration, Engineering, Planning, General Services, Transportation, Street Lighting, Street Services, and a host of Contractors and Sub-Contractors.

A simple boring project by sub-contractors in order to install a Fire Department traffic control override system resulted in the discovery of lead covered conduit of unknown origin. By law, contractors notify the DWP upon discovery. The DWP then takes control of the site to determine what's underground and who the owner is.

The DWP excavated, they deliberated, and they evacuated. They left behind a plywood covered pit, crumbling asphalt, a berm of dirt and cement debris, and the obligatory misplaced DWP barricades and caution tape. Weeks have gone by.

A city official described working with the DWP by comparing it to the Roman Army. "Decentalized command with autonomous Generals running their own battalions, you can't rely on rules and code, you have to negotiate with each commander."

While private contractors are limited from street work during peak hours, from haul routes without authorization, and from street closure without permit, the DWP is charged with operating to their own authority.

In situations such as this, contractors and sub-contractors are prevented from completing their work, setting them up for claims against the city for the additional cost of pulling crews off jobs and standing by while the city of LA appears on Family Feud.

The irony of the departmental liability battle is that each department is represented by diplomatic forces that come from the City Attorney's office. While it's unclear whether the attorneys consider the City of LA or the specific department to be their client, it's abundantly clear that they do not serve the people who live and work in LA: A city under siege.



(Stephen Box is a grassroots advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net. Disclosure: Box is also a candidate for 4th District Councilman.)

Hollywood Car Share Stalls, Electric Bikes Debut

CityWatch, Apr 27, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 33

Bechir Blagui's vision for an electric community car-share program on Hollywood Boulevard is unfulfilled but his commitment to providing a sustainable transportation solution for his neighborhood is as strong as ever. As he continues the grapple with LA's unique bureaucratic landscape, Blagui came up with an innovation that has locals and tourists alike slowing down and smiling, Hollywood's first electric bike rental program.

Blagui's ongoing efforts to deliver on his promise to place electric charging stations on Hollywood Boulevard have only resulted in a frustrating journey down a bureaucratic rabbit hole, taking him to the Mayor's office, to the City Council, to the DWP, the LADOT, the City Attorney's office and Assemblyman Mike Feuer's office, none of which took him any closer to his original goal, an electric community car share program.

Along the way, Blagui visited other cities to survey the best and worst of their car share programs and in cities both small and large he found curbside charging stations, car share companies operating freely in a competitive market, and a customer base that demanded a variety of options. Inspired by a recent tour that took him from San Francisco to San Jose to Philadelphia, he returned to LA and looked for a solution, coming up with a program that had no obstacles, an electric bike rental program.



LA's City Council Transportation Committee has a long history of sustainable transportation discussion, most of which go nowhere. Meanwhile, on the streets, it's a local business operator who delivers electric bike rentals to Hollywood.

This simple success story of a local business operator with a fleet of electric rental bikes is significant for two reasons:

1) Mayor Villaraigosa's State of the City address of last week again referred to his unfulfilled vision of becoming America's Greenest Big City, this time with his proclamation of "a plan that once and for all makes Los Angeles the undisputed national leader in green energy and green jobs."

Time after time the people of Los Angeles watch LA's leadership talk the talk but when it comes to implementing sustainable business plans, it turns out that LA is the land of obstacles, not solutions.

Small businesses are a major part of our economy. They innovate and they create new jobs at a faster rate than larger organizations. The real change on the horizon will come from the bottom up, not from the top down, and if the Mayor and the City Council are serious about a green economy, they'll look at the Hollywood Rent A Car experience and they'll get busy removing the obstacles that have kept LA from developing the sustainable transportation solutions that are common in other large cities.

2) LA's high-altitude approach to transportation solutions makes for great press but the simply reality on the streets is personal. Simply synchronizing the services that LA already provides so that our streets are efficiently maintained, repaired, patrolled and enhanced is not only good for cyclists, it's good for local businesses, pedestrians, mass transit passengers and motorists. In fact, what's good for cyclists is also good for the community.

The lesson learned at Hollywood Rent a Car is one the Mayor might consider: When approaching the problem, take a look at it from the cyclists' perspective. It worked for Bechir, it might work for LA.

(Stephen Box is a cycling advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net)

Cyclists claim their Rights, Smokey writes a Ticket

As thousands of cars idled in gridlock that resulted in miles of parked cars, LA's Park Rangers focused on the arrival of 50 cyclists, complete with General Services Bike Police escort, and stood prepared to enforce a law they couldn't identify, following the orders of people they can't identify, and finally writing me a ticket for "FAILING TO COMPLY WITH TRAFFIC CONTROL OFCR."

Friday, December 18th, marked the end of the pedestrian nights at the Griffith Park Festival of Lights and the beginning of the vehicular nights. To the city's credit, there were 14 pedestrian nights and there will be 13 vehicular nights, marking the first time in 14 years that the car-free nights outnumber the vehicular nights. As for cyclists, there was the token press conference "Bike-Night" and then nothing but the traditional "it's for your own safety" exclusion from the vehicular nights.



For the last four years, cyclists have ridden the Festival of RIGHTS, decorating their bikes and howling at the moon, riding the Festival a few rounds and challenging the prohibition on cyclists. This year was no different. Well, not much. When we arrived at Mulholland Fountain for the traditional milling about and socializing, there were two General Services Bike Cops who were very polite and friendly and who told us it was their responsibility to escort us safely through the Festival of Lights.

We rode, we howled, we enjoyed riding Griffith Park and we made lots of friends along the ride. At least that's what it sounded like as the cyclists and the people stuck in gridlock exchanged holiday greetings.

As we regrouped at the Zoo parking lot, we encountered Sgt. Kilpatrick of LA Rec and Parks. He artfully moved his vehicle so as to block us and then gave us a series of explanations on why we couldn't ride the streets of Griffith Park. I asked him under whose authority he was prohibiting cyclists while we watched the public drive their cars on the street right behind him. He said they were Rec and Park streets and they could exclude cyclists. I invoked State Law, pointing out that Los Angeles may be a big city but it hardly trumps State Law and CVC 21 is the Uniformity Code and it guarantees me the right to ride the streets that are open to the motoring public.


Sgt. Kilpatrick then invoked the special event argument, I responded by asking for the permit. He had none. I asked for his supervisor, he said he was it. I asked who gave the instructions to prohibit cyclists, he didn't know. We chatted for a while and he was very polite but firm, he said he would cite us if we violated the ban on cyclists in the park during the Festival of Lights. I asked what law would be violated and he didn't know. He really didn't know what law because when he wrote the ticket, it was for failing to comply.

Here are a few problems:

1) "It's for your own safety!" is code for getting cyclists out of the way of the motorists. It's not about our safety or the streets would be cleared of motor vehicles, intersections would be grade separated and motorists would be banned from the park. It's about moving motor vehicles and the plan was prepared by engineers who can't conceive of what to do with all of the humans.

2) Simple attempts to restrict cyclists must be resisted as a matter of principle. Los Altos went so far as to paint "NO BIKES" on El Monte Road before cyclists protested and won. Pasadena drafted an ordinance restricting cyclists from riding two abreast, making it to the second reading before cyclists again prevailed. In both cases, CVC 21 was invoked and used to demonstrate that local municipalities don't have the authority to restrict cyclists unless specifically articulated in the CVC. (Bike licenses, sidewalk riding and cyclists on the freeways are the exceptions) The Griffith Park prohibition is one of tradition and it is inappropriate and illegal.

3) The prohibition has no "Owner" and there is no accountability. Did Councilman Tom LaBonge direct the Park Rangers and the LADOT to prohibit cyclists from the Festival of Lights? Did the DWP determine that the Festival would be safer with no cyclists? Was it the LADOT who prepared the traffic plan for the Festival and determined that the two hour trek through the gridlock would be safer for the motorists if the cyclists were banned? Was it the Park Rangers who banded together and proposed a cyclist-free Festival? Why is it so hard to find the person behind the directive?

4) Sgt. Kilpatrick is in his third decade of service as a Peace Officer. How is it he stands prepared to enforce a ban on cyclists on the streets of Griffith Park, yet he can't identify the supporting law, he can't identify the authority who gave him his orders and he can't even offer up a reasonable defense of the absurd policy. He is the guy in charge. I would hope that he is enough of a professional to recognize that a man of his experience and his level of authority is of value because he thinks, because he asks questions and because he does what's right, not just what he's told. We are so far beyond the "I'm just following orders." days and the City of Los Angeles deserves better from those who operate under the color of authority. Putting on a badge and a gun means stepping up and doing what's right, not simply what is anonymously passed down as a directive.

5) The City of LA is in the midst of the worst budget crisis in our lifetimes. Rita Robinson, the GM of the LADOT, just met with the neighborhood council reps to tell them that the year-long Memorandum of Understanding meetings would not result in an MOU because she was unable to make any commitments in the middle of the current budget and staffing crisis. How then does she find the money to pay LADOT Traffic Officers to work Griffith Park wrangling the tens of thousands of motor vehicles that jam up the park and the surrounding community. Who is paying for the LADOT staff?

6) Rec and Parks stands to lose over 200 members of their staff as a result of the Early Retirement Incentive Plan. The department is in turmoil and local communities are being told that their parks are in danger of being closed and services restricted, all as a result of the budget meltdown. Meanwhile, the Park Rangers are out in Griffith Park with all of the trucks and gear, looking for cyclists who threaten the stability of the eco-system with their nefarious plan to ...ride their bikes on Crystal Springs Drive, the one with the bike lanes that get decommissioned during the holiday season to make room for more cars. Who is setting the Park Ranger priorities and who is directing them during the Festival of Lights?

7) The DWP has hosted the Light Festival ever since then-City Council President John Ferraro helped them think of it 14 years ago. How does the DWP get to host the Festival of Lights without pulling a permit, without paying fees that other organizations would have to pay if they wanted to put on a special event and dramatically impact the operation of the park as well as the surrounding community. How did the DWP avoid the rules and regulations and fees that apply to all other community groups and non-profits and special events?

8) The traffic on the 5 Freeway gets congested all the way back to the 134 Freeway, requiring mitigation and supervision from Caltrans and the CHP. In the last 14 years, have the operators of the Festival of Lights taken responsibility for evaluating the impact of the Festival on the freeway and on the safety of those who are caught in the congestion? Are Caltrans and the CHP voluntary partners with the Festival of Lights or are they simply responding to the disruption of service on the freeway?



Councilman Tom LaBonge of CD4, Jon Kirk Mukri of Rec and Parks, Rita Robinson of LADOT, and David Freeman of the DWP are all, at some point in time, referred to as the authority and the one in charge when it comes to the DWP's Festival of Lights in Griffith Park.

One of them needs to step up and take responsibility for the Festival of Lights.

That person needs to reconcile the current Festival of Lights with the Mayor's commitment to making LA the Greenest Big City.

That person needs to reconcile the current Festival of Lights with the City's current budget crisis.

That person needs to reconcile the current Festival of Lights with the Mayor's recent acknowledgment that he and the City of LA don't do enough for cyclists.

Most of all, that person needs to rise to the occasion and give the people of LA hope that even in the midst of these dire straits, there are people within the City of LA who will do what's best for the people of LA.

Happy Holidays and I look forward to seeing you on the streets of Griffith Park.

Holiday Light Festival - NC's Walk!

Photo by Militant Angelino
LA's Department of Water & Power has dusted off the Holiday Light Festival decorations and is busy investing the public's money in the event that won the "Eco-Moron" award last year for its ability to drawing idling vehicles in such numbers that Griffith Park, the adjacent communities and the 5 freeway all sit in gridlock for hours each evening of the holiday season. As the Park Rangers and the Department of Transportation grapple with the traffic, the DWP claims the "Going Green" title and then proceeds to go after more of your green.

The Griffith Park Holiday Light Festival is an old tradition, dating back to Councilman John Ferraro who visited San Antonio during the holiday season and came back all enthralled with the idea of a public light festival. In hindsight, it's only too bad that he didn't visit a city with Great Streets, one with holiday lights and people walking and talking and having conversations and singing and enjoying a human-sized people based festival. Of course, it's not too late to make some changes!

The Greater Griffith Park NC, the Atwater Village NC, the Los Feliz Improvement Association, the Oaks Home Owners Association and community members representing hikers, runners, cyclists, equestrians, and folks who simply like to breath clean air when standing in the middle of the America's largest urban wilderness park have joined together to ask the DWP to simply have motorists park their cars in the Zoo parking lot, then get out and walk through the Festival. The simple move to a pedestrian based festival, with ADA accommodations, would relieve the community from the idling queue that approaches the park from the south. It seems so simple!

The DWP's Public Affairs office, very nice folks who have one of the hardest jobs imaginable, putting a shine on the DWP's policies and programs, gave this year's version of "Why you can't have what you want but here is something shiny to distract you!" presentation, again to a full house and again to well-articulated arguments for the same old vehicular based paradigm for enjoying the great outdoors.

The Bike Writers Collective objects to the DWP's Griffith Park Holiday Light Festival for a few reasons, first because it excludes cyclists from the vehicular nights based on the recommendation of the LADOT that it is too dangerous to have motor vehicles and bicycles on the same road. This becomes a principle issue since one of the basic rights cyclists claim is the right to ride on the streets of Los Angeles. The DWP claims that it is exempt from the law and can exclude cyclists which leaves cyclists charging "The DWP is trying too hard to find a legal loophole to do something absurd, prevent cyclists from riding bikes in traffic that moves so slowly, the road resembles a parking lot."

Plans are already underway for a protest ride, The Festival of Rights, which will take place on Friday, December 18. The protest ride, which gathers at the Mulholland Fountain where cyclists decorate themselves with lights, has become an annual tradition and this will be the third year (2007 and 2008) that the absurdity of a vehicular light festival at the expense of the community, the pedestrians and the cyclists will be challenged by the cycling community. Cyclist should be cautioned that the ride is not without risk, participants who elect to breath while riding will be subjected to greenhouse gases, auto emissions and noxious odors.

As for the larger issue of the "Pedestrian Friendly" event that local community leaders have been proposing, endorsing and working to bring to fruition, the DWP Commissioners, the DWP Management and Councilman Tom LABonge have all been notified that the Greater Griffith Park Neighborhood Council has polled the community and concluded with a resolution calling for the "complete environmental reform of the annual LADWP Light Festival in Griffith Park."

CityWatchLA - Rosendahl on Solar: "I Might Not Support It"

CityWatch, Jan 13, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 4

DWP Workshop Notebook
By David Lowell and Stephen Box

DWP General Manager, H. David Nahai, spent Saturday morning giving a three-hour "Renewable Energy" presentation to a crowd of approximately 70 community leaders representing Neighborhood Councils from throughout the city, most of whom were sitting on the edge of their seats waiting for the discussion of Measure B to come up.

Measure B is the City's proposed "Green Energy and Good Jobs for Los Angeles Act," which has been called "risky" by the City's own analyst and will appear on the March 3rd ballot. Nahai and Assistant GM Aram Benyamin went to great lengths to steer clear of the topic, instead demonstrating incredible message control and sticking to the polished PowerPoint presentation that was well received.

Their efforts to bypass B went askew, however, when Councilman Bill Rosendahl dropped by and jumped into the mix, announcing "I have not made up my mind. I voted to put it on the ballot but I haven't voted to support it because, frankly, I want to understand the details that are to be presented to us as a Council. I might end up supporting it, I might not."

Rosendahl echoed the sentiment of literally everybody by stating "I believe whole-heartedly in Solar. We're in California. It's Sunny. My roof is flat." He continued by endorsing the DWP's union and the opportunity to bring more people into the DWP workforce while at the same time developing the private sector partnerships and supporting solar housing collectives such as proposed in Mar Vista.

Rosendahl polled the room and found that many were opposed to measure B, that many were undecided, that everybody reckoned that they had an open mind and that there were two people in support of Measure B, one of whom was Gary Baratta who explained "Solar Power has to go forward. There is absolutely no reason not to go forward. The DWP is the only party in a position to develop the infrastructure necessary to deliver power." Gary went on to urge Nahai to ignore the City Charter and to stop contributing funds to the City's general funds.

This softball suggestion from Baratta allowed Nahai to respond vigorously that the DWP would by no means violate the City charter and that it was their desire to abide by the rules and obligations and processes.

Nahai called the meeting a success saying "I think it went well. There were many probing questions and the feedback from the audience was that the presentation was very comprehensive. It was a good meeting. As for Measure B, the DWP has no position on Measure B. We are waiting on financial reports from Huron and we will release them as part of our outreach."

Jack Humphreville “thought the presentation was great, very informative and very interesting. The thing is,” he said, “I came to hear about Measure B."

DWP Advocacy Committee Chair Soledad Garcia agreed, "Solar energy is not the issue, we're all for it. The DWP has much to answer for if we are to work together to develop a solar plan for Los Angeles.”

Rusty Millar, Co-Chair at the Silver Lake NC was unconvinced saying "The LADWP asks us to trust them but they never came to the Neighborhood Councils as required by the City charter and they never revealed any information on the cost of Measure B. I want to know how much, how it will be paid and what the fiscal impact on the city will be."

Barbara Moynihan Burke called the entire process "A travesty!. I was there in Van Nuys when they voted on Measure B. It was called as a "special" with 24 hour notice and then it was over. No financials, no information, no opportunity for feedback from the community. I protested to Council President Garcetti based on process and based on content and yet it's still underway."

Jeff Jacobberger and Tony Butka both referred to the meeting as an informative and comprehensive big-picture presentation of the future of LA's Renewable Energy program but both also left with their expectation of a discussion of Measure B unmet.

Observers Everett Littlefield and BONC Commissioner Al Abrams seemed destined for the Diplomatic Corps. They both argued for open minds. Littlefield said "I'm union and I believe in unions but not when we're getting less for more. I have an open mind and I think like an investor, I think like a rate payer, and I think like a homeowner who wants to install solar. I need to know that everything we do is financially sound." Abrams echoed and said "It's our DWP, we're the stakeholders. We owe it to the DWP to wait and see, to keep an open mind and to evaluate the Huron financial report."

In summary: the Department got good marks for their solar presentation but disappointed many when they avoided the hot-button Solar Energy Prop B issue.

CityWatchLA - Brown Out at the DWP

CityWatch, Sept 26, 2008
Vol 6 Issue 78

City Ignores the Law
By Stephen Box

Legendary rock band Van Halen, at the peak of its popularity, was taken to task by the media when it was discovered that Van Halen’s contract contained a provision that called for a backstage bowl of M&M’s, but with all of the brown ones removed. Often dismissed as Urban Legend, Van Halen lead singer David Lee Roth confirms the story as true, quoting article #126 of their production contract which specifies “There will be no brown M&M’s in the backstage area, upon pain of forfeiture of the show, with full compensation.”

As for the charge that this was evidence of the lavish and whimsical demands that Rock Stars made on promoters, Roth responds the ban on brown M&M’s was far from frivolous and was instead simply a quality control measure, implemented to guarantee adherence to a contract that was complicated and included complex technical specifications.

In short, when the band arrived in town, they would stop backstage and look for the bowl of M&M’s on the craft service table. If they found brown M&M’s, they knew it was time to line check the entire production because there were sure to be technical problems. Sometimes they might be minor, sometimes they might threaten to destroy the show and sometimes they might be simply dangerous.

There’s a lesson here for the members of the public who attend meetings covered by the Ralph M. Brown Act, the state law that guarantees the public the opportunity to participate in government meetings and deliberations.

Simply announce to the Security Staff at the entrance that you are a member of the public attending a public meeting. The Brown Act specifies that the members of the public have the right to attend public meetings without having to provide their name or any information.

Last month I attended the DWP Commission meeting in order to appeal to the Board to lift the ban on cyclists in Griffith Park during the DWP Festival of Lights in November and December.

I approached the Security Desk and was asked to sign-in. I smiled and identified myself as a “member of the public, here to attend a public meeting.” The guard didn’t smile and instead informed me that I needed to show identification and sign in. I responded that I was a “member of the public, here to attend a public meeting.” He repeated his position, I asked for a Supervisor, the Supervisor supported the Guards position and I showed identification and signed.

When it came time to speak before the Commission, presenting my claim that the DWP is violating state law (CVC 21) by banning cyclists from the streets while leaving them open to motor vehicles, I pointed out that the DWP was also violating state law, the Brown Act, by refusing to allow me to attend the DWP Commission without showing identification and signing in.

General Counsel to the DWP, Richard M. Brown (no relation to Ralph M.) responded quickly saying “you’re absolutely right! According to the Brown Act, the public has the right to attend meetings without having to identify themselves or provide identification.”

I pointed out that I was there to ask the DWP to stop violating state law at Griffith Park only to find the DWP violating state law at the DWP Commission. The remedy or “cure” for the Brown Act violation is to re-agendize the meeting and reconvene at a later date. I passed on requesting the “cure” but I did ask them to adhere to state law and lift the ban on cyclists in Griffith Park.

My request drew a meeting with Councilman Tom LaBonge, DWP staff and Recreation & Parks staff, all who reiterated that the ban on cyclists would stand.

At the next DWP Commission meeting I repeated the “I’m a member of the public and I’m here to attend a public meeting” request. This time it only took four members of the DWP security detail a consultation with the supervisor, a series of back and forth requests to sign in, a discussion with regards to providing me with an escort and …voilá…I was free to attend the DWP Commission meeting without signing in. This was progress!

I spoke my piece and then DWP Commission Chair Nick Patsaouras graciously noted that this was my second visit the DWP Commission on the same topic and instructed staff to put my issue on the agenda “so it can be resolved.”

As I left the meeting, I had the opportunity to chat with the Deputy Counsel to the DWP, Joseph A. Grajevich, and I pointed out that progress had been made but that it was still an ordeal to invoke the Brown Act at the DWP. He shook his head and said they were working on it. I reminded him that the law was 53 years old and at this rate, I was worried that they would never get to my real concern, the ban on cyclists during the DWP Festival of Lights.

He asked me who was in charge of the DWP Festival of Lights. I chuckled and responded “If it’s successful, there will be many departments responsible, if it’s controversial, it will be an orphan.”

The journey is far from complete. I’ll be at the next DWP Commission meeting on October 7 and I look forward to presenting my proposal to lift the DWP ban on cyclists.

I hope you’ll join me, not just in fighting for my cause, but also in claiming your rights under the Brown Act and in ensuring that those in power are reminded at every opportunity that the Brown Act is a real law and that we expect it to be enforced.

“See you in Chambers!”

(Stephen Box is a community activist and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net)