City Hall Sharks Circling Neighborhood Councils

CityWatch, July 26, 2011
Vol 9 Issue 59

RETHINKING LA - The City of LA is almost one month into the first month of its 2011/2012 budget, a $6.9 billion behemoth that exceeds last year’s budget by $150 million and is the largest operating budget in the history of LA. The increase in LA’s budget is a quiet fact that was completely overshadowed by the City Hall budget drama of the last couple of years that has been used to justify significant cuts to city staff and services complemented by increases in fees, permits, fines, and penalties.

During the City Council’s contentious budget hearing earlier in the year, the heads of each city department appeared before the Budget & Finance Committee to defend their department, their staff, and their operating budget. One by one, from the offices of the City Controller and the City Attorney to the departments of Aging and Community Development, the City of LA’s org chart was shaken, squeezed and put through the budget wringer.

The public showed up to defend the city departments that were on the chopping block, arguing vehemently against cuts to the Police Department, the Fire Department, Recreation and Parks, Libraries, Cultural Affairs, Planning, and the many others that deliver the public safety and quality of life city services that Angelenos consider to be essential.

As the hearings progressed, the crowd thinned, and by the time the Neighborhood Councils were on the chopping block, the outcome was a fait accompli, resulting in a 10% reduction in annual budgets and the loss of all rollover funds. This action took place quietly and was complemented by the continued evisceration of the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment.

Missing from the exchange was the deafening roar of support from the Police Department, the Fire Department, Recreation and Parks, Libraries, Cultural Affairs, Planning or any of the other departments who enjoyed the support of the neighborhood councils as they defended their budgets and their mandates.

The budget dust settled, neighborhood councils went back to work, rollover funds were swept and the new $40,500 annual budgets were allocated in order to fulfill their City Charter mandated mission “to promote more citizen participation in government and make government more responsive to local needs.”

All of a sudden, the City Family rediscovered their affection for neighborhood councils and department heads came courting their budget buddies, demonstrating the fact that self-preservation has no boundaries.

In a city with a $6.9 billion operating budget, it’s an incredible demonstration of bold egocentrism that motivates a manager of a billion dollar department to ask neighborhood councils for a share of their meager pittance, a reward that can hardly be worth the manager’s time.

And yet the city family sharks circle the neighborhood councils, asking for money to pay for equipment and services that should be paid for with their own budgets.

The city’s budget grew by approximately $150 million this past year, money that funds the delivery of city services that include public safety and public works. Neighborhood councils collectively account for less than $4 million of the city’s $6.9 billion budget, a number that pales in comparison to the $1.2 billion Police Department budget or the $480 million Fire Department budget or the $133 million Transportation budget.

In spite of their limited funds, neighborhood councils still find a way to support the LAPD with volunteers and funding, they still find a way to train and equip volunteers for the LAFD, they continue to pay to clean streets, to pull weeds from sidewalks, to empty trash, to remove graffiti, and they continue to fund median strip improvements, speed humps, Sharrows, and planning outreach.

But, along the way, the burden of that $40,500 budget has distracted the neighborhood councils from their mandate of advising the City of LA on the delivery of City Services and has allowed then to assume responsibility for funding the departments that should be answering to the neighborhood councils.

There is something absurd about the largest departments within the city family shaking down the smallest members. Any financial benefit to the larger department is surely negligible relative to the time and energy it takes to accomplish but the process also reverses the roles, given that neighborhood councils should actually be advising the city departments on their budgets and operations. After all, it’s the City Charter mandate.

The larger absurdity is that City of LA department managers can find the time to chase funds from one pocket to another, foregoing the larger opportunity to perhaps engage in the efficient operation of their department or, even bolder, look for opportunities to engage the public in roles of oversight.

But if the City of Los Angeles is to consider the departmental shake-downs of neighborhood councils appropriate shuffling of city funds, there should be some protocols in place, rules that govern the transference of neighborhood council funds to the operating budgets of city departments:

1) Neighborhood Councils funding should be limited to City Departments that stood up for the neighborhood councils during the City of LA’s Budget Hearings and defended the volunteers who work so hard to fulfill their City Charter mandate of engaging the public in monitoring the delivery of City Services. When the General Managers and Directors of LA’s Departments and Bureaus stand side by side with neighborhood councils as partners, they should feel free to solicit funds for their departments.

2) Neighborhood Councils funding should be limited to City Departments that have Commissions with a seat that is set aside for Neighborhood Council representation. When the Police Commission has an NC seat, the LAPD should feel free to solicit funds for their equipment. When the Rec & Parks Commission opens up an NC seat, RAP should feel free to solicit funds for their programs.

3) Neighborhood Councils funding should be limited to departments that entertain reciprocal requests for funding and services. Of course, this is the way things were supposed to be before they were flipped, one where the neighborhood councils advised the city on the delivery of city services and the departments were actually responsive to the local priorities.

The absurdity of the biggest of the big going after the smallest of the small in order to fund services and supplies is predatory and does nothing to advance LA but simply allows the departments to consume the host.

The missed opportunity through all of this is for the City Family to take its collective eyes of the budgets of other departments and to focus on outside revenue sources that require community support as a key element in qualifying and implementing federal and state money that would go much further in funding city services.

Neighborhood councils are in an ideal position to serve as the funding partners on Office of Traffic Safety funding that would go directly to LAPD staffing and services. The impact of an OTS grant is much more significant that any NC contribution to LAPD office supplies.

Neighborhood councils are best equipped to conduct the outreach necessary to qualify for funds such as the CA Statewide Park Program that funded the creation of parks in underserved communities. The impact of a $5 million grant far outweighs the negligible benefit of a neighborhood council contribution for RAP outreach materials.

Neighborhood councils are perfect partners for the Transportation Department as the City of LA goes after Safe Routes to School funding, money that can be put to work improving the sidewalks and streets of our neighborhoods. The impact of proactive teamwork has the potential to deliver millions of dollars to our streets which far outperforms the current meager contributions that are made in desperate attempts to “prime the pump” and motivate a reticent department.

It’s time that City Hall and the city departmental leadership recognize neighborhood councils as partners in engaging the public in the civic process, as partners in departmental oversight and accountability, and as partners in great funding that supports the delivery of city services.

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

CityWatchLA - It's Not the Heat, It's the Disconnect!

CityWatch, Oct 1, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 78

CONSIDER THIS

This past Monday, the temperature in Los Angeles hit a record 113 degrees, prompting a press release from the City of LA's Emergency Management Department (EMD) directing the public to cooling stations set up in locations such as LA's Libraries. The next day, the EMD issued another press release, this time acknowledging their recent discovery that LA's libraries are now closed on Mondays.

There are a few elements of this scenario that demonstrate LA's lack of emergency preparedness and emergency responsiveness.

1) Emergencies don't work 9-5, Monday through Friday. The heat wave didn't sneak up on LA, in fact at 8 am on Saturday morning the participants at the LAPD's Community Policing Advisory Board (C-PAB) Summit were sweltering. Unable to find relief in the beautiful but unshaded open space of LAPD headquarters they found refuge in the new Deaton Hall where the limitations of the AC system were discovered.

The theme of the C-PAB Summit was emergency preparedness and featured Caltech's Dr. Lucy Jones and EMD's James Featherstone. In a wicked display of irony, the top brass of the EMD and the LAPD discussed emergency preparedness on Saturday and then went home, waiting until Monday to let the public know "It's hot, head for the libraries!" If only we were better connected and had the right information at the right time.

2) Emergencies involve everybody. Utilities collapse, streets buckle, the LAPD gets stretched thin, the Fire Department must contend with medical emergencies and heightened fire risks, priorities shift and the last people to know are the ones who need help the most.

This simple heat wave illustrates that the importance of our libraries, our parks, our schools, our open space, our neighborhood councils, our senior centers, and our public space.

Regardless of the emergency, all of the assets of LA are part of the emergency response system, from open space for staging areas to protected space for animals, to libraries and community centers for cooling stations or evacuation shelters, nothing is to be taken for granted. If only we were better connected and had a plan for the right facilities at the right time.

3) Emergencies are local, very local. In a real emergency people won't be downloading PDF's from EMD, they won't be shopping for supplies or rethinking the recent interdepartmental competition over emergency preparedness funding. They'll be yelling, using a whistle, listening to a radio and taking care of themselves, their families and their neighbors.

A real emergency doesn't respect bureaucracy and it hasn't been trained by the personnel department in time management, loss-prevention, or the hierarchy of municipal decision-making. To wait for City Hall to recognize an emergency is to court disaster. If only we were better connected and were prepared to take responsibility for our own lives.

Last year's Station Fire demonstrated the deficiencies in our current emergency preparedness system when it was unclear which department or authority was in charge. Inter-agency squabbling over responsibility left locals navigating the back roads in order to do what needed to be done, save lives and save property.

Two years ago, a series of bushfires in Victoria, Australia took the lives of 173 people. "Black Saturday" resulted in an inquiry that called into question the simple nature of authority and the process for communicating an evacuation alert. It got hot, it got windy, the fires started, people trusted a hesitant fire authority and lives were lost.

Fifteen years ago, a heat wave struck Chicago and 739 Chicagoans lost their live due to the heat. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) sent an investigator to Chicago to study the incident and the researcher reported "It's the heat!" He was wrong. It was hot all over but the deaths came in clusters, demonstrating the impact of social structure, access and mobility, isolation and connectivity.

Quite simply, it's not the nature of the emergency that puts Angelenos at risk, it's our ability to prevent or minimize the impact and it's our ability to respond and survive that makes all the difference.

1) The City of LA needs to integrate its emergency preparedness and emergency response strategies and accept that they must be in the DNA of every department. Chicago demonstrated that simple land use decisions had an impact on the survival rates in a heat wave, demonstrating that even the CRA is having an impact on LA's inability to weather the storm.

From the DWP to the Street Services to the Libraries to Rec & Parks to the LAPD to the LAFD, every department in Los Angeles plays a role but the fact that they are disconnected means that we'll be playing "Who's on first?" in the next emergency.

2) The City of LA needs to connect with the public now and there is no better mechanism for that outreach than the neighborhood councils. It was locals that went over the fences in the aftermath of the Chatsworth Train crash to take food to emergency service providers who worked around the clock to save lives. It was locals who used the back routes to evacuate the animals in the Station Fire while the "authorities" set up roadblocks that hindered an emergency response.

From Community Policing to CERT to Communications, the network must be in place now, not after an emergency has arrived, and the strategy for success must start with supporting the public, not interfering.

3) The City of LA needs to clearly communicate now the chain of command so that the people of LA never, ever again stand in the middle of an emergency and watch the Red Cross argue with CERT over funding or watch the LAPD argue with the County over jurisdiction. Those moments might be dramatic and entertaining on the big screen but they are the seeds of disaster when they take place on the streets of LA.

The record-setting heat of last week may have passed but in its wake is a reminder that we must be prepared, we must take responsibility, and we must get connected. As always, it's up to us.

(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 - The Dismantling of Los Angeles

CityWatch, Sept 21, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 75

THE ‘LEGAL MINIMUM’ STANDARD

The City of LA stands alone amongst other large cities in its commitment to establishing "legal minimum" as the standard for performance in access, civic participation, communication and the delivery of city services.

LA Weekly's Patrick Range McDonald details LA's latest "legal minimum" performance commitment in his exhaustive review of the evisceration of LA's library system, one that sees the library budget being reduced to the City Charter minimum.

While the Mayor bemoans the obstacles that prevent him from taking control of the LAUSD and leading the charge on improving the educational landscape for the children of Los Angeles, he partners with the City Council in turning an estimated 15,000 schoolchildren away from the library every Sunday and then again every Monday.

While the Mayor claims sweeping reforms in the City’s delivery of gang reduction and promises to invest in LA's youth by addressing gang violence, he partners with the City Council in closing the neutral gang-free libraries where students have a quiet homework haven after school.

While the Mayor promises to helping lead Los Angeles out of this economic recession by training young adults and adults for the jobs of tomorrow, he partners with the City Council in closing very popular internet access that offers job-seekers an opportunity to prepare for and locate employment.

Through it all, a City Hall spokesperson excused the Mayoral and City Council behavior by explaining "Tough choices were made." This statement is especially important because it serves as a reminder that the decisions were, indeed, choices. Not necessarily the choices of the people but they were certainly the choices of the Mayor and the City Council.

Missing from the City Hall spokesperson's defense is an explanation of why the "Tough Choices" and "legal minimum" standards weren't applied to City Hall and the motor pool, the travel accounts, the staffing levels, and the many redundancies and inefficiencies that the public refers to as unnecessary and wasteful.

Granted, the Mayor's office offers the public the opportunity to weigh in on the budget each year, most recently with an online survey. That survey revealed public support for maintaining budget commitments to the Fire Department, to Rec and Parks and to the Public Libraries. Unfortunately, that input was quietly ignored.

The people of Los Angeles are in the midst of a quiet dismantling of a Great City, the proverbial budgetary death of a thousand cuts.

The Mayor and the City Council are in the process of establishing a new standard in "legal minimums," one that threatens to result in the failure of a Great City!

The future of Los Angeles depends on our collective actions and our ability to work together to demand the effective and efficient delivery of city services.

"The library is not a shrine for the worship of books. It is not a temple where literary incense must be burned or where one's devotion to the bound book is expressed in ritual. A library, to modify the famous metaphor of Socrates, should be the delivery room for the birth of ideas - a place where history comes to life." ~Norman Cousins

(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 - East Hollywood Sees the Light…Yard

CityWatch, Oct 16, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 85

In park-poor East Hollywood, LA's Bureau of Street Lighting service yard on Santa Monica Boulevard is looking very attractive to community members who think the large 4.2 acre storage space is the perfect location for a park.

Last month the East Hollywood Neighborhood Council hosted two Park[ing] Day LA celebrations and one of them was on Santa Monica Boulevard, across the street from the Cahuenga Library and right in front of the Street Lighting service yard. Their message was simple. People need parks and in a densely populated neighborhood surrounded by three elementary schools, it's strange to see so much LA city property used for storage while kids are playing in the streets.

The idea of converting the Street Lighting service yard into a park is not a new idea. Years ago, Proposition K was passed, positioning three decades of funding "to develop recreational opportunities for our city's young people." When Councilmember Mike Hernandez initially positioned Proposition K, he called on the other Councilmembers for projects and cobbled together a list that included the development of the Street Lighting service yard for soccer fields. Prop K was quite controversial and there were charges from the public that the money wouldn't be spent on the proposed projects and would instead turn into another City Council slush fund. The assurance at the time was "The City Council must ultimately approve every Proposition K expenditure. We are the ones who will be accountable to the public for the proper use of those monies."

Last week, City Council President Eric Garcetti's staff took a couple of dozen community members on a tour of the Street Lighting service yard, offering a backstage view of the very busy service yard. The invitation referenced the "great deal of interest in locating green space/park space/community space at this site" and promised that Garcetti's office would be working with the CRA "to undertake a study in that direction that looks at creative, collaborative possibilities." All of which was in stark contrast to the repeated comments from Heather Repenning, Garcetti's District Director of Community Development, who took several opportunities to state firmly that they would look at opportunities to accommodate some green space but that in no way would they compromise the efficiency and efficacy of the Street Lighting service yard.

All of this is in stark contrast to the Prop K commitment and to the City Council motion of 2006 which stated "The conversion of the site into a park would serve to improve the aesthetic quality of the local community." The motion directed staff to identify a new location for the service yard and specified that once the service yard is relocated, the existing site can be converted to much needed park space.

It appears that the framers of Prop K thought the Street Lighting service yard would be a great place for a park. It appears that the City Council thought the Street Lighting service yard would be a great place for a park. It also appears that the community thinks the Street Lighting service yard would be a great place for a park.

Yet City Council motion 06-07-07 expired on August 25, 2009 and simply died, mortally wounded by City Council inactivity.

There's no doubt that the Street Lighting service yard provides an invaluable service. Approximately 80 Street Lighting trucks call the lot home and every morning, they load up with poles, fixtures and supplies and head to the four corners of the City of Los Angeles, from the Harbor to the Westside the the far reaches of the Valley and to the Eastside, confirming that East Hollywood is indeed the center of Los Angeles. They repair or replace about 75 light poles each month that are damaged or destroyed by motorists in auto collisions. They replace burned out light bulbs and they conduct routine maintenance in order to keep approximately 5000 miles of LA's streets illuminated for our safety and comfort.

There are approximately 400 different street light fixtures used on the 5000 miles of LA street that the Street Lighting maintains and they store approximately 200 of those fixtures at the East Hollywood service yard. Some are rare and historic fixtures that require custom repairs at the welding shop. Some are common such as the cement or aluminum poles. Some are experimental and the light yard is also used to test the new LED lighting, low impact lighting, solar panels and solar wraps, all of which represent some of the changes that are taking place in the Bureau of Street Lighting as new technology drives new solutions to the old public safety commitment of illuminated streets.

The Street Lighting service yard has been in this location for decades. It has grown over the years, taking over space that formerly served as film production facilities, as restaurants, as apartment buildings and as a gas station. There is no more room to grow and the yard now counts among its neighbors a convalescent home, apartment buildings, and a a library. There really is no place to grow.

Meanwhile, every morning the local kids walk past a chain link fence topped with razor wire as 80 large utility trucks leave the service yard to take care of the lighting needs for the entire city.

The Bureau of Street Lighting needs more room and the local community needs a park.

One would think that the opportunity here would be win-win instead of the either-or situation that Repenning works to deflect when she repeats the "community green space as long as it doesn't interfere with the efficiency of Street Lighting" mandate for further development of East Hollywood green space at the Street Lighting service yard.

It was not too long ago that the City of Los Angeles, as it grappled with the budget crisis, surveyed the City-owned property and looked for opportunities to divest itself of unused or under-utilized property. Surely that information could lead to a large facility that could accommodate the Bureau of Street Lighting and supporting their invaluable contribution to the quality of life in Los Angeles while at the same time allowing for the development of the 4,2 acres of service yard into a great park for East Hollywood.

The City Council motion of 2006 directed General Services to identify property that could be used to accommodate the Bureau of Street Lighting service yard and property was identified but the motion died. It simply died.

This area is part of the Specific Plan Area of "Vermont / Western Station Neighborhood Area Plan" and the property is earmarked for redevelopment into "public elementary, secondary or high schools; police stations and related uses; parks and recreation facilities, including bicycle paths and walking trails, nature trails; park land and lawn areas; children's play areas; picnic facilities; athletic fields (not to exceed 200 seats); senior citizen centers, community centers, clubhouses; swimming pools, libraries; tennis courts; rest rooms; gyms; camping facilities; museums; aquaria, observatories, planetaria and zoos."

Perhaps there is an opportunity here for the community to partner with the Bureau of Street Lighting and to look for a way to support and to even enhance the efficiency and efficacy of the people who bring light to our community. Perhaps there is a way to repair and store the special, historical and architectural lighting fixtures and poles without having to service the entire city from one location. That only serves to make all commutes equally inefficient. Perhaps there is a way to explore inventory management innovations so that the Bureau of Street Lighting can more effectively service the communities that have unique lighting needs.

All of which would free up the East Hollywood Bureau of Street Lighting service yard so that the Prop K commitment can be kept, so that Council President Eric Garcetti's City Council motion can be honored and so that the community of East Hollywood can enjoy a park within walking distance of their homes and of their schools.

Seems like a win-win situation to me!