The Politics of Inertia

CityWatch, Aug 26, 2011
Vol 9 Issue 68

RETHINKING LA - One of the most important City Hall survival skills is the artful dance of inertia, the ability to steer clear of any responsibility for progress while maintaining the appearance of support.

For the City Councilmembers, this skill is best demonstrated by their enthusiastic response to literally any proposal or proposition when it’s introduced. Then the Politics of Inertia takes over and departmental reports are ordered, cost impacts are studied, staffing requirements are analyzed, and eventually any good idea dies of old age in a dusty stack of council committee droppings.

For the departmental staffers, this skill requires the artful avoidance of “yes” and “no” answers, all while maintaining a flurry of activity that includes scurrying from meeting to meeting with the obligatory beleaguered look on the face and an armload of reports and charts as evidence that an important mission is underway.

Staffers typically invoke three specific tools of inertia in their commitment to avoiding progress; budget impacts, security concerns, issues of liability.

As for budget concerns, we get it. The real question is “Does City Hall get it?” The public knows that things have costs, that everything has an impact on the budget. Yet when it comes to establishing priorities and engaging in oversight and accountability, the crickets chirp. Until the public asks for something and then the first line of defense is “Well, you know, we’re in a budget crisis!”

Security is a concern to everybody but it also turns into an obstacle that is used to restrict access, not facilitate public participation. It’s easier to for the public to get into Sacramento’s Capital Building than into LA’s City Hall, as if it’s the public that should be feared. Meanwhile, the most recent murders on city property have been at the hands of city employees and the most recent acts of sabotage were city staff labor actions directed at the LADOT.

The City of LA has armed guards in charge of dispensing visitor stickers, demonstrating that the illusion of Security trumps the limits of Budget at the “Department of No!”

Liability is the last line of defense, used when all else fails as a way to avoid progress and now synonymous with the “ability to lie.” Community members advocating for progress find it hard to overcome the “liability” objection, after all, it sounds so “responsible.”

If liability was really a concern, the City of LA would stop rejecting transportation innovations requested by the public and start restricting the actions of the Mayor, the City Council, and the LAPD.

LA’s City Council just got taken to task in the California Court of Appeal for exceeding its authority, resulting in a court reversal and the Judge's opinion that “the City Council abused its discretion by failing to proceed in the manner required by law.”

The LAPD was taken to task by U.S. District Judge Dean Pregerson who ruled that the “Superheroes” on Hollywood Boulevard had a First Amendment and Fourth Amendment right to remain on the public sidewalk free from LAPD persecution.

As for the Mayor, the City Attorney failed to impress on him the danger in accepting free tickets from companies with lobbyists in City Hall or contracts with the City. While the public clearly understands the liability involved when one attends a taping of American Idol or a Spice Girls concert, the Mayor didn’t and it resulted in California's political watchdog recommending the largest combined ethics fine in the agency's history.

Pound for pound and dollar for dollar, objections of liability are typically the line of defense as City Hall defends the status quo and fights to avoid progress.

Professionals in all endeavors must contend with the limitations of budgets, with obligations to provide a safe and secure environment, and requirements to conduct business legally and responsibly so that there are no issues of liability. But at City Hall, they’re not standards for performance, they’re tools for avoiding responsibility and sidestepping progress.

The Mayor rises above the fray with a unique strategy that trumps the simple bureaucratic tools of those in City Hall’s hamster wheel, he employs the most powerful weapon of inertia, “Press Conference!”

Villaraigosa’s twist on Burnham’s “Make Big Plans!” directive is to make really big plans, plans so big that the responsibility for actually delivering on them will fall on those in the next generation.

Villaraigosa has bounced from promise to promise, assuring Angelenos that LA is the Greenest Big City, the land of Sustainable Industry, home to a million trees, and just recently he discovered the entertainment industry and now he has a plan for supporting film production!

You can’t turn a ship that isn’t moving and Villaraigosa is currently at the helm of the Capital of Inertia, a city so stuck in the quagmire of bureaucracy that even with his muscle behind a Mayoral Directive, simply implementing LA’s Bike Plan with paint on the street won’t be complete until he’s 93 years old. Of course, that’s only if it doesn’t run into budget restraints, security and safety concerns, and liability issues.

LA’s future belongs to the bold, to those who are willing to confront mediocrity and to challenge the veracity of the objections that get thrown at the feet of progress. It’s up to the public to reject false obstacles and to demand progress.

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

CityWatchLA - A Tale of Two Fences

CityWatch, June 21, 2011
Vol 9 Issue 49

RETHINKING LA - Tony and Walter live in Los Angeles, just two and half miles apart, and they both want to live quietly and safely in homes surrounded by security fencing.

Tony has called Windsor Square his home for the last six years and he lives in a lovely house provided by his employer as a condition of his employment.

Walter lives in East Hollywood with his wife and teen-age daughter in a house he bought 14 years ago with money he earns as a painter.

In a city of almost four million people, Tony and Walter live relatively close to each other but they have never met. For all practical purposes, they might as well live in two different countries.

Tony’s neighborhood is very quiet at night. The only sound on Irving Ave. comes from the engine of an idling City of LA Public Safety vehicle which serves as the “guard shack” for the 24 hour city funded security that watches over Tony’s home.

Walter’s street is noisy at night, serving as a popular cut-through between Melrose and Santa Monica. It’s only a short walk to lots of great shops and restaurants but pedestrians are rare in this neighborhood because of fear.

Both gentlemen place a high premium on public safety and Walter agrees with Tony who said "Keeping our City safe is the first responsibility of local government.”

When it comes to results, the men disagree.

Tony recently stood shoulder to shoulder with LAPD Chief Charlie Beck and proudly announced across the board reductions in the city’s crime statistics, “marking the city’s safest point in more than 50 years.”

Walter’s experience contradicts Tony’s claim and to prove it, he simply holds a police report in each hand, representing the two unsolved criminal invasions that took place in his home this past year.

Tony and Walter have both gone public with their experiences.

Tony is often quoted in the press claiming “crime is at historically low levels, gang violence is on the decline, and the City is seeing the fewest homicides in four decades.”

Walter doesn’t get as much media attention but that hasn’t stop him from speaking out about the gang activity, the criminal element, the abandoned homes, the drug and alcohol activity under the freeway overpass, the dumping, the graffiti, and the other signs of a forgotten neighborhood.

In spite of Tony’s “safe city” claims, he apparently agrees with Walter’s personal safety concerns because his office recently submitted paperwork requesting a variance to city bylaws in order to build a security wall around his home.

Tony’s request prompted John Welborne, Windsor Square Association vice president for planning and land use, to say “Should all of Los Angeles, including its historic residential neighborhoods, become a collection of walled compounds?”

Walter has moved more quickly than Tony, building a six foot tall security wall consisting of wrought iron fencing decorated with Asian designs and supported by a series of brick pillars. This defiant act of self-preservation incurred the wrath of the City of LA’s Building and Safety Inspectors who told him his fence exceeded the permitted 42” height. He was fined for building the fence and then fined again for non-compliance and ultimately told to remove his fence.

Meanwhile, Tony is proceeding with a variance request that was prepared by and funded with public funds, after all, his house is provided by his employer which in turns contributes more than $100,000 per year to the foundation that operates and maintains his home.

In spite of the LAPD report indicating that there have been no “calls for service,” Tony knows what it’s like to feel threatened. Just last year, city librarians held a children’s storytelling session on his front lawn to protest his proposed reduction to city library services and staff.

Fortunately for Tony, an LAPD security detail arrives each morning to escort him as he engages in the business of the day, leaving Office of Public Safety officers to guard his home, all at the expense of the City of LA.

Meanwhile, Walter gets up every morning and looks out onto a busy street filled with speeding motorists, littered with shopping carts, host to fresh dumped trash, pocked with the campsites of vagrants and the campers that favor the shade of the freeway overpass. As he locks the gate, he does so knowing that if his family calls for help, there are no neighbors left to hear them. If they call the police, it will take a long time to respond and will simply generate more useless paperwork.

The ongoing debate over walled homes starts with a public safety failure. On the one hand, there is a credible argument for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) that holds the enhanced safety of open and visible space. Walled environments create hiding places and interfere with “eyes on the street” security.

None of this philosophical debate over walls and their impact on public safety, CPTED, or historic preservation matters much to those who have been victimized and who have failed to receive the support of the Mayor’s office, the Council office, the LAPD, the City Attorney.

Walter has been making the rounds of the neighborhood councils, asking for help making their community safer and in getting relief from the crippling fees, fines, and penalties that the City of LA levies as they simply attempt to protect their homes and families.

East Hollywood has more than 100 languages spoken and the greatest obstacle addressing public safety, city ordinances, permits and variances is simply mastering the most difficult language of all, Bureaucratese.

Walter and his neighbors are struggling to master a system that is Byzantine in nature and unforgiving to the mistakes of the uninitiated.

Tony, on the other hand, is the person in charge. The one responsible for public safety, for the staff who administer and enforce the rules and regulations, who respond to issues on the streets. He even has a staff to help him navigate his request for a variance, one paid for by Walter and his neighbors.

Walter and his neighbors have appealed to the Mayor’s office, to City Council President Garcetti’s office, to the LAPD, to the City Attorney’s office and to the local neighborhood councils.

While on the neighborhood council circuit, they often share space with representatives from the city, including the City Attorney’s office, the City Council office, and the LAPD.

The City Attorney’s office showed up recently to extol the virtues of the Administrative Citation Enforcement (ACE) program that would expedite enforcement of municipal code issues such as over-height fences using a complaint driven process for enforcement that allows the City Attorney to move swiftly with an internal process that fines violators and increases contributions to the City’s General Fund.

Walter and his neighbors looked at each other and realized that this ACE program targeted the residents and small businesses in their community, not the predators who violate their neighborhood, threaten their families, steal their possessions and destroy their peace of mind. From Walter’s perspective, the City Attorney should be focused on pursing the criminals who are mocking the Mayor’s “Safe City” claim.

The LAPD, a billion dollar department, was represented by Captain Bea Girmala who has made the rounds of the local neighborhood councils asking for a share of their $45K annual budget (now $40.5K) in order to buy tactical gear for her officers. The neighbors watch and wonder, a few thousand from Central Hollywood, a few thousand from East Hollywood, when will they have enough tactical gear so they can send a police officer over to our street?

Through it all, Walter and his neighbors encounter the power of the “Department of No!” They call the Mayor’s office but can never get through to anyone who finds their situation worthy of a call or a response. They certainly never bump into a Mayor’s representative on the neighborhood council circuit.

They call City Council President Garcetti’s office and after weeks of communication with a representative, they encounter weeks of silence, only to discover that this representative had transferred into the Mayor’s office.

They call the LAPD and they wait, only to get great advice such as “Build a security fence!” from the officers who arrive at the scene of the crime hours after the call with no greater response than the creation of more paperwork.

Tony and Walter have a lot in common, they both want to build a fence around their homes.

For Tony, his fence represents failure, after all, he has acknowledged that his first responsibility is public safety.

For Walter, his fence is a defiant act that demonstrates his commitment to protecting his home and his family, with or without Tony’s help.

Walter’s front yard has two lawn chairs in the center, decorated with American flags. He hopes to host Tony someday, just the two of them sitting together, watching the street and discussing great neighborhoods and safe communities.

As they say, good fences make good neighbors.

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

CityWatchLA - The Year of the Well Connected

CityWatch, Dec 30, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 105

"A crisis is a terrible thing to waste!"

The City of Los Angeles is in the midst of a crisis of unprecedented proportions and that presents LA with a rare "do-over" opportunity. A chance for the people of Los Angeles to embark on a new direction. One embracing the tactics of other Great Cities and charting a course driven by a connection to our destiny, our vision, and our purpose. If LA Mayor Villaraigosa wants to change the City’s downward spiral, he'll quickly establish Los Angeles as the Capital of the Well-Connected. He'll appoint a Czar of Connectivity. Not just somebody to fine-tune the Mayor's Tweeting skills, but somebody to rally the people of Los Angeles around our history, our story, our legacy and our journey.

Here are a few places that Los Angeles, the land of the well-connected, can start:

1) Los Angeles needs to connect with its history. Its story. As the City struggles with the budget crisis, now more that ever, the people of LA need to define the city's purpose.

Brisbane, Australia has a museum at its City Hall, and in that museum is an exhibit that presents the "City Machine" concept and tells the story of Brisbane from its early days to the present to its vision for the future.

It is acutely clear that the city's purpose is based on meeting a hierarchy of needs that starts with public health and public safety and moves through infrastructure and transportation to education and the arts.

Brisbane's motto is Meliora sequimur, Latin for We aim for better things. LA needs to connect with its past and maintain that connection as if it were the rudder steering the ship. It's the sign of a Great City.

2) Los Angeles needs to connect with its personality and character. As the City struggles to service the many communities in Los Angeles, the diversity of people and the variety of needs is often offered as an obstacle and as an excuse for inactivity.

Sydney, Australia by way of contrast, is a city with 25% more people and it positions itself as a "City of Villages," capitalizing on its diversity and celebrating the many choices to be found.

Los Angeles is the greatest brand in the world and it is made up of people from over 100 countries and speaking over 200 languages. Now more than ever, it is imperative that we recognize the people of Los Angeles as our greatest asset and position the patch-work quilt of LA's demographic landscape as a strength, not as a weakness. It's the sign of a Great City.

3) Los Angeles needs to connect physically with itself. Our communities are bisected and divided and children learn from an early age "Stay away from the street!"

We are a city of fences, boundaries, and borders, all of which contribute to the anonymity that prevails and prevents us from coalescing as a Great City with a shared purpose. There is no better time to embrace the development of open space, green space, and public space as tools for connecting the people of Los Angeles.

The Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council recently hosted a team of Planning Gurus from around the country as part of a sustainability survey and their recommendation for LA was to create "zippers" of public space that united neighborhoods and communities. LA needs to embrace the concept of streets that are designed for people. It's the sign of a Great City.

4) Los Angeles needs to connect with its clearly defined vision. The Mayor can talk about issues all day long and he even has a section on his website labeled "issues" but he does not have a clear VISION for Los Angeles.

Shame on us for waiting. It's acutely apparent that LA is currently a city focused on symptoms and that it is up to the people of LA to imagine the future and to create a vision for Los Angeles.

The East Hollywood Neighborhood Council has commissioned an "Imagine East Hollywood" project that is collecting the stories, experiences and visions of the individuals who make up the community. From the schools, the library, the streets, the transit hubs, the businesses and the churches, people are being asked to "Imagine!"

It is imperative that we as a community can collectively answer the questions "Where do you see LA in 5 years? Where do you want to go? What's your vision for Los Angeles?" It's the sign of a Great City.

5) Los Angeles needs to connect with its legacy. I appreciate Villaraigosa's enthusiasm but he has declared LA the Commercial Capital and the Culture Capital and the Biotech Capital and the Creativity Capital and the Eco-Fashion Capital and the Solar Capital and the Green Technology Capital and the Basketball Capital and the Electric Car Capital. Whew!

When reality sets in, it's apparent that LA is actually the Capital of Homelessness, Unemployment, Traffic Congestion and Air pollution.

We're also vying for titles in Unaffordable Housing, Wage Disparity and Failing Infrastructure. Toss in the fact that the City is in the middle of an economic meltdown and that the City staff is in the midst of an induced exodus and LA's legacy is now the Crisis Capital.

Almost fifty years ago, President-Elect John Kennedy quoted John Winthrop's sermon to the colonists as they prepared to settle in the new world. ""We must always consider," he said, "that we shall be as a city upon a hill—the eyes of all people are upon us."

Kennedy warned that history sits in judgment based on the answers to four questions: Were they truly people of courage? Were they truly people of judgment? Were they truly people of integrity? Were they truly people of dedication?

The eyes of all people are upon Los Angeles. It is imperative, now more than ever, that the people of LA connect with their legacy as the Do-It-Yourself Capital and take responsibility for introducing courage, judgment, integrity and dedication into the governance of Los Angeles. After all, it's the sign of a Great City!

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

Bikes! Bikes! Bikes!

Years ago Enci and I were on a large evening ride that took hundreds of cyclists through the greater LA area. As we rode through one of the neighboring cities, I noticed that the intersection up ahead was "corked" by the local police department. "Why, that's thoughtful of them!" I said to myself, smiling as I basked in the obvious respect that we were drawing from the local authorities.

As we approached the next intersection, the police had blocked the intersection so that we all turned right. "Excellent! This is what it's like to be accepted into the mainstream paradigm of "transportation" and to be treated as a solution, not a problem!" I said to myself. (It was a noisy crowd, I did a lot of talking to myself)

As I rode my high-horse, it dawned on me that the friendly faces that were "corking" intersections for us were actually simply steering us out of town. The route was simply "Anywhere else, very quickly!"

We were run out of town. But for most of the trip, we were convinced that they were working for us, that right then, they really liked us and wanted to help us.

I learned then to look closely to see if the "help" is really helpful or if it's simply a way to get the cyclists out of the way.

This brings us to LA's Bike Plan. What should be a document that positions cycling as a legitimate transportation solution instead dresses up like a "We're here to help!" solution but it's really a "Get out of the way!" ploy to move cyclists to the fringe.

The current Bike Plan is still under wraps but the Bike Plan Maps reveal less Bikeways facilities than the old plan had which means the City of Los Angeles paid its consultants $450,000 to erase the inconvenient elements.

The proposed Bike Maps are unintelligible without the Bike Plan, unless of course you have an LADOT decoder ring. They're also Orwellian and seek to position "infeasible" as an engineering term that purportedly supports cycling as a safe and effective means of moving through Los Angeles, as long as it's done from within the confines of a spin class at the Equinox.

All of this is to say, take a look at the motion Alex Thompson is working through the Mar Vista Neighborhood Council:

"The MVCC finds that, with respect to Mar Vista, the maps for the draft Bicycle Master Plan show that the plan does not offer a significant improvement over existing conditions for cyclists riding in Mar Vista. We therefore recommend that the scope of the work be rewritten to position the Bicycle Plan as an inspiration and aspiration document that will support cycling as a transportation choice."

Take a look at the presentation I gave at Saturday's Los Angeles Neighborhood Council Coalition where I asked the NC's to simply ask the hard questions and to endorse the Cyclists' Bill of Rights.

Most importantly, look closely whenever the City of Los Angeles presents the cycling community with a gift that positions "Safety, Security and Liability" as their motivation for action or, more likely, inaction.

It's Equality that should be the foundation for our mobility and public space policies and anything less is an effort to get somebody out of the way.

"See you on the Streets"

CityWatchLA - MTA Communication Off the Tracks

CityWatch, July 24, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 59

This past Sunday, a man leading a group of cyclists north on the Metro Gold Line (Highland Park to South Pasadena) encountered a Rail Operator who yelled at the group "Two bikes per car only!" and threatened to kick the cyclists off the train until cooler heads prevailed and the reality of an empty train on a Sunday morning allowed common sense to take over.

The cyclists continued on their journey and the Rail Operator went back to being confused about the anticipated implementation of the controversial "Bikes-on-Rail" policy which would limit cyclists to two per rail car.

The proposed policy went to the Metro's Operations Committee last week but Supervisor Mike Antonovich was prepared with a counter- proposal that directed the Metro staff to consider the legal implications of bikes, strollers, and luggage and directed them to prepare a report that should result in a "Stuff-on-Rails" policy.

In spite of the fact that the proposed "Bikes-on-Rail" policy didn't clear the Metro Operations Committee, it appears that the Metro staff were excited enough about the opportunity to limit access to cyclists that they began free-lance implementation, complete with the obligatory yelling that comes with a commitment to safety.

With this new commitment, one can only wonder if Rail Conductors will also be yelling at women with strollers, travelers with luggage, and recyclers with shopping carts or if it's just cyclists who will be targeted as the source of congestion on the Metro Rail.

In spite of the failure of the proposed "Bikes-on-Rail" policy to pass GO, the marketing element appears to already be implemented … including signage indicating that bicycles, strollers and luggage are to share a specific area in the corner of each rail car is already appearing. Apparently, positive thinking runs freely in the Rail Division of the Metro, making up for the fact that common sense has run dry.

This process seems to indicate that decisions were made, actions were taken, messages were communicated and the Metro team was ready to go, all in advance of Metro Board approval and all completely unencumbered by that pesky public participation element … the one that simply asks the Metro to actually consider the humans who depend on a robust Transportation System in order to conduct their business and get home to their families at night.

It would seem that one of the simplest partnerships would be between the Metro and those passengers who want the Metro to be safe and effective. One would think that in a county of 10 million people, the Metro might be able to find one or two passengers who might have some useful insight into safety and efficiency and who might be willing to participate in the development of programs and policies that move the Metro toward becoming a robust Transportation System that supports all modes of travel.

Even more specific to this situation, one would think that the Metro would have involved the cycling community in the development of a "Bikes-on-Rail" policy but such was not the case.

All of which should change as a result of Operations Committee Chair Rita Robinson's direction to Metro staff that the cycling community be involved in the future development of the "Stuff-on-Rail" policy.

Apparently there are cyclists who have actually traveled to other cities and even other countries and it didn't take long for the cycling community to advance solutions from around the world, including the popular "Bike-Car" that has the seats removed and allows those with bikes to efficiently travel without compromising capacity.

With so many enviable Transportation Systems around the world, perhaps the best way to prevent the Metro Rail staff from taking their proposed step backwards would be to send them on a vacation, require them to travel, to visit other cities and to experience transit solutions that will allow them to return to LA full of commitment to a robust Transportation System that sets a world-class standard for safety and efficiency and equality.

They might also want to checkout some communications systems. Might help get all of Metro on the same page.

(Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net) ◘

Metro vs. Cyclists

This past Monday, Enci and I were riding south on Vermont, a couple of hundred yards north of Prospect.

We were riding southbound on Vermont in lane #2 alongside parked cars at approximately 3:25 pm in light traffic. I was in the lead, Enci was in second position and the bus was in third. I heard Enci scream, I looked back and saw a bus behind me but not Enci. I pulled over and the bus passed me, pulling to the curb just yards further on. Then I saw my wife riding down Vermont.

Bus Operator #25119 had just "asserted" himself into the #2 lane at the expense of my wife's position and in doing so, forced my wife to choose between the side of the bus, the parked cars or simply braking to avoid getting hit by the bus as it came from behind alongside her and then simply merged right toward her.

Tough choices!

This incident drew a Metro Supervisor, two Sheriff's Deputies, an LASD Supervisor, LAPD officers from both Hollywood (4) and NorthEast (2) and an LAPD Supervisor. Quite a significant show of force!

The Bus Operator was long gone when the first LAPD officers responded to my call. As we stood on Hollywood Blvd. talking to the officers, Operator #25119 came back on his return route, graciously slowing down and waving, apparently enjoying the spectacle. Imagine his shock when Officer Lee WALKED off in pursuit and pulled the bus over.

Through it all, we experienced a cloud of jurisdictional confusion over who takes the report and law enforcement confusion over whether or not it's a crime to run a cyclist off the road.

I went to the Metro Board on Thursday to address 1) this incident 2) the issue of training and oversight of bus operators on safe interaction with cyclists on the road 3) the jurisdictional confusion 4) feedback opportunities for the metro on weekends and holidays.

It was a crazy session, public comment was scheduled for the end of the meeting and then moved to the beginning. It was a full house with overflow in the cafeteria. They moved public comment from the end of the meeting to the beginning and all of a sudden I heard them call my name. I was prepared for a two minute speech but they cut us down to 60 seconds and so I gave it my best.

I went over my time and kept going, committed to hitting the 4 points and I thought County Supervisor Knabe was trying to cut me off, then I realized he was calling over Jack Gabig, the Division Manager, who motioned for me to follow him out a side door. For a moment I flashed on that scene from Casino and imagined a bunch of Metro Operators waiting "backstage" but with RoadBlock and Courage flanking me, I figured I was in a good position.

Mr. Gabig spent half an hour taking my complaint and I'd like to think we're on our way to starting a relationship between cyclists and bus operators, one that puts our safety before their schedule or convenience.

Attached is an email I sent as a recap of that meeting.

Mr. Gabig,

Thanks for taking the time to talk with me at the Metro Board Meeting and for discussing the details of my complaint.

I wanted to recap the specific elements so that you can address them or direct me to the appropriate person.

1) Metro vs. Cyclist incident from this past Monday. My wife was riding her bike south on Vermont, in contol of the #2 lane, when she was run off the road by Operator #25119.

From our first encounter with a Metro supervisor to those we speak with along the journey, it is made clear that this is a personnel issue and that we have no right of access to the Metro file or process.

I contend that Metro passengers and those on the streets and sidewalks also have rights and that the Metro can surely balance the personnel limitations with appropriate resolution and communication of this complaint.

Further to the potential claim that this is a personnel issue, I would contend that this is, first and foremost, a criminal complaint.

2) Metro Training and Oversight: This incident, along with similar incidents, indicates a need to address the training and oversight of the Metro's Operators. From honking unnecessarily to passing unsafely, CVC violations must not be tolerated, especially when they endanger the lives of cyclists.

The Metro's manual calls for 3 to 4 and a half feet of passing room for cyclists but some operators still "assert" themselves and squeeze cyclists.

The Metro's manual refers to "cyclists and other road hazards" indicating a culture of primacy that results in unsafe and illegal behavior.

3) Jurisdictional confusion must be resolved: Once again, we experienced jurisdictional confusion as my call to LAPD resulted in 1 Metro Supervisor, 2 Sheriffs, 1 LASD Supervisor, 2 NE LAPD Officers, 1 NE LAPD Supervisor, 4 Hollywood LAPD Officers.

One shouldn't have to watch law enforcement officers debate jurisdiction in order to report a crime. One shouldn't have to know the system in order to get the full support of the system.

If there is a memorandum of understanding between the LASD and the LAPD with regards to jurisdiction on the streets, the rail lines, the busway and the bike paths, please consider this a formal request for that MOU.

4) Metro Customer Service is cumbersome and ill-equipped to handle simple complaints, as evidenced by the deluge of tweets, messages, emails, texts and verbal stories I received over the last 3 days that conclude with "I tried to contact the Metro but I gave up!"

One would think that from a simple loss prevention position, the Metro would want a customer service system that yields good accurate data on safety and performance.

And yet...the current system doesn't allow someone to call in during the evening, on weekends and holidays. There's not even an answering machine in place!

Most important is the need for significant improvement in acknowledging complaints and reinforcing the process by communicating resolution, even if in general terms. But there must be some confirmation that the process works.

I thank you for your help in addressing this specific situation and the larger opportunity of the relationship between the Metro and cyclists.

As I mentioned today, cyclists and bus operators move at the same speed across town and share the curb lane so it's imperative that we develop a relationship based on equality and respect.

I look forward to working with you.