Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils Congress
Senate AMENDED Agenda
#4b added; #12 modified
Saturday June 2nd, 2007
(10:00 a.m.)
DIFFERENT LOCATION THAN NORMAL!!!
Hollywood City Hall at 6501 Fountain Avenue (between Wilcox and Cole; West of Cahuenga.
Limited free parking is available in the lot behind the building or on the
streets
LANCC Board Meeting will be followed by DONE meeting at 12:30 – 3:00 PM on how the NC’s can help organize the next Congress of Neighborhoods this fall.
1. Call to order and roll call.
2. Approval of the minutes
3. Public Comment (2 minutes per speaker on non-agenda items)
4a. Reports from board members/Neighborhood Council motions including responses to asking that Neighborhood Councils be granted the right of appeal on planning and zoning matters and the request that a citywide transportation plan to be developed in consultation with the NC's.
4b. Presentation by Kai Stansberry on the United Way/PATH Homeless Initiative and how NC’s can become involved in dealing with this issue.
5. Discussion on how NC's and LANCC can work with the new school board on issues affecting our communities starting with a reconsideration of controversial new school sites in areas such as Echo Park, Winnetka, Granada Hills and Van Nuys. Possible action item.
6. Report from DWP committee on status of the new MOU, other DWP issues and budget meeting with DWP.
7. Reports from any other committees/creation of any new committees.
8. Creating focus groups to work with Rob Barrett of the LA Times on developing community input on the redesign of the LA Times website and creating a focus group to help design a template for NC websites.
9. Report from UNCOLA – United Neighborhood Councils of Los Angeles – a 501 c3 formed to support the efforts of NC’s and LANCC and a request for donations to cover incorporation costs.
10. Presentation by LANCC Restructuring Committee by Ken Draper and Greg Nelson. Possible action item.
11. Open nominations for LANCC officer elections at the July 7th meeting and review of nominating and voting process.
12. Discussion of LANCC participation in the planning process of the next citywide Congress of Neighborhoods and the possibility of LANCC holding quarterly citywide meetings on specific issues at the Convention Center in conjunction with the Home Show with DONE’s assistance. Discussion on city attorney’s letter saying that NC’s can plan and run Congress of Neighborhoods with DONE providing the financial assistance
13. Public Comment
14. Future Agenda Items
15. Adjournment.
FOLLOWING LANCC MEETING AT 12:30, DONE WILL HOST A PLANNING MEETING FOR THE FALL 2007 CONGRESS OF NEIGHBORHOODS
Next LANCC Meeting will be Saturday July 7th at 10 AM.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Historian Eugen Weber Dead At Eight-Two
During my four years at UCLA, I almost never attended my undergrad classes. I instead bought the texts and the class notes and showed up only for mid-terms and finals. I then bought the books and sat in on the upper grad classes.
This was particularly true for my history classes (one of my several majors) since the level of teaching in the history department was pretty bleak at UCLA in those days (and I still can recall my California and Western teacher's lazy incompetence). But there were two exceptions. And one of them was Eugen Weber. I never missed any class he taught.
Eugen Weber, 82; UCLA expert on France
By Claire Noland
Times Staff Writer
May 20, 2007
Eugen Weber, a noted UCLA history professor who wrote prolifically about France and brought a joie de vivre to his lectures that formed the basis of the PBS documentary series "The Western Tradition," has died. He was 82.
Weber died of pancreatic cancer Thursday at his home in Brentwood, the university announced.
French culture and politics were his forte, and he delved into the country's history time and again in his books, starting in 1959 with "The Nationalist Revival in France, 1905-1914" and continuing with "Action Francaise: Royalism and Reaction in Twentieth-Century France" (1962), "Peasants Into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France, 1880-1914" (1976), "France, Fin de Siecle" (1986), "My France: Politics, Culture, Myth" (1991) and "The Hollow Years: France in the 1930s" (1994).
Rather than the meditations of the intellectuals of the day, Weber was fascinated by the everyday lives of the masses. In "France: Fin de Siecle," he dug up details on bathing, dining, sports and leisure, and the reaction to then-new technologies such as electricity and the telephone at the end of the 19th century. Then he wove the many patterns into an illustration of the era's standards and practices.
"Weber's approach to history," observed Financial Times writer Paul Betts in 1991, "is to make the past accessible and relevant to the present, all written in a vibrant and witty style."
As Weber put it in a 1999 interview with the Toronto Star, "I don't think you can be a scholar without the wild desire to want to pass on [what you've learned]. You sit in rooms or libraries or archives or caves and read, read, read, and what do you do with it? At the very least, you want to get it into print so somebody can know about it. It's even better if you can get 20 or 200 people in a hall and have a captive audience whom you can bore to death or, better still, whom you can excite."
Many students were introduced to Weber through his 1971 textbook "A Modern History of Europe," which became widely used on college campuses. Then in 1989 he was exposed to an even wider audience as host of "The Western Tradition," a 52-part documentary series on Western civilization produced by Boston public television station WGBH.
A member of UCLA's faculty since 1956, Weber was dean of the College of Letters and Science from 1977 to 1982. He won a UCLA distinguished teaching award in 1992 and held the university's endowed chair in modern European history, now named for him.
Born in Bucharest, Romania, in 1925, Weber was educated in England. He enlisted in the British army during World War II and after the war studied history at Paris' Institut d'Etudes Politiques and Cambridge University. In 1950 he married a Frenchwoman, Jacqueline Brument-Roth, his only survivor.
Weber took various teaching posts before arriving in Los Angeles. "After we saw the palm trees, we never wanted to move again," Weber said in 1999.
A visit to southwest France in the 1960s stoked his interest in that country's culture.
"I thought I knew France when I lived in Paris," Weber said later, "but in Bordeaux, I looked around me and realized there was another France. I realized there were a lot of Frances."
Though an admitted Francophile, Weber wrote scholarly books and articles about many subjects, including apocalyptic myths, intellectual history, anti-Semitism and fascism.
He also wrote opinion pieces and book reviews for The Times. He indulged his love of mysteries and thrillers, especially the works of George Pelecanos, Robert Parker and Henning Mankell, in his "L.A. Confidential" column for The Times Book Review from 1999 until 2005.
"One of his most endearing qualities was the way he wrote his reviews for us," Times deputy book editor Nick Owchar said. "He banged them out on an old typewriter, and you could spot the black blotchy typed characters from across the office. In the middle of a storm of e-mails and faxes, his missives were a reminder of another era, a calmer, gentler one in which knowledge was exchanged over a glass of brandy and a cigar or during a long lunch."
This was particularly true for my history classes (one of my several majors) since the level of teaching in the history department was pretty bleak at UCLA in those days (and I still can recall my California and Western teacher's lazy incompetence). But there were two exceptions. And one of them was Eugen Weber. I never missed any class he taught.
Eugen Weber, 82; UCLA expert on France
By Claire Noland
Times Staff Writer
May 20, 2007
Eugen Weber, a noted UCLA history professor who wrote prolifically about France and brought a joie de vivre to his lectures that formed the basis of the PBS documentary series "The Western Tradition," has died. He was 82.
Weber died of pancreatic cancer Thursday at his home in Brentwood, the university announced.
French culture and politics were his forte, and he delved into the country's history time and again in his books, starting in 1959 with "The Nationalist Revival in France, 1905-1914" and continuing with "Action Francaise: Royalism and Reaction in Twentieth-Century France" (1962), "Peasants Into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France, 1880-1914" (1976), "France, Fin de Siecle" (1986), "My France: Politics, Culture, Myth" (1991) and "The Hollow Years: France in the 1930s" (1994).
Rather than the meditations of the intellectuals of the day, Weber was fascinated by the everyday lives of the masses. In "France: Fin de Siecle," he dug up details on bathing, dining, sports and leisure, and the reaction to then-new technologies such as electricity and the telephone at the end of the 19th century. Then he wove the many patterns into an illustration of the era's standards and practices.
"Weber's approach to history," observed Financial Times writer Paul Betts in 1991, "is to make the past accessible and relevant to the present, all written in a vibrant and witty style."
As Weber put it in a 1999 interview with the Toronto Star, "I don't think you can be a scholar without the wild desire to want to pass on [what you've learned]. You sit in rooms or libraries or archives or caves and read, read, read, and what do you do with it? At the very least, you want to get it into print so somebody can know about it. It's even better if you can get 20 or 200 people in a hall and have a captive audience whom you can bore to death or, better still, whom you can excite."
Many students were introduced to Weber through his 1971 textbook "A Modern History of Europe," which became widely used on college campuses. Then in 1989 he was exposed to an even wider audience as host of "The Western Tradition," a 52-part documentary series on Western civilization produced by Boston public television station WGBH.
A member of UCLA's faculty since 1956, Weber was dean of the College of Letters and Science from 1977 to 1982. He won a UCLA distinguished teaching award in 1992 and held the university's endowed chair in modern European history, now named for him.
Born in Bucharest, Romania, in 1925, Weber was educated in England. He enlisted in the British army during World War II and after the war studied history at Paris' Institut d'Etudes Politiques and Cambridge University. In 1950 he married a Frenchwoman, Jacqueline Brument-Roth, his only survivor.
Weber took various teaching posts before arriving in Los Angeles. "After we saw the palm trees, we never wanted to move again," Weber said in 1999.
A visit to southwest France in the 1960s stoked his interest in that country's culture.
"I thought I knew France when I lived in Paris," Weber said later, "but in Bordeaux, I looked around me and realized there was another France. I realized there were a lot of Frances."
Though an admitted Francophile, Weber wrote scholarly books and articles about many subjects, including apocalyptic myths, intellectual history, anti-Semitism and fascism.
He also wrote opinion pieces and book reviews for The Times. He indulged his love of mysteries and thrillers, especially the works of George Pelecanos, Robert Parker and Henning Mankell, in his "L.A. Confidential" column for The Times Book Review from 1999 until 2005.
"One of his most endearing qualities was the way he wrote his reviews for us," Times deputy book editor Nick Owchar said. "He banged them out on an old typewriter, and you could spot the black blotchy typed characters from across the office. In the middle of a storm of e-mails and faxes, his missives were a reminder of another era, a calmer, gentler one in which knowledge was exchanged over a glass of brandy and a cigar or during a long lunch."
Is PMS About To Become A Thing Of The Past?
If so, I can predict next year's winner of the Nobel Peace Prize...
Birth-Control Pill Halts Women's Periods
Tuesday May 22, 5:33 pm ET
By Andrew Bridges, Associated Press Writer
Birth-Control Pill That Eliminates Women's Periods Wins FDA Approval
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The first birth-control pill meant to put a stop to women's monthly periods indefinitely has won federal approval, the manufacturer Wyeth said Tuesday.
Called Lybrel, it's the first such pill to receive Food and Drug Administration approval for continuous use. When taken daily, the pill can halt women's menstrual periods indefinitely and prevent pregnancies.
It's the latest approved oral contraceptive to depart from the 21-days-on, seven-days-off regimen that had been standard since birth-control pill sales began in the 1960s. The Wyeth pill is the first designed to put off periods altogether when taken without break.
The FDA planned a late-afternoon news conference to announce approval.
Wyeth plans to start Lybrel sales in July. The Madison, N.J., company said it hasn't yet determined a price. The pill contains a low dose of two hormones already widely used in birth-control pills, ethinyl estradiol and levonorgestrel.
Most of the roughly 12 million U.S. women who take birth-control pills do so to prevent pregnancy. Others rely on hormonal contraceptives to curb acne or regulate their monthly periods.
Some nontraditional pills such as Yaz and Loestrin 24 shorten monthly periods to three days or less. Seasonique, an updated version of Seasonale, reduces them to four times a year. With Lybrel, in tests, 59 percent of women who took the medication had no bleeding after six months.
However, 18 percent of women dropped out of studies because of spotting and breakthrough bleeding, according to Wyeth. That sort of unanticipated and irregular bleeding can be a problem with low-dose pills.
Still, a women's health expert said Lybrel would be a welcome addition for the woman who seeks relief from the headaches, tender breasts, cramps and nausea that can accompany monthly periods.
"Over time she will experience markedly less bleeding episodes or no bleeding episodes. That is very beneficial for some women -- and is wanted by some women," said Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president for medical affairs at Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc.
University of New Hampshire sociologist Jean Elson pointed to advantages for what she characterized as a small number of women who suffer extraordinarily during menstruation, but overall she said the pill left her with mixed feelings.
"For women in that situation, I certainly can understand the benefits of taking these kinds of medications, but for most women menstruation is a normal life event -- not a medical condition. Why medicate away a normal life event if we're not sure of the long-term effects?" said Elson, who researches the sociology of gender and medical sociology.
In recent years, as the hormone content of birth-control pills has dipped, failure rates have climbed. The FDA is mulling whether to establish an acceptable failure rate for the pills. In January, a panel of agency advisers said less-effective birth-control pills should still merit federal approval if they promise other benefits, including improved safety.
Generally, lower-dose birth-control pills can reduce the risk of serious and sometimes deadly side effects, including blood clots and stroke, associated with their use.
Birth-Control Pill Halts Women's Periods
Tuesday May 22, 5:33 pm ET
By Andrew Bridges, Associated Press Writer
Birth-Control Pill That Eliminates Women's Periods Wins FDA Approval
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The first birth-control pill meant to put a stop to women's monthly periods indefinitely has won federal approval, the manufacturer Wyeth said Tuesday.
Called Lybrel, it's the first such pill to receive Food and Drug Administration approval for continuous use. When taken daily, the pill can halt women's menstrual periods indefinitely and prevent pregnancies.
It's the latest approved oral contraceptive to depart from the 21-days-on, seven-days-off regimen that had been standard since birth-control pill sales began in the 1960s. The Wyeth pill is the first designed to put off periods altogether when taken without break.
The FDA planned a late-afternoon news conference to announce approval.
Wyeth plans to start Lybrel sales in July. The Madison, N.J., company said it hasn't yet determined a price. The pill contains a low dose of two hormones already widely used in birth-control pills, ethinyl estradiol and levonorgestrel.
Most of the roughly 12 million U.S. women who take birth-control pills do so to prevent pregnancy. Others rely on hormonal contraceptives to curb acne or regulate their monthly periods.
Some nontraditional pills such as Yaz and Loestrin 24 shorten monthly periods to three days or less. Seasonique, an updated version of Seasonale, reduces them to four times a year. With Lybrel, in tests, 59 percent of women who took the medication had no bleeding after six months.
However, 18 percent of women dropped out of studies because of spotting and breakthrough bleeding, according to Wyeth. That sort of unanticipated and irregular bleeding can be a problem with low-dose pills.
Still, a women's health expert said Lybrel would be a welcome addition for the woman who seeks relief from the headaches, tender breasts, cramps and nausea that can accompany monthly periods.
"Over time she will experience markedly less bleeding episodes or no bleeding episodes. That is very beneficial for some women -- and is wanted by some women," said Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president for medical affairs at Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc.
University of New Hampshire sociologist Jean Elson pointed to advantages for what she characterized as a small number of women who suffer extraordinarily during menstruation, but overall she said the pill left her with mixed feelings.
"For women in that situation, I certainly can understand the benefits of taking these kinds of medications, but for most women menstruation is a normal life event -- not a medical condition. Why medicate away a normal life event if we're not sure of the long-term effects?" said Elson, who researches the sociology of gender and medical sociology.
In recent years, as the hormone content of birth-control pills has dipped, failure rates have climbed. The FDA is mulling whether to establish an acceptable failure rate for the pills. In January, a panel of agency advisers said less-effective birth-control pills should still merit federal approval if they promise other benefits, including improved safety.
Generally, lower-dose birth-control pills can reduce the risk of serious and sometimes deadly side effects, including blood clots and stroke, associated with their use.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Miss Snark Has Left The Auditorium!
When I first read that literary agent/blogger Miss Snark was shutting down her blog -I didn't post the news, hoping that she might change her mind.
But tonight she posted her last post.
It's over.
See the below links to understand how attached many of us had become to both our daily dosage of Snarkisms and the comments of the regular Snarklings.
First, my response to a contest she held - at the end is a link to a very funny tribute video a Snarkling made about her:
http://lacowboy.blogspot.com/search?q=snark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRrb2pkA7h0
Next a video of the time Miss Snark exposed a crooked agent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucPXrBFu2nc
Lastly, a final tribute video made upon her retirement. And yes, that is a shot of LACOWBOY among all the other Snarklings....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrzUttl6RT0
We'll all miss you, Miss Snark and Killer Yapp and Grandmother Snark - and all the Snarklings.
But tonight she posted her last post.
It's over.
See the below links to understand how attached many of us had become to both our daily dosage of Snarkisms and the comments of the regular Snarklings.
First, my response to a contest she held - at the end is a link to a very funny tribute video a Snarkling made about her:
http://lacowboy.blogspot.com/search?q=snark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRrb2pkA7h0
Next a video of the time Miss Snark exposed a crooked agent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucPXrBFu2nc
Lastly, a final tribute video made upon her retirement. And yes, that is a shot of LACOWBOY among all the other Snarklings....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrzUttl6RT0
We'll all miss you, Miss Snark and Killer Yapp and Grandmother Snark - and all the Snarklings.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Can Someone Buy The LA Times Newsroom And Editorial Staff A Thomas Guide - And A Dictionary?
Today's article on the immigration march/rally at MacArthur Park had three interesting, if contradictory, statements:
Waving American flags and signs reading "No to Deportation," about 2,000 marchers gathered about 6 p.m. for a brief rally in front of Immanuel Presbyterian Church on Wilshire Boulevard before heading to the park several blocks away.
And...
Hundreds of police officers on foot, bicycles and motorcycles patrolled the boulevard along the roughly 10 blocks leading to MacArthur Park near downtown.
And...
As the marchers entered the park near Vermont Avenue about 7:15 p.m., they joined another 2,000 people already there. A sound system on a stage blared popular songs about the struggles of illegal immigrants, leading to wild cheers and dancing.
First, in one paragraph it states the park is several blocks away from the church; then a second paragraph states it is TEN blocks from the church. Any dictionary will prove both statements cannot be true.
Second, saying the marchers entered the park near Vermont Avenue is... odd... since Vermont is closer to ten blocks away from the park - depending on how you count blocks - while it is only two blocks from the church. There is also a second major park - Lafayette Park - between Vermont and MacArthur Park
Now if the purpose was to give the approximate location of the park - the main street by the park is Alvarado. And if you wanted to give the main street where they entered 'near' the park - that would be Rampart since it is far closer to the park. But then so are Hoover and Virgil. Vermont, on the other hand, is only two blocks from where they left the church, and it is nowhere near where they entered the park.
Now these are not big deals except that they demonstrate neither the writer nor the editor has any real world working knowledge of this neighborhood and someday the Times needs to hire someone who actually knows this city to read their articles before they get printed.
Waving American flags and signs reading "No to Deportation," about 2,000 marchers gathered about 6 p.m. for a brief rally in front of Immanuel Presbyterian Church on Wilshire Boulevard before heading to the park several blocks away.
And...
Hundreds of police officers on foot, bicycles and motorcycles patrolled the boulevard along the roughly 10 blocks leading to MacArthur Park near downtown.
And...
As the marchers entered the park near Vermont Avenue about 7:15 p.m., they joined another 2,000 people already there. A sound system on a stage blared popular songs about the struggles of illegal immigrants, leading to wild cheers and dancing.
First, in one paragraph it states the park is several blocks away from the church; then a second paragraph states it is TEN blocks from the church. Any dictionary will prove both statements cannot be true.
Second, saying the marchers entered the park near Vermont Avenue is... odd... since Vermont is closer to ten blocks away from the park - depending on how you count blocks - while it is only two blocks from the church. There is also a second major park - Lafayette Park - between Vermont and MacArthur Park
Now if the purpose was to give the approximate location of the park - the main street by the park is Alvarado. And if you wanted to give the main street where they entered 'near' the park - that would be Rampart since it is far closer to the park. But then so are Hoover and Virgil. Vermont, on the other hand, is only two blocks from where they left the church, and it is nowhere near where they entered the park.
Now these are not big deals except that they demonstrate neither the writer nor the editor has any real world working knowledge of this neighborhood and someday the Times needs to hire someone who actually knows this city to read their articles before they get printed.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
My Article In CityWatch On The Neighborhood Councils And The New School Board!
View from Here - Schooling the School Board
Mayor’s picks kick butt. What does it have to do with NCs?
Tuesday, the Mayor's candidates for the Los Angeles School Board, Tamar Galatzan and Richard A. Vladovic, kicked butt and won landslide elections. They now join previously elected reformers, Monica Garcia and Yolie Flores Aguilar, in a four to three majority on the board. Now, what should the Neighborhood Councils expect from this new board in protecting both our neighborhoods and our students?
First, the new board should immediately reinstate chronically under-performing Locke High School's Principal Frank Wells who was suspended from for committing the ultimate LAUSD crime - putting his students ahead of the interests of the teacher's union and the LAUSD bureaucracy. For this, the School Board and Superintendent Brewer had him physically removed from the campus in a police action. Objective: to intimidate anyone who might think about opposing them.
What was the Principal’s crime? After most of teacher's signed a petition to have the Locke High School become a cluster of Green Dot Charter Schools, the LAUSD claimed one or more unnamed teachers obtained signatures during class time – even though the teachers strongly denied this to the LA Times. But this was still used as the pretense to physically remove the principal from school grounds and suspend him from his position.
This is the first time an existing school will become chartered which means the money allocated for Locke will now go straight to the school from the State and not to the LAUSD bureaucrats. In addition, the teachers will be able to teach unencumbered by the endless restrictions imposed by the union.
Brewer and the school board are afraid that if a chartered Locke High is successful, other parents and teachers will team up and secede from the LAUSD's bureaucracy and union rules until every school in the LAUSD could take advantage of the state law that allows them to secede from both the union and from the LAUSD's paper pushers.
A public apology needs to be issued to Wells and it might be good karma to appease the Gods of Education by offering up an union rep or LAUSD functionary to Reggie the Alligator to demonstrate proper contrition, though the rules about feeding animals toxic substances might render that… problematic .
Next, the new board needs to immediately place a time-out on all new school projects challenged by the affected neighborhoods. The board needs to re-study demographic trends to determine if there is a future need for these schools and, if so, if the proposed site is the most appropriate site. This is relevant since the numbers of students in the LAUSD peaked at close to 747,000 in 2003 and has steadily declined since then to 708,000 – a loss of almost 40,000 students. However, in addition, many thousands of those still enrolled have fled to charter schools in leased spaces, freeing up thousands of seats in regular schools. A point that has gone unmentioned in the debate. And both trends are only increasing.
Among the sites that should be stopped on day one are the infamous Site A elementary school in Echo Park – which is destroying an entire neighborhood even though the nearest elementary school has lost 500 students in recent years; the proposed Elementary School 14 in Van Nuys--which wipes out blocks of single family homes and the condemning of the old Granada Hills Community Hospital for a high school, which would preclude any other hospital from ever opening in that under-served area.
One of the problems with the LAUSD is that single family homes and low income housing are seen as low hanging fruit as opposed to condemning industrial or commercial properties that might allow for mixed-used projects that would not displace more residents but would allow for mixed uses that could help amortized the costs of the school.
This does not mean that the new board won't – or shouldn't – build most of these schools. But the district's real needs should be determined as quickly as possible though an unbiased look at the facts in open forums. And, it needs to be done as quickly as possible, unless the facts clearly indicate a rethinking of available options for any of the sites.
The school board needs to pass a resolution to declare their commitment to reopen all five closed LAUSD schools as charter schools, and to then work to find ways to accomplish that goal. The savings from not building unneeded schools might pay for those projects.
Finally, the LAUSD needs to develop relationships with the broadest possible groups of stakeholders in each neighborhood – and in Los Angeles. That means Neighborhood Councils. There needs to be a series of regional meetings with all the NC'S (and other community groups) in each area to tell them how their schools measure up to other schools, what after-hours community uses are in these schools and what schools might, and schools will, be built.
Unfortunately, until now, as with thousands of others– you may have never once been contacted by the school board about what they are doing in and to your neighborhood. And that is one of the first things the new School Board needs to change. Neighborhood Councils should demand it. (Brady Westwater is Chair of the LA NC Congress. He is also a writer and frequent contributor to CityWatch.)
Mayor’s picks kick butt. What does it have to do with NCs?
Tuesday, the Mayor's candidates for the Los Angeles School Board, Tamar Galatzan and Richard A. Vladovic, kicked butt and won landslide elections. They now join previously elected reformers, Monica Garcia and Yolie Flores Aguilar, in a four to three majority on the board. Now, what should the Neighborhood Councils expect from this new board in protecting both our neighborhoods and our students?
First, the new board should immediately reinstate chronically under-performing Locke High School's Principal Frank Wells who was suspended from for committing the ultimate LAUSD crime - putting his students ahead of the interests of the teacher's union and the LAUSD bureaucracy. For this, the School Board and Superintendent Brewer had him physically removed from the campus in a police action. Objective: to intimidate anyone who might think about opposing them.
What was the Principal’s crime? After most of teacher's signed a petition to have the Locke High School become a cluster of Green Dot Charter Schools, the LAUSD claimed one or more unnamed teachers obtained signatures during class time – even though the teachers strongly denied this to the LA Times. But this was still used as the pretense to physically remove the principal from school grounds and suspend him from his position.
This is the first time an existing school will become chartered which means the money allocated for Locke will now go straight to the school from the State and not to the LAUSD bureaucrats. In addition, the teachers will be able to teach unencumbered by the endless restrictions imposed by the union.
Brewer and the school board are afraid that if a chartered Locke High is successful, other parents and teachers will team up and secede from the LAUSD's bureaucracy and union rules until every school in the LAUSD could take advantage of the state law that allows them to secede from both the union and from the LAUSD's paper pushers.
A public apology needs to be issued to Wells and it might be good karma to appease the Gods of Education by offering up an union rep or LAUSD functionary to Reggie the Alligator to demonstrate proper contrition, though the rules about feeding animals toxic substances might render that… problematic .
Next, the new board needs to immediately place a time-out on all new school projects challenged by the affected neighborhoods. The board needs to re-study demographic trends to determine if there is a future need for these schools and, if so, if the proposed site is the most appropriate site. This is relevant since the numbers of students in the LAUSD peaked at close to 747,000 in 2003 and has steadily declined since then to 708,000 – a loss of almost 40,000 students. However, in addition, many thousands of those still enrolled have fled to charter schools in leased spaces, freeing up thousands of seats in regular schools. A point that has gone unmentioned in the debate. And both trends are only increasing.
Among the sites that should be stopped on day one are the infamous Site A elementary school in Echo Park – which is destroying an entire neighborhood even though the nearest elementary school has lost 500 students in recent years; the proposed Elementary School 14 in Van Nuys--which wipes out blocks of single family homes and the condemning of the old Granada Hills Community Hospital for a high school, which would preclude any other hospital from ever opening in that under-served area.
One of the problems with the LAUSD is that single family homes and low income housing are seen as low hanging fruit as opposed to condemning industrial or commercial properties that might allow for mixed-used projects that would not displace more residents but would allow for mixed uses that could help amortized the costs of the school.
This does not mean that the new board won't – or shouldn't – build most of these schools. But the district's real needs should be determined as quickly as possible though an unbiased look at the facts in open forums. And, it needs to be done as quickly as possible, unless the facts clearly indicate a rethinking of available options for any of the sites.
The school board needs to pass a resolution to declare their commitment to reopen all five closed LAUSD schools as charter schools, and to then work to find ways to accomplish that goal. The savings from not building unneeded schools might pay for those projects.
Finally, the LAUSD needs to develop relationships with the broadest possible groups of stakeholders in each neighborhood – and in Los Angeles. That means Neighborhood Councils. There needs to be a series of regional meetings with all the NC'S (and other community groups) in each area to tell them how their schools measure up to other schools, what after-hours community uses are in these schools and what schools might, and schools will, be built.
Unfortunately, until now, as with thousands of others– you may have never once been contacted by the school board about what they are doing in and to your neighborhood. And that is one of the first things the new School Board needs to change. Neighborhood Councils should demand it. (Brady Westwater is Chair of the LA NC Congress. He is also a writer and frequent contributor to CityWatch.)
Agenda For This Saturday's Neighborhood Councils Congress!
Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils Congress
Senate Agenda
Saturday May 19th, 2007
(12:30 p.m.)
DIFFERENT LOCATION THAN NORMAL!!!
LOS ANGELES CITY COLLEGE
855 N. Vermont
http://www.lacitycollege.edu/public/cmap/map.html
Room 105 Holmes Hall - just west of Alliance’s meeting place
One-half block south of Vermont/Santa Monica Blvd. Red Line Station
Parking is across Vermont from LACC. Coming north or south on the 101 (Hollywood) Freeway, exit onto VERMONT. Turn NORTH to MARATHON ST. Turn EAST onto MARATHON, then NORTH into the lot. http://www.allncs.org/meetings.htm & Holmes Hall is due left of the faculty lounge as shown on the map.
1. Call to order and roll call.
2. Approval of the minutes
3. Public Comment (2 minutes per speaker on non-agenda items)
4. Reports from board members/Neighborhood Council including responses to Tarzana asking that Neighborhood Councils be granted the right of appeal on planning and zoning matters and the San Pedro request that a citywide transportation plan to be developed in consultation with the NC’s.
5. Report from Luciana Dar on status of UNCOLA – the support group for LANCC – and a request for donations to cover the costs of establishing the non-profit.
6. Discussion on how NC’s and LANCC can work with the new school board on issues affecting our communities starting with a reconsideration of controversial new school sites in areas such as Echo Park, Granada Hills and Van Nuys. Possible action item.
7. Report from DWP committee on status of the new MOU, other DWP issues and presenting a motion to ask NC’s to ask their city attorney representative about the legality of approving hiring a water trunk line crew at a recent board meeting without any public notice or any public comment and without notifying the public there was a financial impact caused by this motion.
8. Discussion on brush fire dangers within the City of Los Angeles and creation of an ad hoc committee to study recommendations including, but not limited to, the emergency replacement of wood shake roofs in fire prone neighborhoods. Possible action item.
9. Presentation by Jacque Lamishaw on LANCC participation in Los Angeles Home Show possibly starting with the June 1st – 3rd event.
10. Report from Charlotte Laws of the Animal Welfare Committee and their motion to support bill on spaying and neutering animals that is before the state legislature, AB 1634.
11. Discussion led by Greg Nelson on DONE’s May 23rd meeting to start to organize the next DONE Congress.
12. Nomination of Dede Audet to head Homelessness Committee.
13. Creating ad hoc committee taxation and revenue committee to study impacts and solutions for possible loss of revenue from recent court decisions on the DWP water transfer fee, the cell phone tax and other related issues.
14. Creating focus groups to work with Rob Barrett of the LA Times on developing community input on the redesign of the LA Times website and creating a focus group to help design a template for NC websites.
15. Report on past DONE Congress & LANCC’s participation.
16. Other committee reports and discussion of committee structure.
17. Formation of any new committees.
18. Public Comment
19. Future Agenda Items
20. Adjournment.
NEXT LANCC Senate Meeting: Saturday June 2nd 10 AM
Senate Agenda
Saturday May 19th, 2007
(12:30 p.m.)
DIFFERENT LOCATION THAN NORMAL!!!
LOS ANGELES CITY COLLEGE
855 N. Vermont
http://www.lacitycollege.edu/public/cmap/map.html
Room 105 Holmes Hall - just west of Alliance’s meeting place
One-half block south of Vermont/Santa Monica Blvd. Red Line Station
Parking is across Vermont from LACC. Coming north or south on the 101 (Hollywood) Freeway, exit onto VERMONT. Turn NORTH to MARATHON ST. Turn EAST onto MARATHON, then NORTH into the lot. http://www.allncs.org/meetings.htm & Holmes Hall is due left of the faculty lounge as shown on the map.
1. Call to order and roll call.
2. Approval of the minutes
3. Public Comment (2 minutes per speaker on non-agenda items)
4. Reports from board members/Neighborhood Council including responses to Tarzana asking that Neighborhood Councils be granted the right of appeal on planning and zoning matters and the San Pedro request that a citywide transportation plan to be developed in consultation with the NC’s.
5. Report from Luciana Dar on status of UNCOLA – the support group for LANCC – and a request for donations to cover the costs of establishing the non-profit.
6. Discussion on how NC’s and LANCC can work with the new school board on issues affecting our communities starting with a reconsideration of controversial new school sites in areas such as Echo Park, Granada Hills and Van Nuys. Possible action item.
7. Report from DWP committee on status of the new MOU, other DWP issues and presenting a motion to ask NC’s to ask their city attorney representative about the legality of approving hiring a water trunk line crew at a recent board meeting without any public notice or any public comment and without notifying the public there was a financial impact caused by this motion.
8. Discussion on brush fire dangers within the City of Los Angeles and creation of an ad hoc committee to study recommendations including, but not limited to, the emergency replacement of wood shake roofs in fire prone neighborhoods. Possible action item.
9. Presentation by Jacque Lamishaw on LANCC participation in Los Angeles Home Show possibly starting with the June 1st – 3rd event.
10. Report from Charlotte Laws of the Animal Welfare Committee and their motion to support bill on spaying and neutering animals that is before the state legislature, AB 1634.
11. Discussion led by Greg Nelson on DONE’s May 23rd meeting to start to organize the next DONE Congress.
12. Nomination of Dede Audet to head Homelessness Committee.
13. Creating ad hoc committee taxation and revenue committee to study impacts and solutions for possible loss of revenue from recent court decisions on the DWP water transfer fee, the cell phone tax and other related issues.
14. Creating focus groups to work with Rob Barrett of the LA Times on developing community input on the redesign of the LA Times website and creating a focus group to help design a template for NC websites.
15. Report on past DONE Congress & LANCC’s participation.
16. Other committee reports and discussion of committee structure.
17. Formation of any new committees.
18. Public Comment
19. Future Agenda Items
20. Adjournment.
NEXT LANCC Senate Meeting: Saturday June 2nd 10 AM
LA Cowboy At Westside Urban Forum Friday Morning!
Just realized I forgot to post that I will be appearing on a panel discussion about neighborhood councils and planning and land use issues tomorrow morning at 7:45 AM - the actual start time of the panel:
The Micropolitics of Land Use: Demystifying L.A.'s Neighborhood Councils
Fri May 18, 2007 7:00 AM
The Micropolitics of Land Use: Demystifying L.A.'s Neighborhood Councils
L.A.'s future -- dense, elegant, or otherwise -- rests in part with neighborhood councils, L.A.'s grand experiment in democracy that began in 1999 and continues to unfold today. The 89 neighborhood councils, diverse groups organized and elected by community members, are well on their way to usurping homeowners' associations as the first stop for developers seeking to do business in their respective areas. They also have become passionate advocates for planning in their communities-whether that means balanced growth, boosterism, or NIMBYism.
This month, the Westside Urban Forum explores the relationship between grassroots democracy, the public sector, and the developers who are shaping L.A. Are neighborhood councils working to bring balance and democracy to our community politics? Do they represent the silent majority, or do they fall prey to activists with personal agendas? Do they understand the complexities of land use? Can they be trusted with even more power than they currently wield? Are they simply giving a forum to angry obstructionists? Or are they, as was initially hoped, the places where homeowners and renters, businesspeople and community leaders, can come together to craft a common agenda?
Come join the Westside Urban Forum for this month's program, exploring the brief history and future of Neighborhood Councils.
Panelists
Raphael Sonenshein, Executive Director, Neighborhood Council Review Commission; Professor of Political Science, Cal St. Fullerton
BongHwan Kim, Assistant General Manager, L.A. Department of Neighborhood Empowerment
Brady Westwater, Chair, Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils Congress
Moderator
Cindy Miscikowski, former Los Angeles City Councilmember, 11th District
Location & Time
The Regency Club
10900 Wilshire Blvd.
17th Floor
Los Angeles, CA
Friday, May 18, 2007
7:00 am - Registration
7:45 - 9:00 am - Program
The Micropolitics of Land Use: Demystifying L.A.'s Neighborhood Councils
Fri May 18, 2007 7:00 AM
The Micropolitics of Land Use: Demystifying L.A.'s Neighborhood Councils
L.A.'s future -- dense, elegant, or otherwise -- rests in part with neighborhood councils, L.A.'s grand experiment in democracy that began in 1999 and continues to unfold today. The 89 neighborhood councils, diverse groups organized and elected by community members, are well on their way to usurping homeowners' associations as the first stop for developers seeking to do business in their respective areas. They also have become passionate advocates for planning in their communities-whether that means balanced growth, boosterism, or NIMBYism.
This month, the Westside Urban Forum explores the relationship between grassroots democracy, the public sector, and the developers who are shaping L.A. Are neighborhood councils working to bring balance and democracy to our community politics? Do they represent the silent majority, or do they fall prey to activists with personal agendas? Do they understand the complexities of land use? Can they be trusted with even more power than they currently wield? Are they simply giving a forum to angry obstructionists? Or are they, as was initially hoped, the places where homeowners and renters, businesspeople and community leaders, can come together to craft a common agenda?
Come join the Westside Urban Forum for this month's program, exploring the brief history and future of Neighborhood Councils.
Panelists
Raphael Sonenshein, Executive Director, Neighborhood Council Review Commission; Professor of Political Science, Cal St. Fullerton
BongHwan Kim, Assistant General Manager, L.A. Department of Neighborhood Empowerment
Brady Westwater, Chair, Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils Congress
Moderator
Cindy Miscikowski, former Los Angeles City Councilmember, 11th District
Location & Time
The Regency Club
10900 Wilshire Blvd.
17th Floor
Los Angeles, CA
Friday, May 18, 2007
7:00 am - Registration
7:45 - 9:00 am - Program
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
It's Freakin' 8 AM - And The LA Times STILL Does NOT Have The Election Results Everyone Else Has Had For Hours!
LA Times results at 8 AM
Election results
Board of Education District 3
26.48% precincts reporting votes percent
Jon M. Lauritzen* 9,321 39.85
Tamar Galatzan 14,069 60.15
Board of Education District 7
50.22% precincts reporting votes percent
Neal Kleiner 5,429 47.17
Richard Vladovic 6,081 52.83
Rest of the world's long, long before 8 AM results:
BOARD OF EDUCATION DISTRICT 3 100 % of votes in
JON M. LAURITZEN 15,301
41.51
TAMAR GALATZAN 21,563
58.49
BOARD OF EDUCATION DISTRICT 7 - 98.71% of votes in
NEAL B. KLEINER 7,247
45.87
RICHARD A. VLADOVIC 8,552
54.13
Election results
Board of Education District 3
26.48% precincts reporting votes percent
Jon M. Lauritzen* 9,321 39.85
Tamar Galatzan 14,069 60.15
Board of Education District 7
50.22% precincts reporting votes percent
Neal Kleiner 5,429 47.17
Richard Vladovic 6,081 52.83
Rest of the world's long, long before 8 AM results:
BOARD OF EDUCATION DISTRICT 3 100 % of votes in
JON M. LAURITZEN 15,301
41.51
TAMAR GALATZAN 21,563
58.49
BOARD OF EDUCATION DISTRICT 7 - 98.71% of votes in
NEAL B. KLEINER 7,247
45.87
RICHARD A. VLADOVIC 8,552
54.13
It's After Midnight - So Where're The School Board Election Results On The LA Times Website?
Well, there are some hours old results - but they are largely the very first absentee votes. To find out who really won those races - and the State Assembly seat - you need to check the Daily News website.
It's surprising that after all the ... months... of coverage - there is no one at the paper to keep us updated on even an hourly basis.
UPDATE!
The news story is still not updated, but the box now under it on page two now has the current vote totals.
It's surprising that after all the ... months... of coverage - there is no one at the paper to keep us updated on even an hourly basis.
UPDATE!
The news story is still not updated, but the box now under it on page two now has the current vote totals.
Sunday, May 13, 2007
So Why Doesn't The LA Times Showtracker Blog Tell Us What's REALLY Important?
The good news is that the LA Times is starting to cover Los Angeles.
The bad news is that it's not always the serious news that impacts our city. As an example, the blog SHOWTRACKER covers the gossip concerning TV shows - and it is now covering the upfronts where it is decided what series live - and which die. And it does a fine job covering much of the story. But the blog - and the rest of the LA Times - always misses covering the major impact these decisions have on our local economy; impacts that affect all of us and not just those of us who work in the TV industry.
As an example, the local TV movie industry is essentially... gone - mainly to Canada, but also to other states and countries. Feature films are also increasingly being shot outside of LA. What has remained, though - at least until recently - are TV series.
But increasingly scripted shows are being replaced with far cheaper reality shows and more and more TV shows are being shot in Canada, in other states and in New York.
So why not tell us about that as the series are being picked up?
Particularly once the schedules are finalized - why not tell us what is the ratio between reality and regular shows - and how has that changed over the past five years? And there are plenty other questions that should be answered..
How many shows are being shot out outside of this country this season - compared to last season? In other states? Who are the stars who are taking their series out of LA? How effective has New York been over the past five years in getting series? And what is the breakdown of where cable shows are shot? And how is original programming expanding on cable channels - or is it?
Now I know this might involve some actual... reporting.... but what the hell.
Into each life some rain must fall.
The bad news is that it's not always the serious news that impacts our city. As an example, the blog SHOWTRACKER covers the gossip concerning TV shows - and it is now covering the upfronts where it is decided what series live - and which die. And it does a fine job covering much of the story. But the blog - and the rest of the LA Times - always misses covering the major impact these decisions have on our local economy; impacts that affect all of us and not just those of us who work in the TV industry.
As an example, the local TV movie industry is essentially... gone - mainly to Canada, but also to other states and countries. Feature films are also increasingly being shot outside of LA. What has remained, though - at least until recently - are TV series.
But increasingly scripted shows are being replaced with far cheaper reality shows and more and more TV shows are being shot in Canada, in other states and in New York.
So why not tell us about that as the series are being picked up?
Particularly once the schedules are finalized - why not tell us what is the ratio between reality and regular shows - and how has that changed over the past five years? And there are plenty other questions that should be answered..
How many shows are being shot out outside of this country this season - compared to last season? In other states? Who are the stars who are taking their series out of LA? How effective has New York been over the past five years in getting series? And what is the breakdown of where cable shows are shot? And how is original programming expanding on cable channels - or is it?
Now I know this might involve some actual... reporting.... but what the hell.
Into each life some rain must fall.
Friday, May 11, 2007
Can Neighborhood Councils Save Los Angeles From Burning?
Below is my article today in today's CITYWATCH:
Can Neighborhood Councils Save Los Angeles From Burning?
By Brady Westwater
Well, it has to be Neighborhood Councils because no one else in this city has the courage to demand a change from the current ostrich head in the sand attitude towards hillside fire safety.
Even as we face the potentially most disastrous fire season in history, no one in city government has suggested, much less demanded, the measures necessary to handle the present crisis. Our leaders do not seem to understand that not just hundreds, but thousands of homes will one day be lost in a single fire, wiping out entire hillside and canyon communities from Mulholland to Sunset Boulevard or from Mulholland to Ventura Boulevard – or within the hillside communities of East Los Angeles or North East Los Angeles or Elysian Park or Baldwin Hills – or within the North, East or West Valley areas.
This winter we have already watched Malibu beachfront homes burn – many of them with wood shake roofs. Then we watched the Beverly Drive fire when three homes burned or were damaged – not from the flames of the fire, but from sparks that landed on the wood shake roofs on each of the three homes. And now comes the Griffith Park fire where the only structural damage came from sparks landing on… a wood shake roof.
Three fires – all with structure damage from wood shake roofs. This is why Laguna Beach banned existing wood shake roofs by 2017 and Beverly Hills has by 2013. That is also why Beverly Hills is now considering moving that date up. As for Los Angeles – the deadline to replace wood shake roofs is … never.
Yes, our city has never felt it important enough to even try to replace existing wood shake roofs, the single greatest cause of structural fire damage in our hillside communities.
Clearly, we can no longer wait for the city council to initiate this action. Neighborhood Councils need to take the leadership role on this and on other fire safety matters.
Our city has just had the driest winter in its history, closely following one of the wettest winters, creating a bumper crop of dry brush. Added to this the LA Fire Department's admirable ability to keep most of the Santa Monica Mountains fire free for almost a half-century. The side affect of this is the brush build-up in remote areas that ensures the next major Santa Ana driven fire will be unimaginably worse than anything this city has ever seen. But only because we have failed to take the steps to protect ourselves.
This is why Steve Twining, President of the Bel Air Beverly Crest NC, and Carol Sidlow, Co-Chair of the BABCNC LND Use Committee, have agreed to serve as joint chairs of an ad-hoc Los Angeles Neighborhood Council's Congress committee to deal with the present hillside fire emergency. The Congress will be asked to approve their appointments at the May 19th LANCC meeting.
This committee will not just look at the issue of wood shake roofs. It will also take a systemic look at all building and zoning codes in the fire prone areas. They will also ask why government agencies such as the DWP, Cal Trans, and state and federal park agencies, among others, have not cleared their brush in residential areas in a timely matter.
They will also ask why government funds continue to be given to non-profits such as the Santa Monica Conservancy to buy more land when they have yet to do the necessary fire clearance to protect the lives of those who already live adjacent to their current holdings.
And they will ask why undergrounding power lines in fire areas has not been given a higher priority.
And, importantly, they will ask why have so few of recommendations of the fire report that followed 1961 Bel Air fire been implemented? Yes, 1961. It has, after all, been over forty years since those recommendations were been made.
Do we have to wait for another forty years for these reforms to take place – or we will have to wait for a fire that takes out scores of lives and thousands of homes before we take seriously the safety of LA’s hillside communities?
Or, will the Neighborhood Councils be the ones to ensure … demand … that these actions be taken now. They will have an opportunity to answer that question at LA City College on May 19th. (Brady Westwater is a professional writer and political activist. Westwater is a regular contributor to CityWatch.)
Info: The LA NC Congress (LANCC) meet next, on this and other important issues, on Saturday, May 19 at 12:30 p.m. at LA City College at Melrose and Vermont. The meeting will follow the Alliance of Neighborhood Councils Forum.
Can Neighborhood Councils Save Los Angeles From Burning?
By Brady Westwater
Well, it has to be Neighborhood Councils because no one else in this city has the courage to demand a change from the current ostrich head in the sand attitude towards hillside fire safety.
Even as we face the potentially most disastrous fire season in history, no one in city government has suggested, much less demanded, the measures necessary to handle the present crisis. Our leaders do not seem to understand that not just hundreds, but thousands of homes will one day be lost in a single fire, wiping out entire hillside and canyon communities from Mulholland to Sunset Boulevard or from Mulholland to Ventura Boulevard – or within the hillside communities of East Los Angeles or North East Los Angeles or Elysian Park or Baldwin Hills – or within the North, East or West Valley areas.
This winter we have already watched Malibu beachfront homes burn – many of them with wood shake roofs. Then we watched the Beverly Drive fire when three homes burned or were damaged – not from the flames of the fire, but from sparks that landed on the wood shake roofs on each of the three homes. And now comes the Griffith Park fire where the only structural damage came from sparks landing on… a wood shake roof.
Three fires – all with structure damage from wood shake roofs. This is why Laguna Beach banned existing wood shake roofs by 2017 and Beverly Hills has by 2013. That is also why Beverly Hills is now considering moving that date up. As for Los Angeles – the deadline to replace wood shake roofs is … never.
Yes, our city has never felt it important enough to even try to replace existing wood shake roofs, the single greatest cause of structural fire damage in our hillside communities.
Clearly, we can no longer wait for the city council to initiate this action. Neighborhood Councils need to take the leadership role on this and on other fire safety matters.
Our city has just had the driest winter in its history, closely following one of the wettest winters, creating a bumper crop of dry brush. Added to this the LA Fire Department's admirable ability to keep most of the Santa Monica Mountains fire free for almost a half-century. The side affect of this is the brush build-up in remote areas that ensures the next major Santa Ana driven fire will be unimaginably worse than anything this city has ever seen. But only because we have failed to take the steps to protect ourselves.
This is why Steve Twining, President of the Bel Air Beverly Crest NC, and Carol Sidlow, Co-Chair of the BABCNC LND Use Committee, have agreed to serve as joint chairs of an ad-hoc Los Angeles Neighborhood Council's Congress committee to deal with the present hillside fire emergency. The Congress will be asked to approve their appointments at the May 19th LANCC meeting.
This committee will not just look at the issue of wood shake roofs. It will also take a systemic look at all building and zoning codes in the fire prone areas. They will also ask why government agencies such as the DWP, Cal Trans, and state and federal park agencies, among others, have not cleared their brush in residential areas in a timely matter.
They will also ask why government funds continue to be given to non-profits such as the Santa Monica Conservancy to buy more land when they have yet to do the necessary fire clearance to protect the lives of those who already live adjacent to their current holdings.
And they will ask why undergrounding power lines in fire areas has not been given a higher priority.
And, importantly, they will ask why have so few of recommendations of the fire report that followed 1961 Bel Air fire been implemented? Yes, 1961. It has, after all, been over forty years since those recommendations were been made.
Do we have to wait for another forty years for these reforms to take place – or we will have to wait for a fire that takes out scores of lives and thousands of homes before we take seriously the safety of LA’s hillside communities?
Or, will the Neighborhood Councils be the ones to ensure … demand … that these actions be taken now. They will have an opportunity to answer that question at LA City College on May 19th. (Brady Westwater is a professional writer and political activist. Westwater is a regular contributor to CityWatch.)
Info: The LA NC Congress (LANCC) meet next, on this and other important issues, on Saturday, May 19 at 12:30 p.m. at LA City College at Melrose and Vermont. The meeting will follow the Alliance of Neighborhood Councils Forum.
Latest Update On DWP Follies!
Below is my update on the DWP in today's CITYWATCH:
View from Here - Down the Rabbit Hole with the DWP!
By Brady Westwater
Since CityWatch reported that the Department of Water and Power's surrendering to the Union over who rebuilds the city's water trunk lines was kept hidden from the public, goings on within the DWP's rabbit hole have gotten curiouser and curiouser. More on that later.
First the good news.
Since Ron Deaton approved a new five year Memorandum of Understanding between the Neighborhood Councils and the DWP that gave Neighborhood Councils everything they asked for, a record number of NC's are signing the document. And, on most issues, the DWP has gone to great lengths to keep NCs informed and the new board has been very engaged when it comes to looking after the public's best interests – with one major exception.
The bad news is that the NC's are just realizing they have been hoodwinked. All this time, they have been negotiating with the wrong people. The real shot-callers are not in the executive office or at the Board of Commissioners--they are behind locked doors at Union headquarters.
The reason for this power is that that IBEW has quietly unionized much of the normally non-unionized management - which the previous boards cluelessly agreed to - so that much of management would be required to go on strike, making it impossible to run the DWP. A perfect set-up for blackmail even without all the protection money, I mean campaign contributions, made by the union folks to both the Mayor and members of the city council.
The first indication of who really runs the DWP came when a previous Board approved a blatant giveaway of almost two million dollars in public funds. They executed an unsecured loan for building eclectic scooters to an unqualified out of state company. A more experience company existed right here in Los Angeles. The fact that much of this money ended up in the pockets of workers …represented by a union friendly with the leaders of the DWP's union (widely reported at the time of the contract) - I'm sure was a total coincidence. The DWP was never paid back one dollar of that loan and the rate payers of the DWP got a very healthy seven figure sum added to their collective rates.
The second indication of who really rules Rabbitania was the last wage settlement. It pushed many DWP employees far beyond the salaries paid almost anyone doing the same work anywhere in the country – much less any other employees of the City of Los Angeles
This power explains why the DWP Board felt that it had no choice but to hire a third in-house trunk line work crew. This even after the Daily News revealed that a DWP crew could take up to twice as many men, twice as much money to do the work of a privately contracted crew.
According to the Daily News article – this surrender to the union was considered a victory by many on the DWP board because, if the union had managed to take control of 13 other projects, the cost to rate payers would have been an extra half-billion dollars. Yes – it costs a half-billion less for private workers to do the exact same jobs as DWP workers. Scary – huh?
What the Daily news did not report, though, was that the hiring of this new work crew was never even hinted at in the publicly noticed agenda item. Nor did the article mention that the underlying document, that should further explain and clarify the agenda item, also made no mention that a third trunk line crew was going to be hired. In addition, the public was not allowed to speak during general public comment at the start of the meeting or before this item was voted upon. Further, according to witnesses, the public was also never told what the Board was voting on---before or after the vote was taken.
Now, I don't know how many violations of the Brown Act that is--I ran out of fingers to count on – but those seemingly multiple Brown Act violations may turn out to be the least of the Board's problem.
What could – and should - invalidate the entire board approval of the labor contract was a statement in the public documents prior to the meeting that there was no fiscal impact involved within this agenda item since the fiscal impact was judged to be “n/a”– not applicable.
That is, of course, totally false. To begin with, there is the cost of hiring an entire new work crew. Then there are the administrative costs connected with all these new workers. Then there are the lifetime medical and pension benefits for this new crew.
So how can the DWP claim that hiring a third in-house trunk line team has no financial impact? I don't know. But we might soon find out since the NC/DWP MOU Oversight Committee last Saturday unanimously recommended individual that Neighborhood Councils ask their city attorney rep's if the DWP's egregious lack of any public notice – or comment on this agenda item – along with the DWP mislabeling this item as having no fiscal impact when it had one makes the approving of this contract an illegal act..
If it turns out this action was against the law, Rabbit Land will never be the same again.
And now comes the curiouser and curiouser part.
Of all the things I did not expect after the first article about the DWP – it was multiple phone calls from different DWP workers thanking me for exposing what happened at the DWP board meeting. They also wanted to thank CityWatch for helping expose what has been happening for years at the DWP. Repeatedly, they told me they were embarrassed by their union and by the fact that they felt it necessary to call me from pay phones, blocked numbers and disposable cell phones to protect their jobs and their safety.
They are angry and tired, they told me, of being made to look like incompetents by a system that instead of encouraging their best efforts, is instead designed to make it impossible for DWP's own crews to be competitive with the private market place.
They had hoped, they said, that this negotiation with the union would – finally – shine the light on this story so that the DWP board could stand up the union.
This is where the Neighborhood Councils come in. NCs need to demand that elected officials examine these allegations of massive waste within the DWP. And if true, to ask how a union can make it impossible for DWP workers to be only half as efficient as private workers – and why the DWP Board was afraid to publicly address this issue and confront the union's leaders in a way that even many of the union’s members wished they had.
View from Here - Down the Rabbit Hole with the DWP!
By Brady Westwater
Since CityWatch reported that the Department of Water and Power's surrendering to the Union over who rebuilds the city's water trunk lines was kept hidden from the public, goings on within the DWP's rabbit hole have gotten curiouser and curiouser. More on that later.
First the good news.
Since Ron Deaton approved a new five year Memorandum of Understanding between the Neighborhood Councils and the DWP that gave Neighborhood Councils everything they asked for, a record number of NC's are signing the document. And, on most issues, the DWP has gone to great lengths to keep NCs informed and the new board has been very engaged when it comes to looking after the public's best interests – with one major exception.
The bad news is that the NC's are just realizing they have been hoodwinked. All this time, they have been negotiating with the wrong people. The real shot-callers are not in the executive office or at the Board of Commissioners--they are behind locked doors at Union headquarters.
The reason for this power is that that IBEW has quietly unionized much of the normally non-unionized management - which the previous boards cluelessly agreed to - so that much of management would be required to go on strike, making it impossible to run the DWP. A perfect set-up for blackmail even without all the protection money, I mean campaign contributions, made by the union folks to both the Mayor and members of the city council.
The first indication of who really runs the DWP came when a previous Board approved a blatant giveaway of almost two million dollars in public funds. They executed an unsecured loan for building eclectic scooters to an unqualified out of state company. A more experience company existed right here in Los Angeles. The fact that much of this money ended up in the pockets of workers …represented by a union friendly with the leaders of the DWP's union (widely reported at the time of the contract) - I'm sure was a total coincidence. The DWP was never paid back one dollar of that loan and the rate payers of the DWP got a very healthy seven figure sum added to their collective rates.
The second indication of who really rules Rabbitania was the last wage settlement. It pushed many DWP employees far beyond the salaries paid almost anyone doing the same work anywhere in the country – much less any other employees of the City of Los Angeles
This power explains why the DWP Board felt that it had no choice but to hire a third in-house trunk line work crew. This even after the Daily News revealed that a DWP crew could take up to twice as many men, twice as much money to do the work of a privately contracted crew.
According to the Daily News article – this surrender to the union was considered a victory by many on the DWP board because, if the union had managed to take control of 13 other projects, the cost to rate payers would have been an extra half-billion dollars. Yes – it costs a half-billion less for private workers to do the exact same jobs as DWP workers. Scary – huh?
What the Daily news did not report, though, was that the hiring of this new work crew was never even hinted at in the publicly noticed agenda item. Nor did the article mention that the underlying document, that should further explain and clarify the agenda item, also made no mention that a third trunk line crew was going to be hired. In addition, the public was not allowed to speak during general public comment at the start of the meeting or before this item was voted upon. Further, according to witnesses, the public was also never told what the Board was voting on---before or after the vote was taken.
Now, I don't know how many violations of the Brown Act that is--I ran out of fingers to count on – but those seemingly multiple Brown Act violations may turn out to be the least of the Board's problem.
What could – and should - invalidate the entire board approval of the labor contract was a statement in the public documents prior to the meeting that there was no fiscal impact involved within this agenda item since the fiscal impact was judged to be “n/a”– not applicable.
That is, of course, totally false. To begin with, there is the cost of hiring an entire new work crew. Then there are the administrative costs connected with all these new workers. Then there are the lifetime medical and pension benefits for this new crew.
So how can the DWP claim that hiring a third in-house trunk line team has no financial impact? I don't know. But we might soon find out since the NC/DWP MOU Oversight Committee last Saturday unanimously recommended individual that Neighborhood Councils ask their city attorney rep's if the DWP's egregious lack of any public notice – or comment on this agenda item – along with the DWP mislabeling this item as having no fiscal impact when it had one makes the approving of this contract an illegal act..
If it turns out this action was against the law, Rabbit Land will never be the same again.
And now comes the curiouser and curiouser part.
Of all the things I did not expect after the first article about the DWP – it was multiple phone calls from different DWP workers thanking me for exposing what happened at the DWP board meeting. They also wanted to thank CityWatch for helping expose what has been happening for years at the DWP. Repeatedly, they told me they were embarrassed by their union and by the fact that they felt it necessary to call me from pay phones, blocked numbers and disposable cell phones to protect their jobs and their safety.
They are angry and tired, they told me, of being made to look like incompetents by a system that instead of encouraging their best efforts, is instead designed to make it impossible for DWP's own crews to be competitive with the private market place.
They had hoped, they said, that this negotiation with the union would – finally – shine the light on this story so that the DWP board could stand up the union.
This is where the Neighborhood Councils come in. NCs need to demand that elected officials examine these allegations of massive waste within the DWP. And if true, to ask how a union can make it impossible for DWP workers to be only half as efficient as private workers – and why the DWP Board was afraid to publicly address this issue and confront the union's leaders in a way that even many of the union’s members wished they had.
Friday, May 04, 2007
LA Times Website Assaults Viewers!
Help!
Every time I open the LA Times website - blaring loud - are KTLA stories - and no matter what I do - it happens every time I come back to the front page - blasting at full volume - no matter how I change the settings. Any one else having this problem?
Every time I open the LA Times website - blaring loud - are KTLA stories - and no matter what I do - it happens every time I come back to the front page - blasting at full volume - no matter how I change the settings. Any one else having this problem?
Teacher’s Union Surrenders LA Schools to Villaraigosa! Mayor’s Win Streak Continues!
Much ink has been spilled in the past few weeks about the Mayor's recent defeats. Below is my article in today's CITYWATCH which offers another point of view.
The View from Here
Teacher’s Union Surrenders LA Schools to Villaraigosa! Mayor’s Win Streak Continues!
By Brady Westwater
And, no – this is not a late April’s Fool Day story.
While the media has been busy crowing over the court’s overturning the Mayor’s ill-designed plan to take limited control over parts of the LAUSD (and other perceived losses), Villaraigosa has been equally busy ensuring his candidates win two more seats on the school board so they can take full control of the full school district.
And, according to a story in the Daily News (but not in the LA Times) - the teacher’s union – UTLA – has folded their cards, thrown in the towel and raised the white flag.
The union has recently (if unofficially) dropped its campaign to keep incumbent Jon Lauritzen (a charter school roadblock until becoming a born again charter believer in the last vote before the run-off election) in office once they pulled the half-million they had ear-marked for his run-off, essentially conceding the race to reformer, Tamar Galatzan.
This, along with the expected election of reformer Richard A. Vladovic in the District 7 run-off, will for the first time in years put the school board back in the hands of members accountable to the public, the parents and the students - and not the UTLA. And if you think the UTLA cares more about students (or teachers) than its own interests – remember this is the union the LA Times recently exposed as defrauding its members of potentially millions of dollars in retirement investment income by accepting payoffs of a few hundred dollars from investment firms in exchange for recommending those investment firms to their teacher members.
But now with Yolie Flores Aguilar already winning in District 5 to join present board member Monica Garcia in District 2, this will give the allies of the Mayor four of seven votes on the school board (and hopefully Aguilar has learned from her previous support of the disastrous anti-phonics ‘whole language’ and bi-lingual ‘reforms’ that did so much damage back in the 1990’s).
In addition, this majority should be expandable in the next election since the only seat the Mayor did not win – or contest – this time was that of Marguerite Poindexter LaMotte who won primarily due to her strong support from the black community, and not the support of the teacher’s union.
So with this new majority ready to work with new Superintendent David L. Brewer who has already made it clear he feels almost nothing is presently working in the LAUSD – the Mayor should be able to declare victory in his battle to wrest control of the schools from the UTLA leaders and the entrenched LAUSD bureaucracy (with which the UTLA has warred) who have each stifled much needed reforms as they spend as much time battling over turf as they do in educating the students.
Other recent wins for the Mayor – and the City – are his new budget, the continuing decline in crime and the soon to be confirmed reappointment of Chief Bratton. Villaraigosa hasOther recent wins for the Mayor – and the City – are his new budget, the continuing decline managed to raise the number of cops on the streets to the highest in the city’s history while balancing a budget that reduces the structural deficit he inherited though a combination of cuts and increased (and usually deservedly so) user fees – but with no new taxes.
No inconsiderable achievement.
As for the loss of the Olympics – there is not much the Mayor could have done to save that bid with all the strikes against LA.
To begin with, with the current unpopularity of this country overseas, the idea of selecting one of the few cities to have had the Olympics twice – for a third Olympics – which no city has ever had (though London will in 2012) – and to do this when this county has also had the Olympics far more than any other country in the world at a time more and more counties are capable of hosting them – well, LA was not the most likely of choices to win on the international stage.
In addition, our team greatly underestimated the skills and cohesiveness of Chicago’s closely networked business and political communities which are capable of realizing far greater civic projects (cf. Millennium Park) than this city can even imagine. And this is a problem our city needs to admit exists before it can even try to find a way to solve it.
Getting back to the victories, though, there is one more huge one for the Mayor. Just when it seemed that the relationship between the Neighborhood Councils and the Mayor was about to be seriously damaged – he surprised everyone with two amazing choices to head DONE – Carol Baker Tharp and BongHwan Kim - and scored another victory.
Now there are of course, legitimate complaints that the Mayor has not yet made any serious progress in dealing with gangs, stopping traffic congestion, ending homelessness, solving global warming – or catching Reggie the Alligator – but that is all fair game for another article. (Brady Westwater is a professional writer and political activist. Westwater is a regular contributor to CityWatch).
The View from Here
Teacher’s Union Surrenders LA Schools to Villaraigosa! Mayor’s Win Streak Continues!
By Brady Westwater
And, no – this is not a late April’s Fool Day story.
While the media has been busy crowing over the court’s overturning the Mayor’s ill-designed plan to take limited control over parts of the LAUSD (and other perceived losses), Villaraigosa has been equally busy ensuring his candidates win two more seats on the school board so they can take full control of the full school district.
And, according to a story in the Daily News (but not in the LA Times) - the teacher’s union – UTLA – has folded their cards, thrown in the towel and raised the white flag.
The union has recently (if unofficially) dropped its campaign to keep incumbent Jon Lauritzen (a charter school roadblock until becoming a born again charter believer in the last vote before the run-off election) in office once they pulled the half-million they had ear-marked for his run-off, essentially conceding the race to reformer, Tamar Galatzan.
This, along with the expected election of reformer Richard A. Vladovic in the District 7 run-off, will for the first time in years put the school board back in the hands of members accountable to the public, the parents and the students - and not the UTLA. And if you think the UTLA cares more about students (or teachers) than its own interests – remember this is the union the LA Times recently exposed as defrauding its members of potentially millions of dollars in retirement investment income by accepting payoffs of a few hundred dollars from investment firms in exchange for recommending those investment firms to their teacher members.
But now with Yolie Flores Aguilar already winning in District 5 to join present board member Monica Garcia in District 2, this will give the allies of the Mayor four of seven votes on the school board (and hopefully Aguilar has learned from her previous support of the disastrous anti-phonics ‘whole language’ and bi-lingual ‘reforms’ that did so much damage back in the 1990’s).
In addition, this majority should be expandable in the next election since the only seat the Mayor did not win – or contest – this time was that of Marguerite Poindexter LaMotte who won primarily due to her strong support from the black community, and not the support of the teacher’s union.
So with this new majority ready to work with new Superintendent David L. Brewer who has already made it clear he feels almost nothing is presently working in the LAUSD – the Mayor should be able to declare victory in his battle to wrest control of the schools from the UTLA leaders and the entrenched LAUSD bureaucracy (with which the UTLA has warred) who have each stifled much needed reforms as they spend as much time battling over turf as they do in educating the students.
Other recent wins for the Mayor – and the City – are his new budget, the continuing decline in crime and the soon to be confirmed reappointment of Chief Bratton. Villaraigosa hasOther recent wins for the Mayor – and the City – are his new budget, the continuing decline managed to raise the number of cops on the streets to the highest in the city’s history while balancing a budget that reduces the structural deficit he inherited though a combination of cuts and increased (and usually deservedly so) user fees – but with no new taxes.
No inconsiderable achievement.
As for the loss of the Olympics – there is not much the Mayor could have done to save that bid with all the strikes against LA.
To begin with, with the current unpopularity of this country overseas, the idea of selecting one of the few cities to have had the Olympics twice – for a third Olympics – which no city has ever had (though London will in 2012) – and to do this when this county has also had the Olympics far more than any other country in the world at a time more and more counties are capable of hosting them – well, LA was not the most likely of choices to win on the international stage.
In addition, our team greatly underestimated the skills and cohesiveness of Chicago’s closely networked business and political communities which are capable of realizing far greater civic projects (cf. Millennium Park) than this city can even imagine. And this is a problem our city needs to admit exists before it can even try to find a way to solve it.
Getting back to the victories, though, there is one more huge one for the Mayor. Just when it seemed that the relationship between the Neighborhood Councils and the Mayor was about to be seriously damaged – he surprised everyone with two amazing choices to head DONE – Carol Baker Tharp and BongHwan Kim - and scored another victory.
Now there are of course, legitimate complaints that the Mayor has not yet made any serious progress in dealing with gangs, stopping traffic congestion, ending homelessness, solving global warming – or catching Reggie the Alligator – but that is all fair game for another article. (Brady Westwater is a professional writer and political activist. Westwater is a regular contributor to CityWatch).
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Why Did LA Times Screw Up On Imigration March Violence - When Their Photographer Has Photos Of The Incident?
The Times was two hours later in even mentioning that there was any violence at McArthur Park last night, and even then got all their facts wrong which did not get corrected for another two or three hours. And this morning's article seem to mainly rely upon interviewing the press which was their - and quoting what they had seen on the evening news, along with quoting police sources.
And yet they have numerous photos from a Rick Loomis/LAT - so once assumes he is a staff photographer - showing the first outbreak of the violence when it was still bright day light.
So why no story until longer after everyone else had it? And why was it so wrong when when it first came out?
And yet they have numerous photos from a Rick Loomis/LAT - so once assumes he is a staff photographer - showing the first outbreak of the violence when it was still bright day light.
So why no story until longer after everyone else had it? And why was it so wrong when when it first came out?
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
LA Times Does Great Job Covering Marches On-Line - But Then Drops Ball Big Time! UPDATE!
I largely kept track of the marches today by checking in with the LA Times website.
It was pretty quiet until the marchers finally paraded up and down Broadway and then left. But when I came back from Hollywood on the subway - we were told the Alvarado Station was closed and after we transferred to buses we saw demonstrators displaying rubber bullets from the police and when the bus finally came near Wilshire and Alvarado - no one - including pedestrians - were even allowed near there and as a mob surged towards the bus, the driver was afraid to stop until three blocks later.
Clearly - something had happened. But when I finally got back to the office and checked the front page of the website about 20 minutes later - there was... nothing.
UPDATE!
Two hours after some the violence started - and long after radio, TV and internet reports - the Times - finally - covered the story.
FURTHER UPDATE!
The 8 PM article in the Times that no one was hit by the bullets and other details turned out to be wrong (in fact a number of journalists were among those hit)since - evidently - the Times had no one on the scene) and had to be considerably updated three hours later.
It was pretty quiet until the marchers finally paraded up and down Broadway and then left. But when I came back from Hollywood on the subway - we were told the Alvarado Station was closed and after we transferred to buses we saw demonstrators displaying rubber bullets from the police and when the bus finally came near Wilshire and Alvarado - no one - including pedestrians - were even allowed near there and as a mob surged towards the bus, the driver was afraid to stop until three blocks later.
Clearly - something had happened. But when I finally got back to the office and checked the front page of the website about 20 minutes later - there was... nothing.
UPDATE!
Two hours after some the violence started - and long after radio, TV and internet reports - the Times - finally - covered the story.
FURTHER UPDATE!
The 8 PM article in the Times that no one was hit by the bullets and other details turned out to be wrong (in fact a number of journalists were among those hit)since - evidently - the Times had no one on the scene) and had to be considerably updated three hours later.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Forget Being Hung Like A Stallion - It's The Drake That's The Champ!
Who knew? When it comes to the being the king of the males - it's ducks over stallion and bulls. And it's not even close...
May 1, 2007
New York Times
In Ducks, War of the Sexes Plays Out in the Evolution of Genitalia
By CARL ZIMMER
LITCHFIELD, Conn. — “This guy’s the champion,” said Patricia Brennan, a behavioral ecologist, leaning over the nether regions of a duck — a Meller’s duck from Madagascar, to be specific — and carefully coaxing out his phallus.
The duck was quietly resting upside-down against the stomach of Ian Gereg, an aviculturist here at the Livingston Ripley Waterfowl Sanctuary. Dr. Brennan, a post-doctoral researcher at Yale University and the University of Sheffield, visits the sanctuary every two weeks to measure the phalluses of six species of ducks.
When she first visited in January, the phalluses were the size of rice grains. Now many of them are growing rapidly. The champion phallus from this Meller’s duck is a long, spiraling tentacle. Some ducks grow phalluses as long as their entire body.!
So the next time your girl friend compares you to a duck - take it as a complement!
May 1, 2007
New York Times
In Ducks, War of the Sexes Plays Out in the Evolution of Genitalia
By CARL ZIMMER
LITCHFIELD, Conn. — “This guy’s the champion,” said Patricia Brennan, a behavioral ecologist, leaning over the nether regions of a duck — a Meller’s duck from Madagascar, to be specific — and carefully coaxing out his phallus.
The duck was quietly resting upside-down against the stomach of Ian Gereg, an aviculturist here at the Livingston Ripley Waterfowl Sanctuary. Dr. Brennan, a post-doctoral researcher at Yale University and the University of Sheffield, visits the sanctuary every two weeks to measure the phalluses of six species of ducks.
When she first visited in January, the phalluses were the size of rice grains. Now many of them are growing rapidly. The champion phallus from this Meller’s duck is a long, spiraling tentacle. Some ducks grow phalluses as long as their entire body.!
So the next time your girl friend compares you to a duck - take it as a complement!
LA Times Circulation Continues To Plummet!
While three of the largest newspapers in the country had rises in their circulation figures, the LA Times had the largest drop both in absolute numbers and in percentage drop.
Circulation at the Top 20 Newspapers
Monday April 30, 10:59 am ET
By The Associated Press
Average Weekday Circulation at the Top 20 U.S. Newspapers
Average paid weekday circulation of the nation's 20 largest newspapers for the six-month period ending in March, as reported Monday by the Audit Bureau of Circulations. The percentage changes are from the comparable year-ago period.
1. USA Today, 2,278,022, up 0.2 percent
2. The Wall Street Journal, 2,062,312, up 0.6 percent
3. The New York Times, 1,120,420, down 1.9 percent
4. Los Angeles Times, 815,723, down 4.2 percent
5. New York Post, 724,748, up 7.6 percent
6. New York Daily News, 718,174, up 1.4 percent
7. The Washington Post, 699,130, down 3.5 percent
8. Chicago Tribune, 566,827, down 2.1 percent
9. Houston Chronicle, 503,114, down 2 percent
10. The Arizona Republic, 433,731, down 1.1 percent
Circulation at the Top 20 Newspapers
Monday April 30, 10:59 am ET
By The Associated Press
Average Weekday Circulation at the Top 20 U.S. Newspapers
Average paid weekday circulation of the nation's 20 largest newspapers for the six-month period ending in March, as reported Monday by the Audit Bureau of Circulations. The percentage changes are from the comparable year-ago period.
1. USA Today, 2,278,022, up 0.2 percent
2. The Wall Street Journal, 2,062,312, up 0.6 percent
3. The New York Times, 1,120,420, down 1.9 percent
4. Los Angeles Times, 815,723, down 4.2 percent
5. New York Post, 724,748, up 7.6 percent
6. New York Daily News, 718,174, up 1.4 percent
7. The Washington Post, 699,130, down 3.5 percent
8. Chicago Tribune, 566,827, down 2.1 percent
9. Houston Chronicle, 503,114, down 2 percent
10. The Arizona Republic, 433,731, down 1.1 percent
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Six Things You Need To Know About The LA TImes Festival!
1. It's one of the great civic events in Los Angeles so if you didn't go Saturday - go today.
As usual, I saw 40 or 50 people I know (or who at least 40 or 50 people who recognized me). Plus I got my photo taken by Gary Leonard, spoke with Kevin Roderick who was signing his Wilshire book (after which I tip-toed past Downtown History Mangler DJ Waldie who was signing his book next to Kevin - and see earlier post for why), pitched three book stores and one antique mall on moving to Downtown, talked up people on the new Los Angeles Museum, harassed various LAT representatives, talked with some reps from Go Country 105 FM about thier sponsoring a Wyatt Earp WIld West Days Celeberation Downtown, exchanged phone numbers with a young lady who between my cowboy hat and my cowboy wrestling shirt figured out who I was & wanted to know if the stories were true, met a couple cool authors, a Brit professor and exchanged another dozen business cards with various people (actors, architect, playwright, artists, curators, etc.) for various reasons.
But I did miss Patt Morrison who I wanted to ask if she had any cool photos of Main Street in her LA collection I could borrow for the LA Museum's first show - The Main Street Project. So call me Patt!
2. Everything in the UCLA bookstore is 20% off - including their remaindered books
3. You can buy the Sunday LA Times for a third-off (only $1)- and no tax.
4. The food and drink prices are... outrageous. However, the vending machine clusters have tons of super cheap food - such as Klondike bars for a buck. My favorite cluster is just south and west of the research library.
5. Rather than standing in line of the portable restroom, the research library also has ground floor - empty - bathrooms.
6. Lastly, if you need to check you e-mail and your blackberry is toast - there's dozens of open computers at the research library.
Unsurprisingly, during my four years as a second generation Bruin - I virtually lived in the research library (whenever I was not breaking wild horses, bar fighting or repossessing stolen airplanes, of course)and its been a favorite wallowing place of mine ever since.
As usual, I saw 40 or 50 people I know (or who at least 40 or 50 people who recognized me). Plus I got my photo taken by Gary Leonard, spoke with Kevin Roderick who was signing his Wilshire book (after which I tip-toed past Downtown History Mangler DJ Waldie who was signing his book next to Kevin - and see earlier post for why), pitched three book stores and one antique mall on moving to Downtown, talked up people on the new Los Angeles Museum, harassed various LAT representatives, talked with some reps from Go Country 105 FM about thier sponsoring a Wyatt Earp WIld West Days Celeberation Downtown, exchanged phone numbers with a young lady who between my cowboy hat and my cowboy wrestling shirt figured out who I was & wanted to know if the stories were true, met a couple cool authors, a Brit professor and exchanged another dozen business cards with various people (actors, architect, playwright, artists, curators, etc.) for various reasons.
But I did miss Patt Morrison who I wanted to ask if she had any cool photos of Main Street in her LA collection I could borrow for the LA Museum's first show - The Main Street Project. So call me Patt!
2. Everything in the UCLA bookstore is 20% off - including their remaindered books
3. You can buy the Sunday LA Times for a third-off (only $1)- and no tax.
4. The food and drink prices are... outrageous. However, the vending machine clusters have tons of super cheap food - such as Klondike bars for a buck. My favorite cluster is just south and west of the research library.
5. Rather than standing in line of the portable restroom, the research library also has ground floor - empty - bathrooms.
6. Lastly, if you need to check you e-mail and your blackberry is toast - there's dozens of open computers at the research library.
Unsurprisingly, during my four years as a second generation Bruin - I virtually lived in the research library (whenever I was not breaking wild horses, bar fighting or repossessing stolen airplanes, of course)and its been a favorite wallowing place of mine ever since.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
El Camino High Wins National Academic Decathlon Again - And LA Times Beats Daily New On Story - By At Least An Hour!
There's a new sheriff in town when the Times kicks the Daily News' butt on a Valley story like this - and on a Saturday night.!
El Camino Real wins Academic Decathlon
The Woodland Hills high school takes the U.S. title for the fifth time, tying a record held by a Texas school.
By Mitchell Landsberg
Times Staff Writer
7:45 PM PDT, April 28, 2007
HONOLULU — El Camino Real High School of Woodland Hills won the National Academic Decathlon for a record-tying fifth time Saturday.
El Camino had come into the competition as a strong favorite, but faced tough challenges from schools in Wisconsin and Illinois that were hoping to crack California's near-lock on success in the decathlon, which measures student strength in an array of academic subjects.
It was the fourth year in a row that a school from Woodland Hills has won the national title. El Camino won in 2004 and 2005, then lost the California state title last year to archrival Taft High, which went on to win the national championship.
Whitney M. Young Magnet High School of Chicago finished second. Waukesha West High School of Waukesha, Wis., was third.
El Camino also won the national title in 1998 and 2001. Only one other high school, J.J. Pierce of Richardson, Texas, has won five national decathlons, and it hasn't won since 1991. California schools have now won 14 national championships since the competition began in 1982.
El Camino Real wins Academic Decathlon
The Woodland Hills high school takes the U.S. title for the fifth time, tying a record held by a Texas school.
By Mitchell Landsberg
Times Staff Writer
7:45 PM PDT, April 28, 2007
HONOLULU — El Camino Real High School of Woodland Hills won the National Academic Decathlon for a record-tying fifth time Saturday.
El Camino had come into the competition as a strong favorite, but faced tough challenges from schools in Wisconsin and Illinois that were hoping to crack California's near-lock on success in the decathlon, which measures student strength in an array of academic subjects.
It was the fourth year in a row that a school from Woodland Hills has won the national title. El Camino won in 2004 and 2005, then lost the California state title last year to archrival Taft High, which went on to win the national championship.
Whitney M. Young Magnet High School of Chicago finished second. Waukesha West High School of Waukesha, Wis., was third.
El Camino also won the national title in 1998 and 2001. Only one other high school, J.J. Pierce of Richardson, Texas, has won five national decathlons, and it hasn't won since 1991. California schools have now won 14 national championships since the competition began in 1982.
El Camino High Wins National Academic Decathlon Again - And LA TImes Beats Daily New On Story - By At Least An Hour!
There's a new sheriff in town when the Times kicks the Daily News' butt on a Valley story like this - and on a Saturday night.!
El Camino Real wins Academic Decathlon
The Woodland Hills high school takes the U.S. title for the fifth time, tying a record held by a Texas school.
By Mitchell Landsberg
Times Staff Writer
7:45 PM PDT, April 28, 2007
HONOLULU — El Camino Real High School of Woodland Hills won the National Academic Decathlon for a record-tying fifth time Saturday.
El Camino had come into the competition as a strong favorite, but faced tough challenges from schools in Wisconsin and Illinois that were hoping to crack California's near-lock on success in the decathlon, which measures student strength in an array of academic subjects.
It was the fourth year in a row that a school from Woodland Hills has won the national title. El Camino won in 2004 and 2005, then lost the California state title last year to archrival Taft High, which went on to win the national championship.
Whitney M. Young Magnet High School of Chicago finished second. Waukesha West High School of Waukesha, Wis., was third.
El Camino also won the national title in 1998 and 2001. Only one other high school, J.J. Pierce of Richardson, Texas, has won five national decathlons, and it hasn't won since 1991. California schools have now won 14 national championships since the competition began in 1982.
El Camino Real wins Academic Decathlon
The Woodland Hills high school takes the U.S. title for the fifth time, tying a record held by a Texas school.
By Mitchell Landsberg
Times Staff Writer
7:45 PM PDT, April 28, 2007
HONOLULU — El Camino Real High School of Woodland Hills won the National Academic Decathlon for a record-tying fifth time Saturday.
El Camino had come into the competition as a strong favorite, but faced tough challenges from schools in Wisconsin and Illinois that were hoping to crack California's near-lock on success in the decathlon, which measures student strength in an array of academic subjects.
It was the fourth year in a row that a school from Woodland Hills has won the national title. El Camino won in 2004 and 2005, then lost the California state title last year to archrival Taft High, which went on to win the national championship.
Whitney M. Young Magnet High School of Chicago finished second. Waukesha West High School of Waukesha, Wis., was third.
El Camino also won the national title in 1998 and 2001. Only one other high school, J.J. Pierce of Richardson, Texas, has won five national decathlons, and it hasn't won since 1991. California schools have now won 14 national championships since the competition began in 1982.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Why Is The City Of Los Angeles And The CRA Trying To Destroy Gallery Row?
Today the City Council of Los Angeles will review the results of a public hearing recently held to get public comment about turning the Frontier Hotel (aka the Rosslyn Lofts) into subsidized housing instead of the additional workforce/artist oriented for housing the present owner was planning. This rehabed affordable housing was in addition to the already finished units in the building, most of which are rented by people who walk to work, thus reducing traffic congestion at no cost to the public.
But instead of allowing this process to continue, the CRA now wants to give millions of dollars to a politically connected developer to destroy the proposed workforce housing and make it subsidized housing rather than creating new subsidized income housing without taking workforce housing off the market.
This is a perfect example of why this city has a housing crisis. Political posturing is always more important than solving the problem.
Now as for what the public had to say about this at the... public... meeting - oddly enough - no one showed up to testify.
Not one person.
That was because the notice of the meeting was paid advertisement in an obscure legal newspaper. This despite the fact there is a free local list-serv that covers the area, a neighborhood council in the area, a business improvement district in that area, a Main Street Association for the area, a CRA CDBG committee for that area and two arts organizations that represent galleries located in that very building.
And yet news of this public meeting was deliberately hidden from each one of these organizations.
That was because when it comes to anything the CRA does in our neighborhood - the fix was in and everything that could legally done to keep the public from finding about the 'public' meeting - or what was being done - was done.
Even worse, though, than the loss of an artist/neighborhood oriented project - is the potential death blow to the still vulnerable Gallery Row District centered at 5th and Main. Three galleries are already located in the building - the most located in any building in the area - and two more much needed galleries necessary to create the needed critical mass, have been waiting to sign leases as soon as the CRA approved the previously negotiated deal to turn the building into workforce housing - at no cost to the taxpayers.
Now, though, a potential new owner trying to buy the building will be required to offer rents far below marker rate with his millions of dollars in subsidies; that developer will then need the income from the retail spaces - that the current owner has given to the galleries at well below market rates – to be dramatically raised and that will not only preclude the signing of the two new galleries - but it will likely force the existing galleries to close.
And yet the city proclaims one of its top priorities is the creation of cultural tourism while the city’s main redevelopment agency and the city’s development projects, increasingly, seem dedicated to destroying the galleries of Gallery Row.
Now I’d like to say I am optimistic that this can be satisfactorily resolved – but from all my past experiences in dealing with the CRA - I would be lying.
But instead of allowing this process to continue, the CRA now wants to give millions of dollars to a politically connected developer to destroy the proposed workforce housing and make it subsidized housing rather than creating new subsidized income housing without taking workforce housing off the market.
This is a perfect example of why this city has a housing crisis. Political posturing is always more important than solving the problem.
Now as for what the public had to say about this at the... public... meeting - oddly enough - no one showed up to testify.
Not one person.
That was because the notice of the meeting was paid advertisement in an obscure legal newspaper. This despite the fact there is a free local list-serv that covers the area, a neighborhood council in the area, a business improvement district in that area, a Main Street Association for the area, a CRA CDBG committee for that area and two arts organizations that represent galleries located in that very building.
And yet news of this public meeting was deliberately hidden from each one of these organizations.
That was because when it comes to anything the CRA does in our neighborhood - the fix was in and everything that could legally done to keep the public from finding about the 'public' meeting - or what was being done - was done.
Even worse, though, than the loss of an artist/neighborhood oriented project - is the potential death blow to the still vulnerable Gallery Row District centered at 5th and Main. Three galleries are already located in the building - the most located in any building in the area - and two more much needed galleries necessary to create the needed critical mass, have been waiting to sign leases as soon as the CRA approved the previously negotiated deal to turn the building into workforce housing - at no cost to the taxpayers.
Now, though, a potential new owner trying to buy the building will be required to offer rents far below marker rate with his millions of dollars in subsidies; that developer will then need the income from the retail spaces - that the current owner has given to the galleries at well below market rates – to be dramatically raised and that will not only preclude the signing of the two new galleries - but it will likely force the existing galleries to close.
And yet the city proclaims one of its top priorities is the creation of cultural tourism while the city’s main redevelopment agency and the city’s development projects, increasingly, seem dedicated to destroying the galleries of Gallery Row.
Now I’d like to say I am optimistic that this can be satisfactorily resolved – but from all my past experiences in dealing with the CRA - I would be lying.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
LA Cowboy Answers FishbowlLA's Twenty Questions!
My 2 AM in the morning response to Kate Coe's 20 stupid blogger questions...
Tuesday, Apr 24
FBLA 20 Questions: Brady Westwater
Downtown advocate, gad-fly or whatever he is, Brady Westwater is the LA Cowboy. Since we're moving into his neighborhood, we tried to get on his good side, but he was wise to our tricks. So, lookin' for 8 right out of the gate*, here's Westwater's answers.
1. What newspapers do you read?
LA Times, New York Times, Downtown News, LA Weekly, City Beat, Daily News, and Rodeo News plus the LA Business Journal, Journal of the Arts & Wall Street Journal if I can score a free copy.
2. Which ones do you move your lips to while reading?
Cowboys don't move our lips unless food or sex is involved. But if we did - it would be the NYT's editorial page and LAT'S West magazine.
3. Which Web sites are on your favorites bookmark?
Fishbowl LA & NY, MissSnark, LAObserved, the Curbs, Kausfiles, and DrudgeReport plus any site with naked cowgirls on it
4. Where do you get your car washed?
Cowboys don't have cars. Cowboys ride horses.
5. Do you know your dentist's first name?
If I need a tooth pulled, I use a horse, a saddle and a rope.
6. Do you believe newspapers are going to die? If so, when?
Nothing ever dies. It just comes back on Ebay.
7. What was the last book you read?
Best Urban Parking Management Practices.
8. What's the last book you say you read?
Sex and the Single Cowgirl.
9. If you got a unicorn what would you name it?
Mr. D - that was my horse's name and he was the best horse that ever lived.
10. What does your TiVo think about you?
That I watch entirely too much bull riding.
11. character of fiction you most resemble?
Any Max Brand Hero. They beat up the bad guy, hug the horse, and kiss the girl.
12. Who plays you in your bio-pic?
Mikey Henderson - and he will.
13. Do you floss?
Depends on whom I am with that night - and if she is watching.
14. Did you ever believe your toys come alive when you leave the room?
Who needed to leave the room?
Do you still?
Define... toys.
15. How many old cell phones do you own?
Counting ones I have jumped up and down on? Countless...
16. Best show legendary biz/movie star encounter.
Either the infamous Bobby Blake Vince's Gym incident or seeing Tammie Faye Baker at Malibu's Cross Creek shopping center. She and Jim Baker were 'in hiding' in Malibu after being charged with embezzlement and she was yelling at him to spend hundred dollars on a blouse for her. He just rolled his eyes. On a hunch I checked out the local drug store's make-up section and sure enough there was a huge gap on the shelf where the all mascara used to be.
I called a friend at Eyewitless News - and a pan shot of the decimated mascara shelf beat out all the bleed and lead stories on the eleven o'clock news.
17. Do you get satellite radio?
You can not fit a satellite radio on a double-rigged Western saddle, without making the horse very, very angry.
18. And as a follow do you "get" satellite radio?
Um... do I understand the desire to pay to hear Howard Stern? Hell no!
Do I appreciate the financial rewards of niche programing - Hell yes!
19. Do you read the Enquirer/InTouch/US/people?
Keeping track of my own sex life is confusing - and dangerous - enough.
20. Do you lie about it?
Cowboys never lie. Cowboys always tell the truth.
* George Strait reference.
Tuesday, Apr 24
FBLA 20 Questions: Brady Westwater
Downtown advocate, gad-fly or whatever he is, Brady Westwater is the LA Cowboy. Since we're moving into his neighborhood, we tried to get on his good side, but he was wise to our tricks. So, lookin' for 8 right out of the gate*, here's Westwater's answers.
1. What newspapers do you read?
LA Times, New York Times, Downtown News, LA Weekly, City Beat, Daily News, and Rodeo News plus the LA Business Journal, Journal of the Arts & Wall Street Journal if I can score a free copy.
2. Which ones do you move your lips to while reading?
Cowboys don't move our lips unless food or sex is involved. But if we did - it would be the NYT's editorial page and LAT'S West magazine.
3. Which Web sites are on your favorites bookmark?
Fishbowl LA & NY, MissSnark, LAObserved, the Curbs, Kausfiles, and DrudgeReport plus any site with naked cowgirls on it
4. Where do you get your car washed?
Cowboys don't have cars. Cowboys ride horses.
5. Do you know your dentist's first name?
If I need a tooth pulled, I use a horse, a saddle and a rope.
6. Do you believe newspapers are going to die? If so, when?
Nothing ever dies. It just comes back on Ebay.
7. What was the last book you read?
Best Urban Parking Management Practices.
8. What's the last book you say you read?
Sex and the Single Cowgirl.
9. If you got a unicorn what would you name it?
Mr. D - that was my horse's name and he was the best horse that ever lived.
10. What does your TiVo think about you?
That I watch entirely too much bull riding.
11. character of fiction you most resemble?
Any Max Brand Hero. They beat up the bad guy, hug the horse, and kiss the girl.
12. Who plays you in your bio-pic?
Mikey Henderson - and he will.
13. Do you floss?
Depends on whom I am with that night - and if she is watching.
14. Did you ever believe your toys come alive when you leave the room?
Who needed to leave the room?
Do you still?
Define... toys.
15. How many old cell phones do you own?
Counting ones I have jumped up and down on? Countless...
16. Best show legendary biz/movie star encounter.
Either the infamous Bobby Blake Vince's Gym incident or seeing Tammie Faye Baker at Malibu's Cross Creek shopping center. She and Jim Baker were 'in hiding' in Malibu after being charged with embezzlement and she was yelling at him to spend hundred dollars on a blouse for her. He just rolled his eyes. On a hunch I checked out the local drug store's make-up section and sure enough there was a huge gap on the shelf where the all mascara used to be.
I called a friend at Eyewitless News - and a pan shot of the decimated mascara shelf beat out all the bleed and lead stories on the eleven o'clock news.
17. Do you get satellite radio?
You can not fit a satellite radio on a double-rigged Western saddle, without making the horse very, very angry.
18. And as a follow do you "get" satellite radio?
Um... do I understand the desire to pay to hear Howard Stern? Hell no!
Do I appreciate the financial rewards of niche programing - Hell yes!
19. Do you read the Enquirer/InTouch/US/people?
Keeping track of my own sex life is confusing - and dangerous - enough.
20. Do you lie about it?
Cowboys never lie. Cowboys always tell the truth.
* George Strait reference.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Wildly Inaccurate Article On Downtown Los Angeles In Sunday LAT Opinion Section!
The normally reliable D. J. Waldie has a rather unusual Op-ed in Sunday's Los Angeles Times about Downtown Los Angeles in which he contradicts historic facts and indulges in some bizarre logic at times. It also shows the desperate need for a Los Angeles Museum (the first incarnation of which will shortly open on Main Street - stay tuned) so people who write for the Time might learn the actual history of the city instead of just repeating long discredited myths.
Rather than go into the whole article, I will just address a few of the errors:
From its conception, the city's heart was divided. The pueblo that clustered around the plaza in the 1780s was purely secular. Its religious center was Mission San Gabriel, whose Franciscan padres were so suspicious of the pueblo's unruly residents that L.A. didn't have its own church until 1822.
The 'purely secular' Plaza of the 1780's was laid out in 1781 with a chapel as part of the original plan and that chapel was constructed for weekly services in 1784 (or at least construction was started, there is debate as to exactly when in the 'purely secular' 1780's the chapel was finished). Then in 1810 the slowly growing Pueblo felt financially able to support the chapel being upgraded to a church with a full time priest as opposed to a just priest on Sundays and the San Gabriel Mission granted that request.
The cornerstone was laid in 1814, but the site later had to be abandoned due to flooding from the LA River. Because of that, both the church and the entire Plaza had to be eventually relocated and the present church resumed construction in 1819.
So the whole premise that the city was totally secular for forty years - is false. But even so - who could possibly believe that the present state of Downtown has anything to do with how some Franciscans in San Gabriel felt about Los Angeles in the 1780's? Ergo, I'd like to see a show of hands of how many people who think that is a valid intellectual argument.
I thought so.
By then, the city's pattern of centerless edges had been set. The foothills and valleys of the L.A. and San Gabriel rivers were divided into more than 40 semi-self-sufficient ranchos. The Pueblo de Los Angeles was just a depot and general store.
Again, total fantasy. In both Spanish and Mexican California Los Angeles was the social, cultural and economic center of not only what was to become Los Angeles County - but almost all of Southern California. It was nothing remotely resembling just a depot and a store.
While each rancho by necessity had a certain degree of economic self-sufficiency for the day to day necessities of life - for everything else - Los Angeles was the place everyone went. For that reason most of the larger rancho owners maintained residences around or near the Plaza since that was the place where social life of all of greater Los Angeles revolved and the place where business was transacted for most of Southern California.
Even the most cursory readings of either first hand accounts of that era or later histories of that era make that clear.
Besides, is there any city anywhere that did not originally have scattered settlements around it? There was nothing unique about LA's development during that time. LA's sprawl was due to one fact and one fact only; it became a city at the time street cars came into general use, followed by the automobile's invention.
LA's sprawl had nothing do do with the settlement patterns of the early 19th Century; settlement patterns that were the same ones that Chicago and other cities of that era had. The only difference was that that Chicago became a major city far before street cars or automobiles. Also illustrating that point is that other cities which developed at the same as LA did - such as Houston and Dallas - also had the same development patterns as did Los Angeles.
After California became a state, new American owners subdivided the ranchos into farms and crossroad villages only loosely tied to Los Angeles. Railways in the 1880s created more towns along the mainline tracks in the valleys north and east. Beginning in 1901, Henry Huntington's network of electric trolleys filled the intervening space with miles of housing tracts and little Main Streets. Only between 1890 and 1920 did a real downtown — with tall buildings, all-day pedestrian traffic and neighborhoods — boom. By the early 1920s, mostly suburban visitors filled the city's movie theaters and department stores. And by the end of the decade, suburbia had unmade downtown.
After California became a state, the ranchos remained places where cattle and sheep were raised, albeit in increasingly smaller parcels, for several decades and most of those ranchos (though far from all) did pass into American hands. But this was already happening long before California became a state due to the continuing influx of Americans - starting in the 1820's and rapidly increasing in the 1830's and 1840's - who married into the rancho families.
The subdivision into farms and towns though only seriously began in the 1870's - and even then they were mostly paper subdivisions leaving Los Angeles as the only center in the region for both commerce and social life. As an example of Downtown's importance even in 1880, thirty years after the statehood Waldie cites as a turning point, Long Beach and Burbank did not even exist, Pasadena only had a little over 200 full time residents, Santa Monica a little over 400 and most other towns were far smaller than even those two.
Only Downtown LA had the critical mass of people for anything other than the most basic needs of life, much less cultural and social activities of any size, making it the only regional hub in the area. For anything else, people had to come Downtown.
As for a 'real downtown' boom only happening from 1890 - 1920, that too is wrong. First, if one ignores the tall buildings aspect, the 1850's was one of the greatest booms in city's history as money from selling cattle to the Northern California gold miners flooded the city with commerce and gold coins and flooded the streets with people (as contemporary accounts vividly describe)in the admittedly compact city. That was the period that shops and business and cultural activities of all kind first appeared in Los Angeles on a large scale, making Los Angeles even more the heart of the region since it suddenly offered far more attractions than any other regional center could offer.
Finally, the big boom was not the in the 1890's but in the 1880's with the coming of the second railroad. That created the single greatest boom in the city's history if one looks at the degree of change that occurred to the downtown portion of the city. LA entered the decade the market center for a largely stock raising area but quickly developed into a modern city with large new hotels, factories, office blocks and high rises - for the time - such as the massive new City Hall and Courthouse.
And photos - and first hand accounts - from that era show the sidewalks filled with pedestrians.
No other boom - or any other decade - ever saw such a fundamental change in the city, much less downtown. What happened from 1890 - 1900 was merely a far more subdued, far more incremental example of what happened in the earlier decade. It was not a fundamental change. And the rate of population growth in the at decade was far below what it had been in the 1880's boom; in the 1880's the city grew by over 400%, in the 1890's LA grew by only 100%.
Lastly, the statement that suburbia had unmade downtown by the end of the 1920's is also inaccurate. While the rapidly expanding, sprawling city did in time unmake Downtown and while that process did start in the late 1920's, the actual change did not happen until the 1930's - and later (though it also made a huge comeback during the 1940's). So while the suburban boom of the 1920's had stated the process of mass decentralization that would soon undo Downtown, in 1929 Downtown was still the retail, business, cultural, banking and entertainment heart of the city. It was far from undone. That came, but at a later date.
Then comes his description of Downtown as it is today - and, if anything - it is even more inaccurate.
The making and unmaking of downtown has been the focus of the city's business and political elites since the 19th century. The area is historically contested ground, dividing Angelenos by ethnicity and class but rarely uniting them. The divisions are brutally sharp now. Fewer than 9% of the jobs in the city are downtown, and income disparities there are among the widest in L.A. The non-homeless population is less than 25,000, with middle-class residents a tiny fraction of that. So, whose downtown is it, anyway, and why are so few of us asking?
The first statement is odd since in the 19th Century Los Angeles WAS Downtown and a few suburbs. The focus, if anything, by the business elite then was in developing the surrounding suburbs and annexing all the land around Los Angeles into the City of Los Angeles. And every ethnic group in the city was living within the Downtown at that time and the differing classes often lived within one or two blocks of each other with rooming houses often being built just one or two streets over from mansions.
As for today's population, to begin with, it is close to 29,000 and not the under 25,000 figure quoted. And the middle class is far from being a tiny fraction of that and, if anyone is interested, I can explain why that is the case in mind numbing detail...
But the most important statistic ignored is that downtown has virtually equally number of market rate and subsidized housing and yet that is... bizarrely... restated as saying that the divisions are brutally sharp now - when the exact opposite is true.
The single largest subsidized project in the city is not on Skid Row - but right in the heart of Bunker Hill - right next to the new Grand Avenue Project. Another large center of subsidized housing are the buildings scattered throughout South Park, mixed in with the new high rise condos. And streets like Main and Spring have both SRO's, subsidized apartments and lofts, market rate lofts and market rate condos all mixed together.
In no other part of the city does this type of economic and social integration and interaction of the very poor, the working class, the middle class and the upper class exist - and yet Waldie claims this is a brutally sharp division compared to the rest of the city.
Is it possible to imagine any statement being any more dishonest?
All of us loft dwellers and condo owners and SRO & subsidized dwellers walk the same sidewalks and many of us shop at Grand Central Market together, eat at many of the same restaurants and shop in many of the same stores. Many of us attend the free concerts at Pershing Square, the free events at the Music Center Plaza and at the California Plaza. We interact with each every day in ways that happen in no other part of the city.
And if Mr. Waldie would ever like to actually walk the streets of downtown with me and see this for himself, I'd be glad to give him a tour.
But I'm not holding my breath.
Rather than go into the whole article, I will just address a few of the errors:
From its conception, the city's heart was divided. The pueblo that clustered around the plaza in the 1780s was purely secular. Its religious center was Mission San Gabriel, whose Franciscan padres were so suspicious of the pueblo's unruly residents that L.A. didn't have its own church until 1822.
The 'purely secular' Plaza of the 1780's was laid out in 1781 with a chapel as part of the original plan and that chapel was constructed for weekly services in 1784 (or at least construction was started, there is debate as to exactly when in the 'purely secular' 1780's the chapel was finished). Then in 1810 the slowly growing Pueblo felt financially able to support the chapel being upgraded to a church with a full time priest as opposed to a just priest on Sundays and the San Gabriel Mission granted that request.
The cornerstone was laid in 1814, but the site later had to be abandoned due to flooding from the LA River. Because of that, both the church and the entire Plaza had to be eventually relocated and the present church resumed construction in 1819.
So the whole premise that the city was totally secular for forty years - is false. But even so - who could possibly believe that the present state of Downtown has anything to do with how some Franciscans in San Gabriel felt about Los Angeles in the 1780's? Ergo, I'd like to see a show of hands of how many people who think that is a valid intellectual argument.
I thought so.
By then, the city's pattern of centerless edges had been set. The foothills and valleys of the L.A. and San Gabriel rivers were divided into more than 40 semi-self-sufficient ranchos. The Pueblo de Los Angeles was just a depot and general store.
Again, total fantasy. In both Spanish and Mexican California Los Angeles was the social, cultural and economic center of not only what was to become Los Angeles County - but almost all of Southern California. It was nothing remotely resembling just a depot and a store.
While each rancho by necessity had a certain degree of economic self-sufficiency for the day to day necessities of life - for everything else - Los Angeles was the place everyone went. For that reason most of the larger rancho owners maintained residences around or near the Plaza since that was the place where social life of all of greater Los Angeles revolved and the place where business was transacted for most of Southern California.
Even the most cursory readings of either first hand accounts of that era or later histories of that era make that clear.
Besides, is there any city anywhere that did not originally have scattered settlements around it? There was nothing unique about LA's development during that time. LA's sprawl was due to one fact and one fact only; it became a city at the time street cars came into general use, followed by the automobile's invention.
LA's sprawl had nothing do do with the settlement patterns of the early 19th Century; settlement patterns that were the same ones that Chicago and other cities of that era had. The only difference was that that Chicago became a major city far before street cars or automobiles. Also illustrating that point is that other cities which developed at the same as LA did - such as Houston and Dallas - also had the same development patterns as did Los Angeles.
After California became a state, new American owners subdivided the ranchos into farms and crossroad villages only loosely tied to Los Angeles. Railways in the 1880s created more towns along the mainline tracks in the valleys north and east. Beginning in 1901, Henry Huntington's network of electric trolleys filled the intervening space with miles of housing tracts and little Main Streets. Only between 1890 and 1920 did a real downtown — with tall buildings, all-day pedestrian traffic and neighborhoods — boom. By the early 1920s, mostly suburban visitors filled the city's movie theaters and department stores. And by the end of the decade, suburbia had unmade downtown.
After California became a state, the ranchos remained places where cattle and sheep were raised, albeit in increasingly smaller parcels, for several decades and most of those ranchos (though far from all) did pass into American hands. But this was already happening long before California became a state due to the continuing influx of Americans - starting in the 1820's and rapidly increasing in the 1830's and 1840's - who married into the rancho families.
The subdivision into farms and towns though only seriously began in the 1870's - and even then they were mostly paper subdivisions leaving Los Angeles as the only center in the region for both commerce and social life. As an example of Downtown's importance even in 1880, thirty years after the statehood Waldie cites as a turning point, Long Beach and Burbank did not even exist, Pasadena only had a little over 200 full time residents, Santa Monica a little over 400 and most other towns were far smaller than even those two.
Only Downtown LA had the critical mass of people for anything other than the most basic needs of life, much less cultural and social activities of any size, making it the only regional hub in the area. For anything else, people had to come Downtown.
As for a 'real downtown' boom only happening from 1890 - 1920, that too is wrong. First, if one ignores the tall buildings aspect, the 1850's was one of the greatest booms in city's history as money from selling cattle to the Northern California gold miners flooded the city with commerce and gold coins and flooded the streets with people (as contemporary accounts vividly describe)in the admittedly compact city. That was the period that shops and business and cultural activities of all kind first appeared in Los Angeles on a large scale, making Los Angeles even more the heart of the region since it suddenly offered far more attractions than any other regional center could offer.
Finally, the big boom was not the in the 1890's but in the 1880's with the coming of the second railroad. That created the single greatest boom in the city's history if one looks at the degree of change that occurred to the downtown portion of the city. LA entered the decade the market center for a largely stock raising area but quickly developed into a modern city with large new hotels, factories, office blocks and high rises - for the time - such as the massive new City Hall and Courthouse.
And photos - and first hand accounts - from that era show the sidewalks filled with pedestrians.
No other boom - or any other decade - ever saw such a fundamental change in the city, much less downtown. What happened from 1890 - 1900 was merely a far more subdued, far more incremental example of what happened in the earlier decade. It was not a fundamental change. And the rate of population growth in the at decade was far below what it had been in the 1880's boom; in the 1880's the city grew by over 400%, in the 1890's LA grew by only 100%.
Lastly, the statement that suburbia had unmade downtown by the end of the 1920's is also inaccurate. While the rapidly expanding, sprawling city did in time unmake Downtown and while that process did start in the late 1920's, the actual change did not happen until the 1930's - and later (though it also made a huge comeback during the 1940's). So while the suburban boom of the 1920's had stated the process of mass decentralization that would soon undo Downtown, in 1929 Downtown was still the retail, business, cultural, banking and entertainment heart of the city. It was far from undone. That came, but at a later date.
Then comes his description of Downtown as it is today - and, if anything - it is even more inaccurate.
The making and unmaking of downtown has been the focus of the city's business and political elites since the 19th century. The area is historically contested ground, dividing Angelenos by ethnicity and class but rarely uniting them. The divisions are brutally sharp now. Fewer than 9% of the jobs in the city are downtown, and income disparities there are among the widest in L.A. The non-homeless population is less than 25,000, with middle-class residents a tiny fraction of that. So, whose downtown is it, anyway, and why are so few of us asking?
The first statement is odd since in the 19th Century Los Angeles WAS Downtown and a few suburbs. The focus, if anything, by the business elite then was in developing the surrounding suburbs and annexing all the land around Los Angeles into the City of Los Angeles. And every ethnic group in the city was living within the Downtown at that time and the differing classes often lived within one or two blocks of each other with rooming houses often being built just one or two streets over from mansions.
As for today's population, to begin with, it is close to 29,000 and not the under 25,000 figure quoted. And the middle class is far from being a tiny fraction of that and, if anyone is interested, I can explain why that is the case in mind numbing detail...
But the most important statistic ignored is that downtown has virtually equally number of market rate and subsidized housing and yet that is... bizarrely... restated as saying that the divisions are brutally sharp now - when the exact opposite is true.
The single largest subsidized project in the city is not on Skid Row - but right in the heart of Bunker Hill - right next to the new Grand Avenue Project. Another large center of subsidized housing are the buildings scattered throughout South Park, mixed in with the new high rise condos. And streets like Main and Spring have both SRO's, subsidized apartments and lofts, market rate lofts and market rate condos all mixed together.
In no other part of the city does this type of economic and social integration and interaction of the very poor, the working class, the middle class and the upper class exist - and yet Waldie claims this is a brutally sharp division compared to the rest of the city.
Is it possible to imagine any statement being any more dishonest?
All of us loft dwellers and condo owners and SRO & subsidized dwellers walk the same sidewalks and many of us shop at Grand Central Market together, eat at many of the same restaurants and shop in many of the same stores. Many of us attend the free concerts at Pershing Square, the free events at the Music Center Plaza and at the California Plaza. We interact with each every day in ways that happen in no other part of the city.
And if Mr. Waldie would ever like to actually walk the streets of downtown with me and see this for himself, I'd be glad to give him a tour.
But I'm not holding my breath.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Want To Bring Parks To YOUR Neighborhood? Want To Bring Economic Development To YOUR Neighborhood? Find Out How To This Saturday!
Saturday April 21st from 8:30 AM – 3 PM the Congress of Neighborhoods will meet at the Bonaventure Hotel at 404 S. Figueroa Street in the California Ballroom. Parking is free with validation at the City National Plaza Parking garage at 400 S. Flower and there will be a complementary breakfast and lunch.
The Opening Session/Mayor's Welcome begins at 8:30am in the California Ballroom.
Mayor Villaraigosa, Carol Tharp, DONE GM & BongHwan Kim, AGM, Council members Eric Garcetti, Ricard Alacon, Janice Hahn and others will be speaking to participants at the Opening Session. The first workshop session - and there iwll be dozens of different workshops - starts at 9:30 AM. You aren't required to stay to the end, or get there early, you can drop in at the Westin Bonaventure Hotel any time and leave when you want.
Three of the many sessions will be held by the Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils Congress and you want to increase community outreach, develop jobs and businesses in your community or need more parks and green spaces in your community - the Los Angeles Neighborhood Congress will multiple experts to answer your questions as well as NC members to tell you their success stories.
You will each be given specific action items to take back to your communities Monday morning to get to work to solve these problems. .
From 9:30AM – 10:45 AM, a speaker from the Trust for Public Land will explain how neighborhood councils can develop political support for parks, use “greenprint” maps to make a case for additional park space in their communities and learn the basics of land acquisition and how to use that information to acquire more park land.
Also on the panel with be a representative from the LAUSD on how to working with the school district to use school facilities after hours, someone from Parks and Rec to discuss the parks assessment survey and several community based organizations that have successfully created parks and green spaces throughout Los Angeles including BONC commissioner, Tsilah Burman, Executive Director of the L.A. Neighborhood Land Trust.
For more information on this event and a complete list of guest speakers on this topic, go to our temporary website www.parksforla.blogspot.com.
From 11 AM to 12:15 PM, real world examples of how NC's can – and have – brought economic development to local communities will be presented. Experts will explain how to get financial incentives for local businesses and how to access job training and jobs for youth’s programs in your communities
Downtown Los Angeles, as one example, will detail exactly how it turned the worst drug dealing neighborhood in the city - Fifth and Main - into Gallery Row, a neighborhood now filled with ethnic restaurants, clothing boutiques and book stores as well as art galleries and then describe how four DLANC board members brought Fashion Week back to Los Angeles from Culver City in just six weeks. Other NC’s will describe how to create both cultural tourism and locally based events that have brought economic and cultural benefits to their neighborhoods.
For more information on this event and a complete list of guest speakers, go to our temporary website: www.lameansbusiness.blogspot.com.
Everyone talks about outreach, but nobody seems to know what to do about it. Well, from 1:30 PM to 2:45 PM here’s the place for the latest ideas in promoting what your NC is doing in your community.
Our main guest speaker is Rob Barrett who is head of all things web and interactive at the Los Angeles Times. He is also in charge of making the LA Time website the place to go for hyper-local coverage of the communities of Los Angeles.
And while he has a lot to say on how we can use the Times to promote the NC movement, just as importantly he – and the LA Times – want to hear from us about how we feel how latimes.com can do a better job covering our neighborhoods.
Among the other topics covered will how NC’s can get involved in placing computers in underserved parts of the community to allow everyone on-line access, now NC’s can help better connect our communities by providing access to literacy and English as second language classes and programs to better allow everyone in our city to participate in civic affairs and how anyone can create a website in five minutes or less.
For more information on this session go to our temporary website. www.LANCCOutreach.blogspot.com.
The Opening Session/Mayor's Welcome begins at 8:30am in the California Ballroom.
Mayor Villaraigosa, Carol Tharp, DONE GM & BongHwan Kim, AGM, Council members Eric Garcetti, Ricard Alacon, Janice Hahn and others will be speaking to participants at the Opening Session. The first workshop session - and there iwll be dozens of different workshops - starts at 9:30 AM. You aren't required to stay to the end, or get there early, you can drop in at the Westin Bonaventure Hotel any time and leave when you want.
Three of the many sessions will be held by the Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils Congress and you want to increase community outreach, develop jobs and businesses in your community or need more parks and green spaces in your community - the Los Angeles Neighborhood Congress will multiple experts to answer your questions as well as NC members to tell you their success stories.
You will each be given specific action items to take back to your communities Monday morning to get to work to solve these problems. .
From 9:30AM – 10:45 AM, a speaker from the Trust for Public Land will explain how neighborhood councils can develop political support for parks, use “greenprint” maps to make a case for additional park space in their communities and learn the basics of land acquisition and how to use that information to acquire more park land.
Also on the panel with be a representative from the LAUSD on how to working with the school district to use school facilities after hours, someone from Parks and Rec to discuss the parks assessment survey and several community based organizations that have successfully created parks and green spaces throughout Los Angeles including BONC commissioner, Tsilah Burman, Executive Director of the L.A. Neighborhood Land Trust.
For more information on this event and a complete list of guest speakers on this topic, go to our temporary website www.parksforla.blogspot.com.
From 11 AM to 12:15 PM, real world examples of how NC's can – and have – brought economic development to local communities will be presented. Experts will explain how to get financial incentives for local businesses and how to access job training and jobs for youth’s programs in your communities
Downtown Los Angeles, as one example, will detail exactly how it turned the worst drug dealing neighborhood in the city - Fifth and Main - into Gallery Row, a neighborhood now filled with ethnic restaurants, clothing boutiques and book stores as well as art galleries and then describe how four DLANC board members brought Fashion Week back to Los Angeles from Culver City in just six weeks. Other NC’s will describe how to create both cultural tourism and locally based events that have brought economic and cultural benefits to their neighborhoods.
For more information on this event and a complete list of guest speakers, go to our temporary website: www.lameansbusiness.blogspot.com.
Everyone talks about outreach, but nobody seems to know what to do about it. Well, from 1:30 PM to 2:45 PM here’s the place for the latest ideas in promoting what your NC is doing in your community.
Our main guest speaker is Rob Barrett who is head of all things web and interactive at the Los Angeles Times. He is also in charge of making the LA Time website the place to go for hyper-local coverage of the communities of Los Angeles.
And while he has a lot to say on how we can use the Times to promote the NC movement, just as importantly he – and the LA Times – want to hear from us about how we feel how latimes.com can do a better job covering our neighborhoods.
Among the other topics covered will how NC’s can get involved in placing computers in underserved parts of the community to allow everyone on-line access, now NC’s can help better connect our communities by providing access to literacy and English as second language classes and programs to better allow everyone in our city to participate in civic affairs and how anyone can create a website in five minutes or less.
For more information on this session go to our temporary website. www.LANCCOutreach.blogspot.com.
My Story In CITYWATCH On DWP Contracting Scandal!
Public Hosed Down at DWP Board Meet
By Brady Westwater
LA’s Board of Water and Power Commissioners surreptitiously maneuvered two expensive and controversial issues through the public meeting process under the radar on Wednesday and then argued that because the deal they approved was a good one, they it didn’t need any public airing. Had it not been for a Daily News article alerting the public – and the Neighborhood Council’s – the Board might have managed their slight of hand in total darkness.
Ignoring their own agenda, the commissioners refused to have general public comment at the beginning of the meeting. The two questionable motions (agenda items 10 & 11) were then called out of order and, with no discussion among themselves and with no explanation about what was being voted upon, the board approved both motions. As a final insult, the board also refused to allow public comment on either item, silencing the members of the public who had left work on short notice and driven down to the Harbor to testify before the commissioners voted on these motions.
Now I do not know what the DWP’s policies are, but I can think of no other LA City agency that refuses public comment of any kind before they vote on listed agenda items.
Even more Byzantine, though, was the secrecy surrounding agenda item 10.
The agenda description stated that it was an amendment to the agreement between the Department of Water and Power and its union and related to the construction of trunk lines. No mention was made of what the changes were. There was a clickable link on the DWP website to reach the document but it still did not say what was being changed.
The one major new piece of information was that under fiscal impacts. It was a N/A (non-applicable) item; which would mean there is no fiscal impact from this action, suggesting it was just a minor technical adjustment to the MOU with the union.
Again, wrong.
Withheld from the public prior to the meeting was a second document, hidden from sight, unless one knew it existed. And even then, one had to make a special request to see it before the meeting. Hard to do if its existence is kept hidden. Begging the question – if a motion passes based on notations indicating that there are no fiscal impacts – when in fact there are– is that motion still legal?
This brings us to the content of the motion 10.
The City of Los Angeles is in desperate need of updating its DWP infrastructure; major (i.e.Active Image trunk) water lines across the city are in urgent need of replacement. But for two years this work has been held up in a dispute within the DWP on who was going to do this – DWP crews – or private contractors?
This is particularly relevant to rate payers since, according to the Daily News article, DWP documents state that the union crews can take up to twice as long, cost twice as much money – and, at times, deliver poorer quality work-- than private contractors. To quote the Daily News: “In one example cited, a private contractor bid $6.2 million to install a 42-inch pipeline beneath Burbank Boulevard and White Oak Avenue, a project estimated to take 250 days. When the union objected, the project was turned over to DWP crews, who completed the work in 439 days at a cost of $13.8 million. “
And, “A staff report showed that DWP crews cost 161 percent to 221 percent more than if outside contractors had handled the job. They also noted that the DWP had assigned 31 employees to install the Parthenia trunk line while a contractor had just 13 working on the Hollywood-Stone Canyon trunk line.”
So what was yesterday’s motion? Well, it was to increase by one-third the number of DWP employees hired to build trunk lines at substantially higher costs and far longer time periods than if those trunk lines were built by private contractors. And the cost cited likely does not include all the internal support staff required by all the new employees or the decades of health and pension payments after these employees retire, making even those much higher costs estimates unrealistically low.
This brings up two questions. First, why should it take twice as many DWP workers twice as long to do a job as private workers – and then, allegedly, have the work at least sometimes be of lower quality? I can not believe there is that great a difference in work skills. Could union work rules be deliberately designed to make projects last twice as long as necessary? Is it due to feather-bedding, unseen since the days when Boss Tweed bled the taxpayers of New York dry? I don’t know and I can’t find anyone else who does.
The irony is that the union, by refusing to address these problems, is unfairly maligning the skills of DWP workers and is costing its members hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs they might have if they were competitive with private contractors.
Second, how could the DWP have allowed a politically powerful union – which donates substantial sums to the politicians who approve their contracts and pay raises (and that may have just answered that question) – to dictate how the DWP is run? And what can be done when a city department – and a city – is held hostage by a union?
These are the types of issues that need to be exposed to the light of day. That deserves to be publicly discussed and debated. But do not expect to see that kind of debate or discussion soon at the Board of Water and Power Commissioners.
So the next time the DWP comes to the Neighborhood Council’s with a request for rate increases, or the next time your neighborhood’s streets are torn up and the construction takes twice as long as normal or the next time you are stuck in bumper to bumper traffic due to construction delays throughout the city – be sure to send a thank you note to the mayor-appointed DWP Board of Commissioners for making it all possible. (Brady Westwater is a writer, community activist and Chair of the LA Neighborhood Councils Congress.)
By Brady Westwater
LA’s Board of Water and Power Commissioners surreptitiously maneuvered two expensive and controversial issues through the public meeting process under the radar on Wednesday and then argued that because the deal they approved was a good one, they it didn’t need any public airing. Had it not been for a Daily News article alerting the public – and the Neighborhood Council’s – the Board might have managed their slight of hand in total darkness.
Ignoring their own agenda, the commissioners refused to have general public comment at the beginning of the meeting. The two questionable motions (agenda items 10 & 11) were then called out of order and, with no discussion among themselves and with no explanation about what was being voted upon, the board approved both motions. As a final insult, the board also refused to allow public comment on either item, silencing the members of the public who had left work on short notice and driven down to the Harbor to testify before the commissioners voted on these motions.
Now I do not know what the DWP’s policies are, but I can think of no other LA City agency that refuses public comment of any kind before they vote on listed agenda items.
Even more Byzantine, though, was the secrecy surrounding agenda item 10.
The agenda description stated that it was an amendment to the agreement between the Department of Water and Power and its union and related to the construction of trunk lines. No mention was made of what the changes were. There was a clickable link on the DWP website to reach the document but it still did not say what was being changed.
The one major new piece of information was that under fiscal impacts. It was a N/A (non-applicable) item; which would mean there is no fiscal impact from this action, suggesting it was just a minor technical adjustment to the MOU with the union.
Again, wrong.
Withheld from the public prior to the meeting was a second document, hidden from sight, unless one knew it existed. And even then, one had to make a special request to see it before the meeting. Hard to do if its existence is kept hidden. Begging the question – if a motion passes based on notations indicating that there are no fiscal impacts – when in fact there are– is that motion still legal?
This brings us to the content of the motion 10.
The City of Los Angeles is in desperate need of updating its DWP infrastructure; major (i.e.Active Image trunk) water lines across the city are in urgent need of replacement. But for two years this work has been held up in a dispute within the DWP on who was going to do this – DWP crews – or private contractors?
This is particularly relevant to rate payers since, according to the Daily News article, DWP documents state that the union crews can take up to twice as long, cost twice as much money – and, at times, deliver poorer quality work-- than private contractors. To quote the Daily News: “In one example cited, a private contractor bid $6.2 million to install a 42-inch pipeline beneath Burbank Boulevard and White Oak Avenue, a project estimated to take 250 days. When the union objected, the project was turned over to DWP crews, who completed the work in 439 days at a cost of $13.8 million. “
And, “A staff report showed that DWP crews cost 161 percent to 221 percent more than if outside contractors had handled the job. They also noted that the DWP had assigned 31 employees to install the Parthenia trunk line while a contractor had just 13 working on the Hollywood-Stone Canyon trunk line.”
So what was yesterday’s motion? Well, it was to increase by one-third the number of DWP employees hired to build trunk lines at substantially higher costs and far longer time periods than if those trunk lines were built by private contractors. And the cost cited likely does not include all the internal support staff required by all the new employees or the decades of health and pension payments after these employees retire, making even those much higher costs estimates unrealistically low.
This brings up two questions. First, why should it take twice as many DWP workers twice as long to do a job as private workers – and then, allegedly, have the work at least sometimes be of lower quality? I can not believe there is that great a difference in work skills. Could union work rules be deliberately designed to make projects last twice as long as necessary? Is it due to feather-bedding, unseen since the days when Boss Tweed bled the taxpayers of New York dry? I don’t know and I can’t find anyone else who does.
The irony is that the union, by refusing to address these problems, is unfairly maligning the skills of DWP workers and is costing its members hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs they might have if they were competitive with private contractors.
Second, how could the DWP have allowed a politically powerful union – which donates substantial sums to the politicians who approve their contracts and pay raises (and that may have just answered that question) – to dictate how the DWP is run? And what can be done when a city department – and a city – is held hostage by a union?
These are the types of issues that need to be exposed to the light of day. That deserves to be publicly discussed and debated. But do not expect to see that kind of debate or discussion soon at the Board of Water and Power Commissioners.
So the next time the DWP comes to the Neighborhood Council’s with a request for rate increases, or the next time your neighborhood’s streets are torn up and the construction takes twice as long as normal or the next time you are stuck in bumper to bumper traffic due to construction delays throughout the city – be sure to send a thank you note to the mayor-appointed DWP Board of Commissioners for making it all possible. (Brady Westwater is a writer, community activist and Chair of the LA Neighborhood Councils Congress.)
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Daily News Editorial On DWP Scandal!
This is only the beginning of the examination of the contracting mess at the DWP. Lots more to come - and I have an article that will be published on CITYWATCH first thing Friday morning.
DWP blackmail
Public held hostage by utility's all-powerful union
Article Last Updated:04/18/2007 08:28:46 PM PDT
THE Department of Water and Power has a long-standing practice of misusing the public's money to benefit its employees, contractors and good friends - and then extracting more money from ratepayers to cover what was squandered.
There is only one word for this practice: blackmail.
That's exactly what happened this week.
A Daily News review of reconstructing the city's aging water pipes found that costs doubled when the department quit using outside contractors in favor of unionized in-house crews.
Not only did the DWP workers cost twice as much as private-company workers, but they took twice as long to do the same work.
Despite this revelation, the DWP Board of Commissioners voted Tuesday to expand the number of in-house crews. The deal was called a compromise, but really it was nothing but surrender to extortionists.
The DWP employee union wields so much political power that all but a few dozen of the utility's executives are forced to join the International Brotherhood of Electrical workers. The IBEW's clout is so great that DWP workers earn as much as 30 percent more for the same work as their well-paid counterparts in other city agencies.
Unlike previous DWP commissioners, this board is actually working hard to penetrate the wall of secrecy, dishonesty and incompetence and fix what's broken. But even good intentions weren't enough in this case.
It was obvious to the board that water-pipe reconstruction was a job that should be outsourced. Just one comparison makes that clear: A $6.2 million proposal to install a 42-inch pipeline beneath Burbank Boulevard and White Oak Avenue in 250 days by a private company was ignored in favor of DWP crews, at the urging of the union. The job took 439 days to complete and cost $13.8 million.
This was not a difficult choice to make, unless you factor in political power at City Hall.
The result was that instead of dismantling the two DWP crews doing this work, a third one will be added. If there's any work left undone, private firms will be hired. Don't count on it.
If you wonder how the DWP can afford this kind of wasteful spending, look in the mirror. The public pays.
Last fall, after approving salary increases potentially twice those other city employees are getting, the City Council endorsed a DWP proposal for a 5.5 percent water-rate increase over two years. Those come on top of other recent rate increases and more are sure to come in the years ahead.
This water torture of the people of L.A. is just one more example of how the city government operates primarily for itself, its employees and their special interests, and not for the people.
We wouldn't pay blackmail to criminals, and we shouldn't pay blackmail to people who are supposed to be our public servants.
DWP blackmail
Public held hostage by utility's all-powerful union
Article Last Updated:04/18/2007 08:28:46 PM PDT
THE Department of Water and Power has a long-standing practice of misusing the public's money to benefit its employees, contractors and good friends - and then extracting more money from ratepayers to cover what was squandered.
There is only one word for this practice: blackmail.
That's exactly what happened this week.
A Daily News review of reconstructing the city's aging water pipes found that costs doubled when the department quit using outside contractors in favor of unionized in-house crews.
Not only did the DWP workers cost twice as much as private-company workers, but they took twice as long to do the same work.
Despite this revelation, the DWP Board of Commissioners voted Tuesday to expand the number of in-house crews. The deal was called a compromise, but really it was nothing but surrender to extortionists.
The DWP employee union wields so much political power that all but a few dozen of the utility's executives are forced to join the International Brotherhood of Electrical workers. The IBEW's clout is so great that DWP workers earn as much as 30 percent more for the same work as their well-paid counterparts in other city agencies.
Unlike previous DWP commissioners, this board is actually working hard to penetrate the wall of secrecy, dishonesty and incompetence and fix what's broken. But even good intentions weren't enough in this case.
It was obvious to the board that water-pipe reconstruction was a job that should be outsourced. Just one comparison makes that clear: A $6.2 million proposal to install a 42-inch pipeline beneath Burbank Boulevard and White Oak Avenue in 250 days by a private company was ignored in favor of DWP crews, at the urging of the union. The job took 439 days to complete and cost $13.8 million.
This was not a difficult choice to make, unless you factor in political power at City Hall.
The result was that instead of dismantling the two DWP crews doing this work, a third one will be added. If there's any work left undone, private firms will be hired. Don't count on it.
If you wonder how the DWP can afford this kind of wasteful spending, look in the mirror. The public pays.
Last fall, after approving salary increases potentially twice those other city employees are getting, the City Council endorsed a DWP proposal for a 5.5 percent water-rate increase over two years. Those come on top of other recent rate increases and more are sure to come in the years ahead.
This water torture of the people of L.A. is just one more example of how the city government operates primarily for itself, its employees and their special interests, and not for the people.
We wouldn't pay blackmail to criminals, and we shouldn't pay blackmail to people who are supposed to be our public servants.
Daily News Article On DWP Caving Union's Threats!
WP adds to in-house work crews
Compromise with union means higher project costs
BY KERRY CAVANAUGH, Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 04/17/2007 09:12:29 PM PDT
Despite concerns that DWP crews nearly double the cost of major pipeline construction projects, the Los Angeles Board of Water and Power Commissioners on Tuesday unanimously approved a deal to expand the number of in-house crews.
The deal, approved without discussion, marked a compromise with the DWP union to allow the Department of Water and Power to contract out more pipeline work without union challenge.
The settlement ends a stalemate with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 18, which had sought to limit the use of outside construction contractors to build trunk lines, the massive pipes that carry water to smaller lines.
DWP managers wanted to use private contractors for the work after comparisons showed in-house crews roughly doubled both the cost and time of trunk line projects.
While DWP board members said the settlement was a fair compromise to get crucial water infrastructure upgrades moving, some community members were troubled that the utility will continue to use pricey DWP crews.
"If these differentials are this substantial, it is absolutely idiotic to contract in-house," said Jack Humpreville, who testified at the hearing. "Outside house, if properly monitored, makes much more financial sense to ratepayers and taxpayers of Los Angeles."
Under the settlement, DWP will add a third, 20-person crew to help build trunk lines. IBEW agreed to not challenge the hiring of outside contractors for 13 major water system construction projects.
DWP officials have estimated the upcoming trunk line projects will cost $737 million over the next decade, but could have cost as much as $1.3 billion if all were completed by in-house crews.
Neighborhood council activist Brady Westwater said the agreement was passed with little public notice, no community input and no disclosure of how much it will cost ratepayers.
"How can you say there is no fiscal impact when there is one?" Westwater said. "We don't know what they're doing. When they hide something like this, it's real hard to know what they're doing."
But DWP Board President David Nahai said the settlement was a compromise that will add staff but also allow the utility to save money with outside contractors.
"To add a third crew, which gives the department a certain amount of in-house capability, and to contract all of the rest of the work, should not be something that raises eyebrows," Nahai said. "We're trying to make sure we act in a way that's wise, fiscally."
But Councilman Greig Smith said city leaders know DWP employees are among the highest paid in the city at the same time they have refused to challenge IBEW over issues of pay and efficiency.
"Any time we do anything over there with their personnel, it is going to cost more. There are too many people over there and over here that are afraid to stand up to that union," he said.
Also Tuesday, the DWP board agreed to pay $2.1 million a year to the Joint Training Institute, a facility in Sun Valley run by the IBEW and co-managed by the DWP.
The institute was created by the union and DWP in 2002 to provide employee training and education. The DWP contributed $6 million through 2004, and the new agreement will provide continued funding.
kerry.cavanaugh@dailynews.com
Compromise with union means higher project costs
BY KERRY CAVANAUGH, Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 04/17/2007 09:12:29 PM PDT
Despite concerns that DWP crews nearly double the cost of major pipeline construction projects, the Los Angeles Board of Water and Power Commissioners on Tuesday unanimously approved a deal to expand the number of in-house crews.
The deal, approved without discussion, marked a compromise with the DWP union to allow the Department of Water and Power to contract out more pipeline work without union challenge.
The settlement ends a stalemate with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 18, which had sought to limit the use of outside construction contractors to build trunk lines, the massive pipes that carry water to smaller lines.
DWP managers wanted to use private contractors for the work after comparisons showed in-house crews roughly doubled both the cost and time of trunk line projects.
While DWP board members said the settlement was a fair compromise to get crucial water infrastructure upgrades moving, some community members were troubled that the utility will continue to use pricey DWP crews.
"If these differentials are this substantial, it is absolutely idiotic to contract in-house," said Jack Humpreville, who testified at the hearing. "Outside house, if properly monitored, makes much more financial sense to ratepayers and taxpayers of Los Angeles."
Under the settlement, DWP will add a third, 20-person crew to help build trunk lines. IBEW agreed to not challenge the hiring of outside contractors for 13 major water system construction projects.
DWP officials have estimated the upcoming trunk line projects will cost $737 million over the next decade, but could have cost as much as $1.3 billion if all were completed by in-house crews.
Neighborhood council activist Brady Westwater said the agreement was passed with little public notice, no community input and no disclosure of how much it will cost ratepayers.
"How can you say there is no fiscal impact when there is one?" Westwater said. "We don't know what they're doing. When they hide something like this, it's real hard to know what they're doing."
But DWP Board President David Nahai said the settlement was a compromise that will add staff but also allow the utility to save money with outside contractors.
"To add a third crew, which gives the department a certain amount of in-house capability, and to contract all of the rest of the work, should not be something that raises eyebrows," Nahai said. "We're trying to make sure we act in a way that's wise, fiscally."
But Councilman Greig Smith said city leaders know DWP employees are among the highest paid in the city at the same time they have refused to challenge IBEW over issues of pay and efficiency.
"Any time we do anything over there with their personnel, it is going to cost more. There are too many people over there and over here that are afraid to stand up to that union," he said.
Also Tuesday, the DWP board agreed to pay $2.1 million a year to the Joint Training Institute, a facility in Sun Valley run by the IBEW and co-managed by the DWP.
The institute was created by the union and DWP in 2002 to provide employee training and education. The DWP contributed $6 million through 2004, and the new agreement will provide continued funding.
kerry.cavanaugh@dailynews.com
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
In A LAT Article On Stupid Crooks - What Are The Odds Of There Being A Stupid Grammar Error?
About 100%, of course. (though first the verb was corrected, then the entire sentence rewritten since this post)
Wrong number gets suspects booked
By Richard Winton
Times Staff Writer
2:00 PM PDT, April 17, 2007
Two Pomona drug suspects were arrested this morning after mistakenly dialing 911 when they were actually trying to reach their drug dealer, police said.
"No one said criminals are smart," said Pomona Police Sgt. Michael Olivieri.
AND...
Gregory Daniels, 48, was arrested for burglary after he and an accomplice, who got away, drove into a dead-end street. Daniels' leg fell off as he began to run from the truck and he was found laying on the ground.
The proper verb is, of course, lying. But no one said editors at the LAT are smart.
Wrong number gets suspects booked
By Richard Winton
Times Staff Writer
2:00 PM PDT, April 17, 2007
Two Pomona drug suspects were arrested this morning after mistakenly dialing 911 when they were actually trying to reach their drug dealer, police said.
"No one said criminals are smart," said Pomona Police Sgt. Michael Olivieri.
AND...
Gregory Daniels, 48, was arrested for burglary after he and an accomplice, who got away, drove into a dead-end street. Daniels' leg fell off as he began to run from the truck and he was found laying on the ground.
The proper verb is, of course, lying. But no one said editors at the LAT are smart.
Update On DWP Giveaway Of Public Funds!
Clarification of DWP Board Meeting Today:
Due to the complete lack of notice to the neighborhood councils, the public or the press – it is almost impossible to find out what is really going on today, but this is the best I can tell at the moment.
Item number ten on the agenda describes a change in the MOU with the union – but it does not say what it is. And that document is still not publicly available on-line less than an hour before the meeting starts. But I am told that it calls for a third 20 man crew to do trunk line work that would otherwise be contracted out, for possibly one-half less the money.
Plus the document that is on-line rather than tell us what this is going to cost us – says the cost is – N/A.
Then item 11 is an additional 8.5 million dollar transfer of public funds to a fund privately administered by the union that has been very controversial due to a lack of openness on how that money has been spent.
Now these are the two items that are – supposedly - being extracted from the DWP – i.e., us – in order to allow the DWP to go ahead on its private contracted 13 projects at a half-billion less in cost than if they were being done in house.
But again – due to a total lack of transparency – I am only making informed guesses.
Due to the complete lack of notice to the neighborhood councils, the public or the press – it is almost impossible to find out what is really going on today, but this is the best I can tell at the moment.
Item number ten on the agenda describes a change in the MOU with the union – but it does not say what it is. And that document is still not publicly available on-line less than an hour before the meeting starts. But I am told that it calls for a third 20 man crew to do trunk line work that would otherwise be contracted out, for possibly one-half less the money.
Plus the document that is on-line rather than tell us what this is going to cost us – says the cost is – N/A.
Then item 11 is an additional 8.5 million dollar transfer of public funds to a fund privately administered by the union that has been very controversial due to a lack of openness on how that money has been spent.
Now these are the two items that are – supposedly - being extracted from the DWP – i.e., us – in order to allow the DWP to go ahead on its private contracted 13 projects at a half-billion less in cost than if they were being done in house.
But again – due to a total lack of transparency – I am only making informed guesses.
How The DWP Plans To HIDE Millions Of Dollar In Expenses From The Public!
I just talked with the reporter from the Daily News, Kerry Cavanaugh, who broke the story of the multi-million dollar give away of DWP rate payer funds and she informed me that none of the documents were made available to the public in the agenda for the 2 PM meeting today to approve the first of the new contracts. Normally, there are links on the agenda on the website - but not on this item, though don't be surprised if they 'suddenly' appear today on the website.
Lastly, this is all being voted on down in the Harbor far from the eyes and ears of the press and the public.
Coincidences?
Hardly.
UPDATE - Still no documents on-line!
Lastly, this is all being voted on down in the Harbor far from the eyes and ears of the press and the public.
Coincidences?
Hardly.
UPDATE - Still no documents on-line!
DWP TO Flush Down The Toilet Millions Of Dollars Of YOUR Money!
The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is about violated the MOU agreement with the by giving away millions dollars of rate payers funds without any notification to us. Luckily, the Daily News is covering this while the LA Times remains... silent.
DWP crews costly choice
But in-house teams a 'must'
BY KERRY CAVANAUGH, Staff Writer
LA Daily News
Article Last Updated:04/16/2007 10:44:56 PM PDT
The cost of upgrading Los Angeles' aging water system soared by tens of millions of dollars after some of the work was shifted from private contractors to DWP construction crews, the Daily News has learned.
A review by the Department of Water and Power found that using union crews to install trunk lines roughly doubled both the cost and the length of time it would have taken private workers to complete the project.
In one example cited, a private contractor bid $6.2 million to install a 42-inch pipeline beneath Burbank Boulevard and White Oak Avenue, a project estimated to take 250 days. When the union objected, the project was turned over to DWP crews, who completed the work in 439 days at a cost of $13.8 million.
"Experience indicates that contractors can complete trunk-line projects on a substantially shorter time period than in-house forces," Water System Chief Operating Officer James McDaniel wrote in a memo to General Manager Ronald Deaton.
"This is important both to completing these important water quality improvement/security related projects and minimizing disruption to communities."
Despite the cost overruns - and complaints from some employees about waste and inefficiency - the Board of Water and Power Commissioners is poised today to approve hiring a 20-member crew for a third trunk-line project.
It's actually part of a compromise with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 18 - the politically powerful union that represents most of the DWP employees and has challenged the utility's effort to hire private contractors for trunk-line work.
As part of the settlement, the DWP will hire a third, 20-person trunk-line crew, and the IBEW has agreed not to challenge private contracts for 13 upcoming trunk-line projects.
"The settlement agreement clears way for the department to enter into a number of contracts for essential trunk-line construction work," board President David Nahai said. "At the same time, we have to remember that we need to have in-house capability, as well.
"At the end of the day you can't just continue contracting out."
Can't win everything
The 13 future projects will cost ratepayers an estimated $737 million, officials said, but could have cost as much as $1.3 billion had DWP employees done the work.
"Am I totally happy? No! However, it's a great beginning to correct a totally unacceptable situation," said DWP Commissioner Nick Patsaouras.
"It's good for ratepayers. (We) cannot win everything off the bat. It takes time to correct ingrained problems in a bureaucracy."
Local 18 representatives did not return calls Monday.
But the union has previously challenged the DWP's cost comparisons, saying they grossly overstate the expense of work done by IBEW crews.
And IBEW leaders have also criticized the DWP board for hiring private contractors for maintenance and emergency work.
Older than 1940
The DWP maintains more than 280 miles of trunk lines and 7,200 main lines that transport water to 670,000 homes, apartments and businesses in Los Angeles. About half of the trunk lines - massive pipes that carry water to the smaller main lines - were built before 1940.
Last year, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council raised water rates 5.5 percent over a two-year period. The increased revenue is supposed to cover costs for some of the infrastructure improvements.
But the utility hasn't initiated any trunk-line projects since 2004 because of the stalemate with the IBEW over who would do the work.
"The board is in the process of reviewing the issue," said Parita Shah, a spokeswoman for the mayor. "And while we do not want to prejudice its decision, we have requested the board and department ensure that the department has adequate internal capacity to provide reliable water service to Angelenos."
The DWP used to hire private contractors for major pipeline projects, but its construction budget was slashed in 1999 as the agency prepared for energy deregulation. The union then asked that its DWP members be allowed to install water pipelines instead.
The department instructed two teams, called Integrated Support Services crews, to install the Roscoe Boulevard trunk line and a recycled-water pipeline in the Harbor area.
But the price tag was two to three times higher than it would have been for an outside contractor to do the work, and inspectors said the quality wasn't as good.
In early 2000, utility employees raised concerns about the high cost of using Integrated Support Services crews.
An internal e-mail sent in March 2000 said private contractors are specialists in pipeline construction and have a financial incentive to finish faster so they can move to the next contract.
"A contractor is much more motivated and skilled in keeping costs down (than is) a group of civil servants," the memo said.
Union can challenge
In 2002, an audit by the Barrington-Wellesley Group found that the DWP was paying more for trunk-line construction using its own crews and recommended forming a committee of water-division managers and the IBEW to compare costs.
A staff report showed that DWP crews cost 161 percent to 221 percent more than if outside contractors had handled the job. They also noted that the DWP had assigned 31 employees to install the Parthenia trunk line while a contractor had just 13 working on the Hollywood-Stone Canyon trunk line.
Since 2003, the IBEW has pushed for a third trunk-line crew to handle the work. Under its contract, the IBEW can challenge contracts of any outside work that could be done by DWP employees.
In 2004, DWP managers and the union discussed a compromise that would permit outside contracts for trunk-line projects with some perks for the union - such as granting "substantial" overtime, records show.
Still, there was no agreement. Efforts to move forward on new trunk-line projects stalled, and staffers warned that delays were threatening the city's ability to meet water-quality deadlines.
The city must remove or cover all open reservoirs, and part of that work will include major construction projects such as building tanks and large pipelines.
That's why DWP board members are eager to settle the labor stalemate.
"This provides an opportunity to move ahead aggressively without objections to essential contracts," Nahai said.
Nahai said the decision was a reasonable response to valid union concerns about the need for more in-house staffers.
"We see it at every turn with power outages, with the problems last summer (with the heat wave), that you have to have in-house capabilities with emergency and maintenance issues," Nahai said.
kerry.cavanaugh@dailynews.com
(213) 978-0390
Projected trunk line costs
Project, Private contractor, DWP
Burbank/White Oak, $6.2 million, $13.8 million
Magnolia, $19.5 million, $34.3 million
Parthenia, $37.6 million, $67.1 million
DWP crews costly choice
But in-house teams a 'must'
BY KERRY CAVANAUGH, Staff Writer
LA Daily News
Article Last Updated:04/16/2007 10:44:56 PM PDT
The cost of upgrading Los Angeles' aging water system soared by tens of millions of dollars after some of the work was shifted from private contractors to DWP construction crews, the Daily News has learned.
A review by the Department of Water and Power found that using union crews to install trunk lines roughly doubled both the cost and the length of time it would have taken private workers to complete the project.
In one example cited, a private contractor bid $6.2 million to install a 42-inch pipeline beneath Burbank Boulevard and White Oak Avenue, a project estimated to take 250 days. When the union objected, the project was turned over to DWP crews, who completed the work in 439 days at a cost of $13.8 million.
"Experience indicates that contractors can complete trunk-line projects on a substantially shorter time period than in-house forces," Water System Chief Operating Officer James McDaniel wrote in a memo to General Manager Ronald Deaton.
"This is important both to completing these important water quality improvement/security related projects and minimizing disruption to communities."
Despite the cost overruns - and complaints from some employees about waste and inefficiency - the Board of Water and Power Commissioners is poised today to approve hiring a 20-member crew for a third trunk-line project.
It's actually part of a compromise with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 18 - the politically powerful union that represents most of the DWP employees and has challenged the utility's effort to hire private contractors for trunk-line work.
As part of the settlement, the DWP will hire a third, 20-person trunk-line crew, and the IBEW has agreed not to challenge private contracts for 13 upcoming trunk-line projects.
"The settlement agreement clears way for the department to enter into a number of contracts for essential trunk-line construction work," board President David Nahai said. "At the same time, we have to remember that we need to have in-house capability, as well.
"At the end of the day you can't just continue contracting out."
Can't win everything
The 13 future projects will cost ratepayers an estimated $737 million, officials said, but could have cost as much as $1.3 billion had DWP employees done the work.
"Am I totally happy? No! However, it's a great beginning to correct a totally unacceptable situation," said DWP Commissioner Nick Patsaouras.
"It's good for ratepayers. (We) cannot win everything off the bat. It takes time to correct ingrained problems in a bureaucracy."
Local 18 representatives did not return calls Monday.
But the union has previously challenged the DWP's cost comparisons, saying they grossly overstate the expense of work done by IBEW crews.
And IBEW leaders have also criticized the DWP board for hiring private contractors for maintenance and emergency work.
Older than 1940
The DWP maintains more than 280 miles of trunk lines and 7,200 main lines that transport water to 670,000 homes, apartments and businesses in Los Angeles. About half of the trunk lines - massive pipes that carry water to the smaller main lines - were built before 1940.
Last year, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council raised water rates 5.5 percent over a two-year period. The increased revenue is supposed to cover costs for some of the infrastructure improvements.
But the utility hasn't initiated any trunk-line projects since 2004 because of the stalemate with the IBEW over who would do the work.
"The board is in the process of reviewing the issue," said Parita Shah, a spokeswoman for the mayor. "And while we do not want to prejudice its decision, we have requested the board and department ensure that the department has adequate internal capacity to provide reliable water service to Angelenos."
The DWP used to hire private contractors for major pipeline projects, but its construction budget was slashed in 1999 as the agency prepared for energy deregulation. The union then asked that its DWP members be allowed to install water pipelines instead.
The department instructed two teams, called Integrated Support Services crews, to install the Roscoe Boulevard trunk line and a recycled-water pipeline in the Harbor area.
But the price tag was two to three times higher than it would have been for an outside contractor to do the work, and inspectors said the quality wasn't as good.
In early 2000, utility employees raised concerns about the high cost of using Integrated Support Services crews.
An internal e-mail sent in March 2000 said private contractors are specialists in pipeline construction and have a financial incentive to finish faster so they can move to the next contract.
"A contractor is much more motivated and skilled in keeping costs down (than is) a group of civil servants," the memo said.
Union can challenge
In 2002, an audit by the Barrington-Wellesley Group found that the DWP was paying more for trunk-line construction using its own crews and recommended forming a committee of water-division managers and the IBEW to compare costs.
A staff report showed that DWP crews cost 161 percent to 221 percent more than if outside contractors had handled the job. They also noted that the DWP had assigned 31 employees to install the Parthenia trunk line while a contractor had just 13 working on the Hollywood-Stone Canyon trunk line.
Since 2003, the IBEW has pushed for a third trunk-line crew to handle the work. Under its contract, the IBEW can challenge contracts of any outside work that could be done by DWP employees.
In 2004, DWP managers and the union discussed a compromise that would permit outside contracts for trunk-line projects with some perks for the union - such as granting "substantial" overtime, records show.
Still, there was no agreement. Efforts to move forward on new trunk-line projects stalled, and staffers warned that delays were threatening the city's ability to meet water-quality deadlines.
The city must remove or cover all open reservoirs, and part of that work will include major construction projects such as building tanks and large pipelines.
That's why DWP board members are eager to settle the labor stalemate.
"This provides an opportunity to move ahead aggressively without objections to essential contracts," Nahai said.
Nahai said the decision was a reasonable response to valid union concerns about the need for more in-house staffers.
"We see it at every turn with power outages, with the problems last summer (with the heat wave), that you have to have in-house capabilities with emergency and maintenance issues," Nahai said.
kerry.cavanaugh@dailynews.com
(213) 978-0390
Projected trunk line costs
Project, Private contractor, DWP
Burbank/White Oak, $6.2 million, $13.8 million
Magnolia, $19.5 million, $34.3 million
Parthenia, $37.6 million, $67.1 million
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
