City of Angles

Main Breaks: The Fault of Mother Nature?

2009-11-19T23:01:41Z

The Department of Water and Power issues a report on why L.A. saw so many water main breaks in the past few months. It's inconclusive, but a combination of corroded old iron and unusually high reservoir levels and pressure are likely to blame.

]]> The L.A. Times's account stresses the nature part of the story:

Corroded pipe also is more susceptible to breaking when subjected to minor increases in pressure. A cluster of leaks in July and August, for example, coincided with an increase in reservoir elevation -- and a corresponding increase in static pressure of about 4 pounds per square inch -- at the Lower Franklin Reservoir.

The report said the pressure was still "within the normal operating range," but that it could have been enough to stress already aging pipes.

The report did seem to debunk a theory, discussed earlier here at City of Angles, that the city's use restrictions on sprinklers might have created days where too much water was being used at once.

The Daily News's reporting on the same study doesn't talk about the reservoir angle, but does discuss citizen anger at the DWP's pipe replacement strategies:

the DWP had focused primarily replacing pipes only when they ruptured. "However, that replacement rate corresponded to a replacement cycle for water mains of well over 400 years," the report said. "This means it would take over 400 years to replace all the pipes in the DWP water system."

The new program will replace 200,000 feet of pipes each year between now and 2012 - reducing the replacement cycle to 180 years.....

The report noted that the utility has added staff, but needs to do more - a factor which might cost ratepayers more money to repair all the pipes that are needed. The report drew criticism from Jack Humphreville, who serves on the Neighborhood Council Oversight Committee of the utility. "The problem that we and all the public have is the lack of credibility of the DWP," Humphreville said. "A report like this just shows, again, why we need a ratepayer advocate at the DWP."

In other water news this week, the L.A. Times has an interesting summation of the state's new comprehensive water use and regulation plan, in which:

more than $1 billion of the money is earmarked for projects that have little or nothing to do with quenching the state's thirst.

The bond proposal includes funding for bike paths, museums, visitor centers, tree planting, economic development and the purchase of property from land speculators and oil companies -- all in the districts of lawmakers whose key votes helped it pass the Legislature.

Earlier City of Angles blogging on the new state water plan.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user Chim Chim. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

D.A. on Pot: No Way

2009-11-17T15:31:05Z

The City Council gets closer to a new medical marijuana ordinance, rejecting key elements of the suggestions from the City Attorney's office. D.A. Cooley says that he doesn't care if the City Council wants to make over the counter sales legal for medical pot dispensaries--he'll ignore them.

]]> L.A. Weekly reported on the hearings of the joint council committee yesterday, and on the lawsuit threats that arose:

Americans For Safe Access on Monday stated the courts in California have supported the sale of pot to patients with doctors' approvals and that if the council moves forward with is sales ban it will take City Hall to court.

"The City Attorney has consistently argued that medical marijuana sales are illegal," said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford. "Neither the Los Angeles City Attorney nor the City Council has the right to ban activity that is protected under state law. Medical marijuana sales have been deemed legal by the state legislature, the courts, and the California Attorney General."

The city attorney's office has argued that state law only allows for nonprofit collectives with members and a limited amount (five pounds) of the drug on-hand.

A joint meeting of two council committees today, however, watered down Trutanich's language with the caveat that any city regulation allow pot sales. The committees also supported regulation that would not force dispensaries to turn over the names of patients to authorities. (The names "shall be made available by the collective to the Police Department upon request," according to the older language).

The meeting was impassioned, with Council members Dennis Zine and Jose Huizar especially clearly ready to get an ordinance passed--but not one as strict as the city attorney's office's proposal. Over a hundred pro-medical pot citizens filled City Hall meeting room 340 and clapped for statements they liked, and booed one's they didn't; in the public statement period people against the severe ordinance outnumbered those for at least 10 to 1.

D.A. Cooley's rather heated and uncollegial reaction to the Council's amended the City Attorney's recommendations to openly permit sales, via the L.A. Times:

"Undermining those laws via their ordinance powers is counterproductive, and, quite frankly, we're ignoring them. They are absolutely so irrelevant it's not funny," Cooley said. Cooley said state law and state court decisions have made it clear that collectives cannot sell marijuana at dispensaries.

He reiterated his view that most, if not all, dispensaries in the county were in violation of the law. "We don't know of one that's not engaging in just over-the-counter sales," he said. The district attorney said his office was already prosecuting some dispensaries, and he promised to step up efforts next month. Cooley said he decided to weigh in today because he was irritated that the council had ignored the advice of the city attorney, Carmen Trutanich.

"What the City Council is doing is beyond meaningless and irrelevant," he said.

Past City of Angles blogging on the medical pot conundrum here and here.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user epape. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

Chief Beck Makes His Political Debut

2009-11-13T22:59:02Z

L.A. police chiefs don't need to win over the public before they get the job, but new LAPD head Charlie Beck is trying to do so in the face of accusations his appointment was too much of a mayoral power play, under departing Chief Bratton's influence.

]]> The L.A. Weekly reports on the discontent:

In this sometimes-bizarre city, prospective chiefs don't meet and greet the public before they get the job. The campaigning happens after the mayor has made a selection from a short list created by the Police Commission. Beck's an insider, sure, but one whose own evolution took him from company man to reformer -- and he isn't a problematic choice for most.

Rather, for some City Hall critics, a problem lies with a backroom process that was so rapid and, perhaps, so prejudiced toward the man backed by Bratton that few outsiders applied for what is the brass ring of the police world....

While tiny Beverly Hills conducted a three-month, nationwide search just for a new city manager, the nation's most prestigious policing job was all but filled after about a month. Community meetings to gather input for the mayor-appointed Police Commission, which chose three finalists, were not half as well-publicized as Beck and Villaraigosa's after-the-fact town hall meetings....

While two anonymous outsiders were on a list of semifinalists, such big-gun names as San Francisco Police Chief George Gascon and Miami Police Chief John Timoney did not turn up as finalists. The process was seen by some as a mayoral ramrod down the public's throat of Bratton's favorite soldier.

Ron Kaye at his website of local news, politics, and commentary has more on discontent over the Beck selection process:

There was no nationwide search by a headhunting firm as has been the practice (and is being done to find someone to run the DWP) and it only took a month or so to pick the next chief based on a couple of interviews each with the mayor.

Bratton indicated for months that Beck was his favorite and made it perfectly clear in the end that the Chief of Detectives was his first and only choice for a successor.

His top cronies from the Police Executive Research Forum, Chuck Wexler and Miami Chief John Timoney, formerly chief in Philadelphia, also apparently weighed in with their own advice to help Beck move up the list where he ranked well below a host of other candidates based on overall command experience.

Timoney slipped into LA late in the process and met with commissioners with the story being put out that he was applying for the job. Yet, he didn't make the cut despite credentials far more impressive than any of the LAPD candidates, raising suspicions he wasn't there as a candidate but as an adviser.

Past City of Angles blogging on Bratton's leaving and Beck's arrival as LAPD chief.

(Photo: Getty Images)

City Attorney vs City Controller

2009-11-11T15:22:35Z

The city controller's office--currently filled by Wendy Greuel--may be deprived of the legal power to audit other elected officials programs if a current court decision is finalized.

]]> It's a convoluted story, summed up in this Daily News account:

A judge on Tuesday again postponed finalization of a ruling that could set a precedent for elected officials to avoid having their programs audited by the city controller. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mark Mooney decided to hold another hearing on Nov. 20, though Chief Deputy City Attorney William Carter argued a delay would be pointless since a settlement seems out of reach.....

In his preliminary judgment dated June 23, Mooney sided with then-City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's argument that then-City Controller Laura Chick had no authority to audit the workers' compensation program in his office.

Mooney has repeatedly postponed finalizing that ruling, however, to give their successors, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich and City Controller Wendy Greuel, time to reach a settlement.

To date, they have been unsuccessful. The sticking point is who should pay lawyers' fees amassed by Chick and Greuel, estimated at $200,000.

Speaking of lawyers' fees amassed by the city, see this other Daily News story for more grim news for our city in budget crisis:

The city of Los Angeles shelled out $137 million over the past two years for legal costs - nearly two times more than the previous two-year period and enough to hire nearly 1,300 police officers and cover most of the public works budget, according to a report released Monday.

The study by California Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse also found the amount of money Los Angeles County spent on lawsuit verdicts, settlements and outside counsel rose from $138 million to $190 million in the same period.

California Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse website.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user David Markland. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

New Transport Plan: Too Westside?

2009-11-09T16:55:58Z

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's new 30-year "Long Term Transportation Plan" has a lot for the Westside, but other constituencies aren't thrilled.

]]> The L.A. Weekly reports on the plan, and the controversy:

when the MTA several days ago approved its eye-popping $298 billion, 30-year Long Range Transportation Plan, with Measure R's $40 billion sales-tax injection as its engine, it was an unpleasant surprise for many. Critics say the day-to-day needs in densely packed Los Angeles County were swept under the bus in favor of vanity projects that include not one, but two trains to Santa Monica....

To some, it reflects Villaraigosa's ego and desire for a monument -- the "subway to the sea" -- to himself.....

The majority of L.A. County's transit users take bus lines, which are far cheaper to expand and -- unlike totally inflexible rail lines -- are extremely easy to reroute when populations and jobs shift. Existing rail in L.A. is already being heavily subsidized, and despite all the hype, existing lines are underutilized.....

The plan remains just that--a plan--and not a done deal, and politicians outside the MTA and Villaraigosa circles are doubtful it's the right move:

The plan is essentially a vision statement by the current politicians on the MTA board; it's also an official hope that the unknown politicians who control the MTA board five and 10 years from now will raise $298 billion by 2040, and will spend that money to fund the current board's vision....

....the Long Range Plan's emphasis on a Westside subway that does not actually go near the sea and a Westside light rail that may not ever reach Santa Monica was so pronounced that members of Congress, Sacramento legislators, and the Bus Riders Union pressured the MTA's board to agree to protect non-Westside projects.

A rare bipartisan delegation of Southern California congressional representatives urged "a more inclusive, regional and long-term strategy" than the Villaraigosa-favored blueprint. Several state senate and assembly members argued in a separate letter that with the new sales-tax bite affecting all county taxpayers for the next 30 years, not just Westsiders and L.A. urbanites, the plan "must be geographically representative of the entire region."

Streetsblog on Villaraigosa's late October announcement that he wants to speed up Measure R transportation spending from a 30-year plan to a 10-year one.

Ted Balaker of the Reason Foundation (which owns Reason magazine, where I work) on how L.A. would be better off spending transportation money on freeways than on light rail.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user Daniel Greene. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

New Water Policy for California

2009-11-06T21:17:53Z

After much tense and longwinded day and night negotiations, the state legislature comes out with a new water policy for the coming decades, including over $10 billion in new bonds and new restrictions on water use and new political councils to help manage the state's water.

]]> Political victory required the paying of political costs, as detailed in the Los Angeles Times' account:

The size of the bond worries some liberal Democrats, conservative Republicans and public employee unions. It ballooned as legislative leaders sweetened the financing with something for every part of the state and every major water interest.

"There's no arguing in many ways it's a political document," conceded Sen. Dave Cogdill (R-Modesto), who drafted the bond measure. "It creates constituents of support as we go to the polls. That's not anything new."

The bond issues would be staggered, and backers said debt payments will not kick in until some existing bonds are retired. But when fully issued, the debt service will amount to more than $600 million a year, potentially taking money from education and other programs supported by the general fund.

The bond will have to be approved by voters in November 2010. Capitol Weekly has more details on how the money is being spread around the state to ensure political support:

The bond contains more than $1.7 billion in water quality and watershed protection funding - all of which is earmarked for specific agencies and groups. The bond includes $100 million for the Lake Tahoe Conservancy, $100 million for Salton Sea preservation and $250 million for a dam removal project near Lake Shasta.

The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy is in line to receive $75 million to "protect the Los Angeles River watershed," and another $25 million for Santa Monica Bay watershed projects. In Speaker Karen Bass's backyard, the Baldwin Hills Conservancy is set to receive $20 million if the bond is approved. There's also $125 million earmarked for the California Department of Forestry for forest restoration and "to provide for climate change adaptation."

George Skelton in the Times details the basic shape of what the bill will try to do:

Basically, the legislative package creates a new, streamlined governing structure for the delta. It provides a pathway leading to probable construction of a newly designed peripheral canal, plus a dam or two. It enables ecological restoration of the delta, mandatory statewide water conservation, monitoring of groundwater and a crackdown on illegal diversions of water.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user calwest. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

It's Charlie Beck for L.A. Police Chief

2009-11-04T17:57:40Z

Deputy Chief Charlie Beck moves into the top spot at LAPD, unsurprisingly--but the decision to name him wasn't as simple as some expected.

]]> The L.A. Times details the forces for Beck, and his virtues. Departing Chief Bill Bratton wanted him, City Council head Eric Garcetti approves, and he has a decent history of accomplishment:

He first made a mark as an up-and-coming commander by rehabilitating the LAPD's Rampart Division, which had been at the center of a corruption scandal, and later earned praise as head of the department's forces in South L.A. During that time, Beck has managed to win kudos from both cops and onetime critics of the LAPD for blending a tough stance on crime with a progressive approach to bettering the LAPD's relationship with city residents.

In a different story, the Times reports that the L.A. Police Commission ranked Beck last of their three finalists for chief, and that Bratton's support for him hurt Beck, not helped. Villaraigosa was said to be torn between the three finalists--Beck, Assistant Chief Jim McDonnell and Deputy Chief Michel Moore--and didn't finalize his choice until Sunday.

Local media gadfly Ron Kaye sees the selection process as a sign of Villaraigosa's feckless reliance on Bratton's crime record as one of his few mayoral laurels:

With his public standing so low he can't run for governor, was the mayor really going to take the risk of choosing his own chief instead of Bratton's?....

Moore, the Valley chief, is smart, studied hard in Bratton's school of police and hard-working to the point his subordinates call him Micro-Mike. He was the star of the auditions and his performance appear to have forced the mayor into the uncomfortable position of thinking about his choice rather than just doing what Bratton told him.

McDonnell, the LAPD's No. 2 cop, has the most experience, actually was running the department during Bratton's many absences and was far and away the most popular choice with the public and police. But it was always Beck's job because he was Bratton's choice.

City of Angles on Bratton's awkward farewell to LAPD.

(Photo: Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images)

Newsom Drops Out of Governor's Race

2009-11-02T17:27:13Z

No one officially wants to be the Democratic governor for California next year--leaving "exploratory" former Governor and current attorney general Jerry Brown heir apparent to his old throne.

]]> What caused San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to run away from the race to lead our troubled state? Calbuzz has the skinny on Newsom's lack of fire for the fundraising part of politics:

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's publicly-stated reason for dropping out of the Democratic race for governor was the absolute truth: "With a young family and responsibilities at City Hall, I have found it impossible to commit the time required to complete this effort the way it needs to -- and should be -- done."

....Despite his charisma, policy depth and breezy communication skills, Newsom found himself behind Attorney General Jerry Brown by 8-to-1 in campaign cash and 20 points in the polls because of three key problems: his utter lack of discipline, his inability to manage his City Hall staff and his faulty judgment about the practical operations of a statewide campaign.

Last week, with about $375,000 in the bank, Newsom finally realized he would have to put City Hall on maintenance mode and commit to at least 20-40 hours a week on the phone, schmoozing donors and political shakers, raising money the old-fashioned way - a task he simply could not make himself do....

He would find one excuse after another to blow off scheduled time for fund-raising, even when his campaign staff arranged for an office across the street from City Hall. He could not be made to make the phone calls -- even in the car during drive time -- for a senator's birthday or a labor leader's new baby....

Newsom believed he could fundraise using such new media tools as Facebook, which proved not to be the case. His campaign staff and mayoral staff were also constantly at loggerheads on how to sell the candidate-that-won't-be.

Meanwhile, in the camp of the Last Democrat Standing, not-yet-officially-running Jerry Brown's spokesman at the AG office resigns for illegally taping phone calls from reporters.

So does this mean our mayor Villaraigosa should renege on his commitment to not run for governor?, the L.A. Times asks.

City of Angles has been following the gubernatorial race on both sides of the aisle here and here.

The image associated with this entry was taken by Flickr user jdlasica. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

Citizen Activists Win With Council

2009-10-29T22:13:55Z

A proposed fee hike to $500 for citizens challenging development decisions before the City Council seems to have been derailed for now.

]]> Details from the L.A. Weekly:

Peeved at the less-than-transparent ways of downtown politicians...environmental justice groups, homeowner associations and neighborhood councils joined forces to stop the passage of a steep new fee hike charged to those who want to oppose developments in their area.....

"Everyone said we did not receive notice" that existing fees paid by citizens who challenge development plans were about to be doubled, or in some cases sextupled, from $74 to as much as $500, says Daniel Wright, a land-use and environmental attorney and board member of the Mount Washington Homeowners Alliance....

Wright and other community activists such as Hollywood Highlands Democratic Club Vice-President Bob Blue, were alarmed that the City Council was thinking about jacking up "planning appeal" fees for ordinary citizens -- while decreasing and capping those same fees for real-estate developers.....

Why are citizen activists so concerned with this potential hike?

Planning appeals are used by people to voice concerns about everything from strip malls to skyscrapers, in the hope that Planning Department officials will then require the developers to make the proposals more neighborhood-friendly....

But to get to that point, Angelenos still have to go through a costly and time-consuming process that involves paying the appeal fees, taking time off work to attend appeal hearings -- almost always held during the day -- and constantly talking with Planning Department officials, City Council members and their aides.

"The system already seems to favor developers," says Blue....At press time [last week], Wright expected council members to vote to lower and then cap the appeal fees paid by developers but retain the $74 charge for average citizens who want to challenge a project.

Ron Kaye also came out against the proposed fee hike, and against Council member Greig Smith (District 12) and his support for it.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user Alexbcthompson. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

Can Our Legislature Improve Itself?

2009-10-27T19:14:25Z

California's Committee on Improving State Government has its first meeting, as the state legislature struggles to show an angry state populace that it can reform itself.

]]> George Skelton of the L.A. Times' Capital Journal reports that most legislators, unsurprisingly, blame their ineffectiveness and voter discontent on the fact that they can't keep their cushy jobs longer:

Term limits was the most commonly cited culprit at the hearing, from the political left to the right. Six two-year terms in the Assembly and two four-year stints in the Senate simply aren't enough to gain policy expertise, legislating skills, leadership strength and bipartisan relationships, several said.

"Term limits is just an awful thing," asserted Assemblyman Tom Berryhill (R-Modesto), speaking publicly as few Republicans would have dared until recent years. "When you're first up here, you're just terrified. If you don't have a good staff, your career is over before it starts."

But California voters, alas for the politicians, have shown they love and support term limits and reject amending it when given the chance. And there are things even term-limited politicians should have time to do:

Self-enacting reforms are not hard to find and several were mentioned: Speed up the committee hearing process so lawmakers don't just cool their heels through winter. Give committees more power over major bills and reduce the dominance of the power-hogging "Big Five" -- the governor and top four legislative leaders. Enact two-year budgets and constantly monitor the money flow. Begin "performance-based" budgeting so failed programs can be scrapped.

Most of all, as state treasurer Bill Lockyer told the committee, our state legislature needs to remember that they are not going to be getting more tax money out of Californians anytime soon, and need to be smarter with what they have.

Past City of Angles blogging on Sacramento's problems with governing and the economy and a potentially "failed state."

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user Miss Sophistifunk. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

L.A. Medical Marijuana Scene in Tumult

2009-10-22T15:57:36Z

The medical marijuana scene in Los Angeles gets more uncertain, with judges knocking down the existing moratorium, the city attorney threatening a severe crackdown, and the city council ready to act on a new wave of restrictions.

]]> First on the court action, from the L.A. Times account:

A Superior Court judge concluded today that Los Angeles' moratorium on new medical marijuana dispensaries is invalid and granted a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the ban sought by a dispensary that had sued the city.

Judge James C. Chalfant determined that the city failed to follow state law when it extended its initial moratorium. "The city cannot rely on an expired ordinance," he said.

Green Oasis and a number of other medical marijuana collectives sued the city last month, challenging its efforts to control the dispensaries. The lawsuit argued that the City Council violated state law when it extended the ban until mid-March and that it is unconstitutionally vague.

Although the injunction applies only to Green Oasis, the judge's ruling calls into question the city's power to enforce the moratorium against hundreds of dispensaries that have opened in the last two years. The ruling could inspire other dispensaries to join the lawsuit or file similar actions.

Of course, many city politicians are annoyed that the moratorium in issue in that court decision hasn't really worked to stop new medical dispensaries from going into business in L.A. And that's why City Attorney Trutanich has proposed a new set of medical pot regulations for L.A., as noted in this Daily News story:

A day after a judge invalidated the city's ban on new medical marijuana collectives, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich released a new ordinance that would better spell out how the facilities can operate and create safety standards for their product. Trutanich also vowed to continue a crackdown on illegal operators of dispensaries.

"If you are illegally selling marijuana or supplying it in the city of Los Angeles, you should get out of business," Trutanich warned. "I don't need a new ordinance to go after you."

Trutanich said the [Superior Court] decision will not affect enforcement of existing city laws dealing with the clinics, but City Council members said they felt a need to get a new ordinance on the books quickly. The moratorium overturned by the judge had been intended as a temporary measure while city officials spent two years debating and drafting a permanent ordinance.

The new draft ordinance, the fourth considered by the City Council since 2008, is the toughest version brought before the body and seeks to strictly control the dispensaries.Under the measure, the shops will be open only from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m., will be allowed to have only five pounds of marijuana on hand and no more than 100 plants. Also, all the marijuana provided must have been grown by the collective.

LAist reproduces Trutanich's proposed ordinance, and his attempts to get neighborhood councils behind him on the crackdown effort.

The L.A. Times highlights the severity of the ordinance, which the City Council might act on any day now:

Under the latest proposal, most dispensaries would be required to close immediately and could not apply to reopen for six months. The 186 dispensaries that registered with the city when it passed its moratorium in 2007 would be allowed to remain open for six months, but then would have to meet the ordinance's requirements.

The ordinance could effectively outlaw most dispensaries in the city by prohibiting sales of medical marijuana. Both City Atty. Carmen Trutanich and Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley maintain that state law does not allow over-the-counter sales, though they say collectives owned by the members are allowed to recoup their expenses. Dispensary operators say the sales, usually in 1/8 -ounce increments, are meant to cover their operating costs.

The L.A. Weekly reports on who is taking which side in the local debate over pot dispensaries.

An L.A. Times chart of operating medical pot dispensaries in the L.A. area. And an L.A. Times report on a poll showing that most voters don't want to see the dispensaries prosecuted or forced to close.

On the national front, the Obama administration has sworn it won't target federal enforcement efforts on medical users--but that might not mean a thing when it comes to what the federal DEA has always been doing, which is targeting dispensaries of the stuff. See my Reason magazine colleague Jacob Sullum for a skeptical take on the administration announcement.

Past City of Angles blogging on the city and medical pot here and here.

(Photo by David McNew/Getty Images)

Angry About Supergraphics

2009-10-19T23:01:12Z

City Attorney Trutanich actually threatens City Councilwoman Jan Perry with possible jail time on a dispute over a big billboard on the Regal Cinemas in the downtown L.A. Live complex.

]]> Details from the L.A. Times:

Los Angeles City Atty. Carmen Trutanich allegedly threatened to prosecute city building officials last week if they issued permits for six wall signs at the L.A. Live entertainment complex downtown....

AEG, which owns L.A. Live and is seeking to place large signs on the outside walls of its new movie theater, called Trutanich's actions "bullying and political thuggery."...

"I'm going to enforce the law. There's a ban," Trutanich said. "I told them what the consequences were. Nobody got threatened. Absolutely not."

Trutanich confirmed, however, that in a meeting last week he vowed to file misdemeanor charges against Raymond Chan, interim general manager of the Department of Building and Safety, if he approved permits for signs on AEG's Regal Cinemas....

Trutanich declined to discuss allegations that he threatened Councilwoman Jan Perry....But Perry said the outdoor advertising ban -- which bars new digital signs, supergraphics and billboards facing freeways -- does not cover projects already approved and underway, including the AEG's theater at L.A. Live. Perry said that when she made her case to Trutanich earlier this week, he threatened to send her to jail. ["Trutanich Ups the ante in battle over L.A. Live signs," L.A. Times]

Blogdowntown has more on Perry's reaction to Trutanich's threat:

Perry emphasized that she was simply asking about why the final permits had not been given when Trutanich made his threat. "I was merely doing my job and making an inquiry," she told blogdowntown today. "It's a legitimate question to ask."

Her motion -- CF 09-2559 -- asks that Building and Safety report "whether it intends to exercise its duties ... to act on pending building permit requests for the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District." The motion would normally go to the Council's Planning committee, but Perry said that it may instead come before the full Council this week.

Past City of Angles blogging on the supergraphics war in L.A.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user James Trosh. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

Chief Bratton's Awkward Goodbye

2009-10-16T21:00:08Z

Police Chief Bratton finally leaves L.A. for New York, amid recriminations over police hiring and the actual use of a trash fee hike that citizens believed was meant to hire new cops.

]]> Details from the L.A. Weekly:

Bratton came out swinging on October 6, when he told a swarm of reporters that "once again the political leadership of this city has told a lie. ... They told the public we were going to grow this department with your tax dollars. If they're going to shrink the department, well, they better give those tax dollars back."...

City Council members who sit on two powerful committees -- Budget and Finance, and Public Safety -- wanted to cancel a November LAPD cadet class for recruits and halt the LAPD's largely successful recruiting efforts. Council members insisted it's merely a "temporary" hiring freeze to help plug a $405 million budget shortfall....

The budget battle...calls into question whether city leaders publicly lied when Villaraigosa, City Council President Garcetti and then-Councilwoman Wendy Greuel in 2006 pushed through an exceedingly controversial trash-collection fee hike, and then in 2008 a near-unanimous City Council pushed through another trash fee hike....Downtown's pols assured Angelenos that the extra cash raised would not vanish into the general fund but would be used to hire 1,000 additional police.

Now, with trash bills soaring to $435 per year for an average household....Council District 8 representative and former chief Bernard Parks, a longtime Bratton critic, goes so far as to say the chief "does not understand" the legalities of the trash tax, saying "it's illegal to raise (garbage) fees for specific allocations."...

To tap into the trash fee, the City Council would mine perfectly legal loopholes included in the language approved in 2006 -- fine print L.A. residents didn't hear about until former L.A. City Controller Laura Chick released an eye-popping 2008 audit. Chick discovered that only $47 million, or about one-third of the new trash-fee revenue then pouring into city coffers, went to hiring cops, and 366 officers were hired instead of the promised 1,000. The rest of the money -- another $90 million also tacked onto residents' trash bills -- paid for LAPD overhead and raises.....

Now, City Hall appears to be abandoning all pretense that the tax was ever meant for LAPD. The chief spokesman for the latest spin appears to be Koretz, [who says]: "The tax-hike fee is not an earmark (for police)."

Ron Kaye on another Bratton departure issue--whether there is a conflict of interest related to his being hired by Michael Cherkasky, who also helped release LAPD from its federal consent decree. The problem, as Kaye quotes Tim Rutten from the L.A. Times, is that "the monitor [Cherkasky] gave the court advice that helped cement Bratton's reputation as the country's leading police chief, then just weeks later the two enter into a lucrative business arrangement built on that very reputation."

Past City of Angles blogging on Bratton's departure.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user Ericrichardson. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

L.A. Schools Fall Back on Federal Money

2009-10-14T22:21:36Z

L.A. Unified School District expects to use federal stimulus money to make up for a $400 million shortfall in money they expected from the state.

]]> As the Daily News reports:

Los Angeles Unified officials said they can make up for a recent $140 million cut in state funding by using federal stimulus money - but they'll feel the pinch next year.

The $140 million cut, the equivalent of closing seven high schools, follows Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's weekend veto of a bill that would have temporarily retained special funding for school districts that serve low-performing students.

Those funds, totalling $400 million statewide, were initially taken away in July by lawmakers who argued the school districts could use stimulus money to make up the difference.

While LAUSD plans to use stimulus money this year to cover the $140 million cut, officials say they might have to accelerate cuts that are not budgeted to hit for another two years. "This is a crisis averted but delayed," said Megan Reilly, LAUSD's chief financial officer. "It creates a bigger hole for us next year."

Gov. Schwarzenegger was openly encouraging the schools to take this "let the Feds handle" it approach--not exactly the sort of firm and tough leadership that will keep California solvent in the years to come. Without some new arrangement to permanently cut costs or expenses, the school district will still face an unavoidable fiscal crisis soon.

A September 2006 state audit of LA USD's "reorganizations and its procedures for evaluating performance and setting salaries for managers" which "concludes that LAUSD did not consistently achieve reductions in support services positions proposed in its 2000 and 2004 reorganization plans."

Past City of Angles blogging on the early stages of area schools' plans to tap into federal stimulus funds.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user bryan.norwood. It was used under user Creative Commons license.

Villaraigosa Agrees to Police Hiring Freeze

2009-10-13T17:40:40Z

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa does a turnaround on his firm stance that L.A. needs more cops pronto and agrees to a cost-conscious hiring freeze for at least the rest of the year.

]]> From the Daily News's account:

In an abrupt reversal, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on Monday appeared to back a plan to freeze hiring at the Police Academy at least throughout the rest of this year.

Villaraigosa had previously denounced the idea of a freeze at the Los Angeles Police Department, adamant that the size of the force be maintained at 10,000 officers.

But in a news conference Monday at LAPD's Topanga Station in Canoga Park, Villaraigosa sided with the City Council's Public Safety Committee, which has recommended not hiring cadets in November and December to help reduce the LAPD's record $129 million budget deficit.

"I care more about results than process," Villaraigosa said. "I will support any proposal that maintains the police force at its current level. But I will oppose any measure that puts our police department in jeopardy and goes back on the promise that we made to the people of this city to make public safety the No. 1 priority."

Ron Kaye is disgusted with what he sees as the city, once again, just evading making hard budget decisions re: LAPD, and other matters:

We are now well into the second quarter of the city's financial year and spending still exceeds revenue by more than $400 million....the money troubles that started with the housing bubble bursting more than two years ago and became a crisis more than a year ago with the collapse of Wall Street is now on track to become a catastrophe as the hole in the city budget gets deeper by the day...

Yet, the nation's highest paid municipal officials, lavished with endless perks and servile staff, flip and flop, waffle and debate, conspire in back rooms or palaces of fine dining and drinking, and continue to do nothing.....

Item No. 7 on the City Council agenda is supposed to deal with the tricky issue of how to reduce LAPD spending by $129 million this year. That was supposed to take place over 12 months so it's now the equivalent of $160 million on an annualized basis and it will reach the $200 million mark by January.

Actually, it will be more than $200 million because the mayor and Council plan to put off making a hard decision on LAPD funding, as they have all the other hard decisions on city spending, until mid-January when they return from their lavish vacations to faraway places.

Past City of Angles blogging on crime rates and LAPD.

The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user Thomas Hawk. It was used under user Creative Commons license.