Is Los Angeles In Permanent Decay?

Many of you think of Los Angeles, and think liberals, Britney, and sunshine. That's what I thought, too. I am looking into buying a Prius, avoiding any place where Britney may be flashing people, and responding ot the incessant sunshine by, well, wearing the exact same clothes I wear in winter. That's the New Yorker in me.

But over the last few days, a new opinion of Los Angeles has taken shape.

Angelenos have had a moment akin to when the American people saw George Bush flying over New Orleans in his helicopter, completely out of touch with reality.

At that moment, New Orleans natives realized that our Administration wasn't going to save them, and Americans realized that their government was incompetent.

This weekend, we had a blackout, which ended up leaving us with no power for more than two days, during a heat wave.

The people who live in our community were indignant - who was helping us through this time? When we called the Department of Water and Power, they had no timetable to fix the problem, but they were quick to say they thought they were handling the situation really well. As if anyone asked. If they could have said, "Heck of a job, Brownie," they would have. Honestly, my phone calls with the DWP (all of which were recorded on their end) were capable of filling an Idiot's Guide to Incompetence. The supervisors could not stop saying stupid things, and here is my top three:

* This was an unexpected disaster and we've handled it really well! (What, you may ask, was the disaster? A heat wave not as bad as the one we had last year? This wasn't exactly an earthquake, or even that unusual)

* We have enough people on the job! (How can that be, you ask, since power wasn't restored for three days in many places? When I asked this question, the supervisor responded, "If you want more people, you have to raise taxes. Are you going to do that?)

* We can't put in a work order unless your power has been out for 24-48 hours (when informed that their records show my power was out for 48 hours, they said, "Oh, that's terrible.)

The Los Angeles Times hasn't written an editorial that holds anyone accountable. They've written a bit about the problems that the City is facing, but today, as an example, their editorials are about Iran, the Port, and the State Legislature.

You might think our Councilman would be marching the streets of our neighborhoods, to tell people he's on top of the situation. But we found out that our Councilman, Tom LaBonge, wasn't storming the gates of the DWP because he was in Germany.

Our City is in bad shape. In many communities in Los Angeles, parents cannot send their kids to public schools. Gangs are the main reason for their fear. The Department of Water is unreliable, and they have let us know that our power may go out at any time. The traffic situation is a nightmare, and it's not getting any better. People often site it as the main reason they can't live in L.A.

And yet, we all pay our taxes. We pay for schools, power, and good roads. But the return on our investment is poor.

It would be helpful if we saw political figures that seemed to be on top of the situation, that had a plan to make it better.

It would be enlightening to see the major media publication in our area hold the irresponsible responsible.

What is the plan to fix Los Angeles? What is the plan to make this City livable?

The big fear in Los Angeles is that an earthquake -- the dreaded Big One -- will make the City unlivable. But the bigger fear of Angelenos today is that our City is dying because of a thousand little cuts.

Comments

[TuffPosh]

This is what happens when you support massive illegal activity either to profit, for racial power reasons, or because you're too afraid of false names some might call you: you end up with a massively corrupt local bureaucracy and a city which (except for the Westside and small parts of the area where the poster lives) going straight down the tubes.

[SteveAlso]

I believe that LA is deeply broken and fragmented.

[Newfycrat]

After seeing what happened to folks after hurricanes, and after seeing all the problems with any disaster, I think anyone who lives in a potential disaster zone, has a house and enough money to buy a generator is a fool not to have one.
I'm sorry, but in any major crisis, and having power transformers going out all over the place can be one, you cannot wait for anyone to save you. With a lot of things to fix and a small number of people to do it, it takes a while. I grew up in the mountains and during the winter our power would go out for up to five days. We understood we lived the farthest out of town (30 miles) and would be the last to get power restored. Living in an earthquake zone you should have (as I do) at least a five day supply to live on and power is an essential supply. I came to understand that from a friend who was a hero because he was one of the few people with a generator after a hurricane. He helped out a lot of neighbors. So don't just think of being prepared as being selfish. My friend really helped out some elderly people in need.

[Dantheman99]

"After seeing what happened to folks after hurricanes, and after seeing all the problems with any disaster, I think anyone who lives in a potential disaster zone, has a house and enough money to buy a generator is a fool not to have one."

What great practical advice. That hadn't occurred to me. I have drinking water stored just in case (which I rotate out as recommended).

[setman]

That is the problem with Los Angeles and California in general. By the tone of the article the author implies that LA is the only major city that suffers from such a lack of leadership and such a breakdown in basic services. St. Louis suffered two such breakdowns last year. One in the height of summer, with temperatures similar to those in LA for this past week but with a much higher humidity, and one at the end of November with freezing temperatures. During each of these breakdowns residents, anywhere from 400,000 to 800,000 people were left without electricity for as much as a week. This article seems to want to leech a little bit of Katrina-New Orleans love for the "long suffering" people of Southern California.

[Dantheman99]

Los Angeles' biggest problem is unsustainable sprawl and an unsustainable car culture, and polticians which enable the declining quality of single-occupancy motoring, by not building necessary transportation alternatives.

Too many people want to live in their own little dreamworlds and drive large distances from place to place and not interact with anyone. That Los Angeles is dying. The golden age of single-occupancy motoring, where someone felt a sense of entitlement to drive their car anytime, anyplace, anywhere for cheap gas, affordable/available parking and minimal congestion is over. It's over. The quality of that lifestyle will only continue to decline with increasing urbanization. Creating alternatives to securit L.A.'s economic future is taking too long because of NIMBY obstructionists, and people who think that lifestyle modifications and changes should apply to someone else.

Microeconomics will change this. People will make difference choices on where to live, work, play and how to get there, but they will be motivated by more painful and inconvenient variables that they would be if they would just build the mass transit system we need.

The L.A. Times had an article on Singapore rapidly building a subway system. We need leaders who will bang heads together to make that happen. Unfortunately, Mayor Villaraigosa went AWOL due to personal difficulties just when we need a strong, vocal mayor the most.

Fortunately, a tide has turned. When Beverly Hills has a working group to plan where their desired subway stops should go, the world has changed. Politicians like Rep. Waxman and Supervisor Yaroslovsky who used to obstruct transit construction are slowly coming around. There are more people willing to build the systemw we need. However, it will cost time and money. L.A. is in the painful transition of people who don't want to change their lifestyle till a more comprehensive system is in place and the construction of that system. It may be a painful transportation decade.

Fortunately, anti-transit motorists and bus-only extremists will both be beaten back from their attempts to sabotage L.A.'s future for their selfish aims.

[Dantheman99]

Both California and Los Angeles have a crisis of governance. California's State Assembly has only 80 members for 40,000,000 people. This means half-a-million people represented by one Assemblymember, when other states have legislators representing a district of 1/10 that population.

Los Angeles County has over 10,000,000 people and only has 5 members of the Board of Supervisors with no directly elected executive.

Los Angeles City has almost 4,000,000 people and only 15 City Council members.

There is a new network of Neighborhood Councils, 83 thus far, probably another 10 to be formed, but they are formative and have limited advisory powers.

For some reason, California settles for inadequate representation at every level. This means that money has that much more influence in campaigning and lobbying has that much more influence in governing.

Term limits keep politicians constantly running for their next office, with no incentive for long-term decision making, and little ability for grass roots candidates to run and win office.

Electoral reforms creating larger, more representative legislative bodies, public financing and proportional representation would be extremely helpful. Term limits has turned out to be the wrong solution to the wrong problem.

We need more democracy in California and more empowerment, not less.