Re: What Do the City Council Candidates Think About Residential Parking Restrictions, and the City Council’s Recent Actions and Attitude Toward Conflicts of Interest?
Dear Editor,
At 1:30 on Tuesday morning, while you were probably sleeping, the City Council (Meghan Sahli-Wells dissenting) changed the residential parking law that it enacted in November 2013 for the 10700 block of Farragut Drive.
Under the old parking law, only residents of a parking district and the city engineer could initiate and decide modifications to restrictions in an established parking district.
Now, a non-resident of a parking district can petition directly to the City Council to change parking restrictions.
For instance, Joxer Daly’s Irish Pub can ask the City Council to change parking restrictions so that its customers can park (24/7) in front of adjacent residences.
The City Council gave no public notice that it intended to change the parking law. The City Council ignored protests that it was violating the open-government Brown Act requirement that such information be expressly stated in the agenda.
This City Council is a serial Brown-Act violator.
Further, the City Council totally ignored and would not discuss a Council member’s conflicts-of-interest. The mayor accused residents of being conspiracy theorists for daring to raise the issue.
That is understandable considering our city attorney’s hands-off attitude. The May 17, 2015 City Council Minutes reflect Culver City’s approach to resolving conflict-of-interest issues where it states: “Carol Schwab, City Attorney, discussed instances where a conflict of interest arises; the appearance of bias; and she clarified that it is up to the individual Council member to make the decision.” (Emphasis added.) That is, if a Council member does not think he or she has a conflict-of-interest, then none exists. We pay $300,000 per year for this advice?
Reporting from a Banana Republic in West Los Angeles,
Mr. Greenberg may be contacted at LGreenberg@LGEsquire.com
