web analytics

Venice Update

News of Venice, CA and Marina del Rey CA

Nick, Cityhood Chair, Not Happy with Bonin or Encampments; Pushes for Cityhood



By Nick Antonicello, chairman of the Venice Neighborhood Council ad-hoc committee on Cityhood

The encampment at Staples on Lincoln Boulevard in the heart of Venice has now surged to the mouth of the driveway and the entire sidewalk at the entrance as well as the other side of the building across from Chase Bank.

While Councilman Mike Bonin takes victory laps for scamming Venetians into thinking his meeting this week was some kind of legitimate exchange of opinions, he is already moving forward and really doesn’t care what the average person thinks!

He is proudly constructing a ghetto and slum by the sea and he is daring you to stop him!

This is his typical, Machiavellian and condescending politics in action by busing in a bunch of bureaucrats that make money and profit off the misery of the un-housed and nothing changes!

Bill Rosendahl served eight years as councilman and did nothing. Mike Bonin has served some five years as a councilman and sits under the threat of a recall and still does nothing!

That’s 13 years of broken promises and failed public policies and he wonders why the residents of Venice believe he’s nothing but a liar?

Photos were taken on June 15th.

Cityhood for Venice is the only viable option to address the issue of homelessness and so much more. We need Venetians running and governing Venice, not career politicians earning over $1,000,000 in salary and perks courtesy of taxpayers during their term of office!

Nick Antonicello is the Chairman of the Ad-hoc Committee on Venice Cityhood and can be reached at nantoni@mindspring.com

Venice Blvd No Longer Route 187


Venice Blvd—from Lincoln Blvd to 10 Freeway—is no longer State Route 187, and as of relinquishment agreement dated 1 September 2016, became the responsibility of the City of Los Angeles. For this the State gave the City 14.5 million.

This relinquishment occurred at the request of Councilman Mike Bonin, chair of the LA City Council Transportation Committee, to “facilitate the implementation of the City’s Great Streets initiative on Venice Blvd.”

It was previously reported that only the “Great Streets” portion had been relinquished.

Culver Blvd Restored to Two Lanes Eastbound from Pershing Drive to Jefferson


Workers worked diligently Friday to remove and repaint the thoroughfare to reconfigure Culver Blvd for two lanes eastbound from Pershing Drive to Jefferson Blvd.  Two lanes were open Saturday afternoon.

There was only one eastbound and one westbound as a result of Councilman Mike Bonin’s proposed “Safe Streets” configuration.  The street was restored to two lanes at the request of the community.

Councilman Bonin will be hosting a town hall meet 29 July, 1 to 3 pm at Roski Hall, Loyola Marymount University, regarding “Safe Streets” for Playa del Rey.



Venice Gay Pride Month Kicks Off, Beach Dedicated to Former Councilman Bill Rosendahl

City Councilman Mike Bonin, Venice Gay Pride President Grant Turck, and County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl

Kickoff ceremony for the City of Los Angeles starting the National LGBT Pride Month was held at the rainbow colored life guard station at Breeze Ave Thursday, 1 June. The ceremony featured the dedication of Venice Beach from Park to Breeze Avenues as the Bill Rosendahl Memorial Beach in honor of the first openly gay person elected to the Los Angeles City Council.

Dedication was made by LA County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, the first openly gay person elected to the California Legislature. Other speakers were Councilman Mike Bonin, who was Bill Rosendahl’s chief of staff, and Venice Pride Board President Grant Turck.

Venice Gay Pride Board President Grant Turck kicked off the Los Angeles Gay Pride Month at the Venice Beach next to the rainbow colored life guard station. He also talked of the closing of Roosterfish and announced that LA Chargers and LA Rams will be supporters of the Venice Gay Pride and the LA Gay Pride. This is the first time any professional team has ever supported the Gay Pride month.

County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl dedicates the Venice beach from Breeze to Park Ave as Bill Rosendahl Beach.

Councilman Mike Bonin talks about former councilman Bill Rosendahl. Mike Bonin was chief of staff to Bill Rosendahl when he was councilman.

Events for Gay Pride Month in Venice.



Councilmembers To Ask for more Police in Neighborhoods at City Council Meeting

LOS ANGELES – A plan authored by Councilmembers Mike Bonin and Joe Buscaino that calls for more Los Angeles Police Department officers to be deployed to neighborhood patrols will be considered by the Los Angeles City Council’s Public Safety Committee on Tuesday morning at 8:30 am at Los Angeles City Hall.

“In neighborhoods throughout our city, the deployment of patrol officers is bare-bones – sometimes as few as two or three radio cars for an entire division – with officers overwhelmed and overworked,” Bonin and Buscaino wrote in a letter about their plan to their constituents. “This is unacceptable and it is time to take bold steps to address this problem.”

Bonin and Buscaino’s legislation is a 10-point plan that seeks to rebuild and bolster the LAPD’s primary patrol function and community policing delivery mechanism — the Basic Car Plan. They have branded the plan “Back to Basic Car.”

In addition to comments from Bonin and Buscaino (who both serve on the Public Safety Committee), officials from the Los Angeles Police Department and representatives of the Los Angeles Police Protective League are scheduled to appear at Tuesday morning’s committee meeting to discuss how LAPD officers are deployed and what can be done to focus deployment on getting more officers working in and with neighborhoods.

WHAT: “Back to Basic Car” LAPD Redeployment Plan Committee Hearing

WHO: Los Angeles City Councilmember Mike Bonin
Los Angeles City Councilmember Joe Buscaino
Los Angeles Police Department Officials
Los Angeles Police Protective League Representatives

WHEN: Tuesday, February 21, 2017; 8:30am

WHERE: Los Angeles City Hall
200 N. Spring St.
Room 1010
Los Angeles, CA 90012

For more information on Bonin and Buscaino’s “Back to Basic Car” Plan, including a detailed white paper and full text of the legislation, please visit http://www.11thdistrict.com/support_back_to_basic_car.

Incumbent, Candidates Answer Your Questions in Venice Update Q&A

This is the second set of questions the Venice Update submitted to the incumbent and the two candidates for the CD11 Council Seat. These questions were composed by a small group of Venetians. The questions have been answered and are printed below.

The Update plans to continue to submit some of these questions each week to the candidates and answers will be printed the following week. The purpose is so that you, the reader, will be better versed on where your candidates stand on the issues that concern you. Each was asked the same questions.

The order of people answering the questions was questioned by a reader. Councilman Mike Bonin was placed first because he is the councilman; second and third were selected in the order they were strictly because women go first.

Councilman Mike Bonin

1. Climate change is supposedly increasing putting coastal cities at greater and greater risk for flooding. In addition, Los Angeles is at the tail-end of a six-year-long drought, and climate scientists have warned that the rate and intensity of local wildfires will increase as global temperatures rise. With all this evidence of an already overstressed local environment, how can you advocate for adding density to Los Angeles’ housing stock in order to (presumably) make the City more affordable for greater and greater numbers of inhabitants?

We can make our city more livable, affordable and sustainable at the same time, and I have championed big initiatives and ideas to make protecting our environment – and thus our communities – a central priority of my work as your Councilmember.

It is crucial to note that climate change isn’t “supposedly” putting coastal cities at greater risk of flooding – it is absolutely and scientifically proven to be putting our communities at risk. Much of the gorgeous coastline of the neighborhoods I represent will literally be underwater within decades if we do not take dramatic action to stop using harmful and climate-polluting fossil fuels.

I am the co-author of legislation that will help chart the pathway to 100% clean energy in Los Angeles. The legislation is already groundbreaking, as it made LA the largest city in the nation to commit to a completely clean energy portfolio. As the pathway to 100% is mapped out and then pursued aggressively, Los Angeles will be able to show the rest of the world that clean and sustainable future is achievable and that cities can thrive when they invest in more sustainable solutions.

At the same time, we must create more housing in Los Angeles. The population of the City continues to grow, and if we do not create additional housing stock (while preserving additional affordable housing), prices will continue to climb higher and higher, forcing hundreds of thousands of people out of the housing market. That will mean greater numbers of people commuting longer distances to work, creating increased traffic congestion, and greenhouse gas pollution, exacerbating our climate crisis.

Where and how we build the housing is key. We should build near transit lines, allowing residents to use mass transit or go “car lite.” And we should focus on and increase sustainable design and building requirements — making energy efficiency a priority, and using and new and innovative ways to use power and water more effectively, so that even as our population increases, our reliance on resources is reduced.

2.  Do you support a community-neutral homeless housing strategy in which housing facilities for the homeless  are distributed evenly across all 15 Council Districts and across the neighborhoods within each district?

Every neighborhood in Los Angeles is suffering the effects of the homelessness crisis, and every neighborhood should share in the solutions to the crisis.

Los Angeles and our neighborhoods not only have a tremendous homelessness crisis – but we have one of the largest unsheltered homeless populations in the United States. It has created a city of shanties and tents in our neighborhoods, and we very clearly need to house our way out of the homelessness crisis.  Historically, affordable housing and homeless housing are incredibly difficult to build, facing challenges in financing, site selection, and much more.

Venice should not be — and is not being — asked to be the exclusive or primary area to provide housing. Our neighbors in Santa Monica has provided significant housing over the past several decades. Nearby Del Rey has three new housing complexes with formerly homeless residents. Under the recently approved Veterans Administration Master Plan, the Brentwood and West LA areas will see nearly 2,000 units of permanent and transitional housing for homeless veterans.  Hollywood, downtown Los Angeles, the Harbor area have all added significant homeless and affordable housing in recent years. And in addition to city-owned properties in Venice, the City of Los Angeles is exploring the potential of housing on every vacant, surplus or under-utilized property owned by the City.  This includes every part of Los Angeles.

3.  What do you think of the role of neighborhood councils and should they be abolished or strengthened and why?  If strengthened, how?

Neighborhood Councils are important and essential bodies that have the ability to give voice to community concerns, develop grassroots solutions to problems, and promote understanding and consensus about neighborhood issues and controversies. I am proud to have some of the most robust neighborhood councils in the City of Los Angeles, and I have been glad to author and support legislation to strengthen and increase funding for neighborhood councils. I have been proud to partner with the Venice Neighborhood Council on outreach efforts, community festivals and I am working closely with members of the VNC’s Homelessness Committee to explore options for providing people an alternative to storing their belongings on streets and sidewalks.

I take the input of neighborhood councils seriously, and weigh their advice carefully. I do the same with homeowners associations, renters, chambers of commerce, political advocacy organizations, environmental organizations, people who invite me into their homes to meet with neighbors, people I meet at “pop up office hours” or door-to-door canvasses, and people who approach me at Ralph’s or Whole Foods. There is no one unified and definitive voice of, by and for the people of Venice, so I make a concerted effort to hear as wide an array of voices as possible.

4.  How should Proposition HHH money be spent effectively on housing in CD11.  Can this money be used to provide services?

Thanks to the overwhelming approval of Proposition HHH last November, we now have a funding stream that can help us build much of the housing we need to actually end the homelessness crisis on our streets. I am very grateful for the nearly 80% of voters in many areas of Venice who supported HHH and voted to help solve the homelessness crisis. (A sharp contrast to one of my opponents who wrote the ballot argument against this solution — as he has opposed so many other solutions.) Now the challenge is to get the housing built, get people off the streets, and eliminate the need for encampments in our neighborhoods.

Because Proposition HHH was a bond measure, funds can only be legally used for capital expenditures and acquisition of property. Services will be provided by the County of Los Angeles, which is seeking voter approval March 7 of Proposition H to help fund those services.  (Please vote Yes!)

But just because HHH is limited to capital and acquisition does not mean we need to wait years for homeless housing. I have been advocating for ways to spend the money and provide housing quickly — by converting or retrofitting existing vacant structures into housing. A perfect example is a project we have all driven past and probably never noticed: a former motel on the Culver City/Mar Vista border (Washington and Beethoven) that was converted by Upward Bound House into transitional housing for homeless families with children. We can use HHH funds to acquire or convert former hospitals, motels, etc, into housing at a very fast clip.

The city’s Proposition HHH and the county’s Proposition H are not the only way to provide services quickly.  Back in 2015, I proposed that the City invest in the County’s Housing for Health program, which provides master leasing to more quickly house people. I am currently pushing LA County Metro and Los Angeles World Airports to do the same, by housing people living on Metro or airport property. Ocean Park Community Center in Santa Monica uses a similar model, and I am working to expand master leasing into LA-funded programs. We also can (and do) invest in rapid rehousing vouchers, and I have been working to shift the City into supporting quicker and nimbler solutions to homelessness — such as shared housing and family reunification.


Candidate Robin Rudisill

1.  Climate change is supposedly increasing putting coastal cities at greater and greater risk for flooding. In addition, Los Angeles is at the tail-end of a six-year-long drought, and climate scientists have warned that the rate and intensity of local wildfires will increase as global temperatures rise.  With all this evidence of an already overstressed local environment, how can you advocate for adding density to Los Angeles’ housing stock in order to (presumably) make the City more affordable for greater and greater numbers of inhabitants?

Los Angeles County Health Department’s climate change action framework is distinct from the City’s self-imposed hardship from “infrastructure abuse” caused by its refusal to enforce its own regulations.  Even before planning infrastructure restoration needed in order to accept increased density, we must stop allowing illegal destruction of affordable housing and begin protecting families from illegal conversions and evictions.  It’s the City’s job to manage developer expectations, starting with enforcing existing laws.

The City can even decide to make more stringent laws if needed in order to assure that we’re not destroying current affordable housing and displacing families. But if the incumbent remains as the councilmember in our District, which has lost many times more affordable housing than the other districts during the last four years, the opposite is going to happen – developers will continue to be given false freedom, which will continue to harm communities and eventually backfire on everyone.

Choose me to make sure that both housing affordability AND infrastructure relief are addressed; and I will also work with the Coastal Commission on the global warming and rising sea level issues, in order to protect our coastline and our City.

2.  Do you support a community-neutral homeless housing strategy in which housing facilities for the homeless  are distributed evenly across all 15 Council Districts and across the neighborhoods within each district?

No, I do not support an even distribution of housing facilities for the homeless across all 15 districts. That is a short-sighted, NIMBY idea. I support a crisis approach that uses the money that the Public will be entrusting in us, as well as the City land, in order to maximize the amount of housing that can be provided for our Homeless population, in the soonest possible timeframe.

3.  What do you think of the role of neighborhood councils and should they be abolished or strengthened and why?  If strengthened, how?

My view is that we should change the City Charter’s definition of “stakeholder” to include only the residents of each neighborhood, the owners and tenants. It needs to follow how the Community Plans are set up. The General Plan and its Community Plans are in place as the “Constitution” and “blue prints” for planning for the City of L.A. and its communities, for the residents/citizens who live in L.A. and are the voters for Los Angeles’ elected officials and legislation impacting the City or its districts. Out of town investors and developers don’t get a say in how our City is run, but rather the City must be run in the best interest of its citizens. The Charter should also be updated to reflect the recommendation that I authored and the LUPC, which I chaired, recommended to the Venice Neighborhood Council, who unanimously approved it:

            Neighborhood Council Land Use and Planning-related recommendations shall be disclosed in a “standing” 

            section of all related City Staff Reports and Determinations, called “Neighborhood Council Recommendation.” 

            Along with such recommendations, if the Neighborhood Council recommendation has not been followed, the 

            City “decision maker” shall provide an explanation.

These changes must also be implemented via an amendment to City Ordinance 176704, the implementing regulations for Neighborhood Councils.

4.  How should Proposition HHH money be spent effectively on housing in CD11.  Can this money be used to provide services?

This money is for housing and facilities. It should be spent in a way that maximizes the amount of housing so the maximum people can get off of the streets, in the fastest way possible, using existing facilities that can be converted to transitionary housing wherever possible. It should not be co-mingled with money from developers to do market rate housing or used for projects that require added incentives such as height bonuses, zone exceptions or general plan amendments. It will be used in conjunction with city land.

In conjunction with this, the loss of the City’s affordable housing must be curtailed by requiring every city department to take all steps necessary to stop the loss of affordable housing, including tightening all procedures used by that department in decisions related to affordable housing, whether for Mello Act and Venice Land Use Plan replacement affordable housing, Specific Plan replacement affordable housing, Community Plan and General Plan requirements to preserve and protect affordable housing, Rent Stabilized housing protections or Ellis Act enforcement. The City cannot continue to tolerate the significant loss of affordable housing at the same time its citizens and the citizens of the County are footing the very significant bill to build affordable housing and homeless housing.

Also in order to assure the money is effectively spent, the audit requirement must be changed to be an independent annual financial audit, as opposed to the current requirement the city put onto the measure, which is an internal city annual financial audit.


Candidate Mark Ryavec

1.  Climate change is supposedly increasing putting coastal cities at greater and greater risk for flooding. In addition, Los Angeles is at the tail-end of a six-year-long drought, and climate scientists have warned that the rate and intensity of local wildfires will increase as global temperatures rise.  With all this evidence of an already overstressed local environment, how can you advocate for adding density to Los Angeles’ housing stock in order to (presumably) make the City more affordable for greater and greater numbers of inhabitants?

I believe that the effects of global warming are largely unrelated to LA’s housing shortage.  The population needs to be housed.  The question is how to do it in sustainable ways that do not exacerbate global warming.  Housing/jobs balance to cut commuting is one answer.  More mass transit and electric vehicles are others.  More energy efficient buildings yet another.

2.  Do you support a community-neutral homeless housing strategy in which housing facilities for the homeless  are distributed evenly across all 15 Council Districts and across the neighborhoods within each district?

Yes, housing for the homeless should be fairly distributed across the city but this does not mean that such facilities must be in largely single family neighborhoods, as the incumbent is trying to do in Venice.

3.  What do you think of the role of neighborhood councils and should they be abolished or strengthened and why?  If strengthened, how?

The role of Neighborhood Councils should be strengthened.  This is reprinted from my February, 2016, YoVenice column:

The other option (to de-annexation) is for Venice and other like-minded districts to pursue amendments to the City Charter to create a means to matriculate from the neighborhood council model to a new, yet to be defined borough government model.  Under a borough system, control of many city services and decision-making powers would devolve to local residents. 

Here are some examples for consideration:

A new seven member borough council – elected by district to ensure representation of all parts of Venice – would be able to choose a local police commander from three candidates submitted for consideration by the Los Angeles Chief of Police.  The commander would be physically officed in Venice and would control officers assigned to Venice.

Under a similar system, there would be Venice administrators for most city departments chosen from qualified candidates submitted by the heads of certain city departments.  So, there would be borough-appointed heads of parks, street services, sanitation, urban forestry, planning, parking enforcement, etc., in Venice  (We probably would not need a local director for DWP service, and certainly not for the Harbor Department or LAX.)

Planning decisions would be made by a zoning administrator assigned and officed in Venice and initial appeals would go to a Venice Planning Commission appointed by the borough council.  The Venice commission would replace the West Los Angeles Area Planning Commission, with appeals going to the borough council not the City Council, as is the current practice.

Planning laws – such as revisions to the Venice Local Coastal Specific Plan – would be drafted by the Planning Department’s Venice representative in consultation with the Venice Planning Commission, though would require final approval of the Los Angeles City Council.

Eventually a percentage of all revenue generated in Venice would remain in a separate Venice account of the City’s Finance Department and it would be used for discretionary projects selected by the borough council.

Under a borough model, the voices of Venice residents would move from being advisory to a degree of local control.

The process to move towards borough councils with devolved city powers would be initiated by a charter reform commission – appointed by the City Council – charged with developing the specific language to submit to city voters.  In my model, moving from a neighborhood council to the borough model would require a vote of each district’s residents.  The City might also set some minimum period for operation of a district’s neighborhood council before it could propose to graduate to the borough system.

4. How should Proposition HHH money be spent effectively on housing in CD11.  Can this money be used to provide services?

Prop. HHH funds cannot be used for services.  However, Measure H on the March 7th ballot will fund about $330 million in services for the homeless each year.

I would like to see a portion of HHH funds spent on transitional housing and on conversion of existing buildings to 300 units with shared bathrooms, so more housing would be created more quickly.  The old “tax credit” model used, for example, for the recently built 20 units on Beach Street in Del Rey, takes years and costs about $500,000 per unit.  At that rate it will be five years and more before LA starts to make a dent in the homeless population with HHH funds.  It’s good for developers and for unions, but not for the majority of the homeless who will remain on the streets for years as the city tries to build its way out of the problem with an expensive, time consuming process.

Bonin Kicks Off Campaign for Re-Election

Councilman Mike Bonin kicked off his 2017 re-election campaign for the CD11 Council seat at the Coffee Grinder 7 January in Mar Vista.  Senator Ted Lieu, California State Assemblyman Sebastian Ridley-Thomas, President of the City Council Herb Wesson, as well as other dignitaries praised the accomplishments of Bonin.


Venice residents appeared with signs to voice their concerns regarding MRSA, trash in the streets, homeless in Venice and the future homeless plans the councilman has for Venice.

Venetians Want to Know–Is There a Disease Outbreak; Are Conditions Such That Homeless Areas are Breeding Grounds

Venetians want to know: Is the City protecting 1000 homeless at the expense of 40,000 residents, the latter who could possibly be subjected to outbreaks of diseases?

The Venice Update received an email this week from a distressed resident who lives in the vicinity of 3rd Avenue in Venice. She showed garbage strewn on sidewalk and street on Rose between 3rd and 4th Avenues on 1 January. It is nothing compared to pictures shown of garbage up and down 3rd before garbage pickup this Wednesday. Nearby residents and now all of Venice ask: Is this alarmingly unsanitary? Is it a breeding ground for an outbreak of some kind of disease? Do we have an outbreak already?

Last week it was reported that there were six cases of MRSA based on a worker’s observation of type of prescriptions taken by homeless living on 3rd. It is well known that tuberculosis is a frequent resident of homeless camps. Could the flesh eating disease found in skid row be next for Venice? These diseases are contagious. These are questions that residents living near 3rd are asking and the questions are spreading throughout Venice. There are 40,000 Venetians at risk.

The Venice Update reported the MRSA figures to the Contagious Disease Center and the Public Health Nurse 21 December. No one got back to Update with results. Questions have since been submitted without answers. Councilman Mike Bonin made a statement that he had been in contact with all agencies and that there was nothing to worry about. Residents are not satisfied. The Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) Homeless Committee is meeting Friday to ask the VNC to make a motion to get some official answers regarding this situation from the proper authorities.

Third Avenue is an area that is possessed by the homeless. It has a life of its own and has recently been hitting the headlines with the news of MRSA. Homeless collect dumpster stuff and fill the sidewalks on 3rd in spite of the law that says one cannot do such. The sidewalks are not ADA compliant.

The C3 group comes, supposedly each day, to encourage homeless to seek services and keep records of residents. In the meantime, restaurants and people drop off food. Services drop off blankets and other cold-weather clothes. One lady from Anchorage, Alaska said they don’t have dumpsters like this in Anchorage. I came with nothing and look. She had a U-shaped area cordoned off with prizes from dumpster digging. This defined her new Venice home.

This “Venice 4Ever” is sprayed on a private fence on 3rd. This is how the homeless feel about 3rd.

This is west side of 3rd.

This is east side of 3rd.

These are the porta poties that were installed on private property. A container for garbage was supplied for the homeless. It is shown overflowing. The sign says that potty will be removed if clothing is dumped inside.

The following photos are of garbage cans ready for pickup on Wednesday. Residents nearby complain about unsanitary conditions, a breeding ground for diseases.








Safran Group Responds to Questions Regarding Thatcher Yard

Thatcher Yard

Thatcher Yard

Tyler Monroe, member of the Thomas Safran development team for the Thatcher Yard, answered Venice Update questions, such as what is the process, where are you with the process, and what was proposed for the site.

We do not yet have official written approval of our selection. The City staff recommended us to Council; two council committees already voted to approve. The City staff expects full City Council approval by mid-December. The staff report to Council recommends TSA “in writing” for the site.

Our Proposal. The goal of our proposal was to demonstrate flexibility and willingness to consider all options to make the best project for the site, the community and the City. Therefore, we proposed multiple “mixed income” options for this site. The options vary in density (from 84 to 152 units) and the mix of populations served (market rate, independent affordable and permanent supportive). We don’t yet know what the City staff prefers. We specifically state in our proposal that once selected, we will “work with the City and the local stakeholders to find the right tenant population.”

As a starting point, we proposed 60% market rate, 30% independent affordable and only up to 10% permanent supportive housing. I think that this may be quite different from what many people expect. We also expressed willingness to increase affordability if it was acceptable and City funds were provided (Proposition HHH or other) to make it work. The final project size and housing types will be determined by the community engagement process.

Next Steps. Once approved, we will do very thorough community outreach (including public meetings with ample opportunity for input) to determine the best solution on this site for all stakeholders and then; go through the city planning process for land use approvals plus, the Coastal Commission for a Coastal Development Permit. We are absolutely at the earliest stage. The final project program will be born out of a robust community input process.

We look forward to discussing further how we make this a wonderful project for all!

City Council Passes New Live/Sleep LAMC 85.02; Enforcement

Motorhome now parked next to Westminster Elementary School and close to preschool will be prohibited from parking within 500 feet of either with new LAMC 85.02.


The highly controversial LAMC 85.02 defining live/sleep vehicles parking on city streets has been totally replaced with an ordinance that prohibits live/sleep vehicles in residential areas during the hours of 9 pm to 6 am and at no time within 500 feet of  a park, licensed school, pre-school or daycare facility.  Posted city parking restrictions will remain in force.

This law will sunset 1 July 2018.  The mayor has yet to sign.  It also says nothing about commercial/industrial areas.

The new code is as follows:


A. Use of Vehicles for Dwelling Restricted on City Streets. No person
shall use a Vehicle for Dwelling as follows:

1. Between the hours of 9:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. on any Residential
Street; or
2. At any time within a one Block radius of any edge of a lot containing
a park or a licensed school, pre-school or daycare facility.

Nothing herein precludes the enforcement of any other laws such as parking restrictions, including, but not limited to, prohibitions on overnight parking.

B. Definitions: As used in this section:

1. Block is defined as 500 feet.
2. Dwelling means more than one of the following activities and when
it reasonably appears, in light of all the circumstances, that a person is using a vehicle as a place of residence or accommodation:

Possessing inside or on a vehicle items that are not associated with ordinary vehicle use, such as a sleeping   bag, bedroll, blanket, sheet, pillow, kitchen utensils, cookware, cooking equipment, bodily fluids. Obscuring some or all of the vehicle’s windows. Preparing or cooking meals inside or on a vehicle. Sleeping inside a   vehicle.

3. Residential Street means any street which adjoins one or more
single family or multi-family residentially zoned parcel.
4. Vehicle means any motor vehicle, trailer, house car or trailer coach
as defined by the California Vehicle Code.

C. Penalty. A first violation of this section shall be punishable as an infraction not to exceed $25. A second violation of this section shall be punishable as an infraction not to exceed $50 and all subsequent violations of this section shall punishable as an infraction not to exceed $75. Violators may be eligible for referral to a prosecutorial-Ied diversion program such as the Homeless Engagement and Response Team (HEART).

D. Sunset Provisions. The provisions of this section shall expire and bedeemed to have been repealed on July 1, 2018, unless extended by ordinance.

E. Severability. If any portion, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this section is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this section. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each portion or subsection, sentence, clause and phrase herein, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more portions, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.

The City Attorney’s letter dealt with the enforcement situation and wrote to the City Council members the following:

City Council sought to enforce the draft ordinance through the City’s Administrative Citation Enforcement (ACE) program. However, the ACE program relies on the violator having a current and valid mailing address. Based on information provided by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) and others, people who use their vehicles to dwell often do not have reliable mailing addresses. Therefore, the ACE program is not suitable as a tool to enforce the draft ordinance.

In order to establish enforcement that meets the goals of City Council, the draft ordinance provides for the issuance of infraction citations with a penalty structure requested by City Council: $25 for first violation, $50 for the second violation and $75 for third and subsequent violations. A violator can pay the fine or appear in court to challenge the issuance of the citation. Alternatively, a violator may seek eligibility for dismissal of the citation through participation in the Homeless Engagement and Response Team (HEART) program or similar prosecutorial led diversion program.

The City will provide public outreach concerning information about where people can vehicle dwell on City streets. Public outreach will be coordinated with LAHSA and homeless service providers through the creation and distribution of maps developed by the City denoting the streets on which vehicle dwelling is allowed. The maps will be made available on the City’s website and updated regularly.

The adoption of this draft ordinance will allow the City to collect data for an environmental analysis of permanent regulation of vehicles used for dwelling on public streets.