LAist: 'Saving' Los Angeles: Is Chicago Our Kind of Town?

Belgand

Mon, 07 Jul 2008 04:14:33 -0800

Or look at San Francisco. Why does a city that's roughly seven miles on a side have such poor bike lanes? Why do we have a terrible, poorly-run public transit system in a town where plenty of people don't own cars and driving (and even worse, parking) are nearly impossible? Why, in a very dense city that relies heavily on public transit do we not have a functional subway system instead having one roughly on par with LA (if that) and almost entirely above-ground where it has to fight with traffic? Our smartcard system (though it covers a very wide array of region-wide transit providers) has been in the works for six years at this point and it still isn't launched (though it does work unofficially in some cases). Of course, our mayor is now a gubernatorial candidate who loves to take credit for other people's work, bulk up his own staff at others expense... and won a re-election by a massive majority last year after entering rehab for alcoholism and sleeping with a staffer who is also a friend's wife. So, while I love SF, look north once in a while where I'll be standing around in our 60 degree summer weather and waiting 20 minutes for a bus that'll take an hour to go seven miles across town. Things could definitely be worse.

Jeremy

Mon, 07 Jul 2008 00:55:36 -0800

Not to rub salt in the wounds, but the head of the Chicago Transit Authority, Ron Huberman, rides the system daily for his commute.

wrecked

Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:43:41 -0800

There is a key difference between the Chicago and L.A. school situation - in Chicago the school district boundaries match the city boundaries, while in L.A. the school district boundaries encompass more than just the city of L.A. In the former case, mayoral takeover was relatively easy due to the boundary matching, while in the latter it is rather difficult because the mayors of the other cities represented in LAUSD would have to cede power to allow L.A.'s mayor to take over LAUSD, which, in turn, would disenfranchise those who don't live in the city of L.A. And that doesn't even to get into the issue of the elected school board in L.A. Chicago is in some ways lucky to have a mayor who believes serving his city is the greatest job in the world and has no aspirations for higher office. I daresay our mayor has his eye on a bigger prize and doesn't have the long-term commitment to change nor the political capital to spare that someone like Daley has. Though to be fair, Daley didn't really takeover the school district so much as the IL legislature foisted it upon him by giving him the power to appoint the superintendent and the school board. But really, Chicago isn't even the best example of mayoral takeover of schools working. If you want to see success, look at Boston and what Bloomberg has done in NYC. Both are better case studies for what Mayor V. should do if he is really serious about reforming our schools. Sadly I don't think he is serious.

Lindsay William-Ross

Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:03:06 -0800

Excellent points, Zach. The LAUSD is so colossally overextended in its scope, reach, resources, credibility that I think it would take a miracle to fix it, not one person stepping in decades after it began to unravel. I wish they could detangle the politics, focus on who is really suffering (the kids), and really break the district in to separate, smaller, more manageable districts--the breakdown now still stems from its rotten root. But of course, this is all another post altogether...don't get me started! :)

Zach Behrens

Sun, 06 Jul 2008 12:51:08 -0800

Richard M. Daley has been Mayor of Chicago the majority of my life (I grew up just outside of the city and he started in 1989 and still is Mayor). To Mayor Villaraigosa's defense, In 1995, Daley gained control of the schools. That's six years since he became mayor. Let's see if Mayor V can do that in his second round of being mayor... that is, if he gets elected next year. It's not that easy to just take over a school district. I believe the mayor, whoever it be now and in the future, should have control over the schools. Right now, 11,000 or so people make the decision of who should be on the school board. Accountability is very low. If the schools are failing and the mayor is in control, it's easy to know who to hold accountable and where to protest every year on July 14.

filipinofetus

Sun, 06 Jul 2008 10:53:00 -0800

I LOVE LA!

photo_la

Sun, 06 Jul 2008 09:59:55 -0800

the problem seems obvious to me, Villaraigosa is all talk. he has been since the beginning. And as much as I love a good rally, the best thing that could happen is to end some of these "lifetime" appointments in our city's government. Why should these city council members actually do anything when it seems they are never really challenged for their positions?