BART Cop Murder Trial to Move to Downtown L.A., Lawyer Predicts More L.A. Riots
Jason Segel Sings His Phone Number at the Swell Season Last Night
-thumb-110x110-459458.jpg)
Bouchon Amuses Our Bouches
Video of the Day: Your East Side Moment of Zen
Sobriety Checkpoint in Sherman Oaks Tonight
Will these be filled by digital graphics? Downtown residents discuss at blogdowntown | Photo by Eric Richardson/blogdowntown
In the process to make L.A. Live a reality, AEG has been going through the city for permits and approvals for eight years. Now with a moratorium on billboards upheld by a judge, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich is fighting the installation of six digital billboards at the new 14-screen Regal Cinemas theatre, set to open on Wednesday. Today, the LA Times editorial board chimes in on the issue:
We applaud the City Council's efforts to halt new billboards, and we support a strong, legally enforceable ordinance. But L.A. Live built its signs with specific and repeated city authorization. City Atty. Carmen Trutanich and his staff are overreaching in concluding that L.A. Live is not "vested" because it hasn't received a final sign permit. Ifeight years of city approvals and the company's huge investments based on them do not constitute vesting, nothing does.Compounding the problems with the city attorney's position has been his truculence. At one meeting earlier this month, he threatened to jail a city official if he granted AEG's permit. A Trutanich deputy now says that was meant in jest, but it creates an impossible quandary for a well-meaning department head when his own lawyer proposes putting him in jail.
On the other side of things, Ban Billboard Blight is taking Trutanich's position. "Please support the city attorney in his defense of the ban, which has put him at odds with Councilwoman Jan Perry and AEG, the powerful, politically-connected company that owns L.A. Live.," an e-mail newsletter explains. "Let him know that you appreciate his willingness to stand up to political pressure for what he believes is the proper interpretation of the law."
The issue will be discussed and possibly voted upon at todays City Council meeting.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Shame on Ban Billboard Blight. One thing is standing for your cause, and another one is standing for it regardless of legality. Yes, AEG has been heavy handed in city politics in the past. Is a city attorney being even more heavy handed the solution? It's called escalating and in the end the only loser is the consistent implementation and rule of law.
Sounds like Trutanich thinks he's some kind of bad ass. Some one needs to tell 'ol Carmie that era of Judge Roy Bean justice ended about 100 years ago.
Laws change. If you're building wasn't equipped to handle earthquakes when it was built then you need to retrofit. I see no difference here.
Regardless of the initial plans AEG should abide by the ordinance.
You can't compare retrofitting laws, which are intended for public safety, to billboards. Huge difference.
Billboard blight is an issue worthy of a fight, but to fight them downtown in an area that is becoming Times Square West makes no sense. And with that in mind, why not zone the area to allow them?
Oh goodie. I can't wait for traffic near the 110/10 interchange to get EVEN SLOWER because people are paying attention to the electronic billboards instead of focusing on the road.
Didn't we learn our lesson near the Citadel? Digital Billboards near the highway are really nothing productive.