Congress has cut federal funding for public media — a $3.4 million loss for LAist. We count on readers like you to protect our nonprofit newsroom. Become a monthly member and sustain local journalism.
This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.
This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.
Councilmembers, Loan Us Your Ears
A California state appellate court is calling on local elected officials to make a New Year’s resolution to listen up—to their constituents, that is.
A ruling handed down last Thursday is a result of a lawsuit brought by owners of the Blue Zebra, an East Los Angeles strip club. Roger Jon Diamond, attorney for the Blue Zebra, addressed the Los Angeles City Council in June 2003 regarding a request to allow the club to stay open until 4:00 AM on weekends. Diamond anticipated being ignored and videotaped the proceedings, which consisted of typical Council behavior: one official on a cell phone, three holding a private conversation, others walking around the room.
The 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled on Thursday that these actions violated the Blue Zebra’s due process rights and ordered a new hearing. The City hasn’t decided whether to appeal the ruling, but did argue that the hearing was fair because everyone was treated the same. The judges were not satisfied with this argument, writing that both sides “had the right to be equally heard, not equally ignored.”
Support for LAist comes from
The ruling doesn’t apply when the Council is passing laws or presenting resolutions, but only when they are acting in a judicial capacity, such as deciding an appeal on a land-use case. Despite this limitation to the ruling, Councilmember Dennis Zine was incredulous at the unreasonable demands of the court. "The city should appeal, absolutely," he said. "It's impractical for us to sit there like students in a classroom paying attention to the professor."
LAist gets that there are two sides to this issue. There are so many items that come before the City Council in any given week that staff members are responsible for researching background, presenting pros and cons, and recommending action. That’s not to say Councilmembers don’t do their own homework. They read literally hundreds of pages of reports and recommendations, ask hard questions, and sometimes agonize over a vote. Because of their efforts, and those of their hard-working staffers, they head into chambers three times a week with a good understanding of the agenda items and knowing, usually, how they will vote on most issues. They then use this time to multi-task.
Any one of us would gladly use time spent in yet another boring meeting to accomplish another task. But we can't do this for risk of being fired, despite our (possibly) noble intentions of getting more work done. Yet Councilmembers routinely use laptops or cellphones while their constituents speak before them. They do this at the risk of alienating the very people who elected them with the expectation that they would be heard when decisions are made that affect their homes or businesses. These residents deserve to be heard, especially when they take time off of work to come to City Hall and express their concerns about a planning or building and safety case impacting their community.
Given that Thursday's ruling only applies to judicial cases—which by no means make up the bulk of items on Council agendas—LAist can’t justify the failure of Councilmembers to behave civilly and listen respectfully, whether or not the words they hear impact their decision.
As Editor-in-Chief of our newsroom, I’m extremely proud of the work our top-notch journalists are doing here at LAist. We’re doing more hard-hitting watchdog journalism than ever before — powerful reporting on the economy, elections, climate and the homelessness crisis that is making a difference in your lives. At the same time, it’s never been more difficult to maintain a paywall-free, independent news source that informs, inspires, and engages everyone.
Simply put, we cannot do this essential work without your help. Federal funding for public media has been clawed back by Congress and that means LAist has lost $3.4 million in federal funding over the next two years. So we’re asking for your help. LAist has been there for you and we’re asking you to be here for us.
We rely on donations from readers like you to stay independent, which keeps our nonprofit newsroom strong and accountable to you.
No matter where you stand on the political spectrum, press freedom is at the core of keeping our nation free and fair. And as the landscape of free press changes, LAist will remain a voice you know and trust, but the amount of reader support we receive will help determine how strong of a newsroom we are going forward to cover the important news from our community.
Please take action today to support your trusted source for local news with a donation that makes sense for your budget.
Thank you for your generous support and believing in independent news.
Chip in now to fund your local journalism
(
LAist
)
Trending on LAist
-
Censorship has long been controversial. But lately, the issue of who does and doesn’t have the right to restrict kids’ access to books has been heating up across the country in the so-called culture wars. -
With less to prove than LA, the city is becoming a center of impressive culinary creativity.
-
Nearly 470 sections of guardrailing were stolen in the last fiscal year in L.A. and Ventura counties.
-
Monarch butterflies are on a path to extinction, but there is a way to support them — and maybe see them in your own yard — by planting milkweed.
-
With California voters facing a decision on redistricting this November, Surf City is poised to join the brewing battle over Congressional voting districts.
-
The drug dealer, the last of five defendants to plead guilty to federal charges linked to the 'Friends' actor’s death, will face a maximum sentence of 65 years in prison.
Best of LAist