Adopted Positions

Motion

The ______ Neighborhood/Community Council requests that the State of California mandate that localities be empowered to assess the impact on traffic and congestion of ride sharing services by mandating comprehensive data from ride sharing companies available for study. Data should include time spent on the road to and from their homes and between rides for all ridesharing drivers as compared to traffic that would be generated by private vehicles making each trip. The results of this survey should guide both local and state policy in regards to ridesharing and better understand our transportation system. Using such data, the City of Los Angeles should then establish benchmark dates prior to and after implementation of each ridesharing platform and study in a scientific manner using all data available to determine if ride sharing vehicles add to or lessen congestion within the City of Los Angeles.

Motion

Refers to City Council file 11-1705

The _________ Neighborhood Council fully supports Version B+ of the proposed sign ordinance as approved by the City Planning Commission on 10/22/2015, Council File 11-1705. We request the PLUM committee of the Los Angeles City Council adopt a version of the ordinance, which accomplishes the following goals that are important to the stakeholders of our community:

1. Disapproves any amnesty for existing billboards that lack permits or have been altered in violation of their permits
2. Disapproves the “grandfathering” of any sign districts that were not approved in the ordinance when it was reviewed by CPC in 2009.
3. Disapproves any new process, including a Conditional Use Permit process to authorize construction or operation of digital off-site signs outside of sign districts
4. Restricts any new off-site signs, including digital billboards, to sign districts in the 22 areas already zoned as Regional Commercial for high-intensity commercial use
5. Requires existing billboards to be taken down before any new off-site signs can go up in sign districts. The take down ratio of existing signs to new signs should be 5:1 for conventional and 10:1 for digital
6. Ban on new digital billboards or on conversion of existing billboards to digital
7. Request that the City Attorney review all signs without permits and those altered in violation of their permits for enforcement action and compliance.
8. Prohibits any off-site signage in city parks, recreation facilities and open spaces
9. Provides for stiff civil penalties with escalating penalties for erecting or maintaining illegal signs and for multiple or repeat offenses so that penalties are not viewed as a cost of doing business

Motion

Whereas California neighborhoods depend upon high quality, citizen driven, local community planning for justice and equity and balanced development, and

Whereas State Senate Bill 50 [Scott Wiener] weaponizes state government code to eviscerate local planning statewide and thereby increases financialization of land use; intensifies inequality; encourages predatory speculative activity; and masks massive wealth transfer by shifting property ownership opportunities away from small owners to corporate investors, and

Whereas the City Charter-mandated Neighborhood Council system of Los Angeles, and the Community Councils of the City of Los Angeles, represent grass roots democracy, and

Whereas California State Senate Bill 50 [Scott Wiener] establishes “one size fits all” development criteria–based on changeable municipal structures such as bus stops and employment locations–to be determined, without democratic due process or public scrutiny, by the Department of Housing and Community Development and the Office of Planning and Research, and

Whereas the lack of analysis of infrastructure and other costs associated with this pen stroke planning creates grave uncertainty that any local agency would be able to “levy enough service charges, fees or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code”, and given the aforementioned lack of fiscal analysis, Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution “No reimbursement” clause is wrongfully applied to this legislation,

Whereas reform is needed for the present state legislative system which allows sweeping, ideological blunt instrument legislation such as SB 50 to be introduced without extensive vetting in local public hearings prior to consideration in the State Legislature, and

Whereas this wholesale removal of all land use authority to the State clearly abolishes all meaningful local input into land use planning and therefore constitutes an attack upon local democracy, upon neighborhoods, and upon the Neighborhood Councils and Community Councils in the City of Los Angeles,

Therefore,  ____________ Neighborhood/Community Council opposes SB 50 and urges our City Councilmembers to introduce a resolution in Council forthwith, opposing SB50.

Motion

The ______________ Council opposes the lifting of the beach curfew currently in place, restricting beach access from midnight to 5am, daily. This is in consideration of public health and safety concerns and in keeping with long standing practice, supported by LAPD and LA County Beaches and Harbors, who are tasked with maintaining the safety and integrity of the beach and the shoreline, respectively.

Motion

Refers to City Council file 15-0524

In the interest of ensuring that local constituencies represented by Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils are heard, the ____________NC/CC requests that seating be reserved at City departmental hearings, commission meetings, and Council meetings for members of Neighborhood and Community Councils [who have submitted Community Impact Statements on item(s) before the body.*]

The _____________NC/CC further requests that the City Council introduces a motion to amend the Administrative Code (Section 22.819) to reflect this policy.

*  Some Councils may choose to omit this qualifying statement, to be in line with a similar LANCC motion.

Motion

Motion

Motion

WRAC recommends opposing SB 649, which removes from cities the discretionary regulation of “small cell” cell phone towers in the public right-of-way and on city property. Exceptions for historic zones and Coastal Zone are included, but scenic highways and R zones are not included. Local control should be maintained. Cities have capability to properly analyze applications within existing laws and balance protection of neighborhoods with the need for increased wireless capacity.

Motion

Motion

The ________ Neighborhood/Community Council supports the Los Angeles Homeless Veterans Leasing Act of 2015 (Feinstein / S. 2013 and Lieu / H.R. 3484), to place permanent supportive housing on the Department of Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Campus in West LA.