August 4, 2004
THE WESTSIDE URBAN FORUM
The Written Forum
Newsletter Vol 2 Issue 2

The Westside Urban Forum's recipient of the 2001 Westside Prize was then City of Los Angeles Councilmember, now State Assemblymember, Jackie Goldberg ("JG"). Jackie Goldberg was honored for her heroic efforts on behalf of the community and for her vision and leadership in connection with the successful implementation of the Business Improvement District in Hollywood.

Two WUF directors, Jeffrey Graham and Stephanie Pincetl met with Jackie at the Assemblymember's District Field Office on Avenue 56 in Highland Park to discuss Los Angeles' urban issues from Jackie's eastside perspective.

WUF: Please fill us in on what you are currently focusing on from your perch in Sacramento.

JG: From a planning standpoint, we are tussling with the concept of Smart Growth in that Smart Growth has come to mean "put the density somewhere else" and we, in the working and low income class communities, are the "somewhere else." While we don't object to development in our neighborhoods, we want other amenities to come along with that new housing. Urban areas, to be safe and complete, need parks, schools, libraries, and small scale service oriented retail.

WUF: And those things are not being brought into your 45th Assembly District?

JG: No, not in the least. What we see here are developers trying to convert a bunch of five-plexes into major residential projects ranging from 30 to 100 units per project.

WUF: Fancy that. Among the suitors may well be from our very own; namely, Westside Urban Forum members.

JG: But, one must understand there is no pre-conceived Master Plan for the City, nor the District, and nor the County. From what I can tell, new projects are proposed without consideration given to the quality and capacity of neighborhood schools and parks. Existing schools may not be large enough or good enough to accept the new population. That approach is not deserving of the moniker "Smart Growth."

WUF: Jackie, please reacquaint us and our readers: identify for us the rough boundaries of the District your represent in the Assembly.

JG: Sure: I occasionally lapse into defining and describing our City in terms of the City Council Districts; I am a creature of habit.

WUF: Understandable. You are referring to the organization of our 15 districts within the City of Los Angeles?...

JG: Yes, my Assembly District consists of portions of City Council Districts 1, 13, and 14. If you take the City of Los Angeles as a whole, 5 out of 15 City Council districts are zoned to receive all the future population growth. Those 5 districts once fully built out would, as currently planned, include fully one-half of all of LA's population.

WUF: How do you explain that?

JG: Simple. Politics. The folks within those areas slated for big growth have no political juice. While Silver Lake is down- zoning, and getting wider streets and sewer upgrades, that is not happening yet in other parts of the City with equal or greater needs.

WUF: The system seems lopsided.

JG: Further complicating the picture is that the people I serve rank as the second most transit dependent in the City. We have studies to that effect.
But, and this is huge – these same people lack the "last 2 ½ miles" of transit to make light rail convenient. Moreover, the Gold Line, which runs closest of any of the lines to my District's people – is too expensive. It's as much as the bus, which doubles the cost to commute.

WUF: What are you proposing for a cure?

JG: While I was at the Council we worked on DASH buses that are free 25 cents and we are continuing to expand that program so customers do not have to double pay. In fact, we just successfully introduced a DASH line between Pico Union and Echo Park. The Department of Transportation initially opposed it. With over 7,000 additional riders for the day, however, it pays for itself. The incremental revenue from the new ridership covers the reduction in the cost of the ticket. We have proven our mettle.

WUF: Good news there. Do you have more to share in an optimistic vein?

JG: Yes. Let me bring to your attention my Joint Use Initiative. This is to be used in connection with Master Planning for our District and on a City wide basis. We are bringing together for planning and budgeting purposes representatives from each of the following: City, County, State, Agencies, School Districts, and private for profit and non-profit housing developers.

WUF: Thanks, that is promising.

JG: Yes – and fraught with obstacles but we are pulling together all these elements (public, private and non-profit) in order to draw intelligent plans and to figure out a way to pay for them. I have asked that the group look at all bond monies available for schools, housing, police, libraries, and parks and develop a coordinated effort for deploying that capital in a coordinated way.

WUF: You are offering a bigger Big Picture Approach. Are you going to wrap in health care?

JG: Yes. From a policy perspective, this has never been done this way before. Each member of this civic club historically has had concerns about missing or losing out on money – as the divergent funding suggest. Traditionally everyone pursued their own separate pot of money for their own project or part of a project. I am proposing we approach things jointly from a master planning joint use perspective. From a legal point of view, there are still some impediments but we have lawyers from each element working together to make recommendations on how to overcome those. From a financing perspective, we have divergent funding cycles, and lines for applications and approvals under each type of bond facility that is run – by different state agencies. Changes need to be made and the State Allocation Board is probably the place to start since most growth neighborhoods need more schools and changes can only come under the State Allocation Board.

WUF: So it's become partly a timing issue.

JG: Yes, yet there have been joint use successes already in Glendale and in San Diego. And there is one in the charrette phase for Cypress Park – Susie Hoffman Kipp, my District Director, and Fabolia Vilchez in our office is working on it and of course she is willing to talk with neighbors and community leaders. Without the early community participation at the design phase, the dam breaks and you get Westwood.

WUF: What's that?

JG: One or two last items I need to mention:
1. If we don't raise taxes somewhat – increase revenue at the State and local levels – there will be no public services nor infrastructure development. It is that simple. Proposition 56, the Proposition that could have allowed more dollars to flow into infrastructure only lost 2 to 1, which isn't a bad showing really given the big dollars spent by Southern California Edison coupled with the vocal opposition to any new taxes-animus to new taxes in the State, cultivated by the Governor, the Chamber of Commerce and others.

If I am not mistaken, one of your recent Forums centered around the fact that there has been pitifully little invested by the City, County and State in infrastructure for the past 40 years. This has to change. The money has to come from somewhere.

Finally, though this is outside of the Forum's balliwick, it does affect quality of life especially in my parts of the City: there is a crying need for gun control.

WUF: Thank you Jackie. Don't be a stranger.

JG: You are very welcome. Thank you.