New Appointments
First up, Geraldine Knatz as Executive Director for the Port of LA:
LA Business Journal: Villaraigosa Taps Long Beach Port Exec to Head Port of L.A.
Daily Breeze: Geraldine Knatz will take over as head of harbor
LA Times: Mayor Picks Outsider as Port Executive
Daily News: Long Beach port official named to top L.A. Harbor post
Long Beach Press Telegram: Knatz gets nod to head L.A. port
Next up, Estela Lopez to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority board:
LA Times: Business Leader Named to Homeless Aid Panel
LA Business Journal: Villaraigosa Taps Long Beach Port Exec to Head Port of L.A.Daily Breeze: Geraldine Knatz will take over as head of harbor
LA Times: Mayor Picks Outsider as Port Executive
Daily News: Long Beach port official named to top L.A. Harbor post
Long Beach Press Telegram: Knatz gets nod to head L.A. port
Next up, Estela Lopez to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority board:
LA Times: Business Leader Named to Homeless Aid Panel
Posted by Anonymous @ 12/08/2005 08:01:00 AM
25 Comments:
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.."
Alas, she is facing a huge challenge in proving that the above is not true.
That is if, in fact, she wants to or can.
My hope is that she is more environmentally grounded than the paper made her out to be.
Estela Lopez is a good choice.
Estela Lopez surprised me after she was hired on as the central City East Association Executive Director.
She has started a neighborhood watch walk , she works with businesses ,Residents, and Social Service Providers. She isn't afraid to walk the streets of Central City East at night - well of course the LAPD walks with her.
I missed last night's Neighborhood Watch Walk, I am in a theatrical performance at the Los ANgeles Cathedral, I have bronchitis bad , so it wouldn't have helped me to wander the streets last night, but I saw the news report on ABC 7 where Estela and even mitch Netburn were out in the streets.
I have noticed that when it gets extremely cold out , like last night , I see lots of people bundle up on the sidewalks of Central city East and all over downtown. Probably because they won't be messed with because it is best for them to be bundled up under as many covers as possible, instead of harrassed and told to move on. BUt I do have to say after the articels on sleeping and sitting on the sidewalks in the papers , I have seen an increase in folks on the sidewalks. IT is ok right now to do so. SO everyone is on the sidewalks.
All in all, I think having Estela Lopez on the LAHSA Commission is a good choice because it will balance the board and it will also allow for the ACLU and CCEA to be at the same table. I will be attending LAHSA meetings now ; it seems to me entertainment is about to happen there.
Yes, thanks to ACLU its ok to sleep on the sidewalks but if you're a business owner how do you think they feel? Who wants to go into a business when you have to literally walk over people sleeping with all their stuff right in front of your business? There has to be a better answer. Instead of bringing the 4,500 plus from New Orleans and finding them homes why didn't Antonio go to skid row first? Start in your own backyard first.
You know this sam epeson keeps posting the same thing as anonymous.
I feel sorry for you actually. Everyone had to do their part after HUrricane KAtrina and thus far I still don't have anything , no data to tell me who and how these 4,500 were brouth from new orleans.
If ANtonio Villaraigosa did so , good for him , at least Los Angeles did what we could to help- not to mention all of the donations to the red cross etc.
But please come up with some documentation on where these 4,500 are , who specificallly brought them here.
I need some documentation
Thanks to the ACLU it's not a criminal offense to be homeless and poor, Jackass!
I'm sure it feels a whole lot fuc*ing worse sleeping on sidewalks in the winter than having to step over some poor soul you callous sh*t.
Please as if the ACLU is a do gooder for homeless. They went after LAPD not to help the homeless. Thanks to your ACLU many of the homeless have severe mental problems and many of them have cuts, brusies, diseases, etc. and when the LAPD were able to arrest them they knew they would at least the care they needed i.e. 72 medical attention, a doctor diagnosis etc.. Is the ACLU out there helping them get medical attention now? NO NO NO NO
And what are you saying allow all homeless people througout the city sleep on sidewalks even in the rich areas? As if that would ever happen.
have you ever been homeless anonyomus. I have. HAving to walk all night long in the cold because the police keep moving you around. That was in Salt Lake City. You get very ill in the winter when you aren't under the covers. In Los Angeles when it gets like this it is much worse to move people and keep them moving in the cold , the to leave them alone. The police even if the law was changed would proabblay leave them alone in LOs Angeles while we go through the coldest months.
Beleive it or not , you can bet because of the ACLU lawsuit even the homeless are and can not be moved even in the rich neighborhoods . Sorry , but it is happening.
Funny you can't accept responsibility for what you say. I do. I don't hide bhind anonymous.
Reality is that as long as the ACLU is on the LAHSA commission it will be balanced now that Estela Lopez will be on it.
HAve you ever had to be repsonsible for people in all types of weather? Probably not.
Easy to call people names and callous when you have never been reponsible for large groups of people before.
I have and Ihave to tell you , making people get up out of the covers in the middle of the night in the coldest part of winter in Los ANgeles , which is more or less survivable and like camping out , because I have been camped out in the very very cold weather before, is much better than walkng around in the wind and the cold and being exposed to the elements , not to mention not sleepinfg , decreasing the effectiveness of the immune system and causing illness.
Not that I condone this , but until people are allowed to live in housing with supportive services , we still have to make allowances for the health and welfare of the people on the sidewalks.
Callous no, realistic yes.
12:31 -
1. The ACLU went after the LAPD for criminalizing homelessness, which is not a crime but a condition of poverty.
2. Last I checked, the ACLU is NOT the cause of mental illness, rather genetics is the widely accepted medical and scietific explanation.
3. The LAPD didn't arrest homeless to get them medical treatment. They arrested them for sleeping on sidewalks. Thank God the law requires police to provide medical attention to suspects who need it.
4. I'm saying that the ACLU has protected the civil rights of homeless individuals, particularly when their only crime is being poor and having no place to live.
Don't forget the ACLU defends gang bangers and the hell with poor hard working families who want to do something about gang members terrorizing their neighborhoods. Please you are all trying to make the ACLU seem to be knights in shinning armor. Ask the victims of all the murders the gang bangers commit what they think of the ACLU.
You are not going to have the last say on this one.
1. There is an old syaing that says you don't sh*t on your own doorstep.
2. Most liberals live in the suburbs of Los Angeles.
3. These ACLU liberals have sued the City of Los ANgeles not on behalf of the homeless but on behalf of their neighbors in the surrounding communities , so that these people whom they claim to defend can continue to live on the streets of Downtown in a contained environment.
4. Suing on behalf of the homeless is a pre-text , to keep them out of thier neighborhods.
5. If the ACLU was so adamant in protecting the rights of the homeless they would sue the city to build housing, such as the lawsuits these liberals have made on the east coast , yet of course , here in their home , they will not.
6. The ACLU is hypocritical.
7. Let us see what they do on LAHSA.
8. If you beleive that the ACLU is altruistic in what they do. I have a bridge in San Franciso I want to sell you.
Geraldine is an excellent choice. Let's give her a chance. She has lived and worked in the harbor communities for many years and she knows the issues we are facing. Mayor Villaraigosa and Commission President Freeman are pushing for major reforms at the Harbor Department, and now it's her job to implement these changes.
Quoting: "3. These ACLU liberals have sued the City of Los ANgeles not on behalf of the homeless but on behalf of their neighbors in the surrounding communities , so that these people whom they claim to defend can continue to live on the streets of Downtown in a contained environment."
Do your homework. It's one thing to disagree, but to misrepresent or lie is inexcusable. The plaintiffs in the cases were homeless people who didn't want to be abused by 1) the police 2) the BIDs hired goons 3) businesses only interested in their interests.
Those are the facts.
DGARZILLA NICELY SAID AND I TOTALLY AGREE. The ACLU is part of the problem and a big reason why the homelessness has increased so dramatically in skid row. Just watch when the $$$$$$ developers start to try and move the homeless out and watch how Antonio tells his commission appointees to handle that situation. Its all about money.
of course the plaintiffs were homless. WHo else would the ACLU front for their own purposes. HOw much money did these homeless recieve and what thpe of other option did they recieve?
Again , this is the ACLU wanting to keep the status quo.
Actually, it was ALice Callaghan who cried foul and asked to sue the City. Come on . WE know the story and the history.
In a housing crisis , like we have now ,those of us who choose not to live on the streets or have to live on the streets due to the cost of housing,, know the truth and the score.
Irregardless , the homeless were the pre-text.
And because of the lawsuit, now you have people in other parts of the city crying foul because they can't harrass the homless who wander into their neighborhoods, like they used to , these high paid ACLU lawyers and JUdges live there too.
In other words Don't enforcement in skid row is considered harrassment and in other places harrassemnt is considered enforcing the laws, That is containment .
NOw tell me where are the HOmeless who sued the city ?, how much money went to them to get them off of the street and how much money went into the pockets of the ACLU for thier operating budget?
We need to wake up and see what is really going on. Smell the roses my friends , wake up .
Anyway , I am gald I can post on MAyor sam where I can argue against the face vale semantics and really call inot question the actual motives of why the HOmeless plantiffs actually sued.
If I recall correctly , for those who do not live in Central city East , many homless people sell their own medications on the street , they have street value. Even diabetes medication has street value , not jsut illicit drugs.
The ACLU is out of touch big time .
BUt then the laws and rules and quality of life in Central City East are different than anywhere else and it is planned that way.
AS the housing crisis increases and you will see mnay neighborhoods fight back about quality of life issues and how things are handled.
Sue to build housing in the surrounidng communities , not sue to allow people to sleep in the streets. The city should be fined everytime someone can't find housing and fined big time if it is mothers and children.
But good luck in gettting the ACLU to sue for that
in lincoln place, in venice , people are being evicted from thier affordable housing .
Where is the ACLU as AIMCO creates more homelessness?
Keep drinking the Kool-aid as someone in the past on this board used to say.
dgarzila and 6:59 -
Was the ACLU the problem in these cases too?
The 1925 Scopes trial (challenged a ban on teaching evolution)
1941 - Edwards v. California (challenged the anti-Okie laws prohibiting immigration of poor to CA)
1944 Smith v. Allwright (invalidated the law excluding
African Americans from Texas' "white primary")
1948 Shelley v. Kraemer (invalidated restrictive covenants)
1954 Brown v. Board of Education (school desegregation)
1962 Engel v. Vitale (ban on school prayer)
1963 Gideon v. Wainwright (giving poor people the right to a state appointed attorney)
1964 Reynolds v. Sims (applied the one-person one-vote formula to state legislative districts)
1965 Griswold v. Connecticut (invalidated a Connecticut law forbidding the use of
contraceptives)
1966 Miranda v. Arizona (right to remain silent or right against selfincremination)
1967 Loving v. Virginia (a civil rights landmark that invalidated the anti-miscegination laws of Virginia and 15 other southern states)
1968 Levy v. Louisiana (invalidated a state law that denied an illegitimate child the right to recover damages for a parent's death)
1971 Reed v. Reed (A breakthrough women's rights decision that struck
down a state law giving automatic preference to men over women as
administrators of decedents' estates)
1973 Roe v. Wade (abortion rights)
1974 U.S. v. Nixon ("There is no proposition more dangerous to the health of a constitutional democracy than the notion that an elected head of state is above the law and beyond the reach of judicial review."
1996 - Romer v. Evans (struck down Colorado law that voters adopted which prevented any level of state or local government to protect the status of persons based on their "homosexual, lesbian or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships." ).
where's_the_justice says . . .
It sounds like they prefer the good ol' days where women remained at home, schools could promote religion, segregation stood strong, no mixing of the races, gays could be persecuted and accused communists jailed without due process.
You keep missing the point:
In reference to central City East . The ACLU sees this area has to continue to be much different than others.
Irregardless of the fact they did these wonderful things way back when .....
When it comes to Central City East they conintue to allow a place to coninue to exist that allows for people to be dumped and a place for genocide which needs to be protected.
each case should be weighed on an individual basis.
So in order to justify their bad judgment when it comes to Central City East , you cite these things they have done in the past. BAsically you have lost your argument , thus you accuse me of things i did not say.
I agree with many of these actions of which the ACLU took, but I don't agree that allowing people to sleep on city sidewalks is a proper way to address this situation. The way it should be handled is to sue the city to create housing and if people are still on the street , again sue the city for that. It should be illegal to allow this to be happening in this city , when we don't like the laws we change them , but once the ACLU lawsuit is over we will still have this problem.
ANd not until you see that it is not ok to say that we must protect the poor,s civil rights to die in the streets because other people don't want them in their neighborhooods , even the lawyers of the ACLU, and say that if their rights are not protected then we may lose ours , I have a very big problem with it. Their daily struggle of living in thier own filth, shooting up until they die , and just living out in the elements with diesease and sickness , without medical care , my conscience can't agree with this as being a romantic heroic thing to do. NOr can my heart.
Read the mission statement of the ACLU:
"If the rights of society's most vulnerable members are denied, everybody's rights are imperiled."
so anonymous ,is that what you do while you eat at Arnie MOrton's and live in your wonderful condo whether it be a SRO , or a house on the HIll? Do you actually raise your wine glass in these people's honor while they die in the streets , while they protect your civil rights?
I ,so far have not been to one of their funerals, because if their dying in our streets is to protect my freedoms, then it only goes that they should be shown and given a hero's funeral , with colors and honors.
It makes me sick to think people are eating at home inside , watching their television , and drinking their wine and tell me that these people are protecting their rights, if so , show them the honor they deserve and get them off of the street.
ANd if it is romantic to protect our rights by living on the streets , then maybe we should all be out there living in our own filth , and in disease etc.
Someone needs to quit seeing things through rose colored lenses.
Things need to change here. And like I said I don't see the ACLU suing on behalf of those tenants in LIncoln Place, who are now becoming homeless.
What does the consitution say about this?
Oh , yeah .The ACLU says that these new homeless are what stands between us and our freedoms being taken away. Thus we must protect their right to live on the streets.
You know I mean what I say above , but I do not think prison or jail should be an option , but the ACLU needs to sue to create these other options, they need to follow through.
Your argument that the ACLU is bogus, self-serving, supportive of the status quo and therefore has done homeless a disservice is ridiculous.
Protecting people's constitutional rights and fighting for increased housing are NOT mutually exclusive issues. The previous criminalization of the homeless in no way served a purpose of providing for their quality of life needs, despite how incidental some services may have seemed.
The true culpret of homelessness, namely among the mentally ill, is former Gov and Pres. Ronald Reagan. The release of thousands of mentally ill from state institutions and failure to provide for community-based services set the stage for what we now see. But let's not stop with him; every governor since has failed to sufficiently provide for those mental health and housing needs.
Your confusion between protecting civil liberties and advocating for increased housing and mental health services needs to be distinguished.
2:22 and 8:01
My heroes for the day. I can now leave Mayor Sam and go party.
Yet that is where they will stop. They will not fight for increased housing. The ACLU will stop with this, after this lawsuit is over. To them this is mutualy exclusive.
They do not follow through.
Anyway , good try . But your arguments don't stand , they never have and they never will.
Once again you put words in my mouth. I did not mention crinminalizing the homeless , I have mentioned crimninalizing those who stand in positions of responsibility in these municipalities who should be criminalized for allowing homelessness to continue.
One day independent thought may come to you. But independent thought seems to be something you lack.
Everyything you mentioned are arguments that already have been made , how about some original thinking here?
I don't blame Ronald Reagan nor any other GGovernor , actually I blame people such as yourself who will not take responsibility and say it is your problem too and get hundreds of thousdands of People to march in the streets , just like the marches aganst the bush wars. But alas , it won't happen. Talking behind anonymouus tells me something about you and that says that the strength of your convistions is weak.
In this case ,( not in the other cases , again you make wide reference to the ACLU ,) the ACLU is bogus , self - serving etc.- In this case.
I live here and I see it everyday. I will be toasting those this month at our memorial cermony for those who have died here in the streets and the hotels and the social service provider missions, etc. For me this hits close to home.
Come on down to gladys park this month when we do this , I will keep you posted on the day we do it.
Again you won't come. You don't have to see it . You will hide . You will hide from your responsibilites , just like the ACLU is doing. MAke money off of the homeless , but won't provide another option for them to live . MAkes sense.
I feel sorry for you.
I depends on the ACLU to fight for me in reference to the diasability act , so I am not hostile towards them , but I am going to question themm, if I feel they are not thinking correctly.
NOw define to us what you mean by not being mutually exclusive and how the ACLU will sue for the city to create hoisuing in this lawsuit which is pending?
It's not an either-or situation:
You can/should stop criminalization of homeless by police AND create more housing. Stopping the police from arresting the homeless didn't put any more people on the streets; they were already there.
There are several homeless advocates out there who can use the public's support. I encourage you to join me in supporting them, specifically, the Los Angeles Coalition to End Hunger and Homelessness.
I'm an ACLU member and LACEHH donor. I believe in both.
Please let me know the date and time of the Gladys Park event. I WILL be there.
You know you keep missing my point completely.
Arresting and enforcing the laws is inmportant, living here , I watched as the drug dealers as they began to use more honmless people in wheelchairs after the lawsuit over the streetsweeps , to fron their dope.
Now that we may wind up losing the lawsuit over the sleeping and lying in the streets you are going to see more and more homeless be used as fronts ot sell dope. They adapt.
To answer our response , the homeless have laways been there , but now even the surrounding communities are not going to ahve them run out of thier neighborhoods because the LAPD officers will be afraid to question people wandering those neighborhoods for fear of being sued. Tie the LAPD hands is what these lawsuits have done.
The LACEHH has not created housing for the homeless , that is not in thier mission statement , they are an advocacy organization. Thus they also do nothing but sue bt not follow through.
Now they were there for me when I was on the City Center Redevelpment project committee when we said there was not enough affordable hosuing in the plan nor were the rules for displacement acceptable. Thus they sued over the plan, I applaude them for that, but , we need to donate money to those who are actually creating housing and now that the property values are increasing to aquire these places for rehabilitation shoul donate to them , it is going to get worse.
AIMCO has created more homeless in Venice.
Arresting people who are doing wrong should happen irregardless of if they are homeless or not. The law is the law and this is where we are going to have to disagree. When someone violates the law they should be held responsible for what they do.
You are going to counter me and tell me that living on the streets is not a crime, I lso agree with this,but selling drugs is a crime , sellimg your own prescription medications is a crime esp, if the taxpayers are paying for them .
Just like that poster who says that the ACLU defends gangbangers who committ heinous crimes, I have to also say the ACLU defends drug dealers in the guise of the Homeless.
I live here , I see it on a daily basis. , I know what is going on .
If this lawsuit is successfull , it will now allow for the creation of skid row all over the city of Los Angeles. SInce the LAPD will not question anyone who may appear to them may be homeless.
I say good job.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home