LA City Council: Has Herb Wesson Lost Control or Is Disruption the New Norm?

VOICES-In a media interview last week LA City Council President Herb Wesson alluded to numerous options in his elusive political future, but his photos and comments did not depict the suave, affable, confident persona of the past. He seemed confused. The Daily News reported on July 8 that a new press secretary is trying to “reboot” Wesson’s media image. That may not be enough. 

It may just be an attempt to counteract claims that he was a “controlling dictator” as Assembly speaker, but at the June 30 Council meeting it appeared the President had lost control. Or, has he purposely adopted a new ultra-permissive approach? 

President Wesson made no effort, in an almost-full Chamber, to calm the din of visitors’ voices carrying on unbridled conversations during the meeting, nor did he interfere with their frequent outbursts of clapping, cheers or cat-calls (conveniently inaudible in the “on-demand” archived video.) 

At one point the disruption was so raucous that, instead of summoning Councilman Mitch Englander by microphone, Wesson leaned far forward and motioned him to the podium as if he were hailing a taxi. 

The unnerving country-club atmosphere was compounded by an eerie absence of traditional rules for security and stability in a sea of movement--people gathered in aisles and stood in the bench-seating area, freely took photos with cell phones, and blocked monitors as well as the view of the horseshoe. 

I looked for the LAPD Sergeants-at-arms and discovered they, too, were politely conversing with attendees  rather than just providing their usual perfunctory responses and reverting immediately to maintaining order. 

It was impossible to follow the few brief discussions before the next “call the roll, close the roll, 14 ayes,” as the Council whizzed through 83 items.  Amidst all the distraction, I heard Wesson state several times that he was confused about which item was up for vote or being combined.  He was not alone. We were all straining to hear and struggling to follow the agenda. 

The noise dimmed during several brief public comments, suggesting those present had more respect or interest in the opinions of their peers than the city leaders. Outspoken political critic John Walsh was kept at the microphone for his commentary on three different items, then abruptly thanked and dismissed as the unanimous “ayes’ were recorded. 

Not all speakers were ignored by the Council. A well-endowed young woman wearing a one-size-too-small tank top was granted a two-week extension by President Wesson on a property cited as public nuisance before she even stated the reason for her request.  She was waved to the smiling Councilman who agreed to meet with her personally at the side of the room. 

There were also three presentations of Council commendations, each followed by a long litany of praise by Councilmembers competing for gratitude.  That doesn’t mean the recipients are undeserving of recognition. However, this took up 75 minutes of the Council’s session; and busy, serious attendees were forced to sit through a documentary and a singing commercial for a jazz festival. 

One bright spot was Councilman Paul Krekorian announcing that the homeless-veteran problem in Los Angeles had been solved.  I took that message to the vet who lives in a vacant lot near me and who had bludgeoned his meager belongings to pieces a few nights before in a tragic PTSD episode.  He said it was news to him. 

Taxpayers are becoming increasingly concerned about filthy, unrepaired streets, exploding crime, and allegations of hidden deals by elected officials as we watch developers fill every green patch in the city of angels with concrete. Sadly, the degree of rudeness, annoyance, or, at best, apathy by LA’s Council toward public commentary (or even the public’s presence) has become increasingly apparent during Councilman Wesson’s presidency. Wesson himself often leaves before general public comment. 

The Council’s disdain was most memorably conveyed a few months ago when a Valley Councilman dramatically turned his back and sat on the horseshoe dais when public comments began. 

The paltry two-minute time allowance for constituents who take time off work and pay $16 to park at City Hall to address their city leaders during the last item on the agenda was reduced to one minute earlier this year. It has now been decreased to a total of 15 minutes for all speakers. 

Undeniably, the clownish displays by costumed sensationalists who disrupt the meetings daily are intentionally disrespectful.  But, what happened on June 30, and apparently has become the new "norm," seriously raises questions about Council President Wesson’s legacy and how city business is conducted. 

On that date, a male wearing a red Ku Klux Klan-type pointed hat with a full-face cloth mask with eyeholes and a flowing black cape, flamboyantly strutted numerous times from the back of the Chambers down the middle aisle, sitting, standing and walking at will throughout the gallery with the obvious intent to distract. 

He was also wearing a black T-shirt with large white print on the front, stating, “Fuck White Niggers Too.” He briefly removed his mask to disclose that he was—or appeared to be—African American.  His race is not the issue. 

I went to the the Sergeant-at-arms and said I was extremely offended by the abusive wording on the shirt and also worried about the lack of overall decorum during the meeting as a safety issue.  He responded that there was nothing he could do because the instructions of President Wesson were not to take any action.

Neither Wesson nor any Councilmember called for order throughout the meeting and all ignored the T-shirt, passively confirming what the officer said. 

If the shirt had indicated a different skin color, ethnicity or a certain religion, would it have been considered “hate” speech?  Does free speech at a government meeting include inciting a violent act against one skin color but not another? 

Shouldn’t general or specific disruptions of government business--conducted at taxpayer expense--elicit at least a call for order by the Council and/or the President? 

These were questions I posed to an attorney with another governmental agency to get an objective opinion.  As most attorneys do, he pondered the alternatives, finally asking another question:  Could it be that noise, disruption and confusion serve an overriding purpose in discouraging public participation and inquiry into Council decisions?  Maybe he has a point.   

See also:

Smith, Dakota, Daily News (July 8, 2015) Los Angeles City Council President Herb Wesson: ‘I’m not running for mayor’  

 

(Phyllis M. Daugherty is a contributing writer to opposingviews.com, and an animal activist. She lives in Los Angeles.) –cw

 

 

 

CityWatch

Vol 13 Issue 58

Pub: Jul 17, 2015