latimes--2020-11-25--New L.A. County 'Safer at Home' restrictions revealed as COVID-19 surge worsens

With coronavirus cases and COVID-19 deaths surging at an alarming rate , Los Angeles County officials Tuesday began to outline a new limited Safer at Home order aimed at slowing the virus spread while sticking with an outdoor dining ban amid a growing outcry .
The new restrictions are looking increasingly likely as daily coronavirus infections spike to unprecedented levels , increasing stress on hospitals amid concern more people will be infected during the Thanksgiving holiday .
But it also appears that a new stay-at-home order that had been suggested as a possibility last week would fall far short of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the pandemic in the spring .
The March order closed all but essential businesses and left many people at home except for trips to such places as supermarkets and medical offices .
But officials suggested Tuesday the new rules would allow many businesses to remain open but with limited customer capacity .
More details might be provided today .
“ We are not completely shutting down everything , ” said Los Angeles County Supervisor Hilda Solis .
“ Nonessential businesses will be very much open ; gyms will be open outdoors ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; mini-golf and go-karts will be open with reduced capacity , ” supervisor Janice Hahn said .
The proposed directives are all designed to keep people in their homes as much as possible , reduce capacity at sites where people from different households interact with each other , and curtail some nonessential activities .
• A ban on all gatherings among people who don ’ t live in the same household , with exceptions for outdoor church services and outdoor protests .
Currently , small gatherings are allowed outdoors , but capped at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than three households allowed .
• A reduction in occupancy of essential retail stores to 35 % of capacity ; for grocery stores , that would be a reduction from the current cap of 50 % capacity .
• A reduction in capacity at nonessential retail stores and libraries to 20 % ; currently , they can hold up to 25 % of capacity .
• The ordered closure of playgrounds that are not part of a school or child-care center ; swimming pools that serve members of more than one household , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and card rooms .
Beaches , trails and parks would remain open , as would outdoor venues like golf courses , tennis courts , skate parks , and community gardens .
Child-care and day care , schools and day camps that have opened under current protocols would be able to remain open as is the case under existing rules , with one new requirement : an ordered closure for 14 days should an outbreak occur , which is defined as three or more cases over a two-week period .
Activities that can continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ youth sports for conditioning and skill building only ; tournaments and competitions have not been allowed to resume .
And the county would still need to abide by the state ’ s limited overnight stay-at-home order , which says nonessential activities outside the home with members of other households must end between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m .
It was only a week ago that county officials raised the prospect of a new stay-at-home order , which they said would only generally allow essential workers and people securing essential services to leave their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Los Angeles County director of public health , Barbara Ferrer , said a sweeping shutdown is not necessary because the county has more tools to handle COVID-19 compared with the spring , when less was known about the disease .
“ We have much more capacity on testing now , which allows us to do a better job quickly identifying people who are positive , ” Ferrer said .
“ We ’ ve learned some things from that previous time , ” said Dr. Muntu Davis , the L.A. County health officer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t have in place , in terms of universal face covering.
” Officials did not elaborate on the timing of the new order .
But conditions were continuing to deteriorate .
On Tuesday , 45 additional deaths were reported in L.A. County , the highest single-day total since early September .
The deaths of L.A. County residents are now reported at triple the daily rate they were on Nov. 3 .
Hospitalizations were also climbing at rapid rates , with nearly 1,700 people in the hospital with COVID-19 on Tuesday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Officials warned that unless county residents change their behavior on a widespread scale , the existing supply of staffed hospital beds will soon be exhausted .
While L.A. County has been particularly hard hit , the state as a whole is wrestling with an avalanche of coronavirus cases , and officials expect the number of daily deaths will become even worse than the summer peak .
“ Certainly , the numbers of deaths will likely go up .
Just as we are exceeding our highest-ever numbers of cases , and beginning to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beyond where they ’ ve ever been pressed before , the idea that the numbers of deaths could exceed where we ’ ve been before is also real and true , ” Dr. Mark Ghaly , the California health and human services secretary , said Tuesday .
The state recorded 20,654 cases Monday , shattering the previous single-day record of 13,412 infections , according to an independent Times survey of California counties .
L.A. County recorded nearly 6,200 cases Monday , which was also a daily record , and more than 3,700 on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the midst of a surge here in California , ” Ghaly said .
Statewide , the daily average of new coronavirus cases , calculated over a seven-day period , more than doubled in the past two weeks , a Times analysis found .
Most of California ’ s counties also reported the same doubling or worse .
Imperial County has seen its daily average of coronavirus cases nearly quadruple in the last two weeks .
That county has been forced to erect a 50-bed tent to help deal with a surge in COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ healthcare workers , including 33 intensive care unit nurses , three lab scientists , 21 emergency room nurses and six respiratory therapists , officials said last week .
Imperial County has also seen its coronavirus test positivity rate double in the course of a month , from 10.5 % to 23.8 % .
Between Nov. 1 and Monday , the number of people hospitalized with COVID-19 statewide has more than doubled , Ghaly said , from about 2,500 to more than 5,800 .
Some hospitals ’ intensive care units “ are already being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he added .
“ When you see the numbers more than double in just under three weeks , we ’ re concerned , ” Ghaly said .
Los Angeles County health leaders have made the same point , saying they worry cases could spike much more after the Thanksgiving holiday .
But their efforts to restrict movements are meeting with growing backlash .
The suspension of outdoor restaurant dining was met with anger and desperation from restaurateurs , who have been reeling from the shutdown .
Outdoor dining offered a lifeline , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing everything they could to keep their establishments safe .
Others questioned the wisdom or efficacy of the restriction , and demanded to see the data justifying such a move .
A divided Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors rejected calls Tuesday to walk back the ban on in-person outdoor dining and restrict restaurants — along with breweries and wineries — just to takeout and delivery service beginning at 10 p.m. Wednesday .
Supervisor Kathryn Barger , whose district includes Santa Clarita , much of north L.A. County and the northern San Gabriel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ punish a sector that is unfairly shouldering the burden ” — and added that she ’ s “ concerned that this county has taken the approach of everything should be closed , unless we have a good reason to open it.
” “ I feel that what is happening today is truly going to devastate not only the workers but their families , ” Barger said .
Barger and Hahn voted to block the ban .
But the board majority was swayed after county health officials said it was clear that people gathering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ removing their masks to eat increased the risk of new infections .
“ This is the only business that allows its customers to remain , and often for quite a while , unmasked , ” said Supervisor Sheila Kuehl , who represents parts of the Westside , the San Fernando Valley and Malibu .
“ And that , I think , is enough to single it out right there .
We tried , but the numbers have gone up.
” Solis , who represents East L.A. , southeast L.A. County and parts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was at a private hospital over the weekend because her mother had a health issue and was alarmed at what she saw .
“ I ’ ve never in my life seen the corridors in the ER completely full , ” Solis said .
“ There were no rooms available to treat COVID patients .
That to me was very startling.
” The 3-to-2 board vote to go forward with the restrictions came shortly after the Los Angeles City Council voted 11 to 3 Tuesday to seek a repeal of the outdoor dining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommendation because the city is generally governed by the county ’ s public health rules .
“ This will be the final nail in their coffin , ” said Councilwoman Monica Rodriguez of local restaurants .
Councilman Mike Bonin , who cast a dissenting vote along with members Marqueece Harris-Dawson and Curren Price , said some restaurants have set up outdoor dining areas with barriers so significant that their patrons are effectively experiencing indoor dining .
He also argued that the council , which lacks its own health department , does not have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their decision .
“ Since we don ’ t have the scientists … I would prefer to think that we would defer to the county , which is in charge of the issue , ” he said .
The California Restaurant Assn .
filed a lawsuit challenging the ban by county health officials and sought an emergency order from a judge halting the new rules from taking effect .
Attorneys for the association asked Judge James Chalfant to issue an order to stop the closures from going forward unless health officials can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impose the dining ban .
Chalfant denied the request , calling the evidence the association presented “ insufficient ” to overturn the ban or to require the county to provide the data in his ruling .
The judge also said that in the absence of “ solid evidence ” from the association showing the dining ban was inappropriate , he would not schedule further hearings to consider whether the ban should be overturned .
If new evidence comes to light , Chalfant said the association is free to bring it to him .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim a victory in Pasadena , which said will allow restaurants to continue outdoor dining despite the county order .
The city has its own Department of Public Health that can issue independent orders , and until now had generally followed the lead of Los Angeles County .
“ We will assess our data daily but at this point will not close down restaurants on Wednesday or the near future , ” said Lisa Derderian , spokeswoman for the city of Pasadena .
San Francisco , which has seen its own COVID-19 case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better shape than Los Angeles County , announced Tuesday it would keep outdoor dining open for now .
Still , officials warned the virus was spreading fast .
The rate at which coronavirus tests turned up positive has more than doubled in the last month .
Hospitalization rates for COVID-19 in the city have doubled since the end of the month .
“ This is a once-in-a-century pandemic , ” said Dr. Grant Colfax , the city ’ s public health director .
“ This not the time to throw caution to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in San Francisco , Sean Greene in Thousand Oaks , and Ryan Menezes and David Zahniser in Los Angeles contributed to this report .

Rong-Gong Lin II, Luke Money, Jaclyn Cosgrove, Lila Seidman

Raul and Silvia Garcia enjoy a beer at the Venice Ale House along Ocean Front Walk in Venice on Monday.
With coronavirus cases and COVID-19 deaths surging at an alarming rate, Los Angeles County officials Tuesday began to outline a new limited Safer at Home order aimed at slowing the virus spread while sticking with an outdoor dining ban amid a growing outcry.
The new restrictions are looking increasingly likely as daily coronavirus infections spike to unprecedented levels, increasing stress on hospitals amid concern more people will be infected during the Thanksgiving holiday. But it also appears that a new stay-at-home order that had been suggested as a possibility last week would fall far short of the one imposed during the first months of the pandemic in the spring.
The March order closed all but essential businesses and left many people at home except for trips to such places as supermarkets and medical offices. But officials suggested Tuesday the new rules would allow many businesses to remain open but with limited customer capacity. More details might be provided today.
Advertisement
“We are not completely shutting down everything,” said Los Angeles County Supervisor Hilda Solis.
“Nonessential businesses will be very much open; gyms will be open outdoors; zoos will be open; hair salons; mini-golf and go-karts will be open with reduced capacity,” supervisor Janice Hahn said.
The proposed directives are all designed to keep people in their homes as much as possible, reduce capacity at sites where people from different households interact with each other, and curtail some nonessential activities.
They include:
A ban on all gatherings among people who don’t live in the same household, with exceptions for outdoor church services and outdoor protests. Currently, small gatherings are allowed outdoors, but capped at up to 15 people with no more than three households allowed.
A reduction in occupancy of essential retail stores to 35% of capacity; for grocery stores, that would be a reduction from the current cap of 50% capacity.
A reduction in capacity at nonessential retail stores and libraries to 20%; currently, they can hold up to 25% of capacity.
The ordered closure of playgrounds that are not part of a school or child-care center; swimming pools that serve members of more than one household, although regulated lap swimming can continue; and card rooms.
Beaches, trails and parks would remain open, as would outdoor venues like golf courses, tennis courts, skate parks, and community gardens.
Tracking the coronavirus in L.A. County The latest maps and charts on the spread of COVID-19 in Los Angeles County, including cases, deaths, closures and restrictions.
Advertisement
Child-care and day care, schools and day camps that have opened under current protocols would be able to remain open as is the case under existing rules, with one new requirement: an ordered closure for 14 days should an outbreak occur, which is defined as three or more cases over a two-week period.
Activities that can continue include professional sports without spectators and outdoor youth sports for conditioning and skill building only; tournaments and competitions have not been allowed to resume.
And the county would still need to abide by the state’s limited overnight stay-at-home order, which says nonessential activities outside the home with members of other households must end between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m.
It was only a week ago that county officials raised the prospect of a new stay-at-home order, which they said would only generally allow essential workers and people securing essential services to leave their homes.
But since then, the Los Angeles County director of public health, Barbara Ferrer, said a sweeping shutdown is not necessary because the county has more tools to handle COVID-19 compared with the spring, when less was known about the disease. “We have much more capacity on testing now, which allows us to do a better job quickly identifying people who are positive,” Ferrer said.
“We’ve learned some things from that previous time,” said Dr. Muntu Davis, the L.A. County health officer. “There were certain things that we didn’t have in place, in terms of universal face covering.”
Officials did not elaborate on the timing of the new order. But conditions were continuing to deteriorate. On Tuesday, 45 additional deaths were reported in L.A. County, the highest single-day total since early September. The deaths of L.A. County residents are now reported at triple the daily rate they were on Nov. 3.
Hospitalizations were also climbing at rapid rates, with nearly 1,700 people in the hospital with COVID-19 on Tuesday, up from nearly 800 on Oct. 23. Officials warned that unless county residents change their behavior on a widespread scale, the existing supply of staffed hospital beds will soon be exhausted.
While L.A. County has been particularly hard hit, the state as a whole is wrestling with an avalanche of coronavirus cases, and officials expect the number of daily deaths will become even worse than the summer peak.
“Certainly, the numbers of deaths will likely go up. Just as we are exceeding our highest-ever numbers of cases, and beginning to see our hospital systems pressed with COVID beyond where they’ve ever been pressed before, the idea that the numbers of deaths could exceed where we’ve been before is also real and true,” Dr. Mark Ghaly, the California health and human services secretary, said Tuesday.
The state recorded 20,654 cases Monday, shattering the previous single-day record of 13,412 infections, according to an independent Times survey of California counties. L.A. County recorded nearly 6,200 cases Monday, which was also a daily record, and more than 3,700 on Tuesday.
“We are truly in the midst of a surge here in California,” Ghaly said.
Statewide, the daily average of new coronavirus cases, calculated over a seven-day period, more than doubled in the past two weeks, a Times analysis found. Most of California’s counties also reported the same doubling or worse.
Imperial County has seen its daily average of coronavirus cases nearly quadruple in the last two weeks. That county has been forced to erect a 50-bed tent to help deal with a surge in COVID-19 patients and has requested dozens of additional healthcare workers, including 33 intensive care unit nurses, three lab scientists, 21 emergency room nurses and six respiratory therapists, officials said last week.
Imperial County has also seen its coronavirus test positivity rate double in the course of a month, from 10.5% to 23.8%.
Between Nov. 1 and Monday, the number of people hospitalized with COVID-19 statewide has more than doubled, Ghaly said, from about 2,500 to more than 5,800. Some hospitals’ intensive care units “are already being pressed to a significant degree,” he added.
“When you see the numbers more than double in just under three weeks, we’re concerned,” Ghaly said.
Los Angeles County health leaders have made the same point, saying they worry cases could spike much more after the Thanksgiving holiday.
But their efforts to restrict movements are meeting with growing backlash. The suspension of outdoor restaurant dining was met with anger and desperation from restaurateurs, who have been reeling from the shutdown. Outdoor dining offered a lifeline, and many owners and workers felt they were doing everything they could to keep their establishments safe.
Others questioned the wisdom or efficacy of the restriction, and demanded to see the data justifying such a move.
A divided Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors rejected calls Tuesday to walk back the ban on in-person outdoor dining and restrict restaurants — along with breweries and wineries — just to takeout and delivery service beginning at 10 p.m. Wednesday.
Supervisor Kathryn Barger, whose district includes Santa Clarita, much of north L.A. County and the northern San Gabriel Valley, said the suspension “will punish a sector that is unfairly shouldering the burden” — and added that she’s “concerned that this county has taken the approach of everything should be closed, unless we have a good reason to open it.”
“I feel that what is happening today is truly going to devastate not only the workers but their families,” Barger said.
Barger and Hahn voted to block the ban. But the board majority was swayed after county health officials said it was clear that people gathering with others outside their immediate families and removing their masks to eat increased the risk of new infections.
“This is the only business that allows its customers to remain, and often for quite a while, unmasked,” said Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, who represents parts of the Westside, the San Fernando Valley and Malibu. “And that, I think, is enough to single it out right there. We tried, but the numbers have gone up.”
Solis, who represents East L.A., southeast L.A. County and parts of the San Gabriel Valley, said she was at a private hospital over the weekend because her mother had a health issue and was alarmed at what she saw.
“I’ve never in my life seen the corridors in the ER completely full,” Solis said. “There were no rooms available to treat COVID patients. That to me was very startling.”
The 3-to-2 board vote to go forward with the restrictions came shortly after the Los Angeles City Council voted 11 to 3 Tuesday to seek a repeal of the outdoor dining restrictions. The vote amounted to a recommendation because the city is generally governed by the county’s public health rules.
“This will be the final nail in their coffin,” said Councilwoman Monica Rodriguez of local restaurants.
Councilman Mike Bonin, who cast a dissenting vote along with members Marqueece Harris-Dawson and Curren Price, said some restaurants have set up outdoor dining areas with barriers so significant that their patrons are effectively experiencing indoor dining. He also argued that the council, which lacks its own health department, does not have a team of experts to guide them on their decision.
“Since we don’t have the scientists … I would prefer to think that we would defer to the county, which is in charge of the issue,” he said.
The California Restaurant Assn. filed a lawsuit challenging the ban by county health officials and sought an emergency order from a judge halting the new rules from taking effect.
Attorneys for the association asked Judge James Chalfant to issue an order to stop the closures from going forward unless health officials can provide scientific evidence backing their decision to impose the dining ban. Chalfant denied the request, calling the evidence the association presented “insufficient” to overturn the ban or to require the county to provide the data in his ruling.
The judge also said that in the absence of “solid evidence” from the association showing the dining ban was inappropriate, he would not schedule further hearings to consider whether the ban should be overturned. If new evidence comes to light, Chalfant said the association is free to bring it to him.
Critics of the outdoor dining ban did claim a victory in Pasadena, which said will allow restaurants to continue outdoor dining despite the county order. The city has its own Department of Public Health that can issue independent orders, and until now had generally followed the lead of Los Angeles County.
“We will assess our data daily but at this point will not close down restaurants on Wednesday or the near future,” said Lisa Derderian, spokeswoman for the city of Pasadena.
San Francisco, which has seen its own COVID-19 case numbers surge but is still in much better shape than Los Angeles County, announced Tuesday it would keep outdoor dining open for now. Still, officials warned the virus was spreading fast. The rate at which coronavirus tests turned up positive has more than doubled in the last month. Hospitalization rates for COVID-19 in the city have doubled since the end of the month.
“This is a once-in-a-century pandemic,” said Dr. Grant Colfax, the city’s public health director. “This not the time to throw caution to the wind.”
Times staff writers Maura Dolan in San Francisco, Sean Greene in Thousand Oaks, and Ryan Menezes and David Zahniser in Los Angeles contributed to this report.


latimes--2020-11-24--LAPD request for $100-million budget increase draws criticism  amid city's fiscal crisis

Despite growing concern over a ballooning budget shortfall that could usher in sweeping cuts to city services in coming weeks , the Los Angeles Police Department put forward a proposal Tuesday that would increase its operating budget next year by more than $ 100 million .
Police officials claimed the proposal represented a “ bare bones ” budget that would preserve public safety as much as possible while absorbing cuts to personnel and previously negotiated salary increases for remaining officers — all while meeting Mayor Eric Garcetti ’ s calls to rein in spending .
“ I do believe that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and represents the type of austerity that we need to exercise during this time of such tremendous demands on the city ’ s coffers , ” LAPD Chief Michel Moore told the Police Commission , which unanimously approved the proposal .
Activist groups blasted the proposal , saying it undermined recent efforts to shift spending away from police and toward alternative social services , including through a $ 150-million cut to the department ’ s budget by the City Council .
An even more cutting assessment came straight from City Hall , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given the COVID-19 pandemic ’ s impact on L.A. 's bottom line .
“ Pandemic-driven revenue losses have devastated the city ’ s finances , and they are forcing us to make sizable cuts across the board , ” said Alex Comisar , a spokesman for Garcetti .
“ The mayor is working with all departments to prepare a 2021-2022 budget that preserves the most basic city services , and that ’ s what we plan to deliver next year.
” The $ 1.83-billion LAPD proposal reflects a nearly $ 30-million reduction from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year , which is how the LAPD described it in its proposal .
However , activists pointed out that it would be a $ 106-million increase over the reduced budget that went into effect after the City Council made its changes to the LAPD budget in July — and called the LAPD ’ s suggestion it was a budget cut misleading .
“ This is a gross misrepresentation , right to our face , ” said Hamid Khan , of the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition , an activist group that has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months alongside the group Free Radicals .
“ When the rest of the city has to suffer from austerity , and even other critical services and essential services are being cut back , you have a [ police ] department playing with numbers , ” Khan said .
“ This lie has to be exposed.
” The discussion Tuesday showed that the intense debate over police funding that occurred amid massive protests against police violence this summer is far from over , and will likely heat up in coming weeks and months as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the intensifying fiscal crisis .
The Police Commission ’ s approval sends the proposal to Garcetti ’ s office for further review and changes .
It will then be incorporated by Garcetti ’ s office into a broader citywide spending blueprint for the 2021-2022 fiscal year , which will then go before the City Council for final adjustments and approval this summer .
The city ’ s projected shortfall for this year stands at $ 600 million , but some analysts expect that number to grow as the impacts of the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told agencies to reduce spending this year by 3 % .
City Administrative Officer Richard Llewellyn Jr. said his office is calculating what impact those cuts may have on the shortfall .
If the shortfall continues to grow , agencies — including the police — would be asked to make more cuts .
What that will mean for a city already experiencing its highest homicide rate in a decade — mirroring other cities across the country — is unclear .
Activists have suggested that fewer police on the streets won ’ t mean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out , but growth of alternate services isn ’ t likely in a budget crunch .
Police officials have suggested that cuts to the department would be devastating for the crime fight .
Moore on Tuesday defended the department ’ s proposed budget , saying it was “ not meant to be smoke and mirrors ” but a serious , discerning evaluation of how best to move forward given the serious fiscal constraints on the city .
Moore said the funding requested would allow LAPD to maintain public safety — albeit with some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and growing contractual obligations , including a previously negotiated salary and overtime increase for officers that will cost the department more than $ 30 million next year even with a reduction in overall police officer positions .
Moore said it would not restore any of the approximately 250 officer positions that were slashed in response to the City Council ’ s cut to the LAPD budget in July .
Craig Lally , president of the union that represents rank-and-file LAPD officers — and who just won reelection this week to another three-year union @ @ @ @ @ @ @ endangered Angelenos and should be undone as homicides and shootings continue to rise .
Additional cuts would be catastrophic , he said .
“ It ’ s going to be very difficult for us to police this city the way it should be because of all the budget cuts and fiscal constraints , ” he said .
City officials have tried to call the union , the Los Angeles Police Protective League , back to the negotiating table , including to discuss whether the slated salary increases could be put on hold to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far rejected such overtures .

Despite growing concern over a ballooning budget shortfall that could usher in sweeping cuts to city services in coming weeks, the Los Angeles Police Department put forward a proposal Tuesday that would increase its operating budget next year by more than $100 million.
Police officials claimed the proposal represented a “bare bones” budget that would preserve public safety as much as possible while absorbing cuts to personnel and previously negotiated salary increases for remaining officers — all while meeting Mayor Eric Garcetti’s calls to rein in spending.
“I do believe that this is measured and fiscally conservative, and represents the type of austerity that we need to exercise during this time of such tremendous demands on the city’s coffers,” LAPD Chief Michel Moore told the Police Commission, which unanimously approved the proposal.
Advertisement
Activist groups blasted the proposal, saying it undermined recent efforts to shift spending away from police and toward alternative social services, including through a $150-million cut to the department’s budget by the City Council.
An even more cutting assessment came straight from City Hall, where officials suggested the LAPD proposal was unrealistic given the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on L.A.’s bottom line.
“Pandemic-driven revenue losses have devastated the city’s finances, and they are forcing us to make sizable cuts across the board,” said Alex Comisar, a spokesman for Garcetti. “The mayor is working with all departments to prepare a 2021-2022 budget that preserves the most basic city services, and that’s what we plan to deliver next year.”
The $1.83-billion LAPD proposal reflects a nearly $30-million reduction from the budget first approved for the department this year, which is how the LAPD described it in its proposal. However, activists pointed out that it would be a $106-million increase over the reduced budget that went into effect after the City Council made its changes to the LAPD budget in July — and called the LAPD’s suggestion it was a budget cut misleading.
“This is a gross misrepresentation, right to our face,” said Hamid Khan, of the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, an activist group that has been questioning the department about its budget for months alongside the group Free Radicals.
“When the rest of the city has to suffer from austerity, and even other critical services and essential services are being cut back, you have a [police] department playing with numbers,” Khan said. “This lie has to be exposed.”
Advertisement
The discussion Tuesday showed that the intense debate over police funding that occurred amid massive protests against police violence this summer is far from over, and will likely heat up in coming weeks and months as the city weighs its options to deal with the intensifying fiscal crisis.
The Police Commission’s approval sends the proposal to Garcetti’s office for further review and changes. It will then be incorporated by Garcetti’s office into a broader citywide spending blueprint for the 2021-2022 fiscal year, which will then go before the City Council for final adjustments and approval this summer.
The city’s projected shortfall for this year stands at $600 million, but some analysts expect that number to grow as the impacts of the pandemic continue to be understood.
Garcetti recently told agencies to reduce spending this year by 3%. City Administrative Officer Richard Llewellyn Jr. said his office is calculating what impact those cuts may have on the shortfall.
If the shortfall continues to grow, agencies — including the police — would be asked to make more cuts.
What that will mean for a city already experiencing its highest homicide rate in a decade — mirroring other cities across the country — is unclear. Activists have suggested that fewer police on the streets won’t mean more crime if social services are built out, but growth of alternate services isn’t likely in a budget crunch.
Police officials have suggested that cuts to the department would be devastating for the crime fight.
Moore on Tuesday defended the department’s proposed budget, saying it was “not meant to be smoke and mirrors” but a serious, discerning evaluation of how best to move forward given the serious fiscal constraints on the city.
Moore said the funding requested would allow LAPD to maintain public safety — albeit with some difficulty — while covering other equipment needs and growing contractual obligations, including a previously negotiated salary and overtime increase for officers that will cost the department more than $30 million next year even with a reduction in overall police officer positions. Moore said it would not restore any of the approximately 250 officer positions that were slashed in response to the City Council’s cut to the LAPD budget in July.
Craig Lally, president of the union that represents rank-and-file LAPD officers — and who just won reelection this week to another three-year union term — said the cuts this summer endangered Angelenos and should be undone as homicides and shootings continue to rise. Additional cuts would be catastrophic, he said.
“It’s going to be very difficult for us to police this city the way it should be because of all the budget cuts and fiscal constraints,” he said.
City officials have tried to call the union, the Los Angeles Police Protective League, back to the negotiating table, including to discuss whether the slated salary increases could be put on hold to save money. The union has so far rejected such overtures.


latimes--2020-11-24--Woman's body found in Pasadena park

Woman's body found in Pasadena park

Detectives are investigating the death of a woman whose body was found with visible physical injuries in a Pasadena park @ @ @ @ @ Pasadena Police Department got a call around 7:50 a.m. regarding an unresponsive woman in Hahamongna @ @ @ @ @ the woman on the ground near a parking lot and immediately realized she was dead @ @ @ @ @ .
Foul play is suspected because of the woman ’ s injuries , police said @ @ @ @ @ to be between 35 and 45 years old .
She has not yet been identified @ @ @ @ @ the scene and are continuing the investigation .
The motive remains unknown , police said @ @ @ @ @ with information to call ( 626 ) 744-4241 .

A woman’s body was found in a Pasadena park on Tuesday morning
Detectives are investigating the death of a woman whose body was found with visible physical injuries in a Pasadena park on Tuesday morning.
The Pasadena Police Department got a call around 7:50 a.m. regarding an unresponsive woman in Hahamongna Watershed Park.
Officers found the woman on the ground near a parking lot and immediately realized she was dead, according to the department.
Foul play is suspected because of the woman’s injuries, police said. The victim is believed to be between 35 and 45 years old. She has not yet been identified.
Advertisement
Homicide detectives responded to the scene and are continuing the investigation. The motive remains unknown, police said.
Police are urging anyone with information to call (626) 744-4241.


latimes--2020-11-24--L.A. County Sheriff's Department accused of trumped up train-wrecking charges against protester

The Los Angeles County district attorney ’ s office has filed charges against a protester for allegedly attempting to wreck a train at the scene of a demonstration against the Sheriff ’ s Department — a case where the defendant ’ s attorneys have accused officials of gross exaggeration in retaliation for protest activity .
Emanuel Padilla , a 34-year-old toy designer who lives in Hawthorne , was charged Monday with one felony count of a train wrecking attempt , which carries a maximum sentence of life without parole , and one felony count of unlawful obstruction of a railroad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four-year sentence .
Padilla pleaded not guilty at an arraignment at the Compton courthouse Monday , where a judge denied bail .
According to the Sheriff ’ s Department , the alleged incident occurred Nov. 15 at the intersection of Compton Boulevard and Willlowbrook Avenue in Compton — the location of a largely peaceful protest organized that afternoon to urge justice for Andres Guardado , an 18-year-old killed by a sheriff ’ s deputy in Gardena this summer .
Padilla helped drag a metal cable across train tracks near the intersection , shortly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an alarm alerted that a train was coming , according to the district attorney ’ s office .
A detective ’ s report on Padilla ’ s arrest describes how officials had placed a coiled wire barricade near the train tracks .
As the protest drew to a close and most people had left , Padilla and two others began dragging the wire across the tracks , the report said .
When deputies tried to pull the wire back , the two other individuals let go but Padilla briefly continued pulling , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he eventually lost his grip to the deputies ’ tug , then continued crossing the tracks .
Shortly after , a train passed by , the report said , noting that Padilla must have been aware of its approach .
Padilla was arrested last Wednesday afternoon shortly after a small , peaceful protest near the home of L.A. Sheriff Alex Villanueva where demonstrators called for the department to release the names of deputies involved in the recent fatal shootings of Dijon Kizzee and Fred Williams .
Department spokesman Lt. John Satterfield said deputies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspicion of attempted derailment of a passenger train .
He was initially held on $ 1-million bail .
The department would not comment on why Padilla had not been arrested on the date of the alleged train-wrecking attempt , referring the question to the district attorney ’ s office .
Jorge Gonzalez , Padilla ’ s attorney , alleged that the charges have been inflated and that his client is being retaliated against for his protest activity .
He ’ s also representing Padilla on a pending class-action lawsuit that claims the Sheriff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and excessive use of force at protests this summer against police killings of people of color .
“ It ’ s because they recognized him as a repeat protester , ” Gonzalez said .
“ This is all about retribution.
” “ Padilla ’ s arrest was absolutely in no way connected to his participation in protests or any exercise of his First Amendment rights , ” he said in a statement .
When asked about Gonzalez ’ s allegations , district attorney spokeswoman Pamela Johnson said in a statement , “ we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are aired in open court.
” At Monday ’ s arraignment , a representative for the district attorney ’ s office said that Padilla had admitted to dragging a barricade onto the tracks , knowing that a train was approaching .
He said that when Padilla was asked what he thought could have happened if a train had made contact with the barricade , Padilla responded that it could have caused an electrical issue .
The interrogation of Padilla was included in the detective ’ s report on the arrest .
The account @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the cable when he realized it was on the tracks and could cause an accident .
Gonzalez told The Times that Padilla ’ s alleged statement is “ not proof of what his intent was.
” While Gonzalez would not comment on whether Padilla had touched the cable , he said that it doesn ’ t appear there was “ malicious ” intent to derail a train .
“ I think the charges are as exaggerated as I have ever seen , your honor , ” he told the judge .
“ He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from The Times that the alleged offenses occurred on the same day and location as a protest , Inspector General Max Huntsman said that he would request documentation from the Sheriff ’ s Department regarding the arrest .
” I believe this is a case which requires monitoring of LASD to ensure they are handling it in an objective and lawful manner , ” he said in a statement .
Padilla ’ s wife , Meagan Adams , alleges that an unexpected encounter she had with the Sheriff ’ s Department last Wednesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which she called “ a farce.
” Sheriff ’ s officials pulled Adams over as she was driving to go see Padilla in jail the evening of his arrest .
She was arrested on suspicion of engaging in misconduct related to motor vehicle documentation and released the next day with a citation .
The Sheriff ’ s Department would not comment as to the reason for the stop .
The department obtained a warrant to search the couple ’ s home Wednesday night for property that included eight guns registered in Padilla @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Padilla goes shooting as a hobby . )
The department referred a question about the outcome of the search to the district attorney ’ s office , which would not comment .
More than 40 people , some holding signs that said “ Free Eman ” gathered in front of Compton City Hall during a press conference Saturday .
Maria Padilla , the defendant ’ s mother , spoke to the crowd .
“ He was only protesting , he wasn ’ t doing anything wrong , ” she said in Spanish .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ all have in this country.
” Many friends of Padilla vouched for his character and described him , at more than 6 feet tall , as a “ gentle giant.
” Adams said that Padilla , who grew up in Compton , became particularly active in protests in the aftermath of George Floyd ’ s death .

Emanuel Padilla, 34, is arrested after a protest outside Sheriff Alex Villanueva’s home in La Habra Heights on Nov. 18.
The Los Angeles County district attorney’s office has filed charges against a protester for allegedly attempting to wreck a train at the scene of a demonstration against the Sheriff’s Department — a case where the defendant’s attorneys have accused officials of gross exaggeration in retaliation for protest activity.
Emanuel Padilla, a 34-year-old toy designer who lives in Hawthorne, was charged Monday with one felony count of a train wrecking attempt, which carries a maximum sentence of life without parole, and one felony count of unlawful obstruction of a railroad track, which carries a two- to four-year sentence.
Padilla pleaded not guilty at an arraignment at the Compton courthouse Monday, where a judge denied bail.
According to the Sheriff’s Department, the alleged incident occurred Nov. 15 at the intersection of Compton Boulevard and Willlowbrook Avenue in Compton — the location of a largely peaceful protest organized that afternoon to urge justice for Andres Guardado, an 18-year-old killed by a sheriff’s deputy in Gardena this summer.
Advertisement
Padilla helped drag a metal cable across train tracks near the intersection, shortly before railroad crossing signals lit up and an alarm alerted that a train was coming, according to the district attorney’s office.
A detective’s report on Padilla’s arrest describes how officials had placed a coiled wire barricade near the train tracks. As the protest drew to a close and most people had left, Padilla and two others began dragging the wire across the tracks, the report said.
When deputies tried to pull the wire back, the two other individuals let go but Padilla briefly continued pulling, according to the account. It describes how he eventually lost his grip to the deputies’ tug, then continued crossing the tracks. Shortly after, a train passed by, the report said, noting that Padilla must have been aware of its approach.
Padilla was arrested last Wednesday afternoon shortly after a small, peaceful protest near the home of L.A. Sheriff Alex Villanueva where demonstrators called for the department to release the names of deputies involved in the recent fatal shootings of Dijon Kizzee and Fred Williams. Department spokesman Lt. John Satterfield said deputies had recognized Padilla as being wanted on suspicion of attempted derailment of a passenger train. He was initially held on $1-million bail.
The department would not comment on why Padilla had not been arrested on the date of the alleged train-wrecking attempt, referring the question to the district attorney’s office.
Jorge Gonzalez, Padilla’s attorney, alleged that the charges have been inflated and that his client is being retaliated against for his protest activity. He’s also representing Padilla on a pending class-action lawsuit that claims the Sheriff’s Department engaged in unlawful arrests and excessive use of force at protests this summer against police killings of people of color.
Advertisement
“It’s because they recognized him as a repeat protester,” Gonzalez said. “This is all about retribution.”
Satterfield denied that portrayal.
“Padilla’s arrest was absolutely in no way connected to his participation in protests or any exercise of his First Amendment rights,” he said in a statement.
When asked about Gonzalez’s allegations, district attorney spokeswoman Pamela Johnson said in a statement, “we can’t discuss details until they are aired in open court.”
At Monday’s arraignment, a representative for the district attorney’s office said that Padilla had admitted to dragging a barricade onto the tracks, knowing that a train was approaching. He said that when Padilla was asked what he thought could have happened if a train had made contact with the barricade, Padilla responded that it could have caused an electrical issue.
The interrogation of Padilla was included in the detective’s report on the arrest. The account states that Padilla said he stopped pulling the cable when he realized it was on the tracks and could cause an accident.
Gonzalez told The Times that Padilla’s alleged statement is “not proof of what his intent was.” While Gonzalez would not comment on whether Padilla had touched the cable, he said that it doesn’t appear there was “malicious” intent to derail a train.
“I think the charges are as exaggerated as I have ever seen, your honor,” he told the judge. “He’s been targeted.”
After learning from The Times that the alleged offenses occurred on the same day and location as a protest, Inspector General Max Huntsman said that he would request documentation from the Sheriff’s Department regarding the arrest.
“I believe this is a case which requires monitoring of LASD to ensure they are handling it in an objective and lawful manner,” he said in a statement.
Padilla’s wife, Meagan Adams, alleges that an unexpected encounter she had with the Sheriff’s Department last Wednesday relates to her husband’s case, which she called “a farce.”
Sheriff’s officials pulled Adams over as she was driving to go see Padilla in jail the evening of his arrest. She was arrested on suspicion of engaging in misconduct related to motor vehicle documentation and released the next day with a citation.
The Sheriff’s Department would not comment as to the reason for the stop.
The department obtained a warrant to search the couple’s home Wednesday night for property that included eight guns registered in Padilla’s name. (Adams said Padilla goes shooting as a hobby.) The department referred a question about the outcome of the search to the district attorney’s office, which would not comment.
More than 40 people, some holding signs that said “Free Eman” gathered in front of Compton City Hall during a press conference Saturday.
Maria Padilla, the defendant’s mother, spoke to the crowd.
“He was only protesting, he wasn’t doing anything wrong,” she said in Spanish. “That’s a right we all have in this country.”
Many friends of Padilla vouched for his character and described him, at more than 6 feet tall, as a “gentle giant.” Adams said that Padilla, who grew up in Compton, became particularly active in protests in the aftermath of George Floyd’s death.


latimes--2020-11-24--Column: Should Mayor Garcetti go to D.C. if Biden offers a job? When does the next plane leave?

If President-elect Joe Biden calls Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and offers him a big job in the new administration , should the mayor go east ?
If I were Garcetti , I ’ d already have my bags packed and a Washington condo lined up .
Garcetti served as national co-chair of Biden ’ s campaign and has been on a short list of candidates , possibly for Transportation secretary , because who wouldn ’ t tap the mayor of a city with notoriously bad traffic to bring his talents to Washington ?
Biden and Garcetti have been largely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ introducing his picks for key cabinet posts .
And at the moment , there are two things we don ’ t know for sure .
And whether , if asked , Garcetti will leave town .
So let ’ s get into both of those , beginning with why I think Garcetti should grab any good offer from Biden like the life preserver it would be .
Sherry Bebitch Jeffe , a longtime observer of local politics , lays it out pretty well .
“ Look at the mess we ’ re in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wouldn ’ t you like to find a way out of this morass ?
I mean , there ’ s an increase in homicides , there ’ s the pandemic , and the issue of homelessness is always going to be around his neck.
” Garcetti has two years left in his term as mayor , and by some measures , the city ’ s fortunes over that time look bleak .
Budget deficits will be a killer , thousands of city workers could get sacked , an economy wrecked by the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city of tarps and tents is likely to see more of both on Garcetti ’ s watch .
Some have speculated that Garcetti ’ s calculation may be that it wouldn ’ t be right , or look good , to leave a job he was elected to while so much work remains to be done .
Yeah , maybe .
But I doubt it .
Garcetti is good with words .
He may already be in front of a mirror making a speech about what a true patriot does when duty calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to serve the needs of the entire nation as well as the city he loves , a city that hasn ’ t gotten its fair share of federal dollars .
He can also rationalize an early departure by noting that due to an election calendar change , his current term will run more than five years rather than the usual four , so he ’ s already approaching the normal finish line .
And besides , Garcetti is an ambitious man who always has one eye on what ’ s next , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to emerge from this sharknado of municipal distress with a brighter political future .
But will Biden extend an offer ?
Or would it look bad for the president-elect to begin his administration by hooking arms with a mayor whose city is in crisis , and whose homeless population has grown despite efforts by the mayor to raise and spend more tax dollars on solutions ?
A mayor , by the way , who has found himself in the awkward position recently of saying he was unaware of inappropriate behavior by a former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accused of sexual misconduct .
And is Garcetti , who has only held local office , qualified to run the federal department of transportation ?
He wouldn ’ t be the first mayor to run that department , said Brian Taylor , director of UCLA ’ s Institute for Transportation Studies .
Former Charlotte , N.C. , Mayor Anthony Foxx had the job during the Obama Administration and former San Jose Mayor Norman Mineta ran the department under former President George W. Bush .
In Mineta ’ s case , though , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the House Transportation Committee , and Garcetti wouldn ’ t have the advantage of that experience .
But Taylor said big-city mayors like Garcetti have to know how to pull federal , state and local resources together , along with political will , to get transportation projects moving .
“ I would say , knowing Mineta a little bit and Foxx a smidgen , that Garcetti is probably more of a down in the weeds policy wonk than either one of them was , ” said Taylor .
James Moore , on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Transportation Engineering Program , is rooting for Garcetti to get the job because he ’ d like to see him leave town .
“ The man is a walking nightmare with respect to local transportation decisions , ” said Moore , who argued , among other things , that Garcetti ’ s road diets — intended to make way for bikes and improve safety — have added to congestion and fallen short of the mayor ’ s promises on greater safety .
But Moore ’ s bigger criticism has to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ member of the regional Metro board .
“ As board president and member he has cheerfully supported Metro ’ s cumulative , $ 26-billion-and-counting in expenditures on the rail system , ” Moore says .
The emphasis on rail , Moore says , has hurt bus service and “ driven end-to-end transit trips per capita down by 40 % from our 1985 peak.
” Personally , I ’ d like to see more east-west and north-south thoroughfares become dedicated bus routes , congestion pricing in dozens of traffic bottlenecks , financial incentives for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ penalties for doing so , along with more of the telecommuting we ’ ve been practicing the last eight months .
But everyone ’ s got their own take , and Garcetti is not the king of greater Los Angeles , so he can ’ t be given full credit or full blame on any traffic and transportation issues .
There ’ s the City Council involved , and the county board of supervisors , as well as elected officials in dozens of cities .
And Garcetti hasn ’ t been without some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years of transportation funding through voter-approved Measure M in 2016 .
“ Measure M will be a signature legacy , ” said Juan Matute of UCLA ’ s Institute of Transportation Studies , with various infrastructure projects producing thousands of jobs for years .
Garcetti also touts his role on projects including the Crenshaw/LAX line , the Purple Line extension and the Gold Line Foothill extension and a conversion to clean-energy buses .
And the mayor ’ s website promises to leverage Measure M “ to complete 28 key transit and highway projects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paralympic Games.
” For all that , Matute said he hoped Garcetti “ would have had more success in the implementation ” of his vision for a better Los Angeles , given the mayor ’ s grasp of the intricacies of transportation planning .
It ’ s kind of like that on homelessness with Garcetti , who has held local office now for nearly 20 years , most of it as either City Council president or mayor .
He knows the nuances of policy inside out , but the homeless population continues to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so did the region ’ s commuting nightmares .
Building consensus on how to fix that isn ’ t easy , and it sure as heck won ’ t happen in the next two years , if ever .
Garcetti , who happens to be a former lieutenant in the U.S. Navy Reserves , is the captain of a ship that ’ s taking on water .
He can remain at the helm and try to steer us away from the rocks , or he can start paddling east .

Joe Biden with Mayor Eric Garcetti in 2015 at an event at Bobrick Washroom Equipment in Los Angeles. Garcetti was the president-elect’s national campaign co-chair.
If President-elect Joe Biden calls Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and offers him a big job in the new administration, should the mayor go east?
If I were Garcetti, I’d already have my bags packed and a Washington condo lined up.
Garcetti served as national co-chair of Biden’s campaign and has been on a short list of candidates, possibly for Transportation secretary, because who wouldn’t tap the mayor of a city with notoriously bad traffic to bring his talents to Washington?
Advertisement
Biden and Garcetti have been largely mum, even as Biden has begun introducing his picks for key cabinet posts. And at the moment, there are two things we don’t know for sure.
Whether Biden will call.
And whether, if asked, Garcetti will leave town.
So let’s get into both of those, beginning with why I think Garcetti should grab any good offer from Biden like the life preserver it would be.
Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a longtime observer of local politics, lays it out pretty well.
“Look at the mess we’re in,” she told me. “Wouldn’t you like to find a way out of this morass? I mean, there’s an increase in homicides, there’s the pandemic, and the issue of homelessness is always going to be around his neck.”
Exactly.
Garcetti has two years left in his term as mayor, and by some measures, the city’s fortunes over that time look bleak. Budget deficits will be a killer, thousands of city workers could get sacked, an economy wrecked by the virus could take years to recover and the city of tarps and tents is likely to see more of both on Garcetti’s watch.
Some have speculated that Garcetti’s calculation may be that it wouldn’t be right, or look good, to leave a job he was elected to while so much work remains to be done.
Yeah, maybe. But I doubt it.
Garcetti is good with words. He may already be in front of a mirror making a speech about what a true patriot does when duty calls — when there’s an opportunity to serve the needs of the entire nation as well as the city he loves, a city that hasn’t gotten its fair share of federal dollars.
Advertisement
He can also rationalize an early departure by noting that due to an election calendar change, his current term will run more than five years rather than the usual four, so he’s already approaching the normal finish line.
And besides, Garcetti is an ambitious man who always has one eye on what’s next, and there is no clear path for him to emerge from this sharknado of municipal distress with a brighter political future.
But will Biden extend an offer? Or would it look bad for the president-elect to begin his administration by hooking arms with a mayor whose city is in crisis, and whose homeless population has grown despite efforts by the mayor to raise and spend more tax dollars on solutions?
A mayor, by the way, who has found himself in the awkward position recently of saying he was unaware of inappropriate behavior by a former chief aide and ally who has been accused of sexual misconduct.
And is Garcetti, who has only held local office, qualified to run the federal department of transportation?
He wouldn’t be the first mayor to run that department, said Brian Taylor, director of UCLA’s Institute for Transportation Studies. Former Charlotte, N.C., Mayor Anthony Foxx had the job during the Obama Administration and former San Jose Mayor Norman Mineta ran the department under former President George W. Bush.
In Mineta’s case, though, he had been a congressman and ranking member of the House Transportation Committee, and Garcetti wouldn’t have the advantage of that experience. But Taylor said big-city mayors like Garcetti have to know how to pull federal, state and local resources together, along with political will, to get transportation projects moving.
“I would say, knowing Mineta a little bit and Foxx a smidgen, that Garcetti is probably more of a down in the weeds policy wonk than either one of them was,” said Taylor.
James Moore, on the other hand, director of USC’s Transportation Engineering Program, is rooting for Garcetti to get the job because he’d like to see him leave town.
“The man is a walking nightmare with respect to local transportation decisions,” said Moore, who argued, among other things, that Garcetti’s road diets — intended to make way for bikes and improve safety — have added to congestion and fallen short of the mayor’s promises on greater safety.
But Moore’s bigger criticism has to do with Garcetti’s role as a member of the regional Metro board.
“As board president and member he has cheerfully supported Metro’s cumulative, $26-billion-and-counting in expenditures on the rail system,” Moore says. The emphasis on rail, Moore says, has hurt bus service and “driven end-to-end transit trips per capita down by 40% from our 1985 peak.”
Personally, I’d like to see more east-west and north-south thoroughfares become dedicated bus routes, congestion pricing in dozens of traffic bottlenecks, financial incentives for not driving alone in a car and penalties for doing so, along with more of the telecommuting we’ve been practicing the last eight months.
But everyone’s got their own take, and Garcetti is not the king of greater Los Angeles, so he can’t be given full credit or full blame on any traffic and transportation issues. There’s the City Council involved, and the county board of supervisors, as well as elected officials in dozens of cities. And Garcetti hasn’t been without some victories, including his role in promoting years of transportation funding through voter-approved Measure M in 2016.
“Measure M will be a signature legacy,” said Juan Matute of UCLA’s Institute of Transportation Studies, with various infrastructure projects producing thousands of jobs for years.
Garcetti also touts his role on projects including the Crenshaw/LAX line, the Purple Line extension and the Gold Line Foothill extension and a conversion to clean-energy buses. And the mayor’s website promises to leverage Measure M “to complete 28 key transit and highway projects in time for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games.”
For all that, Matute said he hoped Garcetti “would have had more success in the implementation” of his vision for a better Los Angeles, given the mayor’s grasp of the intricacies of transportation planning.
It’s kind of like that on homelessness with Garcetti, who has held local office now for nearly 20 years, most of it as either City Council president or mayor. He knows the nuances of policy inside out, but the homeless population continues to multiply, and prior to the coronavirus, so did the region’s commuting nightmares.
Building consensus on how to fix that isn’t easy, and it sure as heck won’t happen in the next two years, if ever.
Garcetti, who happens to be a former lieutenant in the U.S. Navy Reserves, is the captain of a ship that’s taking on water. He can remain at the helm and try to steer us away from the rocks, or he can start paddling east.
Steve.lopez@latimes.com


latimes--2020-11-24--San Francisco will keep outdoor dining for now despite COVID-19 surge

San Francisco will keep restaurants open for outdoor dining when the city moves into the most restricted coronavirus tier , possibly later this week , a city official said Tuesday .
Joaquín Torres , San Francisco ’ s Office of Economic and Workforce Development director , said during an online news conference that gyms , movie theaters , places of worship and museums will have 24 hours to close for indoor activity once the city moves into the purple tier , which indicates the virus is widespread .
Nonessential businesses also must reduce capacity to 25 % .
Torres said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they will have to end outdoor dining , as eateries in Los Angeles County have been forced to do .
San Francisco previously has reopened more slowly than allowed by the state .
At this time , Torres said , the city anticipates continuing to permit outdoor dining as allowed by the state for counties in the purple tier .
Residents will have to abide by the state ’ s 10 p.m. curfew within 48 hours after the state readjusts the city ’ s tier ranking because of deteriorating health conditions , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city ’ s public health director , said he expects the city to enter the most restrictive zone “ sometime soon , perhaps later this week.
” Last week , he predicted San Francisco could move from the red to the purple tier as early as Sunday .
“ We are surrounded by purple so the fact that we are in red should give no one reason for not taking precautions during the holiday , ” he said .
The percentage of residents testing positive for the virus has risen by 265 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , moving from 0.81 % to 2.15 % and “ going up.
” Hospitalization rates for COVID-19 in the city have doubled since the end of the month , he said .
“ This is a once-in-a-century pandemic , ” he said .
“ This not the time to throw caution to the wind.
” Los Angeles County has been much harder hit by the pandemic than San Francisco .
Still , the decision to suspend outdoor dining has sparked criticism from restaurant owners and some elected officials .
A Los Angeles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ block a ban on outdoor dining from going into effect in Los Angeles County , rejecting an 11th-hour plea by the state ’ s leading restaurant group .
Under the new rules , which are scheduled to go into effect Wednesday night , all restaurants , breweries , wineries and bars in the county will be barred from serving customers in outdoor settings for at least three weeks .
Indoor service has been prohibited since the spring .
In announcing the restrictions , health officials said they were necessary to cut down on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread the virus .

San Francisco will keep restaurants open for outdoor dining when the city moves into the most restricted coronavirus tier, possibly later this week, a city official said Tuesday.
Joaquín Torres, San Francisco’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development director, said during an online news conference that gyms, movie theaters, places of worship and museums will have 24 hours to close for indoor activity once the city moves into the purple tier, which indicates the virus is widespread.
Nonessential businesses also must reduce capacity to 25%.
Torres said restaurants have been asking the city whether they will have to end outdoor dining, as eateries in Los Angeles County have been forced to do. San Francisco previously has reopened more slowly than allowed by the state.
Advertisement
At this time, Torres said, the city anticipates continuing to permit outdoor dining as allowed by the state for counties in the purple tier.
Residents will have to abide by the state’s 10 p.m. curfew within 48 hours after the state readjusts the city’s tier ranking because of deteriorating health conditions, he said.
Dr. Grant Colfax, the city’s public health director, said he expects the city to enter the most restrictive zone “sometime soon, perhaps later this week.”
Last week, he predicted San Francisco could move from the red to the purple tier as early as Sunday. “We are surrounded by purple so the fact that we are in red should give no one reason for not taking precautions during the holiday,” he said.
The percentage of residents testing positive for the virus has risen by 265% in the past four weeks, he said, moving from 0.81% to 2.15% and “going up.”Hospitalization rates for COVID-19 in the city have doubled since the end of the month, he said.
“This is a once-in-a-century pandemic,” he said. “This not the time to throw caution to the wind.”
Advertisement
Los Angeles County has been much harder hit by the pandemic than San Francisco. Still, the decision to suspend outdoor dining has sparked criticism from restaurant owners and some elected officials.
A Los Angeles Superior Court judge declined Tuesday morning to block a ban on outdoor dining from going into effect in Los Angeles County, rejecting an 11th-hour plea by the state’s leading restaurant group.
Under the new rules, which are scheduled to go into effect Wednesday night, all restaurants, breweries, wineries and bars in the county will be barred from serving customers in outdoor settings for at least three weeks. Indoor service has been prohibited since the spring. In announcing the restrictions, health officials said they were necessary to cut down on places where large groups can gather and spread the virus.


latimes--2020-11-24--Tobacco industry submits signatures on California referendum to block ban on flavored products sales

A coalition representing the tobacco industry said Tuesday it has turned in more than 1 million signatures as it seeks to qualify a referendum for the November 2022 ballot aimed at overturning a law banning the retail sale of flavored tobacco products in California .
If the Secretary of State ’ s office determines there is a sufficient number of signatures to qualify the referendum , the new law , which was scheduled to take effect Jan. 1 , would be suspended until the voters act on the ballot measure in November 2022 .
The signatures were submitted to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which said in a statement Tuesday that its signature drive showed that voters are put off by the new law .
“ In the midst of an unprecedented pandemic , raging wildfires , heatwaves and power outages across the state , more than one million Californians signed petitions for the right to have their voice heard on an unfair law that benefits the wealthy and special interests while costing jobs and cutting funding for education and healthcare , ” the statement said .
The coalition has received more than $ 21 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Philip Morris USA and its affiliated U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Co. , as well as R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co .
Opponents needed to collect the signatures of 623,312 registered voters to quality the referendum .
The referendum was criticized Tuesday by Lindsey Freitas , advocacy director for Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids , a leading supporter of the new law .
“ We know Big Tobacco has hidden behind smoke and lies for years to hook generations of young people on deadly tobacco products , and this referendum is just one more tactic to continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ If this referendum qualifies for the ballot , we ’ re confident that California voters will reject Big Tobacco ’ s desperate attempt to keep hooking our kids for a profit .
But the delay will be costly and deadly.
” Supporters of the flavored tobacco sales ban accused signature gatherers of misleading voters by telling them the petitions were for a measure to ban sales of flavored tobacco products to minors , a charge the coalition denied .
Gov .
Gavin Newsom , who signed the new law in August @ @ @ @ @ @ @ launched .
“ This is Big Tobacco ’ s latest attempt to profit at the expense of our kids ’ health , ” Newsom said at the time .
“ California will continue to fight back and protect children from Big Tobacco.
” The law Newsom signed would ban the retail sale of flavored tobacco products including menthol and fruit flavors , as well as those used in electronic cigarettes .
To win legislative approval , the bill exempted hookah , expensive cigars and flavored pipe tobacco .
It also does not apply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jerry Hill ( D-San Mateo ) , who introduced the bill , said flavored tobacco is used by the industry to attract minors to smoking and vaping .
He cited a 2018 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found that 67 % of high school students and 49 % of middle school students who used tobacco products in the prior 30 days reported using a flavored tobacco product during that time .
The high cost of qualifying the referendum and delaying the law for nearly two years would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make selling flavored tobacco products in the meantime , supporters of the ban say .
They estimate sales of menthol products alone will bring the industry $ 1.1 billion in revenue during the 22 months that California ’ s law would be delayed .
The campaign over the referendum is likely to generate heated debate , following vitriol between the two sides leading up to the Legislature ’ s approval of the law .
The tobacco industry ran television ads before the Legislature ’ s vote that alleged by exempting hookah , expensive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ban , legislators gave “ special treatment to the rich , and [ singled ] out communities of color ” by banning menthol cigarettes .
Black lawmakers called the ads offensive and argued that the tobacco industry has targeted Black and Latino residents with marketing of flavored tobacco products , causing disproportionate harm to their health .
The coalition of tobacco companies repeated their charge on Tuesday .
“ SB 793 criminalizes the sale of menthol cigarettes preferred by people of color and creates special exemptions for products preferred by the wealthy — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and pipe tobacco , in addition to hookah , to remain legal , ” the group said in its statement .
In pursuing the referendum , the coalition said it agrees “ that youth should never have access to any tobacco products , but this can be achieved without imposing a total prohibition on products that millions of adults choose to use.
” The referendum is one of two prongs of the tobacco industry ’ s attack on the new law .
The companies also filed a federal lawsuit against the state , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law , arguing it is “ an overbroad reaction to legitimate public-health concerns about youth use of tobacco products.
” A court hearing on the lawsuit is scheduled for Dec. 10 .

The tobacco industry wants to overturn a law banning the retail sale of flavored tobacco products in California.
A coalition representing the tobacco industry said Tuesday it has turned in more than 1 million signatures as it seeks to qualify a referendum for the November 2022 ballot aimed at overturning a law banning the retail sale of flavored tobacco products in California.
If the Secretary of State’s office determines there is a sufficient number of signatures to qualify the referendum, the new law, which was scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, would be suspended until the voters act on the ballot measure in November 2022.
The signatures were submitted to the state by the California Coalition for Fairness, which said in a statement Tuesday that its signature drive showed that voters are put off by the new law.
Advertisement
“In the midst of an unprecedented pandemic, raging wildfires, heatwaves and power outages across the state, more than one million Californians signed petitions for the right to have their voice heard on an unfair law that benefits the wealthy and special interests while costing jobs and cutting funding for education and healthcare,” the statement said.
The coalition has received more than $21 million so far, largely from companies including Philip Morris USA and its affiliated U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Co., as well as R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
Opponents needed to collect the signatures of 623,312 registered voters to quality the referendum.
The referendum was criticized Tuesday by Lindsey Freitas, advocacy director for Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a leading supporter of the new law.
“We know Big Tobacco has hidden behind smoke and lies for years to hook generations of young people on deadly tobacco products, and this referendum is just one more tactic to continue the status quo,” Freitas said. “If this referendum qualifies for the ballot, we’re confident that California voters will reject Big Tobacco’s desperate attempt to keep hooking our kids for a profit. But the delay will be costly and deadly.”
Supporters of the flavored tobacco sales ban accused signature gatherers of misleading voters by telling them the petitions were for a measure to ban sales of flavored tobacco products to minors, a charge the coalition denied.
Advertisement
Gov. Gavin Newsom, who signed the new law in August, denounced the referendum effort when it launched.
“This is Big Tobacco’s latest attempt to profit at the expense of our kids’ health,” Newsom said at the time. “California will continue to fight back and protect children from Big Tobacco.”
The law Newsom signed would ban the retail sale of flavored tobacco products including menthol and fruit flavors, as well as those used in electronic cigarettes. To win legislative approval, the bill exempted hookah, expensive cigars and flavored pipe tobacco. It also does not apply to Internet sales of flavored products
Sen. Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo), who introduced the bill, said flavored tobacco is used by the industry to attract minors to smoking and vaping.
He cited a 2018 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found that 67% of high school students and 49% of middle school students who used tobacco products in the prior 30 days reported using a flavored tobacco product during that time.
The high cost of qualifying the referendum and delaying the law for nearly two years would be eclipsed by the profits the industry would make selling flavored tobacco products in the meantime, supporters of the ban say. They estimate sales of menthol products alone will bring the industry $1.1 billion in revenue during the 22 months that California’s law would be delayed.
The campaign over the referendum is likely to generate heated debate, following vitriol between the two sides leading up to the Legislature’s approval of the law.
The tobacco industry ran television ads before the Legislature’s vote that alleged by exempting hookah, expensive cigars and flavored pipe tobacco from the ban, legislators gave “special treatment to the rich, and [singled] out communities of color” by banning menthol cigarettes.
Black lawmakers called the ads offensive and argued that the tobacco industry has targeted Black and Latino residents with marketing of flavored tobacco products, causing disproportionate harm to their health.
The coalition of tobacco companies repeated their charge on Tuesday.
“SB 793 criminalizes the sale of menthol cigarettes preferred by people of color and creates special exemptions for products preferred by the wealthy — allowing the sale of expensive flavored cigars and pipe tobacco, in addition to hookah, to remain legal,” the group said in its statement.
In pursuing the referendum, the coalition said it agrees “that youth should never have access to any tobacco products, but this can be achieved without imposing a total prohibition on products that millions of adults choose to use.”
The referendum is one of two prongs of the tobacco industry’s attack on the new law. The companies also filed a federal lawsuit against the state, seeking an injunction to block the new law, arguing it is “an overbroad reaction to legitimate public-health concerns about youth use of tobacco products.”
A court hearing on the lawsuit is scheduled for Dec. 10.


latimes--2020-11-24--Tanker truck hauling milk overturns on 5 Freeway in Boyle Heights

A milk truck made an unwelcome splash Tuesday morning when it overturned on the southbound 5 Freeway in Boyle Heights in an accident that left the truck ’ s driver and another motorist injured , officials said .
The tanker truck ended up flipped onto its side near the Main Street exit around 6 a.m. All four southbound lanes were blocked for a few hours , according to the Los Angeles Fire Department .
By about 10:30 , at least three lanes had reopened , California Highway Patrol public information officer Roberto Gomez said .
The driver was pulling onto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unsafe ” turn , Gomez said .
Drugs or alcohol were not involved , Gomez confirmed .
The back end of the trailer crushed a white SUV when it flipped over , injuring its driver , who complained of shoulder pain , Gomez said .
A pickup truck rear-ended the fallen rig on the highway .
The tanker driver suffered lacerations to his face , Gomez said .
He and the SUV driver were transported to a nearby hospital .
Some milk seeped from the tank onto the road , but the leak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On Friday , a truck carrying overturned on the 15 Freeway .

Southbound lanes of the 5 Freeway were closed in Boyle Heights on Tuesday morning after a tanker truck hauling milk overturned.
A milk truck made an unwelcome splash Tuesday morning when it overturned on the southbound 5 Freeway in Boyle Heights in an accident that left the truck’s driver and another motorist injured, officials said.
The tanker truck ended up flipped onto its side near the Main Street exit around 6 a.m. All four southbound lanes were blocked for a few hours, according to the Los Angeles Fire Department. By about 10:30, at least three lanes had reopened, California Highway Patrol public information officer Roberto Gomez said.
Avoid the I-5 S/B (GSF) south of SR-110 through Main St. for an overturned milk truck incident. All lanes open south of Main St. Southbound Traffic being diverted off at Broadway @ktlagingerchan @FOXLA @NBCLA @ABC7 @CBSLA @TELEMUNDO52 pic.twitter.com/8HL5rd9ALd — CHP Central LA (@CHPCentralLA) November 24, 2020
The driver was pulling onto the freeway when he made an “unsafe” turn, Gomez said. Drugs or alcohol were not involved, Gomez confirmed.
The back end of the trailer crushed a white SUV when it flipped over, injuring its driver, who complained of shoulder pain, Gomez said.
A pickup truck rear-ended the fallen rig on the highway.
The tanker driver suffered lacerations to his face, Gomez said. He and the SUV driver were transported to a nearby hospital.
The pickup driver was apparently unhurt.
Some milk seeped from the tank onto the road, but the leak was quickly stopped, according to Gomez.
“There was a minor spill,” Gomez said.