New Geography

Author: Jerry Sullivan

  • Glimpsing Reasons to Give Thanks in the City of Angels

    This is one tough Thanksgiving coming up for a lot of folks in Los Angeles, where so many have been left vulnerable by the economic downturn.

    This place of ours, this city, looked good for the ride just a few months ago.

    Now it looks different.

    There are different faces on our streets. Some are new, out of place, in a daze over where they have landed.

    Some others are the same folks we used to see, but they look hungrier now, or less healthy.

    There are different faces in the stores and restaurants, too. Merchants look worried, and their employees seem just as wary.

    Friends and neighbors, shopkeepers and strangers — everyone, it seems, looks different these days. Concern has crowded out confidence.

    But look a bit closer and you’ll start to see something else, a certain characteristic that resides somewhere among the worries. The initial shock of the economy’s dive is wearing off. Resolve is beginning to show in folks’ eyes, offering a down payment on the promise that optimism will return in time.

    It will take some time, to be sure—and not every story will have a happy ending as we work our way through the economic storm.

    I am quite certain, though, that the vast majority of us will make it through, and that we’ll find the capacity to aid those who fall hardest.

    I am confident of this because I have learned quite a bit about the people who make up this city. I have seen what can be accomplished when resolve digs in against uncertainty.

    I received a reminder from a man at a bus stop on Broadway not long ago. I’ve known him for years because he has spent years working as a janitor at a Downtown office building that I have occasion to frequent. He has always struck me as a modest fellow — polite, constantly working, cleaning up after others.

    The man had his daughter with him, and the two of them were unsure whether they had the right bus stop. He called to me and asked if I could help. The young lady had to get to the Westside. I directed her to the correct stop across the street.

    The man thanked me, and told me that his daughter had to get to UCLA, where she is currently studying. He said he has another daughter enrolled at UCLA, too.

    It occurred to me that the modesty I had long attributed to this man is actually resolve. Oh, he may be a modest sort, but his accomplishments are not. His high-reaching daughters attest to the resolve in his character.

    It also occurred to me that this man is an immigrant who pulled up stakes somewhere far away to come here and pursue a better future. Think about the uncertainty of such a move — and then consider how often you encounter individuals who have done the same thing. Ponder how many others have faced similar uncertainty upon arriving here from another state — or even moving from one neighborhood to another in search of better circumstances.

    I spent some time thinking about this after I saw my acquaintance at the bus stop. I became lost in thought for a moment, and then a rumble of hunger brought me back. I had a cold and didn’t want to go out to eat, so I called a regular lunch spot for a delivery. It’s a small restaurant, and the owners are among the many to travel a long way to cast their lot in Los Angeles. They’re feeling the economic slump, their faces creased with concern lately.

    A familiar voice came on the line and took my order. She noticed that I sounded a bit off. She inquired about my health, and I told her about my cold.

    My lunch arrived 20 minutes later with something extra in the bag—a bowl of soup with a get-well note.

    It dawned on me that, yes, it will be a tough Thanksgiving for a lot of folks — but this is still the City of Angels.

    Look for them — they walk among us.

    Give thanks for them — they will not fail us.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen, a weekly community newspaper that covers Downtown Los Angeles and surrounding districts (www.garmentandcitizen.com)

  • The Purpose of Finger-Pointing on Financial Crisis

    The presidential campaign is over and the global financial crisis remains. President-elect Barack Obama offers hope for a fresh start even as he prepares to face a backlog of enormous problems. I believe that our nation is up to any and all challenges, able to achieve a new unity and purpose in these trying times.

    Yes We Can, indeed.

    You’ll hear some others say that these challenging times leave no room for finger-pointing over the origins of the financial mess we face.

    I beg to differ, based on the firm belief that our nation will be served well by understanding how this mess came about. This is part of the challenge, and it will require some sorting through the rubble and—yes—some finger-pointing.

    A lot of time could be spent on the Wall Street big shots who played significant roles in the whole affair.

    There’s certainly room for a hard look at the culture of monetary hedonism that grew in Corporate America over the past several decades.

    There are bigger culprits out there, though. I’m talking about the elected officials who the voters of this nation have trusted to keep an eye on those Wall Street big shots. That’s a basic part of the job for Washington politicians—voters don’t expect
    Wall Street big shots to behave themselves.

    You’ve probably noticed that politicians generally don’t do very well when it comes to facing their own shortcomings on the job.

    You’ve also probably noticed a phrase that’s been on the lips of politicians who want to dodge any blame for what ails our financial system. It began making the rounds during the presidential campaign, as so many elected officials performed the circus act of scurrying for cover even as they lusted after airtime on cable TV shows. Here is the basic message, although you’ll hear plenty of slight variations:

    “The problem is that we have a 20th-century regulatory system for a 21st-century financial market.”

    Keep in mind that many of the Washington politicians who have uttered this sentiment have the authority to keep an eye on our financial regulatory system. They have been—and most of them remain—in positions to raise questions and seek changes to the system at any time.

    Remember also that our financial regulatory system has never been chiseled in stone. It can and has been changed over the years. The truth is that the system itself cannot be outdated—it can be adjusted as needed by our elected officials. They have always had the standing to consider new developments in the marketplace—exotic investment instruments and lax mortgage-lending standards, to name a couple—and seek changes to regulations on such practices.

    The only thing outdated in recent years has been the elected officials who have had oversight of our financial regulatory system.

    The world changed, and the financial industry changed, too. The politicians who were supposed to ride herd on the financial industry didn’t change.

    Go ahead and give some of the politicians in Washington a back-handed benefit of the doubt on the motives behind their lack of oversight—it’s become clear that most of them had little understanding of the forces tearing the financial system to shreds. That still leaves room to suspect that some of them didn’t know because they didn’t want to know—because they were taking in all the campaign donations they needed right up to the point of the meltdown.

    Readers can decide how all of that shakes out.
    Whatever you decide, though, don’t let any politicians off the hook by accepting the notion that events simply overtook an outdated regulatory system, and there was nothing to be done until the whole thing broke down. This is the worst sort of bunk—the kind that will embolden ignorance and influence peddling in our political class if left unchallenged.

    There is good reason to be hopeful about the incoming Obama Administration, and cause to believe that the U.S. can beat this bad spell.

    There’s also good reason for all of us to complete the full exercise of getting a grip on what has occurred.

    That will require some finger-pointing.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen, a weekly community newspaper that covers Downtown Los Angeles and surrounding districts (www.garmentandcitizen.com)

  • Big City Prediction: Expect All Things in Moderation From Obama

    Barack Obama is now set to become the first genuine urbanite to occupy the White House in more than 100 years.

    It will be tempting for many politicians and activists to envision a new era for big cities, with federal money flowing freely toward plans for high-density housing, transit projects, and any number of other dreams and schemes held dear by urban folk.

    And why not? The so-called “liberals” or “progressives” who dominate politics in many big cities form a key part of the base of the Democratic Party. They have long claimed Obama as one of them—and he has let them do so when politically convenient.

    But here’s why not: The way that Obama managed his campaign offers indications that he’s smart enough to find that precious intersection where good politics and good policy become one. That will mean saying no more than yes, disappointing fervent supporters more often than not.

    Obama is impressive, but he’s a politician and not a saint.

    He plays tough, and knows how far his supporters will bend. He’s willing to push them right up to the breaking point in service of his larger goals. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the urban agenda will get less than it has in recent years. Just don’t expect a gusher for big cities.

    The guess here is that Obama will zero in on some large national efforts such as healthcare, the ongoing stresses on our financial system, a winding down of the war in Iraq, and some new strategy in Afghanistan. Look for him to occasionally square off against the Democratic majority in the U.S. Congress, using the Republican minority for leverage when his own party gives him a hard time.

    Such moves will amount to a high-stakes strategy to redefine the middle in U.S. politics. Success will likely pave Obama’s way to re-election in four years, while failure will tempt a stiff challenge on re-nomination.

    Obama has shown that he’s willing to take his chances when he likes his cards, though. He’s now holding enough cards to pull off a big political feat. Watch him say no to big cities if that is what it takes to address national priorities and give him enough room to occasionally co-opt Republicans to tame Democrats who grow obstreperous in Congress.

    Anyone who doubts this scenario should review the recent campaign, where Obama beat New York Senator Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination—and took her husband, former U.S. President Bill Clinton, down a few pegs in the process. Obama didn’t seriously consider Hillary Clinton as a vice presidential pick…and Bill Clinton steamed. Obama heard the whispers about the Hillary factor costing him big chunks of votes. He toughed it out while Bill Clinton damned his candidacy with faint praise and spoke ever-so-kindly of John McCain.

    Obama, meanwhile, focused on building his campaign into a model of efficiency that overwhelmed any bitterness about the battle with the Clintons. Both Clintons were eventually happy enough to jump aboard the winning campaign. Where else were they going to go?

    Compare that to McCain, who won the Republican nomination over the heated objections of the so-called “conservative” movement and the big names in the vaunted world of talk radio—those yakkers who claim to represent their party’s base. These ideologues had no use for McCain, but he whipped them outright.

    McCain failed to claim victory in his own party, however, moving instead to appease his critics with a dubious choice for vice president. The decision cost him any chance of getting the support he needed from other segments of the electorate—he vacated the middle ground of the political field, where presidential elections are always decided.

    McCain should have taken the chance on disappointing a segment of his party’s base in hopes that they would bend but not break.

    Obama did exactly that, and he has reaped the political benefit.

    Big city politicians and activists should expect the same playbook from Obama in the White House.

    The rest of us should hope that’s the plan, because it’s time for all of our politicians to make a virtue of saying no to their most fervent backers in the service of larger goals.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen, a weekly community newspaper that covers Downtown Los Angeles and surrounding districts (www.garmentandcitizen.com)

  • A Twice-Told Tale of Black, Brown & LAPD Blue

    This is a story of heartbreak and hope – and neither end of the tale made the news.

    A curious combination of factors recently led me to these events on a street in South Los Angeles, where worn houses and skinny palm trees can sometimes trick you into seeing nothing much.

    Then a crumpled baby bottle near a truck’s tire caught my eye and kicked me in the gut.

    The bottle belonged to a toddler who had just been crushed to death.

    The mother lost track of the baby. The baby crawled behind the wheel of a neighbor’s truck. The neighbor didn’t notice the child there.

    That’s how death came to this street, a place where African Americans and Latino Americans live side-by-side in a “Black-Brown” slice of the city – the sort of streetscape where so much of the potential and tension of our famed diversity resides.

    The scene leaned toward tension for several reasons.

    The mother of the baby was African-American.

    The neighbor was Latino-American.

    The mother was still in her teen years, and preliminary reports indicated that she had been having some trouble with the responsibilities that come with a baby.

    It appeared that the neighbor – an immigrant – didn’t have a driver’s license.

    It was hot and Santa Ana winds were blowing, sucking all the moisture out of the atmosphere, working the nerves.

    African-American folks gathered on front walks, whispering among themselves. They peered toward the yellow tape that marked off the house down the block, where a distraught woman occasionally appeared on the porch.

    There wasn’t a Latino-American neighbor in sight.

    The tension hung there, deciding whether to shrink or grow.

    The drone of the Harbor Freeway provided a monotonous soundtrack, seemingly ready to drive its tempo crazy or cool.

    Hope didn’t follow on to the scene naturally, but it did arrive to stake a claim. The first foothold came with uniformed cops and plainclothes investigators of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), who went about their grim duty quietly, efficiently, respectfully.

    Authorities had transported the baby from the scene in hopes of some life-saving treatment. The mother of the child had gone along. Social service agencies had been notified. The sorry details of an autopsy and funeral arrangements would be handled from the hospital. The driver of the vehicle was in custody, also away from the scene.

    Curiosity continued up the street, with neighbors now forming clusters, their whispers growing into not-quite-hushed tones. One group of youngsters started getting a bit louder.

    That’s when hope went on the offensive, able to do so because word of this incident had already gone from the streets of South Los Angeles to the highest levels of LAPD.

    A member of the agency’s command staff got there quickly. He received his briefing, took a measure of the situation, and headed back to his car. He stopped short of the vehicle, though, turning toward a group of five or six neighbors as they looked toward the scene. He approached them, ramrod straight, and asked if they knew what had just happened down the block on the street where they live.

    No, they didn’t, they replied.

    The high-ranking officer told them in clear, calm tones.

    A collective gasp came from the neighbors. What a shame, they said, wondering aloud how such a thing could happen.

    The gasp soon yielded to shaking heads. The tension eased toward sympathy.

    I can tell you that the neighborhood could have gone either way until then. I know that LAPD’s work at this scene will go largely unnoticed in our workaday world. I can report that the beat cops and investigators presented themselves with a professionalism that held tension at bay. I saw the high-ranking officer make sure that clear, courteous communication on the street trumped skepticism.

    The neighborhood stayed right-side-up in the face of the heartbreak at the end of the block. A baby died and folks felt the loss, leaving the Black-Brown dynamic out of the equation.

    The whole thing was awful—but it could have been worse.

    Things didn’t get worse, so none of this made the news.

    I just happened to be there, and I thought you all should know.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen, a weekly community newspaper that covers Downtown Los Angeles and surrounding districts.

  • California Disconnect: Don’t Get Out the Vote for Congress, State Legislature

    Have you heard about the current election season in Los Angeles?

    Sure, we’ve all gotten word about the presidential campaign. But how much have you heard about races for the U.S. Congress or State Legislature?

    The member of the U.S. House of Representatives who represents my neighborhood is up for re-election, along with his 434 colleagues. So is the fellow who represents me in the California State Assembly—and his 79 colleagues.

    I haven’t heard a peep from either one of them – no automated phone calls, signs, brochures, or door knockers. I’ll bet most of you could say the same for your representatives.

    There are a couple of reasons for all of this quiet, and the first is that elected officials don’t want to campaign.

    The U.S. Congress is just as unpopular as President George W. Bush. They’ve earned the low esteem, too, because many members of both major parties have been asleep at the switch these last eight years, dozing off while our nation continued to conduct warfare abroad and inflate a housing bubble at home, putting both ends of the deal on credit.

    Members of the State Legislature just did some foot stomping with the governor that caused their annual budget to be a couple of months late—a case of tardiness that has and will cost us all plenty.

    The second – and more discomforting – reason for the quiet campaign season is that an overwhelming number of the elected officials who represent Los Angeles in Washington and Sacramento don’t need to run hard. They have “safe seats,” with boundaries for their districts carved up to give them a lock at the polls.

    There’s also a measure on the November 4 ballot that claims to fix the process of drawing up boundaries for state offices in California. Rest assured that politicians have a hand in the deal, so don’t expect much.

    Where does that leave unhappy voters?

    It seems clear that there only a couple of ways to deal with a political system that’s in such shape. The first is for everyday folks to get together and start looking for individuals they know and trust as possible candidates for various offices. Forget about political experience—all the experience in Washington and Sacramento hasn’t done us much good. Just look for bright men and women whom you know to be honorable. Tell them you want them to run for office. Then help them make the race.

    Of course it’s too late to take such steps in this election, which leaves the matter of how to make the current crop of elected officials feel your displeasure.

    Voters could make a powerful statement by withholding their votes for members of Congress and the State Legislature. This is not suggested lightly, and it’s not to say that anyone should skip the presidential election, which is simply too important to sit out.

    It’s also understood that this will hit the few legislators who have actually been working in the best interests of their constituents lately. That’s a tough break, but it’s become clear that mass punishment of the legislative class is the only way to convince them of what poor use they’ve made of our hallowed institutions. Voters must let them all know that we know the game is rigged.

    The legislative class might get the point if its members see large numbers of us vote in the presidential election but find no reason to cast a ballot for other offices. They’ll win their rigged game, but victory will come with a warning. Maybe they’ll figure out that we’re tired of safe seats choking off any hope for vibrant campaigns where ideas matter.

    Again, this is nothing to take lightly. The right to vote is sacred. Yet the very same right is abused by the current system.

    So it’s true that your vote is your voice.

    Yet it’s also true that silence can sometimes speak volumes.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen, a weekly community newspaper that covers Downtown Los Angeles and surrounding districts

  • Villaraigosa’s Housing Proposal: Billions of Dollars and Too Little Sense

    The matter of whether private companies should be required to include so-called affordable housing units in residential developments is worthy of debate. Perhaps any developer who takes public funding ought to be subject to such requirements. A developer who doesn’t take public money is a different story.

    There is room to debate a number of points between those two notions, and we hope that interested parties will do just that as Los Angeles considers its future.

    That’s why we regret that Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has confused the debate with a proposal that offers precious little clarity as it aims to spend $5 billion on affordable housing.

    The proposal counts an initial commitment of $700 million to be invested by a Columbia, Maryland-based non-profit organization called Enterprise Community Partners, along with $300 million that apparently would come from the city, although no specifics were offered there.

    The next $4 billion would be raised through borrowings, grants, and “tax-credit equity”—whatever that turns out to be. In any case, Villaraigosa claims that the city will “leverage $1 billion in public funds into a $5 billion investment in affordable housing throughout local neighborhoods.”

    The Garment & Citizen appreciates Villaraigosa’s willingness to step up to a challenge. We like politicians who want the spotlight when the going gets tough. We also appreciate Villaraigosa’s political instincts, which are usually well-honed.

    We must, however, respectfully inform the mayor that he has gone tone deaf on this one.

    Our nation is currently amid a crisis wrought by a lot of folks who talked in vague terms about the financial aspects of housing, and a bunch more who didn’t listen closely enough. We have a bunch of elected officials trying to figure out what to do about our problems, and it’s a safe bet that many of them still can’t explain how Wall Street’s exotic financial instruments figure into the misery. We have a big chunk of our corporate class that used to revel in the sharp edges of the free market but now await government rescue.

    Now is not the time to launch a $5 billion proposal that relies on “tax-credit equity” for even a single bit of its funding. Not unless you are willing and able to explain the meaning of tax-credit equity, and how it benefits taxpayers. Nor is this the proper climate for putting 20% down on a $5 billion proposal and “leveraging” the rest of the funding.

    There are many other problems with Villaraigosa’s proposal, which talks about the $1 billion in public money for starters. But that total appears to count the $700 million from Enterprise Community Partners, which is not an agency of government.

    The proposal mentions 20,000 new housing units, but then says that some of the money would go toward “addressing the foreclosure crisis” and “preserving the affordability of 14,000 rental units.”

    We wonder if those 14,000 rental units to be “preserved” are part of the overall goal of 20,000. Are we adding 20,000 units of housing? Or will we preserve those 14,000 and see only 6,000 new units? Is this a bailout for over-extended landlords whose tenants are having a tough time making the rent as the economy dips?

    Then there are the hints of a taxpayer-financed smorgasbord. Villaraigosa says he also wants to build the housing units along heavily used transit corridors. There’s a call to shift the “city’s strategy from managing homelessness to moving people out of it.” He says he wants to “transform L.A.’s public housing sites into vibrant, mixed-income communities.”

    Is this proposal aimed at reducing the city’s carbon footprint by getting residents to trade their cars for train rides? Is it about social services for the homeless? Poor folks in housing projects? The middle class?

    All of those subjects merit a clear focus, but this is a mish-mash.

    Villaraigosa should review his proposal and think again about whether he wants to pursue these goals in this way.

    Perhaps it’s worth his effort, and there might be more to like with a better explanation.

    For now, however, this is a $5 billion proposal that just doesn’t add up.

    That’s not a line Villaraigosa or any other elected official ought to be walking in today’s world.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen, a weekly community newspaper that covers Downtown Los Angeles and surrounding districts (www.garmentandcitizen.com).

  • Rx for ‘Residential Renaissance:’ Take Two Years and Ease Up on the Hype

    A big going-out-of-business sign on the Rite-Aid store at 7th and Los Angeles streets tells a bigger tale—a story I’ll call “Hype Happens.”

    The Rite-Aid opened a few years ago with fanfare, arriving at just about the high-point of the hype over the “Residential Renaissance” of Downtown. Rite-Aid set up shop in the Santee Village project, an ambitious effort that saw a developer get plenty of help from various government agencies in order to convert a collection of mid-rise buildings from garment shops to residential lofts.

    The project won plaudits as the latest in a trend that was bound to remake Downtown into a place where folks with lots of disposable income could “live, work and play,” according to boosters.

    Rite-Aid’s arrival appeared to offer a clear signal that the trend would go on unabated. The new, young, and relatively upscale residents of Downtown would need a proper drugstore, after all. It all seemed quite modern for a section of the city where mom-and-pop corner stores were the only option for aspirin or chewing gum, and pharmacies were still just that—not places that offer shampoo and light bulbs and soda to customers waiting for their prescriptions to be filled.

    The hype apparently failed to meet the expectations of the marketplace, though, and now Rite-Aid is leaving.

    Get used to it—but also realize that this is a phase, and there can be some benefits to a slowdown.

    Also keep in mind that Downtown has, indeed, seen a great deal of change with the latest round of residential redevelopment. Much of it has been good, even with the strains that have come as wealthier newcomers bumped into the many poor folks who called the area home long before its latest star turn. Take some solace in the thought that such strains will likely find room to ease now that the hype fading.

    The pending closure of the Rite-Aid, meanwhile, offers lessons to be absorbed by boosters and others. The chain is no stranger to inner-city retail, but you can bet that its executives overlooked a few things on the way to the corner of 7th and Los Angeles, especially in regard to the chances for crowds of upscale loft dwellers filling their aisles. All the gushing press and publicity couldn’t change the fact that the location still backs up against Skid Row, one of the toughest precincts of the city. It still takes a walk of several blocks—through territory that can be pretty scary at night—to get to the next section of Downtown where bright lights and activity provide a perception of public security.

    Add that up and you’ll see that Downtown has not reached the sort of critical mass that matches the “live, work and play” sloganeering. There are pockets of the city’s center that have established an active, commercial nightlife. The Old Bank District centered at 4th and Main—a collection of several residential buildings, a few restaurants, a convenience store, and a DVD shop—comes to mind. For the most part, though, many gaps remain and the larger scene just hasn’t been knitted together.

    Consider the once-a-month Art Walk for a clear illustration of the over-sell of Downtown. The event has inspired an outsized helping of hype even by Downtown standards, getting regular and uncritical boosts from print media, broadcasters and the blogosphere, with reports offering it up as evidence of the success of Downtown’s upscale makeover. The Art Walk does draw hundreds of upscale visitors to galleries at 5th and Main and a few adjacent blocks on the second Thursday of each month. That’s great, but turn the proposition on its head and think about it this way: The Art Walk imports visitors who account for a vibrant sidewalk scene once a month. That’s not “live, work and play.” It’s more like “drive Downtown, look around, and leave.” Check 5th and Main on the other nights of the month and you’ll seldom see anything like the Art Walk crowds.

    Does this render the boosters’ dreams for Downtown dead?

    Certainly not—but expect them to go on hold for awhile.

    The economic turmoil that’s shaking the nation is hitting Downtown, too, and will continue to do so. The city’s center is not some chic pocket of creative energy that’s somehow able to escape the mess.

    So Downtown is in for a tough row to hoe, but there’s also a chance to learn some lessons in preparation for its next phase, which will surely start with plenty of hype at some point in the next several years.

    Perhaps by then our boosters and builders will have learned enough from the last go-round to ensure that the new corner drugstore will still stand tall when the next hot streak comes to an end.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen, a weekly community newspaper that covers Downtown Los Angeles and surrounding districts (www.garmentandcitizen.com).

  • Wondering About Skid Row: Whatever Happened to Work?

    I found myself in separate, private discussions with a couple of high-ranking city officials recently. They were pleasantly challenging exchanges, especially because both of my conversation partners displayed intellectual curiosity and willingness to consider divergent viewpoints. Those are wonderful qualities in general, and encouraging when found in individuals who have some influence on public policy.

    The subjects of poverty and crime in the Skid Row district of Downtown Los Angeles came up in both talks. The conversations covered various causes and effects—a changing economy, substandard educational systems, racism, the erosion of the family unit, our consumer society’s penchant for marketing violence as entertainment. It wasn’t all sociology, though—the fact that some individuals simply choose crime as a shortcut in life also came up.

    The talks served as reminders that any genuine improvements in Skid Row and other hard-pressed locales will require our entire society to work on a circumspect and well-reasoned plan.

    Los Angeles might appear to be in the first stages of such a plan with its efforts to rid Skid Row of the violent crime that has plagued the area for years. The program has had some success, but there’s still far more poverty and crime in Skid Row than would be tolerated in most neighborhoods. Indeed, it has become apparent that law enforcement can only keep a lid on things. It’s clear that the rest of us—and other public agencies—must work toward a next step or remain stalled on a recently achieved plateau that falls well short of other worthy goals.

    That’s where it gets tough, because I came away from the recent talks with the two high-ranking city officials filled with the feeling that too few of their colleagues have given much thought to a next step for Skid Row. I now wonder whether the most recent efforts to forge improvements have stalled because the tactic of fighting crime on Skid Row is not part of any larger strategic plan. That sort of stall might be happening before our very eyes, because most of us continue to view the poverty and crime of the area from a distance safe enough to preserve misunderstandings.

    Sure, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) is knee-deep in crime-fighting efforts inside Skid Row. Various activists are busy keeping an eye on the LAPD. A roster of social-service providers offers stop-gap shelter and patchwork health care.

    Meanwhile, the dynamics surrounding Skid Row have not changed much. Some folks want the cops to clear the poverty and crime away—and some of them don’t care how the job gets done. Another contingent views the whole thing from a few blocks away, anxious to somehow hear a magical “all-clear.” Some sit farther away, concerned only with keeping whatever is going on in Skid Row from bumping against their neighborhoods.

    It struck me—after I had a chance to reflect on the recent conversations with the two city officials—that any progress on poverty and crime in Skid Row will require one key ingredient that hasn’t gotten much attention lately: Jobs.

    When is the last time you heard anyone talk about work when the topic turned to Skid Row?

    I realize that some folks there won’t be able to work. There has been too much chemical and emotional damage, and they will be wards of the larger society for the rest of their lives.

    There are, however, many in Skid Row who would welcome a chance to earn a living, willing to do what it takes to make that possible. That means rehabilitation and training—and incentives for employers willing to serve as a bridgehead for workers who will likely be special cases for a period of time on the job. Someone will have to figure out what sort of employers might consider such an idea. We’ll have to determine what it will take to draw jobs to locations in or near Skid Row, or entice employers already in the area to do more local hiring.

    That’s a next step into another multi-tiered challenge. It’s a challenge that must start with jobs—or at least a requirement that the concept of work returns to the conversation when we talk about “cleaning up” neighborhoods such as Skid Row.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen.

  • Questioning Conventional Wisdom: Should Poor Folks Stay Put?

    There is reason to think again about the now-current idea of dispersing the population of poor folks in the Skid Row district of downtown Los Angeles and similar precincts in other cities across the U.S.

    There’s cause to pause over notions such as mixing “affordable housing” that’s priced in the range of working-class or poor folks alongside spiffy market-rate units.

    There’s some research going on that combines data analysis in the law-enforcement profession with efforts in the social sciences, and it’s far enough along to raise questions about some commonplace assumptions among policy makers.

    One questionable assumption is the notion that it’s best to do away with old-fashioned, densely developed centers of subsidized housing – places such as Skid Row, or the many areas of cities across the U.S. known as “the projects.” Conventional wisdom currently holds that such clusters on the low end of the socio-economic scale are best relegated to history and replaced with scattered sites.

    Here’s a simpler way of putting it: Recent years have seen government authorities ditch the old “projects” model – literally blowing them up, in some cases – in favor of programs that shift poor residents from the inner city to residences in outlying areas. They don’t bunch the poor folks together, at least not in the cheek-by-jowl way of the old neighborhood. The idea is to mix things up and put a relatively small number of poor folks into any given middle-class neighborhood that is safer and has better schools. The presumption is that spreading poverty out will give the poor a greater chance to work their way up the socio-economic scale.

    Such thinking bears a similarity to efforts by some public officials in Los Angeles who aim to make similar shifts possible based on regulations requiring builders to subsidize lower rents for certain numbers of units in their developments.

    It’s not exactly the same, and you can argue the finer points. But the truth is that the efforts to change the residential patterns of poor folks – and the talk of dispersing the social service agencies that serve low-income residents of neighborhoods such as Skid Row – aim for a goal that’s similar to the top-down approach of blowing up the projects and moving folks to places beyond the city’s center.

    Also similar is the reason behind some of the efforts to move poor residents out of the downtown areas of many cities: gentrification. Cities want to spruce up their historic cores. They want new retail and residential developments that will generate more tax revenue than any densely populated housing project or collection of low-rent residence hotels will ever provide. Public officials have often presented such efforts with a two-birds-with-one-stone argument – poor folks get to go off to nicer, safer neighborhoods and the city gets a shiny new trophy in a redeveloped downtown.

    There’s an article in the current issue of the Atlantic that looks at recent developments in Memphis, Tennessee, where sociological researchers have been comparing law-enforcement data on crime trends to recent programs to relocate poor folks from the inner city to outlying areas. Some of the findings have the researchers leaning toward a different two-birds-with-one-stone argument on subsidized housing. They think it might just be that both the folks who were shifted from those hard-pressed areas and their new neighbors far away from the inner city are worse off for all the manipulations.

    The research has not reached any definitive conclusions, and there are plenty of variables that must be considered with care. Still, there seems to be enough to raise serious questions about a trend in urban planning and public policy that has gone nearly unexamined for some time.

    The Garment & Citizen yields to the Atlantic on this matter, urging anyone who is interested to give careful consideration to the piece, “American Murder Mystery.”

    We also urge all involved in the debate to ask themselves a few questions:

    What is a neighborhood? Do common economic circumstances bring a sense of community that is necessary to any neighborhood? Is a poor neighborhood necessarily a bad neighborhood? If so, why?

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of the Los Angeles Garment & Citizen.

  • In Praise of Manufacturing & Industrial Zones

    My father made the huge piece of art that sits proudly on display at the entrance of the Daley Center Plaza in Chicago. Pablo Picasso designed this particular sculpture—or conceived it…or bent it with artistic vision…or however you want to put it.

    But my father made it.

    I’ve believed that since I was a small child. It’s a belief based mostly in filial pride, but there is some truth to it. Picasso, as I understand it, ordered the material for his untitled sculpture from the steel mill where my father worked at the time.

    My father handled the job as iron ore mixed with heat and sparks and sweat and swear words on the way to becoming steel. Picasso only took over after things had cooled down.

    I think of this as city planners ponder what to do with the industrial zone that sits on Downtown’s eastern edge. I can’t help but wonder why Los Angeles County’s role as the largest manufacturing center in the U.S., with approximately 470,000 jobs, so often goes overlooked.

    Sure, the manufacturing sector has shrunk over the years – and it will likely shrink some more in the future. But you could cut the local manufacturing sector in half and it would still be a giant engine of our economy. It gets bigger when you consider that manufacturing jobs tend to pay more than many service-sector jobs. That means the manufacturing jobs put more dollars in circulation to help finance a lot of those service-sector positions.

    Manufacturing also brings benefits that defy statistical analysis. Making things – objects or materials that can be touched, like the steel in a sharp sports car or the clothes on your back – is different than providing a service.

    Here’s what happens with services: The burger is made and consumed. The bed is made, slept in, and made again.

    Here’s what happens with manufactured products: The steel is used to build a grand cruise ship that steams into the harbor between trips to exotic ports and spills stories that will live for generations. The chair is purchased for some hearing room at City Hall and allows visitors to sit and gather their thoughts before standing up to take part in our democracy. The plastic is fabricated in a way that protects our astronauts as they set out on some historic mission of exploration.

    And here’s a simple fact: Making things makes people proud – and that’s the best thing you could hope for a city’s populace.

    I realize that the new lofts that have sprung about around Downtown – including some in the industrial zone – are pretty. I also understand why some land might be more valuable – at the moment, anyway – as a residential development instead of a metal-bending plant or a tool-and-die operation.

    I also believe, however, that Los Angeles is fortunate to have a major industrial center Downtown. I believe all involved in the current debate over its future should consider that seriously.

    Yes, manufacturers will continue to face challenges. One of the biggest will come from offshore markets with plentiful and cheap labor.

    But anyone who thinks industry is done in Los Angeles or the U.S. should keep Italy in mind. The Italians have been at a disadvantage on labor costs since somewhere around the 13th Century. Yet Italy has carried on as a manufacturing center, turning out everything from fine textiles to high-performance motorcycles. Italy long ago made a virtue of design and matched it with manufacturing processes that cannot be easily knocked off in low-wage markets thousands of miles away.

    It’s time for some enterprising city in the U.S to bring the same virtue to manufacturing – and Los Angeles is uniquely positioned to do exactly that. This will require some land – and history shows it will work best if various manufacturers are clustered together near a lively landscape with a plentiful labor pool and available housing stock.

    Sound familiar? I hope so – and I hope all involved will see the wisdom of maintaining a healthy and sizeable industrial zone Downtown. After all, some kid’s father might just make a famous artwork for City Hall someday.

    Jerry Sullivan is the Editor & Publisher of Los Angeles Garment & Citizen.