NELA Live

Equality Not Hate Rally In Lincoln Park

East Los Angeles Rally Sunday!!! 1pm Lincoln Park

PROTEST in the PARK: EQUALITY not H8TE Sponsored by the Latino/a LGBT Coalition latino.lgbt. coalition@ gmail.com

This Sun Nov 9th - 1 pm East LA : Lincoln Park
3501 Valley Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90031

A peaceful rally of the people. We rally then we march. In peace and with dignity... Everyone's voice is needed. Everyone's help is needed to spread the word... REPOST - SEND TO YOUR EMAIL LISTS & CONTACTS - SEND TEXT MESSAGES 

BE THERE! Bring signs, banners, whistles and some friends...

This image was made from a photo taken taken at the marriage ceremony of two dear friends.

I must comment that this joyous celebration was attended by elderly family members, and young children.  I didn't count noses, but my impression was that heterosexual couples outnumbered gay couples.  Believe me, no one felt threatened.

Measure J Results

J - SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT BONDS -

YES -- 849,759 -- 69.86 %

NO -- 366,678 -- 30.14 %

From http://rrccmain.co.la.ca.us/  (Local Contests->School Districts)

Election Day in Northeast L.A.

When was the last time you saw a line outside a polling place in Northeast Los Angeles?

Measure J Affects the Southwest Museum

Measure J on tomorrow's ballot is a $3.5 billion bond for the Los Angeles Community College District.

But did you realize that a YES vote on this measure possibly endangers the Southwest Museum by turning the Museum into a campus? 

Zuma Dogg: Why Measure J (Nov 4) Means ADIOS To The Southwest Museum And It's Billion Dollar Artifcats 

Boulevard Sentinel  (Scroll down to the 14th article)

On the other hand Los Angeles Times takes the YES position and, curiously, although the article was posted in October, there are no comments.  Could it be that some comments have been deleted?  Did any Southwest Museum supporters try to comment there?

Some background information here: Understanding the Southwest Museum Controversy

Supreme Court Spreadsheet: Kelo v. City of New London 2005

In 1997, Susettte Kelo purchased and restored an older home with a river view in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood of New London, Connecticut.

Soon after, the city of New London attempted to purchase 115 houses in the area in order to sell to commercial developers.   The plan called for the purchase and demolition of the standing homes, after which the private commerical developers would build a resort hotel and conference center, research facilities, new homes, offices and retail space.

Susette Kelo and 15 other homeowners refused to sell to the City of New London, so the city cited eminent domain and claimed the land.

A legal battle followed.  Ms. Kelo's position: The fifth amendment says the government can take private property for "public use", but this land was not being taken for that purpose; it was being taken to build what amounted to a privately owned real estate development.

The case was heard before by the Supreme Court, and the Court's decision was delivered June 23, 2005.  5 Justices voted in favor of the City of New London, 4 in favor of Kelo.

Here is my spreadsheet of the votes:

JUSTICE NAME	VOTE ON KELO V. NEW LONDON	YEAR APPOINTED	APPOINTED BY
John Paul Stevens	Wrote opinion: City has right to take property	1975	Gerald Ford - Republican
Anthony Kennedy	CONCUR	1988	Ronald Regan - Republican
David Souter	CONCUR	1990	George H. W. Bush - Republican
Ruth Bader Ginsberg	CONCUR	1993	Bill Clinton - Democrat
Stephen Breyer	CONCUR	1994	Bill Clinton - Democrat
William Rehnquist, Chief Justice	DISSENT	1972	Richard Nixon - Republican
Sandra Day O'Connor	DISSENT	1981	Ronald Regan - Republican
Anotonin Scalia	DISSENT	1986	Ronald Regan - Republican
Clarence Thomas	DISSENT	1991	George H. W. Bush - Republican

The full text of each Justice's opinion is archived at Cornell Law

Wikepedia on Kelo v New London

MSNBC article re Kelo

My purpose in doing this?  To first explore the idea that American Presidents can effect policy and law for decades by the appointment of a Supreme Court justice.  (Justice Stevens is now 88 years old, so it is possible that the next president may have the opportunity of making an appointment.)  And second, to explore the idea that justices do not always vote as expected.

Supreme Court Decision Spreadsheet: Dred Scott V. Sandford

I love election years.  The conversations that take place about the candidates and issues often lead to learning new things about history and government.

A few days ago I exchanged some comments with Mike Saunders about looking at "landmark" Supreme Court decisions in a spreadsheet format:  A snapshot, if you will, of how each justice voted, viewed beside the name and political party of the appointing president ....

To start playing with the idea, I reached back in history to Dred Scott V. Sandford, of 1857, certainly one of the most infamous decisions in our country's history.

From Wikipedia: Dred Scott v. Sandford,^[1] 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States and held as slaves, or their descendants^[2]-whether or not they were slaves-could never be citizens of the United States, and that the United States Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories

Here is my spreadsheet

JUSTICE NAME	VOTE ON DRED SCOTT	YEAR OF BIRTH	YEAR APPOINTED	APPOINTED BY
John McLean	Dissent	1785	1830	Andrew Jackson
James M. Wayne	Concur	1790	1835	Andrew Jackson
Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice	Wrote opinion: Slaves are not citizens	1777	1836	Andrew Jackson
John Catron	Concur	1786	1837	Martin Van Buren
Peter V. Daniel	Concur	1784	1842	Martin Van Buren
Samuel Nelson	Concur	1792	1845	John Tyler, Jr.
Robert C. Grier	Concur	1794	1846	James Polk
Benjamin Curtis	Dissent	1809	1851	Millard Filmore
John A. Campbell	Concur	1811	1853	Franklin Pierce

It soon became apparent that including a column indicating the appointing president's political party was problematic for this point in time, since in the first half of the 19th century, American political parties were undergoing great changes.   For example, Wikipedia lists Martin Van Buren's party affiliations as Democratic-Republican, Democratic, and Free Soil.

To place the Dred Scott decision in a historical timeline, consider this:

The American Revolutionary War took place 1775 - 1783.  The oldest justice at the time of the Dred Scott decision, Chief Justice Taney, was born during the Revolutionary War.

James Buchanan was inaugurated President March 4, 1857.

The Dred Scott decision was delivered March 6, 1857.

Abraham Lincoln was elected in 1860.

Fighting in The American Civil War began in April, 1861.

Robert E. Lee surrendered April 9, 1865, ending the American Civil War.

Abraham Lincoln was assassinated on April 15, 1865.

-----------

The full text of opinions written by each justice are archived at Cornell Law Library here.

FindLaw case summary here.

Further reading:  The Supreme's Greatest Hits

This historical review would not have been possible without Wikipedia.  Carolyn, I know you're a Wikipedia editor, my hats off to you and all editors!!

Mike, now that I've sorted the idea out a bit, I'm going to tackle KELO.  Stand by!

Pondering the Supreme Court

I had a conversation with a couple friends yesterday about John McCain and his selection of Sara Palin as a running mate.

The conversation wound its way into the topic of a President's legacy being his (or her) Supreme Court appointments.   And the possibility that the next president may have at least one appointment to make in the next four years, given that Justice John Paul Stevens is now in his late eighties.

I ended up making this list of the current Supreme Court Justices, sorted by each Justice's year of birth:

JUSTICE NAME	YEAR OF BIRTH	YEAR APPOINTED	APPOINTED BY
John Paul Stevens	1920	1975	Gerald Ford
Ruth Bader Ginsberg	1933	1993	Bill Clinton
Anthony Kennedy	1936	1988	Ronald Regan
Antonin Scalia	1936	1986	Ronald Regan
Stephen Breyer	1938	1994	Bill Clinton
David Hackett Souter	1939	1990	George H. W. Bush
Clarence Thomas	1948	1991	George H. W. Bush
Samuel Alito	1950	2006	George W. Bush
John Roberts, Chief Justice	1955	2005	George W. Bush

Here is the same list, sorted by each Justice's year of appointment:

JUSTICE NAME	YEAR OF BIRTH	YEAR APPOINTED	APPOINTED BY
John Paul Stevens	1920	1975	Gerald Ford
Antonin Scalia	1936	1986	Ronald Regan
Anthony Kennedy	1936	1988	Ronald Regan
David Hackett Souter	1939	1990	George H. W. Bush
Clarence Thomas	1948	1991	George H. W. Bush
Ruth Bader Ginsberg	1933	1993	Bill Clinton
Stephen Breyer	1938	1994	Bill Clinton
John Roberts, Chief Justice	1955	2005	George W. Bush
Samuel Alito	1950	2006	George W. Bush

Something to ponder.

And for further pondering:

The Supreme Court Web Site

Short biographies of each justice

A U S News article about "Ranking the Politics of Supreme Court Justices"

Charles Fletcher Lummis High School

The Highland Park Heritage Trust is conducting a petition gathering all this week to emphasize the importance of naming HS #13 for a person who is significant to the Northeast of Los Angeles, our own Charles Fletcher Lummis.

Petition gathering started at the HPHT booth on Lummis Day, June 1, and the first round of signature gathering will continue until June 11th when the ground breaking ceremony will be taking place at the location on San Fernando Road, at Division Street.

Historian, Charles Fisher, author of "Highland Park", the book that chronicles the history of the community, was the one who had the brilliant idea of naming it Charles Fletcher Lummis HIgh School. Can you imagine the motto? "Can Do!"

To help with the signature gathering, send your email request to:

Carmela Gomes
President of the Board of Highland Park Heritage Trust
hphtpres@gmail.com

Signed petitions can be returned during the HPHT meeting on Monday, June 9, from 7-9PM at Ramona Hall, or to the Community Booth at the Farmer’ Market on Tuesday, June 10, at the Avenue 57 Gold Line Station.

Instructions for returning the signed petitions at other times, before June 11, will be given along with the Petition attachment.

Thanks for your continuing community spirit.

Don't Forget to Vote June 3

Los Angeles,

Don't forget to vote today!

To obtain a sample ballot and find your polling place, visit the County Clerk's Polling Place Locater

California marriage ruling sets historic precedent

The California Supreme Court ruled today that same-sex couples must be allowed to marry in California. Domestic partnership is not sufficient. Only "marriage" will suffice in order to afford gays and lesbians full protection under the state Constitution.

In 1981, Michael Vasquez and I exchanged our vows in international waters since, at that time, no nation on the planet legally recognized the right of same-sex couples to marry. We chose international waters as the forum for our commitment ceremony as a way of expressing our belief that our right to marry was not dependent on the political beliefs of the rulers of our planet. More than 300 people showed their support by joining us on the ship we chartered for this great adventure.

Today, a few nations, such as Canada, do recognize the right of same-sex couples to legally marry.

In the United States, Massachusetts has been the only state to recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry. The Supreme Court in that state issued a constitutional ruling a few years ago which opened up marriage to all couples regardless of gender or sexual orientation.

Today is a historic day, one that will be remembered for years to come.

Now, it would be appropriate for the State of California to open up "domestic partnership" to opposite-sex couples who may wish to have primary family rights but who do not want the term "marriage" applied to their relationships. Currently, only gay couples of any adult age, and opposite-sex couples above the age of 62, can register with the state as domestic partners. Heterosexual couples under the age of 62 are denied the right to register their relationship as a domestic partnership.

If freedom of choice in personal relationships means anything, and now that same-sex couples will have access to marriage, heterosexual couples should have access to domestic partnership if they choose it.

Also, state and federal laws should be "marital status neutral," neither rewarding those who marry or punishing those who do not. Marital status discrimination should not be allowed.

Economic barriers to marriage should also be removed so that seniors, people with disabilities, and those receiving government assistance are not penalized if they choose to marry.

Just as the Constitution protects freedom of religion and the freedom from religion, as well as the right to have children and the right not to have children, it is time for society to truly respect freedom of choice with respect to marriage.

Society should treat all people fairly regardless of whether they choose marriage or domestic partnership, or for that matter whether they choose to be single.

* Thomas F. Coleman is an attorney who has been advocating for liberty and equal rights for 34 years. He and his partner, Michael Vasquez, reside in Los Angeles.  Coleman is also a realtor with Bob Taylor Properties located in Highland Park.

A New Post from a New Poster

It is a great pleasure to post for the first time here on Nelalive - thanks Cheryl for the invitation.
I'm a happy Highland Park homeowner who had the great pleasure of buying my house with the help of Blob Taylor back in 1985 and I'm still there, rooted in Garvanza like a Bouganvilla! 

After helping start the Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council, I've satisfied myself with keeping it's website interesting while the Council itself continues to grope for relevance, with mixed results.  It's election time coming up, so those who think they might want to help the HHPNC move to the next level of meaningfulness for the Highland Park Community, please step up and run for a position. 

Visit the HHPNC website at http://historichighlandpark.org        

If you take the trouble to register and become a ' registered user' of the website, you'll be able to access all the historic photos I've put there as well as contribute to the 'forums'.  But even as an unregistered 'guest', there is a lot to see there, so please give it a spin.

The most exciting recent news was announced just today:  Garvanza (north Highland Park neighborhood, historically defined north of York, East of Figueroa) will be getting an HPOZ!  Here is the notice that just appeared on NELAlist today!: 

It's a YES, Garvanza!

 

With great pleasure, I write to inform you that council UNANIMOUSLY approved the initiation of a Garvanza Historic Preservation Overlay Zone and related Interim Control Ordinance today at council. 

 

Councilmember Huizar advocated strongly for this project, and wants to send sincere THANKS to each person who came down to council today to support the item.  Your presence was important, as one never knows how these things will go.  As it turns out, it went through with flying colors with no objection!  In fact, another council office commented they've never seen an HPOZ go through so smoothly - a tribute to the broad support and importance of this project. 

 

I am including the Councilmember's press release below for your reference.

 

Thanks again for your diligent and consistent support for this issue and the Councilmember's work on behalf of the community. It's a pleasure working with all of you.

 

Sincerely,
Jessica

 

Jessica Wethington McLean
Planning & Economic Development Director
Office of Councilmember José Huizar
200 N. Spring Street Room 465
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(213) 473-7014
Jessica.WethingtonMcLean@Lacity.org 

 

 

PRESS RELEASE

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE    CONTACT: George I. Gonzalez    (213) 473-7014
Tuesday July 17th, 2007                                 Cell   (213) 200-9974
                                                                        
COUNCILMEMBER JOSE HUIZAR LEADS EFFORT TO
CREATE GARVANZA HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY ZONE

 

City Council Approves HPOZ Study- Action Long-awaited by Northeast Los Angeles Community
                                                                                    
LOS ANGELES- Councilmember José Huizar, District 14, was pleased to announce that the Garvanza community of Northeast Los Angeles is closer to becoming a Historic Preservation Overlay Zone (HPOZ).  The City Council approved a motion introduced by Councilman Huizar, which instructed the City’s Planning Department to conduct a $120,000 study that will evaluate the historic significance of the area. 

 

HPOZ’s are designed to protect and enhance the use of buildings, structures, natural features, and areas which are reminders of the City’s history.  They also protect unique and irreplaceable assets to the City and its neighborhoods which are worthy examples of past architectural styles.

 

The Garvanza community features many structures which represent significant architectural history, including the original historic township of Garvanza established in the early 1900’s. The proposed Garvanza HPOZ boundaries cover areas between Pasadena City limits to the north; Metro right-of-way bridge to the south; Eastside of Avenue 66 to the east; and Eastside  of Figueroa proceeding to the Westside of Avenue 63 at York to the west.  The Garvanza HPOZ will also incorporate the Judson Studios/Thorne Street portion of the current Highland Park HPOZ.

 

Councilman Huizar advocated strongly, along with the community, for Council to agree to fund the HPOZ study; and hopes the area will be added to the existing 21 HPOZ’s in the City.

 

“I believe this area represents significant cultural and architectural resources which should be protected.  Residents have been fighting for this Historic Preservation Overlay Zone for many years - in fact, this issue stretches back several administrations in Council District 14,” said Councilman Huizar.

 

“We are at a critical point in time for the historic portions of Garvanza - many of the structures we are looking to protect with this HPOZ are in danger of being torn down. This HPOZ will also offer homeowners various tax, regulatory, and financial incentives that are designed to offset the expense of rehabilitating and maintaining their properties.” he added.

 

The study is expected to be completed within a year.

 

# # #

...............................And keep an eye on the upcoming Grand opening of the new Garvanza skatepark....It's a cutting edge concrete park that is already getting a lot of use from the skaters who can't wait for the opening and are breaking in to use it, despite the Rec and Parks Dept.'s efforts to dissuade them by putting sand down on the surfaces and locking the fence.  The skaters simply cut the gate off and toss it aside, sweep up the sand and go forward with their use, "padless" and "helmetless", and just for good measure, they cover the park with graffitti tagging.  In my opinion, unlesss they replace the fence w/ "prison" quality barriers, there will never be an adequate amount of security to keep the skaters out. 

Once the park is opened, the skaters will be required to wear pads and helmets (which they abhor), so the "pirate" use will continue to be a strong magnet, and the gang members will continue to want to tag it to clearly claim it's 'turf' as their own.  A great number of us in the community were apprehensive about this park for these very reasons:  A world class skatepark arrives on the scene with world class challenges in terms of security and controlled use.  If young kids are to feel safe and welcome at this skatepark, a concerted effort on the part of Rec and Parks staff to control it's use will be required.  We worry that funding shortfalls at Rec and Parks will present difficulties in adequately staffing, securing and regulating the skaters.  Without a high level of attention, the park threatens to 'ghettoize' the Garvanza neighborhood by attracting pervasive tagging and repeated breakins by rambunctious skaters, night and day in the off hours.     In August we will witness the grand opening, I am told, so let's cross our fingers that things will progress smoothly.

You can read more asbout the Garvanza skatepark on the forum devoted to it on the HHPNC website at http://historichighlandpark.org/modules.php?name=4nForum&file=forumdisplay&fid=8


Thanks for reading my first post on Nelalive and I hope you'll check out the HHPNC website soon!
Robert Mendel

General Election May 15

A few days ago I received a sample ballot in the mail for a General Election taking place May 15, 2007.

There is only one item on the ballot, a Community College District Board of Trustees seat.

How much does it cost to put on an election? Is it just me, or does an election for just one Board of Trustees seat seem rather wasteful? How many people will even come out and vote?

I'm sure the candidates are sincere, hard-working people, and it doesn't seem fair to them either.

Just my humble opinion.

Highland Perk Planning Commission Hearing

Cross posted from NELAlist - from Scott Robbins

Dear Highland Perk Coffeehouse Customers,

WE NEED YOUR HELP! This Wednesday we are going to the East Los Angeles Area Planning Commission hearing to fight for the survival of our coffeehouse!

We need community members, customers and neighbors to come out and support us. Please come to Ramona Hall Community Center in Highland Park at 4580 North Figueroa Street L.A., CA 90042 at 4:30 P.M. Wednesday 3/14/07.

If you like our coffeehouse and you want us to financially stay in business then we need you to come to support our APPEAL HEARING for our DENIED beer and wine permit. No permit = No coffeehouse.

We are supported by the following entities just to name a few:
1. All adjacent property owners and residents.
2. Los Angeles City Councilman Jose Huizar, CD 14
3. LAPD Senior Lead Officers, Mark Allen and Chris Cooper
4. The fire department station 12 in Highland Park.
5. The Highland Park Lutheran Church
6. The Parents board members at Saint Ignatius School.
7. 250 very close by neighbors and property owners.
8. The Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council.
9. The Highland Park Chamber of Commerce.
10. Highland Park Automotive
11. Tacos Michoacano

Please come out and support our survival. We need your support!

Sincerely,

The Owner and 8 employees here at the Highland Perk Coffeehouse

14th District Results

14th District Results

(From City Clerk's website as of 4:30 am, March 7)

Jose Huizar 65.80% - 6,353 votes

Juan "Johnny Jay" Jimenez  4.46% - 431 votes

Alvin Parra 29.74% - 2,871 votes

Don't Forget To Vote March 6

Hey, L.A. Don't Forget to vote today, Tuesday, March 6.

Find your polling place, and print a sample ballot here:  http://www.lavote.net/locator/

More info here: http://cityclerk.lacity.org/election/

You can follow election night results here, updated every 30 minutes after the polls close: http://cityclerk.lacity.org/election/Results.htm

14th District Candidate Forum 2/21

The February meeting of the Northeast Democratic Club will feature candidate forums for the Los Angeles 14th Council District with incumbent Jose Huizar and challengers Alvin Parra and Juan "Johnny Jay" Jimenez.

LAUSD Board candidates Yolie Flores Aguilar and Bennet S. Kayser will also debate.

Wednesday, 21 February, 7 p.m.
El Arco Iris Restaurant, Meeting Room
5684 York Avenue, Highland Park

14th District Race

Los Angeles Times looks at the race for the 14th  District Council Seat

Eric Garcetti to Speak at 2/18 "House Party for Jose"

City Council president Eric Garcetti will speak on Sunday, February 18 at the “House Party for Jose,” a Mount Washington fundraiser for the campaign to re-elect CD 14 Councilmember Jose Huizar.

The event, scheduled from noon-2:30 pm at 1109 Oneonta Drive in Mount Washington, will include lunch and a hosted bar. Coffee service is being donated by Highland Perk Coffee House. A minimum
donation of $50 to the campaign is suggested, with checks made payable to “Re-elect Jose Huizar (ID#1291807)”

Sponsors for the event include Anne Ahrens, Paul Ahrens, Raul Becerra, Jeff Boxer, Scott Burleigh, Warren Christensen, Doug Dawson, Victor Franco, John Gallogly, Mary Garripoli, Pat Griffith, Liz Herron, Highland Perk Coffee House, Glenn Johnson, Liz Johnson, Sharon Kyle, Dick Price, Scott Robbins, Maya Rumble, Gloria Schneider, Jerry Schneider, Tony Scudellari, Eliot Sekuler, Jain Sekuler and Bob Squires.

For information or to RSVP to the event, please call Eliot Sekuler at 818-535-9178.

###

Huizar V. Parra: The Fallout and the Follow-up

Huizar Response to Article Prompts New Questions; New Details Emerge

By Edward Rivera

Last issue's article on 14th District Councilmember Jose Huizar ("Breach of Faith: Who is the Real Jose Huizar") elicited a bizarre response not only from the Council office, but a wide swath of  bloggers and callers who contacted the newspaper with more details. Calling some accusations "outrageous and blatantly false," the councilman responded with a letter to the Arroyo Seco Journal to address the major points of the story. The letter, sent by campaign consultant Parke Skelton, took issue with three allegations against Huizar leveled by his opponent Alvin Parra, and  subsequently investigated by the newspaper.

The three allegations were that: Huizar failed to act when Henry James Lugo, a convicted child molester was at a Council-sponsored event, in violation of his parole, even after Lugo attempted to molest a Huizar staffer's child; that Huizar failed to stop the expanded permit of a Boyle Heights toxic waste transfer station; and that he signed misleading documents while making illegal improvements to a home he owned in El Sereno. While addressing the charges, the letter raised new questions, and new details have emerged which contradict some of Huizar's responses.

(The full text of Huizar's response is available at http://www.asjournal.net )

A Breach of Faith: Who is the Real Jose Huizar?

Exclusive to the Arroyo Seco Journal
by Edward Rivera

When Jose Huizar filed in 2005 to run for the vacant 14th District seat of newly elected mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, many political observers were as yet unaware of the surprising power the mayor could wield in seemingly "anointing" a successor. As Villaraigos's pick, Huizar overwhelmingly defeated incumbent Nick Pacheco. It was the first time that most could remember a sitting  Councilmember being defeated so soundly.

Now, however, as Huizar faces an election challenge from his former field director Alvin Parra, and a loosely organized revolt from former staffers, it seems many in the district find themselves wondering exactly who it was they voted for.

An Arroyo Seco Journal investigation has revealed a wide dissension within the Councilman's Office, and has uncovered several new allegations. Among them: Huizar refused to act when his staff urged him to take action against a convicted child molester who had attempted to prey on the children of Huizar's own staff.

For the full story, go to http://www.asjournal.net

Prop R??

I've been thinking, for obvious reasons, about the recent passage of Prop R, that City Council/League of Women Voters/Chamber of commerce scam.
My only consolation about the sad and disheartening prospect of the Invisible Ed Reyes in office for four more years is that Prop R is due to be tried in a court.
I will be following this up shortly, but what do YOU thnk?
Eddie Rivera