# L.A. agrees to spend $1.3 billion to fix sidewalks



## mark handler (Apr 1, 2015)

L.A. agrees to spend $1.3 billion to fix sidewalks

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lawsuit-broken-sidewalks-20150331-story.html#page=1

By EMILY ALPERT REYES

APRIL 1, 2015, 3:34 PM

Los Angeles is pledging to spend more than $1.3 billion over the next three decades to fix

its massive backlog of broken sidewalks and make other improvements to help those

with disabilities navigate the city as part of a tentative deal being described as a

landmark legal settlement.

The proposed agreement would resolve a lawsuit filed by attorneys for the disabled, who argued

that crumbling, impassable sidewalks and other barriers prevented people in wheelchairs or others

with mobility impairments from accessing public pathways in violation of the Americans With

Disabilities Act.

The final terms must still be approved by a federal judge, but attorneys described it as the biggest

agreement of its kind in U.S. history.

City leaders said the proposed deal marks the beginning of a sorely needed effort to eliminate one

of Los Angeles' most intractable neighborhood nuisances: the ugly and treacherous obstacle

courses created by miles of buckling walkways.

City officials and advocates for the disabled praised the agreement at a news conference.

Communities Actively Living Independent and Free Executive Director Lillibeth Navarro, whose

group was among those suing the city, called it “a major win” for people with disabilities who had

suffered frustration and injuries trying to move around the city. Councilman Paul Krekorian said

it was a historic victory not only for people with disabilities, but also for the elderly and “anyone

who is ever a pedestrian.”

Under the terms of the proposed settlement agreed to by the City Council and announced

Wednesday, the city must spend $31 million annually on sidewalk and other improvements

beginning in the next budget year. That amount would gradually increase to $63 million in future

years to adjust for rising costs.

The settlement doesn't identify any new source of funding. But City Administrative Officer Miguel

Santana noted that the deal does not limit the type of funding Los Angeles can use to pay for the

repairs, meaning the city could seek various grants for the work.

It's unclear whether the promised money will completely eliminate the backlog. The Bureau of

Street Services has estimated that about 40% of city sidewalks need repairs. At one point, the price

tag was estimated at $1.5 billion. But Santana said there is no reliable estimate for the full cost.

UCLA urban planning professor Donald Shoup said: “It's sad to think that the only thing that has

caused any movement in 40 years is a lawsuit.… But of course I'm glad they're doing it.”

Even with the promised spending, he added, “It would take decades to fix our sidewalks.”

Mayor Eric Garcetti said he believed the spending would be enough to stay ahead of any ongoing

deterioration of aging city sidewalks. Attorney Guy Wallace, one of several lawyers representing

plaintiffs in the case, said the record agreement was larger than a major, $1.1-billion settlement

reached several years ago with Caltrans, the state transportation agency.

The Los Angeles suit alleged that lack of public access for Angelenos in wheelchairs “relegates

them to second-class citizen status” and prevents them from being independent. Wallace said at a

news conference that more than 200,000 Angelenos with mobility disabilities had struggled to

navigate “dysfunctional and inaccessible” sidewalks. Tim Fox, a Denver-based attorney who is on

the national board of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the settlement represented an

unprecedented move by a city to broadly improve access to its sidewalks for the disabled.

The city plans to start by repairing sidewalks around parks and other city facilities, but will also fix

walkways in other areas that are heavily trafficked, close to hospitals or workplaces, or requested

by people with mobility challenges, including those alongside homes, Santana said. The only

sidewalks that would be categorically left out are those next to buildings run by other government

entities, including the Los Angeles Unified School District or federal or state agencies.

Funding to fix sidewalks has been haphazard over the years, and the city abandoned any

systematic sidewalk repair program after the recession hit seven years ago. As the economy has

improved, the city has revived its program and budgeted $27 million for repairs this year.

So far, Los Angeles has focused its efforts on walkways next to parks and other city facilities. Some

council members have also devoted money from their discretionary funds to fix sidewalks in their

districts. But the problem remains glaringly obvious in many areas and has cost the city more

than $6 million in trip-and-fall payouts in less than four years, according to the city attorney's

office.

/

Kathleen Law, 73, a Hollywood resident whom the city paid $50,000 after she tripped on a jagged

sidewalk and shattered her right knee cap in 2008, said the plan was overdue.

“It's absolutely a must,” said Law, adding that she still suffers pain from her injury and has had to

drastically curtail her preferred form of exercise — walking. “There are some streets I just can't

walk on because it's too risky.”

The deterioration of city sidewalks is tied to a historic tug of war over who is responsible for fixing

them. Los Angeles once held property owners responsible for fixing the adjacent sidewalks,

conforming with California law. But decades ago, with federal funding in hand, the city took on

responsibility for fixing sidewalks damaged by city trees.

That federal money quickly dried up and Los Angeles voters proved unwilling to pony up more tax

money to continue repairs. In 1998, a move to authorize $769 million in bonds for sidewalk work

was rejected. Last year, lawmakers abandoned a plan to ask voters to hike the sales tax to pay for

street and sidewalk repairs.

Shoup argued that the city should pursue additional measures, including requiring owners to fix

broken sidewalks next to their property when they sell.

The proposed settlement is silent on who is legally responsible for sidewalks next to private

property — leaving the door open for that kind of program, Shoup suggests. Santana said city

lawmakers still have to grapple with those types of issues.

Under the terms announced Wednesday, the city can reduce its annual spending slightly — to $25

million — but it must make up for it within the next three years.

With the City Council's approval of the settlement terms, city lawyers can present a final

agreement to the court.

In addition to the $1.3 billion pledged for repairs, the city will pay $15 million in attorneys fees and

costs. Wallace said the city is also creating a position to monitor the work and will draft reports on

its progress twice yearly.


----------



## conarb (Apr 1, 2015)

\ said:
			
		

> The onlysidewalks that would be categorically left out are those next to buildings run by other government entities, including the Los Angeles Unified School District or federal or state agencies.


I wonder if this is due to the Supreme Court decision finding Titles I and II of the ADA unconstitutional?


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Apr 2, 2015)

Sidewalks use concrete.

Concrete needs water.

Wonder where they will get that?

This is what happens when idiots dictate to imbeciles what their priorities should be.

Brent.


----------



## mstehlin (Apr 2, 2015)

In my jurisdiction (in Ohio), the public sidewalk must be built and maintained by the property owner.

Must be different state laws about responsibility.


----------



## jdfruit (Apr 2, 2015)

The CA state laws on sidewalks are quite clear, the property owner is responsible to maintain the sidewalk along their property. However when LA "took over" the sidewalks as a "program" they now "own" the maintenance problem. For the sidewalks that can be "categorically" left out, since the maintenance is "owned" by other government entities, LA is not responsible by statute. The big deal here is that LA (among other cities/counties) has not done any work for so long that the conditions are actually hazardous. Big targets get shot at by big guns.


----------



## mstehlin (Apr 2, 2015)

Why did they "take over" the sidewalks as a "program"? Seems like a huge mistake, highly financially irresponsible.


----------



## mark handler (Apr 2, 2015)

mstehlin said:
			
		

> Why did they "take over" the sidewalks as a "program"? Seems like a huge mistake, highly financially irresponsible.


Los Angeles . In 1974, as a result of a grant of federal funds, Los Angeles passed an ordinance placing the obligation to repair sidewalks on the City. Since the federal funds dried up a few years later, the City has had difficulty enacting legislation to place the repair obligation back on the property owners

As of 2010, approximately 4,700 of the Los Angeles’ 11,000 linear miles of sidewalk (approximately 43%) were in disrepair. The City estimated spending between 4 and 6 million dollars in liability claims and the cost estimate to repair the sidewalks was between 1.2 and 1.5 billion dollars.5 Los Angeles has been considering repealing the 1974 ordinance to shift responsibility back to the homeowners. This effort has faced opposition from the homeowners and even unsuccessful efforts

in the State Legislature to require a public vote prior to placing the obligation back on the homeowner. Sacramento also experimented with assuming the repair obligation. From 1943 through mid-1973, the City’s policy was that property owners were responsible for the cost of all repairs except those caused by City street tree roots for which the City shared responsibility. In mid-1973, the City adopted a new policy making the City responsible for all sidewalk repairs. Not surprisingly, sidewalk repair requests increased substantially. In mid-1976, finding the existing policy unworkable, the City elected to adopt a policy making property owners responsible for all sidewalk repairs, including those repairs necessitated by damage caused by City street trees.


----------



## jdfruit (Apr 2, 2015)

Good intentions gone wrong. Started with "let's get nice street trees, good for shade, makes things look better, good for the environment by putting a bit of O2 into the air". Then the project was put together by a budget of a thousand slices and merrily the trees were planted. Next fail; trees were species that had more surface feeding roots than the ground could supply, sidewalks started raising. Next fail; City tells owners to fix sidewalks, rebellion ensues, villagers storm city hall. Next fail; City agrees to take care of problem, finds grant money (again on environmental improvement idea) and goes about some fixes but runs short of goals all over city. Next fail; upper administrators don't want another mob storming city hall so they let the program die and don't notify everyone they are pulling out. Dragon goes to sleep. Next fail; after *tens of thousands verifiable and documented complaints* about safety (some for accessibility) the villagers decide not to storm city hall and go one better; lawyers! Dragon gets rousted by lawyers, havoc ensues for PR, only a few singed bureaucrat behinds during the mass melee to get out of the way at city hall. Dragon gets placated by lots of money, news report issued.


----------



## conarb (Apr 2, 2015)

So why are government agencies excluded?


----------



## ADAguy (Apr 2, 2015)

A long overdue decision that dwarfs Sacramento which should have been a warning.

Only 15 mil. in legal fees, such a deal. Wonder how much the cities were to defend against this?


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Apr 2, 2015)

Nothing will happen.

Brent.


----------



## jdfruit (Apr 2, 2015)

Brent; a lot will happen due to lawsuit settlement agreement that will have a compliance monitor reporting back to the Judge on how well LA does in meeting the settlement terms. If LA doesn't comply with terms, there are individuals on LA staff that can be charged with contempt of court that could result in jail time. Nobody messes with a Judge for settlement agreement compliance.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Apr 2, 2015)

I believe some token work will be done.

There is still no funding for the lions share.

On the off chance it becomes prioritized then something else will be sacrificed. Perhaps the slowest high speed train in the world will be back burnered to pay for sidewalks... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Brent.


----------



## ADAguy (Apr 2, 2015)

Oh "Yee" of little faith, but then you are a Northern Guy, how much have Sacramento & Folsom paid out to date?


----------



## mtlogcabin (Apr 2, 2015)

30 years to comply

Go through and rip em all out.

No more law suits except maybe the business districts where they are needed.

Sidewalks in residential neighborhoods are an amenity that can be removed


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Apr 2, 2015)

ADAguy said:
			
		

> Oh "Yee" of little faith, but then you are a Northern Guy, how much have Sacramento & Folsom paid out to date?


I don't know the particulars. School me.

If you are telling me it's getting done, where is the funding originating? Is it the same circumstances as LA?

Most of Folsom is brand new, not even 20 years old.

Brent.


----------



## Keystone (Apr 2, 2015)

mtlogcabin - you hit the nail on the head, amenity except business/commercial.


----------



## conarb (Apr 2, 2015)

The way L.A. could pay for this is to tax fat people like the Japanese are doing, even Jonathan Gruber, infamous for stating that he deliberately defrauded the "stupid American voters" into supporting Obamacare, has supported taxing fat people.



			
				\ said:
			
		

> In an article for the National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation in April 2010, titled "Taxing Sin to Modify Behavior and Raise Revenue", Gruber advocated a sort of "sin tax" for the obese. He uses the model of cigarette taxes.¹


Judging from the number of people I see riding around in wheelchairs and motorized scooters taxing fat people would only be fair to help pay the amount of money that society has to pay to accommodate them.



			
				\ said:
			
		

> In 2008, Japan’s Ministry of Health passed the ‘metabo’ law and declared war against obesity by measuring the country’s waistline. Their intent is to curb the rise of metabolic syndrome, a number of factors that lead to diabetes and cardiovascular disease including obesity, high blood pressure, high glucose levels and cholesterol. By keeping metabolic syndrome in check, the government hopes to stall the ballooning health care costs of their aging population.In recent decades, concerns over rising rates of obesity and related metabolic diseases in developing countries have increased. Many of these countries are witnessing a growing aging population with decreasing birth rates, foreshadowing a costly future for health systems faced with supporting the declining elderly without the backing of a youthful workforce. Management of chronic disease such as diabetes, hypertension and other metabolic syndromes will compound these costs. Globally, current health policy is being re-examined and interventions to reduce the incidence of metabolic disease in the coming years are being implemented, but none are more radical than Japan’s ‘metabo law’, a law that requires men to maintain a waist line less than 33.5 inches and women less than 35.4 inches.²


¹ http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Jonathan_Gruber_%28economist%29

² http://www.bu.edu/themovement/2011/05/29/the-fats-on-fire/


----------



## jdfruit (Apr 2, 2015)

It seems everyone is doubting how LA can put together the money for compliance with the lawsuit settlement. Current budget for 2014/2015 is 8.122 BILLION $. With the economy recovering in SoCal, it is expected there will be about 3 to 4% net increase in revenue for next budget cycle, so expect about 8.406 BILLION $ next year as they start the work. The $31 million annual requirement is miniscule in comparison, about 3.7 tenths of one percent overall and can be sliced out of a thousand or so budget pieces without severe cuts anywhere.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Apr 2, 2015)

People want this crap, they gots to PAY, yo.

Pretty soon you won't get a check from an employer. The administrative class will just take what they want and send you what's left, if there is anything left.

Brent.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Apr 2, 2015)

jdfruit said:
			
		

> It seems everyone is doubting how LA can put together the money for compliance with the lawsuit settlement. Current budget for 2014/2015 is 8.122 BILLION $. With the economy recovering in SoCaol, it is expected there will be about 3 to 4% net increase in revenue for next budget cycle, so expect about 8.406 BILLION $ next year as they start the work. The $31 million annual requirement is miniscule in comparison, about 3.7 tenths of one percent overall and can be sliced out of a thousand or so budget pieces without severe cuts anywhere.


Water problems are going to slaughter the southern economy. Remember that.

Brent.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Apr 3, 2015)

> With the economy recovering in SoCal,


An economy can swing in any direction at any time for a number of reasons.

There will be a point in time when the cost exceed the need or want and it will come to a stop


----------



## ADAguy (Apr 3, 2015)

MD,

Sac's suit remediation requirement is in about its 1oth year of 30 and Folsom is in its 7 or 8th year of 15 @ 1-2 mil a year.

Consider that the built out area of Folsom increased by about 20% between 1998 and 2006 due to new tract housing development.

Upon completion of "city approved" streets, sidewalks and mini-parks and tot lots, title for these "non-compliant" post ADA improvements was transferred to the city along with liability of non-compliance (smiling).

City engineer looked the other way.

City agreed to a "stipulated Judgement"

LA "knew" this was coming for many years in advance of this judgement.


----------



## conarb (Apr 3, 2015)

MASSDRIVER said:
			
		

> Water problems are going to slaughter the southern economy. Remember that. Brent.


Brent:

I hope we can *get Six California's* on the ballot, maybe send all the gimps south?  It looks like the nice handicapped people are identifying as handicapped and the Communist (LIBCOM) groups as disabled.


----------



## mark handler (May 27, 2015)

City to Property Owners: Fix Your Own Sidewalks

By Karen Jordan

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

http://labusinessjournal.com/news/2015/may/26/city-property-owners-fix-your-own-sidewalks/

The City of Los Angeles has taken on the responsibility for repairing sidewalks buckling under the force of tree roots for more than 40 years, but that may change soon.

A report from City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana, compiled after consultation with the departments of Public Works, Transportation and Disability, recommended that fixes to hazardous sidewalks be the responsibility of property owners.

The response from property owners was swift – and predictable.

“Sidewalks are public domain and should be maintained by the government,” said Adam Tischer, vice president at Colliers International’s downtown office.

Ruben Gonzalez, senior vice president for public policy and political affairs at the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, said the report is not acceptable in its treatment of commercial property owners.

“At a minimum, we believe that commercial property owners and residential property owners should be treated equally,” Gonzalez said. “Requiring a greater burden on commercial property owners is simply unfair.”

Under Santana’s plan, commercial property owners would have one year to make repairs after city inspectors deemed them necessary.

Tuesday’s report also outlined a “fix and release” strategy in which sidewalks in residential areas that are damaged by trees would be fixed by the city. After the city repair, any future damage would be the responsibility of the homeowner.

The report comes in the wake of a settlement agreement reached last month in which the city agreed to invest $1.4 billion over the next 30 years to repair and improve its sidewalks. In the case, Willits v. City of Los Angeles, the city was accused of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to keep sidewalks in adequate enough shape for them to be used by those who rely on wheelchairs and scooters.


----------

