Restore North Village Apron Parking

Re: Potential Next Steps

2011-11-09T06:44:00.000-08:00

thanks to wolfgang and flint for helping to clarify the issue for me. it's been difficult for me to get a firm grasp of the technicalities of enforcement (and non-enforcement) of these arcane laws from so far away. what continues to elude me are the different legal standards and regulations (and moratoriums) affecting "parkway" parking (aka apron parking)--which, as i understand it, is what we have been doing each thursday morning for decades-- as opposed to "tandem" parking, which tacitly extends our individual parking rights into the street beyond the apron. just how does it solve our parking problem if we are allowed to park on the apron without extending our cars, tandem-style, into the street?
--rick

At 12:55 AM 11/9/2011, Flint Dille wrote:

Two issues, the law and enforcement. If it wasn't enforced for 80 years, it wasn't a very important law. If they have a moratorium on enforcement, it solves today's problem. And maybe that's the best we can do --of we seize the moment.

Of course we keep pushing, but I think we can position ourselves in such a way that it is easier to give us what we want.

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 8, 2011, at 12:11 PM, "WVeith1" <wveith1@verizon.net> wrote:

Hi Richard,

My point was that for the North Village we need relief from 2 laws to be able to continue to park in front of our garages on whatâs also called the âapronâ. The City already has an official parking enforcement moratorium on the parkway part (AKA âapronâ). That part is covered by the City law.

Since our traditionally North Village parked cars also require partly parking in front of the driveway, into the street, that part is covered by the State law. And it is my understanding that the City is allowed to regulate street parking use like in permit zones. I also understand that Paul Koretz, Bill Rosendahl, etc. are working on that part. The sooner that gets done the better! We should keep up the pressure to get quick resolution in the City Council.

Wolfgang.

From: Richard Baum [ mailto:rdb1@polisci.ucla.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 5:39 AM
To: WVeith1; 'Flint Dille'; 'Roxane Stern'
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: RE: Potential Next Steps

Wolfgang:
I don't think you are correct when you say that state law has nothing to say about apron parking. The law you cited contains no exception for an owner's right to park in front of his/her own driveway. Unless you drive a bus, taxi, or other "common carrier", you are prohibited by state law from parking in front of a public or private driveway, period. I fail to seen any relevant loophole in such language that would permit apron parking.
--Rick

At 11:21 PM 11/7/2011, WVeith1 wrote:

Hello all:

We should not forget that âApron Parkingâ in the Westwood North Village is affected by two laws:

The LA City law:
SEC. 80.53. STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED.

And the State law:
C V C Section 22500 Prohibited Stopping Standing or Parking:
(e) In front of a public or private driveway, except that a bus engaged as a common carrier, schoolbus, or a taxicab may stop to load or unload passengers when authorized by local authorities pursuant to an ordinance.

Since the City has given up on enforcing their parkway provision, DOT presently can only use the state law at the moment. But that law has nothing to do with apron parking!

I think therefore we, in the North Village, should not talk about âApron Parkingâ anymore. We should instead talk about the property ownerâs right to park in front of their own driveway!

I understand that the City has the right within the California Vehicle Code to tailor parking use within its borders. I also understand that Paul Koretz and others on the City Council work on exactly this issue. We should keep up the pressure up that process, and to get it done soon!

From: Flint Dille [ mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 12:22 PM
To: Roxane Stern
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Rdb1 Baum'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: Re: Potential Next Steps

Option 1 is too passive. Too wimpy. We're missing an opportunity. Like we're starting all over. I'm already paying $200 a month to park my car. What's the real risk? A ticket? I lost more than that by picketing and not working yesterday afternoon.

I don't like being in this position, but I know that if we don't seize this moment, our chances of success drop. The status quo is settling in. Right now, we're dead in the water. We've lost the initiative. The story isn't moving anywhere. Another protest isn't going to help us, and yesterdays had much less than before.

If we seize the initiative, we control the story, and they know it. Right now, no politician in America wants to piss off people who should be part of their constituency.

On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Flint
Very succinct and timely. Thanks-

I say #1 with some additions
We call and write to each council member and state legislator. We can come up with a form letter or?
I can send out all the emails and phone numbers tonight.
r

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

From: Flint Dille [ mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 11:41 AM
To: Roxane Stern; Terrie Dille; Chuck Dubow; Ed Meyer; Rdb1 Baum; Sina Bolour (SINApse); Phil Friedman; Jean-Louis Rodrigue; Kristof Konrad; Susan Lieberman; Joe Schiro; Westwoodparkingblog; < wolfgangveith@verizon.net> Veith
Subject: Potential Next Steps

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

Indeed, I was told by a number of students that they believed that Apron Parking had been reinstated. To illustrate this, some pointed to cars apron parked down the street. Others said they had been Apron parking and had not been ticketed. We saw cars apron parked in all directions (one blocking a sidewalk) that had not been ticketed.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

1) All agree that we can park on the parkway if we don't hang out on the street. THIS IS CRUCIAL because it means that the ADA suit is irrelevant to Apron Parking. Terrie has parked on the parkway for a week now in a loaner van while her car is being repaired.

2) We know that there is a moratorium on some forms of Apron Parking -- maybe all forms. The evidence is mixed. (No student reported having been ticketed, but there were vague reports of ticketing around the neighborhood. If we're going to take this seriously, it would be good to have names and dates).

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:
a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.
b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.
c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.
d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.
e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:
a) Koretz is congratulating himself.
b) There is some kind of moratorium going.
c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.
d) They know they have been vague.
e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)
a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.
b) We can seize the moment of uncertainty and make the bold move of declaring that we believe that the moratorium has been restored (like it has been for 80 years) based on facts on the ground (parked cars), conversations with enforcement officers, etc. In short, park our cars the way we always have, and risk tickets with the idea that if we actually get tickets, we have an issue to rekindle the whole debate (if we know this, the politicians know this). We would, of course, spread word-of-mouth that apron parking is back to maximize the number of cars apron parked and thus the risk to the city).
c) Write Koretz and tell him that we believe the moratorium has been restored and we can park as we traditionally have, putting a clock on him if we haven't heard from him in a week. That puts him in the position of having to deliver bad news to the residents of the north village (who number more than the 800 votes he won by in the last election -- not a good move). Or, he uses whatever influence he has in the city and UCLA to make our perception a reality. And, if he doesn't respond by our deadline (and it will take all of us writing), we've got a good case and we have an actual media story with controversy.
d) We contact Chancellor Block and tell him how much trouble his meddlesome professors have caused, especially now that the Apron Parking issue in the suit was thrown out and ask him how he plans to compensate us for our expenses (garage fees), time and trouble. I think Block has a lot of influence if he wants to use it, and some have even suggested that he can supersede local and state law (as he does with Environmental Impact Reports and the like).
e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.
f) Anything else we can think of.

We can do any or all of these things. The bold plan would be to seize the moment, write Koretz (or not) and tell him we think the moratorium is back on, and, on an appointed day, take back our spaces and see if we are ticketed. We could also put notices under our windshields telling parking enforcement people that we believe the moratorium has been reinstated and we deserve notification before ticketing if it has not.

All of them puts the city and enforcement people in an awkward position. The enforcement company doesn't want to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit (whether or not we would ever file one). As we've noted, most people will back off with just the threat.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.
The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.
Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now
The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.
However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.
And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.
Roxane

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

Re: Potential Next Steps

2011-11-08T15:55:00.001-08:00

Two issues, the law and enforcement. If it wasn't enforced for 80 years, it wasn't a very important law. If they have a moratorium on enforcement, it solves today's problem. And maybe that's the best we can do --of we seize the moment.

Of course we keep pushing, but I think we can position ourselves in such a way that it is easier to give us what we want.

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 8, 2011, at 12:11 PM, "WVeith1" <wveith1@verizon.net> wrote:

Hi Richard,

My point was that for the North Village we need relief from 2 laws to be able to continue to park in front of our garages on what's also called the "apron". The City already has an official parking enforcement moratorium on the parkway part (AKA "apron"). That part is covered by the City law.

Since our traditionally North Village parked cars also require partly parking in front of the driveway, into the street, that part is covered by the State law. And it is my understanding that the City is allowed to regulate street parking use like in permit zones. I also understand that Paul Koretz, Bill Rosendahl, etc. are working on that part. The sooner that gets done the better! We should keep up the pressure to get quick resolution in the City Council.

Wolfgang.

From: Richard Baum [mailto:rdb1@polisci.ucla.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 5:39 AM
To: WVeith1; 'Flint Dille'; 'Roxane Stern'
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: RE: Potential Next Steps

Wolfgang:
I don't think you are correct when you say that state law has nothing to say about apron parking. The law you cited contains no exception for an owner's right to park in front of his/her own driveway. Unless you drive a bus, taxi, or other "common carrier", you are prohibited by state law from parking in front of a public or private driveway, period. I fail to seen any relevant loophole in such language that would permit apron parking.
--Rick

At 11:21 PM 11/7/2011, WVeith1 wrote:

Hello all:

We should not forget that "Apron Parking" in the Westwood North Village is affected by two laws:

The LA City law:
SEC. 80.53. STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED.

And the State law:
C V C Section 22500 Prohibited Stopping Standing or Parking:
(e) In front of a public or private driveway, except that a bus engaged as a common carrier, schoolbus, or a taxicab may stop to load or unload passengers when authorized by local authorities pursuant to an ordinance.

Since the City has given up on enforcing their parkway provision, DOT presently can only use the state law at the moment. But that law has nothing to do with apron parking!

I think therefore we, in the North Village, should not talk about "Apron Parking" anymore. We should instead talk about the property owner's right to park in front of their own driveway!

I understand that the City has the right within the California Vehicle Code to tailor parking use within its borders. I also understand that Paul Koretz and others on the City Council work on exactly this issue. We should keep up the pressure up that process, and to get it done soon!

From: Flint Dille [ mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 12:22 PM
To: Roxane Stern
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Rdb1 Baum'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: Re: Potential Next Steps

Option 1 is too passive. Too wimpy. We're missing an opportunity. Like we're starting all over. I'm already paying $200 a month to park my car. What's the real risk? A ticket? I lost more than that by picketing and not working yesterday afternoon.

I don't like being in this position, but I know that if we don't seize this moment, our chances of success drop. The status quo is settling in. Right now, we're dead in the water. We've lost the initiative. The story isn't moving anywhere. Another protest isn't going to help us, and yesterdays had much less than before.

If we seize the initiative, we control the story, and they know it. Right now, no politician in America wants to piss off people who should be part of their constituency.

On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Flint
Very succinct and timely. Thanks-

I say #1 with some additions
We call and write to each council member and state legislator. We can come up with a form letter or?
I can send out all the emails and phone numbers tonight.
r

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106
From: Flint Dille [ mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 11:41 AM
To: Roxane Stern; Terrie Dille; Chuck Dubow; Ed Meyer; Rdb1 Baum; Sina Bolour (SINApse); Phil Friedman; Jean-Louis Rodrigue; Kristof Konrad; Susan Lieberman; Joe Schiro; Westwoodparkingblog; < wolfgangveith@verizon.net> Veith
Subject: Potential Next Steps

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

Indeed, I was told by a number of students that they believed that Apron Parking had been reinstated. To illustrate this, some pointed to cars apron parked down the street. Others said they had been Apron parking and had not been ticketed. We saw cars apron parked in all directions (one blocking a sidewalk) that had not been ticketed.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

1) All agree that we can park on the parkway if we don't hang out on the street. THIS IS CRUCIAL because it means that the ADA suit is irrelevant to Apron Parking. Terrie has parked on the parkway for a week now in a loaner van while her car is being repaired.

2) We know that there is a moratorium on some forms of Apron Parking -- maybe all forms. The evidence is mixed. (No student reported having been ticketed, but there were vague reports of ticketing around the neighborhood. If we're going to take this seriously, it would be good to have names and dates).

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:
a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.
b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.
c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.
d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.
e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:
a) Koretz is congratulating himself.
b) There is some kind of moratorium going.
c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.
d) They know they have been vague.
e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)
a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.
b) We can seize the moment of uncertainty and make the bold move of declaring that we believe that the moratorium has been restored (like it has been for 80 years) based on facts on the ground (parked cars), conversations with enforcement officers, etc. In short, park our cars the way we always have, and risk tickets with the idea that if we actually get tickets, we have an issue to rekindle the whole debate (if we know this, the politicians know this). We would, of course, spread word-of-mouth that apron parking is back to maximize the number of cars apron parked and thus the risk to the city).
c) Write Koretz and tell him that we believe the moratorium has been restored and we can park as we traditionally have, putting a clock on him if we haven't heard from him in a week. That puts him in the position of having to deliver bad news to the residents of the north village (who number more than the 800 votes he won by in the last election -- not a good move). Or, he uses whatever influence he has in the city and UCLA to make our perception a reality. And, if he doesn't respond by our deadline (and it will take all of us writing), we've got a good case and we have an actual media story with controversy.
d) We contact Chancellor Block and tell him how much trouble his meddlesome professors have caused, especially now that the Apron Parking issue in the suit was thrown out and ask him how he plans to compensate us for our expenses (garage fees), time and trouble. I think Block has a lot of influence if he wants to use it, and some have even suggested that he can supersede local and state law (as he does with Environmental Impact Reports and the like).
e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.
f) Anything else we can think of.

We can do any or all of these things. The bold plan would be to seize the moment, write Koretz (or not) and tell him we think the moratorium is back on, and, on an appointed day, take back our spaces and see if we are ticketed. We could also put notices under our windshields telling parking enforcement people that we believe the moratorium has been reinstated and we deserve notification before ticketing if it has not.

All of them puts the city and enforcement people in an awkward position. The enforcement company doesn't want to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit (whether or not we would ever file one). As we've noted, most people will back off with just the threat.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.
The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.
Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now
The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.
However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.
And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.
Roxane

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

RE: Potential Next Steps

2011-11-08T12:11:00.001-08:00

Hi Richard,

My point was that for the North Village we need relief from 2 laws to be able to continue to park in front of our garages on what’s also called the “apron”. The City already has an official parking enforcement moratorium on the parkway part (AKA “apron”). That part is covered by the City law.

Since our traditionally North Village parked cars also require partly parking in front of the driveway, into the street, that part is covered by the State law. And it is my understanding that the City is allowed to regulate street parking use like in permit zones. I also understand that Paul Koretz, Bill Rosendahl, etc. are working on that part. The sooner that gets done the better! We should keep up the pressure to get quick resolution in the City Council.

Wolfgang.

From: Richard Baum [mailto:rdb1@polisci.ucla.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 5:39 AM
To: WVeith1; 'Flint Dille'; 'Roxane Stern'
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: RE: Potential Next Steps

Wolfgang:
I don't think you are correct when you say that state law has nothing to say about apron parking. The law you cited contains no exception for an owner's right to park in front of his/her own driveway. Unless you drive a bus, taxi, or other "common carrier", you are prohibited by state law from parking in front of a public or private driveway, period. I fail to seen any relevant loophole in such language that would permit apron parking.
--Rick

At 11:21 PM 11/7/2011, WVeith1 wrote:

Hello all:

We should not forget that “Apron Parking” in the Westwood North Village is affected by two laws:

The LA City law:
SEC. 80.53. STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED.

And the State law:
C V C Section 22500 Prohibited Stopping Standing or Parking:
(e) In front of a public or private driveway, except that a bus engaged as a common carrier, schoolbus, or a taxicab may stop to load or unload passengers when authorized by local authorities pursuant to an ordinance.

Since the City has given up on enforcing their parkway provision, DOT presently can only use the state law at the moment. But that law has nothing to do with apron parking!

I think therefore we, in the North Village, should not talk about “Apron Parking” anymore. We should instead talk about the property owner’s right to park in front of their own driveway!

I understand that the City has the right within the California Vehicle Code to tailor parking use within its borders. I also understand that Paul Koretz and others on the City Council work on exactly this issue. We should keep up the pressure up that process, and to get it done soon!

From: Flint Dille [ mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 12:22 PM
To: Roxane Stern
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Rdb1 Baum'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: Re: Potential Next Steps

Option 1 is too passive. Too wimpy. We're missing an opportunity. Like we're starting all over. I'm already paying $200 a month to park my car. What's the real risk? A ticket? I lost more than that by picketing and not working yesterday afternoon.

I don't like being in this position, but I know that if we don't seize this moment, our chances of success drop. The status quo is settling in. Right now, we're dead in the water. We've lost the initiative. The story isn't moving anywhere. Another protest isn't going to help us, and yesterdays had much less than before.

If we seize the initiative, we control the story, and they know it. Right now, no politician in America wants to piss off people who should be part of their constituency.

On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Flint
Very succinct and timely. Thanks-

I say #1 with some additions
We call and write to each council member and state legislator. We can come up with a form letter or?
I can send out all the emails and phone numbers tonight.
r

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

From: Flint Dille [ mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 11:41 AM
To: Roxane Stern; Terrie Dille; Chuck Dubow; Ed Meyer; Rdb1 Baum; Sina Bolour (SINApse); Phil Friedman; Jean-Louis Rodrigue; Kristof Konrad; Susan Lieberman; Joe Schiro; Westwoodparkingblog; < wolfgangveith@verizon.net> Veith
Subject: Potential Next Steps

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

Indeed, I was told by a number of students that they believed that Apron Parking had been reinstated. To illustrate this, some pointed to cars apron parked down the street. Others said they had been Apron parking and had not been ticketed. We saw cars apron parked in all directions (one blocking a sidewalk) that had not been ticketed.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

1) All agree that we can park on the parkway if we don't hang out on the street. THIS IS CRUCIAL because it means that the ADA suit is irrelevant to Apron Parking. Terrie has parked on the parkway for a week now in a loaner van while her car is being repaired.

2) We know that there is a moratorium on some forms of Apron Parking -- maybe all forms. The evidence is mixed. (No student reported having been ticketed, but there were vague reports of ticketing around the neighborhood. If we're going to take this seriously, it would be good to have names and dates).

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:
a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.
b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.
c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.
d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.
e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:
a) Koretz is congratulating himself.
b) There is some kind of moratorium going.
c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.
d) They know they have been vague.
e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)
a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.
b) We can seize the moment of uncertainty and make the bold move of declaring that we believe that the moratorium has been restored (like it has been for 80 years) based on facts on the ground (parked cars), conversations with enforcement officers, etc. In short, park our cars the way we always have, and risk tickets with the idea that if we actually get tickets, we have an issue to rekindle the whole debate (if we know this, the politicians know this). We would, of course, spread word-of-mouth that apron parking is back to maximize the number of cars apron parked and thus the risk to the city).
c) Write Koretz and tell him that we believe the moratorium has been restored and we can park as we traditionally have, putting a clock on him if we haven't heard from him in a week. That puts him in the position of having to deliver bad news to the residents of the north village (who number more than the 800 votes he won by in the last election -- not a good move). Or, he uses whatever influence he has in the city and UCLA to make our perception a reality. And, if he doesn't respond by our deadline (and it will take all of us writing), we've got a good case and we have an actual media story with controversy.
d) We contact Chancellor Block and tell him how much trouble his meddlesome professors have caused, especially now that the Apron Parking issue in the suit was thrown out and ask him how he plans to compensate us for our expenses (garage fees), time and trouble. I think Block has a lot of influence if he wants to use it, and some have even suggested that he can supersede local and state law (as he does with Environmental Impact Reports and the like).
e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.
f) Anything else we can think of.

We can do any or all of these things. The bold plan would be to seize the moment, write Koretz (or not) and tell him we think the moratorium is back on, and, on an appointed day, take back our spaces and see if we are ticketed. We could also put notices under our windshields telling parking enforcement people that we believe the moratorium has been reinstated and we deserve notification before ticketing if it has not.

All of them puts the city and enforcement people in an awkward position. The enforcement company doesn't want to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit (whether or not we would ever file one). As we've noted, most people will back off with just the threat.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.
The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.
Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now
The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.
However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.
And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.
Roxane

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

RE: Potential Next Steps

2011-11-08T05:38:00.000-08:00

Hello all:

We should not forget that �Apron Parking� in the Westwood North Village is affected by two laws:

The LA City law:
SEC. 80.53. STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED.

And the State law:
C V C Section 22500 Prohibited Stopping Standing or Parking:
(e) In front of a public or private driveway, except that a bus engaged as a common carrier, schoolbus, or a taxicab may stop to load or unload passengers when authorized by local authorities pursuant to an ordinance.

Since the City has given up on enforcing their parkway provision, DOT presently can only use the state law at the moment. But that law has nothing to do with apron parking!

I think therefore we, in the North Village, should not talk about �Apron Parking� anymore. We should instead talk about the property owner�s right to park in front of their own driveway!

I understand that the City has the right within the California Vehicle Code to tailor parking use within its borders. I also understand that Paul Koretz and others on the City Council work on exactly this issue. We should keep up the pressure up that process, and to get it done soon!

From: Flint Dille [ mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 12:22 PM
To: Roxane Stern
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Rdb1 Baum'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: Re: Potential Next Steps

Option 1 is too passive. Too wimpy. We're missing an opportunity. Like we're starting all over. I'm already paying $200 a month to park my car. What's the real risk? A ticket? I lost more than that by picketing and not working yesterday afternoon.

I don't like being in this position, but I know that if we don't seize this moment, our chances of success drop. The status quo is settling in. Right now, we're dead in the water. We've lost the initiative. The story isn't moving anywhere. Another protest isn't going to help us, and yesterdays had much less than before.

If we seize the initiative, we control the story, and they know it. Right now, no politician in America wants to piss off people who should be part of their constituency.

On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Flint
Very succinct and timely. Thanks-

I say #1 with some additions
We call and write to each council member and state legislator. We can come up with a form letter or?
I can send out all the emails and phone numbers tonight.
r

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

From: Flint Dille [ mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 11:41 AM
To: Roxane Stern; Terrie Dille; Chuck Dubow; Ed Meyer; Rdb1 Baum; Sina Bolour (SINApse); Phil Friedman; Jean-Louis Rodrigue; Kristof Konrad; Susan Lieberman; Joe Schiro; Westwoodparkingblog; < wolfgangveith@verizon.net> Veith
Subject: Potential Next Steps

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

Indeed, I was told by a number of students that they believed that Apron Parking had been reinstated. To illustrate this, some pointed to cars apron parked down the street. Others said they had been Apron parking and had not been ticketed. We saw cars apron parked in all directions (one blocking a sidewalk) that had not been ticketed.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

1) All agree that we can park on the parkway if we don't hang out on the street. THIS IS CRUCIAL because it means that the ADA suit is irrelevant to Apron Parking. Terrie has parked on the parkway for a week now in a loaner van while her car is being repaired.

2) We know that there is a moratorium on some forms of Apron Parking -- maybe all forms. The evidence is mixed. (No student reported having been ticketed, but there were vague reports of ticketing around the neighborhood. If we're going to take this seriously, it would be good to have names and dates).

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:
a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.
b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.
c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.
d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.
e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:
a) Koretz is congratulating himself.
b) There is some kind of moratorium going.
c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.
d) They know they have been vague.
e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)
a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.
b) We can seize the moment of uncertainty and make the bold move of declaring that we believe that the moratorium has been restored (like it has been for 80 years) based on facts on the ground (parked cars), conversations with enforcement officers, etc. In short, park our cars the way we always have, and risk tickets with the idea that if we actually get tickets, we have an issue to rekindle the whole debate (if we know this, the politicians know this). We would, of course, spread word-of-mouth that apron parking is back to maximize the number of cars apron parked and thus the risk to the city).
c) Write Koretz and tell him that we believe the moratorium has been restored and we can park as we traditionally have, putting a clock on him if we haven't heard from him in a week. That puts him in the position of having to deliver bad news to the residents of the north village (who number more than the 800 votes he won by in the last election -- not a good move). Or, he uses whatever influence he has in the city and UCLA to make our perception a reality. And, if he doesn't respond by our deadline (and it will take all of us writing), we've got a good case and we have an actual media story with controversy.
d) We contact Chancellor Block and tell him how much trouble his meddlesome professors have caused, especially now that the Apron Parking issue in the suit was thrown out and ask him how he plans to compensate us for our expenses (garage fees), time and trouble. I think Block has a lot of influence if he wants to use it, and some have even suggested that he can supersede local and state law (as he does with Environmental Impact Reports and the like).
e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.
f) Anything else we can think of.

We can do any or all of these things. The bold plan would be to seize the moment, write Koretz (or not) and tell him we think the moratorium is back on, and, on an appointed day, take back our spaces and see if we are ticketed. We could also put notices under our windshields telling parking enforcement people that we believe the moratorium has been reinstated and we deserve notification before ticketing if it has not.

All of them puts the city and enforcement people in an awkward position. The enforcement company doesn't want to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit (whether or not we would ever file one). As we've noted, most people will back off with just the threat.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.
The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.
Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now
The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.
However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.
And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.
Roxane

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

2011-11-07T21:18:00.001-08:00

Hi All:

We are putting some final touches on our remodel of the front unit of my
building, it's a bright and cheery 2 bedroom 3 bath townhouse with all new
bathrooms and kitchen, artistically done. We have an Industrial/Modern
Themed Kitchen that goes with the period and style of the house, period
restored bathrooms etc. Be sure to come by and have a look, and do spread
the word if you know anyone interested. I do all the remodel work as though
I were living in it, so all very quality oriented materials. Painting
starts this week.

Thanks in advance.

-Sina

Sina Bolour
SINApse
W h e r e - C o n n e c t i o n s - A r e - M a d e
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-749-1166 Voice
310-209-2331 FAX

sina@sinapse.net

The information contained in this electronic message is privileged and
confidential information intended only for the use of the owner of the email
address listed as the recipient of this message.
If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible
for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone at
310-749-1166 or by return email and delete this email and any attachments
from your electronic files

RE: Potential Next Steps

2011-11-07T15:06:00.000-08:00

Wolfgang, that is an excellent point.

I have just heard that DOT will be issuing new guidelines very soon.

Should know tomorrow.

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

Los Angeles CA 90024

310-443-1106

From: WVeith1 [mailto:wveith1@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 2:22 PM
To: 'Flint Dille'; 'Roxane Stern'
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Rdb1 Baum'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: RE: Potential Next Steps

Hello all:

We should not forget that “Apron Parking” in the Westwood North Village is affected by two laws:

The LA City law:

SEC. 80.53. STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED.

And the State law:

C V C Section 22500 Prohibited Stopping Standing or Parking:

(e) In front of a public or private driveway, except that a bus engaged as a common carrier, schoolbus, or a taxicab may stop to load or unload passengers when authorized by local authorities pursuant to an ordinance.

Since the City has given up on enforcing their parkway provision, DOT presently can only use the state law at the moment. But that law has nothing to do with apron parking!

I think therefore we, in the North Village, should not talk about “Apron Parking” anymore. We should instead talk about the property owner’s right to park in front of their own driveway!

I understand that the City has the right within the California Vehicle Code to tailor parking use within its borders. I also understand that Paul Koretz and others on the City Council work on exactly this issue. We should keep up the pressure up that process, and to get it done soon!

From: Flint Dille [mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 12:22 PM
To: Roxane Stern
Cc: 'Terrie Dille'; 'Chuck Dubow'; 'Ed Meyer'; 'Rdb1 Baum'; 'Sina Bolour (SINApse)'; 'Phil Friedman'; 'Jean-Louis Rodrigue'; 'Kristof Konrad'; 'Susan Lieberman'; 'Joe Schiro'; 'Westwoodparkingblog'; wolfgangveith@verizon.net
Subject: Re: Potential Next Steps

Option 1 is too passive. Too wimpy. We're missing an opportunity. Like we're starting all over. I'm already paying $200 a month to park my car. What's the real risk? A ticket? I lost more than that by picketing and not working yesterday afternoon.

I don't like being in this position, but I know that if we don't seize this moment, our chances of success drop. The status quo is settling in. Right now, we're dead in the water. We've lost the initiative. The story isn't moving anywhere. Another protest isn't going to help us, and yesterdays had much less than before.

If we seize the initiative, we control the story, and they know it. Right now, no politician in America wants to piss off people who should be part of their constituency.

On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Flint

Very succinct and timely. Thanks-

I say #1 with some additions

We call and write to each council member and state legislator. We can come up with a form letter or?

I can send out all the emails and phone numbers tonight.

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

Los Angeles CA 90024

310-443-1106

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

Indeed, I was told by a number of students that they believed that Apron Parking had been reinstated. To illustrate this, some pointed to cars apron parked down the street. Others said they had been Apron parking and had not been ticketed. We saw cars apron parked in all directions (one blocking a sidewalk) that had not been ticketed.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

1) All agree that we can park on the parkway if we don't hang out on the street. THIS IS CRUCIAL because it means that the ADA suit is irrelevant to Apron Parking. Terrie has parked on the parkway for a week now in a loaner van while her car is being repaired.

2) We know that there is a moratorium on some forms of Apron Parking -- maybe all forms. The evidence is mixed. (No student reported having been ticketed, but there were vague reports of ticketing around the neighborhood. If we're going to take this seriously, it would be good to have names and dates).

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:

a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.

b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.

c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.

d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.

e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:

a) Koretz is congratulating himself.

b) There is some kind of moratorium going.

c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.

d) They know they have been vague.

e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)

a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.

b) We can seize the moment of uncertainty and make the bold move of declaring that we believe that the moratorium has been restored (like it has been for 80 years) based on facts on the ground (parked cars), conversations with enforcement officers, etc. In short, park our cars the way we always have, and risk tickets with the idea that if we actually get tickets, we have an issue to rekindle the whole debate (if we know this, the politicians know this). We would, of course, spread word-of-mouth that apron parking is back to maximize the number of cars apron parked and thus the risk to the city).

c) Write Koretz and tell him that we believe the moratorium has been restored and we can park as we traditionally have, putting a clock on him if we haven't heard from him in a week. That puts him in the position of having to deliver bad news to the residents of the north village (who number more than the 800 votes he won by in the last election -- not a good move). Or, he uses whatever influence he has in the city and UCLA to make our perception a reality. And, if he doesn't respond by our deadline (and it will take all of us writing), we've got a good case and we have an actual media story with controversy.

d) We contact Chancellor Block and tell him how much trouble his meddlesome professors have caused, especially now that the Apron Parking issue in the suit was thrown out and ask him how he plans to compensate us for our expenses (garage fees), time and trouble. I think Block has a lot of influence if he wants to use it, and some have even suggested that he can supersede local and state law (as he does with Environmental Impact Reports and the like).

e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.

f) Anything else we can think of.

We can do any or all of these things. The bold plan would be to seize the moment, write Koretz (or not) and tell him we think the moratorium is back on, and, on an appointed day, take back our spaces and see if we are ticketed. We could also put notices under our windshields telling parking enforcement people that we believe the moratorium has been reinstated and we deserve notification before ticketing if it has not.

All of them puts the city and enforcement people in an awkward position. The enforcement company doesn't want to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit (whether or not we would ever file one). As we've noted, most people will back off with just the threat.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.

The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.

Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now

The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.

However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.

And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.

Roxane

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

Los Angeles CA 90024

310-443-1106

RE: Potential Next Steps

2011-11-07T14:21:00.001-08:00

Hello all:

We should not forget that “Apron Parking” in the Westwood North Village is affected by two laws:

The LA City law:

SEC. 80.53. STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED.

And the State law:

C V C Section 22500 Prohibited Stopping Standing or Parking:

Since the City has given up on enforcing their parkway provision, DOT presently can only use the state law at the moment. But that law has nothing to do with apron parking!

I think therefore we, in the North Village, should not talk about “Apron Parking” anymore. We should instead talk about the property owner’s right to park in front of their own driveway!

If we seize the initiative, we control the story, and they know it. Right now, no politician in America wants to piss off people who should be part of their constituency.

On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Flint

Very succinct and timely. Thanks-

I say #1 with some additions

We call and write to each council member and state legislator. We can come up with a form letter or?

I can send out all the emails and phone numbers tonight.

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

Los Angeles CA 90024

310-443-1106

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:

a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.

b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.

c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.

d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.

e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:

a) Koretz is congratulating himself.

b) There is some kind of moratorium going.

c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.

d) They know they have been vague.

e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)

a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.

e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.

f) Anything else we can think of.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.

The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.

Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now

The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.

However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.

And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.

Roxane

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

Los Angeles CA 90024

310-443-1106

Re: Potential Next Steps

2011-11-05T12:21:00.001-07:00

If we seize the initiative, we control the story, and they know it. Right now, no politician in America wants to piss off people who should be part of their constituency.

On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Flint
Very succinct and timely. Thanks-

I say #1 with some additions
We call and write to each council member and state legislator. We can come up with a form letter or?
I can send out all the emails and phone numbers tonight.
r

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

From: Flint Dille [mailto:flintdille@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 11:41 AM
To: Roxane Stern; Terrie Dille; Chuck Dubow; Ed Meyer; Rdb1 Baum; Sina Bolour (SINApse); Phil Friedman; Jean-Louis Rodrigue; Kristof Konrad; Susan Lieberman; Joe Schiro; Westwoodparkingblog; <wolfgangveith@verizon.net> Veith
Subject: Potential Next Steps

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

Indeed, I was told by a number of students that they believed that Apron Parking had been reinstated. To illustrate this, some pointed to cars apron parked down the street. Others said they had been Apron parking and had not been ticketed. We saw cars apron parked in all directions (one blocking a sidewalk) that had not been ticketed.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

1) All agree that we can park on the parkway if we don't hang out on the street. THIS IS CRUCIAL because it means that the ADA suit is irrelevant to Apron Parking. Terrie has parked on the parkway for a week now in a loaner van while her car is being repaired.

2) We know that there is a moratorium on some forms of Apron Parking -- maybe all forms. The evidence is mixed. (No student reported having been ticketed, but there were vague reports of ticketing around the neighborhood. If we're going to take this seriously, it would be good to have names and dates).

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:

a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.

b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.

c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.

d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.

e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:

a) Koretz is congratulating himself.

b) There is some kind of moratorium going.

c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.

d) They know they have been vague.

e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)

a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.

b) We can seize the moment of uncertainty and make the bold move of declaring that we believe that the moratorium has been restored (like it has been for 80 years) based on facts on the ground (parked cars), conversations with enforcement officers, etc. In short, park our cars the way we always have, and risk tickets with the idea that if we actually get tickets, we have an issue to rekindle the whole debate (if we know this, the politicians know this). We would, of course, spread word-of-mouth that apron parking is back to maximize the number of cars apron parked and thus the risk to the city).

c) Write Koretz and tell him that we believe the moratorium has been restored and we can park as we traditionally have, putting a clock on him if we haven't heard from him in a week. That puts him in the position of having to deliver bad news to the residents of the north village (who number more than the 800 votes he won by in the last election -- not a good move). Or, he uses whatever influence he has in the city and UCLA to make our perception a reality. And, if he doesn't respond by our deadline (and it will take all of us writing), we've got a good case and we have an actual media story with controversy.

d) We contact Chancellor Block and tell him how much trouble his meddlesome professors have caused, especially now that the Apron Parking issue in the suit was thrown out and ask him how he plans to compensate us for our expenses (garage fees), time and trouble. I think Block has a lot of influence if he wants to use it, and some have even suggested that he can supersede local and state law (as he does with Environmental Impact Reports and the like).

e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.

f) Anything else we can think of.

We can do any or all of these things. The bold plan would be to seize the moment, write Koretz (or not) and tell him we think the moratorium is back on, and, on an appointed day, take back our spaces and see if we are ticketed. We could also put notices under our windshields telling parking enforcement people that we believe the moratorium has been reinstated and we deserve notification before ticketing if it has not.

All of them puts the city and enforcement people in an awkward position. The enforcement company doesn't want to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit (whether or not we would ever file one). As we've noted, most people will back off with just the threat.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.
The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.
Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now
The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.
However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.
And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.
Roxane

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

Los Angeles CA 90024

310-443-1106

RE: Potential Next Steps

2011-11-05T11:46:00.001-07:00

Flint

Very succinct and timely. Thanks-

I say #1 with some additions

We call and write to each council member and state legislator. We can come up with a form letter or?

I can send out all the emails and phone numbers tonight.

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

Los Angeles CA 90024

310-443-1106

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:

a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.

b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.

c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.

d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.

e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:

a) Koretz is congratulating himself.

b) There is some kind of moratorium going.

c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.

d) They know they have been vague.

e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)

a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.

e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.

f) Anything else we can think of.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.

The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.

Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now

The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.

However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.

And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.

Roxane

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

Los Angeles CA 90024

310-443-1106

Potential Next Steps

2011-11-05T11:40:00.001-07:00

Hi all (please forward to anybody I missed),

We are in an interesting situation.

The other side of that is that in puzzling through the confusing messages coming from the Daily Bruin and the motion we received, it leaves us with the following information:

3) I do not believe we have received any definitive information to the emails we have sent to Koretz, though he seems to have been doing a victory dance.

Lets say that we all agree on the following:

a) We're all sick of this and frankly, are losing steam.

b) We all want the state law changed, but we know that is a long, slow road.

c) We don't really know what the moratorium covers.

d) The city council has not clearly communicated with the residents, given that there are so many divergent opinions.

e) We know that there is a lot of student support for what we are doing.

Now, let us put ourselves in the City of Los Angeles' Position:

a) Koretz is congratulating himself.

b) There is some kind of moratorium going.

c) The last thing they need is more trouble from angry citizens with the Occupy movement struggle coming.

d) They know they have been vague.

e) Rosendahl (sp?) is firmly in our court, and maybe LeBonge and Koretz. They don't need trouble.

So what are our options? (these are not mutually exclusive we can do more than one of them)

a) We can keep slowly plodding along and hope things change. Keep nudging the channels.

e) We mutter to all of the above, and the media about lawsuits were considering.

f) Anything else we can think of.

Anyway, what we do need to do is pick a course. I'm good with any of these, but favor seizing the first opportunity we've had since this all started. I'm not sure when we'll get another one.

Flint

On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Roxane Stern wrote:

Will send out another email soon, but this is just a report on our latest (last) protest rally in North Village.
The weather cooperated and we had no rain during the almost 2 hours we were at Strathmore and Levering yesterday afternoon.
Again, not a lot of people, but those who stopped were supportive. One thing we realize now
The new motion with a moratorium on banning apron parking is a disaster. Cars parked on the street will still get ticketed.
However, North Village parking enforcement officers are not ticketing ANY apron parked cars. So, we now have cars parked on the apron in violation of the law, but they are not getting tickets!

We had an active group manning the corners. Flint, Gwyna, Wolfgang, Phil, and Bob were terrific.
And thanks to Nanette for passing out flyers before hand.
Roxane

Roxane Stern
11053 Strathmore Dr
Los Angeles CA 90024
310-443-1106

Residents Urge the City to Permit Apron Parking - Mar Vista, CA Patch

2011-08-04T17:42:00.001-07:00

patching...

Government

Residents Urge the City to Permit Apron Parking

People affected by the recent crackdown on apron parking persuade the City Council's Transportation Committee to work on drafting a motion to allow the longtime practice.

By Tiffany Kelly
Email the author
July 28, 2011

&nbps;1 Comment

Tweet Email

‹ Back to Article View full size

new

Embed | Share

Apron parking.Credit TheTireZoo|Flickr.com

Photos (1)

Photos

Credit TheTireZoo|Flickr.com

Add your photos & videos

Tell Your Neighbors About Patch

Westside residents gathered at a Los Angeles City Council committee meeting Wednesday afternoon to ask city officials to grant apron parking in certain congested neighborhoods.

About 20 concerned residents, many from Westwood's Beverly Glen Boulevard, attended the meeting to hear the Transportation Committee's motion to allow residents to legally park in front of their own driveways.

If a law is passed, it will allow city-wide property owners and renters to park in front of their driveways. Wednesday's motion, however, was simply a request that DOT report back on the steps that residents need to take to make this happen. The motion passed and a response is expected within a month.

However, several attendees wearing actual aprons took the opportunity to plead with council members to amend the driveway motion to also include apron parking.

Apron parking is the practice of parking cars in driveways so that they only partially block the sidewalk by partially jutting out into the street. It has been going on for years to alleviate parking congestion, residents said Wednesday.

Roxane Stern, a 13-year resident of Westwood's North Village, told the committee, "We live next to one of the largest universities in California, and we have issues that are not in any other neighborhood. Right now, it's a lose-lose. If you make some changes, it will be a win for everybody."

The committee members were only allowed to discuss driveway parking and not apron parking because the latter was not on the agenda. However, 11th District Councilman Bill Rosendahl, who chairs the committee, nonetheless let the residents voice their concerns.

Christopher McKinnon of Mar Vista recommended an amendment to the committee's driveway motion to allow cars to park in the apron in a way that doesn't block the street.

The Department of Transportation started issuing tickets this week to vehicles parked in the apron, a move that 5th District Councilman Paul Koretz delayed until after the spring quarter ended at UCLA.

"This is a system that worked for decades," said Susan Lieberman of Westwood. "All of a sudden, it's being pulled out from under us."

She added that the students have no alternatives to the parking situation and it will get worse when more students return in the fall quarter.

The sudden crackdown on apron parking came as the city faced a threat of being sued for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, because the practice often blocks sidewalks. But the removal of apron parking actually harms those who have a disability because they cannot find close, convenient parking near the school and the surrounding neighborhoods, Lieberman told the committee.

"Ticket those that block the sidewalks but bring back apron parking," she said. "This [potential] lawsuit is bogus. … It's more of a hardship to people who have a handicap that come to visit us."

Rosendahl was advised by a representative from the city attorney's office who attended the meeting that he could not present or amend a motion during the committee meeting about the apron parking issue because it was not on the agenda, and that he would have to schedule it for a future meeting. But the councilman expressed his support for the apron parking system, nonetheless.

"I don't want traffic officers going out there and ticketing people who for 20 years have been in those aprons with no safety issues and no inconvenience issues for anybody," said Rosendahl.

He called an ordinance that prohibits parking of any kind in driveways a "dumb law."

Rosendahl and Koretz plan to draft a motion with DOT as soon as possible to address the apron parking issue and whether it should apply to Westwood only or other areas of the city. That motion could be presented as early as Friday.

"This is clearly a disastrous situation," said Koretz. "The motion today is an incredibly modest first step in the right direction. We clearly have to do more, and we have to do it fast."

Be sure to follow Mar Vista Patch on Twitter and "Like" us on Facebook.

Related Topics: Bill Rosendahl, Los Angeles City Council, apron parking, and paul koretz

Are you for or against apron parking? Tell us in the comments.

Great, we'll send you an email as soon as a follow-up is published!

Tweet Email

Comments (1)

kristof konrad

11:49am on Thursday, August 4, 2011

Lock of apron parking is destroying my business
and life. My family is left with three bedroom place and no parking space for our second car!!!!
Please, use some thinking people.

See More on Patch

Advertise

Advertise on Patch and reach potential customers in your backyard and beyond. Click here for more information.
Learn more »

Volunteer

If you want to help local causes, or your cause needs local help, your next click should be right here.
Learn more »

Contribute

2011-08-03T21:10:00.000-07:00

May 23, 2011
Citizens for Preservation of the North Village
Sina Bolour
10961 Strathmore Drive
Los Angeles CA 90024
Tracy Dudman
University of California, Los Angeles
1060 Veteran Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90095
RE: Glenrock Lanfair proposed redevelopment
Dear Ms Dudman:
We in the North Village appreciate your efforts working with us on the proposed redevelopment of buildings in the North Village.
Recently an event has sparked curiosity on our part in the way UCLA handles North Village Issues, such as parking.
As you know there is a severe shortage of parking spaces in the North Village that seriously impacts the lifestyle of its residents.
On Friday May 20th 2011 at 8:00 AM you visited 10963 Strathmore Drive to inspect the story poles from the backyard of the property neighboring the Glenrock driveway. Because it was street cleaning day (Friday), you spent ten minutes looking for a parking space but could not find one and then opted to park in the driveway, against parking regulations for that day. Apron parking is a way of life in the North Village but all residents know (and you were informed prior to parking) that on Friday it is not permitted due to street cleaning.
We ask that as Senior Planner for UCLA Campus and Environmental Planning, UCLA Capital Programs that you design these redevelopments with adequate parking for the neighborhood, so that issues of parking which you experienced firsthand on 5/20/11 at 8:00 AM be mitigated. Parking is an issue that UCLA has created in the North Village and we feel that parking issues should be resolved as part of any redevelopment plan.
We would like to see UCLA build public parking structures for the neighborhood as part of the Glenrock Landfair residential redevelopment plan, and would like to see such a plan proposed to the Regents and the Community. We hope that your recent experience in the North Village gives you a firsthand account of how important parking is to North Village residents.
Yours Truly
Residents of the North Village
cc: Chancellor Gene Block & Company

SOLUTION!

2011-07-07T13:48:00.000-07:00

Bikes receive special lanes on Public Thoroughfares all over USA

Ergo:

Solution for ALL

Paint some stripes on the macadem,

plunk down a wheelchair logo,

back it up with felony enforcements....

and create the Nation's first Wheelchair Lane.

Leave the innocents in this cynical Shoupian Charade ALONE

DONE

.......NEXT!

Pleasant Family Shopping: Ralphs Westwood Through the Years

2011-01-19T06:58:00.001-08:00

Fun old nostalgia stuff.

http://pleasantfamilyshopping.blogspot.com/2008/08/ralphs-westwood-through-years.html

Apron Parking in Westwood

2009-11-17T09:42:00.001-08:00

Hi Councilmember Koretz,

By way of introduction, my name is Flint Dille. I live in the North Village in Westwood, overlooking UCLA. I'm not really asking you to do anything today, I just wanted to give you a heads up on a brewing issue.

I don't know whether you're aware of the long battle the residents of the North Village had with Michael Dukakis over apron parking, but in a nutshell, it was decided by the L.A. City Council (Jack Weiss was our rep then), that they would suspend ticketing for apron parking in Westwood as long as there was no Americans With Disabilities violation (there were 3 feet on the sidewalk for a wheel chair to pass), because there are only 800 spaces for 5000 or so cars and people had done apron parking in Westwood since the beginning.

The good news is that we have not been ticketed and happiness has returned to the North Village. That is, EXCEPT for a couple of times, apparently by an inexperienced parking officer. The problem is that when we try to explain our case to the Parking Violations Bureau, they have blown us off by investigating the situation and finding themselves in the right. This is frustrating. Last time, I believe most of us just paid the ticket. This time, we're going to be a little more aggressive.

I'm linking you to a YouTube video we took upon finding the tickets. It shows the situation pretty clearly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mxnodc41dSE

If there's anything you can do, that would be great, but as I said, this more is just a heads up. We really want to head off the kind of trouble that we had with Professor Dukakis a couple years ago.

Also, it might not be bad to ask the Parking Violations Bureau to set up an email account as mail-in only is unnecessarily difficult and causes unneeded expense.

Thanks for your time,

Flint Dille

Re: More Shoup Chaos - A Follow-Up on LaJolla

2008-03-24T15:25:00.000-07:00

and the moral of this story is:

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

More Shoup Chaos - A Follow-Up on LaJolla

2008-03-24T14:27:00.001-07:00

A friend of mine sent this from LaJolla. I wonder how many other communities are having the same problem.

UNION-TRIBUNE EDITORIAL
Needless rancor

Shelve the La Jolla parking meter plan

March 22, 2008

When will it ever end?

For more than a year, a nine-member advisory panel has stirred division and rancor in La Jolla by pushing for paid parking at scenic La Jolla Cove, the expansive beach at La Jolla Shores, the Prospect Street shopping district and the Bird Rock business enclave. Residents and business owners could not be more emphatic – and nearly unanimous – in opposing the installation of parking meters in the coastal community. Yet, the La Jolla Community Parking District Advisory Board just won't take no for an answer.

The board continues to stage public meetings that do little more than generate heated opposition, as occurred this week when an overflow crowd of about 100 people turned out once again to jeer the parking meter proposal. Not a single person stepped forward to support it.

Last year, the advisory panel brought in a hired “parking guru” from Los Angeles to tell La Jolla residents how much better off they would be if only they instituted paid parking along the coast. This “nationally recognized parking expert” proposed a scheme that included high-tech pay stations with variable parking rates and a requirement that some residents obtain parking permits to park on the street in front of their own homes. Only the parking guru was surprised that La Jolla residents wanted no part of his complicated “parking management plan.”

Many who don't live in La Jolla like to sneer at it as an elite community of millionaires. In fact, part of La Jolla's charm is that it has the feel of an unpretentious village, where residents greet their neighbors at the post office or the bookstore. Parking meters would compromise the village character of La Jolla. The advisory board should shelve its proposal before holding any more contentious public meetings.

Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080322/news_lz1ed22middle.html

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Baum [mailto:rdb1@polisci.ucla.edu]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 7:44 AM
To: emeyer@firstregional.com; rdb1@polisci.ucla.edu; feelie@ucla.edu; hal_lieberman@yahoo.com; lillhara@yahoo.com; ksalatino@lacma.org; kmsalatino@aol.com; susanlieberman@earthlink.net; flintdille@earthlink.net; terriedille@earthlink.net; cdubow@mailstation.com; knorthpole@adelphia.net; jeanlouisr1@yahoo.com; jsinvest@gmail.com
Cc: kj@joffes.com
Subject: Fwd: North Village Parking Initiative

dear VC homeowners:
i'm in taiwan this week, observing the presidential election. this morning i received the following email from the chancellor's office, and i wanted to share it with all of you. this is a response to my letter of january 12, appended below. it only took ten weeks to get a reply from the chancellor. the wheels of academia turn slowly, when they turn at all....
cheers,
--rick

Professor Baum,

The Chancellor asked me to respond to your inquiry regarding the North Village parking initiative.

As you may know, Councilman Jack Weiss has asked the Department of Transportation to study the possibility of allowing vehicles to be parked in the apron of the driveway so long as there is no blockage of either the sidewalk, nor the vehicle protruding into the street further than a normally parallel-parked vehicle, 18 inches. The study has yet to be completed.

Please let me know if you any questions.

Thanks

E. Felicia Brannon
Executive Director
Community & Local Government Relations
UCLA External Affairs
310/794-6824 office
310/794-6827 fax
www.advocacy.ucla.edu

Dear Chancellor Block:

As you may know, a group of North Village homeowners, renters and students has been fighting against an attempt, spearheaded by UCLA Professor Donald Shoup and Visiting Professor Michael Dukakis, to eliminate the longstanding practice of allowing apron parking in the North Village. Through a joint class project, Dukakis and Shoup have offered a rationale for their crusade that is, to say the least, highly disingenuous. This struggle has been going on for over three years, at great cost in time, energy and money to local homewoners as well as to those UCLA students who llive in this densely populated Westwood Village neighborhood. The net result has been that the City Council and City officials have, at the initiative of local homeowners, drafted legislation that would legalize apron parking in the North Village. Such legislation, which we strongly support, would affirm a widely accepted, de facto status quo that has been maintained consensually and without significant problems for nearly half a century.

Our opposition to the campaign by Professors Dukakis and Shoup is rooted in our deep concern about the severe shortage of parking space faced by North Village homeowners and renters. Ironically, that parking shortage has been sharply exacerbated by the continued dynamic growth of UCLA-- the very institution that employs Professors Dukakis and Shoup. As CEO of that institution, we believe it is your responsibility to help mitigate the serious harm to residents of the North Village that would follow from an enforced ban on apron parking, as demanded by Dukakis and Shoup. With the university having constructed new housing accommodations for almost 2,000 UCLA students in the North Village over the past three years, the parking shortage has now reached critical proportions.

Thus far we have held UCLA blameless, and have tried to avoid bothering university officials with our problem. However, we are growing increasingly distressed by the fact that the ongoing campaign by Professors Dukakis and Shoup to halt apron parking has caused us enormous inconvenience, wasting our time and energy while seriously eroding North Village property values. They have also manipulated their own students into aiding a cause that is truly misconceived and misdirected. We want them to stop, and as they work for you, only you can make that happen. We want them to do what they were hired to do-- train students and conduct research -- not harass their neighbors and make life difficult for local UCLA student-residents.

Now that Winter Quarter has begun, this would be an opportune time to terminate this unnecessary intrusion by Professors Dukakis and Shoup into the well-being of our North Village community. We strongly urge your intervention in this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Richard Baum
Professor of Political Science
North Village homeowner
On behalf of your North Village neighbors

Community Profile

2007-12-23T20:47:00.001-08:00

Mikey M.C. "L'il Tank" D

(as played by Count Dukakis)

In crafting his curious performance

of a pompous yet bumbling Iago,

Mr. Dukakis is revealed as having as much to do with

"the people" and their processes...

as Man of La Mancha has to do with the literature of Cervantes.

FW: Apron Parking Hearing Dec 3

2007-12-01T18:34:00.000-08:00

From Evan Gordon

As you know, many neighborhoods face a severe parking shortage, and
sometimes creative solutions must be found. Earlier this year, Councilmember
Jack Weiss introduced a measure to change the city's laws to explicitly
allow parking in the driveway apron in the North Village. This proposal
will be discussed at 11AM on Monday, December 3 at City Hall (200 North
Spring Street, 90012, RM 340). The hearing will include time for public
comment and testimony about the issue, and it would be helpful to the
Committee members to hear firsthand from local residents about the need for
this measure.

If you have questions, please call me.
Evan Gordon
Offices of Councilman Jack Weiss
Council District 5
822 South Robertson Blvd., #102
Los Angeles, CA 90035
evan.gordon@lacity.org
310.289.0353 (main)
310.289.0365 (fax)

ucla, usc, uc santa barbara already have deals with flexcar

2007-12-01T10:08:00.001-08:00

according to flexcar.com, flexcar is already available to ucla students, with flexcar available in several ucla parking lots.... our streets should be for the public....

steve case, former aol chief's company revolution llc owns flexcar

2007-12-01T09:20:00.001-08:00

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5480088769186503636&q=The+big+heist

steve case's company revolution owns flexcar... though
i think it is a very interesting idea and i hope the
company grows and eases congestion, this is a private
company with huge money behind it... they have made
deals with many universities (they should be buying
spaces from ucla), but why take away our parking
spaces?.... they should be buying spaces from private
parking lots in westwood, not taking away our parking
spaces

to watch the award winning cnbc documentary on the aol
takeover of time warner, called "the big heist" see
link above.... they should be competing in the
marketplace like every other company

Bah

2007-11-27T12:43:00.001-08:00

the silence grows......

Pictured here:

Embarrassed UCLA Chancellor and Regents,

desperately pretending not to know

ANYTHING about Mikey D's latest absurd fiasco...

Note to Mikey D:

Stick to takin' the honest & good folks' money

for your impotent and timelessly irrelevant

"Rally 'round the Party - Evil Bush - Whatever Happened to ME?" speech.

Feel free to tout the benefits Electroshock all you like,

but Mikey, please don't expect us in Westwood

to favor your delusions with anything but the scorn

due a stuffed shirted Popinjay and his self important nest mate

Bah

Fwd: Please Stop ...

2007-11-27T10:23:00.001-08:00

August 17, 2007

Dear Mr. Dukakis:

The residents of the North Village surrounding the UCLA campus are
well aware of your efforts to abolish tandem parking. We are
fundamentally opposed to your propositions and are prepared to do
whatever it takes to preserve our right to park the way we have for
thirty plus years.

We find your approach to this situation somewhat back-handed with no
real motive, other than one that may be personal, pleasing your wife
who does not like the way Tandem Parked cars look from a city planning
perspective. Your approach never included a formal town-meeting, or
other public venue that was officially recognized by any City
Municipality. There were student meetings that carried no real weight
in our eyes or the eyes of city officials over-looking this situation.

All sorts of excuses have been brought into the picture, creating an
air of chaos and uncertainty into our community, for one, the issue of
the ADA has been brought up, when in fact there is no issue.
Furthermore solutions to the problem have been suggested that worsen
the case for the ADA issue and completely contradict your arguments.
Instead of Tandem Parking it is suggested that people Parallel Park in
the driveways, this would solve nothing from an ADA perspective. All
of this goes to show that the real issue is not ADA related and more
of a personal motive.

Having researched the history of this situation for the past 4 years,
the residents of this community feel that your continued efforts to
abolish Tandem Parking are harassment. The city itself has dismissed
your requests several times yet Alex Fay and his entourage backed by
yourself and professor Shoup continue to rebel-on. We find this
behavior nothing short of harassment; we ask that you stop this
immediately.

We have legal teams in position to combat this at a higher more
expensive level if necessary, causing the city, yourself, this
community, a much higher price to pay and increased anger and emotions
that can and should be avoided.

Respectfully yours

North Village Residents

Potential VA Calamity

2007-09-17T07:49:00.001-07:00

Hey Roxanne,

I agree. The VA is like a park that separates us from Brentwood. How do we stop this? Is this a federal (Waxman) issue or is this a city issue.

Also, my friend Steve Reasner says that UCLA is planning MORE building on a 1988 Permit without an impact study. You know anything about this. Steve, if you get this, could you chime in? This is about a lot more than apron parking now.

Flint

-----Original Message-----
From: Roxane Stern [mailto:roxane.stern@verizon.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 2:01 PM
To: Roxane Stern
Subject:

In today’s paper there is an announcement about a meeting regarding the VA property! This is the first notice I received.

I hope you and your neighbors can attend. The meeting is open to the public and will run from 5 to 9 pm at the Wadsworth Theatre on the VA campus.

How many times do we have to fight this battle?

It appears that the VA has already entered into agreements with several companies-Enterprise cars, For Entertainment group, Tumbleweed bus company and Breitburn Energy.

They must be stopped.

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

LA CA 90024

310 443 1106

RE: Meeting on parking

2007-09-17T06:11:00.000-07:00

Thanks Roxanne,

Keep us abreast of this.

Flint

-----Original Message-----
From: Roxane Stern [mailto:roxane.stern@verizon.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 1:27 PM
To: Roxane Stern
Subject: Meeting on parking

I just heard that North Village parking is going to be on the agenda of the Transportation Committee chaired by Wendy Gruel.

It will be held down town and at this time is scheduled for Sept. 26.

This needs to be confirmed, but wanted to get the story out ASAP.

An SRO crowd is very important and we should be ready to voice our opinions if given the opportunity.

Thanks,

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

LA CA 90024

310 443 1106

We Make the Daily Bruin

2007-08-07T20:17:00.000-07:00

News Science&Health Admissions Campus Crime The Hill National Politics Regents USAC Westwood Sports Baseball Football Gymnastics Softball Men's Tennis Women's Tennis Track & Field Women's Water Polo Men's Basketball A&E Film & TV Food Music Theater & Arts Life & Style Games & Comics Viewpoint Columns Editorials Editorial Cartoons Submissions Letters to the Editor Blogs Archives News DBTV Classifieds Place a classified ad DBTV news sports arts & entertainment viewpoint Bruinwalk About Us Contact Us The Staff Corrections Apply to the Daily Bruin Tuesday, August 7th, 2007
printer friendly
mail this article
iPod format
digg
TalkBack:
Apron Parking
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The ban on apron parking in Westwood will being August 1. Will this improve the parking situation? What are other solutions to the problem? Let us know by calling 310-697-8084, and we'll post your message here.

Related stories:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apron Parking Package Flash Graphic

Apron parking restricts disabled students
Anthony Pesce | Monday, July 30

Long-term Village residents fight ban
Ben Thaler | Monday, July 30

Influential figures invested in ban
Robert Faturechi | Monday, July 30

Meter system may offer solution
Natalie Edwards | Monday, July 30

Speaks out: Apron Parking Ban
Josh Lehmer, Yvonne Leow | Monday, July 30

Motion to allow apron parking
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The ban is expected to be enforced Aug. 1, but apron parking in Westwood may not be a lost cause, because of a brief filed by Los Angeles city councilman Jack Weiss, who supports its legalization.

• The motion proposes to make apron parking legal in Los Angeles, as long as parked cars do not impede access to the sidewalk and street.
• This would allow for compact cars in most spaces, but could prevent larger cars from apron parking.
• The motion will be sent to the city council's transportation committee, and it could be months before it is brought to discussion.
• Even if the committee legalizes apron parking, the city attorney could conclude that apron parking is illegal.
• USAC Facilities commissioner Sherlyn Mossahebfar said petitioning for the motion to pass will be a key part of her agenda in the fall.

SOURCES: Alex Fay, Office of Jack Weiss

Photo

Photo by Jessica Lum

Longtime Westwood resident Flint Dille said he tends to avoid political issues, but in order to keep his apron parking spot, he said he had to become a political activist.
Long-term Village residents fight ban
Ben Thaler, Bruin contributor (Contact)
Published: Monday, July 30, 2007
Throughout the last academic year, the North Village was abuzz with student-led petitions and Facebook ads fighting the impending ban on apron parking. Students were successful – to a degree, as a crackdown on apron parking was delayed until at least Aug. 1.

But with the new deadline approaching and summer break in full swing, students have deserted their once-active role in the fight against the apron parking ban.

As a result, the apron parking ban, which will affect approximately 250 cars parked in driveways between the streets and the sidewalk, has primarily become a concern for many of Westwood's long-term residents, who say they rely on the spaces to accommodate visitors and two-car households.

Sherlyn Mossahebfar, the Undergraduate Students Association Council Facilities commissioner who has been involved in the fight against the ban, said students are "jaded by the process."

"Students think they don't have any say against big city politicians," she said.

Alex Fay, a recent graduate who as a student vocally opposed the ban last winter, agrees that students have been apathetic this summer.

He said students tend not to get involved in local affairs unless they own their own property, which makes it hard for representatives to work on their behalf.

The fight against the apron parking ban has now primarily gone to Westwood's long-term residents.

Michael Webb is one long-term resident who will be affected by the apron-parking ban. He said whenever he has guests over, they take an apron parking space on Strathmore.

"Whether the guests are friends over for dinner or the plumbers fixing a leak, I need (apron parking) to accommodate them," Webb said.

Webb's neighbor, Charles Dubow, agrees. He said families with two cars would also be hurt by the ban.

"This doesn't just affect students – it concerns those of us who will stay longer than a couple years," Dubow said.

Many of the long-term residents have taken a position against the ban, but Fay, whose views formerly mirrored the residents, has now tried to take a middle ground.

"There are two camps: people who want nothing to change, and people who acknowledge that something is going to change one way or another," Fay said.

"Whether we like it or not, apron parking is not going to be allowed in its current form, so we should prepare for alternatives," he said.

Fay said he originally pushed for the delay of the apron-parking ban because students renew their leases after the summer, and he did not want his peers to have the rules changed in the middle of the year.

A history of apron parking

Long-term resident Flint Dille is one of the leading opponents of the apron-parking ban.

"About three years ago, we got notes from parking enforcement warning us that we were parking illegally, but the officers themselves told us they didn't want to give us actual tickets," Dille said.

Dille said he didn't take any of the notes seriously until former presidential candidate and visiting UCLA Professor Michael Dukakis came in the picture.

"Dukakis got his class involved, which I think is a misuse of taxpayer money, since we're paying for him to teach," Dille said.

Last fall, Dukakis and urban planning professor Donald Shoup, who is considered a leading expert on parking issues, spearheaded the effort to get rid of apron parking in the North Village on the grounds that it violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. Enforcement was originally set to begin in November, but was delayed twice until the current deadline of Aug. 1.

Dille said he believed that Dukakis and Shoup were "leveraging students as a classroom assignment to mess with property values."

But Dukakis has remained resolute in his opposition to apron parking.

"Apron parking effectively eliminates one lane from the street so you get all kinds of jam-ups," Dukakis said. "And if I see problems, I deal with them."

Still, some view the efforts of the former Massachusetts governor as obtrusive.

"We've been apron parking for 40 years, and all of a sudden some big-wig comes in and uses his political connections to hurt us," Dille said.

In a response to local frustration with the imminent ban, a North Village resident created a blog called "North Village Parking According to Michael Dukakis." The blog is filled with postings lambasting Dukakis and keeping readers updated on developments.

Excerpts from the blog include poetry mocking Dukakis and his wife, Kitty Dukakis, as well as parodies of news headlines. One headline stated that "Officials have already approved construction of UCLA off-site metered parking lots and much-needed extra storage space for the Dukakis' egos."

Dille said he does not believe Dukakis has any good alternatives for apron parking.

"Dukakis doesn't have a viable solution – except to bring in Flexcar, which would take away even more parking spots in the neighborhood," he said.

Car sharing - solution or hindrance?

Some have proposed the expansion of car-sharing services to alleviate the parking congestion in Westwood.

Flexcar is a car-sharing company that allows its members to pay an annual fee to use a car with a guaranteed parking space.

The service is considered one alternative to alleviate the number of cars in the Westwood area, which would make apron parking less crucial to residents.

Margaret Kemp, the marketing and outreach coordinator for Flexcar L.A., said the 22 vehicles on the UCLA campus have been successful at reducing traffic.

Walter King, the general manager of Flexcar L.A., said he hoped 20-30 vehicles would eventually be available for Westwood apartment residents in order to alleviate the parking crisis.

King acknowledged that several of the proposed Flexcar spaces would have to come from street parking, but said that Flexcar was working with private entities, including a local church, for other spaces.

Fay said implementing Flexcar is a good idea, regardless of what happens with apron parking.

"There is a systemic parking shortage in Westwood, and Flexcar is one viable solution along with permitted parking and new structures," Fay said.

Middle ground

Some residents, such as seven-year North Village resident Roxane Stern, are torn between the two sides in the apron parking debate.

"Some of my neighbors have really attacked Dukakis, and whether or not he's caused us our troubles I don't know, but the fact remains that our legislators will make the decisions," Stern said.

But Stern is also wary about implementing car-sharing in the North Village, because of its cost and use of parking spaces.

"The Flexcar idea hasn't been well-received because it takes away parking spaces from people who live here," Stern said.

In contrast to Fay, who said he believes the summer enforcement date is appropriate because it occurs before most leases are signed, Stern said the date is sneaky.

Since the North Village is filled with temporary and new residents over the summer, she said, they might be oblivious or indifferent to the situation.

The differing viewpoints in the community have made it difficult for Stern to create an organized group.

"It's hard to be cohesive with students gone and neighbors with different approaches," she said.

Students in the summer

Mossahebfar said it has been difficult for students to organize against the ban during the summer.

Many students are currently on summer break, and there has been minimal media coverage about the impending ban.

"This is a dead time for students," Mossahebfar said.

But Mossahebfar said students get excited and involved when there is a widespread effort and lots of publicity.

Last winter, students posted fliers around Westwood, started Facebook groups and collected signatures.

"I got 400 signatures alone during that time," she said.

The Facebook groups, with titles such as "Fight the Ban of Apron Parking!" and "I want to keep my apartment parking spot!" have shown little activity in the past few months.

Mossahebfar said students should realize that, united, they are a powerful force.

She urged students to start lobbying and petitioning to local officials once school starts.

With reports from Robert Faturechi, Bruin senior staff.

Our Response to the Daily Bruin Article

2007-07-31T15:38:00.000-07:00

Anthony… I’m assuming you’ve had the wool pulled over your eyes, but it has not escaped our notice that your distraught handicapped person, Victor Pineda, is a Graduate Student in Urban Planning, surprise, surprise, the same department that spawned the whole attack on Apron Parking in the North Village courtesy of Michael Dukakis and, you guessed it, Urban Planning Professor Donald Shoup. To not mention Mr. Pineda’s connection to Shoup in the story damages its credibility. What was quite possibly an oversight can appear, through skeptical eyes, to be a set-up by the Daily Bruin.

The ADA has never been the real issue here. It is the fact that Kitty Dukakis doesn’t like the way we’re parked and Professors Dukakis and Shoup have been misusing the resources of a taxpayer-funded university to inflict their will on us and damage our property values.

Their central argument about blocked sidewalks is a straw man. Everybody agrees that a wheelchair should be able to pass down the sidewalks and that cars blocking the sidewalk should be ticketed or towed. That has never been in question. In fact, cars are ticketed for blocking the sidewalk.

As to the rest of the ADA claim, it seems that there has been a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue by Shoup and Dukakis given that San Francisco has recently legalized apron parking, therefore they obviously do not believe Apron parking to be an ADA violation.

We agree that it would be nice if the city would fix the sidewalks and provide ramps at the curbs. We also believe there are a lot of livability issues in Westwood that should be addressed, such as rampant crime. We also believe it would be nice if they fixed the new crime magnet: a graffiti strewn ex-fraternity ruin at the corner of Landfair and Strathmore.

We do not believe that some dubious ADA claim by Shoup (who certainly knows about San Francisco) is anything other than a tool to get their way.

We also do not see how it can possibly be in UCLA’s interests to arouse the already inflamed neighborhoods surrounding UCLA (take a look at the recall Weiss signs on the lawns – the underlying issue there is in no small part congestion) by having runaway professors making unnecessary enemies. We have already asked that Michael Dukakis not be invited back to UCLA on our blogsite and are prepared to follow it up with petitions if necessary.

What's Wrong With This Article

2007-07-30T18:18:00.000-07:00

You don’t even need to read the entire second paragraph of the Daily Bruin article to see that this one smells funny. Let’s see who can spot the plant –

Apron parking restricts disabled students

Anthony Pesce, News Editor (Contact)
Published: Monday, July 30, 2007

As Victor Pineda navigated the many obstacles to wheelchair users in the Westwood North Village on his way home from a doctor’s appointment he shouted, “I’m trapped in the middle of the street.”

Pineda, a graduate student in urban planning,

Check out the whole article here.

http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/2007/jul/30/anthony/

Hint: Read “Pile of Shoup” or “S**t happens, Shoup is Caused” on this site.

More Good Parking News

2007-07-30T09:50:00.000-07:00

I spoke to Evan Gordon today. The parking enforcement will stay on hold until the motion Jack Weiss submitted is acted upon. He recommended that we be very careful about the rules now-no blocking sidewalk, etc.

Roxane

[]

Text of the Motion to the LACC

2007-07-19T01:00:00.001-07:00

--------------- MOTION

Many neighborhoods in Los Angeles face a serious parking shortage, especially in neighborhoods that were built when parking requirements were lower than present standards. Creative measures or revisions to the municipal code may be necessary to accommodate the demand for parking.

To maximize parking in a limited area, residents of the North Village in Westwood near UCLA have utilized the driveway apron of their residence for parking for many years. Recently, the City of Los Angeles was advised that it is a violation of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines to allow motor vehicles to park in the apron and impede passage for pedestrians. Moreover, the City of Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) does not currently permit residents to park in the driveway apron irrespective of whether or not the motor vehicle protrudes into the sidewalk or street.

The California Vehicle Code does allow local municipalities to create ordinances which allow motor vehicles to park in the driveway apron. Given that driveway aprons are of varying sizes, the City should explore amending the LAMC to allow driveway apron parking where such parking ensures adequate access for the disabled by not impeding the sidewalk or street.

I THERFORE MOVE that the Department of Transportation and the City Attorney report to the Transportation Committee on amendments to the municipal code to change the definition of apron parking to allow residents to park in the driveway apron in the North Village and other areas without impeding the sidewalk or street.

PRESENTED

BY:

JACK WEISS,

Councilmember, 5^thDistrict

SECONDED BY: _ July 13, 2007

On to the Next Fiasco

2007-07-16T22:44:00.001-07:00

Ever Vigilant

Photo of Royal Dukakis Study Group

Leading U.S. Officials and Los Angeles Police Chief Bratton

on site survey of Mt. Whitney (Elev. 14,480')

The study was begun after Mrs. Dukakis

determined that the Mount Whitney was "ugly"

and failed to conform to accessibility guidelines

in the Americans w/ Disabilities Act.

Plans call for the site to be bulldozed,

thus making the majestic mountain into a molehill.

Officials have already approved construction

of UCLA off-site metered parking lots

and much needed extra storage space

for the Dukakis' egos.

No Pictures Please........

2007-07-16T22:21:00.001-07:00

Los Angeles Politicians,

City Officials

and UCLA Administrators,

distancing themselves from the

Runanway M/K Dukakis & Shoup

Hijacked Public Policy & Hubris Bandwagon

Request to UCLA - Do Not Bring Michael Dukakis Back

2007-07-16T09:01:00.000-07:00

Open Letter to UCLA Administration

Now that Jack Weiss’ office and the city council have decided to explore changing the law to accommodate what has been the reality for last 60 years or so, we find ourselves vindicated. Of course the battle isn’t over. Dukakis has been at this for nearly three years now. First it was the stealthy phone call to Chief Bratton, with whom he worked in Boston… Then it was by haranguing parking people, who don’t want to ticket us (they have to function in this neighborhood, too) and finally he used the resources of UCLA students and Professors, including Donald Shoup (see ‘A Pile of Shoup’ and ‘Sh*t happens, Shoup is Caused’ on our blogsite – ‘A Shoupid Solution’ is coming)… In short, he’s leveraged the resources of a tax supported university against its neighbors… Apparently, and I’m not making this up, because Kitty Dukakis didn’t like the looks of the way our parking looks.

The actions of Professors Dukakis and Professor Shoup have caused us a great deal of time, anxiety and some expense. We are not asking the university to reimburse us, and are not, at this point contemplating any legal action, but we are asking UCLA, not to invite Dukakis back. Certainly, the ‘freak show’ aspects of having Mr. Dukakis on campus have been played out, and certainly UCLA would like to restore good relations with neighbors who have been patient through years of construction, dramatic expansion of the campus (exacerbating Westwood’s parking problems), couch-burning celebratory student parties and the like.

If you would like to have a further discussion of this, please contact us. If you would be more impressed by a petition, we will happily begin circulating one.

-- Your North Village Neighbors

question

2007-07-14T10:54:00.001-07:00

i understand that no suv's and trucks will be allowed. can someone clarify the size restrictions on trucks and suv's, and will they be ticketed if they apron park under these rules?

Ticket This

2007-07-14T08:45:00.001-07:00

seen here,

the cause, (ego)

of Westwood tandem parking fiasco;

apparently tandem parked

for some 50 years or so...

Caveat

2007-07-14T08:18:00.001-07:00

Oh dear oh dear...just where has Mikey "D" gone....?

Its so quiet around here.

CAVEAT

Operatives like Mikey D

expect the citizens will doze off after a battle.

Operatives like Mikey D know that the battle

is not the war....so they wait....and wait.

Operatives like Mikey D expect to win and do not like to be resisted.

Westwoodians..

do not assume that the stay of execution

on Mikey D's absurd demands signals an end to the problem.

Typically, political types wait until the crowd is fat and happy

or diverted and then they remount their efforts with renewed fervor.

Don't allow this to happen in this instance.

Do not put down your pitchforks...

Pitch in with your neighbors and resist the absurd.

WE WON !!!

2007-07-13T19:44:00.000-07:00

--------------- MOTION

Tomaximize parking in a limited area, residents of the North Village in Westwood near UCLA have utilized the driveway apron of their residence for parking for many years. Recently, the City of Los Angeles was advised that it is a violation of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines to allow motor vehicles to park in the apron and impede passage for pedestrians. Moreover, the City of Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) does not currently permit residents to park in the driveway apron irrespective of whether or not the motor vehicle protrudes into the sidewalk or street.

PRESENTED

BY:

JACK WEISS,

Councilmember, 5^thDistrict

SECONDED BY: _ July 13, 2007

Jack Weiss Betrays Us - Join the Recall

2007-07-10T09:58:00.001-07:00

Having not hears from Jack Weiss or any of his lieutenants, the news of yesterday stands – especially given that our babysitter (who also relies on the apron parking and is five months pregnant) talked to a parking enforcement officer who said they would be ticketing on August 1^st, but don’t want to.

I, for one, will be joining the Jack Weiss recall effort.

http://www.recalljackweiss.com/

http://recalljackweiss.blogspot.com/2007/05/recall-jack-weiss-blog-opened.html

I suggest in the next couple weeks you tune into the John and Ken Show as we are planning some amusing public events to highlight this.

I’ll also be posting an incredibly racist interview with Jack Weiss on the Blog and at the appropriate moment be forwarding both the edited and unedited version of it to African American leaders in Los Angeles. (I might wait until the Tennie Pierce thing heats up again). We’ve got two pretty good mailing lists. One from church and the other from Aristotle Industries.

Jack Weiss has played Roulette with us.

We’ve lost the parking fight… and he’s about to lose a career.

FW: Apron Parking

2007-07-09T11:53:00.001-07:00

Evan,

I’m hoping this is inaccurate.

Flint

-----Original Message-----
From: Roxane Stern [mailto:roxane.stern@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 10:19 AM
To: Roxane Stern
Subject: Apron Parking

This information is correct as of July 9, 2007 and it comes from Evan Gordon in Jack Weiss’s office

Apron parking ban will go into effect August 1

Notices will be placed on cars before enforcement begins

Weiss’s office is working on an alternative plan (whatever that is) for the village with the council and city attorney

Stay tuned….

Roxane Stern

11053 Strathmore Dr

LA CA 90024

310 443 1106

Restore North Village Apron Parking

Re: Potential Next Steps

Re: Potential Next Steps

RE: Potential Next Steps

RE: Potential Next Steps

RE: Potential Next Steps

RE: Potential Next Steps

Re: Potential Next Steps

RE: Potential Next Steps

Potential Next Steps

Residents Urge the City to Permit Apron Parking - Mar Vista, CA Patch

Residents Urge the City to Permit Apron Parking

Photos

Read More in Government

Comments (1)

kristof konrad

Leave a comment

Get Email Updates

In This article

Crackdown on Apron Parking Affects More Than Just Students

See More on Patch

Most Popular articles

Follow us:

Advertise

Volunteer

Contribute

Patch Info

Get in Touch

Patch Initiatives

Goodies

Share This Article

Residents Urge the City to Permit Apron Parking

Grow Your Patch

Email the author

Send us a news tip

Please sign up or log in to continue.

Log In to Patch

Please sign up or log in to continue.

Sign Up for Patch

Create a new Patch account

Get Patched In

SOLUTION!

Pleasant Family Shopping: Ralphs Westwood Through the Years

Apron Parking in Westwood

Re: More Shoup Chaos - A Follow-Up on LaJolla

More Shoup Chaos - A Follow-Up on LaJolla

Community Profile

FW: Apron Parking Hearing Dec 3

ucla, usc, uc santa barbara already have deals with flexcar

steve case, former aol chief's company revolution llc owns flexcar

Bah

the silence grows......

Fwd: Please Stop ...

Potential VA Calamity

RE: Meeting on parking

We Make the Daily Bruin

Our Response to the Daily Bruin Article

What's Wrong With This Article

Apron parking restricts disabled students

More Good Parking News

Text of the Motion to the LACC

On to the Next Fiasco

Ever Vigilant

No Pictures Please........

Request to UCLA - Do Not Bring Michael Dukakis Back

question

Ticket This

Caveat

WE WON !!!

Jack Weiss Betrays Us - Join the Recall

FW: Apron Parking