ED1 can remove members from their community by removing affordable housing. ED1 silences their say in it by removing public comment. Our right to due process has been removed.
​

En Espanol

June 22, 2024
​

NO PUBLIC COMMENT = NO VOICE

Before ED1, projects used to be required to tell neighbors their proposal plans, then the neighborhood council would talk to the community and weigh in on projects. Many Angelenos believe this is still the case.

What is actually happening?

Mayor Bass took away our right to have a voice by writing into ED1 that public comment is removed.

Six months after removing our public comment, she publicly said: "I think one of the worst things that we could do would be to frighten neighborhoods that now we're going to (approve) anything and everything. We want Angelenos to support the idea that housing needs to be built everywhere, but that doesn't mean that we're trying to say people in their neighborhoods no longer have a voice, and are just going to put up with anything that happens. We have to strike a balance where Angelenos support the development of housing, but we also want to do it in an inclusive way." (ABC 7 News) She is saying one thing and doing another.

Mayor Bass can write an executive directive that bypasses our rights only because she is using executive power she gave herself by declaring the unhoused crisis a State of Emergency. But lawsuits against the city of LA claim that states of emergency are for unexpected occurrences, not chronic city problems and that the mayor has violated California code and violated her own local law.

​While ED1 is being disputed in the courts, the city is moving forward with their plans, continuing to step past the rights of the people it represents.

For one building proposal in CD 13, the neighborhood council didn't weigh in about the proposal. Neighbors who live next to the RSO units set to be demolished didn't receive notice a building was in the works until a year after the application for the proposal was put in. Then they received a letter from the city naming codes the developer received permission to waive because of ED1. The letter closed by saying those decisions were final and not appealable.

​Receiving notice after something is approved is very different than receiving it beforehand. Our friends in Pasadena say, even if there is a simple garage renovation, neighbors receive a packet of information and are given 60 days to talk together, with the neighborhood council, and with the person doing the construction because neighbors legally have a say in what happens in their community.

​In more affluent neighborhoods, neighbors understand to have a voice anyway and they have legal representation. Neighbors in Larchmont Village, Sherman Oaks and Sawtelle have spoken up against ED1 projects in temporarily effective ways.

​Less affluent neighborhoods, where more people are struggling to get by, don't always have as much time to gather as a community or do research and may take longer to realize speaking up is allowed. This makes it easier for developers to take advantage of lower income areas and destroy their RSO housing. ​

Also, ED1 is new, so whether we are affluent or not, LA residents are navigating a maze while the city has given developers permission to act faster than ever.

​If we wanted to change ED1 by putting it on the ballot to give ourselves a chance to weigh in by voting, are we even allowed to vote on something created with executive powers? Has our vote also been taken away? We're genuinely asking. Can we add a ballot measure about a law created by an executive directive? Also, people often spend millions to add ballot measures. How would we do that?  

​One hope could be the that the lawsuits from Fix the City claiming that removing public comment "decimates due process" are able to win their appeal. The press often paints Fix the City as disingenuous, implying they represent wealthy people who don't like unhoused people and only care about their neighborhood. As long as the press distracts with judgements about who is speaking instead of what they are saying, it seems easier for readers to brush over the allegations. Regardless of public opinion, the law will hopefully stand true throughout.

Another hope is the community. The wealthy, the poor, and residents in-between, care about our neighborhoods. We care that our children, parents, and grandparents can grow up in our neighborhoods, that there are trees, enough water, and that there is housing affordability, safety, stability, and community. The greatest strength right now seems to be people who live here caring together as a community.

There is a common thought that developers are allowed to do what they want because it is their property. But there is a balance missing there. Legally, a community also has a right to be a part of something that will affect them.

​We have a right to due process. "Due process is a requirement that legal matters be resolved according to established rules and principles and that individuals be treated fairly." (Investopedia.com) We have a right to be told about a project in advance and to comment about how it will affect the community we comprise.

Over the past decade, developers have been lobbying to speed up their path to profit. So many laws that lobbyists have helped change over the years, signed off by government employees from the state to local level, have come together to allow for ED1. And now our legal right to participate has been taken away. But that's not how law works.​ That's one reason why the city is getting sued over ED1.

We matter legally. We have a right to comment and come together. In the past, we have thought intensely about the right of the developer; we are learning to think equally as intensely about the right of a neighborhood to speak.

Think about if your right was taken away where you live. Ours has been. (​​And if you live in the city of LA, yours has been taken away as well.)