City Council Claims Jurisdiction Over Autry Museum Expansion
With vote, the expansion plan has been referred to the arts, parks, health and aging committee.
The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday afternoon unanimously approved a motion to claim jurisdiction over the Autry National Center's plan to renovate and expand their museum space on a plot of city land in Griffith Park.
The vote came after the city council heard numerous public comments from community members who claimed they were not properly notified about a May 20 recreation and parks commission board meeting during which the Autry's renovation and expansion plan was approved.
Though the meeting was properly posted on the recreation and parks commission's website, according to the city attorney's office the meeting's agenda was never e-mailed via the city's early notification system.
As a result, many of those who spoke during the public comment portion of Tuesday's meeting said they had no idea that the vote on the Autry renovation and expansion would take place during the Friday, May 20 meeting.
With the passage of motion, which was co-authored by Councilmen José Huizar (CD 14) and Ed Reyes (CD 1), the issue will now be heard on Friday morning at 8:45 a.m. by the city council's arts, parks, health and aging committee.
The city council was able to grab the reins of the Autry issue through section 245 of the city charter, which gives the city council permission to claim jurisdiction over any city board decision within five regular council meetings.
Daniel Finely, CEO of the Autry, said now the council will up against a new shot-clock, lest they jeopardize $6.9 million that the Autry received from California’s Prop. 84 Nature Education Facilities (NEF) Program.
Finley said that the Autry needs to have a contract in place to complete the expansion and renovation project by July 1 or risk losing that funding.
Huizar said that the additional review he requested through the motion should not imperil the Autry's timeline, given that the provisions of section 245 of the city charter require the council to come to a decision on any issue they claim jurisdiction over within 21 days.
Huizar added that his motion was not an attempt to upend the Autry's expansion plan, rather an effort to honor those community members who claimed that they were overlooked by the recreation and parks commission.
"It's very simple. If a group of people as large as the one you've seen today come before this body and they tell you 'we have not been heard' ... that is one of the principles of our democracy, to allow the public to be heard on items for which elected officials vote upon," he said "Whether you are passionate about this issue or not. I have my own opinions about what what direction we should go with this issue. It's very simple today. If you see the number of people who have taken time out of work and their daily lives to come here and say 'city of Los Angeles, councilmembers, give us an opportunity to be heard.' That's the least we could do."
Ess Zee
2:41 pm on Tuesday, May 31, 2011
I was not able to attend the meeting, but I contacted each of the council members by phone before the meeting. I appreciate the efforts of Councilpersons Reyes and Huizar, and the votes of all the Councilpersons.
It is vital that the Southwest Museum be re-opened as a museum... even if it is a pared down version of the original. There are enough artifacts for both the Autry AND the Southwest to display.
SZinLA, Mt. Washington
Apples
3:24 pm on Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Reigns instead of reins? "Parks and Recreation commission" instead of the correct "Recreation and Parks commission"? You need an editor.
That said, check out the Autry trying to rush the process through using their grant as a threat. They don't need my tax dollars, thank you.
David Fonseca
3:34 pm on Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Thanks for the feedback, Apples. I've made the corrections.
Alice M.
3:54 pm on Tuesday, May 31, 2011
(Well, considering the 15 mini-monarchs that actually run the City Council of L.A., maybe "reigns" wasn't really an error?)
;)
Rob Schraff
4:03 pm on Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Thank you for the thorough, well-balanced coverage. It was clear to me that he council wanted to insure people were heard, but would resist rejecting the grant money already awarded by the state. Even Huizar, as you note in your article, went out of his way to say he wouldn't stand in the way of the grant. (Making me wonder if he clever enough to use this parliamentary maneuver to finally get the "Friends" out of his shorts.)
You can also see the council meeting today (you can scroll through to item 21 near the end) at: http://lacity.org/YourGovernment/CityCouncil/CouncilMeetings/LIVEandON-DEMANDVideo/index.htm
It is also interesting to see just how few people showed up despite the "Friends" overheated rhetoric.
And yes "Apples," these are our tax dollars at work, serving our children's education.
Rob Schraff
6:35 pm on Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Sorry, "Apples," ensure.
Rob Schraff
11:24 am on Wednesday, June 1, 2011
On local Yahoo! Group nelalist the "Friends" have claimed more than 30 people showed up for the city council session Tuesday. And posted a whole bunch of photos without a single group shot - http://www.friendsofthesouthwestmuseum.com/item21/index.html
Of course, you can also see if anything like thirty people showed up on the video link of the entire meeting I have already posted.
Why lie about such a trivial thing? Habit?
And how did these ten, 15, 30 (or whatever) people come to represent the entire community as the “Friends,” again?
chris watts
10:11 pm on Wednesday, June 1, 2011
You wrote:
It's very simple. If a group of people as large as the one you've seen today come before this body and they tell you 'we have not been heard' ... that is one of the principals of our democracy, to allow the public to be heard on items for which elected officials vote upon,"
when in fact you should have written:
It's very simple. If a group of people as large as the one you've seen today come before this body and they tell you 'we have not been heard' ... that is one of the principles of our democracy, to allow the public to be heard on items for which elected officials vote upon," he said "Whether you are passionate about this issue or not.
"Principal" means "highest in rank or importance", or "a person in a leading role". "Principle" is a fundamental law, doctrine, or tenet.
salut!
chris watts