Letters between Levy & Independent Commission, 1991-06 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 1 of 33 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Warreri Christopher CHAIR John A. ArgUelles VICE OWR MEMBERS Roy A. Anderson Willie R. Barnes Prof. Leo F. Estrada Mickey Kantor Richard M. Mosk INDEPENDENT COMMISSION ON THE Los ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT June 14th l 9 9 l John W. Spiegel G£HERAI. COl'NSEL DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL Percy Anderson Ri chard E. Drooyan Gary A. Feess Raymond C. Fisbct Ernest 1. Getto Lawrence B. Gotlieb Thomas E. Holliday Andrea Sheridan Ordin John Brooks Slaughter Robert E. Tranquada. M.D. Barbara J. Kelley Louise A. LaMotbe Yolanda Orozco Dennis M. Perluss Gilben T. Ray EXECUl1VE OIR.ECTOlt Prof. Bryce Nelson O!Jl£CTOR FQR PRESS INFORMATION Mr. Adolph Levy 501 N. Rossmore Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90004 Dear Mr. Levy: John B. Sherrell Brian A. Sun On behalf of Warren Christopher and the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department , I am writing you to thank you for your letter of June 7, 1991. With its very short deadline and heavy responsibilities, the Commission hopes that you will understand that it is not possible to respond in detail to your letter. However, your letter has been read and will be made a part of the Commission files for further review by the Cornrnissiones and staff. GTR: lrg We again thank you for writing . Very truly yours, Gilbert T . Ray Executive Director Suite 1910 400 South Hope Street Los Angeles, California 90071-2899 Telephone (213 ) 622-5205 Facsimile (2 13) 622-73 18 - . ADOLPH LE VY 501 N. Rossmore Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90004 June 7, 1991 Independent Commission -- L.A.P.D. Suite 1910 400 South Hope Street LOS Angeles, CA 90071-2 899 Dear Commission Member: This communication covers a broader area of our city government than the police department . Nevertheless, it is hoped its content may prove of value. The 1925 charter strove to avoid the evils of the 'boss' machines then rampant in the cities of New York and Chicago. However, in doing so and in trying to provide a workable structure, in avoiding one evil it erred to the opposite extreme . The result has been that ever since that time it has failed to provide the accountability and responsibility which any corporate body -- public or private requires to enable a corporate body to operate properly. Any private corporation trying to operate a business under a setup similar to that set up in the city charter , would go bankrupt in no time . Under it we have muddled along inefficiently and to a considerable degree ineffectively for almost three generations. Fifteen years after its adoption , in 1940 , after the recall of the cor rup t Shaw regime , a real effort was attempted under the direction of Mayor Fletcher Bowron to remedy the faults in the charter. Independent Commission -- L.A.P.D. June 7, 1991 Page 2 A Charter Revision Committee was established consisting of forty-six civic-minded men and women reflecting a representative cross-section of Los Angeles citizens. Experts on municipal government were consulted, forms of government adopted by other large cities were studied, and particular attention was paid to the experiences and experiments of other municipalities. The committee labored conscientiously for more than a year. In October 1941, it presented its findings and recommendations to the mayor and council. The outcome of the committee's hard work was bitter, painful and mortifying . It does appear that now there is a real opportunity for the voters to adopt charter changes necessary to provide efficiency, accountability and responsibility -- this after more than sixty- five years. It truly is extraordinary that the opportunity came about as a result of a crisis created by police conduct which just happened to be filmed by a bystander operating a video camera. The ensuing uproar led to the establishment of your commission. The first and most important specific proposal of Mayor Bowron's committee was designed to enable the mayor, as chief administrative officer, to be a more effective bead and to exercise better supervision over city departments. It was adopted by the council and placed on the ballot May 6, 1941. Unbelievably, it was defeated by a vote of 112,000 to 80,000! What percentage of the eligible voters did the "no" vote constitute? What information can the city officials who have to do with election returns and who analyze and report on such matters to the mayor and council, now provide as to the make-up of the "no" votes? What data do the media morgues have, to tell what the position and recommendations were of the several well-organized and powerful civil service-protected municipal employee associations? It is to be profoundly hoped your committee will take into account and profit from the enormous voluntary time expended by, and from the skill and experience of those public- spirited citizens of 1940 . Independent Commission -- L.A . P.D . June 7, 1991 Page 3 That committee came up with specific amendments covering planning and zoning, civil service, controller , public works, police , and water and power . These also were either not endorsed by the council or were defeated at the polls. I do not have the statistical data to explain the reasons for such a sad destiny as aforementioned . However, this must be available to your committee , especially in these days of computers. Nevertheless, I do have firm beliefs relating to such matters based on a long life as an interested and active participant in governmental affairs. Now, with reference to the police conduct which presently is causing so much controversy , how does it seem possible for some elected officials and many civil serviceprotected employees to support a similar civil serviceprotected department head when a sizeable majority of citizens are shown by the polls to believe the police action wa s wrongful? Could it be that his supporters in the city council know that in pursuit of their reelection it is the eligible voters who vote who will decide their fate , not the great numbers of eligible voters who choose not to vote? Could it be that in purely local elections the total vote cast may be as low as five percent of the electorate and rarely more than t wenty percent of the electorate? Could it be that the majority of those who do vote is made up of civil service-protected city employees , their families, friends , neighbors and other dependents? Such votes , wh en combined with those generated by city council endorsements , surely must constitute a very large bloc in a lightly voted local election. A Los Angeles Times editorial of May 30 , 1991 offers a very critical article about the civil serviceprotected police chief's endorsement for reelection of a member of the city council. rs n ot this a classic example of mutual back-scratching and an effor t to rally other civil service- protected employees? The editorial concludes with, " Such a situation makes for very poor government indeed ." Independent Commission -- L.A.P . D. June 7, 1991 Page 4 Could it be the employee- organized bloc•s position on any proposed charter amendment which it perceives to affect its status reflects the employees' desire to defend or expan d their interests? These interests include compensation, civil service protection, promotions, vacations, health and welfar e benefits , retirement provisions , and the like . These matters are naturally close to their hearts, as are such matters to all workers. In endeavoring to defend their interests, they act no differently than any other class or group . Good examples include the lawyer's stand on no-faul t auto insurance; the doctor's stand on Medicare fee regulations; taxpayers on new taxes; unions on anti - strike proposals, and passionate partisans on such matters as family planning, pollution , slow-growth, etc. The list is endless. In any event , is not the result of the recurring voting and non-voting patterns in local elections a case of the tail wagging the dog, whereby a minority bloc usually constitutes a voting majority; where majority interests are sacrificed to minority interests? elections interest issues? the 1941 85,000. take the would not the consolidation of local with general tend to bring out a substantial increase in the and active participation of more voters on local A proposal somewhat along this line was included in committee report . It was defeated 110 ,000 to What percentage of those eligible to vote did not trouble to vote? Who were they? What quality of city government can citizens expect when 80 to 95% of them fail to inform themselves on matters of public interest and to exercise their priceless right and power of suffrage? It will be of interest to compare your recommendations with those doomed ones of fifty years ago. The ability of a democracy to provide for the welfare of its citizens depends upon the degree of involvement by its citizens in its civic affairs. Without substantial involvement , democracy can become more form than substance . History over and over again has affirmed that public inertia has proven a first step to revolution and totalitarianism . Independent Commission - - L.A.P . D. June 7, 1991 Page 5 What is now needed is not another charter revision committee; it is a charter revision campaign committee . Interested and impartial persons familiar with the operation of our city government know what relatively simple revisions are necessary. seeing to it that such constructive proposals win out in the city council, or around it by initiative , and at the polls, are the mountains to be climbed , as the past has proven the mortality rate is close to 100%. It will take the combined effort and involvement of every segment of the city's society for those representing the general we lf are to outvote the activist minority bloc. AL:rw GOVERNMENT, AFTER FAMILY, IS THE GREATEST DETERMINANT OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF EVERY PERSON ON EARTH God bless My brother Maurice Levy, wh o has work ed closely with me on this , is an attorney. We are old-timers in Los Angeles, having lived here more than eighty years.
Object Description
Description
Title | Letters between Levy & Independent Commission, 1991-06 |
Description | Gilbert T. Ray (Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department), 400 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, California, letter, 1991 June 14, to Adolph Levy, 501 North Rossmore Avenue, Los Angeles, California. Adolph Levy, 501 North Rossmore Avenue, Los Angeles, California, letter, 1991 June 7, to Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department, 400 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, California. |
Geographic subject (roadway) | 400 South Hope Street; 501 North Rossmore Avenue |
Geographic subject (city or populated place) | Los Angeles |
Geographic subject (county) | Los Angeles |
Geographic subject (state) | California |
Geographic subject (country) | USA |
Geographic coordinates | 34.051552,-118.255687; 34.079163,-118.3297917 |
Coverage date | 1991-06-07; 1991-06-14 |
Creator |
Ray, Gilbert T. Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department Levy, Adolph |
Contributor |
Levy, Adolph, recipient Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department, recipient |
Date created | 1991-06-07; 1991-06-14 |
Type | texts |
Format | 6 p. |
Format (aat) | correspondence |
Format (imt) | application/pdf |
Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
Series | Independent Commission File List |
File | Complaints, suggestions, and support |
Box and folder | box 23, folder 13, item 1 |
Physical access | Contact: Special Collections, Doheny Memorial Library, Libraries, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189; specol@dots.usc.edu |
Full text | Warreri Christopher CHAIR John A. ArgUelles VICE OWR MEMBERS Roy A. Anderson Willie R. Barnes Prof. Leo F. Estrada Mickey Kantor Richard M. Mosk INDEPENDENT COMMISSION ON THE Los ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT June 14th l 9 9 l John W. Spiegel G£HERAI. COl'NSEL DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL Percy Anderson Ri chard E. Drooyan Gary A. Feess Raymond C. Fisbct Ernest 1. Getto Lawrence B. Gotlieb Thomas E. Holliday Andrea Sheridan Ordin John Brooks Slaughter Robert E. Tranquada. M.D. Barbara J. Kelley Louise A. LaMotbe Yolanda Orozco Dennis M. Perluss Gilben T. Ray EXECUl1VE OIR.ECTOlt Prof. Bryce Nelson O!Jl£CTOR FQR PRESS INFORMATION Mr. Adolph Levy 501 N. Rossmore Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90004 Dear Mr. Levy: John B. Sherrell Brian A. Sun On behalf of Warren Christopher and the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department , I am writing you to thank you for your letter of June 7, 1991. With its very short deadline and heavy responsibilities, the Commission hopes that you will understand that it is not possible to respond in detail to your letter. However, your letter has been read and will be made a part of the Commission files for further review by the Cornrnissiones and staff. GTR: lrg We again thank you for writing . Very truly yours, Gilbert T . Ray Executive Director Suite 1910 400 South Hope Street Los Angeles, California 90071-2899 Telephone (213 ) 622-5205 Facsimile (2 13) 622-73 18 - . ADOLPH LE VY 501 N. Rossmore Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90004 June 7, 1991 Independent Commission -- L.A.P.D. Suite 1910 400 South Hope Street LOS Angeles, CA 90071-2 899 Dear Commission Member: This communication covers a broader area of our city government than the police department . Nevertheless, it is hoped its content may prove of value. The 1925 charter strove to avoid the evils of the 'boss' machines then rampant in the cities of New York and Chicago. However, in doing so and in trying to provide a workable structure, in avoiding one evil it erred to the opposite extreme . The result has been that ever since that time it has failed to provide the accountability and responsibility which any corporate body -- public or private requires to enable a corporate body to operate properly. Any private corporation trying to operate a business under a setup similar to that set up in the city charter , would go bankrupt in no time . Under it we have muddled along inefficiently and to a considerable degree ineffectively for almost three generations. Fifteen years after its adoption , in 1940 , after the recall of the cor rup t Shaw regime , a real effort was attempted under the direction of Mayor Fletcher Bowron to remedy the faults in the charter. Independent Commission -- L.A.P.D. June 7, 1991 Page 2 A Charter Revision Committee was established consisting of forty-six civic-minded men and women reflecting a representative cross-section of Los Angeles citizens. Experts on municipal government were consulted, forms of government adopted by other large cities were studied, and particular attention was paid to the experiences and experiments of other municipalities. The committee labored conscientiously for more than a year. In October 1941, it presented its findings and recommendations to the mayor and council. The outcome of the committee's hard work was bitter, painful and mortifying . It does appear that now there is a real opportunity for the voters to adopt charter changes necessary to provide efficiency, accountability and responsibility -- this after more than sixty- five years. It truly is extraordinary that the opportunity came about as a result of a crisis created by police conduct which just happened to be filmed by a bystander operating a video camera. The ensuing uproar led to the establishment of your commission. The first and most important specific proposal of Mayor Bowron's committee was designed to enable the mayor, as chief administrative officer, to be a more effective bead and to exercise better supervision over city departments. It was adopted by the council and placed on the ballot May 6, 1941. Unbelievably, it was defeated by a vote of 112,000 to 80,000! What percentage of the eligible voters did the "no" vote constitute? What information can the city officials who have to do with election returns and who analyze and report on such matters to the mayor and council, now provide as to the make-up of the "no" votes? What data do the media morgues have, to tell what the position and recommendations were of the several well-organized and powerful civil service-protected municipal employee associations? It is to be profoundly hoped your committee will take into account and profit from the enormous voluntary time expended by, and from the skill and experience of those public- spirited citizens of 1940 . Independent Commission -- L.A . P.D . June 7, 1991 Page 3 That committee came up with specific amendments covering planning and zoning, civil service, controller , public works, police , and water and power . These also were either not endorsed by the council or were defeated at the polls. I do not have the statistical data to explain the reasons for such a sad destiny as aforementioned . However, this must be available to your committee , especially in these days of computers. Nevertheless, I do have firm beliefs relating to such matters based on a long life as an interested and active participant in governmental affairs. Now, with reference to the police conduct which presently is causing so much controversy , how does it seem possible for some elected officials and many civil serviceprotected employees to support a similar civil serviceprotected department head when a sizeable majority of citizens are shown by the polls to believe the police action wa s wrongful? Could it be that his supporters in the city council know that in pursuit of their reelection it is the eligible voters who vote who will decide their fate , not the great numbers of eligible voters who choose not to vote? Could it be that in purely local elections the total vote cast may be as low as five percent of the electorate and rarely more than t wenty percent of the electorate? Could it be that the majority of those who do vote is made up of civil service-protected city employees , their families, friends , neighbors and other dependents? Such votes , wh en combined with those generated by city council endorsements , surely must constitute a very large bloc in a lightly voted local election. A Los Angeles Times editorial of May 30 , 1991 offers a very critical article about the civil serviceprotected police chief's endorsement for reelection of a member of the city council. rs n ot this a classic example of mutual back-scratching and an effor t to rally other civil service- protected employees? The editorial concludes with, " Such a situation makes for very poor government indeed ." Independent Commission -- L.A.P . D. June 7, 1991 Page 4 Could it be the employee- organized bloc•s position on any proposed charter amendment which it perceives to affect its status reflects the employees' desire to defend or expan d their interests? These interests include compensation, civil service protection, promotions, vacations, health and welfar e benefits , retirement provisions , and the like . These matters are naturally close to their hearts, as are such matters to all workers. In endeavoring to defend their interests, they act no differently than any other class or group . Good examples include the lawyer's stand on no-faul t auto insurance; the doctor's stand on Medicare fee regulations; taxpayers on new taxes; unions on anti - strike proposals, and passionate partisans on such matters as family planning, pollution , slow-growth, etc. The list is endless. In any event , is not the result of the recurring voting and non-voting patterns in local elections a case of the tail wagging the dog, whereby a minority bloc usually constitutes a voting majority; where majority interests are sacrificed to minority interests? elections interest issues? the 1941 85,000. take the would not the consolidation of local with general tend to bring out a substantial increase in the and active participation of more voters on local A proposal somewhat along this line was included in committee report . It was defeated 110 ,000 to What percentage of those eligible to vote did not trouble to vote? Who were they? What quality of city government can citizens expect when 80 to 95% of them fail to inform themselves on matters of public interest and to exercise their priceless right and power of suffrage? It will be of interest to compare your recommendations with those doomed ones of fifty years ago. The ability of a democracy to provide for the welfare of its citizens depends upon the degree of involvement by its citizens in its civic affairs. Without substantial involvement , democracy can become more form than substance . History over and over again has affirmed that public inertia has proven a first step to revolution and totalitarianism . Independent Commission - - L.A.P . D. June 7, 1991 Page 5 What is now needed is not another charter revision committee; it is a charter revision campaign committee . Interested and impartial persons familiar with the operation of our city government know what relatively simple revisions are necessary. seeing to it that such constructive proposals win out in the city council, or around it by initiative , and at the polls, are the mountains to be climbed , as the past has proven the mortality rate is close to 100%. It will take the combined effort and involvement of every segment of the city's society for those representing the general we lf are to outvote the activist minority bloc. AL:rw GOVERNMENT, AFTER FAMILY, IS THE GREATEST DETERMINANT OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF EVERY PERSON ON EARTH God bless My brother Maurice Levy, wh o has work ed closely with me on this , is an attorney. We are old-timers in Los Angeles, having lived here more than eighty years. |
Filename | indep-box23-13-01.pdf |
Archival file | Volume73/indep-box23-13-01.pdf |