Los Angeles: when 10 City Halls are not enough...

In 2007, Los Angeles City Hall - the third such building with that name - will be turning 80 years old. When it was built in the years prior to 1927, it was lauded as a building with statewide significance. Sand from every county in the State was brought in and mixed in the concrete to build the structure, which was the tallest building in Los Angeles from the time it opened until 1968.

In 1917, the first "branch city hall" was opened in Van Nuys not far from the Municipal Building built about 15 years later. During the 1920s, under Mayor George Cryer (who was known for wearing suspenders but never a 2-quart hat), the City established "branch" City Hall in San Pedro. (It was a campaign promise of Cryer's to San Pedrans that a local City Hall would be built.) So, branch City Halls in far-flung reaches of the City have not been unheard of. But things are getting a little too politicized, if you ask me...

Earlier this year, on October 20th, Councilwoman Janice Hahn introduced a motion to analyze the need/distance of regional City Halls. The September 26 report shows that there are gaps, but they are not as glaring as they theoretically could be in a City this size. Should the City be spending more resources in this increasingly digital age to build brick and mortar Neighborhood City Halls? Facing a $450 million shortfall in fiscal year 2007/2008, shouldn't we be spending the City's energy on streamlining existing services instead of studying more?

Well, on Monday the Budget and Finance Committee will consider adding another "Branch City Hall" to the collection. The strange part is, this regional city hall will be only 2 miles from the main City Hall. In a city of 465 square miles, wouldn't regionalizing mean something a little different? The Committee will be considering a:

"Department of General Services report, and the City Administrative Officer (CAO) to report, relative to acquisition of the Chicago Plaza Building, located at 2130 East 1st Street, for the Boyle Heights Neighborhood City Hall, in Council District 14."

It will cost $13.6million to acquire, renovate, etc. and will not make that much difference to really bringing services closer to the people. True, there is an opportunity bring in $449,941 in rents from non-city tenants each year, but that is only half the amount needed for the annual debt service of $927,000 each year. And, seeing how long it has taken the City to lease its space (i.e. that in the Braude Center), I wouldn't count on that tenant income for a while. I see this as a waste of resources at this time.

Look at what we have right now in the City: nine existing Municipal Buildings/Regional City Halls:

San Pedro City Hall

Eagle Rock City Hall

North Valley City Hall in Sunland/Tujunga (not to be confused with the area's one-time City Hall, Bolton Hall.)

West Valley Municipal Building

Valley Municipal Building (aka "Van Nuys City Hall")/Braude Center

Mark Ridley-Thomas Constituent Service Center

Westchester Municipal Building

Hollywood Municipal Building

Sawtelle/West LA Municipal Building

Additionally, two years ago, funding had been approved for the design of ANOTHER City Hall in the Valley: in Pacoima.

How effective/full are these "regional City Halls?" The City still rents space throughout the City for offices that could be housed at Municipal Buildings. And there is still much underutilized or empty space at many of these facilities. Why spend more money on another building just to appease a community so that they can claim that they "have one, too"?

Approving further expenditures on a Boyle Heights City Hall is not a good use of City funds.