Tradition or Transgression? : One of L.A.’s best features is its freedom from the congestion, noise and interference of street vending. It poses a number of hazards and should not be legalized.

In just a few years, Los Angeles residents have seen a radical change in the complexion of our city. In many areas the streetscape has changed from one lined with palm trees and open space to blocks of crowded thoroughfares that look like swap meets or bazaars. Streets, sidewalks and freeway off-ramps have become a jungle of vendors hawking their wares as if they were on a carnival midway.

For two years the Los Angeles City Council has wrestled with the licensing of street vendors. In October, 1990, a task force made up of vendor associations, legal aid groups, health officials, chambers of commerce and others issued a report recommending the legalization of street vending in special districts, where extensive vending already exists.

The council is now faced with a divisive and emotional issue that strikes at the heart of what Los Angeles is and is to become.

The fact that other cities approve selling goods on street corners doesn’t mean that our city should do the same. One of the best features of Los Angeles has always been its freedom from the congestion, noise and interference of street vendors.

The street vendor debate has discounted the rights of independent, established merchants and our labor laws, insurance regulations, tax structure, health issues and the freedom of residents to walk the streets unimpeded and unharassed.

Those who support legalization claim that it offers a foothold on the ladder of upper mobility.

But many residents oppose street vending. Established merchants see it as unfair competition. City planners see it as undermining our zoning laws. Residents and property owners fear that the noise and congestion of these legalized swap meets will spill over into residential neighborhoods.

We believe that street vending should not be legalized, and our zoning laws should be strictly enforced. And if legalized sidewalk vending is inevitable, it should be tightly controlled.

A close look shows that the proposed ordinance is grossly flawed. Here are some of the changes that should be made in it:

* Vendor districts should be established by the City Council, not the Board of Public Works as is now proposed. A full environmental impact report should be conducted on each proposed district.

* It should take the approval of 60% of the property owners in an entire council district before a district can be put in place. Under the present plan, a mere 20% of lessees and tenants in the district itself could create one.

Only those who own property in the proposed district should be allowed to vote. We need to prevent a block-by-block Balkanization of communities and give residents, business owners and real estate boards a voice in the complexion of their neighborhoods.

* The City Council should be given broad power to reject a proposed district, and not be limited to the narrow prerogatives now in the ordinance.

* Each district should have a “sunset” clause built into it at its creation. Many neighborhoods change character. Residents move in and out, and new buyers take title to property. Shouldn’t their voices be heard?

* Competitive bidding should be required to pick the vendors for any given community. Renewals should not be automatic. The city should receive a percentage of the gross revenues from each vendor--after all, the city is the “landlord” providing the space for the business.

* Vendors should get permits only if they show they are legal residents of the city of Los Angeles.

* No sidewalk vending should be allowed within 1,000 feet of a residence. This will act to support our commercial zoning in the city, rather than undermine it.

* Fees for vendor permits should recover the full cost to the city, collected at once with no refund if a vendor terminates a permit.

* The rights of established merchants of this city must be protected. It is unfair and irresponsible for the city to require one class of business (those on private property) to follow strict rules of health, sanitation, taxation, permitting and worker safety while allowing another group to compete without the same level of controls.

The hazards of street vending include traffic, smog and street crime, not to mention the lack of proper insurance. The American dream has always thrived on upward mobility, but this ordinance offers the worst rather than the best of the mercantile climate that Los Angeles has to offer.