Twisted Road for Street Vendors : Would-be sellers are facing bureaucratic snarl under new L.A. system

Elation among vendors over last January’s Los Angeles City Council decision to legalize sidewalk selling has been replaced by dismay. That’s because the city has left them facing a bureaucratic maze that would discourage even the savviest followers of urban government.

We can’t list everything that must take place before a legal vending district can be established; that would take up the rest of this space. We will share what the council has and has not done, and a bit of what is being attempted to negotiate the maze.

The City Council vote allowed establishment of up to eight zones in which sidewalk vending would be legal for those who had acquired the proper permits and paid the appropriate fees.

The council is not required to take any initial action in deciding where those zones would be. That is up to the vendors, who must organize themselves and obtain enough support in a given location (a thumbs-up from 20% of the merchants and residents) to start the ball rolling.

So far, the Street Vendors Assn. of the San Fernando Valley is setting the standard for this activity, with the help of Mission College and the advice of such local groups as the Coalition of Women for Economic Development.

The Valley vendors have begun seeking signatures of support in the Pacoima and Panorama City areas. If they are successful, they can move on to step two, in which a community advisory committee is established.

Because the Valley group is so well organized, it has made the most of the advice from the city government’s Sidewalk Vending Program. Other vendors around the city should follow its lead.

In fairness it must be said there are far too many contradictions in the city’s actions. In 1993, when no action had been taken to legalize vending, 952 misdemeanor citations were issued against vendors. In the five months following the City Council vote to allow sidewalk vending, 850 citations already have been written.

Why the crackdown on vendors when the city has made it so difficult to comply with its law? If all this sounds like a city government working at cross purposes, that’s exactly what it is.