Traveling Council on Right Road

Make no mistake: last week’s City Council meeting in Sylmar was a feel-good spectacle full of honorary certificates, local pork projects and furry animals. It was, as council president John Ferraro quipped, a “dog and pony show” without the pony. And we applaud it.

For all the political puffery the Mission College meeting held, it demonstrated that--despite grousing about extra costs and wasted time--the City Council can venture out from City Hall without too much pain. It showed that it is possible to bring occasional meetings out to the city’s residents rather than forcing them to drive downtown.

Taking council meetings on the road can be an effective way of diffusing the growing grumbling over the inaccessibility of city government. The benefits in terms of goodwill--and a general feeling that the council cares about the people it represents--outweigh the rather modest costs of such trips. Tuesday’s trip, for example, cost the city about $5,000 to transport broadcast equipment, files and staff. Mission College provided its personnel, security and custodial staff and use of the auditorium for $892. Councilman Richard Alarcon, who represents the area and was the driving force behind the Sylmar meeting, spent another $800 on snacks for the public and lunch for the council.

Yet the full council has met outside City Hall only a handful of times. Laura Chick and Michael Feuer brought a meeting to Pierce College last October. Both that meeting and last week’s were attended by crowds much larger than the usual turnout downtown. Even so, the council balked at a proposal by Chick and Feuer to hold four meetings a year outside City Hall.

We urge the council to reconsider. If each council office planned a single meeting each year in its district and helped defray costs from its own accounts, the City Council could provide some credibility to its claims that the people of Los Angeles matter. Some members gripe about the hassle of commuting to far-flung meeting places. But how is that any different from the experience of residents who want to address the council? Some members complain that not much of substance gets done at traveling meetings. But how is that any different than a lot of meetings in City Hall?

Quite simply, there is growing dissatisfaction with the way Los Angeles is governed. Witness the Valley secession movement and similar rumblings in San Pedro. Unless the City Council makes serious overtures to the people it represents--and community meetings are just a start--it may not have anyone left to represent.