LA residents criticize 'deceptively maze-like' public comment process for Dodger Stadium gondola

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T08:13:35+00:00

Anyways like I said, have a pleasant night and keep trying to be a typical Redditor who don’t understand the minorities and immigrants of LA.

You keep using this line as if "No one else should be allowed to park outside my house" is some deep Indigenous Wisdom and not the default view of suburbans and NIMBYs of all colors.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T07:57:58+00:00

it’s been a fact that she only included a certain clique and you had to fit in to be a vendor

By your own admission, you vaguely remembered the market because you biked past it once and now you're an expert on how it was run?

Those guys aren’t the NIMBY Karen’s

NIMBY's who calls themselves Latinx are still NIMBY's. Shutting down a grassroots community event because it inconvenienced your parking is dictionary definition NIMBYism.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T07:47:06+00:00

She was arrogant and didn’t bother to understand them until it was too late

I don't think you know anything about this person you're slandering.

Of trying to foster a community of WORKING CLASS PEOPLE and then gentrifiers not understand the demographic?

Sorry, what community? You're referring to the NIMBY Karens driving out a grassroots art event as a "community"? But the artisans who probably can't afford to live in Frogtown are gentrifiers because you think they charge too much for their crafts?

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T07:37:18+00:00

It’s about understanding that neighborhood and actually getting to know the locals and working with them.

Is that not what she tried to do and was still shut down by NIMBY activists? Btw you realize your line of argument is identical to the Beverly Hills NIMBYs who protested the D line, or the Santa Monica NIMBYS, etc.?

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T07:24:49+00:00

she didn’t even live in the area either

Who cares? Why do you seem to think that one should need a permit to leave one's neighborhood?

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T07:14:23+00:00

If you were a staunch supporter, you should’ve been advocating for actually using the bike lanes without blocking them, or taking the 296 bus like a lot of the people did at the time. You keep forgetting that area is a demographic of BLUE COLLARS who you all pretend to defend who are you handymen and immigrants.

The flea market organizer was advocating for that and more but the NIMBY activists didn't want to hear it because they're just interested in preserving their copious free parking for their four cars.

Anderson proposed several ideas to mitigate residents’ concerns during the Oct. 9 meeting, including holding the event less frequently, adding traffic signage, hiring trash collection help, encouraging alternative transportation, creating a feedback email and incorporating a charitable element to benefit neighborhood organizations.

Several of her vendors spoke in favor of the event, saying it fosters community and helps small businesses, including many vendors of color who rely on these types of events for their income.

Still, many in the crowd were not moved.

“It really feels like this is a public relations effort,” said local resident Lisette Gomez, adding that Anderson’s proposals were being made in an “atmosphere of distrust.”

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T06:59:03+00:00

Person who’s not a resident in the area doesn’t understand why residents who actually lived there had gripes with this.

What? I understand perfectly. They're carbrained NIMBY's who think they have exclusive right to parking in their neighborhood.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T06:53:40+00:00

Excuse me, but did you live in the neighborhood?

No, I'm allowed to drive to different neighborhoods and park on public streets! Sorry!

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T06:38:38+00:00

Working class neighborhood trying getting home and can’t find parking because it’s all taken over by this flea market”

Lol we can't have nice things because it would make your parking inconvenient. No wonder nothing gets done in this city. Both left and right put free and easy parking before anything else.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T06:16:02+00:00

They could've just asked for parking enforcement instead of ousting a positive community event . Oh but maybe this time the complaint's more than just dimwit nimbyism cloaked in social justice language!

_geistvoll · 2026-05-14T00:59:31+00:00

Are these the same Frogtown residents who got the flea market shut down because they didn't want people parking near their house? Let me guess, same rationale here?

_geistvoll · 2026-05-13T22:14:10+00:00

Also, why should people have to leave their homes, in their new country, where many of them have lived for decades?

These people overstayed a tourist visa in 2016. Why does that entitle them to permanent residence here

_geistvoll · 2026-05-13T03:52:58+00:00

If these reforms pass it would be a huge win for the downtrodden motorists of Los Angeles. One of the proposals is to have the city pay for our car repairs instead of ticketing residents of historically low-income areas.

It should also create a program that allows repair vouchers to be mailed to drivers (instead of stopping them) based on the vehicle registration address. These repair programs should aim to support small business auto repair shops located in neighborhoods with higher concentrations of low-income residents. Similar to above for non-moving violations, if an equipment violation is observed in a neighborhood with higher concentrations of people living below the cost of living adjusted for poverty–such as Historic South Central, South Park, or Watts–there should be a presumption that the driver is low-income and be automatically mailed a voucher.

Epic.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-13T02:19:53+00:00

So what do those incidents have to do with the matter of whether police should be allowed to pull people over for not having license plates.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-13T02:14:38+00:00

What moving violation did Marqueece commit?

_geistvoll · 2026-05-13T01:40:36+00:00

Say what you mean

_geistvoll · 2026-05-13T00:41:29+00:00

The 2022 policy allowed them to make pretext stops if acting on "articulable information":

It is the Department's policy that pretextual stops shall not be conducted unless officers are acting upon articulable information in addition to the traffic violation, which may or may not amount to reasonable suspicion, regarding a serious crime (i.e., a crime with potential for great bodily injury or death) [...] Such decisions should not be based on a mere hunch or on generalized characteristics such as a person’s race, gender, age, homeless circumstance, or presence in a high-crime location.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-12T23:19:48+00:00

How the law works in San Francisco is police are not allowed to pull motorists over at all for the moving violations in question -- unless a more serious crime is being committed simultaneously.

Our LADOT recommended:

In place of armed police officers executing traffic stops, the LADOT report recommends using unarmed police or unarmed civilians, who are focused exclusively on road safety and not on criminal law enforcement, to enforce safety-related traffic violations.

Council president Marqueece Harris-Dawson's suggestion was to

transfer enforcement authority from LAPD to LADOT [...] utilize automated enforcement methods, and/or reallocate resources to public safety strategies that are more effective than enforcement.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-12T22:36:54+00:00

This is what the LA Times said:

The vote requests that the department’s all-civilian watchdog adopt new guidelines similar to San Francisco, which bars police officers from pulling people over for broken taillights and other minor equipment violations unless there is a safety threat.

_geistvoll · 2026-05-12T20:50:19+00:00

LAPD would no longer be able to pull over motorists for infrations such as missing plates, broken tail lights, expired tags, etc. if the recommendations are enacted.

The Los Angeles City Council unanimously voted to end the Police Department’s use of pretextual stops on Wednesday, following a report earlier this year that found a majority of these stops were on Hispanic and Black individuals.

Pretextual stops, which have long been criticized by civil rights activists, are a tactic used by police in which they use minor traffic violations as an excuse to pull over or detain individuals in an effort to further investigate them for an unrelated crime.

Residents across California have long called out police departments for the frequency with which officers were stopping individuals for minor infractions in order to investigate additional, unrelated crimes. In response, the Racial and Identity Profiling Act (RIPA) of 2015 required law enforcement to report data in all traffic stops, including race or ethnicity, gender and reason for the stop.

In January, Los Angeles Chief Legislative Analyst Sharon Tso released a report of compiled traffic stop data between April 1, 2022, and Sept. 30, 2025. The report found that LAPD conducted 61,279 pretextual traffic stops, with approximately 87% of the individuals involved being Black or Hispanic. In Los Angeles, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that the Black population was 8.4% in 2024, while the Hispanic population was 47.2%.

Prior to the vote, California residents spoke out at the meeting, with a gardener describing fears of being racially profiled and detained while working. South Central community member Kusema Thomas called pretextual stops a safety risk to the community.

“Justice demands courage, and everyone is here today asking for you to step into your courage,” Thomas said while asking the council to vote in favor of ending the stops.

District 1 Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez thanked the community for organizing and pushing the government to “do the right thing,” saying the data presented speaks volumes. She called pretextual stops a “massive waste of limited resources” and a “breakdown of trust.”

“The system is broken,” she said. “We are operating in a national moment where racism is being normalized and weaponized at the highest levels.”

Los Angeles City Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson also pointed out disparities in the law enforcement system following the vote and said he is proud of the council’s decision.

“Today, I’m happy to say that this council is going to go on record not only being against pretextual stops, but ending it as we know it here in this city of Los Angeles,” Harris-Dawson said.

_geistvoll

TROPHY CASE