Can busi­ness own­ers kick ven­dors to curb?

Plan would let shops veto sell­ers on their block

Los Angeles Times - - FRONT PAGE - By Emily Alpert Reyes

When push­cart ven­dors try to set up shop in front of his East Hol­ly­wood gas sta­tion, Jac­ques Mas­sachi tells them to leave.

“I don’t al­low them. I just don’t al­low them,” Mas­sachi said.

The side­walk sell­ers can end up ob­struct­ing traf­fic in and out of the gas sta­tion, he com­plained. And if they hawk hot dogs, ice cream or any­thing else sold at his Ampm store, he sees them as ri­vals.

If some­one can walk up and buy a hot dog out front, Mas­sachi said, “why would he buy a hot dog from me?”

Los An­ge­les is plan­ning to le­gal­ize and reg­u­late side­walk vend­ing, hand­ing out city per­mits to the push­carts and stands that are an ev­ery­day sight in the city.

De­spite a long­stand­ing ban, about 50,000 ven­dors ply their trade on its side­walks, sell­ing ice cream, tamales and other food and goods, ac­cord­ing to city of­fi­cials.

But bricks-and-mor­tar shops, which have com­plained about blocked walk­ways, left­over trash and what they see as un­fair competition from un­reg­u­lated side­walk ven­dors, could stand in their way. Un­der a pro­posal be­ing vet­ted at City Hall, prop­erty own­ers like Mas­sachi could pro­hibit vend­ing on the ad­ja­cent side­walks.

Busi­ness groups have lob­bied for prop­erty own­ers to be able to de­cide whether ven­dors can op­er­ate out­side their doors.

They point to Port­land, Ore., and San Fran­cisco, which give neigh­bor­ing busi­nesses a say over when ven-

dors can set up shop. Some law­mak­ers have backed the idea as a way to curb con­flicts with bricks-and-mor­tar shops.

“It’s im­por­tant to have a kum­baya re­la­tion­ship be­tween the ven­dors and the busi­ness,” Los An­ge­les City Coun­cil­man Joe Bus­caino said. “It needs to be mu­tual and ben­e­fi­cial.”

Side­walk ven­dors and their ad­vo­cates counter that it is un­fair to give busi­nesses the power to block them. The L.A. Street Ven­dor Cam­paign called it “an im­proper reg­u­la­tory re­straint” that could leave ven­dors more vul­ner­a­ble to ex­tor­tion.

Among the wor­ried ven­dors is Ale­jan­dra Ro­driguez, who said that in the past, Piñata Dis­trict shops have de­manded that she pay as much as $800 a month to do busi­ness on the side­walk.

“As soon as they saw that I was mak­ing money, they started to charge me,” said Ro­driguez, who said she had stopped sell­ing toys in the area months ago.

On a Fri­day morn­ing the Fash­ion Dis­trict was abuzz with push­carts and stands sell­ing sliced mango and wa­ter­melon dusted with chile, squeak­ing toys, fid­get spin­ners, makeup pal­ettes and other trin­kets out­side store­fronts dis­play­ing quinceañera gowns, snug jeans and glit­ter­ing high heels.

Some ven­dors said that busi­nesses charged them for a bit of space — a wall or the perime­ter of a shop — but not to use the side­walk it­self.

“But if the city passes this law, they will have the power,” said Aure­liano San­ti­ago, who sells frozen treats in the sum­mer, tacos when the weather turns cold. “That is our fear.”

Along Maple Av­enue, San­ti­ago pointed out many stores that had sta­tioned racks of their cloth­ing or other mer­chan­dise on the side­walk — a tac­tic used to block ven­dors from set­ting up, he said.

Be­hind a cart loaded with mango slices, Wendy Pu­luc said she wor­ried that many lo­cal busi­nesses would sim­ply re­ject vend­ing.

“We won’t be able to sell if they say no,” Pu­luc said. “Where are we go­ing to go?”

The ques­tion of where side­walk vend­ing should be al­lowed has been the most de­bated and di­vi­sive part of the elab­o­rate rules, more than four years af­ter City Coun­cil­men Jose Huizar and Cur­ren Price first pro­posed that Los An­ge­les le­gal­ize and reg­u­late the in­dus­try.

It has pit­ted busi­ness groups against a coali­tion of ven­dor ad­vo­cates — in­clud­ing non­prof­its, im­mi­grant rights groups and at­tor­neys rep­re­sent­ing side­walk sell­ers.

Un­der the pro­posed reg­u­la­tions, the city would ban ven­dors near pop­u­lar at­trac­tions such as Dodger Sta­dium, Sta­ples Cen­ter and the Hol­ly­wood Walk of Fame, cap the num­ber of push­carts on each block and draw up rules that could limit vend­ing in ad­di­tional ar­eas based on safety con­cerns.

At a re­cent hear­ing, one Leimert Park ven­dor ac­cused law­mak­ers of “redlin­ing.”

Giv­ing busi­ness own­ers the power to veto vend­ing could also be legally sen­si­tive: In a re­port, Chief Leg­isla­tive An­a­lyst Sharon Tso rec­om­mended law­mak­ers con­sult the city at­tor­ney be­fore de­cid­ing whether to let busi­nesses ap­prove or re­ject side­walk sales.

Side­walks are the prop­erty of the ad­ja­cent prop­erty owner, but the city has an “easement” that gives it the le­gal right to use them, ac­cord­ing to Rob Wilcox, a spokesman for City Atty. Mike Feuer.

In an in­ter­view, Coun­cil­man Bob Blu­men­field said that if prop­erty own­ers can turn down vend­ing on their side­walks, that could help the city de­fend it­self against law­suits.

The city has some rights over the side­walks, Blu­men­field said, but “it is their prop­erty … it’s a lit­tle murky how far we can push our rights.”

Wilcox de­clined to dis­cuss the le­gal im­pli­ca­tions of al­low­ing prop­erty own­ers to re­ject vend­ing, say­ing that ad­vice from city at­tor­neys was con­fi­den­tial.

Bricks-and-mor­tar busi­nesses say they have al­ready suf­fered from un­reg­u­lated vend­ing and are un­easy about how strictly the city will en­force its newly pro­posed rules.

Ear­lier this year, the city elim­i­nated crim­i­nal charges for vend­ing un­der the mu­nic­i­pal code, lim­it­ing the pos­si­ble penal­ties to ad­min­is­tra­tive fines, in an at­tempt to pro­tect im­mi­grant ven­dors from de­por­ta­tion.

In East Hol­ly­wood, block af­ter block of Ver­mont Av­enue turns into a walk­a­ble rummage sale on week­ends, when a swap meet is held nearby at Los An­ge­les City Col­lege.

Blan­kets, tarps and ta­bles line the side­walks loaded with an eclec­tic ar­ray of mis­cel­lanea: a cook­ing pot, a skate­board, leather boots, a car­ton of gleam­ing Christ­mas or­na­ments, dusty bot­tles of cologne. The blue fence ring­ing an auto re­pair shop be­comes a makeshift thrift store, bear­ing shirts on hang­ers. Faded pairs of pants lie over bushes out­side a mini mall.

Jeff Zar­rin­nam, pres­i­dent and chief ex­ec­u­tive of the Hol­ly­wood Ho­tel down the street, com­plained that some ven­dors have dumped grease or strewn the side­walks with trash.

Even if the city en­forces the new reg­u­la­tions — which would re­quire ven­dors to keep side­walks clean, leave a min­i­mum amount of room for peo­ple to pass, and not block other busi­nesses — Zar­rin­nam ar­gued that side­walk sell­ers could hurt his ho­tel.

“If I have guest rooms that face the side­walk, and some­one is cook­ing and the smoke and smell goes into their room, is the guest go­ing to be happy?” Zar­rin­nam asked.

Mas­sachi, the gas sta­tion owner, peered down the side­walk on a balmy af­ter­noon. “It’s a free coun­try. Peo­ple make money how they can,” he said. “But it has to be in a proper place.”

‘If the city passes this law, [the busi­nesses] will have the power. That is our fear.’ — Aure­liano San­ti­ago, street ven­dor in the Fash­ion Dis­trict

Wally Skalij Los An­ge­les Times

A VEN­DOR pushes a cart along Maple Av­enue in the Fash­ion Dis­trict in L.A., where busi­ness groups are ask­ing that prop­erty own­ers be able to de­cide whether street ven­dors can op­er­ate out­side their doors.

Wally Skalij Los An­ge­les Times

ALONG MAPLE Av­enue, some stores will place their wares on the side­walks to block street ven­dors from set­ting up, one seller says.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.