Sign of the Times

Process and entitlement obscure original intent

Recently, the public welcome sign project for the foot of Sixth Street has caused quite a stir. Renderings of the sign were unveiled by the San Pedro Property Owners Alliance, commonly referred to as the PBID on social media and a Feb. 21 public meeting. It’s actually a project that has been in the works for a long time and has its origins in the vision for the original Arts, Culture and Entertainment district back in 2007. However, the PBID has taken up the mission, like they did with the sidewalk dining idea and proceeded. Kudos for carrying on.

The “committee” that has been working on this project in relative silence consists of three board members (two unnamed) and Alan Johnson (part of the Jericho Development group and West Harbor fame); Linda Alexander, a Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council member and Linda Grimes, the executive director of the San Pedro Waterfront Arts District nonprofit. None of these are artists or designers in their own right, yet they have proceeded to commission and conjure up three designs that are almost exactly the same, except for minor variation in font or border styling. And then they proceed to put them out for the public to choose from: A, B or C. As one neighborhood council member commented, why isn’t there a “none of the above” choice?

The design appears in the renderings to be a cantilevered piece that stretches over Sixth Street, anchored to the north side of the street with a lamp post that lights up at night, welcoming people from Harbor Boulevard into the downtown district (see page 3 of this issue). It rises up high enough to let large vehicles pass and probably meets all of the LADOT’s standards. Sounds pretty good, except that it was originally going to be an arch, but the LADWP has a transformer buried in the ground where the other side would be planted next to the former Pepper Tree Plaza.

Could it be moved up the street or over to Seventh Street? Yes, but that’s not the discussion — it’s either A, B or C at this point as though the place and choices are a fait accompli. It’s not back to the drawing board or anything else, and that’s frustrating for a public sign that is supposed to signify the core of our city. Aside from looking like a very, very large street sign hanging on a street lamp, I have several problems with the end result.

First, is the process by which the decision was made. There was no serious outreach to the talent of the local creative arts community during the months-long planning process. Second there was never any consideration for an “open call” for creative ideas outside of the PBID or a request for proposals.

Third is the relative lack of public input. Even though all PBID meetings are Brown Acted open meetings, few people actually attend. No outreach efforts were made over the months of discussion to bring a larger circle of professionals to the table.

And lastly, the PBID seems to act as the shadow government of downtown San Pedro or San Pedro’s fourth neighborhood council except with a much larger annual budget of some $1.3 million but with far less inclusivity as it’s made up solely of property owners or their designated representatives. Councilman Tim McOsker is their past president.

At the recent Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council, on which I sit as vice president, Alan Johnson presented and defended the design options, stating that the $250,000 price was paid for by PBID dollars.

“These dollars that are going to go toward this sign are 100% [P]BID stakeholders’ dollars,” Johnson said. “There’s no public money that goes into this.”

This is only half true. Approximately 28% or more of the PBID budget comes from public entities like the Port of LA, City of LA and County of LA. And as such, their budget is annually scrutinized by the city controller and clerk’s offices. So in fact, some 30% is public money. Johnson went on to say that the business owners decided they wanted to spend that $250,000 on this, which is the project’s approximate budget.

Shannon Ross, from Coastal San Pedro NC rightly pointed out that even though the PBID would be paying for it, the sign would still be on public property, and argued that it was “a community sign.”

And to the point that Johnson said, “this is not art but a street sign” defense, this project will have to suffer a review by none other than the LA Department of Cultural Affairs — that’s the city’s arts organization. So even though this is “just a sign” it will be scrutinized as public art.

This process is the same mistake that the former Councilman Joe Buscaino made with his designation of a section of downtown San Pedro as “Little Italy” and then absconding with Pepper Tree Plaza to make it a “piazza — lack of public engagement, semi-private meetings and ignoring the input of the neighborhood councils (or other stakeholders) and then assuming a sense of entitlement because of the position he held. These are failures of leadership and the arrogance of power. Buscaino and the PBID see nothing wrong with running things like it’s their little fiefdom — democratic process be damned. It’s just too messy for them. Well, then why come to the neighborhood councils for letters of endorsement at all? Is it just a box to check off or an afterthought?

The problem and the solution are embedded in this same situation. The original idea of an entrance way to the arts district is one I personally embraced. I even endorsed the idea when I was president of the ACE district. However, the process of creating public art, even functional art, is fraught with many hurdles and Johnson and PBID have just tripped over the first of many without realizing that the public isn’t going to stand for rubber stamping mediocrity when there’s the pride and prestige of the town at stake.

Transparency disclaimer: the current arts district director Grimes is a relative, Alexander is a member of the Central SPNC that I am an officer on, and I was founding president of the original ACE district — and it’s difficult to see people take good ideas and mangle them with a flawed process. It’s kind of like watching an amateur cook burn an exquisite steak.

Second Thoughts

Courage in leadership is tested in times of crisis, conflict and struggle. It separates those who only desire position from those who are decisive and have the instinct to lead. It often separates friends and makes enemies of others but this kind of courage can only be taught by example.