Speech to the City Council

Honorable Mayor, Lady & Gentlemen of the City Council, Mr. City Manager:

I am Robert Parry, co-founder, with my wife, Maribel, of the North Primrose Residents Alliance, and a resident of Primrose Avenue.

When Last I spoke here, on January 15, I had to take an unfortunate approach to things in order to make it unambiguously clear that we took our problem seriously and, based on the Staff’s public comment, that we felt you folks did not and had no intention of resolving our concerns. This was not “Nordstrom’s Service. [Note: Mayor Hammond made a reference to Nordstom’s service earlier in the meeting. –RCJP]

We are pleased to say, since then, the City’s response has been largely positive.

That initial presentation was met by a response that made clear we were heard. Some 35 of our neighbors came out on a cold and windy school night to hold a meeting with you, Mr. Hammond and Ochoa, as well as the City Engineer and CPT Hunt from the Police Department.  We felt it to be an overwhelmingly positive result.

Tonight I want to give a brief progress report, based on the product of that meeting.  Since that meeting, our organization has continued to grow, and now includes homes on Oaks, Monroe and Hillcrest.  We have made every effort to broadly disseminate information and the text of our notes we exchange with City staff, almost all of which is posted on our blog for all to read. (Google North Primrose to find it). The blog has been an effective tool for us, and the response to concerns we posted tell us CPT Hunt reads it. We hope the rest of you do too. As such, I hope nothing I am about to say comes a surprise.

The first agreed to response from the City was increased, directed enforcement:  The very next morning, Monrovia PD was out in significant numbers.  While the numbers themselves were impressive, more impressive was that this came at a time of heightened violence in the City.  We appreciated it, but knew it could not last, and it has pulsed higher and lower since.  Just his morning the radar trailer made a re-appearance and our neighbors reported seeing a patrol officer on the street.

This effort got its own form of response when someone – we suspect a citation recipient – stole 47 of our yellow “slow down signs.” CPT Hunt graciously took a theft report on that matter as well.

Given the major gang problem which really rose to prominence following our meeting, we could not have asked for more.

The second agreed response was that the City Engineer would place a variety of appropriate signage on the street.  One measure that we did not discuss was street painting.  This is another very effective passive measure, and Mr. Fike took laudable initiative in making that happen.  Since then, the signage plan has hit something of a snag.  At least one neighbor whom we are aware of feels that signage is not needed and, we assume feels signs are something of an eyesore. We remain confident that a mutually agreeable course of action can be developed. 

The third agreed to response was that the City Engineer would conduct a traffic survey and develop a list of potential solutions, until then, ALL potential solutions remained on the table.  On this point we seem to have had something of a break down.  First off, some miscreants vandalized the survey equipment, ripping the recording lines out of the street.  We frequently witnessed the most egregious speeders whipping around the lines.  However, in early February we all came home from work to find signs advising of proposed rumble strip locations.  This seemed like an interesting solution with potential, but one that would require full exploration.  However, we were shocked when we received a letter from Mr. Fike with the following statement…

“The City met with several residents at the home of Dave Pinto on January 22 to discuss traffic issues. At that meeting, the City agreed to the following:  #5 on that list is “Rumble Strips crossing the street will be installed at the following addresses: 129, 173, 241, 341.”

I don’t know about you, Mr. Hammond, but we were in the same room and I only vaguely recall rumble strips being mentioned at all, and you are the one who mentioned it.  There was no agreement to install them, and no addresses were discussed.  The consensus of our members is that stop signs are the preferred method, with speed humps an alternative, but we remain open to the survey results. However, to say there was any kind of agreement is simply not consistent with the facts.  In fact, one of our members in the 200 block called this a case of “selective amnesia.”

The final point of the meeting was that we would meet again in 30 days, and that Mr. Ochoa and I would coordinate dates, with the place agreed to as the Pinto’s home. On this, the process has broken down entirely. After I made two attempts to find dates that worked for the city staff, we received a letter from Mr. Fike informing us that there was to be another meeting on March 5 here at City Hall.  Upon additional inquiry, I was informed by Mr. Ochoa that the March 5 meeting was to be our “30-day meeting.”

Now, we can understand not using the Pinto’s home, especially if there is some sort of dissent on the issue.  Any meeting needs to be in a forum where all voices can be heard.  However, in dictating to us what the meeting date would be, and ignoring our efforts to coordinate a mutually acceptable date, the City Staff has done exactly the opposite.

You see, the night of March 5 is also the Mayflower Elementary School Open House.  The parents of the children who are our primary concern in this effort are exactly the ones who cannot attend. Needless to say, it is not a date we would have proposed or accepted.

But it is what the City informs us the meeting date will be.

That is not the spirit in which our January 22 meeting was conducted, but it is the attitude which caused my negative vibes on January 15. 

We hope there will be no more regression, and that a new, mutually acceptable date can be found, and that Mr. Ochoa will work with us to open the lines of communication once again.

Primrose Avenue is not, nor should it be, the most important street in the City.  But, when we have a grievance it should be heard, and when a promise is made to our residents, it should be kept.

We thank you, Mr. Hammond, Mr. Ochoa, Mr. Fike & CPT Hunt for the progress to date.  The enforcement and street painting measures have made a modest difference, but they are not sustainable, and a more permanent solution needs to be found.

We look forward to doing so – together – in a mutually acceptable fashion.

Thank you for your time.

Comments

[Lisa Hickey, 135 Oaks Avenue]

Feeling a bit better this morning, so I'm trying to catch up. Good job at that meeting and thank you for having concern for us Mayflower parents regarding that March 5th date.