Community | November 23, 2011 | 3 comments

Occupy L.A. Offered Office Space, Farmland, Housing Assistance, To Go Away

Image
crabbyoldguy
After 52 days of Occupy L.A., City Hall is ready to make a deal. According to Jim Lafferty, an attorney working with the Occupy movement, the city has offered to lease space in the L.A. Mall for $1 a year to the Occupy movement.

The city -- which won't confirm any of this -- apparently offered the old B. Dalton Bookstore, now vacant, to the Occupy L.A. group. Because that space worked so well for B. Dalton...

So: temperature check?

From the looks of last night's G.A., the Occupiers are pretty frosty toward the idea. There were allegations that the "city liaisons" were negotiating behind the backs of the Occupy movement.

There was also resistance to the idea of leaving the City Hall encampment behind. The City Hall site is much more visible than the underground mall. Also, "Occupy B. Dalton!" just doesn't have the same ring to it. On the plus side, however, the Occupiers would have a roof over their heads, and a sustainable home base from which to conduct their operations.

If it were accepted, the city's offer would represent a substantial public subsidy to the Occupy movement. Other merchants in the L.A. Mall rent their space for $1.50 per square foot per month. The B. Dalton space, by that math, would be worth $180,000 a year. (Though it's obviously worth nothing as long as it's empty.)

According to Lafferty, the city has also offered a plot of land for farming, and some housing assistance for the homeless Occupiers.

At this point, though, it seems unlikely that Occupy L.A. will reach a consensus. Too many hard blocks.

Update: Jared Iorio, who was moderating the discussion last night, on the chances that Occupy L.A. will accept the city's offer: "I don't think that's a real possibility based on what I saw last night."

"An offer to appease us as a group of protesters only is a lowball offer that doesn't address the concerns that brought us to City Hall in the first place," Iorio continued. "It's a bit offensive to me personally that City Hall would think we would go away without serious change coming to those who are oppressed in the system."


http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2011/11/occupy_la_offered_office_space.php#Co...
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Politics,   US Politics
  2. tags:
    Los Angeles,  occupy,  Mayor,  Antonio Villaraigosa,  1 more
  3.     
    |

3 comments // Occupy L.A. Offered Office Space, Farmland, Housing Assistance, To Go Away

  • crabbyoldguy
    • 0
      crabbyoldguy  

    • OLA The City/"liaison" Exit Deal & the General Assembly

      Occupy Los Angeles General Discussion

      There was a surprise presentation at the GA yesterday evening. Instead of continuing the discussion on the Press Release regarding transparency, the GA was beaten to the punch as apparently certain unappointed, self-important "liaisons" have been working in secret with the city for over a week to shape an exit plan for OLA from the City Hall encampment. The GA was not told about the "liaisons" involvement in developing the plan nor were we allowed to see it. Instead, someone had the bright idea to use Mario Brito, of all people, to sell it to us sight unseen. One might as well have lobbed a firebomb into the GA. WTF did the "liaisons" expect the reaction to be? People are rightly furious.
      As usual, the L.A. Times knows more about what was going on than the GA did http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-1122-occupy-la-move-20111122,0,1592348.s... (Although I don't know where the "farmland" angle came from, at the GA all that was mentioned was a 10 sq. ft. "garden".) Mario gets two mentions in the Times article (one a quote) and a pic. More for his clipping file as he already dominates almost every press report on Occupy LA. Using the Movement as a springboard for anyone's political ambitions or whatever is despicable. Mario kept bleating that he'd been "elected". No one's been "elected" to anything. He knows, as well as anyone, that a city liaison was tried in the planning stages before the encampment ever happened and was meant to be temporary. It was never, in any case, an invitation to an abuse of power.
      The "liaisons" should have admitted their involvement & posted the offer online & in camp 24 hours before it was even discussed (as per a proposal already passed) instead of trying to railroad us with a sales pitch. But, in actuality they should never have engaged in this behavior at all. The GA is the ONLY decision-making body. Period. No one should have to put up with lies, backroom deals and secondhand information that others have had for more than a week.

      http://occupylosangeles.org/?q=node/2170

    • 6 months ago
  • crabbyoldguy
  • crabbyoldguy
more from Community:
from the community

top videos