ATSAC for Dummies

Well there he goes again... In the spirit of a true zealot, our blogging R-1 Thug reverts to reiterating erroneous statements as if repeating the falsehoods enough times will somehow make them come true. Sorry Mark, but those aren't ruby slippers... no matter how many times you click them together and wish, it won't make it so. And you ain't no Dorothy either.

Nonetheless I guess the only way to clear this up is to get down to as basic a level as I can. Hopefully with the correct information laid out simply enough, anyone can understand it. Even those who are not "...in the know..." to quote Mark. This information is publically available to anyone who wants to bother checking the FACTS before they start putting tripe into print.

It doesn't get more basic than the name - ATSAC (Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control). ATSAC is a proprietary traffic control system owned and operated by the City of Los Angeles. It is arguably one of the most complete and sophisticated systems available. But the operative word here is "proprietary". It belongs to the City of Los Angeles. Not the County. Not Caltrans.

The County of Los Angeles and Caltrans use a different system named ATCS (Adaptive Traffic Control System). It also is a system based on real-time demand. When properly and completely installed, it works just fine. However, there are two major drawbacks. First, the ATSAC and ATCS don't "talk" to each other. One speaks Spanish and the other answers in Portugese. Secondly, even though ATCS could work just fine, it doesn't on the 12 traffic signals between Summerland and PCH. Why not?, you ask. Well, that is because the system has not been properly and completely installed.

That's right. Despite the press release from a County supervisor's office, the system is not working. It seems the only equipment installed were sensor loops under the pavement at the intersections. The light cycles were lengthened to 90 seconds, but the control of the signals IS STILL NOT dynamic. The control cables have a break in them "somewhere" and Caltrans has been running in circles trying to find the gap. So the system is "installed" but not working. You would think they would have tested it before putting out a press release. I suppose that would be too logical.

But it gets even better (or worse, depending on how perverse your sense of humor is). There have been no CCTV cameras installed either. How can you have a demand-based, interactive, real-time system with no cameras? The answer - you can't. No cameras, no working sensors, translates to not really an adaptive traffic control system at all.

Oh, they plan to install the cameras. Only it will be "later". When exactly will "later" be? Perhaps it is my distrust of government, but if it took them this long to act on the suggestions of the Western Avenue Task Force and implement a change as small as lengthening the timing of the signal cycles, PLUS, this work was done ONLY because of special state and federal money being allocated; how much longer do you think it will take Caltrans to complete the job if they have to write the check themselves?

Is everyone confused yet? I know I am, and I've got notes to keep me on track.

Unfortunately this is like a bad dream that won't quit, because it gets more complicated. We have to remember that the entire area borders several different jurisdictions with the County, the City, Caltrans, Lomita, and Rancho Palos Verdes each holding various and sundry ownership and/or control of the assorted roads. The problem is more complex than can be answered by merely installing a dynamic traffic control system along a tiny section of one thoroughfare. What happens when you get 1 block off Western? Or let's say you turn south onto PV Drive headed into 5-points? Or north onto PV Drive and immediately hit a section of Lomita with its traffic signals maintained by the County? Or just continue west toward 25th Street. Without the multiple systems being coordinated, you can drive up and down a 2-mile strip of Western all you want. Just don't try to go anywhere else!

At this juncture, it should be rather obvious that the Ponte Vista benefit is a tangible and credible bonus for San Pedro traffic. I don't think anyone has any illusions about the City of Los Angeles paying to install CCTV cameras on sections of road owned by the County and controlled by Caltrans. Or vice versa. And don't forget about Lomita and Rancho Palos Verdes. Does anyone think any of these municipal entities will pay for the coordinating of systems and the installation of all the necessary equipment? Not in this lifetime...

The irrefutable truth is even without Ponte Vista, traffic in San Pedro traffic is going to increase substantially. The growing Port activities will ensure that all by itself. The only way to give the roads a fighting chance is to tie traffic flow together under one system. The only way that is going to happen is if you have Bisno Development write the check. I would rather have a single, consolidated, coordinated system than a mish-mash of jerry-rigged, patchwork solutions.

So Mr. R-1 Thug blogger, shuck and jive all you want about what you supposedly wrote. The truth is you were just throwing out more unsubstantiated, inflammatory posts merely to give yourself another platform for yet another shrill, meaningless protest.

And perhaps you should refer to a dictionary for the definition of the word "research".

The Privileged and Disgruntled Few

Back in May, a small group of homeowners association members upset over a development project began a recall effort against Jack Weiss the 5th District Councilman. The movement never gained any support outside of neighborhoods of the founding five members. The recall was a complete failure.

What was never publicized was the motivation of the main instigator. It seems this person was to be a major beneficiary of the project because of land rights which would have to be purchased by the developer. However, they were not getting quite the profit they felt they were entitled to. This person appealed to Mr. Weiss for assistance. Mr. Weiss wisely refused to get involved. The landowner was enraged. So what actions do you they took to set things right (in their mind)? They relied on being loud and on demonizing anyone who did not agree with them. In this case Councilman Weiss. His neutrality was evil and disagreement with their particular view was a punishable offense. And the recall was born.

Funny how we have not heard much about the failure of the recall. Nor has anyone described exactly where and how the money raised for the effort was spent. It sort of just flittered away.

Golly, that situation sounds familiar. Money flittering away. Kind of like the money which the Coastal council spent for the benefit of the R Neighborhoods Are 1 Committee without the proper accounting, not to mention in contravention of state law. For that matter, the R-1 gang seem as if they borrowed the entire playbook. Unfounded accusations against Bisno; personal, vindictive attacks against employees; vicious retribution against Ponte Vista supporters.

Only difference is, we do it "the Pedro way" That means we have a president of a neighborhood council justifying the skewed membership in the councils. He thinks it is just fine that "They're older, whiter, wealthier and dominated by homeowners..." And does not support the 912 Commission's recommendation for incorporating demographics. We have Mark Wells writing in his blog that Ponte Vista is going to become "projects" with an obvious slap at the Hispanic and black communities in our town. We have folks trashing years-long friendships over differing opinions about an inescapable reality. Yes, OUR lunatic fringe is much better than any other around the entire city. We don't just start a recall, in OUR community we get down-and-dirty. What is breaking a few laws as long as we keep out the Beverley Hills developer? It's not important that we deceive our friends and neighbors. The important thing is that we continue to artificially limit housing opportunities for anyone who wants to live here, but wasn't born here.

All so some privileged and disgruntled few can keep up their property values, and keep San Pedro an economic and cultural backwater.

Clarification

Before I move forward with another post, I think this would be a good time to clarify the targets of criticism in the last post. The easiest would be starting with those people who ARE NOT targets. This would include all the newly-elected members of the Coastal council. They had no idea what they were walking into. They could not have known of the malfeasance which had occurred before they arrived. And there are some members of the board who have been there this last year who were also surprised by Mr. Griego's declarations.

No, the targets are the board members who are concurrently active, card-carrying members of the Rudderless Steering Committee of the R Neighborhoods Are 1 Committee. I'm not naming names, yet. But if anyone takes a look, they've gone through extraordinary steps over the last year to keep their identities secret. Why would they do that? Yet their actions single them out. These are the people who abused their positions on the Coastal Council, and the Northwest Council, for the gain of the R-1 thugs. These are the people who need to be winnowed out.

Coastal council rebuked by City Attorney

Tom Griego, Deputy City Attorney with the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment, cited the council for its questionable activities involving the R Neighborhoods Are 1 Committee.

On Monday, during the regular monthly stakeholder meeting for the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council, Mr. Griego admonished the council that: recruiting people for a group; using public money to fund supplying banners, signs, and petitions; or supplying labor for lobbying or petition-gathering, was in contravention of state law.

Mr. Griego very clearly defined that "...a Neighborhood Council could only explain the factors they considered and relate their conclusion and no more..." In keeping with this definition, the inclusion of certain articles in the council newsletter over the last year which attempted to recruit members and solicit money is a clear and ongoing violation.

There were many angry and obtuse questions directed at Mr. Griego who did his best to keep things focused and civil. Further debate had Mr. Griego clarifying that no member of a Neighborhood Council could act in, or allude to, their official capacity while participating in any outside group. There could be no reference to the Neighborhood Council and no use of official letterheads, seals or logos.

Were this to be enforced, then quite a few members of the Coastal council, and some members of other councils, could face potential sanctions for speaking at R-1 meetings, gathering petitions and participating in protests, in their official capacities. Nothing prevents anyone from acting as an individual. But that is the problem. Evidently all these actions were taken while loudly trumpeting their official standings and offices.

Taking it to its logical conclusion, this also includes the use of web-hosting. After all, the City pays for the Neighborhood Council web site. Giving the R-1 gang free advertising and free space on the Coastal site, promoting their position and their petition, is using public money for lobbying. Which is forbidden. Sounds like something Laura Chick should be auditing.

But it doesn't end there! Since late March 2006 when you call the contact number for the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council (310-290-0049) you get an answering machine which says, "Hello and thank you for calling the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council and the R Neighborhoods Are 1 Committee..."

No, it's not a simple oversight. The contact page on the R-1 gang's website lists guess who's phone number? Yep, the Coastal Neighborhood Council. Yes! They are that blatant about it! Is it any wonder they have finally been busted?

The questions would not stop and they ran out of time. It was decided that additional questions would be forwarded to Soledad Garcia. Once she had them compiled and organized she would submit them to Mr. Griego who will return for the next monthly stakeholder meeting on December 17, 2007. I encourage everyone to take a little time and attend. It should be a real extravaganza. Watch for their attempt to take these proceedings private into some sort of closed-door "executive" meeting in order to avoid public scrutiny.

It is rather ironic that at the beginning of the meeting, these very same board members were griping about having to take the Ethics/Conflict of Interest training. Sounds like too little, too late to me. For all the finger-pointing they've done, and given the egregious nature and numerous ways they attempted to circumvent the rules, these people could give any slimy professional politician in Sacramento or Washington a run for their money.

ATSAC still pending in City of Los Angeles

In yet another stunning example of brilliantly inept "reporting of facts", it has been incorrectly reported that the ATSAC (Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control) system had been completed.

The truth is that there are still 57 intersections to be completed in San Pedro by LADOT. Expected completion is February 29, 2009. The press release cited in that other blog deals with LA County controlled intersections. There are NO County controlled intersections along Western Avenue. Those intersections are controlled by Caltrans and still part of the Ponte Vista project.

Anyone with half a brain could have discovered this public information. However, rather than talk about the facts, Mark Wells again uses his blog as a springboard to rail against Ponte Vista. He can bleat all he wants. Just use the facts please.

The facts are that the deal to fund $1 million for ATSAC is still pending Ponte Vista project approval. The City still needs the money. In fact more so since their budget crunch is looming and they are facing reduced tax revenue. Just because a street is listed in a press release, doesn't make it fact. The entire tirade in that other blog is just a lot of hot air. But, of course, he won't issue a retraction. That's okay. It is obvious where the credibility sits.

I am not a crook!

When I read "I am not a thug.", I can't help but think of these famous words. Does anyone else remember?

It would be possible to write for many pages dissecting all the different examples which illustrate that, in fact, the author of these words is the quintessential example of the person the letter-to-the-editor is talking about. But I won't. That is his style (the thug's). Not mine. The truths of the letter are obvious and innumerable. Bravo to the letter-writer for being able to elucidate the matter.

And how does the "T" respond? In a manner in which only a thug could. With implied curses and convenient "typos". All accompanied by a disingenuous "apology". Too late, though. His true colors have already been shown.

A main technique used by the "T" in fomenting his consequences upon anyone who dares to form a dissenting opinion is to parse their statements and deconstruct them. He then strings together the definitions of single words to demonstrate how "illogical" the position is. He forgets that communication is not merely about accuracy of individual words. "Context" takes into consideration the meter and cadence of a statement. It takes fine nuances, color and timbre into account. Using a pure definition-driven approach, any piece of great literature could be reduced to gibberish. Analyzing a work by Herman Melville for plot, sub-plot and leit motif is useless when it is all reduced to strung-together definitions. Therefore anything written by any lessor author would stand no chance of being understood. Which is, of course, his intention. Since he cannot debate the facts, he is content to obfuscate the issues.

Of course while criticizing everyone else, his own grammar, spelling, syntax, etc. are so full of errors as to be equivalent to that of a high school student. (Apologies to the good students out there.)

There is no need for parsing and deconstruction when the "T" can merely state fallacies, untruths and misquoted details as if they were fact. It is his blog so no one can argue with him. No dissenting opinions are posted (that is, without being subjected to deconstruction).

All he does his continually bleat the same old protests. And the commenters on his blog continue to fill the space with venom. I used to see your rage-filled faces in Vietnam protest rallies. Protesting so hard against everything, you had no clue about the basic facts over which you were protesting. I guess some things never change.

He doesn't even get it when the publisher of a local paper calls it the "Mark Wells faction". He is so full of himself he automatically assumes it means a faction he founded or controls. So off he goes and we are treated to yet another tear about a hypothetical situation. Seems he enjoys talking about hypothetical situations. Probably because reality does not lend itself to his perception of how things should be. He cannot conceive the concept that it is merely a shorthand label. He, his unswerving allegiance to an illogical goal, his rabid chanting of slogans and his vociferous support for a completely untenable position, make him the perfect label. On this blog he has been referred to as the "lunatic fringe". This is what James Allen was saying. But the "T" does not get it. Of course not. That is part of the definition of being the lunatic fringe. So listen up. It was not a compliment.

Nonetheless, after reading the unending, unadulterated garbage spewing forth in his blog, another quote comes to mind. It was recently made by King Juan Carlos of Spain to Hugo Chavez of Venezuela:

"Por que no te callas?" - or "Why don't you shut up?"