Resident calls for Job Center revote

Alicia Robinson

The decision to close the Job Center could be revisited yet again by

the City Council.

Westside resident Mike Berry, a frequent speaker at council

meetings, filed a request with the city Tuesday that the council

rehear its April 6 decision to keep the center open through

September.

The city-run Job Center was opened in 1988 as a place for day

laborers to meet employers so they wouldn’t loiter in city parks and

on streets looking for work. Since then, it’s been a flashpoint in

debates over the city budget, illegal immigration and the future of

the city’s largely industrial Westside.

The council on March 15 voted, 3-2, to close the Job Center at the

end of June. After Councilwoman Katrina Foley -- who cast one of the

dissenting votes -- requested a rehearing of the issue, the council

on April 6 voted to keep the center open for three more months and

set up a task force to look at options for funding, other locations

and an operator other than the city.

Berry’s request asks for a rehearing of the most recent decision

for nine reasons, including that a lack of adequate public notice

that “the agenda item ‘request for rehearing’ would, in fact, become

the rehearing.” The filing also claims the motion the council

approved on April 6 was unclear, and the discussion at that meeting

violated several city ordinances.

“It’s my feeling that many of the council members, if they took a

closer look at that motion, would never have voted the way they did,”

Berry said.

When reached Wednesday, Mayor Allan Mansoor declined to draw any

conclusions about the rehearing request because he hadn’t yet read

it, but he said he was satisfied with the council’s April 6 vote to

keep the Job Center open through September.

“I was happy with the motion I made -- that’s why I voted for my

motion,” Mansoor said.

Even though the council never voted on Foley’s request for

rehearing, she said the discussion and action at the last meeting

assuaged most of the concerns that prompted her request.

“One of the main concerns was that the center was closed without

any community input and without a plan for the consequences of

closing the center,” Foley said. “I just thought it was a positive

outcome that really addressed a lot of the concerns from people on

both sides of the issue, so I’m not sure what the purpose of

requesting a rehearing is.”

It’s likely to be on the council’s May 3 agenda, City Manager

Allan Roeder said. If the council agrees to a rehearing, no one need

fear it will set off an endless chain of more rehearing requests, he

said.

If the April 6 decision had been to set a rehearing at a future

meeting, whatever decision came from that meeting would have been

final and unappealable.

“The council never approved [Foley’s] request for rehearing but

instead modified its decision from March 15,” Roeder said. “In

essence you had a new decision, if you will, that Mike Berry is

requesting a rehearing of.”

* ALICIA ROBINSON covers government and politics. She may be

reached at (714) 966-4626 or by e-mail at alicia.robinson

@latimes.com.