Vote to increase contracts between Metro and LBPD by $6.9 million delayed

The mother of Cesar Rodriguez, Rosa Moreno, speaks at a protest at Wardlow Station in Long Beach in August 2020, while his sister gazes at a passing Metro train. Rodriguez was fatally hit by a train during an altercation with LBPD officer Martin Ron after being removed from the train for not having a ticket. (Kristen Farrah Naeem | Signal Tribune)

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority on Thursday, Feb. 25 delayed a controversial vote to increase law enforcement contracts with the Los Angeles Police Department, Long Beach Police Department and L.A. County Sheriff’s Department, totaling about $111 million.

The board, which Mayor Eric Garcetti chairs, delayed the vote to authorize contract increases of:

  • $6.9 million for law enforcement services from the Long Beach Police Department, increasing the contract from about $30 million to about $36.9 million
  • $60.1 million for law enforcement services from the Los Angeles Police Department, increasing the contract from about $369.3 million to about $429.4 million
  • $44.1 million for law enforcement services from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, increasing the contract from about $246.2 million to about $290.4 million.

“As we begin that reimagining of public safety, not just in Metro but throughout our county, is to take the right time not to pander but to ponder, and to do this right. To not feel jammed into just solving a budgetary problem — we certainly owe what we owe if we have paid for services — but moving forward as we bring that community process and those parties together to look at what will serve our transit riders, serve our system to operate and serve a way to take our most vulnerable and direct them towards services.”

According to the board report, the contract increase was requested “to cover significant costs incurred to augment outreach services to the unhoused population, address crime trends, sexual harassment enhanced deployments to cover special events, employee and customer complaints and other unforeseen circumstances.”

The proposed increase was met with opposition from activists who support a reimagining of public safety away from armed officers. The Labor/Community Strategy Center and the Bus Riders Union have been urging the public to call in to meetings and oppose the increased funding to law enforcement.

They want the Metro board to:

  • Reject any increase to policing on MTA buses and trains
  • Move towards a free transit system
  • Stop ticketing people for evading fares
  • Demilitarize and de-escalate police presence and consider unarmed civilians on trains and buses
  • Cut the police budget in half

Mayor Eric Garcetti requested that the vote to increase law enforcement contracts be delayed until March.

“I think for a lot of us, (the request) came as a surprise. Some of the work that has been done and some of the spending quite frankly that has occurred is above and beyond what the contract initially called for,” Garcetti said during Thursday’s board meeting. “We’ve also heard loud and clear from communities that there are significant concerns and unanswererd questions over this item.”

Regarding the spending that was already done above what the contract allowed, Garcetti said the board should have monitored it more closely and that the law enforcement agencies should have notified the board before additional services were approved internally.

The vote was rescheduled for March, and in the meantime, Garcetti said the board would seek to have their questions about the contracts and spending answered. He specifically said he wants to explore:

  • What will happen if the board does not approve the contract amendment and will law enforcement be removed from the transit system
  • How will that impact service and riders
  • What are the alternatives to approving the amendment as it’s written now, including scenarios, costs and time lines
  • What is the future model for transit security.

Garcetti also said he wants the board to start planning and preparing for potential alternatives: “If we’re going to replace officers with ambassadors, for example, what would that cost, when would we need to start hiring and training, what would it mean to activity and service, because if we wait 24 months and then we have to start hiring people, it could be three or four years before we deliver different models,” Garcetti said.

Total
0
Shares