By Todd Flora Los Angeles
On March 14, I spoke out at the City Council meeting against the proposed change to police vehicles from our friendly and approachable blue and white to a black-and-white, LAPD-style look. Some readers unaware of this issue should know that I lost. By 2009, all of our cars will be black-and-whites.
For one, I strongly feel that there is cultural psychology at play with the use of black in terms of aggressiveness by law enforcement parties — to no conscious fault of their own — and a subtle shift in the minds of the public that law enforcement is less approachable. It’s no accident sports teams — like the LA Kings — have turned to black uniforms for these reasons.
But I have an even bigger beef with the fact that changing the look of our police vehicles was even the 10th, 100th or 200th priority for city staff. Are youth services too well funded to take up their time? The downtown plan too “back burner” for them? Is the city’s decision on energy production not quite on the same level?
Sadly, in the 15-minute debate that ensued among council members, only Councilman Kevin McKeown — the “conscience” of the Santa Monica City Council in my view — voted against this needless “solution,” which was completely lacking an actual problem. Councilmember Herb Katz, his own campaign rhetoric claiming he’s the “voice of reason on the City Council,” seemed more concerned with whether the word “police” would be in blue or black on the sides of vehicles. But no one actually questions the merits of doing this or the priority this issue should be given.
While some of council member McKeown’s reasons for voting “no” may have differed from my own, I want to express my thanks to him for standing up to the useless debate that did not need to occur, and the “macho politics” that I suspect was clearly behind some other council members’ decisions to go along and get along with this.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on March 20, 2006. Read the original PDF.