DID L.A. CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HERB WESSON & COUNCILMEMBER RICHARD alarCON ADMIT THAT COUNCIL DOES NOT EVEN CONSIDER COMMENT FROM THE PUBLIC, AS THEY ARE REQUIRED BY LAW?:

First of all - Richard, you KNOW I love ya (in SOME ways)! Maybe I'll stop spelling your name, "alarCON,' or "ALARcon," as I have been for six years, just to try and prove it to you. And now, on with the countdown:

Today, I tried to read the passage below (*), during an agenda item on LA Housing Dept's Rent Escrow Program. It is the #1, most discuss item, I have discussed, over the past six years.

But first, It has been announced that the FBI is investigating the department, including over this issue. I wanted to read this passage to council, since they are now saying in the media that I am there for my own self-interest, waste time, get in the way of city business; and I started to read it, even starting off by saying, "This is on topic, and please allow me the flexibility to make the point..."

(*) "Richard Alarcon said, 'These speakers create such sadness in me, that they are in such a condition, that they would waste time in city council, three times a week, to make superfluous arguments about things we don't care about, and will not act on.'" - Councilman Richard Alarcon during council meeting on 06-29-09, after ZD's public comment, at a time I was homeless.

MY POINT, HAD I BEEN ALLOWED TO MAKE IT, before I was interrupted by WESSON for being, "off topic." was, I have been coming here for six year warning you this was happening, please stop, look into it, do something; and now the FBI is investigating it. And property owners are losing buildings and homes, illegally, that are housing people and businesses, when city want to keep people in homes and in business.

After my comment, ALARCON came over to me and asked, "What did you say that I said?" I pulled out my notes with his quote and we read it together. He said, "I'm entitled to my opinion."

I said, "No, you are an elected official. And public comment is an agenda item, and you have to listen. You say in your quote that you have already decided, before you even hear what I have to say."

He then, switches his defense to, "I said it in past tenses." (Indicating that it wasn't about upcoming comments.)

But, if you read the quote, the words, " that they would waste," is future tense. ("they wasted time," is past tense, or even, "would have wasted.") "To make...," is not past tense. "We don't..." is present tense.

ALSO: 04-14-12, after general public comment on non-agenda items, at beginning of the council meeting, during the quorum, WESSON said, "and now let's get to work." As if to say, "that was not city business/city work?"

General Public comment is an agenda item, and the issues discussed are city business (the work of at least listening and considering), under city jurisdiction, or the speaker is called "off topic," and cut off, if non-complaint.

No one was cut off for being off topic. Is City Council not considering public comment city business? Maybe that's why they are in trouble. They are supposed to be taking input from the public.

Doesn't appear as though they are. It's not as though I have been wrong in the past.

###



VIOLATIONS ON 04-13-12 AT LA CITY HALL (ZUMA DOGG)

ENTERING CITY HALL:

We all know the Brown Act (State law) allows you to attend the council meetings, without showing ID.

The cop even asked, "Where are you going?" And I said, "The council meeting," and she said, "can I see your ID?" I said, "No, I don't want to show it to you, to attend the meeting, please give me the pass." She said, "I need to see your ID."

I said, "Get your supervisor." The immediate supervisor, was standing right there, who I know and see, every day, and she already knows about this issue, and especially with ZUMA DOGG at this point, after six f-ing years, and says some things, that did NOT include just handing me my pass...

SO KINGPIN ZUMA DOGG WAS UNLEASHED, and when I am fighting for my basic protected rights, just to walk in the door, when it isn't a dumb game, it WILL include distasteful, yet legal to say, name calling and words.

The supervisor said she would not give me the pass, "unless you (ZD) relax." I said, "I don't want to relax, give me the fucking pass." She said, "You have to relax, before I give you the pass." I said, "I don't want to relax, I want to be tense, give me the pass." She said, "You have to relax."

At this point, I am now at risk of arrest, because any time you are louder than the Ritz-Carlton lobby, the cops can simply claim it's "disturbing the peace/disruption."

I pulled out my mobile device camera, started recording and said, "Can I have a visitor pass?," and she immediately handed me the pass. I said, "How many times did I have to ask you?"

FOLLOW UP:

Eventually, ZD spoke with the ACTUAL supervisors, and they said, "Didn't you say, 'I want to attend the meeting under the Brown Act?'" I said, "I just said I didn't want to show ID to attend the council meeting." The supervisor told me that they are allowed to ask for ID. I said, "But the Brown Act requires that if you ask for ID, you must have a sign posted saying, "ID is not required,' There is no sign posted. And I am not required to be a lawyer and know the laws. It is up to the cops to know and abide by the laws. I just know you don't have to show ID." (At no time during any of this did it even occur to me to say, "I want to attend the meeting under the Brown Act.")

The supervisor continued to defend the fact that the pass was not issued because I didn't use the phrase, "I am here to attend under the Brown Act." I said, "I don't have to utter the secret 'open sesame' word."

I added, "The first question the cops should ask is, 'Where are you going?' If they say, 'council meeting,' and you want to ask for ID, the Brown Act requires you have a sign posted saying it is not required. And if they say they don't have or want to show ID, just hand them the pass. It's not a game show."

The supervisor told me they were doing it the way they were told to, and weren't going to change the policy until they got an official memo from the top. I asked if I should take it up with the General Services Captain, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich, or both. The supervisor said, "both."

###

JULY 22 2009 ITEM 54 ON DECORUM RULES, GRIEG SMITH (MAKER OF MOTION WITH WESSON), "In the court of law you may not wear costumes, you may not dance you may not sing. [A PUBLIC FORUM IS NOT COURT OF LAW. NOT THE SAME STANDARD.] I think we have a responsibkilty to allow public debate to be heard. To allow people who come here with good ideas, like Dr. Williams, and say I want to be heard and I want to present new ideas, to let them do that. But, people who abuse public sensibilities, and people who abuse the rights of the public to have legitimate discussions [AND I GUESS YOU MAKE THOSE DECISIONS, ON THE SPOT, AS THE JUDGE] on items and prolong these meetings for hours [A SPEAKER GETS 2 MINUTES/7 MINUTES PER DAY MAX/4 MILLION PEOPLE IN CITY/BILLIONS OF DOLLARS DISCUSSED/SAFETY ISSUES/SORRY FOR WASTE OF TIME, AS REQUIRED BY LAW], for no other reason than they like to see their face on that television screen is of no avail to the public. [HE IS NOW A MIND READER, ON TOP OF JUDGE.]

And I think that is what we are trying to do today. [You didn't THINK enough, and didn't TRY hard enough.] We just want to bring a decorum to our process. If you want to speak before us, just follow the simple rules, and you will be allowed to speak. If you have great ideas, or tell us we are doing something wrong, you will have that right, guranteed by the Bill of Rights, not the Constitution. [Do YOU judge if they are great, and if not...] And we will abide that rule. We will allow that process to go foward. The Brown Act allows that and protects you. We are not abridging your rights, as long as, you just provide a public comment, that is in a dignified way, and germain to the subject and not for the benefit of getting headlines or your blogs. [DO WE HAVE TO HAVE DIGNITY? WHAT IS THE STANDARD OF MEASURE FOR MINIMUM AMOUNT OF DIGNITY, ALLOWED. There is NO dignity in the fraud, waste and abuse/corruption that is creating public safety and economic crisis. So, it's HARD to expose and forge change when relying on maintaining your dignity. Does council decide whether they are good ideas to be heard, or not. Is he a mind reader to say, "who come here for no other reason than..."] Is Grieg Smith the most ignorant, arrogant, completely misguided jackass in clouncil history?