Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
Read the original blog post
(151 votes) 9:16 am
June 20, 2007
Offline
From Sandra B. via email:
Last night the Venice neighborhood council voted against enforcement of city ordinances which ban occupying or blocking public property. This morning like every morning in Venice I came across a person occupying and blocking city property.
Washington and Speedway
Is a neighborhood council that votes against enforcement of existing laws breaking the law themselves? Is it possible to sue the council for negligence on behalf of our children and our community? By voting against law enforcement has the council not officially supported behavior like seen in this picture?
I do not hate the homeless but enough is enough.
Linda Lucks and the social service mafia at the Venice neighborhood council officially declared war against the housed families of Venice last night. To officially vote that our children should be subjected to daily run-ins like I was today with this naked woman is a disgrace to what a neighborhood council should stand for. Shame on all of them.
I am mad as hell and am not going to take this anymore.
- Sandra B
9:29 am
June 3, 2010
Offline
So, kegger and campfire on the beach this weekend?
9:34 am
May 15, 2010
Offline
HAWT!!!!
I'm going to try and get her number right now… Where did she get Yo! Venice Pasties?!!
P.s. I'm thirsty, baby! Can you pass me some of that V-water.
11:02 am
September 2, 2010
Offline
I am so confused by that vote. So our elected VNC is knowingly and purposely obstructing justice? How can the City of LA go along with this? LAPD doesn't HAVE to listen to the VNC, right? It seems supremely arrogant to think you are above the law. Seems ripe for a class action suit.
11:06 am
February 12, 2010
Offline
Does ANYONE really give a crap what the VNC says?
Worthless, ineffective and just a waste of time.
I guess the cops will just pack up and leave Venice now, eh?
Pathetic.
11:13 am
November 10, 2011
Offline
I was there last night. There was a large vocal homeless advocate group there and only three people showed up to support Mark. The community has to take some of the blame for the VNC vote. You people need to show up to the VNC meeting and speak. I understand that the VNC meeting is torture to sit through. However, we need the community involvement.
FYI some of the VNC members were very articulate in their support of Mark's proposal and I appreciate them volunteering. I know that they have a tedious thankless job.
11:18 am
June 16, 2009
Offline
As said previously, turnout is meaningless because they've already had the vote before you show up.
If NO ONE showed up for Mark or any of the other farces, it probably would be better.
11:28 am
June 20, 2007
Offline
Heard from another reader that this woman was lunging at and being aggressive to passerby on Speedway so 911 was called. While she did put her top on after the picture was taken, she walked around "sans pants" for awhile on Washington before LAPD picked her up near Thoma's Burger.
11:30 am
December 8, 2008
Offline
VNC is so useless! What a waste of time and energy!
11:53 am
February 23, 2010
Online
And $.
11:55 am
January 20, 2012
Offline
The VNC does not set policy and they certainly don't dictate what goes on in the city of Los Angeles. The same laws that are enforsed in Brentwood are the same in Venice Beach, no matter what the VNC votes. They are a toothless tiger that really is a waste of funds for the city and should be disbanded. If a lawsuit is to be filed, it should be directed to where it can do some good for the community.
12:12 pm
February 24, 2010
Online
First off, I'm not too sure what the vote was, something like 14 against, 4 for and 2 abstentions. If anyone can weigh in with a list of how each Board member voted, please do so.
As to this question from Not Native: I am so confused by that vote. So our elected VNC is knowingly and purposely obstructing justice? How can the City of LA go along with this? LAPD doesn't HAVE to listen to the VNC, right? It seems supremely arrogant to think you are above the law. Seems ripe for a class action suit.
I think it is fair to say that by opposing the Motion, the majority of the Board indeed declared that they do not support the enforcement of City laws against occupying sidewalks, parkways, parks and parking lots.
No, the LAPD doesn't have to listen to VNC; the only positive aspect of the evening was that Captain Brian Johnson stated that the LAPD is sworn to uphold all city, state and federal laws and would continue to do so.
The negative aspect of the vote is that the LAPD has a very limited number of officers. If an official city neighborhood council says they oppose enforcement of certain laws, the LAPD may just respond by giving less attention to violations of those laws.
As one poster put it, the VNC once again has sided with the homeless over the residents.
I was disappointed in the turnout for our side, but one of the Board members said he got about 100 emails in support of the Motion, which is a good sign of community support. However, I doubt a large contingent of residents supporting the Motion would have changed the vote. Several of the Board members, e.g., Lucks, Seward, Willis, Chambers and Guzman, were strongly opposed and several actually felt the Motion should not even have been placed on the agenda.
I was impressed by Ira Koslow, who worked with me on a slightly modified substitute Motion and braved the approbation of both some of his colleagues on the Board and those in the audience opposed to the Motion. Daffodil Tyminski, Mariana Aguilar and Scott Kramarich all argued for passage (as did Ira). I was most disappointed by my friend Joe Murphy, who opposed the VNC even considering the Motion, saying that the community did not have a role in advising the LAPD about enforcement priorities.
