Using private email for official government business may finally be ended in California

update: This problem is still widespread in 2015 in many cities. This has to stop. It may take Hillary Clinton down. This story is flabbergasting.

Interestingly its only taken 4 years for this issue to finally come to a head after we first raised the issue in 2011. The problem is simply that of public officials elected and otherwise using private non government email addresses for official government business and communications (with residents..or worse) as a way to "coyly" avoid Public Records requests laws. Its an old Karl Rove trick from 2007 (which may have been where local politicos learned it). But the law looks like it may finally be catching up with the politicos who like to play fast and loose on this. This article (by Chriss Street no less) notes that the California Supremes are going to be taking up the issue and given California's penchant for "Sunshine", city and local government politicos hiding their emails in private email accounts better start cleaning up their email accounts now (time to purge!). You will note that unlike most small cities, the Lakewood city council members do NOT have their own email addresses @lakewoodcity.org. Hmmm how interesting. Even if they did have emails @lakewoodcity.org they are not published anywhere to be found.

Our simple solution to the problem posed by the League of California Cities faux dilemma (in its opposition letter to the California Supremes) is not to allow elected officials and employees of government entities use non government email accounts to send and receive email messages (and attachments!) that pertain to government or taxpayer related business or issues. If the official errors on the side of inclusion and there is something personal on the government e mail server we let the government public records code sort that out. Its more than capable of doing that. We agree its too hard to police and store and get access to private email. That's one of the reasons the government officials want to use it and why we don't want them to. But that is no excuse to just allow officials to keep bypassing the open government problem Karl Rove style. If a government official receives a government related email on his private email account he/she just forwards that to his/her government email account and then responds (if necessary) with the government account. This can also be set up to take place automatically. All smartphones allow multiple domain emails on one phone. If you cant handle that then you have no business using email. Gmail allows you on the fly to select which domain and which email you want to reply from. This is simple people. Pay attention old fogies on the Calif Supreme court! Time for the email shuffle to end and evading public records requests.  This is not a technological problem. Its just a "problem" that local government officials don't want fixed.


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

water and trash service rate increase hearing at Lakewood City Council Chambers on June 24, 2014 at 7:30 pm

Just so that everyone is aware there is a water and trash service rate increase hearing at Lakewood City Council Chambers on June 24, 2014 at 7:30 pm. You must object to the rate increase before that time in writing (presumably to the Lakewood city clerk at dhayward@lakewoodcity.org not to our site) which will be much more effective that rambling on at the meeting. (we find that communicating with the City is much more effective if done in writing so that there is a paper trail) In classic Lakewood "non transparency" style no information whatsoever has been posted about this rate increase (on www.lakewoodcity.org) as of this posting (and the city has been planning this since at least March 2014). We made the following public records request to the city this week and we will try (if we get a timely response from Lakewood) to post what we get back (if anything) on this site. We need this information well in advance of 6/22/14 so that we can respond to the proposed increase in writing before the 6/24/14 hearing. Hopefully with the new "bolstering" of the California Constitution and the Public Records Act under the recently passed Proposition 42 (on June 3, 2014) we can expect to see local government entities give a little bit more respect to public records act requests.

Here is what we were seeking in the public records request: 

1. copies of all staff reports or 3rd party reports and all attachments regarding the rate increase and its need and or justifications

2. Any surveys, studies or any other documentation showing water and trash rates in any other cities done at any time in the last two years

3. communications to / from the Edco trash/waste company wherein they justify and or explain the need for a price or rate increase

4. Any proposed amendments to the Lakewood municipal code regarding the rate increase

5. Any forms or rules proposed for protests to the rate increase

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Swarming Helicopters over Lakewood 10/24/13

This is what we want to know. The Press Telegram article with the details is below (posted only about 15 hours late). The arrest was at 3:40 pm. Ok so far so good. Now there were at least two news helicopters (the high up hovering helicopters) and at least 2-3 low flying circling helicopters. One was black the other the green and gold Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) copter. The news helicopters left soon after the 3:40pm arrest, but the low flying helicopters did not stop circling until after 5pm. So if the arrest was at 3:40 pm (and that would seem correct based on the times below) why did the law enforcement helicopters keep circling for hours? Nothing else to do? Advertising to taxpayers what a great job LASD is doing keeping taxpayers safe from "felony" shoplifters on motorcycles? (I guess all the excessive force lawsuits in and out of the jails have made LASD over sensitive to this issue) Do taxpayers really need all these helicopters for an "accused" shoplifter? And this is not the first time helicopter hovering has been a problem. Just the first time we felt compelled to post something about it due to its excessiveness. I think LASD might as well just move to drones. At least they are quieter.

I guess the noise is only important to Westside and San Fernando Valley Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, as he did something about it.

As a follow up here is a small reminder why the risks of hovering over homes is outweighed by any marginal benefit in hour upon hour of hovering

Posted: 10/25/13, 6:43 AM PDT | http://www.presstelegram.com/general-news/20131025/irvine-motorcycle-chase-of-theft-suspect-hits-speeds-of-120-mph-ends-in-lakewood-arrest

A motorcycle rider suspected of stealing property who led law enforcement officers on a two-county chase at speeds up to 120 mph Thursday was arrested in Lakewood. California Highway Patrol officers picked up the pursuit about 3:15 p.m. on the San Diego (405) Freeway in Irvine, CHP Officer Denise Quesada said. Lt. Julia Engen said Irvine police were assisting Huntington Beach officers, who were investigating a series of property thefts that led them to the Irvine Spectrum shopping center. The motorcyclist aroused the suspicions of police officers, who tried to stop the suspect, Engen said. The pursuit continued through the streets of Irvine and back onto the San Diego Freeway to the San Gabriel River (605) Freeway toward Los Angeles County, Quesada said. An Orange County sheriff’s helicopter helped track the pursuit, because the rider was going so fast, Quesada said. At 3:40 p.m., Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies in Lakewood arrested the suspect at 6038 Amos Ave., sheriff’s Lt. Martin Rodriguez said. The man, whose name was unavailable, was wanted for felony theft, Rodriguez said.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Lakewood, CA Fireworks Report July 2013

It has been 7 years since the explosion on Dunrobin and apparently memories have faded for all the good reasons to sell fireworks in Lakewood (and all the neighboring co-conspiring cities):

1. To piss off all the people in Long Beach that thought they were safe from Lakewood's mania..

2. To ensure that slave labor children in India and China continue to be gainfully employed with full OSHA safety regulations protecting them..

3. To make sure safety is job 1

4. Fireworks never start fires in developed areas!....

5. To ensure that LA Sheriff's dept. employees get enough overtime to get that new boat..

6. To make sure our pets are patriotic as well.

Long ago we said that if "civic" clubs in Lakewood really wanted to raise some cash (for uniforms!?) they would sell pot. Quite frankly that is much less offensive, toxic and dangerous than fireworks. How many people a year are injured by Pot? (this is not an endorsement of Pot use by the way; we are just making a point). Lakewood might go for that as after all its for a good cause. What you're selling is really not that important if its for a good cause, right?

Seriously folks we would like to know what is spent on "special" fireworks enforcement and advertising each year versus the net profits the "civic" clubs make on these fireworks sales. I suspect they are close. So the city should just give the money to the clubs and call its a wash.

Patriotism is not found in Chinese fireworks. Sorry. We had to laugh at a neighbor down the street who (unwittingly) flies a faded flag night a day that is shredded to pieces. Is he patriotic? Veterans and Boy Scouts would say no. But by God he was out there supporting the troops with Chinese fireworks! Amazing. You want to be be patriotic Lakewood residents? There are about 42,000 of you registered to vote in the city and about 3,500 you vote for city council every 4 years (if we even have an election). That is sickening and pathetic. How about starting there. I am going to guess that very few lighting the fireworks in Lakewood voted in the last City Council election.

We can wait until the environmental agencies catch up and overtake the fireworks lobby which has lots of friends in Sacramento. After all who could be against the "essence of Patriotism". Didn't George Washington support fireworks? Let me check Fox News on that... Its like speaking out against NSA "wholesale spying" which keeps you "safe"! So America (Lakewood) light your fireworks and turn on your phone's tracking. Be a proud American. Lets not call them fireworks. Lets call them PatriotBombs! (oh on second thought maybe not...) lol...

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

US Supreme Court takes up issue of using prayers to open city council meetings

We have to say this has always been a pet peeve of ours among the many "practices", informal or otherwise, that Lakewood uses in its meetings. Hopefully this "practice" will soon go away as well. We have never understood why people insist on injecting their particular brand of religion into government. I say lets open with the pledge of allegiance (to the USA of course). That I support. But paying homage to one "brand" or "formulation" of religion? No thanks. Go to church and pray 12 times a week. Pray at home before the meeting. Pray to yourself before the meeting starts. Hell sit in a group in the audience and pray silently while holding hands up in the air. But don't make me have to sit there and listen to your version of a prayer recited in my face and sanctioned (hell even promoted) by the city council. And its televised no less (while public comments are not...hmm how convenient). This is nothing more than city council member pandering to their Christian religious bases (the same 2500 people that vote for them every time). The "open a government meeting with a prayer" routine is much more offensive and much more violative than prayer in schools as its literally the government itself promoting religion, directly and in your face, in conjunction with the governmental legislative process. This is why there are so many problems with the new governments in Egypt, Libya and Iraq; the "religious majority" wants to shut the religious minority out of a say in their own government altogether. Its a huge problem. Its why government needs to remain secular and religion should not become or "run" government. Also lets not get into the whole "religious history" of the founding fathers. Suffice it to say most did not practice "today's version of evangelical Christianity". But I'll leave that for the "revisionist" history writers.

The US Supreme Court sadly decided this was not a problem in May 2014.

As was aptly stated abut this matter recently in the NY Times:

Legislative Prayer

The case concerning prayers, Town of Greece v. Galloway, No. 12-696, came from Greece, a town near Rochester. For more than a decade starting in 1999, the town board began its public meetings with a prayer from a “chaplain of the month.” Town officials said that members of all faiths and atheists were welcome to give the opening prayer. In practice, the federal appeals court in New York said, almost all of the chaplains were Christian. “A substantial majority of the prayers in the record contained uniquely Christian language,” Judge Guido Calabresi wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel of the court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. “Roughly two-thirds contained references to ‘Jesus Christ,’ ‘Jesus,’ ‘Your Son’ or the ‘Holy Spirit.'” Two town residents sued, saying the prayers ran afoul of the First Amendment’s prohibition of the government establishment of religion. The appeals court agreed. “The town’s prayer practice must be viewed as an endorsement of a particular religious viewpoint,” Judge Calabresi wrote.

In 1983, in Marsh v. Chambers, the Supreme Court upheld the Nebraska Legislature’s practice of opening its legislative sessions with an invocation from a paid Presbyterian minister, saying that such ceremonies were “deeply embedded in the history and tradition of this country.” David Cortman, a lawyer for the town, said its practices were consistent with that tradition. “Americans today should be as free as the founders were to pray,” he said in a statement. “The founders prayed while drafting our Constitution’s Bill of Rights.” (LAAG Editor: Perhaps (I was not there) but did they pray openly as an official start to the meeting or silently? Which religion? Also note this was BEFORE the first amendment was finalized and adopted and interpreted; perhaps the prayer gave them the inspiration to have the first amendment leave the prayer out?; also keep in mind these are the same guys that owned slaves yet wrote "...all men are created equal..." etc.) The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the group behind the lawsuit, said the Supreme Court should bar prayers in governmental settings like town meetings. “A town council meeting isn’t a church service, and it shouldn’t seem like one,” he said in a statement. “Government can’t serve everyone in the community when it endorses one faith over others. That sends the clear message that some are second-class citizens based on what they believe about religion.”


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email