Open Government

LAAG is pretty much fed up with Lakewood City Hall refusing to provide timely agendas at least 72 hours before the city council meetings. The law only requires that they post the agendas at city hall not on the website. How convenient for busy voters who work for a living. Just go down to city hall after work and look at the agenda. Same with city council meetings. Make sure they are not archived on the city's website so you cant just go see them when you want or skip ahead to the parts you are interested in. The best way to "slip" things past sleeping voters is to just not alert them to issues and do only the bare minimum as required by law (ie don't post stuff on the website or send out an email or you could end up with some angry voters at your meeting and they don't want that!)

As for the agendas this was brought to the city's attention as noted below but still the problem has not been fixed. For example as of 1/15/07 the current agenda posted on the website was 12/12/06. As of 3/17/07 the "most current" agenda posted on the site is dated 2/27/07. This is a big deal as the agenda is the only way busy residents can see what is going on and if they need to go to a meeting. That is the purpose of agendas.

LAAG has asked the Sheriff's department on 4 separate occasions for the last two months for crime statistics. No response at all. Neither the City nor the Sheriff's department want to back up their vague and grandiose statements about crime "reduction"

LAAG is working to resolve these and many other lack of transparency issues.

Parking: can we use citations to "re-educate"?

I almost fell out of my chair when I read the budget for the motorhome "re-education" campaign. Oh my GOD! $140,545 to put fliers on all the motor homes in Lakewood? Cant we use the same people that Dominoes Pizza and the real estate agents use to litter our doorstep with ads? Are they cheaper? Hey voters if you missed the election and the 35 newspaper stories on the motorhome parking issue in Lakewood were sorry but you're going to get a ticket. You deserve to get one for pure stupidity or living under a rock. Has the City Council lost all touch with reality?

The better part of the story (if believable) is that the city is currently spending $337,949 on parking enforcement? (And this does not include the do nothings at the Sheriff's dept. as they are too busy crime fighting to do parking). The only parking enforcement I have seen is on the few streets posted for no parking on sweeping days (like mine) I see the new white Honda Civic$ drive down the street and waive at the good people who slept in and did not get up time to move the car as the sweeper rolls by. No ticket! How nice! Great enforcement! On top of all that we are paying $337,949 for that service!! Here is a stupid question I am sure the city will not want to answer: Just what did the city collect in paid parking citations for the last 5 years? Something tells me its way south of $337,949. Also Lakewood somehow prides itself on the fact that it is a "complaint driven" parking citation system, meaning someone has to call the city to get a cite issued. That being the case $337,949 is even more outrageous. Good thing y'all just re-elected the two councilmen likely responsible for this long standing parking mess, now made even uglier by the waste of funds. We may need the fireworks companies to chip in here. LOL

Education effort will drive home new rules for RVs
By Karen Robes, Staff writer
Article Launched: 03/14/2007 10:26:27 PM PDT

The Lakewood City Council has approved a plan to educate residents about the new laws, set to take effect July 1, restricting street parking for RVs and trailers in the city. (Scott Smeltzer / Press-Telegram)

LAKEWOOD - There's something city officials want recreational vehicle and trailer owners to know, and they're planning to convey it in letters and on notices hung on RVs.

After July 1, Lakewood RV and trailer owners will face daily fines for parking on city streets without a permit.

The City Council earlier this week approved plans to educate residents, handle complaints and provide the staff and resources to enforce the new RV and trailer laws voters approved last November.

The city's annual operating budget for parking enforcement will be $478,494 - a $140,545 increase over last year.

The extra $140,545 includes the wages of the additional parking control officers, their uniforms and vehicle maintenance costs, said city spokesman Don Waldie.

There also are "one-time-only costs" of about $147,940, which includes public information costs ($20,056), the purchase of four new vehicles ($112,000), and additional equipment ($15,884).

Officials hope to get the more than 6,000 RV and trailers to voluntarily comply with the new rules and help lessen residents' requests for service.

"We're going to make every effort we can to make sure people are aware," Mayor Larry Van Nostran said. "We want to make it easier for people to abide by what the laws are going to be."

The new bans are among several efforts to quell concerns about the increasing number of RVs and trailers parked for long periods on city streets. For more than 30 years, the council has tried to balance the needs of RV and trailer owners and those who view the rigs and motorhomes as eyesores and traffic hazards.

The new laws require owners to obtain a maximum three-day permit to park on the street. Residents can get up to 16 permits annually but there must be at least a three-day gap between permits. The permits, which are free, can be downloaded online at www.lakewoodcity.org/

parking.

Beginning in April, the city will distribute hangers and mail letters to all RV and trailer owners registered with the Department of Motor Vehicles.

The city will add 140 hours of enforcement time per week with two full-time and two part-time parking control officers.

The city will also have customer service liaisons and a part-time relief worker to handle resident service requests.

From July 1 through July 15, there will be a two-week warning period for offenders. After that, violators are subject to a daily $40 fine. A vehicle can be towed if five citations have been left unpaid, the grace period of 21 days has elapsed and notice to the DMV has been sent.

Karen Robes can be reached at karen.robes@presstelegram.com or (562) 499-1303.

Stockton CA Backyard fireworks ban likely

http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070315/A_NEWS/703150340

By David Siders
Record Staff Writer
March 15, 2007 6:00 AM

STOCKTON - The city is likely to outlaw spinners, cone fountains and other backyard, or "safe and sane," fireworks this year.

A City Council panel on Wednesday recommended the full council adopt a formal ban, one firefighters believed existed and was enforced for years until finding last year the rule did not exist.

"It's a public safety issue," Police Chief Wayne Hose told the panel.

The full council rarely, if ever, overturns a recommendation of the council's legislative panel, the committee that considered the ban. Fireworks designated by the state to be safe and sane are legal unless a county or city adopts an ordinance outlawing them.

The panel rejected an appeal by a fireworks company and by local Christian school that sells safe and sane fireworks to raise money but has previously had to travel outside Stockton to sell them.

Safe and sane fireworks - typically those that do not fly or explode - are legal in Manteca, Ripon and Escalon but not in Tracy, Lodi and unincorporated San Joaquin County, according to a list compiled by fire officials last year.

Were the Stockton City Council to allow safe and sane fireworks, Deputy Fire Chief Dave Hafey warned that peddlers of fireworks that are not so designated - including illegal firecrackers and rockets - would sell them illegally near legitimate stands.

Other cities that have allowed safe and sane fireworks have been so troubled, officials said.

The Rev. Steve Kihlthau of Stockton Baptist Church said Stockton Baptist School has raised as much as $12,000 to $15,000 some summers selling safe and sane fireworks, most recently in the Stanislaus County town of Westley, where they are legal. That the fireworks are called "safe and sane," he said, suggests the state does not find them hazardous.

TNT Fireworks Inc.'s Louis Linney told the panel illegal fireworks sales hurt legitimate business and that TNT could work with cities to discourage misuse.

Councilman Clem Lee, a panel member, said that to allow fireworks would force police, who have more serious matters to deal with, to monitor the use of fireworks. "This is not what we need to saddle our guys with," he said.

He said to prohibit safe and sane fireworks would do no more than codify long-standing city policy.

The full council is likely to consider the matter this month or next.

The city's consideration of a fireworks ban follows by one month the city's announcement that its public fireworks show at Weber Point was too dangerous to go on. Fire officials have said they are looking for a different site.

Contact reporter David Siders at (209) 943-8580 or dsiders @recordnet.com. Visit his blog.

Ripon CA may outlaw all fireworks

3/12/07
Manteca Bulletin - Manteca,CA
http://www.mantecabulletin.com/articles/2007/03/07/news/news3.txt

RIPON — Fireworks of any kind could be outlawed in Ripon by the time Fourth of July in 2008 rolls around.

Tuesday, the Ripon City Council voted to approve a one year contract with Fireworks and Stage FX America that will continue the tradition of hosting a Fourth of July Celebration — carrying with it a price tag of $35,000 for the show alone.

But concerns raised by two City Councilmen and members of the audience could not only lead to the decision to eliminate the community-wide event next year, but squash future sales of safe-and-sane fireworks as well — something that the Manteca City Council approved for the first time two years ago.

Citing massive crowds, parking problems, public safety concerns, liability issues, and fiscal responsibility as key reasons behind the need to examine the annual community investment, council members Red Nutt and Mike Restuccia bonded together and represented the two lone-dissenting votes on the item.

“I think that many of the people that come are from out of town and it seems when Ripon does something that it was to be best and the biggest of anybody,” Nutt said. “But it costs $35,000 and I’ll bet that it will cost twice that much when it’s all said and done when you factor in overtime from our police, fire, and city personnel.

“I don’t think it’s a smart expenditure of taxpayers money.”

The agendized item was initially listed on the consent calendar for the second City Council meeting in February before it was brought back as a discussion item Tuesday night.

Ripon Consolidated Fire District Chief Dennis Bitters pointed out to the council that the 8-inch shells included in the program would pose significant dangers to surrounding areas because of the massive fallout area required.

In the past, he said, houses have caught fire because there wasn’t enough space for the byproduct of the massive mortars to land clearly — noting that as a department he advocated the large community gathering focusing on a central show over the independent safe-and-sane fireworks because of the additional dangers associated with them.

And community input was mixed.

Stu Long spoke openly about instances he experienced while living in Contra Costa County where neighbors would actually bet on how long it would take for a house to catch fire — most often due to illegal fireworks that accidentally got away from their handlers.

Stephanie Hobbs let her heartfelt concerns be known by pointing out the festivities every year provided an outlet and an opportunity to enjoy a community event with her children.

Even though the motion for a one-contract passed, both Vice Mayor Chuck Winn and Councilman Dean Uecker recommended that there be ample time provided before the next budget cycle to determine whether the event is feasible to continue — adding that further examination into the safe-and-sane fireworks needs to be continued as well.

Ripon was the first city in San Joaquin County to approve the use of safe-and-sane fireworks, and despite the fact that major problems have been contained since they became legal some fire officials believe that they provide an avenue for illegal fireworks to thrive.

“When you allow the sale of safe-and-sane fireworks those illegals start rolling in and we have a hard time catching them,” said Fire Marshal Joel Castro — noting that children quickly learn how to construct dangerous devices by altering the components of the safe products. “They are the ones that are going to kill somebody.”

By JASON CAMPBELL

Staff reporter of the

Manteca (Calif.) Bulletin