Its time for a new captain in Lakewood

LAAG started in March 2006 in response to the Lakewood house explosion due to fireworks. What seemed like a "fireworks" problem at first really turned out to be a totally dysfunctional Sheriff's substation that was literally asleep at the switch. Since that time we have seen more money poured into the Sheriff's department in Lakewood without much in the way of results. (like hundreds of thousands for fireworks patrols and 20 million for a new station) We are plagued with embarrassing stories like these regarding the Lakewood station. So we started looking around for information on Captain David Fender who runs this circus that is the Lakewood Sheriff's substation. Lo and behold he is not held in very high regard by his peers or his deputies either. Just take a look at the 2004-2006 ratings his own deputies give him. He is 39th out of 43 captains rated!! Dismal and getting worse. Cant wait to see 2007 ratings. You can read the full reviews for 2005 here and 2006 here. I think its time the City of Lakewood, which is in charge of the Lakewood Station, (as its their contract) demand that a new Captain be brought in. LAAG can help in the selection process.

Lakewood Sheriff Captain David Fender 2005 ALADS Leadership Assessment
(click on each image below to enlarge)

Lakewood Sheriff Captain David Fender 2006 ALADS Leadership Assessment

Summary of 2004-2006 ALADS Leadership Assessments for all Sheriffs Captains



Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

Lakewood outdoes Santa Barbara

Not to be outdone by Santa Barbara entire city of Lakewood is off from Dec 21 to Dec 31, 2008. Great I am sure they will all be working hard on Dec 31 until 5pm(New Years Eve). Then off again on Jan 1. Perhaps they should just stay off Dec 21 to Jan 3. They really dont do much when they are working anyway. The funny thing is that Santa Barbara actually got "concessions" for the TWO extra days off. What did the taxpayers in Lakewood get? Not much from what we can see. What is most predictable is the fact that government employees sit around all day on the internet (on our nickel) looking to see what perks other government employees in other districts cities or counties are getting. Then they demand the same. Politicians cave in as always. I wonder what all the poor folks in the private sector are thinking when they read this? Government could care less what we the "little people" think. They are not elected and cannot be fired and heaven knows government ever down sizes.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-eve24dec24,1,1758974.story
From the Los Angeles Times
Santa Barbara County workers get holiday eves off
The extra days at Christmas and New Year's are a thank-you for making concessions in latest contract deal.
By Catherine Saillant
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

December 24, 2007

Government workers in Santa Barbara County can take full advantage of their last-minute holiday shopping this year, thanks to two extra paid days off that the Board of Supervisors quietly slipped into their stockings.

Without comment, supervisors earlier this month gave county government's 4,300 employees Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve off. Since both fall on a Monday preceding a Tuesday holiday, the action created consecutive four-day holiday weekends.

County leaders say it's a one-time deal and that it comes on the heels of hard-fought labor negotiations that resulted in favorable contracts for the county. Giving employees the extra time was a way of thanking them for concessions made in the agreements, said Michael Brown, the county's executive officer.

The county will maintain staffing for emergency services, including police and fire, and the clerk-recorder's office will provide limited services in some locations, he said.

"We had achieved many goals in a responsible way," said Brown, who recommended the days off. "We floated the idea to the board because this year's calendar is unique."

It is not unusual for public employees to get Friday off when Christmas and New Year's Day fall on a Saturday, human resources officials said. But adding an extra day off before a holiday appears to be uncommon, at least among Southern California's public agencies.

Santa Barbara County's action raised eyebrows, and envy levels, of other county government officials asked about the decision. Representatives of Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura counties said their workers would spend the two eves working as usual -- documenting real estate transfers, taking tax payments and prosecuting criminals.

"They got two extra days? Nice," said Judy Hammond, Los Angeles County public information officer. "I've been here since 1991 and we've never gotten either of those days off." L.A. County, she added, will be open for business both days.

The same goes for Orange County, said Jessica Jakary, a spokeswoman for the chief executive's office.

"That's nice for them, but we'll be here," Jakary said. "If our employees want to have those days off, they have to use vacation days."

Ventura County's top administrator was circumspect about Santa Barbara's justification for adding the days off. County Executive Officer Johnny Johnston, who has headed an 8,000-employee workforce for six years, said he knows how difficult labor negotiations can get.

Volume for public services does go down around the holidays, he said. But there will always be someone who waits until the last minute to file a document.

"In the euphoria of the moment, they declared a holiday," Johnston said. "But I'm kind of a Scrooge. We're not here to serve ourselves, but the public."

In a letter to the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, Brown cited the low demand for services in the last two weeks of the year and said "granting these one-time holidays will not significantly inhibit the county's commitment to service delivery."

The days off, he wrote, were a good way to show "appreciation for the hard work of union leaders, and for the willingness of county employees to address financial concerns for the county."

New three-year contracts with much of the county's workforce include salary and benefit increases averaging 7%. The increases fell within the Board of Supervisors' targets, Brown said.

In addition, the unions agreed to hold off the largest increase until the final year of the contract, easing budget pressures for the coming year .

Andy Caldwell, head of the Coalition of Labor, Agriculture and Business, a citizens watchdog group, said he, too, was pleased with the outcome of the negotiations.

The county gained important concessions, making it easier to contract out some services and put on the table for future negotiations the possibility of switching from current guaranteed lifetime pensions to a 401(k)-type retirement package. In view of that, Caldwell said, the group decided not to complain too much about the days off.

Santa Barbara County workers get 11 holidays in a typical year, plus up to 25 vacation days if they have 14 years of service. Most employees also are allowed 12 sick days a year.

"Typically, we would have blasted the board on something like that," Caldwell said of the extra days. "But when we read the concessions they made, we bit half of our tongue."

Brown said it would cost the county $150,000 to cover extra pay for police officers and other emergency workers who will remain on the job.

But Caldwell said the truer cost is the county's payroll for two days, a figure he estimated at $1 million. He said he would have preferred that employees use vacation days to extend their holidays.

"It costs what they are paying them because they are not getting work for those days," he said.

catherine.saillant@latimes.com

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

Still No FIOS in North Lakewood CA

Well LAAG is still waiting for FIOS. Long Beach has it. Norwalk, Cerritos and many other cites close to Lakewood have it. Seal Beach's city council squabbled with Verizon FIOS installation before the statewide franchise in March 2007, but within the last 3 months Seal Beach invited Verizon back into the city with open arms. Long Beach also courted Verizon in 2006 and 2007. From what we can see the city of Lakewood and Bellflower (where the central office in for North Lakewood)have done nothing to get their residents FIOS and wired for the 21st century. Does the city favor Time Warner cable? Or does the city just not care that consumers have a choice for pay TV and internet access? Without action by the city in early 2008 we doubt that Lakewood will get FIOS at all in 2008. The story below is an example of what happens when the city council takes an assertive role in assuring its residents get first shot at new technology.

Fort Wayne Thanks Mayor for FiOS
A politician who understands technology
03:06PM Sunday Dec 23 2007 by KathrynV
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Fort-Wayne-Thanks-Mayor-for-FiOS-90460

Residents of Fort Wayne, Indiana finally got FiOS in May and the area’s Journal Gazette says that they should be thanking the local mayor. Mayor Graham Richard, whose term expires on January 1st, apparently played a very active role in working with Verizon to bring FiOS to the area. Based on the belief that innovation and competition both drive the economy, he held several meetings with Verizon executives to make the case that Fort Wayne was a good market for developing FiOS in the Midwest. Verizon noted that it’s rare for politicians to really understand the technology and to have the same vision as the company for developing it; this ultimately aided in their decision to move into Fort Wayne.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

San Gabriel river bike path safety group

Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:11:44 -0800
To: "5th Dist. Gerrie Schipske" "Josh Butler, 5th dist."
From: Lakewood Accountability Action Group | LAAG
Subject: SG river issues “bike path safety group”
Cc: "Phil Hester, Dir Parks, Rec, and Marine", "LBPD" , (LA County Dept of Pub Works) "Diego Cadena, Dep. Dir." "Afshari, Shari, Div Head" , "Paul Maselbas, Principal Eng", "El-Rabaa, Maged, Program Dev.", "Yusuf, Abu, Cnty Bikeway Coord" (LA County 4th Dist) "Connie Sziebl, LB rep" , "Erin Stibal, Lkwd rep", "Carol Oberman, lkwd office" "Julie Moore, DPW coord" , "Capt. Dave L. Fender LA County Sheriff Dept", "Lt. Terry W. Benjestorf", "Andy Berg, LASD Lkwd Spokesman" "David N. Carmany, Seal Beach City Manager", "Lee Whittenberg, Seal beach", "Todd Rogers, Lkwd City Council"


Ms Schipske:

In regards to this article on your blog (below) please see attached agreements. If there are others that are not attached here (and that involve responsibility for law enforcement patrolling the SG river from South St. to the Ocean) consider this a public records request by LAAG to the City of Long Beach, LA County Dept of Public Works and LA County Sheriff's dept for copies of these additional agreements not attached herein.

If there is going to be a public meeting in Feb 2008 we would like to know the time and place so we can have someone attend to represent trail users (who quite frankly know where and what the problems are). I like to call these rivers "crime channels" or "vagrant rivers". We have already passed along some ideas we had on crime suppression in the river.

I also thought this letter below was rather timely. It was reported about a week after the bike jacking LAAG reported

http://www.presstelegram.com/ci_7618801
Monday's Letters
Article Launched: 12/02/2007 08:43:24 PM PST

Safety problem
How sad to report that Lakewood's sheriff's deputies do not care about our safety. For one month I have been trying to get them to clean out the riverbed located at Centralia and Bloomfield. The transients/felons have set up housekeeping in the holes in plain view of the street. They are drinking in public daily and more of them show up on a daily basis to start their own personal town.

Whenever I call the Lakewood Sheriff's Station I am either placed on hold until I go away, or after the tenth complaint was told that it was not their jurisdiction, but Cypress's. After contacting Cypress, they told me that without a doubt, it belongs to Lakewood.

Last night was the saddest night, as I had to tell them to please not dismiss my complaints, and disperse the dangerous element in the riverbed, because my brother was murdered in the riverbed 20 years ago. I can't wait to move out of Lakewood.

Lorene Diaz
Lakewood

Cleaning up the neighborhood and making it safe
Coyote Creek and other Bike Paths

21. December 2007 Uncategorized, Coyote Creek

Along the Coyote Creek, San Gabriel River and Los Angeles River are bike paths that go quite a distance up into Los Angeles County and down through Orange County to the ocean.

Because these bike paths go through several jurisdictions and also include the Flood Control Districts of both counties, there are many questions as to who is responsible for policing those areas ­ especially in light of bicyclists being mugged along the path.

I called a meeting of the local jurisdictions together that included: County of Los Angeles, Flood Control District, Cities of La Palma, Los Alamitos, Cypress, Seal Beach, Lakewood and Hawaiian Gardens (which did not attend). We also had representatives from Long Beach ­ Government Relations, Councilmember O’Donnell’s office and Police Department.

The focus of this “bike path safety group” is to determine how we can work together to keep the areas of the bike path and the neighborhoods adjacent free from crime and graffitti.

We will reconvene in February after all jurisdictions receive copies of the agreements for use of the bike paths which apparently were executed many years ago between the cities and the flood control district. Many cities were surprised to learn that the County did not have responsibility for policing the bike path and flood control areas.

This is a great chance to work together on a regional basis on a problem that is impacting many cities.


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

L.A. County Sheriff's lax investigation of use-of-force cases

This story was only reported in a few newspapers whereas the related issue of how Paris Hilton and Mel Gibson were treated was given 10 times the amount of press in this Hollywood celebrity obsessed culture. The same "Special Counsel" also reported on the celebrity issues. We dont care about people killed by LA Sheriff's but we do want to know if Mel got a ride to the tow yard by a Sheriff!? All joking aside, both issues point to the fact that the LASD is poorly run and managed. This leads to deputies doing whatever they want in the field as they have such wide discretion and no one to call them on it. And what is the cause? Well one major cause is Baca having zero management skills and being "promoted" (by the voters not knowing who to vote for) to the point where he is in over his head (the "peter principle"). The other cause is police unions. Without the ability to fire deputies or dock their pay you will never have the ability to enforce rules. Period. So do all the studies you want and get all the oversight and consent decrees that you want. If the officers union challenges managements every move then management is held hostage. Lets face it. The unions protect rogue cops. As far as consent decrees and unions go just look at the story regarding the LAPD at the very bottom of this page.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bobb20dec20,1,2351119.story
From the Los Angeles Times
Report faults internal affairs' shooting probes
L.A. County sheriff's monitor cites lax investigation of use-of-force cases.
By Stuart Pfeifer
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

December 20, 2007

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department failed to thoroughly investigate half of its recent use-of-force cases, according to a monitor's report released Wednesday.

Special Counsel Merrick Bobb, who monitors the Sheriff's Department under a contract with the county, said he was concerned that internal affairs investigators didn't interview several deputies who fired weapons at suspects. Instead, the investigators relied on previous interviews of the deputies by homicide detectives.

Bobb, whose staff reviewed dozens of deputies' use of force from 2004 and 2005, also concluded that some of the department's internal affairs detectives appeared to side with deputies while interviewing them.

For example, while investigating the shooting of a juvenile in Compton in 2004, an investigator said, "very good," or "perfect," when a deputy answered questions in a manner that appeared to justify the shooting, according to Bobb's report.

The report found some things to commend, however. It said the Office of Independent Review, which monitors sheriff's internal affairs investigations, had provided useful oversight and improved the thoroughness of the investigations. It also noted that the department's internal affairs process has become a model for agencies across the country.

Sheriff's Division Chief Roberta Abner said the department, in response to Bobb's concerns, recently adopted a policy that requires internal affairs investigators to interview all deputies who shoot suspects, even if homicide detectives already had spoken with the deputies.

By policy, homicide detectives review deputy shootings to help determine whether the deputies were justified. Deputies now will be interviewed first by homicide detectives conducting a criminal investigation and then by internal affairs investigators to determine whether a shooting was within department policy.

In the report, Bobb said he found the review of one deputy-involved shooting particularly troubling. The deputy shot a juvenile whom he said had shot at him. None of six witnesses said they saw the juvenile with a gun, and a gunshot residue test found no evidence that the youth had fired a weapon.

Deputies said they found a handgun in a nearby bush, but there was no evidence linking the juvenile to the gun. In addition, the deputy gave conflicting accounts of the shooting, the report said. He told one investigator he did not see what happened to the gun but told another he saw the juvenile throw it toward the bush, the report said.

Based on the deputy's statements, the juvenile was convicted of assault with a firearm against a peace officer and sentenced to seven years in the California Youth Authority. Bobb requested that the department reopen the investigation, but the department declined. The deputy has left the department.

"If it turns out that the facts were different than as found in the initial investigation it would have very profound consequences for the criminal justice system as a whole and the juvenile in particular," Bobb said Wednesday.

Abner said the department has reviewed the case thoroughly and determined that reopening the case would produce no useful information.

"The issue is whether the juvenile was in possession of a weapon. What we don't feel can happen by reopening it is having any more information that goes to that fact," Abner said.

stuart.pfeifer@latimes.com


http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lapd21dec21,1,2149924.story
From the Los Angeles Times
L.A. police panel requires financial disclosure for some officers; union sues
The commission is trying to get out from under a court order for reform. Critics say the new policy is invasive and won't work.
By Joel Rubin
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

December 21, 2007

The Los Angeles Police Commission approved a plan Thursday to require hundreds of anti-gang and narcotics officers to disclose detailed information about their personal finances, triggering an immediate court challenge by the police officers union and a debate at City Hall over whether to overrule the panel.

At issue in the rapidly intensifying dispute is what LAPD Chief William J. Bratton and the five-member commission hope will be one of the final pieces of a broad reform campaign that began after the Rampart corruption scandal and has kept the department under federal oversight since 2000.

Bratton and his civilian bosses are eager to get out of the federal consent decree, which calls for some sort of financial disclosure rule for officers in specialized units who frequently handle cash, drugs and other contraband. The issue has proved to be the most contentious sticking point as union and city officials have struggled for years to strike a compromise between officers' privacy rights and the need to satisfy the decree.

The reform is intended to help supervisors detect an officer who is taking bribes or involved in other illegal conduct. Under its terms, about 600 officers would be required to disclose to department officials any outside income, real estate, stocks, other assets and debts every two years. They would also have to reveal the size of their bank accounts and include any holdings they share with family members or business partners. Officers already assigned to the units would be granted a two-year grace period before having to complete the records.

"It's important that we use every tool available to make absolutely sure that even if it's just one officer who is potentially inclined to go down this path, that we do everything within our . . . authority to make sure that doesn't happen," said Commissioner John Mack. "We cannot forget the Rampart incident."

Indeed, the legacy of the Rampart Division scandal hung heavy over the commission's special meeting Thursday. The call for financial disclosure stemmed in part from admissions by a former anti-gang officer that he and his partner routinely stole thousands of dollars in cash and narcotics from gang members and drug dealers. He said there was little scrutiny of what officers did on the streets and that many officers in his unit took advantage of the lack of supervision by beating and framing suspects.

But Thursday, several police officers, union leaders and elected officials questioned whether the disclosure requirement would do anything to improve on audits, polygraph tests and other safeguards against abuse already in place.

"You would have to look at the ebb and flow of money coming in and going. This is just a snapshot. All they are doing is looking at one day, and with that you have no idea what has happened," said Don Brady, a lieutenant in charge of about 40 narcotics officers, some of whom specialize in tracking the assets of drug dealers.

Critics warned that the commission's move has left rank-and-file officers deeply angry and that hundreds may retire or request transfers out of the specialized units instead of submitting to the new rules.

"It has dampened morale," Brady said of the officers in his units. "They really feel like they're not being trusted."

Civil rights attorney Connie Rice, who has been closely involved in the push to reform the LAPD, echoed the opposition to the policy, saying increased supervision of officers was needed instead.

"The commission is caught between a rock and a hard place on this one. It is trying to do what the court wants it to do, whether it's a good idea or not," she said, referring to U.S. District Judge Gary A. Feess, who oversees the decree. She said police officers "have a right to be angry. They know this won't do any good and is an infringement on their rights."

Although the vote was unanimous, Commissioner Alan Skobin said he sympathized with the officers' concerns.

"I could not look the officers in the eye and tell them that it will do anything to improve the Los Angeles Police Department, except to hope that it will get us beyond the consent decree," he said. "What we're asking them to do and what we're asking their families to do is a very bitter pill. In fact, we're not asking, we're ordering them."

The scope of the policy goes beyond what is demanded of Bratton in the financial interest forms he must file with the city Ethics Commission. But although Bratton's disclosures are public record, the officers' information would be kept confidential. In response to union officials' concerns that the department would not be able to keep the documents safe, the commission refined the policy Thursday to make clear that the information would be kept locked in Bratton's office until it was periodically destroyed.

The commission's disclosure policy puts the officers on par with many federal law enforcement agents. Every five years, for example, agents in the Drug Enforcement Administration must submit to thorough investigations of their finances, said Special Agent Jose Martinez.

Before Thursday's vote, union President Tim Sands urged commissioners to reconsider a compromise that city, federal and union lawyers agreed to last year but that Judge Feess threw out as insufficient.That deal called in part for the department to conduct frequent sting operations and audits of narcotics and anti-gang officers but did not require across-the-board disclosures.

"Go back to this judge and tell him that we had an agreement," Sands said. "We will protect the rights of our officers. . . . We don't want to go down that road. I am asking you, do not move this order forward."

In response to the commission's action, the union filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court seeking an immediate injunction against the disclosures, contending that they violate state laws and collective bargaining rules that protect officers' privacy rights.

Councilman Jack Weiss, who chairs the council's public safety committee said he would push other council members to take the rare step of voting to supersede the commission and assume jurisdiction over the issue. Such a move would require the support of 10 of the 15 council members. If the council takes that action, it can then vote on whether to veto the commission's plan and force the panel to try again.

"I am skeptical" about the policy, Weiss said. "It's not clear that it will assist in detecting bad cops."

Councilman Dennis Zine, a former LAPD sergeant, said he also opposed the commission's decision but would not support Weiss' effort, which he called a "disingenuous" move targeted at winning the police union's endorsement in Weiss' upcoming run for city attorney.

Weiss could not be reached for comment on Zine's assertion. Lisa Hansen, Weiss' chief of staff, said: "This is not about politics. The council will decide this issue on the merits, but clearly it warrants discussion."

joel.rubin@latimes.com

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™r>

Eating establishments in Lakewood CA

This is a list of all eating establishments in Lakewood CA. This list is using the latest available information. We will try to update the list as we find out more current information about closures of new openings. Whenever possible please patronize Lakewood restaurants over other city's eateries.

Arby’s
5920 South St., Lakewood, CA, 90713

Arby’s
4935 Graywood Ave., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Arby's Roast Beef
5920 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Arby's Roast Beef Restaurants
4935 Graywood Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Baja Fresh Mexican Grill
5001 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Bakers Square Restaurant & Pies
5520 South St., Lakewood, CA, 90713

Banducci's Famous Chicago
2706 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Baskin Robbins
5455 Del Amo Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream & Yogurt
5455 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Benchwarmers Sports Grill
5625 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Black Angus Restaurant Stuart Anderson's
5000 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Boston Market
4895 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Brothers Korean Bbq
12218 Centralia St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Burger King No 10722
2438 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Caffe La Strada
4716 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

California Buffet
4126 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

California Pizza Kitchen
125 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

California Pizza Kitchen
500 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

California Steak & Fries
407 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

California Sushi & Teriyaki
5916 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Carl's Jr Restaurants
2710 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Carl's Jr Restaurants
5247 Clark Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Carl's Jr Restaurants
5601 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Casa Margarita
12228 Centralia St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Chili's Grill & Bar
4931 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

China Buffet
4074 Hardwick St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Chinatown Express No 45
5554 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Chipotle
5310 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Chuck E Cheese's
5151 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Church's Fried Chicken Inc
5610 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Cinnafactory Llc
356 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Coco's Bakery Restaurant
5809 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

The Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf
3225 Carson St., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Cold Stone Creamery
5107 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Corner Bakery Cafe
5312 Clark Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Dairy Queen
214 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Del Taco
11723 Del Amo Blvd., Lakewood, CA, 90715

Del Taco
3501 South St., Long Beach, CA, 90805

Denny's Restaurant
11605 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Denny's Restaurant
2634 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Desserts by Design
4336 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Domino's
5538 Del Amo Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Domino's Pizza
5538 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Domino's Pizza
9353 E Alondra Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Domino's Pizza
Lakewood, CA, 90716

Doo Re Bak
11810 Centralia St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Duke's Char Broiler
11790 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Eastside Mario's
4771 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

El Pollo Loco
2727 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

El Pollo Loco
5935 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

El Pollo Loco Inc
11601 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

El Torito Mexican Restaurant
7591 Carson Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Elephant Bar Restaurant
4634 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Fastel Llc
11802 Centralia St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Flames
21006 Norwalk Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Flite Room
4111 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Foggia Italian Market & Deli
5522 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Friday's
7221 Carson Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Fuddruckers Inc
5229 Clark Ave., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Fuji Grill
2704 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Glory Days Sports Grill
4121 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Golden Spoon the
5536 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Goody's Pizza & Chicken
5695 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Goody's Pizza & Chicken
20161 Pioneer Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Green Burrito
2710 Del Amo, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Green Burrito
5835 Bellflower Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Grumpy's Garden
213 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Guacamole Grille
12612 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90715

The Heritage Family Pantry
2601 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Hideaway the
5523 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Hometown Buffet
4700 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Honeybaked Ham Co
4332 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

House of Fondues & Kebabs the
3253 E South St, Long Beach, CA, 90805

IHOP
5316 Lakewood Blvd., Lakewood, CA, 90712

In-N-Out Burger
5820 Bellflower Blvd., Lakewood, CA, 90713

International House of Pancakes
5316 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Island Flavor Hawaiian the
5526 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

It's A Grind
5127 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

It's A Grind Coffee House
6405 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

It's A Grind Coffee House Lakewood
4214 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

J R Bakery
11816 Centralia St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Jack In the Box
11501 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Jack-In-the-Box Family Restaurants
5858 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Jack-In-the-Box Family Restaurants
5747 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Joe's Sushi Japanese Restaurant
5607 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Kainan Sa Kanto
5521 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Kentucky Fried Chicken
4917 Bellflower Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

L A Italian Kitchen
405 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

La Postada Restaurant
4101 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

La Salsa Fresh Mexican Grill
500 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Lakewood Wok
5445 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Lans Cozy Confab
4823 Paramount Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Laventina's Pizza
5806 Bellflower Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Little Caesar's Pizza
5555 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Loft Hawaiian Restaurant the
20157 Pioneer Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Madanzsae Korean Barbecue
21004 Pioneer Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Mama Mia Pizza and Sandwich Shop
2616 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Mama's Sushi
5679 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Marie Callender's Restaurants & Bakeries
4419 Candlewood St., Lakewood, CA, 90712

McDonald's
4910 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

McDonald's Restaurant
2770 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

McDonald's Restaurants
2707 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

McDonald's Restaurants
4848 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

McDonald's Restaurants
6741 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

McDonald's Restaurants
406 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

McDonalds of Lakewood
5739 Bellflower Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Melt Jelato Lakewood
500 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Mi Casa
5549 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Milk Barn Pizza the
4855 N Bellflower Blvd, Long Beach, CA, 90808

Mimi's Cafe
4404 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Mireille's Caterers
4151 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

New York Subs
2604 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Numero Uno Pizza Pasta & More
4121 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

O J's Submarines
4136 Paramount Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Oriental Express
3400 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

The Original Virgie's Restaurant
5253 Paramount Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Outback
5305 Clark Ave., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Outback Steakhouse
5305 Clark Ave., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Pacific Star Grill
6205 Bellflower Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Panera Bread
135 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Papa John's Pizza
5457 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Peach Garden Chinese Restaurant
4819 Paramount Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Pho Siaigon
6514 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Pino Pizza
2510 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Pizza Equals Two
6114 Bellflower Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Pizza Hut
4110 Lakewood Dr, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Pizza Hut
3960 Paramount Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Pizza Hut
12602 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Pizza Hut
5917 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Pizza Man
6909 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Quizno's
4995 Candlewood St., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Quizno's
3219 Carson St., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Quizno's Subs
3219 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Quiznos Sub 442 Lakewood Mall
4995 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Red Lobster
4333 Candlewood St., Lakewood, Ca, 90712

Red Lobster Restaurants
4333 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Regal Inn
6763 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Round Table Pizza
5250 Faculty Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Rubio's Fresh Mexican Grill
5111 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Rustlers
4130 Paramount Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Safi Enterprises Inc
5721 Bellflower Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Sbarro's Italian Eatery
22 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Sea Hawk
4103 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Seafood Broiler Restaurant & Market
4333 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Sear's Donut
6412 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Shahnawaz Restaurant
12225 Centralia St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Shop Kallerz Sports Bar & Grill
4823 Paramount Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Snug Harbor
5520 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Soot Bul Myung Ga
11697 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Souplantation
4720 Candlewood St., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Starbucks
4226 Woodruff Ave., Lakewood, CA, 90713

Starbucks
208 Lakewood Center, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Starbucks
5538 Woodruff Ave., Lakewood, CA, 90713

Starbucks
2700 Carson St., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Starbucks
5906 Del Amo Blvd., Lakewood, CA, 90713

Starbucks
4833 Candlewood St., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Starbucks
5500 Woodruff Ave., Lakewood, CA, 90713

Starbucks
3400 South Street, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Starbucks
2770 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Starbucks Coffee
500 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Starbucks Coffee
4833 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Subway
4210 Woodruff, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Subway
2706 Carson Blvd., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Subway
6426 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Subway
5538 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Subway Sandwich
127 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Subway Sandwiches
4210 Woodruff Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Super Mex Restaurant
5254 Faculty Ave, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Taco Bell
5850 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Taco Bell
5467 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Take Sushi Inc
12550 Centralia St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Tantalizingly Thai
11401 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90715

Thai Corner Restaurant
2615 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Thai Villa Restaurant
5921 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Togo's Eatery
5175 Lakewood Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Tokyo Grill
403 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Tokyo Hibachi
4645 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Tokyo Wok
4079 Hardwick St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Venni Mac's M&M Soul Food
2450 Carson St., Lakewood, CA, 90712

Volcano Tea House
500 Lakewood Center Mall, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Wendy's
4314 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Wienerschnitzel
5721 Bellflower, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Wing Stop
5910 Del AMO Blvd, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Yamada Curtis Farmers Ins
2725 Candlewood St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

Yoshinoya
6404 South St. #E, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Yoshinoya Beef Bowl Restaurant
6404 South St, Lakewood, CA, 90713

Z Pizza
3221 Carson St, Lakewood, CA, 90712

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

San Gabriel River Safety Problem

This Lakewood resident agrees with LAAG. Read our related post here.

http://www.presstelegram.com/ci_7618801
Monday's Letters
Article Launched: 12/02/2007 08:43:24 PM PST

Safety problem

How sad to report that Lakewood's sheriff's deputies do not care about our safety. For one month I have been trying to get them to clean out the riverbed located at Centralia and Bloomfield. The transients/felons have set up housekeeping in the holes in plain view of the street. They are drinking in public daily and more of them show up on a daily basis to start their own personal town.

Whenever I call the Lakewood Sheriff's Station I am either placed on hold until I go away, or after the tenth complaint was told that it was not their jurisdiction, but Cypress's. After contacting Cypress, they told me that without a doubt, it belongs to Lakewood.

Last night was the saddest night, as I had to tell them to please not dismiss my complaints, and disperse the dangerous element in the riverbed, because my brother was murdered in the riverbed 20 years ago. I can't wait to move out of Lakewood.

Lorene Diaz
Lakewood

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

Zoning nighmare

This is why allowing people to live in converted garages is a bad idea. Take note Lakewood and dont follow Long Beach's path just to accommodate multiple families living at one address. Very bad idea. Using political correctness over safety to make zoning decisions.

UPDATE: LA Times gets the story wrong (below)...it was an illegal conversion per LB Report. Same message above still applies. Allowing resident to cram people into garages or substandard dwellings and trying to accommodate it zoning wise or look the other way is the wrong path to go down.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-fatal15dec15,0,1210649.story?coll=la-headlines-california
From the Los Angeles Times
Long Beach fire leaves 2 girls dead, 1 critical
By Molly Hennessy-Fiske
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

7:32 AM PST, December 14, 2007

Two sisters, ages 6 and 10, died this morning in Long Beach and their 7-year-old sister was in critical condition after a fire broke out in the converted garage where they slept, trapping the three in their windowless bedroom, fire officials said.

The girls' 17-year-old sister, who was also sleeping in the detached garage at 1052 1/2 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., awoke to the smell of smoke and ran to a nearby building to call 911 about 2 a.m., said Long Beach Fire Capt. Mike Duree. She then tried to return to the burning building to rescue her sisters, Duree said, but the heat and smoke forced her back.

The 500-square-foot garage, which had been legally converted to living space, did not have smoke detectors or a sprinkler system, Duree said. Although divided into two rooms, only the front area had a window and a door. The fire started in that area, officials believe, blocking the only exit.

"They would have had to go directly through the fire to flee," Duree said.

Firefighters arrived at the scene shortly after the 911 call and fought back the flames, but when they reached the young sisters all were unconscious. The injured sister is being treated at Long Beach Memorial Hospital.

Officials believe the fire started near an outlet in the living room but were still investigating, Duree said. There was no Christmas tree in the room that could have ignited the blaze, he said.

Duree said that although calling for help when a fire erupts is crucial, the first priority should be to get everyone out of the building.

"The first thing you've got to do is take care of yourself and your family. We can rebuild homes but we cannot rebuild lives," he said.

molly.hennessy-fiske@latimes.com


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

Public Disclosure...well sort of

Well I am glad to see at least another City Council member agrees with LAAG. The city of Lakewood for the most part tries to comply with the letter of the law but surely does not comply with the spirit of the law. It is so many things. They tout their "internet friendly" service desk yet results are no where a swift as the speed at which your request gets to them. They spend hundreds of thousands of tax dollars on consultants and IT infrastructure but the taxpayers never see the results. We have brought this to the city's attention numerous times and we are ignored. The implication of the city's silence is that they like things just the way they are. Don't let taxpayers really know what is going on as it creates too much work, just like with fireworks and RV's. Keep as many issues hidden in plain view as possible so no pesky voters show up at the meetings and get themselves on cable TV (of course no one can really watch the streamed meetings as they are played at odd hours and worst of all are not archived; again another example of complying with the letter and not the spirit of the public disclosure laws.)

You can find out all you want on the Lakewood website about dance class schedules but Heaven forbid they post on their home page a meeting announcement that they think the public may want to attend. (well unless city council members think they can attract lots of voters who agree with their position).

This Costco hearing is a prime example. Read the excerpt below from the PT. Now we dont care if you agree with the Costco or not. Thats not the point. The point is the city tries to do things under the cover of night as much as possible. Skolnick tells the Press Telegram that Lakewood did not "intend" to hide this from Long Beach (what about Lakewood voters?!). I never saw one announcement from Lakewood via its silly email newsletter about the 12/12/08 hearing (plenty of notices about firehouse cookbooks on sale though) If Lakewood knew there "had been a lot of press on the project" (of course not about the specifics or time and date of the meeting) then why didnt the city step up and post the notice on the front page of the website? Would that have killed them? No but they knew it would bring too many people out of the woodwork and Heaven forbid we dont want that.

Now of course it is somewhat the pot calling the kettle black here with Long Beach. We all know that all these border cities fight like Shiites and Sunni's when it comes to attracting new tax revenue (lets not get into incentives). And quite frankly Long Beach has egg on its face with respect to hiding its own City Council meeting agenda items from the public. (LB Report uses the oft used phrase "mushroom treatment"...keep 'em in the dark and fed manure.)

The point is the same. City's need to use the Internet to inform the voters more. But until the voters clamor for it or Sacramento legislates it you wont see any up to date meaningful disclosures of the nasty things that happen (or could happen) at city council meetings for a long time.

From the Press Telegram article 12-13-07
http://www.presstelegram.com/ci_7705914

Long Beach's 5th District City Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske said she felt the study was insufficient and that Long Beach was not given adequate notice about the meeting or the project that affects her constituents within Lakewood Village. "Lakewood wasn't a good neighbor," she said. It was not Lakewood's intent "to hide this from Long Beach," said City Attorney Steven Skolnik, adding that city managers from both cities spoke about the Costco months ago and that there had been a lot of press on the project.

For more coverage as to why Lakewood wanted to bury the notice of the meeting read LB Report

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

Inviting the fox into the hen house

click here to read rest of article

Oh man...we saw this coming. This is really simple for the fireworks peddlers. Just make sure you pack the "citizen task force" with people biased (secretly or not) in your favor. Fortunately here they dont have a majority but that is only members who have announced their biases (and were put forward by the Fireworks industry) This is a loose loose situation. Fireworks companies preach education just like the cigarette companies. LAAG has seen from Fire Department studies that eliminating all fireworks (legal and illegal) has the effect of making enforcement easier and actually decreases the use of illegal fireworks. Anytime the fireworks industry is suggesting that people put their faith in some recently passed legislation (such as senate bill 839) you can be sure that that industry had a lot to do with its crafting via lobbyists and other "persuasive individuals" and methods. Senate bill 839 is worthless and is just another unproven unfunded mandate used as window dressing by the fireworks industry in an attempt to put further pressure on out of state sellers already stealing CA peddlers "safe and sane" business.

New citizen task force focuses on fireworks
By Elaine Larsen EDITOR AND PUBLISHER
Article Launched: 12/12/2007 01:13:07 PM PST

Fireworks and Pacifica. Legal and illegal. Just what should the relationship between pyrotechnics and the community be?

That's going to be the fiery question for a newly formed citizen task force recently established by the Pacifica City Council.

Task Force members appointed are Deborah Joves, Dr. Kimberly Conner, Julie Hartsell (who is a PB&R commissioner), Bernie Sifry, Bill Gray (TN football coach), Jeanne Matysiak, Allen Hale and Lionel Emde.

The mission of the task force is to research options for dealing with the ongoing problem of illegal fireworks that violators manage to set off each July 4 holiday under cover of darkness and obscured by the smoke and hubbub of safe and sane or legal fireworks.

It's an explosive problem to be sure -- how to put a cap on illegal bottle rockets and M-80s that cause mayhem in neighborhoods, yet not penalize those who enjoy safe and sane fireworks that are an old-fashioned tradition in Pacifica and fund sports and other programs for thousands of kids.

Police Chief Jim Saunders said he hand-picked a task force that hopefully reflects a full spectrum of interests. "Their purpose is to provide options for council," he said when the matter came before council late last month.

"The
Advertisement
Task Force's direction is that there is no direction. They need to research and provide options," he said.

The only citizens who spoke were concerned about a brief reference to banning all fireworks in Saunders' staff report. As sports group boosters, they were concerned that would be the ultimate outcome of any task force recommendation.

One speaker said she was concerned the task force was a "back door" way of starting a ban on all fireworks.

TNT Fireworks spokesman Dennis Revell also voiced a similar concern. He said the city should be focusing on a senate bill, 839, recently signed by the governor, which will throw more manpower and resources toward stopping the suppliers of illegal fireworks from bringing them over the border into California or selling them on the Internet in the first place. He also suggested the public education was another key to helping solve the problem.

Saunders said the council and community should not be fixated on the word "ban" in his staff report, noting that he was simply trying to open the door for full discussion of all options.

"At least three members of the task force were proposed by the fireworks company. We tried to make it a mixed group. Frankly, I'm open to anything. I wanted to leave it as open as possible, not leaning one way or another," Saunders said.

The chief's report also mentioned other options such as limiting the times that fireworks may be ignited or possibly limiting the locations that fireworks can be used in the city.

"This is not a complete list of options but only a few a council left up to the task force to research and provide direction to council," Saunders' staff report reads.

"The idea is not to limit the task force, but a ban is not the direction we're going," said Mayor Pete DeJarnatt.

There was some further discussion among council members about defining the task force's options, including an emphasis on enforcement, but the majority consensus ultimately was to leave all options open for research and discussion.

Chief Saunder said although the task force might well come up with an alternative funding source to replace the sale of safe and sane fireworks -- an "ah-ha" type solution," he also said he understands that a ban on fireworks is clearly not the direction the council is going.

"I'm anticipating there will be nine or ten options, but will make it clear that the council is not interested in a ban so that option better be at the bottom of the list," he said.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™