What budget crisis?

What is ironic is on the same day the new (appointed not elected) OC Sheriff just gave up some perks LA Times posts the story below on county vehicles being doled out like candy. As noted in today LA Times: "Further distancing herself from the practices of her indicted predecessor, Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens said she wouldn't use a team of deputies to protect her -- or even a driver to chauffeur her to public appearances. Acting against the advice of some colleagues, Hutchens said she intended to drive herself to meetings in a county car, her only protection the Glock 9-millimeter handgun holstered at her waist."

But not here in good ol' LA county. We waste tax dollars just like they were water (come to think of it we waste water too) What do you think the gas bill is for these gas guzzlers that the taxpayers are also paying? Where is it written that people in government should get free cars, gas and chauffeurs? Did I miss that line in the state constitution? Oh wait, they use the line in the constitution that says "once elected you can do what you want as long as too many of the 'little people' (to quote Leona Helmsley) don't revolt"

I say dump 50% of the county cars. All should be 4 cylinder or natural gas. No freebies for elected officials period. None. Most of those elected "officials" (aka royalty) are millionaires before they get elected anyway.

The Grand Jury report on this issue is available here (the part about vehicle use starts on page 89 of the report)

County officials reaping unintended benefits from vehicles
By Troy Anderson, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 07/10/2008 09:38:08 PM PDT

At a time when many Los Angeles County residents are grappling with the squeeze of an economic downturn, dozens of top county government officials are tooling around in "unjustified luxury vehicles" costing taxpayers as much as $50,000 each.

More than 1,400 county workers are given take-home cars, even though some don't have official authorization to drive them, and at least 30 employees aren't paying the required taxes on the vehicles.

Meanwhile, county employees were involved in 1,852 accidents in their take-home vehicles over the past few years - with 830 accidents in 2005-06 alone that cost taxpayers $6.7 million.

The findings are among hundreds outlined in a recently released Grand Jury report that uncovered broad department inconsistencies and lax oversight of the county's $433 million, 12,780-vehicle fleet.

"I think this certainly demonstrates that the county has a long way to go to convince taxpayers that it has a revenue problem and not a spending problem," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

"Its chronic problems with mismanagement of its vehicle fleet is particularly frustrating given that those perks are something that most county taxpayers will never see in their own jobs."

Chief Executive Officer Bill Fujioka said Wednesday that his staff is still reviewing the Grand Jury's findings and will address all problems and issues that have been identified.

"We are meeting with the CEO next week to go over all the recommendations by the Grand Jury and then we'll develop a response to those recommendations," Auditor-Controller Wendy Watanabe said.

In the report, jurors identified 51 "unjustified luxury vehicles" costing more than $30,000 each that could be considered "excessive for routine county business."

Twenty of those vehicles were being used by employees in the county's health department, eight among the Board of Supervisors, seven in the public works department, three for librarians and 13 in other departments.

Jurors wrote that they also received information that some county departments were purchasing luxury sedans and high-end sports-utility vehicles for top executives.

"A review of departmental vehicle inventories indicates that some departments have purchased luxury vehicles for the department director or other senior managers," jurors wrote.

"Without clear direction from the Board of Supervisors, departments do not have a strong incentive to purchase vehicles that more closely meet the business needs of the departments and are priced at a lower cost."

Supervisors Michael D. Antonovich, Don Knabe, Gloria Molina, Zev Yaroslavsky and Yvonne Burke could not be reached Thursday for comment.

But a spokesman for Antonovich said the board is still reviewing the findings.

"Yes, we are reviewing and we will look at the report and act accordingly, once we've had a chance to review it in its entirety," said spokesman Tony Bell.

The most expensive vehicle identified in the report was a 2007 Acura MDX worth $49,511 that is the take-home vehicle used by Assessor Rick Auerbach.

Auerbach said he paid $10,511 of his own money for the vehicle to help offset its cost, and also uses his monthly vehicle allowance, plus $50, to pay for the vehicle.

"I looked for a car that was the safest, best car I could get that would meet the requirements of what I use it for," Auerbach said.

"I drive approximately 25,000 miles a year throughout the county. I don't have a driver. I spend a lot of time on the road. So I looked for the car that would best meet my needs, realizing I'm driving a lot and it's been written up as a very, very safe vehicle."

Other expensive vehicles included Antonovich's 2007 Cadillac DTS at $31,663, a 2003 Lincoln LS costing $48,192 and a 2007 Toyota Highlander hybrid SUV costing $38,322.

But Bell, Antonovich's spokesman, said the jurors failed to note that Antonovich's car is among the cheapest driven by the five supervisors.

"It was purchased used with 12,000 miles on it and he pays a portion of the monthly costs," Bell said. "We're operating on the premise this is an expensive car. The audit is flawed. It's obviously not compared to the costs of the other cars."

According to information from the Board of Supervisors' Executive Office, Knabe drives a 2008 Hybrid Chevy Tahoe that costs $57,134, while Burke drives a 2006 Chrysler 300 that cost $37,854 and Molina drives a 2007 Buick Lucerne that cost $32,409.

Yaroslavsky drives a 2000 Buick Park Avenue, Internal Services Department fleet car.

Jurors found the county's largest departments have 1,471 take-home vehicles, including 75 for deputies and other employees of the Board of Supervisors.

While many of the take-home vehicles are for employees who may need to respond to an emergency after normal work hours, others are a benefit as part of an employee's compensation package.

Generally, senior department managers are given county vehicles for personal use to drive home and to work.

But jurors wrote some departments have inconsistent take-home vehicle policies, which also places the vehicles at heightened risk of abuse or theft.

"Without formal justification, some take-home privileges may not be appropriate since there is minimal review and oversight to ensure adequate business need," jurors wrote.

troy.anderson@dailynews.com

(213) 974-8985

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

LASD drunk ON duty!

Yet another update to the 2008 story below. June 29, 2008 accident and it takes 15 months to get a guilty plea? This is an open and shut case. The OC Register (http://www.ocregister.com/articles/driving-county-moran-2587604-angeles-influence) reports: "Vicki Podberersky, Moran's attorney, said this morning that her client has already served most of his time on home confinement. She said he was placed on unpaid leave from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department when charges were filed against him (LAAG editor: approx. Feb 2009), but he will seek reinstatement." Oh and note how they don't like to talk about the fact he was on paid administrative leave for 6 months. Now they want LASD to hire him back. Sorry. No deal. Of course even if they have the guts to buck the union and fire him he will just go to another agency. Wonderful how we let the bad apples rot the whole barrel. Dont forget this accident was on duty and in a marked police vehicle. Also no word on the civil suit and eventual settlement the taxpayers will be picking up the tab on. It should be the officer and his private insurance who picks up the entire tab, including the county's cost of defense in the civil case and all these costly reinstatement hearings.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/sheriff-sentencing.html
Former L.A. County deputy sentenced in DUI crash that injured 2
September 30, 2009 | 2:50 pm

A former veteran deputy with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department was sentenced today to six months in jail and three years of informal probation for injuring two people when he crashed his department-issued sport utility vehicle into their car a year ago while under the influence of alcohol, said officials with the Orange County district attorney's office.

Moran, 43, of Buena Park was ordered to complete a three-month first-offender program and face a Mothers Against Drunk Driving panel, according to a statement from the district attorney's office. In such panels, offenders pay MADD a fee to hear victims or relatives of victims of drunk driving crashes relate their stories.

Moran pleaded no contest Feb. 27 to one misdemeanor count of driving under the influence, causing injury and one misdemeanor count of driving with a blood-alcohol level of 0.08% or more causing injury, according to the statement.

Moran was driving his Chevrolet Blazer south on Beach Boulevard in Stanton about 5:30 a.m. on June 29, 2008, when he crashed into a sedan near Garden Grove Boulevard, district attorney officials said. The sedan's 33-year-old driver and his 20-year-old female passenger were knocked unconscious and taken to a hospital. At the time of the crash, the sedan's driver was in possession of and tested positive for methamphetamine. He also tested positive for sedatives and opiates, the statement said.

His case is under review, said Keith Bogardus, an Orange County deputy district attorney. His name and the name of his passenger were not released because the investigation is ongoing.

--Ruben Vives


July 12, 2008 follow up info to story below (from various published news sources):

Witnesses reported that Deputy Robert Moran of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department ran a red light at Garden Grove Boulevard while driving southbound on Beach Boulevard at about 5:25 a.m., Amormino said.

Investigators say Moran was immediately relieved of duty and remains on paid leave, pending the outcome of a criminal investigation.

An internal investigation is expected to be launched when the criminal investigation is concluded.

So he is drunk at 5:25 am? Looks like a real long standing drinking problem. What was he parting all night at a Rave while on duty? Oh and if you read between the lines above they are going to wait until AFTER both the criminal case and the ADMINISTRATIVE cases (which wont even start until after the criminal case) are completed before deciding what to do with him. What a gig. There is about a 99% chance he violated the law but he gets to go surf at the beach while making full salary. Where can I sign up for this? If this guy worked for some private company he would have been fired the day after the accident. This type of behavior takes place as the Sheriff's dept. does not swiftly discipline its own via a citizen review board. Looks like our prior post was right on the money.

Prior posting below:

This is totally unacceptable. I can at least understand being drunk off duty...but on duty?...and then driving? We can only hope that the officer is held personally financially responsible for this action as opposed to the taxpayers. Public employees are the only class of citizens that we know of where they suffer no personal financial threat/harm due to activity like this. He will also not likely loose his job thanks to the union. Also he gets to sit home and collect a check until the 6 month investigation is over, which will likely find no wrong doing. I am sure this will get buried as quickly as possible by the LASD. The sad thing is if he was off duty there could likely be more personal responsibility as opposed to the taxpayers funding this jackpot.


L.A. County sheriff's deputy arrested on suspicion of drunk driving after on-duty crash
Authorities say the officer, on duty in Orange County, was en route to an investigation in Huntington Beach when his car collided with another, causing life-threatening injuries to one person.

By David Haldane, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 10, 2008

A Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy has been relieved of duty after being arrested on suspicion of drunk driving following a traffic accident while on duty in Orange County, authorities said Wednesday.

Robert Andrew Moran, an 18-year veteran of the department, was en route to an investigation in Huntington Beach when his sheriff's Chevy Trailblazer collided with a 1999 Mazda Protege at Beach and Garden Grove boulevards in Garden Grove on June 29.

Two occupants of the Protege were taken to hospitals, one with life-threatening injuries, said Jim Amormino, a spokesman for the Orange County Sheriff's Dept.

Moran, who witnesses said had run a red light, was arrested on suspicion of felony driving under the influence, Amormino said.

He was released after posting bail, but has been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of a criminal investigation. "We will monitor the investigation, then determine our next step," Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept. spokesman Steve Whitmore 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

Getting to the bottom of the fireworks enforcement problem

As LASD refuses to post up to date daily crime and call logs LAAG is forced to make Public Records Act (PRA) requests, which are usually only partly honored, if at all. The problem with the PRA in California is that there really is no teeth in the law. Government entities flout it and LASD I am sure is one of the best at doing so. Again as we have reported before, they don't want taxpayers to have detailed up to date crime info as it would show things are worse than they are telling you in the PR spin the council gives us via the council controlled publications we get. Secondly, they don't want you to know how little they really are doing to fight crime and "quality of life" problems (such as fireworks scofflaws). All the city council does is throw more money at it in terms of LASD overtime. It is almost like a kick back. Paying LASD more money is like pouring money down a rat hole: you will never see it again and it sure won't do you any good.

In any event our PRA sent to LASD today is reprinted in part below. We'll see what happens.

July 6, 2008
Total of 3 page(s) via e mail
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST

Custodian of Records for Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept.
Risk Management Bureau

Dear Custodian of Records:

Pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6250 et seq.), we seek to inspect and or obtain a copy of the following, which we understand to be in the possession, custody or control of your agency or department:

All the following records should be organized into these time periods and related only to the city of Lakewood:

July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2005
July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2006
July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2007
July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2008

Any and all DOCUMENTS (see fn 1) depicting, evidencing, referencing, referring, relating or pertaining to:

1. Any or all calls related to fireworks (calls for service) (along with address information on the calls)

2. Any or all dispatches of units for the calls above or related to fireworks complaints (along with address information on the dispatches)

3. Any or all citations issued related to fireworks calls or as a result of the dispatches in 2 above (along with address information on the cites)

4. Total overtime hours for LASD personnel including but not limited to total cost to city of Lakewood for such overtime;

5. Any or all injuries reported/discovered on 1 or 2 above or calls where LASD assisted with LA County Fire Dept. on the calls (along with address information on the calls);

6. Notwithstanding the foregoing dates, all reports related to any fireworks calls or injuries within 1000 feet of any side of Jose San Martin Park or Del Valle Park from July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2008


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

As memories of the 3/06 Dunrobin explosion fade...

Well it looks like things are back to "normal" in Lakewood. Fireworks problems (legal and illegal) are "better" than they were in July 2004-2005 but not as good as 2006-2007 (post Dunrobin explosion March 2006). One thing is for sure: Lakewood fireworks users don't give a damn about fires in CA! "Just give us our damn fireworks!" For all this overtime we taxpayers are paying for I never saw one sheriff car this July 4 (compared to numerous sightings on July 4, 2006). Hmmm makes you wonder if they spent all that 2008 overtime sitting behind some store.....or watching those new flat screens in the new 20 million dollar sheriff "palace"...We also wonder what portion of Lakewood's sheriff overtime money was spent in Lakewood vs some other nearby cities. From some of the reports (see #5) it sounds as if we may need to call out the national guard. I do know no one at the Lakewood Station takes vacation on July 4, but it sounds to me like they might as well.

LAAG readers report they are not too happy either..here are some reports:

Report 1:

You may wish to be attentive to a news story, or other area resident's stories, regarding a drunk 18 year old igniting illegal fireworks and possibly a stick of dynamite near San Martin Park late last night. It is my understanding that a dozen homes in the area, and cars, were damaged by the blast, including the 18 yr old having a chunk of his leg blown off. Lakewood city hired 50 deputies on overtime (time and a half) to patrol the streets for firework scofflaws. They began at 2 pm and virtually had no activity until 8 pm. So for six hours, 50 deputies fed at the city trough. The new fines and citations won't begin to offset the costs of a police presence. The amount of illegal fireworks I witnessed didn't seem any less then any other year. When you consider the city costs for all of this, you'd think we would come out ahead if the city just went ahead and gifted public funds to the football/soccer/baseball/cheerleader or whatever who claim they can't make it without firework stands. It has to be less then what we are paying deputies to drive around. As for the news story, I haven't seen anything about it yet. But possibly you have some readers that live in the area that are more informed.

Report 2:

We saw a bunch of police cars near the park, but we didn't know exactly what was going on because we had our own issue going on over here. One of our neighbors was shooting off huge illegal fireworks and we called LASD but the only thing they did was come by an HOUR later, then they took one look around the street, found nothing and then left. The neighbors then continued shooting off illegal fireworks until 1 a.m. .... Seriously. This city is a JOKE.

Report 3:

Lakewood sheriffs are the laziest pieces of trash I have ever seen in my life. On the 4th of july our very inconsiderate neighbors fired numerous illegal fire works off and when I called the sheriff's department I got a volunteer that took my complaint and knew nothing about the laws on fireworks in Lakewood. I had to tell him the law on it!

Then I told him that these people here are shooting of the illegal fireworks and hiding them in a vehicle nearby. The stupid, lazy sheriff came one hour later, rolled up in their squad car with police lights on one block away and, of course, all the illegal activity stops. They did the same tactic last year.

If reports come out this year that there were less people cited or arrested, it's not because things are better, it's because the LASD have figured out how to do less work. The sheriff who finally came by, didn't even shine his lights into the vehicle that contained all the illegal fireworks.

Now, if you wanted to catch these people, WHY would you run the police lights up and down the block you might ask? Because they don't want to fill out all the paperwork that would be involved. And why don't they make more arrests? Paperwork, paperwork, paperwork, and crap they would get from the jailers for making their 4th of july a lot more work-intensive.

What's the final outcome? Sheriffs are pissed off because they have to work on this holiday and they're going to do as little as possible; the jailers are pissed off if they have to do any extra work; and the law-abiding homeowners are pissed off because nothing is being done on their behalf; The only ones who benefit are the criminals who destroy property and maim others with not only illegal fireworks, but with "Safe and Sane" fireworks as well.

The other problem is that the so-called "Safe and Sane" people shoot off their fireworks right alongside the illegal people. So, next year I wonder what would happen if people put up signs in the neighboring cities that say something like: "THE CITY OF LAKEWOOD WELCOMES ALL FIREWORKS" because by not showing up and cleaning up this mess, that is essentially what they are doing--condoning it. And then call and call to report all the illegal activity going on. Videotape the illegal acts and send a copy to the Mayor and the rest of his Lakewood cronies who probably had a very good night's sleep last night.

Report 4:

I heard a similar story about this [stick of dynamite near San Martin Park], but it was my understanding that it was near Del Valle Park on Woodruff, not San Martin Park. What I heard was similar to what you said: a large explosive device, damaged cars and some drunk injured and arrested.

Report 5:

...With the shortage of trained Lakewood deputies, most of the two man cars assigned to firework abatement were filled on overtime by jail deputies with no patrol experience. And virtually in all of the contacts that deputies made during the night for fireworks, the were confronted with large groups of drunk individuals. Opting to get involved in a major disturbance or confrontation with odds not in their favor, most deputies avoided contact. They were outnumbered and back up wasn't always available. And in many areas of East Lakewood and Hawaiian Gardens, deputies were confronted with drunks firing handguns, rifles and shotguns in the air. Confrontations could have been tragic and the judgement of the deputies to become involved would have certainly been questioned. There wasn't anyway for them to come out with a win situation.

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

How to better your chances of getting results from City Hall

We get lots of complaints from readers about the lackluster response, if any, they receive from city hall and the Sheriff's. So we thought we would create a guide for the first time city hall "contacter". These are simple rules and if followed might get you somewhere. No guarantees but it sure will help when you use these rules and later follow up at a city council meeting on the staff's lack of response.

1. It is good to have a conversation with the city first about the issue. Try to be knowledgeable about the codes on line first before you call (if applicable) and make sure you talk to the right person and get their direct extension and full name (make sure the spelling is right).

2. Feel free to use the city's on line contact form here but beware...you have no way to track it from that system and it seems very unreliable. Many users have complained to LAAG that their so called "e" complaints "got lost".

3. If you want to use that system fine but we suggest either faxing in a letter with a summary of the conversation/complaint with the city employee after the call. The city's fax is (562)866-0505. Also if you have email use that. Get the full name and email of the person you contacted. Check the spelling. Also get the full name of the dept. head and cc them as well. Then also cc at least one council person and "service1@lakewoodcity.org" as that will make sure the request gets logged into their system via the general email system. I think all the on line complaint forms go to that address.

4. if you do not follow up the call promptly in writing I can pretty much guarantee that your "phone conversation" will be conveniently forgotten within 15 minutes as well as any responsibility of the city to follow up. You will also have no "proof" you ever made a complaint or what it was.

5. All these rules also apply doubly with the Sheriff's Department as they are even worse than city employees as far as follow up. All complaints to them must also be cc'd to the city safety people in charge of LASD so there is at least some political pressure for them to respond or take action.

6. LAAG can help route your request to the right people. Make sure you cc LAAG in your email by typing "Lakewood Accountability Action Group" updates@laag.us in the "cc" or "to" line so that we can see the request and track the city's response or lack thereof (or lack of timeliness) with you as well. Email also helps by adding a date to the request for tracking. Also use a descriptive subject and add phone numbers and property addresses at issue. Add in the same info as you used on the Lakewood service form.

7. Always keep in mind that the less you contact city hall the happier they are. They get paid whether working on your problem or not. So quite frankly there is a lot of incentive to "loose" or ignore your request or to pacify you with some sort of a "don't bother us we are busy" type of "lip service" response, while of course being courteous. It is called the polite city brush off. Most who have dealt with the city know what I am taking about. They are also really good at not following through on anything that requires effort, thought or making people follow the law.

The main thing to remember is that city council people want to get re-elected. If they make city employees go out and enforce laws they will be unpopular and not get reelected. They don't care about the complainers just the people that get complained against.

This is why Lakewood does not enforce any codes at all. It is a so called "complaint driven system" which is unlike many "normal" cities who do things like actually enforce parking laws without resident complaints. But that is another story.


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

"Green" Fireworks...the marketers at work

What is missing from the articles below is a discussion of so called "safe and sane" fireworks pollution and a real discussion about the effects of chemicals in the runoff after such "safe and sane" (aka "legal") fireworks have been shot off (burned) on the asphalt. What is in all that residue people wash off the streets and sidewalks into the storm drains and into the ocean? Has anyone tested it? Can you imagine how much of the toxic brew of chemicals is ending up in the ocean just from the safe and sane users in LA County alone?

Also the articles point out the little known effects of all these dangerous chemicals. It is amazing to us what outrage there has been by parents over lead in consumer products from China yet parents are more than willing to expose their kids to these toxic fumes from Chinese fireworks without batting an eye. Silly.

When you buy some "safe and sane" fireworks this year ask the sellers what they think about all this. You will get a blank stare and given the number of the PR agent for the smoke and fire distributors (or you can call China)

Also the mere fact that they are trying to make fireworks "greener" tells you that there is a problem. "Green fireworks" Wonderful. Now we will have the PR spinmeisters selling "safe, sane and green" fireworks when nothing could be further from the truth. Reminds me of the "smokeless", "low tar" and "light" cigarette campaigns.

Chemists brew 'greener' fireworks
Posted by Elsa Wenzel
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/86/8626cover.html

Researchers are working to reduce the pollution left by the shooting stars and bursting bombs that spangle skies in fireworks displays.

Efforts by Walt Disney and the military are driving the changes, according to a report by Bethany Halford in Chemical and Engineering News.
Fireworks

Fireworks may not cause ecological catastrophes, but researchers are exploring recipes that pose fewer health hazards.
(Credit: Sabrina Campagna via Flickr)

Fireworks have become more colorful within the last two centuries, but the basic technology hasn't changed much in 800 or more years since early forms of gunpowder were likely used in rituals and battles in China.

Staple ingredients are a fuel to create heat and an oxidizer to accelerate burning. Additional chemicals slow the burn, making the light show last longer.

Pyrotechnic cocktails borrow from the Periodic Table of the Elements for color.

Strontium and lithium may be used for red, barium and copper lead for green, and sodium glows golden. Calcium deepens colors. Zinc makes smoke clouds, aluminum sparkles, and antimony adds glitter.

In the past, lead and mercury were in the mix.

Among the toxic culprits being addressed lately, potassium perchlorate is a reliable and inexpensive oxidizer, but it has been connected to cancers and thyroid problems.

Environmental Protection Agency analysis of an Oklahoma lake between 2004 and 2006 found that levels of perchlorate rose in some instances as high as 1,000 times above normal after fireworks shows.

And fireworks can lead to hazier summer days, exacerbating asthma sufferers.

Scientists in Germany and at Los Alamos National Laboratory have explored reducing perchlorate, smoke, and carbon by using substances rich in nitrogen.

Los Alamos researchers responded to complaints some 10 years ago from Anaheim, Calif., residents about pollution from fireworks shows every night at Disneyland.

The theme park in 2004 announced it was adopting safer air cannons that use compressed air instead of a chemical propellant, eliminating black smoke.

DMD Systems of Los Alamos, N.M., uses nitrocellulose to create fireworks with less smoke and more eye-popping colors.

More customers are asking DMD for low-smoke fireworks, which are ideal for indoor displays, Halford noted.

Unless demand expands for eco-friendly pyrotechnics, which can cost twice as much as the majority (which are assembled cheaply in China), they probably won't splash in the skies any holiday soon, Halford told CNET.

Scientists at the University of Munich and Vienna University are thus focusing on low-smoke military flares rather than recreational fireworks.

There appears to be no solid estimate of how much pollution fireworks cause, but the ecological damage is relatively minimal, Halford added.

For instance, most releases of perchlorate come from rocket fuel and other military uses. And heavy metals from fireworks tend to disperse quickly in the environment.

Improperly-handled explosives likely pose more imminent dangers.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission counted fireworks-related injuries in 9,600 people in 2004. The rate of injuries per amount of fireworks released has declined in the early 2000s to nearly one-third the level of the early 1990s, according to the National Council on Fireworks Safety.

These tips for "greening" Independence Day celebrations come from the Environmental News Network.


http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-fireworks4-2008jul04,0,245124,full.story
From the Los Angeles Times
Along with beauty, fireworks create a beastly mix of pollutants
Traces of metals, fuels and other toxics can stay in the air and water for days, even months. Scientists are creating cleaner versions, but they're still not widely used.
By Marla Cone
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

July 4, 2008

When the rockets and the bombs burst in the air tonight, spectators will experience more than a spectacular show celebrating America's birthday.

When their blends of black powder, metals, oxidizers, fuels and other toxic ingredients are ignited, traces wind up in the environment, often spreading long distances and lasting for days, even months.

Although pyrotechnic experts are developing environmentally friendly fireworks, Fourth of July revelers this year will be watching essentially the same high-polluting technology that their grandparents experienced decades ago.

Throughout the Los Angeles region, concentrations of fine particles, or carbon soot, skyrocket for up to 24 hours after the Independence Day shows, reaching levels as high as those from wildfires.

Public health officials warn that people with heart problems or respiratory diseases, such as asthma, should avoid the smoky celebrations, staying upwind or indoors.

"I enjoy a fireworks display as much as anyone else, but we do have concerns about exposure to high levels of smoke and particles," said Jean Ospital, health effects officer for the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Also, traces of poisonous metals, which give fireworks their bright colors, and perchlorate, a hormone-altering substance used as an oxidizer, trickle to the ground, contaminating waterways.

One Environmental Protection Agency study found that perchlorate levels in an Oklahoma lake rose 1,000-fold after a fireworks display, and they stayed high in some areas for up to 80 days.

European chemists Georg Steinhauser and Thomas Klapotke wrote in a recent scientific journal that "several poisonous substances are known to be released in the course of a pyrotechnic application" and that they are dispersed over a large area.

"It is clear from a vast array of studies that traditional pyrotechnics are a severe source of pollution," they wrote.

The black powder, or gunpowder, used in most fireworks has an extremely high carbon content; when ignited, it fills the air with fine particles capable of inflaming airways and lodging in lungs.

Every July 4 and 5, the Los Angeles region suffers "generally poor air quality for particulates," said Philip Fine, the AQMD's atmospheric measurements manager.

Particulates can cause coughing, sore throats and burning eyes. For people with asthma or other respiratory or cardiovascular conditions, the effects are much worse. Hospital admissions and deaths from asthma, heart attacks and respiratory disease increase whenever particulate levels rise.

In the areas around fireworks displays, particulate levels increase about 100-fold and don't return to normal until around midday on July 5, according to AQMD data.

During a fireworks show in Indio in 2004, particulate measurements peaked at 847 micrograms per cubic meter of air, nearly six times the federal health standard. Particulate readings are averaged over a 24-hour period, so that was not technically a federal violation.

Metals in the air also surge, although they do not exceed state health guidelines. Nonetheless, they build up in waterways and soil.

Ironically, green-colored fireworks are the least "green" because the metal that produces the color, barium, is highly poisonous.

Scientists in India found that airborne barium increased by a factor of 1,000 after a huge fireworks display there. Strontium, which creates red, and copper, which forms a blue hue, can also be toxic.

"The use of heavy metals like barium or strontium should be reduced or, if possible, avoided," said Karina Tarantik, a chemist at the University of Munich in Germany whose lab is working on cleaner pyrotechnics.

Much of the new research has been propelled by concern over perchlorate, which has been used since the 1930s to provide oxygen for pyrotechnic explosions.

Perchlorate, which has contaminated many drinking water supplies from military and aerospace operations, can impair the function of the thyroid gland by blocking the intake of iodide. Fetuses are most at risk, because thyroid hormones regulate their growth.

Scientists have made significant advances in low-smoke and perchlorate-free technologies, prompted by the military, which uses flares and other pyrotechnics, and by Walt Disney Co., which stages about 2,000 fireworks displays a year.

In the late 1990s, Disney approached the Los Alamos National Laboratory with a request to develop cleaner fireworks to reduce smoke at Disneyland, which was prompting complaints to the AQMD from neighbors in Anaheim.

Instead of carbon-based materials, scientists there experimented with nitrogen atoms, which produced far less soot and smoke.

"In addition, because the high-nitrogen materials burn more cleanly, you could use less coloring agents. We were able to get much nicer colors with . . . less metals," said David Chavez, a materials chemist at Los Alamos.

Based on those experiments, Los Alamos chemists Michael Hiskey and Darren Naud took an entrepreneurial leave and founded DMD Systems.

Their fireworks use nitrocellulose, which is inexpensive and plentiful, and they emit water, nitrogen and carbon dioxide instead of smoke and perchlorate, Hiskey said. The metal content has been reduced by about 90%, he said.

The cost is about the same as for other U.S.-manufactured fireworks. Disney World in Florida has used his company's comets for about six months.

Disneyland developed aerial launchers that replaced black powder with compressed air in 2004. The resort puts on more than 200 fireworks shows each year, burning about 60,000 pounds of fireworks, far more than all the other theme parks and stadiums in the region combined.

"Now we're on a path toward creating the next generation of fireworks," said Disney Imagineering spokeswoman Marilyn Waters.

She said that other ultra-low-smoke and perchlorate-free technologies are already used in some Disney shows in Anaheim, Florida and Hong Kong and that an international team of vendors and scientists is testing more innovations.

But municipalities and civic groups, which buy inexpensive fireworks from China, can't afford the cleaner ones for their Independence Day celebration. So far, they cost about 10 times more than the Chinese-made ones.

"Everything they get is from China," Hiskey said. "It's going to be very difficult to break the China habit."

But John Conkling, an adjunct professor of chemistry at Washington College in Maryland and former executive director of the American Pyrotechnics Assn., is confident that environmental concerns are driving the industry.

"Certainly if we can replace perchlorates, the world will be a better place," he said.

"I'm optimistic that we will have fireworks shows down the road with much less perchlorate, if any, and we'll still have the spectacular shows we've always had," Conkling said. "I expect even by next season there will be less perchlorate in fireworks. Within a five- to 10-year period, we'll see major, major changes."

In the meantime, Hiskey has some Fourth of July advice: Where there's smoke, there are toxic substances.

"If I'm having trouble seeing things because it's so smoky, if the smoke is headed toward the crowd, that really stinks," he said.

marla.cone@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>
click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Fireworks ordinances in cities near Lakewood CA

We get lots of inquires about fireworks laws. This is a 2008 summary that we found useful for cities near Lakewood CA. We are not sure how accurate it is nor how current. Fireworks laws are in a state of flux, most becoming more restrictive as time goes by, thanks to some city councils having some common sense and protecting the voters from themselves or pyro neighbors.


Independence day ordinances
Article Launched: 07/03/2008 04:01:21 PM PDT
From www.presstelegram.com

Each city decides its own ordinance on the use of fireworks. Long Beach prohibits the use of all fireworks in city limits, while other cities such as Lakewood allow the sale, purchase and discharge of safe-and-sane fireworks during specified days and hours.

Non-safe-and-sane fireworks, like M80 s and bottle rockets, are considered unsafe and are illegal in California. Many question whether safe-and-sane fireworks are any safer and should be allowed at all.

Penalties for fireworks use vary from city to city. Those found using safe-and-sane fireworks in a city that allows their use, outside the specified times, may be subject to an infraction or administrative fine.

Downey, which allows safe-and-sane fireworks during specific dates and hours, had a 100 percent conviction rate on 72 firework citations for 2007, with an average fine of $700.

Depending on city municipal codes, cities may issue infraction citations (similar to those for running a red light) that are paid to the county court, or issue administrative citations that are paid to the city.

The use of any firework in Long Beach is at least a misdemeanor, and in any city felony charges can apply - for example, the use of an M80 carries a felony charge statewide.

Bellflower

Status: Sale of safe-and-sane fireworks permitted July 1-3 from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m., and on July 4 from 8 a.m. to midnight. Discharge permitted July 1-3 and 5 from 10 a.m to 11 p.m., and July 4 from 10 a.m. to midnight.

Penalty: Infraction citations of approximately $500; misdemeanor can apply.

Carson

Status: Sale of safe-and-sane fireworks permitted June 28 from noon to 10 p.m., June 29 to July 3 from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., and from 7 a.m. to midnight on July 4. Discharge permitted at noon June 28 around the clock until July 4 at midnight.

Penalties: Administrative citations of $100, $200 and $300 for first, second and third offenses. Misdemeanor charges could mean up to $1,000 fines.

Cerritos

Status: The sale or use of all fireworks, including safe-and-sane ones, is illegal.

Penalty: Misdemeanor charges subject to fine and/or jail time.

Downey

Status: The sale of safe-and-sane fireworks permitted from July 1-4 from noon to 8 p.m. Discharge permitted on July 4 from 3 p.m. to 10 p.m.

Penalty: Misdemeanor charges could mean up to $1,000 fines.

Lakewood (see details here)

Status: Sale of safe-and-sane fireworks permitted July 1-4 between 8 a.m. and

10 p.m. Discharge permitted July 4 between 10 a.m. and 11 p.m.

Penalty: Misdemeanor charges could mean up to $1,000 in fines and/or jail time.

Long Beach

Status: The sale and use of all fireworks, even safe-and-sane ones, is illegal.

Penalty: Misdemeanor charges could mean up to $1,000 fines and/or jail time.

Norwalk

Status: Sale of safe-and-sane fireworks permitted between July 2-4 between

10 a.m. and 10 p.m.; discharge allowed during same hours.

Penalty: Misdemeanor charges could mean up to $1,000 in fines and/or jail time.

Paramount

Status: The sale of safe-and-sane fireworks permitted June 28 to July 4 during the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Discharge permitted noon July 3-4, no restriction on hours.

Penalty: Infraction citations of $35; Misdemeanor charges could mean up to $1,000 fines.

Signal Hill

Status: The sale or use of all fireworks, including safe-and-sane ones, is illegal.

Penalty: Tiered infraction citations of $50, $100 and $250 for first, second and third offenses. Misdemeanor charges could mean up to $1,000 fines.


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

FIOS starts rolling out in North Lakewood

Lots of loops of fiber all over east of Bellflower Blvd and North of DelAmo. I look for the bright burnt orange tags on the fiber lines where they are secured to the poles. That is the telltale sign for fiber in this area as to where it has been stretched and secured to the poles already. They loop it en masse where they are going to put the tan fios boxes on the sidewalks. I have yet to see one of those installed yet. Funny how fast these guys are laying the trunk wire along major routes. Still not strung on the secondary poles yet for service. No rhyme or reason as to the map/system they are following to string the fiber. I assume they know what they are doing pursuant to some "master plan". Seems like it from the verizon fios guys I talk to on the street doing the work.

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

“I do not plan to order a statewide ban of fireworks, but...."

From: Governor's Press Office
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 2:25 PM
Subject: Gov. Schwarzenegger Issues Statement Regarding Fireworks and Current Fire Danger in California

GAAS:481:08

For Immediate Release: Contact: Aaron McLear

Friday, June 27, 2008
Will Rollins 916-445-4571

Gov. Schwarzenegger Issues Statement Regarding Fireworks and Current Fire Danger in California

Governor Schwarzenegger today released the following statement regarding the use of fireworks and the current fire danger in California:

“Public safety is my top priority, and I want all Californians to enjoy the upcoming Fourth of July holiday, but also to celebrate it safely.

“I do not plan to order a statewide ban of fireworks, but I do encourage fire-affected counties to take a good look at their resources and take the appropriate steps at the local level, including a fireworks ban if necessary, to protect their communities and prevent any further aggravation of our state’s already severe fire situation.

“Each year, fireworks cause hundreds of fires in California, leading to millions of dollars in damages. And right now in California, we are battling hundreds of fires and facing unfavorable weather conditions that include high winds, extreme heat, and the possibility of more lighting strikes. Our firefighters are the best in the world and are working around-the-clock to address the fires currently burning in our state, so they deserve our help in preventing further fire emergencies.

“I encourage all Californians to enjoy our wonderful national holiday safely, and to use every possible precaution when using fireworks—whether you are in a fire-affected area or not.”

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

Status of Fireworks Displays and Fireworks Regulation in the South Coast Air Basin

We find this report below very interesting and see it as a good first step. I see no reason why lawnmowers and light bulbs should be regulated for greenhouse gas problems (and other toxic air pollution issues) but not some of the most polluting stuff out there: fireworks. Also what do you think the effect is of everyone in the country shooting off backyard fireworks all during the month of July every year? Any idiot could surmise that the combined environmental detriment of all those backyard fireworks far outpaces the damages from one these theme park's 15 minute pro fireworks displays. Yet there is no investigation by AQMD or EPA. Hmmmm. Also the other thing that we like to point out is most other sources of pollution have a real and tangible benefit. For example cars help move people around. What tangible benefit do fireworks have other than excite pyros and enrich the Chinese manufactures and the US distributors of this "perchlorate porn"? Oh that's right it helps the kiddies buy new baseball uniforms...well never mind then....

We also find this gem of a code section in the report linked at the end of this article:

AQMD Rule 402; Nuisance & California Health and Safety Code sec. 41700-Nuisance
– "No Person Shall Discharge Pollutants, prohibit any person from discharging from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The only exemption contained in Rule 401/H&S Code 41700 is for odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals."


BOARD MEETING DATE: July 9, 2004
AGENDA NO. 25
REPORT:

White Paper on Status of Fireworks Displays and Fireworks Regulation in the South Coast Air Basin and Recommendation to Seek Letter of Agreement from Disneyland Resort

SYNOPSIS:

Various theme parks throughout Southern California routinely conduct nighttime ground level and aerial fireworks and pyrotechnic displays as part of their public entertainment programs. AQMD Rule 219 specifically exempts from written permitting requirements pyrotechnic equipment, special effects, or fireworks paraphernalia equipment that is used for entertainment purposes. However, fireworks and pyrotechnic displays are subject to AQMD visible emissions and public nuisance prohibitory rules. Staff has prepared a white paper that reviews complaint history regarding fireworks displays; and describes AB2588 Risk Assessment, AQMD particulate sampling analysis results, and current and proposed strategies at one theme park to reduce emissions from fireworks displays. The white paper also provides options developed by staff for the Board's consideration, regarding fireworks displays and/or potential AQMD regulations or activities to further mitigate emissions from fireworks displays and equipment.

COMMITTEE:

Stationary Source, January 23 and June 25, 2004, Reviewed and Recommended Alternative Action (Status Report Only)

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

1. Receive and file white paper.

2. Approve staff recommendations to:

a) Pursue a Letter of Agreement with Disneyland Resorts to continue development and implementation of alternative and new technologies to reduce total emissions and smoke resulting from fireworks and pyrotechnic displays; and
b) Report back to the Board annually regarding smoke reduction progress at the end of the next two summer seasons.

Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env.
Executive Officer

Background

Historically, AQMD and predecessor local county air pollution control agencies have exempted from permitting requirements pyrotechnic equipment, special effects, or fireworks paraphernalia. AQMD Rule 219 - Exemptions from Written Permit Requirements specifically exempts pyrotechnic equipment from permit requirements. AQMD prohibitory Rule 444 - Open Burning, also provides exemption from rule provisions for various fireworks and pyrotechnics activities. However, AQMD Rules 401 - Visible Emissions, and 402 – Nuisance, do not provide exemption for emissions from fireworks displays or pyrotechnics used in the creation of special effects at theme parks.

Disneyland Resorts, Anaheim, has used both aerial and ground level fireworks displays and pyrotechnics special effects as part of various public entertainment programs since 1956. AQMD has received seventy-three (73) public complaints alleging smoke and fallout due to fireworks from 1991 to present. AQMD has investigated these complaints but has been unable to substantiate the occurrence of any air quality violations as the number of complainants on any one occasion has not yet reached the threshold necessary to establish the legal requirement for a “considerable number” of affected persons.

In January 2002, Mr. William Fitzgerald, a board member representing “Anaheim Home Owners Maintaining Their Environment (HOME)” expressed concerns to the AQMD Governing Board regarding possible adverse air quality and health impacts resulting from exposure to emissions from multiple fireworks displays at Disneyland Resorts in Anaheim. AQMD further investigated this complaint and reviewed Disneyland Resorts’ AB2588 Health Risk Assessments of which the first was submitted in 1991 and subsequently updated in 1998 and 2000. The last two updates included emissions from all fireworks related activities conducted at the facility. These updated assessments showed that the facility Cancer Risks and Non-Cancer Hazard Index values were well below any notification requirements of AB2588 or the action levels of Rule 1402 - Control of Toxic Air Contaminants from Existing Sources.

Additionally, AQMD conducted air particulate sampling downwind of Disneyland Resort during fireworks display activities in March and June of 2002. The collected samples were processed in the AQMD Laboratory and the results were reviewed by the AQMD’s Health Effects Officer. The review showed no exceedances of the State’s Reference Exposure Levels (RELs).

To gain a broader perspective of fireworks displays in the South Coast Air Basin, AQMD staff also evaluated the fireworks display activities of four other Southern California entertainment theme parks and two professional baseball parks. When compared to Disneyland Resorts, these facilities conduct fewer fireworks displays and therefore use less pyrotechnics materials in their shows. Also, AQMD’s review found no public complaints regarding fireworks displays at these parks.

In August 2003, Mr. Fitzgerald expressed his concerns again to the AQMD Governing Board. In response to Mr. Fitzgerald’s subsequent concerns about emissions from Disneyland’s fireworks the AQMD Board directed AQMD staff to present an overview of the fireworks activities at Disneyland to the Stationary Source Committee. On January 23, 2004, and subsequently on June 25, 2004, AQMD staff made presentations on “Disneyland Fireworks Show and Air Quality Issues” to the Stationary Source Committee. The overview provided a historical summary of Disneyland’s aerial fireworks displays, complaint history, air quality concerns, AQMD actions to date, applicable AQMD rules, review of Disneyland’s AB2588 Health Risk Assessments, AQMD’s 2002 Disneyland sampling project and results, and Disneyland’s fireworks modifications and projected research to reduce visible emissions and odors. At the January 23, 2004 meeting, the Stationary Source Committee recommended that this information be presented to the full AQMD Governing Board for their review.

In preparation for the Board review, AQMD staff prepared the attached white paper “Status of Fireworks Displays and Fireworks Regulations in the South Coast Air Basin.” The report is a comprehensive review of AQMD’s regulations with respect to fireworks displays, complaint history, AQMD investigations and actions, and review of Disneyland Resorts and other entertainment park facilities’ fireworks activities. The report includes updated Disneyland Resorts information regarding new fireworks air launch technology and future low-smoke and ultra-low smoke explosives developments, which decrease the use of black powder, resulting in reduced ground-level visible smoke and odors. As a result of the research and experimental work accomplished by Disneyland Resort, their proposed 2004 fireworks net explosives are reduced by 33 percent in weight compared to material used in 2003.

Future Considerations

Based on the information available to date and as discussed in the white paper, AQMD staff provides the following response options for the Board’s consideration:

1. Continue to monitor local progress towards the development and use of air launch systems and low- and ultra-low smoke technologies with no change to current AQMD rule requirements and exemptions.
2. Initiate rule amendment activities that would remove the current AQMD Rule 219 exemption and require permitting of various fireworks and pyrotechnics related equipment and activities.
3. Initiate rule amendment activities to remove the current Rule 444 exemption and require the reporting and management of smoke related emissions from the detonation of fireworks and pyrotechnics related materials.
4. Enter into a Letter of Agreement with Disneyland Resorts to continue development and implementation of alternative and new technologies to reduce total emissions and smoke resulting from fireworks and pyrotechnic displays.

Staff Recommendation

Staff proposes 1) to seek a Letter of Agreement in which Disneyland Resorts commits to the continued use and ongoing evaluation and refinement of air launching technologies for aerial fireworks displays as well as continued research into the use and availability of low-smoke and ultra-low smoke explosives for use in their aerial fireworks displays with the goal of phased implementation of such technologies beginning in 2004 and through 2005-2007; and monitor the progress of these smoke reduction efforts and report back to the Board annually at the end of the next two summer seasons regarding the status of these efforts and their success in reducing firework emissions impact on Anaheim residents. However, it should be noted that the Stationary Source Committee recommended an annual status report only without a Letter of Agreement.

White Paper on Status of Fireworks Displays and Fireworks Regulations in the South Coast Air Basin


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