City Attorney Dion O'Connell Makes Important Clarification Regarding Council's "LIMITED" Public Forum
PROGRAMMING NOTE: ZUMA DOGG "LIVE" IN STUDIO , THIS FRIDAY WITH KEVIN JAMES on 870-KRLA HEARD 9p-11p. [Probably 10pm hour. Listen online if away.]
Now that ZD has cooled off a bit and DE is left standing, looking at the past year's wreckage; he wanted to put in a call to Council "line enforcer", Dion O'Connell, to let him know that he can hopefully go back to doing nothing, like he did before ZD first burst through Chamber doors like the Tazmanian Devil. AND...to mention a couple of things on the serious, "realest dough" regarding the meetings. Specifically, my speech volume FROM THE PODIUM, DURING MY OWN COMMENTS -- AND, the fact that if they already have a "public hearing", but make changes/amendments, then they need to open it back up for public comment.
Regarding the volume of my voice: Here's the entire conflict between the two sides of the rope. Regarding Rights, as protected under the First Amendment, there is always going to be a "gap" between what a politician running the meeting is comfortable with, and what is actually allowed. [I'm not pointing fingers at Spring Street...I mean IN GENERAL, and not even only politicians.]
However, in Eric's case, I DO feel he is a little too strict in his enforcement (especially if you combine it with an uncomfortable issue). But let's even leave out the part about "depending on the issue" for this argument:
CLICK "READ MORE"
I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT YELLING "Hooooody hoooooooooo!" from the benches while other people are talking. I am not talking about standing behind CMs during presentations with Matt and Mike, like the Harlem Globetrotters. AND I AM NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT "SCREAMING" FROM THE PODIUM.
I do think there IS a gap however, betweeen ZD's "worked up on the issue/passionate/go get 'em/let's do it/politician voice -- and what Eric is comfortable with. He likes Jazz, I like AC/DC. Tell the damn technician to turn the SPEAKER levels down a little when ZD speaks (but keep the mic volume for TV).
Because when I am not able to go "full steam ahead", I can't get all my information out. (And wouldn't THAT be a Statewide tragedy!) If you enforce time, you use a clock. If you enforce sound, you should use a decibel meter, IF you are going to be an extra "sissy" with the sound. (Hey, last week, I would have said "pussy".)
So bro, I'm not talking "Hell's Bells", but just enough to allow me to get into "full steam ahead" mode. Cause you also must consider, this is ZERO of an issue in committee meetings (notice the difference...I'm "meek" in my delivery.) And the NC meetings, Review Committee meetings, SCAG...ZD is so low-key? So what is the difference? (BESIDES COUNCIL, YOU HATERS...) THE ROOM! THE CHAMBER IS A HUGE MARBLE ROOM WITH GIANT CEILINGS, AND IT TAKES A LOT TO CUT THROUGH. Even if I am allowed to "SHOUT DOWN THE ROOM" by law, all I really want to be able to do is be able to speak at a volume, that covers up the volume of eveyone else talking in the room.
Cause believe it or not...for as loud as ZD is to everyone else...when I hear "rumbling", it throws me off track, and I end up raising my voice, just to cover it up. So hopefully, if Eric knows I'm not doing it just to be mean, he will be able to judge the difference, and enforce it as such.
AND NOW, to Dion O'Connell, who would also like to add that Eric runs a pretty good meeting. And if it wasn't for having to deal with the "ZD/envelope stuff", even ZD will say would be FANTASTIC. (I'm not saying that still doesn't make him shady as hell, but as far as the orderly process of running the meeting and knowing "what's up" I don't think anyone is better suited of the fifteen).
BUT HERE, is what Mr. City Attorney brought to my attention this morning: The "Public Forum" of Council meetings is not quite the same as the public forum, of let's say, a park. You can stand in a park and yell, "Council Sucks" nice and loud.
However, I am told these 3x a week "Shadifests" on Spring Street are "limited public forums". In other words, it's like a "mixed-use" meeting. Not ONLY are they holding public hearings, but they are doing City business, too. So you can't be yelling, "Don't wear fur", at the top of your voice, when they are in the middle of hearing a report from the City Planning Department, in order to make a decision on city business.
I said, "DION, why hasn't anyone mentioned this to the public?" So, if this is true (and I feel he's "right on this, until proven wrong", we have to let the people know this, so they don't come walking in on "fill the bleachers" day, thinking they can do a Riverdance on the podium, because it's a "PUBLIC MEETING". And before you know it, their wrists are cut and bloody, like that senior citizen lady a couple months ago. Or a contused wrist like this other guy.
And this just hit me. ZD DOES feel like it may be a "conflict of interest" to have the councilmembers who are making the decisions and taking the votes, also run the meeting. Maybe the role of Council President, should be MUCH more like an actual judge, separate from Council, like the City Attorney and City Clerk. And the meetings will be run by the City of Los Angeles like other departments. That way, they can still be shady BEHIND closed doors, but at least it won't affect the open process of the meeting. AND I DO FEEL IT IS! (Overall in government, not just you Eric.)
contact: zumadogg@gmail.com
ZumaTimes.com
Now that ZD has cooled off a bit and DE is left standing, looking at the past year's wreckage; he wanted to put in a call to Council "line enforcer", Dion O'Connell, to let him know that he can hopefully go back to doing nothing, like he did before ZD first burst through Chamber doors like the Tazmanian Devil. AND...to mention a couple of things on the serious, "realest dough" regarding the meetings. Specifically, my speech volume FROM THE PODIUM, DURING MY OWN COMMENTS -- AND, the fact that if they already have a "public hearing", but make changes/amendments, then they need to open it back up for public comment.
Regarding the volume of my voice: Here's the entire conflict between the two sides of the rope. Regarding Rights, as protected under the First Amendment, there is always going to be a "gap" between what a politician running the meeting is comfortable with, and what is actually allowed. [I'm not pointing fingers at Spring Street...I mean IN GENERAL, and not even only politicians.]
However, in Eric's case, I DO feel he is a little too strict in his enforcement (especially if you combine it with an uncomfortable issue). But let's even leave out the part about "depending on the issue" for this argument:
CLICK "READ MORE"
I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT YELLING "Hooooody hoooooooooo!" from the benches while other people are talking. I am not talking about standing behind CMs during presentations with Matt and Mike, like the Harlem Globetrotters. AND I AM NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT "SCREAMING" FROM THE PODIUM.
I do think there IS a gap however, betweeen ZD's "worked up on the issue/passionate/go get 'em/let's do it/politician voice -- and what Eric is comfortable with. He likes Jazz, I like AC/DC. Tell the damn technician to turn the SPEAKER levels down a little when ZD speaks (but keep the mic volume for TV).
Because when I am not able to go "full steam ahead", I can't get all my information out. (And wouldn't THAT be a Statewide tragedy!) If you enforce time, you use a clock. If you enforce sound, you should use a decibel meter, IF you are going to be an extra "sissy" with the sound. (Hey, last week, I would have said "pussy".)
So bro, I'm not talking "Hell's Bells", but just enough to allow me to get into "full steam ahead" mode. Cause you also must consider, this is ZERO of an issue in committee meetings (notice the difference...I'm "meek" in my delivery.) And the NC meetings, Review Committee meetings, SCAG...ZD is so low-key? So what is the difference? (BESIDES COUNCIL, YOU HATERS...) THE ROOM! THE CHAMBER IS A HUGE MARBLE ROOM WITH GIANT CEILINGS, AND IT TAKES A LOT TO CUT THROUGH. Even if I am allowed to "SHOUT DOWN THE ROOM" by law, all I really want to be able to do is be able to speak at a volume, that covers up the volume of eveyone else talking in the room.
Cause believe it or not...for as loud as ZD is to everyone else...when I hear "rumbling", it throws me off track, and I end up raising my voice, just to cover it up. So hopefully, if Eric knows I'm not doing it just to be mean, he will be able to judge the difference, and enforce it as such.
AND NOW, to Dion O'Connell, who would also like to add that Eric runs a pretty good meeting. And if it wasn't for having to deal with the "ZD/envelope stuff", even ZD will say would be FANTASTIC. (I'm not saying that still doesn't make him shady as hell, but as far as the orderly process of running the meeting and knowing "what's up" I don't think anyone is better suited of the fifteen).
BUT HERE, is what Mr. City Attorney brought to my attention this morning: The "Public Forum" of Council meetings is not quite the same as the public forum, of let's say, a park. You can stand in a park and yell, "Council Sucks" nice and loud.
However, I am told these 3x a week "Shadifests" on Spring Street are "limited public forums". In other words, it's like a "mixed-use" meeting. Not ONLY are they holding public hearings, but they are doing City business, too. So you can't be yelling, "Don't wear fur", at the top of your voice, when they are in the middle of hearing a report from the City Planning Department, in order to make a decision on city business.
I said, "DION, why hasn't anyone mentioned this to the public?" So, if this is true (and I feel he's "right on this, until proven wrong", we have to let the people know this, so they don't come walking in on "fill the bleachers" day, thinking they can do a Riverdance on the podium, because it's a "PUBLIC MEETING". And before you know it, their wrists are cut and bloody, like that senior citizen lady a couple months ago. Or a contused wrist like this other guy.
And this just hit me. ZD DOES feel like it may be a "conflict of interest" to have the councilmembers who are making the decisions and taking the votes, also run the meeting. Maybe the role of Council President, should be MUCH more like an actual judge, separate from Council, like the City Attorney and City Clerk. And the meetings will be run by the City of Los Angeles like other departments. That way, they can still be shady BEHIND closed doors, but at least it won't affect the open process of the meeting. AND I DO FEEL IT IS! (Overall in government, not just you Eric.)
contact: zumadogg@gmail.com
ZumaTimes.com
Posted by Zuma Dogg @ 7/02/2007 10:33:00 AM
17 Comments:
The previous guy is right: you are a totally hypocritcal censor, yet want to be allowed to continue to disrupt meetings. Your contrition apparently lasted all of maybe one day. You ARE an embarrassment to our whole city, and a waste of time. I myself am a journalist and believe in free speech but if you look at ANY other context in which REAL journalists operate, NO politician would tolerate you. (Not even insignificant actors, like Jolie, etc. etc. on the stupid entertainment shows/venues; can you imagine if there were MORE of you?)
Do you think you're alone in the city -- what if, of all the millions who live here, even a dozen did what you do, even five... In fact, you've had a negative impact already, e.g., those women in Van Nuys who keep turning up and talking about the same nothings AND scolding the CM's... you degrade the system, and if more citizens SAW what you do, paid attention, they would be 99% for banning you.)
You'll probably censor this, too, but want to be heard at taxpayer expense by OUR paid reprentatives however obnoxious/wasteful you are.
wow 12.14
now ur saying the women in Van Nuys don't count either?
and my memory seems to recall some positive criticisms coming from Van Nuys, thank you very much.
leave them out of it.
what's wrong with you?
If the opinion of someone who watches city council regularly, I deeply appreciate ZD's, Matt's and Michael's appearances.
They're not only informative and entertaining, it keeps the SOBs in check. Their knowing that these people, including Miriam and Sharon in Van Nuys, are at least five people who watch closely, is an important checks & balances.
12:14 says, "You ARE an embarrassment to our whole city, and a waste of time."
You must be talking about the mayor. Now there's a real embarrassment to the city.
There certainly seems to be an inverse relationship at City Hall between the significance of the comments, and the amount of time the people concerned take to say it; and also, the level of courtesy. When people come in with truly compelling issues, they get to the point quickly and address the CM's respectfully, however much they may disagree. The mere fact that these gadflies are now known by name, using OUR city channel as "their" platform, reinforces that they are about their own PR, not about making important points. (And indeed, those women also talk about themselves as financially struggling, one of them also crashing at a friend's place -- do any of them or you, Matt Dowd, believe your presense is so welcome and valuable to the general public, that you can't all go find jobs or some community volunteer work that actually has tangible benefits?)
I have never met Matt or any of them, but to answer your question, YES, I VALUE THEIR PRESENCE.
I'm sure if there were a poll of the general public, you enablers of this motley crew would be in the bottom 1-2% of the general taxpaying public.
To the loser who said, "In fact, [oh really...it's IN FACT?] you've had a negative impact already [let's see the Impact report, douche], e.g., those women in Van Nuys who keep turning up [and that IS my fault, you are right] and talking about the same nothings [beause YOU have decided it's nothing? It's something to them, loser] AND scolding the CM's...[as opposed to violating state and federal law, time and time again the way they do. Should I have been more polite to the officer who was crushing my wrist? And say what you want...nothing mertied that.] And I guess because YOU don't like those ladies who are doing what they are supposed to, it's cause they followed Pied Pier Dogg?
Look Just how the loser who I don't want to hurt his feelings so I won't say his name, uses words like, "You ARE (whatever) to the WHOLE City" (survey please, loser)
But even more hilarious, from this person who is most likely not an NC boardmember is this one:
I'm sure [OH YOU ARE SURE?] if there were a poll of the general public, you enablers of this motley crew would be in the bottom 1-2% of the general taxpaying public. [WOW! You can pinpoint results to a 1% range, on such an an obscure topic, with no previous research to even estimate off, and be SURE about it? YOU SHOULD GET INTO RESEARCH. You could just take the money and give 'em the results. NO WONDER YOU ARE SUCH A LOSER THAT NOBODY LIKES...There's this little nobody who used to walk around NC meetings losing his cool, and storming out of the room. He used to quote fake stats with similar certainty. Both you guy are a loser. (Get it...BOTH you guy...not plural. Now chill out before your head explodes.)
"AND REMEMBER A WARNING FROM YOUR MODERATOR THAT YOU ARE AT THE MERCY OF...I WILL DELETE ANY POSTS CONTAINING ANY GRAPHIC LANGUAGE, SLANDEROUS LIES (ZD & CHUCK ARE LOVERS), OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT JUST RUBS ME THE WRONG WAY AT THAT MOMENT!" 07-01-07 Zuma Dogg
Just a reminder. He makes it very convenient for himself.
2:44pm,
"OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT JUST RUBS ME THE WRONG WAY AT THAT MOMENT!"
common loser, i was making fun of your crybabying...doesn't that look like humor to you?
CONGRESSMAN! CUT IT OUT...YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE WHO IS THAT MUCH OF A BABY AND ARGUES ON SUCH WEAK BS. THAT'S WHY YOU GET BUSTED EVERYTIME. YOU ARE DEGENERATE.
So, 2:29: You're saying YOU are an NC Boardmember? LOL, help us, tell us which one so we can be on the alert. I have a few ideas...
So, Zuma, you are now saying that you will leave ALL posts on?
I agree you make it convenient for yourself to be shady.
4:22pm,
Ummm...wait...what??? Oh no, you got me...You are so smart. I've been wrong about everything and delete all the critical posts. I can't find any. You win, you are not inferior minded to Zuma Dogg and you DON'T wish you had what he is trying to throw away.
4:22pm,
No, I DIDN'T say I was going to leave all posts "on". I said, if you are are posting sexually deviant and graphic material I WILL DELETE IT, I WILL DELETE IT, I WILL DELETE IT...I WILL DELETE ANY SEXUALLY GRAPHIC REFERENCES AS TO WHO IS DOING WHOM?
capishe?
How is this even a credible blog when Zuma deletes 90% of the other comments?
“bro, not every caller gets through the radio station, not every letter to the editor gets printed in the paper, not every request gets played by the dj...don't trip. I SHOULD start manicuring the comment section of my threads and weed out the losers. I might start doing more of that.”
Zuma Dogg 07-03-07
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home