Stu's Dad went and sent an email to the Commissioners and "Hoss Fool", Board "whatever", and asked for some answers to some of our most burning questions-- like:
- Why does Hoss state on every agenda that the Brown Act prohibits the Board from responding to public comments when that prohibition EXISTS NOWHERE in the Brown Act.
- Is this the same Brown Act that governs the City Council who has no problem responding to public comments?
- Why did the Board meet only ONCE in 4th quarter 2008 when 6 meetings are mandated by law?
- What happened to President Brown (he apparently quit in a huff after the "Ed Boks Trial" (link to video)on October 7?
- Is it a coincidence that the Board went dark for 3 months following the "Ed Boks Trial?"(link to agenda)
- Who's on deck to fill Brown's (often) empty seat?
show details 8:09 PM (1 hour ago)
Dear Mr. Pool and Commissioners:
I don't have an email address for Ms. Ponce so I request that you provide one.
Perhaps you are aware of the new blog at http://
Due to the postings there and elsewhere, it seems that there are difficulties with the Board holding meetings.
I'm writing to ask what they are.
If you like, you can consider this a formal Request under the California Public Records Act, in which case, I would expect a response within10 calendar days or by January 1, 2009. you have my mailing address or any of you are encouraged to respond by email.
A few questions concerning the Board meetings:.
1) Mr. Pool always places the following paragraph on meeting agenda documents:
Public Comments: The Brown Act prohibits the Board and staff from responding to the speakers' comments.
Some of the matters raised in public comment may appear on a future agenda.
I have scoured the Brown Act (attached for your convenience) but can find no mention of this prohibition.
In fact, City Council permits Councilpersons to respond to public comments in 50 words or less.
- Please cite the code section or provide a copy of the Board Resolution or Motionwhich prohibits Commissioners from responding to public comments,
- or in the alternative, immediately remove this paragraph from your agendas and place in its steadwording that would let the public know what manner of address a Board Member may use in responseto public comment.
- Even better, place this question on your next agenda for discussion.
2) The following meetings are listed on your website as follows:
a. 12/22/08 "CANCELLATION NOTICE" dated 12/17/2008 -5 days before the scheduled meeting.:
Meeting canceled. Explanation: NONE.
b. 12/8/2008 "COMMISSION NOTICE" : dated: 12/1/2008 One week prior to the scheduled meeting.
Meeting canceled. Explanation: "NO MEETING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED BY THE BOARD OF ANIMAL SERVICES COMMISSION FOR DECEMBER 8, 2008. THE NEXT MEETING IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 22, 2008. PLEASE CHECK THE DEPARTMENTS' WEBSITE FOR THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING TIME AND PLACE."
- What is the difference between a "Cancellation Notice" and a "Commission Notice?"
Really, the Board did not schedule a meeting? There is one for this day on the 2008 schedule which , I assume was approved by "the Board."
c. 11/24/2008 "CANCELLATION NOTICE" :
Meeting canceled. Explanation: NONE. Announcement Dated: NONE
d. 11/17/2008 "NO MINUTES"-
- Did this meeting take place?
- If so, when will the minutes be posted?
- Did the Board approve the 2009 meeting schedule which is in violation of Los Angeles Administrative Code Sec. 503?
- If so, why?
- On this agenda are approval of the minutes from August meetings.
- Does it really take 3 months to prepare meeting minutes?
- Did you really not know that the meeting was canceled until the morning of the meeting?
HAS BEEN CANCELLED [sic]. THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING WILL BE HELD ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2008 AT 10:00 A.M,
ROOM 1060, LOS ANGELES CITY HALL, 200 NORTH SPRING STREET, LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90012
- * Interestingly, and coincidentally , this meeting was cancelled on the day following the Special Meeting on Oct. 7 held by the City's Personnel Committee.
- Who canceled this meeting and why?
- When will the Board fill that vacancy as they are permitted to do under L.A.A.C. Sec. 503(a)?
- Is Commissioner Riordan to be considered "acting" President?
Please provide them at your earliest convenience.
- The people really want to know who the Commissioners are and what their agendas are, if any?
These are my questions concerning the 4th quarter 2008. I will address other quarters in my next email.
Several writers , including myself, will be contributing will be contributing to BoardWatch and we are certainly looking
forward to answers to the above questions and explanations where none are given.
We believe that there is a lot of work to be done in the Department of Animal Services and would like to know
what is keeping the Board from doing that work--for the animals and for the people. I am sure that the Board
will gladly and timely answer the questions I've posed as they must all be very concerned about the animals in the shelters who are waiting for someone to help them. We have given up on Mr. Boks and the Mayor and now turn to you.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation and your dedicated service to the animals and the people of Los Angeles.
Jeff de la Rosa
BoardWatch general email box: laboardwatch @ gmail.com