Now he's done it! 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?
Here's the email. We'll let you know if they respond. Don't hold your breath:
______________________
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://laanimalservicesboardwatch.blogspot.com/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: NONEd.
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?
- Why?
e.
10/27/2008 "Cancellation Notice": Dated 10/27/2008
Meeting canceled.
Explanation: NONE- Did you really not know that the meeting was canceled until the morning of the meeting?
f. 10/14/2008 "Cancellation Notice."
Dated: 10/8/2008- one week prior to the scheduled meeting THE BOARD OF ANIMAL SERVICES COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR 10:00 A.M. ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2008
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?
3) I understand that Mr. Brown has resigned from the Commission. What is the "official" reason for this?- 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?
4) We are seeking up to date bios for the Commissioners.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.
Happy Holidays.Jeff de la Rosa
BoardWatch general email box:
laboardwatch @ gmail.com
to have bones or chew toys which might have helped.
Well, more than two years later and after Stu has suffered for that long with pain, bleeding gums and now lost teeth, Jeff's at it again.
With renewed prodding (and because Jeff has had a win in Superior Court (see case BS104874) over his Constitutional Rights being violated by Stuckey-remember him?- and the Hearing Examiner George Mossman and Capt. Karen Stepp -remember her?-and Debbie Knaan-remember her?) LAAS has finally succumbed to getting what's left of Stu's teeth "cleaned." However, they did it without Jeff's permission (after they asked for his permission and he imposed terms) and PUT STU UNDER GENERAL ANESTHESIA WITHOUT FIRST PERFORMING A BLOOD TEST-also without Jeff's permission.
Ed Boks is burning mad because Jeff has beat the City in court, without a lawyer, and is about to do so again for Stu and himself. Cost to you , the taxpayer in the above case was $736 in costs plus many hours of your City Attorney's time. Attorney Todd Leung makes about $200,000 defending Jeff's legal actions over his dogs. Your money.
In Part II, we'll look at Boks's lies (with actual letters and emails) and most recent effort to prey on Stu and Jeff; and Dr. Jeremy Prupas's blunders and poor judgment (which may end up as being determined to be malpractice) and the Board's refusal to address this matter at the direction of Ed Boks , Dov Lesel and the Mayor's buffoons.
Merry Christmas, Stu.
_____________________________________
Here's today's letter from Jeff to "Hoss" re: California Public Records Act.
Jeffrey de la Rosa
[ADDRESS DELETED]
December 24, 2008
via EMAIL and FAX to: (213) 482-9511
Ross Pool
City of Los Angeles
Department of Animal Services
221 N. Figueroa Street, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90012
RE: VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT
Dear Mr. Pool,
On Wednesday, December 17, I wrote to Mr. Boks, Dr. Prupas and Board Vice President Commissioner Riordan and requested copies of the following Public Records:
You did not return my call. I later discovered that you were actually in your offices at the time of my call on Friday and had not “left for the day.”
Mr. Pool, I am not stupid, as you very well know. I have the right to immediate access to these records during business hours. It is common knowledge that my dog, Stu, is the most well-known dog abused by your department in recent history. Any fool would assume, and rightly so, that all records pertaining to Stu are within a few seconds of you and General Manager Ed Boks at your main administrative offices. It is equally unbelievable that you “don’t know where the records are” when you are apparently “in charge of ALL the records.”
As has been the case many times in the past regarding my requests for public records as well as those by others: You are in violation of the California Public Records Act, particularly California Civil Code (C.C.C.) §6253 (a) which states:
(a) Public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency and every person has a right to inspect any public record, except as hereafter provided. Any reasonably segregable portion of a record shall be available for inspection by any person requesting the record after deletion of the portions that are exempted by law.
and
(d) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to permit an agency to delay or obstruct the inspection or copying of public records.
You have been aware of my request since December 17, 2008 and have done nothing to comply with it. After you disingenuously stated that you “don’t even know where they are” I asked you to specify which shelter may have the records so that I may go there to inspect them. You failed to furnish that information. Regarding the requested contract-- please be aware that public contracts are not excepted under the CPRA.
(San Diego Union v. City Council, 146 Cal.App.3d 947 (1983)).
Please also be advised that you and the City are now liable for damages, costs and attorney fees pursuant to California Civil Code §§1798.45-1798.48 You may be personally liable for damages as well as the City being liable for damages. If Mr. Boks has instructed you to “delay or obstruct” the inspection of these records, they are equally liable.
As you know, I have been for a very long time urgently concerned about Stu’s health and the delay tactics and cruelty by your department in these matters has caused me severe emotional distress which is compensable under applicable law.
When you are served with the court action for the most recent act of your habitual transgressions of the law, please do not misconstrue legal action as a withdrawal of my request.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey de la Rosa
CC: Council President Eric Garcetti; Councilperson Dennis Zine; Councilperson Tony Cardenas; Councilperson Bernard Parks; Commissioner Kathleen Riordan; Ed Boks, General Manager ; Jim Bickart Edmund Brown, Attorney General, BoardWatch, LA Animal Watch.