LBReport.com

Perspective

Transparency Lacking In City Hall's Non-Response To Our Request For Public Record Docs re Belmont Shore Area / Ocean Blvd. Lane-Erasing "Road Diet"/Diagonal Parking


LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.
(Sept. 25, 2016, 10:45 a.m.) -- On August 15, 2016, LBREPORT.com made a request under the CA Public Records Act (CA Gov't Code section 6250 et seq.) seeking access to the following records:

All communications, reports, memos, texts, emails, videos, tapes, power-points, letters and the like from July 15, 2014 to date in the offices of the City of Long Beach's Department of Public Works, Traffic Engineer, Marine Safety Bureau, LBPD, LBFD and/or Councilwoman Suzie Price that concern, refer or relate to diagonal parking, a "road diet," lane narrowing or other traffic calming measures along portions of E. Ocean Blvd. The records requested include but aren't limited to traffic studies, safety studies, communications with constituents and/or current or prospective business owners/operators/developers or entities.

[Scroll down for further below.]

The CA Public Records provides in pertinent part:

  • Gov't Code section 6250: In enacting this chapter, the Legislature, mindful of the right of individuals to privacy, finds and declares that access to information concerning the conduct of the people's business is a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state.

  • Gov't Code section 6253(c): Each agency, upon a request for a copy of records, shall, within 10 days from receipt of the request, determine whether the request, in whole or in part, seeks copies of disclosable public records in the possession of the agency and shall promptly notify the person making the request of the determination and the reasons therefor. In unusual circumstances, the time limit prescribed in this section may be extended by written notice by the head of the agency or his or her designee to the person making the request, setting forth the reasons for the extension and the date on which a determination is expected to be dispatched. No notice shall specify a date that would result in an extension for more than 14 days. When the agency dispatches the determination, and if the agency determines that the request seeks disclosable public records, the agency shall state the estimated date and time when the records will be made available. As used in this section, "unusual circumstances" means the following, but only to the extent reasonably necessary to the proper processing of the particular request:
    (1) The need to search for and collect the requested records from field facilities or other establishments that are separate from the office processing the request.
    (2) The need to search for, collect, and appropriately examine a voluminous amount of separate and distinct records that are demanded in a single request.
    (3) The need for consultation, which shall be conducted with all practicable speed, with another agency having substantial interest in the determination of the request or among two or more components of the agency having substantial subject matter interest therein.
    (4) The need to compile data, to write programming language or a computer program, or to construct a computer report to extract data.

    (d) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to permit an agency to delay or obstruct the inspection or copying of public records. The notification of denial of any request for records required by Section 6255 shall set forth the names and titles or positions of each person responsible for the denial.

    (e) Except as otherwise prohibited by law, a state or local agency may adopt requirements for itself that allow for faster, more efficient, or greater access to records than prescribed by the minimum standards set forth in this chapter. [which LB's City Council hasn't done]

On August 16, 2016, the City of Long Beach acknowledged receipt of our request by indicating it intended to take the maximum allowable statutory time:

We received your request. Occasionally, when a request involves unusual circumstances or requires a search within several City facilities, our normal response time is delayed. Consequently, pursuant to the Government Code, we are extending the time within which to identify responsive records. We anticipate a response to your request on or before September 8, 2016. Thank you.

We received nothing on Sept. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17 or 18. On Monday Sept. 19, we contacted the City Attorney's office about this. Our experience in the past has been that the City Attorney's office is attentive and responsive when informed of Public Records Act issues. In recent days, we separately learned that the City Hall staffer who'd been handling records requests retired recently, so what happened may be a "fall through the cracks" snafu, but at this point we honestly don't know.

During the interim delay, City Hall agendized an item for the Sept. 20 City Council's "consent calendar" (items with no discussion unless requested by a Councilmember or addressed by the public) that sought approval to allocate FY17 General Fund taxpayer dollars to various Council district projects, almost all benign or clearly consensed (tree stump removal, naming a bridge for a beloved local athletic figure.)

But buried among the list of items were three line items allocating sums for the lane-erasing "road diet" and diagonal parking, which could then be implemented without further Council discussion or approval.

LBREPORT.com blew the whistle. We reported the upcoming Council action here and here...and (to borrow a phrase from radio's Larry Elder) "the fit hit the shan." We reported what took place here.

No, we still don't have the public records we requested. Yes, we'll report what City Hall's latest traffic engineer says. Yes, we'll report what the 3rd dist. Councilmember says, but we'll continue to pursue the public records behind their words. The public has a right to know how and why public officials spend public money as they do.

The images below were prepared by city staff and provided to an area resident several weeks ago.



Developing.


Opinions expressed by LBREPORT.com, our contributors and/or our readers are not necessary those of our advertisers. We welcome our readers' comments/opinions 24/7 via Disqus, Facebook and moderate length letters and longer-form op-ed pieces submitted to us at mail@LBReport.com.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement



blog comments powered by Disqus

Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:


Follow LBReport.com with:

Twitter

Facebook

RSS

Return To Front Page

Contact us: mail@LBReport.com







Adoptable pet of the week:





Carter Wood Floors
Hardwood Floor Specialists
Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050


Copyright © 2016 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here. Privacy Policy, click here