If you can make it there, you’ll make it anywhere!
Tonight’s the night when we get to see several dozen subliterate early 30-somethings go on and on about how talented and brilliant each other are with how they’ve put together their more-than-derivative TV-show-looking movies.
No surprise then that the only decent filmmakers of the bunch aren’t being allowed entry into the country. It’s perfect. You won’t hear it being phrased this way tonight of course.
No, really, we’re just kidding. Movies are better than ever!
What would happen if a local Marxist-Leninist Man-Boy Love group suddenly decided to start a Facebook page entitled “City of Burbank”?
The thought of such a thing is delightful, isn’t it? Especially if it was a “closed group.”
You can imagine the wailing and lamentation. Half the city attorney’s office would be in court the next day at 8 a.m., and the other half would be flying to Facebook headquarters with injunctive threats and paperwork in hand.
It would certainly be proof that this town wantonly picks and chooses just who can operate under their name.
Somebody should really try to do it if they can figure out how to get around Facebook’s policy sheet. It’d be fun to watch the meltdown.
David Hunter needs to sue the C-O-B and council members for what are by now obvious First Amendment violations
Enough’s enough already on this ridiculously restrictive and censorious local government organ known colloquially as the closed-group “City of Burbank” Facebook site.
When Vice Mayor Rogers uses it tonight as an official city council channel of communications and resident-input vehicle, and yet they still ban admission to the residents they don’t happen to like, it’s high time for the courts to get involved on free speech and equal access grounds.
Local activist David Hunter complained to the Leader last week that he’s not being allowed entry to this group. Nor are others. He makes a great point in his letter to the editor about this blatant act of political blockade, and we think that something formal really does have to be set into action now about that problematical little page. Run as it is by the mayor and his family, Hunter and other similarly affected parties need to visit an attorney soon and take legal action against both them and our cahoot-ish city government.
This Facebook group — named as it is the “City of Burbank” — is clearly being run under the aegis and approval of the city itself. It’s become an active agent of the city, if that wasn’t the intention from the beginning. By allowing entry to only select, pre-approved individuals, a First Amendment and prior restraint line has been crossed repeatedly with the participation of these city officials in the performance of their duties. It can no longer remain “closed.”
This intermingled, phony third-party City of Burbank site has become more than just a problem for Albano and the C-O-B. It’s become a local outrage, and we think most judges would agree that a city named site run by city people talking about city business must be open to all. It’s become a clear third-party front and agent for the city council and city government.
They’d surely ask why it wasn’t.
[Correction: Yes, we got the two Davids mixed up on the first go round. Blame the Leader’s paywall, which can be hard to consistently get around.]
Isn’t it interesting how no one on these two networks happened to mention the following? Yet they’ve been talking about the Trump administration’s actions here all day.
MSNBC has been getting all high and mighty about this all day. How dare Trump do this!
No, how dare they went along with the blacklisting. And then have buried the story about the solidarity protest of Time and AP.
Impact on schools. After conversations with the superintendent, the developers were under the impression that Burbank High School could handle any influx of students. We shared our impression, as parents, that in fact the Burbank high schools are overcrowded and resources are stretched thin. They pointed out that the school tax on construction — which goes directly to the schools and not into the general fund — might help mitigate this problem.
While this was not said, my impression after looking at the plans, is that these apartments are not intended for families anyway so it’s unlikely we’ll see an increase in school-aged children. With an on-site gym, a rooftop pool, and a shared-workplace facility, they seem to want to appeal to young professionals. (In my opinion whether the rare millennial who can afford $2000/month one-bedroom apartment will opt to live in Burbank instead of in Silverlake or off-Sunset remains to be seen, but that is beyond the purview of this discussion).
2K a month ain’t that much for a one-bedroom any more. Anywhere. And even if it is a lot to pay, the place will still be full of kids — especially if these studio singles flee Burbank for Atwater.
Why is that?
Remember when that fancy pool-on-the-roof and Nautilus-ready apartment house opened on Olive and Sixth back in the late 70s? They said the same thing about its lack of appeal for families. But when the courts finally ratified the illegality of “adults only” apartment houses in California this same joint immediately filled up with kids. The pool’s long gone but the families are still there.
And on what planet is this BUSD superintendent living on? A thousand + units and not much impact on BHS?
After reviewing the candidate forum that was just held as well as the recent Leader article on the subject, a couple of quick questions arise-
– Is there a consistent point of view in the bunch? Pro-growth, slo-growth, anti-growth, anything substantive?
– What specific goals does each candidate want to attain? Not platitudes, but specifics.
– Given the lack of specifics, why in the world are they interested in being on the city council in the first place? They get a thrill just managing?
– Why can’t any of them come up with a decent defining slogan? Honesty and Integrity, Slo-Growth, Let’s Give Away the Store, anything?
This management crowd just doesn’t quit, do they? From today’s Leader about recent grants received:
In Burbank, a more esoteric effort was awarded $375,000. The city wants to research the viability of a state financing method that could be used to build infrastructure in a commercial-industrial area known as the Golden State district near Hollywood Burbank Airport.
Esoteric, hell. It’s a blatant attempt to get around Sacramento’s prohibition on RDAs.
The California Legislature has made it perfectly clear that there’s to be no more local government top-down redevelopment zones. In any fashion or subterfuge.
Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts are community-development tools available as a way for cities to potentially capture the growth of property values in designated areas and invest the money from that growth into the city’s infrastructure.
“There’s lots of caveats to [the financing districts], which is why we want to study it, and this tool hasn’t really been used in California yet. It’s still somewhat new,” said David Kriske, Burbank’s assistant community development director.
What “infrastructure”? The whole thing sounds sleazy and underhanded. You can’t do that in this way without also having economic control over what goes on there.
I.e., a new Redevelopment Agency. No matter what they want to call it.
This city doesn’t get the point of it all, do they? They didn’t like that big change several years ago and they’re still in denial.
All feel-good hype aside, will any of our council members be asking this important question? Will they be satisfied with the answer? Or will they instead take their proper leadership role seriously and actually set police department policy for the city? It might be a first if they do.
Chief Bratton was just on MSNBC right now. He thinks that most local police departments probably won’t go along with Trump on this, and shouldn’t. Our prediction is that the BPD will instead become active and enthusiastic immigration agents for the federal government.
Why? Because it’s in the blood. But as a department they’ll definitely be in the minority here, unless you live in Oklahoma or rural Ohio or some other backwater joint. That’s something to emulate, eh?
Remember, this is the same town which let Tom Angel slide by on his obviously bigoted and incredibly ignorant and hostile emails about Muslims and Mexicans. And without a peep of protest from any of our current council members.
They even let Albano ridiculously claim that none of that noxious crap was sent to other Burbank employees, or came back from any. Yeah, right.
It’s just that kind of town. It’s always been that kind of town.
So how will the BPD be cooperating with the Trump administration’s new immigration enforcement orders?
Is anyone on the council going to be asking this question? Are they going to follow state law, or Trump? Whose side is the membership on?
Why too doesn’t Burbank consider becoming a sanctuary city? You have the balls to bring this idea up, Will?
Don’t believe the current hype: the BPD does indeed inquire about the immigration status of selected targets
Something btw that the LAPD does not do.
If LA cops are called upon the scene in some criminal or traffic matter they don’t suddenly add to the problem by going off topic and acting like the official immigration patrol. By express LAPD policy they completely stay out of this area.
So does the NYPD, and even so vigilant a law-and-order guy as Rudy Giuliani supports this policy. In fact, he initiated it years ago.
When LaChasse and the BPD claim that Burbank only goes into immigration matters as part of other situations (not as “sole”), all he’s saying is that his department doesn’t violate state law by pulling people over just to check their papers.
Unlike LA, Burbank though will often use the individual police calls as an opportunity to roust suspected illegals about their status. They then turn them over to the federal authorities if there’s any doubt about what’s going on. And they’ve been doing this for years.
This is not appropriate behavior for a local police department, and it’s also counterproductive to good and effective law enforcement. Inquiring about immigration status both creates fear in and antagonizes the very community they’re sworn to protect.
Such a policy also has its roots in bigotry. Think the city council cares?
From the Leader article:
The Burbank Police Department is not affected by this [Trump executive] order,” Losacco said. “We will continue detention, arrest and jail procedures as usual.”
According to Burbank police policy, a person’s immigration status should not be the sole basis of contact or arrest unless it proves relevant to a criminal offense of investigation.
How would immigration status be relevant? A crime is a crime on its own. Being illegal is a criminal offense too, and so an “investigation” into this status alone could indeed make it “sole” cause for arrest or detention..
The council needs to pin down LaChasse about exactly how and when the BPD checks on the immigration status of contacts. And then ask around. People like Rogers who claim that they care about these sorts of policies and police behaviors need to care in public.
Interesting thing about that Leader article. Notice how no one official would go on record about these practices and policies? Or even talk to the reporter?
Nor homelessness, either. The comments from some of our individual council members last week (as recorded today in the Leader) show that the majority of them won’t even back a 1/4 cent sales tax increase for overnight shelters.
Welcome to the 19th century. On this one Talamantes and Frutos are totally correct, and Gordon’s being the lamebrain. Something has to be done about the problem, as it has been in other and more sophisticated communities.
Maybe it’s time to move. Here’s a handy site that’ll tell you where to get your application in and when. Note that Sonoma County (and Monterey) always has an open list. You can apply at any time.
There are much nicer places to live than Burbank. The old Rust Belt areas have some fantastic deals, especially for older folks who aren’t that old. Ever seen upstate New York? The weather’s not that bad (NYC’s been almost 70 degrees the last couple days). They also have more active and accessible housing lists where you don’t have to wait a hundred years to get situated.
Trust us on this one: Burbank’s a pit. Culturally it won’t get any better. The smart money’s heading out quick.
Here’s a hint: it’ll be exactly what ever it takes to justify building a brand new facility across the street that wouldn’t be warranted in the absence of this same conveniently timed “model.”
And btw … if service to the Burbank community is an actual and legitimate concern here, how come this same Central Branch isn’t kept open on Sundays? You’d think that would be close to No.1 on the list of good things to do now, wouldn’t you? And not too hard to accomplish.
It’s all kind of inconsistent, isn’t it? Not doing what you can right away? The better word perhaps is “hypocritical.”
One building that many people would like to see updated is the Central Library, which opened in 1963. Goldman said that talks about modernizing that facility have been going on for years, even as far back as 1989.
“This year, we’ll be updating [that] set of options to match our new service model, demonstrating what level of service would be possible within either the existing building, the existing building with a small addition or in a new, potentially larger building on a different site,” she said.
If you read the actual survey you’ll see that the major concerns of the public are access and materials. Not rec rooms, community centers, 3D printers. ESL classes, or more sitting room for coffee klatches and entrepeneurial-minded moms on the make.
But who’s reading these days. Right?
The WeLoveBurbank! Facebook page is currently citing complaints about how the free hamburgers that Grocery Outlet was giving away yesterday weren’t very good and didn’t come as part of a combo. Apparently they weren’t taking special orders on them either.
Such small portions too no doubt.
Do Burbankers realize that this kind of behavior makes it impossible to attract decent businesses? Who with any class would want to be here.
It’s the one part of the past that we wish would.
We’ve been hearing today all about how the “We Love Burbank” Facebook wires have been burning up in anticipation of the grand opening of that new discount food outlet in town. How exciting, no?
Burbank obviously deserves little more. So why make the effort. Bon appétit, dipshits.
See anything good here? We thought so.
We’ll be spending the long weekend watching the snow melt in Central Park.
This might do in passing:
One of the saints of the age.
16:20 has never been explained. Who’da thought years earlier that it would come to this?