So who got to them?


hello burbank

Typical Burbank numbskullness.

Last month the city council voted unanimously to allow bike riders to walk their bicycles across the Mariposa Street bridge:


FireShot Capture 38 - - http___burbank.granicus.com_MetaViewer


But, just last week they refused to ratify this previously approved ordinance when it came back to them for a final vote.

Not one member voted for it:

(click to enlarge)


FireShot Capture 40 - City Council - Joint _ - http___burbank.granicus.com_GeneratedAgendaViewer


Instead, they sent the whole thing back to staff for a complete revision. Now our city council members want to completely ban bikes and bike riders from using the bridge at all.

Disgusting. Can these council people be any more transparent about their ridiculous favoritism towards this over-privileged group of neighborhood fanatics? Even worse, home horse stabling itself is inherently cruel to animals. Horses are social creatures, and those Rancho-ites who insist on keeping their animals at home are subjecting them to solitary confinement-like conditions.

And they’re worried about a bridge? What hypocrites.

It’s about time the City of Burbank start addressing this issue. We need to completely ban home horse stabling in Burbank. This “Rancho” crowd has been getting away with way too much and for way too long.

What year is this anyway? 1872 on the Ponderosa? Where are we living?

Great website here about the new nation-wide effort to get rid of home horse stables and restrictive stabling in general. Just like keeping caged elephants in zoos, people are finally starting to wise up about how cruel it all is. The effort’s catching on.

And about time, too. This barbaric, leisure time, elitism-with-animals fantasy world of theirs needs to be addressed at last.

No, eliminated.








Filed under Uncategorized

15 responses to “So who got to them?

  1. Anonymous

    Dead on, Semi. “The average horse in the average stable has around TWENTY TIMES LESS SPACE than an AVERAGE HAMSTER in his two-tiered cage.”

    • semichorus

      Yeah, this is a great issue — and one that is only being thought of now because of the arrogant selfishness of these Rancho horse fanatics.

      The council can’t have it both ways: be oh so concerned about the plight of Peggy Wood’s alleged “puppy mill” animals — of which there was absolutely no proof — and then turn a blind eye to these permanently installed horse-pens right down the street from them that some of these same activist clowns actually celebrate.

      Concern for animals here in Burbank? Ok, yeah — let’s bring it on. These barbaric home horse cages must be eliminated.

      • Deb

        I’m pretty sure that if horses were abusrd in the Rancho the horse lovers would step into action to put and end to the abuse. I have never seen a horse that looked unhealthy or sad in the Rancho.

      • Steve

        Wasn’t Luddies a big supporter of the protect dogs Rizzotti crowd ? How can she now turn a blind eye to the plight of horses kept in small enclosures ? Your right she was aghast at dogs un cages at Peggy Woods. So Luddies has a oedegree dog and a horse ? Double standard much here ?

  2. Burbank Bill

    Even the Leaderless OpEd today denounced the flip flop vote.. Even Will himself went 3 times to the bridge and didn’t see any bike vs horse incidents. In ALL the years the bridge has been there, none have occurred. Will also rightly pointed out the Rancho crowd ALWAYs complains in force and get their way if they don’t like a vote:i.e. whole foods , the GM site condos,etc. shouldn’t Emily have recused herself from the vote , as a resident there? Puffer and others have done so in the past when issues are on their street, etc.

    • semichorus

      According to the agenda-minutes result, Will didn’t vote to keep the original ordinance. So I’m not sure what his position is.

      Even though she doesn’t have to, EGL usually recuses herself from Rancho business (and then comes right back and butts in at oral communications because it’s supposedly her legal right to do so as a resident, at least according to Albano. Which btw is not an actual recusal when she goes up to the podium to lobby her fellow council members towards a specific result. The mind boggles at this contradictory behavior… and ridiculously bad legal advice from the city attorney.)

      Anyway, she only has to recuse herself when there’s a potential economic consequence for her with the item. I don’t think there is one here. Although if she has a horse and uses the bridge herself then there might be a common law conflict of interest. The case could also be made that having a private bridge like that just for horse owners could enhance the value of her property if she’s one of them and is living nearby.

      Usually the conflict is economic. Someone should find out her status with the horses.

      • Greg

        Emily needs to be gagged so that the rest of us don’t gag from listening to her and Rogers ? The man is absolutely insane

      • Nancy

        Semichorus I suggest that you seek guidance from the Protectorates on this issue after all they are the animal experts in Burbank

        • Joann

          Why such animosity toward the horses and their owners ? The Rancho is not a new area and horses are not new to the Rancho nor are they new to Burbank. Is the author on this blog on an agenda to change things simply for the sake of change ? True bikes were not a problem on the bridge or the horse trails since their inception however radical bike riders have created an issue in recent years. These radical bike riders have no regard for horses or for other people. We all see them on the streets they are the ones who seem to believe that traffic laws do not apply to them because they are bicyclists. This bridge and these trails were not designed for bikes they were designed for horses. It’s odd that people who would express concern for horses being contained in stables would also express an attitude that would interfere with and take away the horses exercise which requires the use of the horse bridge. So I must ask here is your real point that you don’t like horses and are simply using the bikes in an attempt to get rid of horses ?

          • semichorus

            Who says the bridge then goes only to the horses, presuming that there are problems? Did the horse owners pay for it? Is it on private horse property?

            It’s time for the horses to leave these R-1 homes. It’s no longer safe or healthy for them. This brouhaha stirred up by the Rancho people only makes the rest of us start to think about the bigger problem down there.

            • Joann

              You need to look into who the driving force was behind the bridge and why the bridge was needed. Here is a hint it was not needed for bikes. Did the city pay to build it or was it given to the city ? Hint the city did not pay to build it.

    • Norm

      Oh you mean Whole Foods is good enough for your neighborhood but not good enough for my neighborhood Emily ?

  3. chad

    If it ever becomes a public health issue, like spread of equine encephalitis, you may get your wish.

    • DixieFlyer

      Over the course of time, the R1-H designation shrank down to only one side of Alameda.

      The Rancho area adds another facet to our Great City.

      The aggressive behavior evidenced throughout our City by aggressive spandex clad bike riders has only added to the conflict.

      While some may rely on the statements attributed to one LA City employee, there actually is a problem or conflict once bike riders reach the end of the Equestrian Bridge in the City of Los Angeles.

      Try paying attention to the intersection of California and Chandler.
      Those STOP signs are for ALL of us, or at least they are supposed to.

      Domesticated horses are a part of our history, proudly.

      Our Rancho neighborhood deserves Neighborhood Protection and any effort to avoid senseless conflict with bike riders should be welcomed.

      • semichorus

        I think an equestrian district is fine, but these backyard horse pens have reached the end of their line.

        Years ago I had cousins who lived in Malibu Canyon. They had horses, and the talk always was that the animals needed to be outside during the day in pairs or threes, and with room to travel around. Like no less than 1/3 acre.

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s