Leader’s bullshit article about that Naomi “fence”

We’ll get into this a little later, but that new Leader article today about the fence issue over on Naomi is terrifically dishonest. The complainant in the case is not disputing the existence of the fence at all (no, we’re the ones doing that!) In fact, she’s the one who installed it in the first place back when she owned the property!

Which is somehow being used as a point against her… ? Instead, she’s complaining that the new owner violated the Code by replacing the original wrought iron work with completely opaque slats. A perfectly legitimate gripe this is, and one that even the city agreed with.

That’s why it was on the council docket last week — it had required an official city approval which the complainant wanted the council members to override.

The Leader even goes on to impute that this same complainant might have improperly abused the appeals process in order to illegally harass the current owner. Can you imagine? On just what planet might this be?

That fence is absolutely gawdawful. It needed a Code override. And yeah, these council members would all love it if their own neighbors suddenly put up front walls like this all up and down their own blocks. Walls for Pepper Street, yes!

You’d see a Code change so fast “your head would spin.”

The real question is why such a monstrosity could even be close to being allowed in the first place. That’s what the council should be remedying. Where are we living now, El Monte?

Bring in the roosters then. They might as well.

Have people in this town lost their frigging minds? Who thinks this new front fence wall is at all OK?

You know what such things do to the property values nearby? This hypocritical city council of ours would only allow such a thing in Burbank’s traditionally lower-income minority and “gang” neighborhoods. One that here — until we stepped in a few years ago — they all used to officially refer to as “The Thornton Enclave.” What does that obvious bigotry tell you?

If this were an affluent White neighborhood there would have been some major handwringing going on last Tuesday night. Don’t let anyone fool themselves about this. It’s Burbank we’re talking about.

Try a “five-foot” wall stunt like this up on Bel Aire and watch what happens.






Filed under Uncategorized

11 responses to “Leader’s bullshit article about that Naomi “fence”

  1. Anonymous

    You’re right semi the fence is atrocious and would not be allowed anywhere else in Burbank. The neighbor had a legitimate appeal, she wasn’t complaining about the fence being there just that it was altered.

    • semichorus

      The fact that someone or someones are now trying to slander this woman and impugn her motives raises some serious questions. Anyone would be complaining about this now opaque front wall. Who’s kidding whom.

      The original wrought iron was completely different. I don’t like that either, but there’s nothing inconsistent about her complaining about the later change.

      These council members will be doing double-backward-somersaults when and if this same complaint were lodged up on, say, Olive Ave or Angeleno. It’s just so fucking hypocritical for them to approve the thing on Naomi, and then go beyond this to insinuate that she’s guilty of bad-faith abusive process.

      If I were here I’d hire an attorney. SHE’S the one being retaliated against. She deserves a retraction from the Leader.

      • Kate

        Actually the fence is not atrocious at all and other fences and solid walls in the neighborhood are even higher. If the woman doesn’t like fences she really should never have built it to begin with but Semichorus take a look at the complainers home and you will discover what is atrocious in the neighborhood.

        • DixieFlyer

          The Public Hearing delivered some actual meat.

          Various photographs illustrated many points, graphically.

          The letters of complaint re: color of paint etc established attitude.

          History played a role in the decision according to the questions and answers.

          Watch the tape, and learn.

  2. American Voter

    Climate change and the world laughs at our stupidity on the issue as green jobs take down the American economy.

  3. Anonymous

    So now a fence means bigotry ? How about we petition the government to require the removal of all locks from all doors to prevent bigotry ? Maybe a fence could be ugly but isn’t private property ownership a constitutional right ?

    • semichorus

      It’s bigotry for the council to be allowing this kind of crap in the lower-income ethnic neighborhoods, when they would all be crying REAL TEARS for the neighbors if it were going on anywhere else.

      And where else do we see such monstrosities but “The Thornton Enclave”?

      These council members know I’m right, and it pisses them off. That’s why they’re suggesting going after this woman for bad faith harassment. It’s a blatant attempt to deflect attention from the real issue by engaging in retaliation and trying to make HER the problem.

      Classic Burbank thug tactics. You’ve got White people and Tio Tacos running the show here. It’s been that way for years.

  4. Nancy

    Didn’t she also admit she built the fence without a permit and then complain the new owner updated it without a permit ? She lost my support right there it was this surreal i didn’t get a permit but you should have thing.

    • semichorus

      She was complaining about how the fence had been made opaque, not that the fence in fact existed. It was OTHER people who were complaining about the thing being there in and of itself.

      And the last I heard, two wrongs don’t make a right (and I believe it was the block wall that had gone in w/o a permit, not the fence). And it’s hilarious that the people who are modifying the fence (or defending it) are now castigating the appellant for the fact that she first built it without getting a permit and that THEY are then benefiting from its use. They can’t have it both ways, regardless of what she once did.

      The word’s “hypocrisy.” Again, she is NOT complaining about the existence of this fence. We are. There seems to be some confusion there, as well as a vast amount of point-missing.

      In any sane World of Burbank, this city council would have IMMEDIATELY sought a recension of any zoning rule that allows such horrid, front-wall style fences. If not, they want them to then start springing up all over Burbank?

      Instead, they want to go after the complainant!

      Each of these council members is a rank hypocrite as well, because they would all FREAK if their own neighbors started putting these things in. The issue at hand is the existence of these “five foot” opaque fences, not the appellant.

  5. chad

    It’s not “global warming” it’s climate change. Big difference.

    • DixieFlyer

      Say chad, make sure the “enviromaniacs” get “the word”.

      They are the one’s who have confused the issue for some time.

      One even complained about Burbank having “too many tree’s”???

      People caring about their City AND it’s environment are NOT NEW here.

      Check how many years we were declared a “Tree City USA”

      Check when we installed a Water Treatment Plant, and started providing Recycled Water in Burbank.

      Weather Cycles aren’t NEW to us either, check the tree rings.

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

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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