Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Greater Cypress Park NC Agenda - Marijuana shop discussion

Expand Messages
  • car2532002
    The owner of the 2 businesses should have been invited to hear the community concerns. They were not. When I was on the board I invited the owner to attend
    Message 1 of 6 , Jan 18, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      The owner of the 2 businesses should have been invited to hear the community concerns. They were not.

      When I was on the board I invited the owner to attend the meeting and he gave very useful information. He put to rest lies and rumors. Too bad that did was not the case at this last meeting. Next time I strongly suggest to invite the owners and let them defend themselves and give the truth about their businesses.

      Susan


      --- In nelalist@yahoogroups.com, hauntedcasa@... wrote:
      >
      > The Neighborhood Council did not invite anyone. It was requested by some
      > of the businesses for that item to be placed on the agenda.
      >
      > Belen
      >
      >
      > In a message dated 1/16/2013 6:24:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
      > car2532002@... writes:
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > This was one of the most attended meetings because of the discussion on the
      > medical marijuana stores. But, the owners of the 2 stores were not
      > invited. The neighborhood council did not want them there.
      >
      > Susan
      >
      > --- In _nelalist@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:nelalist@yahoogroups.com) ,
      > "rourk_us" wrote:
      > >
      > > hi, everyone,
      > > Here is the agenda for tues. night,
      > > Thanks,
      > > Rourk
      > > The public is requested to fill out a "Speaker Card" to address the
      > Board on any item of the agenda prior to the Board taking action on an item.
      > Comments from the public on Agenda items will be heard only when the
      > respective item is being considered. Comments from the public on other matters not
      > appearing on the Agenda that is within the Board's subject matter
      > jurisdiction will be heard during the Public Comment period. Public comment is
      > limited to 2 minutes per speaker, unless waived by the presiding officer of the
      > Board. Agenda is posted for public review at the Cypress Park Public
      > Library, 1150 Cypress Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90065; Super A Food Supermarket,
      > 2925 Division Street, Los Angeles, CA 90065; Cypress Park Community Center,
      > 929 Cypress Ave., Cypress Park Recreation Center, 2630 Pepper St. and
      > Cypress Park Job Center at Home Depot, San Fernando at Figueroa. In addition, the
      > members of the public may request and receive copies without undue delay
      > of any documents that are distributed to the Board, unless there is a
      > specific exemption under the Public Records Act that prevents the disclosure of
      > the record. (Govt. Code § 54957.5) In compliance with Government Code
      > section 54957.5, non-exempt writings that are distributed to a majority or all of
      > the board in advance of a meeting may be viewed by contacting the Board or
      > at the scheduled meeting. In addition, if you would like a copy of any
      > record related to an item on the agenda, please contact the Board. As a
      > covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of
      > Los Angeles does not discriminate on the basis of disability and upon
      > request, will provide reasonable accommodation to ensure equal access to its
      > programs, services, and activities. Sign language interpreters, assistive
      > listening devices, or other auxiliary aids and/or services may be provided
      > upon request. To ensure availability of services, please make your request at
      > least 3 business days (72 hours) prior to the meeting you wish to attend by
      > contacting the GCPNC Board.
      > >
      > > . CALL TO ORDER: WELCOME ALL STAKEHOLDERS PRESENT & TAKE ATTENDANCE OF
      > PRESENT BOARDMEMBERS.
      > > . APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
      > > . COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC OFFICIALS: (IF AVAILABLE)
      > > a. CD1 FIELD DEPUTY
      > > b. NELA POLICE DEPT
      > > c. LAFD FIRE STATION 44
      > > d. D.O.N.E.
      > > i. INFORMATION, DEMONSTRATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, Q&A (IF APPLICABLE)
      > > . PUBLIC COMMENT: COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD, STAKEHOLDERS, AND THE
      > PUBLICON NON-AGENDA ITEMSWITHIN THE BOARDS JURISDICTIONARE LIMITED TO TWO (2)
      > MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND THE SPEAKER MUSTCOMPLETE AND SIGN A SPEAKER CARD BEFORE
      > THE MEETING.
      > > . TREASURER'S REPORT: TREASURER IS TO PROVIDE EACH MEMBER OF THE BOARD
      > WITH COPIES OF THE MOST RECENT AND UP TO DATE FINANCIAL REPORTS ON APPROVED
      > ITEMS.
      > > . ACTION ITEMS: (NEW AGENDA ITEMS)
      > > a. GCPNC HAS BEEN REQUESTED TO APPROVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE
      > BUILING OF A NEW BUS SHELTER ON THE BORDER OF CYPRESS PARK & GLASSELL PARK.
      > > b. ALISSA SMITH, A STAKEHOLDER, IS REQUESTING AND SELF NOMINATING
      > HERSELF TO REPRESENT THE GCPNC ON THE LANCC OR BONC COMMITTEE'S
      > > c. GCPNC MOTIONS TO BEGIN THE PROCESS FOR CURRENT BOARD MEMBER ENRIQUE
      > FLORES FOR POSSIBLE REMOVAL FROM THE BOARD DUE TO EXCEEDING ALLOWED
      > ABSCENCES BY THE GCPNC BYLAWS. THE GCPNC IS TO CONTACT MR. FLORES BY THE 2/19/13
      > GENERAL MEETING.
      > > d. GCPNC REQUESTING TO CONTACT FORMER TREASURER, HUGO LOPEZ, IN ORDER TO
      > HAVE ALL GCPNC PROPERT (BANK STATEMENTS, REPORTS, RECEIPTS, DOCUMENTS)
      > THAT MAY BE IN HIS POSESSION AS HE FILLED THE ROLE OF TREASURER FOR THE GCPNC.
      > > e. GCPNC IS ACCEPTING NOMINATIONS TO ASSIST D.O.N.E. IN A NEW OUTREACH
      > PROPOSED PLAN TO INCREASE STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
      > COUNCIL.
      > > f. GCPNC TO DISCUSS, PRESENT, & TAKE POSSIBLE BOARD ACTION ON THE
      > CONCEPT OF EDUCATE, CELEBRATE, AND STOP HATE. PRESENTAION BY PATTY HEIDEMAN.
      > > g. GCPNC TO DISCUSS, PRESENT, AND TAKE POSSIBLE BOARD ACTION ON THE
      > TOPIC OF THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA LOCATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN OPENED UP WITH-IN THE
      > CYPRESS PARK BOUNDRAIES.
      > > h. GCPNC TO DISCUSS AND TAKE BOARD ACTION ON THE NEWLY REVISED BUDGET
      > THAT WAS WORKED ON DURING THE GCPNC BOARD TRAINING THAT WAS HELD ON 1/12/13
      > FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2012-2013.
      > > i. OMAR, REQUESTING THAT THE GCPNC POST-PONE ANY DISCUSSION & BOARD
      > ACTION IN REGARDS TO PROP K & THE "OLD CYPRESS PARK LIBRARY" UNTIL THE DEPT OF
      > REC & PARKS CAN SPEAK AND PRESENT TO THE BOARD THEIR CURRENT FINDING OR
      > SITUATION.
      > > . NEW BUSINESS: (NON- ACTION ITEMS)
      > > a. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS ON SUBJECT MATTERS WITHIN ITS
      > JURISDICTION AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.
      > > b. FUTURE BOARD MEETING DATES AND LOCATIONS:
      > > i. MEETING AT THE RIO DE LOS ANGELES STATE PARK ON 1/17/13 AT 6PM TO
      > DISCUSS THE POSSIBLE LAND USE BUILDING ISSUES AROUND CYPRESS PARK.
      > > ii. GENERAL AND EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING: FEB 19, 2013 AT CYPRESS PARK
      > REC CENTER @ 2630 PEPPER AVE @ 7 PM.
      > > . ADJOURNMENT.
      > >
      > > PROCESS FOR RECONSIDERATION: The Board may reconsider and amend its
      > action on items listed on the agenda if that Reconsideration takes place
      > immediately following the original action or at the next regular meeting. The
      > Board, on either of these two days, is to be scheduled at the next meeting
      > following the original action, then two items shall be placed on the agenda
      > for that meeting (1) A Motion for Reconsideration on the described matter and
      > (2) a proposed action should the motion to reconsider be approved. A
      > motion for reconsideration can only be made by a Board member who has previously
      > voted on the prevailing side of the original action taken. If a motion for
      > reconsideration is not made on the date the action was taken, then a Board
      > member on the prevailing side of the action must submit a memorandum to
      > the Secretary identifying the matter to be reconsidered and a brief
      > description of the reason (s) for requesting reconsideration at the next regular
      > meeting. The aforesaid shall all be in compliance with the Brown Act.
      > >
      >
    • Ray Bacon
      Susan, Please forgive my cynicism, but would the pot store owner s attendance convince you that his customers are only patients in need of medication? Park
      Message 2 of 6 , Jan 19, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Susan,

        Please forgive my cynicism, but would the pot store owner's attendance
        convince you that his customers are only "patients" in need of medication?

        Park outside any pot store during business hours for a while and see the
        types of folks who are "filling their prescriptions." The doctors who are
        used by these pot stores to refer potential customers have often written
        these "prescriptions" on a wholesale basis with little more proof than a
        claim of "migraine" headaches.

        I'm in favor of regulated decriminalization of cannibas merchandising, but
        the hypocricy currently in place which allows cannibas and drug
        paraphernalia sales in our neighborhoods would be laughable if not for the
        implied community consent.

        --Ray B

        On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:59 AM, car2532002 wrote:

        > **
        >
        >
        > The owner of the 2 businesses should have been invited to hear the
        > community concerns. They were not.
        >
        > When I was on the board I invited the owner to attend the meeting and he
        > gave very useful information. He put to rest lies and rumors. Too bad that
        > did was not the case at this last meeting. Next time I strongly suggest to
        > invite the owners and let them defend themselves and give the truth about
        > their businesses.
        >
        > Susan
        >
        > --- In nelalist@yahoogroups.com, hauntedcasa@... wrote:
        > >
        > > The Neighborhood Council did not invite anyone. It was requested by some
        > > of the businesses for that item to be placed on the agenda.
        > >
        > > Belen
        > >
        > >
        > > In a message dated 1/16/2013 6:24:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
        > > car2532002@... writes:
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > This was one of the most attended meetings because of the discussion on
        > the
        > > medical marijuana stores. But, the owners of the 2 stores were not
        > > invited. The neighborhood council did not want them there.
        > >
        > > Susan
        > >
        > > --- In _nelalist@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:nelalist@yahoogroups.com) ,
        > > "rourk_us" wrote:
        > > >
        > > > hi, everyone,
        > > > Here is the agenda for tues. night,
        > > > Thanks,
        > > > Rourk
        <snip>
      • car2532002
        Ray, that is a separate issue on whether this stuff is for medicine or not. My concern is not that. People are going to get the stuff off of their drug
        Message 3 of 6 , Jan 20, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Ray, that is a separate issue on whether this stuff is for medicine or not. My concern is not that. People are going to get the stuff off of their drug dealer if not by legal purposes anyways. People need to make their own choices. The city makes tax revenue rather then expenses locking people up.

          My real concern is that these pot shops are not a nuisiance to the neighborhood. Cypress Park only has 2 pot shops. One has been around for a while and the 2nd one just opened a block away. These 2 shops have not been a nuisiance. People come and go and that's it. No illegal activity outside the shops. The owner of the one shop is very strict on their customers. Any bad behavior and they can not come back. They do not want to be closed down so have very strict rules. The owner came to the nieghborhood council meeting when I was on the board. I invited him to attend. He gave very useful information. The other shop just opened. I don't know if it is owned by the same guy or not. But the same thing. There is no one loitering in front or any illegal activity.

          I am sure there are good owners and bad ones. The shops in Cypress Park do not seem to be a problem. I detest it when people lie about what is happening. That is why I like to bring in the owners to tell the truth. That was not done at the last Greater Cypress park neighborhood council meeting. The owners need to attend to stop lies and give the truth and hear the concerns of the neighbors.

          Susan


          --- In nelalist@yahoogroups.com, Ray Bacon wrote:
          >
          > Susan,
          >
          > Please forgive my cynicism, but would the pot store owner's attendance
          > convince you that his customers are only "patients" in need of medication?
          >
          > Park outside any pot store during business hours for a while and see the
          > types of folks who are "filling their prescriptions." The doctors who are
          > used by these pot stores to refer potential customers have often written
          > these "prescriptions" on a wholesale basis with little more proof than a
          > claim of "migraine" headaches.
          >
          > I'm in favor of regulated decriminalization of cannibas merchandising, but
          > the hypocricy currently in place which allows cannibas and drug
          > paraphernalia sales in our neighborhoods would be laughable if not for the
          > implied community consent.
          >
          > --Ray B
          >
          > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:59 AM, car2532002 wrote:
          >
          > > **
          > >
          > >
          > > The owner of the 2 businesses should have been invited to hear the
          > > community concerns. They were not.
          > >
          > > When I was on the board I invited the owner to attend the meeting and he
          > > gave very useful information. He put to rest lies and rumors. Too bad that
          > > did was not the case at this last meeting. Next time I strongly suggest to
          > > invite the owners and let them defend themselves and give the truth about
          > > their businesses.
          > >
          > > Susan
          > >
          > > --- In nelalist@yahoogroups.com, hauntedcasa@ wrote:
          > > >
          > > > The Neighborhood Council did not invite anyone. It was requested by some
          > > > of the businesses for that item to be placed on the agenda.
          > > >
          > > > Belen
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > In a message dated 1/16/2013 6:24:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
          > > > car2532002@ writes:
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > This was one of the most attended meetings because of the discussion on
          > > the
          > > > medical marijuana stores. But, the owners of the 2 stores were not
          > > > invited. The neighborhood council did not want them there.
          > > >
          > > > Susan
          > > >
          > > > --- In _nelalist@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:nelalist@yahoogroups.com) ,
          > > > "rourk_us" wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > hi, everyone,
          > > > > Here is the agenda for tues. night,
          > > > > Thanks,
          > > > > Rourk
          >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.