Long Beach Post: Police Promise West Division Residents "Significant" Change Within Three Months

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Police Promise West Division Residents "Significant" Change Within Three Months

by Greggory Moore | Staff Reports | 01.27.12 |

| Text Size:

9:45am | Speaking Thursday night to residents at a "town hall" held in response to five shootings this month within the West Division, Commander Josef Levy said police have upped their patrols, and promised that noticeable change -- in particular, reduced gang activity -- is coming in the near future. "I'm asking all of you to give me three months," said Levy, who was named West Division commander in mid 2010. "Three months and you'll see a significant difference."

Several persons in attendance referred to a recent rise in gang activity. "From my observations, this community's in the middle of a gang war," said one resident. But Levy said there is no "crisis situation.

[�] There is definitely not a gang war." Levy did say that the "vast majority" of shootings in Long Beach are gang-related, and he admitted that gang activity is a problem in the area, particularly the area around Washington Middle School, which 1st District Councilmember Robert Garcia (who helped organize the meeting) called a "neighborhood in transition." "You know as well as I do there is gang activity in this area," Levy said. "[�] Over the next few weeks, you're going to start seeing people involved in gang activity disappear. [�] We have already begun to walk every street in this area."

According to Levy, the crime currently "plaguing the city" is robbery -- in particular, chain-snatching. "It's happening all over," he said.

Levy posited the high price of gold as a causal factor, and suggested that proactive residents could reduce or eliminate this crime. "If you don't show and flash the gold, you won't be a victim," he said.

Community involvement was the theme of the evening. Levy stated while police will continue to employ new strategies, residents also need to ask themselves, "What am I going to do?" about the various problems in their neighborhoods. Garcia urged residents not to hesitate to call the police regarding suspicious activity, even if they are unsure as to whether it merits law-enforcement attention. Deputy Chief Robert Luna emphasized the need for community involvement. "In every neighborhood, you have to have that police/community partnership," Luna said.

Another attendee calling for community participation was Shivaun Williams, principal of Washington Middle School. Williams asked anyone spotting a middle-school-aged child wearing khaki pants and a blue shirt outside of school between 8 a.m. and 2 p.m. on a weekday to call her personally at (562) 591-2434. "Our children need to be in school," she said.

Many residents expressed dismay that word of meetings such as Thursday's is not more effectively disseminated. Garcia noted that the next such meeting is scheduled for February 22; and Levy noted that residents can contact the LBPD to get on an e-mailing list so as to be kept informed.

Comments

Click Here to Join the Discussion on this Story

66 Comments so far.

Mike Ruehle
The Mayor and Long Beach City Council have asked justices to overturn a Superior Court ruling that the city of Long Beach must provide the names of officers involved in shootings as requested by a Los Angeles Times Public Records Act information request.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-police-officer-names-20120127,0,7553910.story?track=rss

An attorney for The Times contends the City of Long Beach and the Police union, although separate parties to the lawsuit, were 'colluding' to skirt the city's obligation under public records laws and indefinitely keep secret the identities of law enforcement officers who had exercised lethal force.

What this means is that Mayor Foster's administration is continuing to spend TAXPAYERS MONEY to withhold the names of police officers who kill Long Beach TAXPAYERS. What are they hiding?????

Rather than increasing the fight against increasing gang activity, why is Mayor Foster and City Council spending OUR MONEY to hide the identity of trigger-happy police officers???????

The City places a higher priority on shielding the names of officers who kill TAXPAYERS than protecting TAXPAYERS from crime.

Jim Lewis
Would it have hurt to note that the meeting was hosted in the chapel of Long Beach Rescue Mission? We are honored to be an active and involved partner in our Washington Neighborhood Association.

There has also been a marked increase in new homeless in the area. We do not allow our guests to loiter in the area, in vehicles, or in the 14th Street Park. We announce this regularly in our guest orientation. Our staff monitor the area regularly and our cleaning crews are out three times a day. If you notice someone hanging around - especially when kids are going to and from school - please ask them to move on. We will refuse services to those who don't cooperate with us in being good neighbors.

Thank you for allowing us to provide critical services to our community, thus enhancing the quality of life for all.

Jim Lewis, CEO
Long Beach Rescue Mission

Dave in Alamitos Beach
I don't know. I'd almost rather know there IS a gang war going on, otherwise it is too random and scary. And according to other news outlets, there were three more shootings last night after this meeting. Yikes.

trey w
"Many residents expressed dismay that word of meetings such as Thursday's is not more effectively disseminated"

As a resident of the area who attended this meeting, I feel there was ample notice. There was an artcile in the presstelegram and mr garcia sent an email out

By Tracy Manzer, Staff Writer
Posted: 01/23/2012 07:54:10 PM PST
Updated: 01/23/2012 08:04:55 PM PST

LONG BEACH -- A town hall meeting will be held Thursday to address concerns about a recent spate of shootings in the Washington Middle School area and what is being done to combat the situation.
~~~

01/25/2012 02:43 PM
if you live in the Washington Neighborhood, I will be co-hosting a meeting with our West Division Command Staff and the Washington Neighborhood Association to discuss crime levels and the recent terrible shootings that have happened in this community. Join us this Thursday at 5:45pm for refreshments - the meeting starts at 6pm at the Long Beach Rescue Mission Offices at 1335 Pacific.

Thanks again, and Go Long Beach,

Robert Garcia

What do people want, a personal phone call?

Scott M. Jones
I live less than a half a mile from the Washington neighborhood. It is a myth that police = safety. If that was the case crimes never world happen. The police can't be there before a crime happens. If you want crime to drop then neighbors need to know one another. Yes there is a role of the police to deal with law breakers, it is the neighbors responsibility more than the police. Relationships and trust take time, but you can count me in as a neighbor of the First District to play my role. Here is my email scott@welovelb.org This
crap can stop if we work together.

david
I recently ventured north of 10th on Orange ave and I noticed an explosion of gang members in this area. This area used to be prodominately black but there is an unusually dispropotinate number of mexican gang members. Someone is losing turf.

MUNCHIES MAN
Proactive is the correct word and for some reason, the residents served by the West Division are not concerned about reporting crime.

You may have relatives that are gang members and their activities are causing fear in the community. Or you may know of criminal activity in the area. Some people figure that as long as they aren't beng hurt, then things are ok.

HERE IS THE FACT! EVERY TIME THAT YOU DON'T REPORT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, YOU TAKE A STEP CLOSER TO SOMEBODY YOU KNOW BEING A VICTIM. YOU OR A FRIEND OR A RELATIVE MAYBE ROBBED OR EVEN SHOT BY ACCIDENT. HAVE SOME PRIDE IN YOUR COMMUNITY AND REPORT CRIME..

nOTE: IT TOOK US THREE YEARS, AND MANY POLICE CALLS TO RUN PROSTITUTES OUT OF THE AREA, PLACE A STOP SIGNAL ON PCH/ LEMON AND STOP THE BIG RIGS FROM PARKING OVER NIGHT ON PCH. SO ANYTHING CAN BE DONE!!

John B. Greet
@ Ruehle: Unnecessary name-calling aside, Do you accept that violent retaliation against police officers can sometimes be a valid concern in these cases?

If so, do you think it is reasonable that we (the taxpayers) try to guard against that as far as possible?

If so, how would you propose we (the taxpayers) do so, if not by withholding names, even temporarily?

Do you agree that LBPD does not keep this information entirely secret and that we (the voters) have elected people to represent us in government (City Councilmembers and a Mayor) who have access to these names?

I do not think violent retaliation against police officers should be considered a valid concern in *all* such cases cases. Perhaps we can develop some sort of compromise method for making determinations about whether officers names shall be released to the general public and, if so, when?

B
Ruehle - Trust me when I tell you that most if not all of the folks that have been killed by the LBPD not only have never paid taxes, they've never thought about it.

I'm no shill for Foster or the LBPD, but if you think these people wake up in the morning trying to abuse taxpayers you're goofier than most.

This type of thing is exactly why I sold my place in Long Beach last year and moved out of state.

Good Luck but maybe you should quit making excuses for the lawbreakers and support the silent majority that they try to intimidate every day.

Just Wondering
Since when did violent retaliation against cops truly become an issue? How many times has it occurred? And how often in the last year? Or in the last five years? Statewide? Nationwide?

When did we become villagers carrying torches and pitchforks?

Just because "violent retaliation" COULD happen doesn't mean it WILL or DOES happen with any great frequency.

Of course, Greet will say anything to protect his precious LBPD.

LB
I used to live in long beach area more on the richer side for a while.I honestly think they r doing good job.but what I noticed they have lots of new officer who are sadly dont have the experience or just too nice sometimes. problem I noticed the crime flurishes between border lines they need to go hard on two areas polly high school like 5 blocks north and south east and west of that area from anaheim to PCH the other area is by jack in box and pch that should be orange st west of that.. I think is ok to pull over gang members and do routine stop just to ID peoples in cars just to let them know hey where here not to give out tickets but we know who u r where u from
officers do need support from people and not think they r been harassed. another area that bringing long beach lot trouble is Metro line which is on long beach BLVD
I honestly think LBPD should have a hand with santa ana PD to and OC PD'S to control mouvement and Identify any hardcore members and high value target..westside Div has weakness which gang know it they know what streets to take and they are guaranteed not to get pulled over they should switch their routine roads.another weakness there is language problem
most cops I ran into r white
u need more asian cops african american hispanic.that could be injected into gang undercover units
after all long beach cops r good nice people respectful hard workers but do need a street smart
watch commenders good leaders that do stand behind their back when things goes wrong.one thing that most people dont recognise that long beach is full of gangs problem is they dont fit discription of a gang bungers they dont show off they dont have tattoes no colors but yet they r more leathal than average killers out there they r more sofisticated and they honor code of silence and they dont get together on corner of the block they organise and excute outside of the city but do bring their problems back to their street

Rescue Mission
Do you know how many rescue missions there are in Irvine? Zero. Do you know how many murders? A couple in the entire year and none from gangs. Why do we continue to work so hard to keep poverty in Long Beach?

West Side Teacher
There was a shooting right in front of the station back in 2004. The police stepped up their action. They wrote unlimited traffic tickets to parents and teachers driving their kids to and from school. Insult to injury.

John B. Greet
@ Just: My comment came from verbiage paraphrased from the LA Times article Ruehle was kind enough to cite.

I will always support and defend professional police officers and the hard work they do. Likewise, I will always condemn officer misconduct whenever I am provided with proof that it has occurred.

To the best of my knowledge, violent retaliation against police officers, while not common, is also not rare. The fact that such retaliations and attempted retaliations occur at all, coupled with threats of retaliation (which occur more often) should be sufficient to create a realistic concern about it among law enforcement professionals and the jurisdictions they work for.

Perhaps you disagree and I fully respect your right to do so.

Seriously
Seriously, are there ANY incidents of retaliation to police officers in the last 5 years in Long Beach? Has paranoia overtaken the LBPD?

John B. Greet
@Seriously: I don;t know the answer to your question. more to the point, though, I doubt you do either. Nor should we limit our concern in this area to just Long Beach. A simple Google search will reveal sufficient incidents of retaliation, attempted retaliation, and credible threats of retaliation against police officers. I think these incidents argue on the side of caution for all law enforcement agencies, rather than on the side of dismissing them out of hand as potential paranoia.

Just Wondering
@ Seriously--Apparently paranoia has taken over Greet.

Because it's possible a photographer MIGHT be a terrorist, LBPD is justified in infringing on the rights of ordinary citizens.

Because it's a possibility that a citizen or citizens MIGHT decide to act like barbarians and exact revenge, the city of LB and the police union SPEND our tax dollars to keep their names SECRET.

Because there has been violence at other Occupy movements, the LBPD feels there MIGHT be violence in the LB Occupy movement and dispatching a multitude of officers to the area (even thought gang warfare runs rampant in other parts of the city)is justified.

At this rate, ANYTHING the LBPD feels MIGHT be untoward, justifies whatever action the LBPD sees fit.

Unless you're loading a bunch of dogs into a ventilation free trailer, then no action is justified at all.

It's obvious that the officers hired are NOT mental giants. I wonder if they are chosen specifically by their superiors for that reason, since they apparently can't think for themselves, maybe their superiors think they MIGHT be easier to control and will follow orders blindly.

As they are now.

Outta Here !
It's been two years since I moved out of the LB. Two reasons firstly the wild wild west attitude of the PD. and the fact that the off shore ships waiting to off load oil and other goods continue to spew out their filthy bunker oil while illegally running their engines at night. Spreading the toxins over "the shore" as we would sleep . Perhaps quality of life is not connected with our ocean at all when that of which what we breathe polutes our thoughts as well.

John B. Greet
@Just: You are inaccurately characterizing my comments on this topic. I think you are doing so because you really have no methods other than inaccuracy, hyperbole, and petty offerings of insult with which to refute the points i actually *have* made.

I think that is very sad. Mature, courteous, and intelligent discourse demands more of us than you seem willing to offer here.

Jim Lewis
Whoa! I take offense to the clear implication you make that our Rescue Mission draws violence. Irvine may not have a homeless shelter, but the demographics and lack of urban center have more to do with the difference than the fact that OC's Rescue Mission is tucked away in a military base re-use campus (much like LB's Villages at Cabrillo). You can ask most anyone connected with LBRM and learn that our presence has helped mitigate the issues in our neighborhood - not exacerbated them. Rather than "steps away" from LBRM as some articles state, the related shooting was blocks away. Yes, there are a good number of incidents within a mile of our location, but that has less to do with our location than it does with the demographic and issues of poverty. We are here for those in need, who would otherwise be at risk on the streets. The Rescue Mission's clientele are not those who would prey on others, rather they are men, women and children who need a safe harbor from the elements -- including those who would seek to harm them. We are a benefit to our neighborhood and community, not the bane that you would suggest.

To close: your Irvinite arrogance is telling . . . it is similar to this blog I found: http://www.newuniversity.org/2006/10/features/the_homeless_of_irvine14/

Just Wondering
@ Greet- You'll have to show where I have inaccurately characterized your comments on here. If you notice, I have just posted the very reasons you yourself used to justify the very questionable actions of the LBPD, in regards to photographers, the heavy police presence at the Occupy movement (all while gang warfare runs rampant elsewhere in the city), the unwillingness of the LBPD to release the names of officers, and the inability of the LBPD to perceive a danger to live animals in a ventilation free Uhaul.

Now you're taking issue with the fact that I referred to these officers as less than "mental giants."

Of course, you would have to do that in order to cloud the issue and ignore the valid points I raised.

That being, that the LBPD will say and do anything to justify their actions, no matter how egregious they may be.

Guess I hit a nerve...

Apologies
Re: Rescue Mission - I didn't mean to say the Mission caused violence. I totally get that you the "good guys" in the homeless community.

That said, while I detest Irvine for it's boring beige, I do believe they have the right approach to the homeless situation. I'd alter it a little to say the homeless are directed to a shelter not just the city boundary.

I think the reason LB is violent, why many of its neighborhoods are just plain scary is that somewhere along the line we decided that an Irvine-like approach (with the modification of taking them to a shelter, ideally in another town)would be a bad idea and the much preferable situation would be to allow homelessness, invite rescue missions, shelters, gang outreach and whatever else into the city instead of making it a point to RELOCATE the people who use those services.

I get that the homeless have to go somewhere, the gangs are going to exist somewhere, that violence is going to exist somewhere - I just don't see why we think that somewhere needs to be Long Beach.

Just Wondering
@ Apologies-- You demonstrate a very skewed sense of entitlement with your "not in my back yard" solution to the problem of the homeless. It's telling that the term "mental illness" isn't included anywhere in your dialogue.

The gangs and the homeless are two separate and different problems that plague Long Beach.

Perhaps you could place blame on past city planners who allowed the demolition of single family homes for multi-unit dwellings, thus increasing population density, for the gangs.

As for the homeless, like everyone else, they come here for the weather. Their problem is not just one of economics, but also in many cases, mental illness.

It seems a bit naive to believe you can "relocate" problems when their origin is environmental.

Mike Ruehle
POLICE OFFICER SHOT, KILLED BY FELLOW OFFICER TRYING TO ARREST HIM.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/28/10259852-police-officer-shot-killed-by-fellow-officer-trying-to-arrest-him

A very similar situation nearly occurred 2-weeks ago involving a Long Beach Police Officer accused of domestic violence standing off the Sheriff's Department for 5-hours. I also wonder how often this happens.

Paul
Apologies is correct on some points. The LA County Board of Supervisors voted 100 million dollars to help, "Disperse" LA Skid Row to other cities. There were no direct takers, however, all members of the City Council at the time voted at least once, to bus into Long Beach Homeless Mentally Ill for, " Treatment" but made no plans to bus them back to the county wide locations where they were to be picked up. It does not take much to see how this could de a disaster. At least one of these Einsteins is doing a write in campaign to avoid term limits.

John B. Greet
@Just: I never said that because it's possible a photographer MIGHT be a terrorist, LBPD is justified in infringing on the rights of ordinary citizens.

Or that,

Because it's a possibility that a citizen or citizens MIGHT decide to act like barbarians and exact revenge, the city of LB and the police union (should) SPEND our tax dollars to keep their names SECRET.

Or that,

Because there has been violence at other Occupy movements, the LBPD feels there MIGHT be violence in the LB Occupy movement and dispatching a multitude of officers to the area (even [though] gang warfare runs rampant in other parts of the city) is justified.

Or that,

ANYTHING the LBPD feels MIGHT be untoward, justifies whatever action the LBPD sees fit (to take.)

These are all inaccurate characterizations of the things I actually have said, tortuously twisted to suit your own apparent anti-LBPD biases.

If you are interested in arguing the facts in a mature and courteous manner, then please attempt to do that and give up the rhetorical games and childish offerings of insult.

John B. Greet
@Ruehle: If it happens once it happens too often.

But in any case it probably happens far less often then the instances of your ducking direct questions and ignoring challenges to your various blatant falsehoods.

Just Wondering
@ Greet- Sorry Greet, I'm not playing your little word game. Yes, that is pretty much how you justified the LBPD's actions in each case.

Each incident of questionable behavior (one instance even catching the attention of a national conservative pundit, who ultimately views the actions of law enforcement dis-favorably) by the LBPD you've justified. In each instance you've asserted and warned of the potential for danger or mayhem of some sort.

But,it's interesting that now you're backpedaling.

At any rate, it really seems ridiculous to try and justify the heavy police presence at Bixby Park for the Occupy movement a few weeks ago, in lieu of the problems in the West division.

John B. Greet
@Just: Sorry, it is neither reasonable nor logical to inaccurately characterize the words I *actually* use, then presume to attempt to justify doing so by saying that is "pretty much" what I said (when, in fact, I said nothing even closely resembling it) and then to accuse *me* of back-pedalling when I call *you* on your own rhetorical fraud.

I do not attempt to justify anything that is not, in fact, reasonably justifiable. Neither do I condemn officers without proof that they have done anything wrong. Neither do I excuse actual officer misconduct when it can be proven to have actually occurred.

I have never tried to justify "the heavy police presence at Bixby Park for the Occupy movement a few weeks ago." I disagree with your characterization of "heavy." One sergeant and a few officers is considered a "team" and given that the Occupiers out-numbered the officers at the time it does not seem reasonable to me to consider that to be a "heavy" police presence. You seem to disagree. So be it.

From now on please try to focus on and respond to the things I *actually* say and avoid inaccurately characterizing them to suit your own apparent anti-LBPD bias.

Apologies
Just Wondering, I totally get that a huge number of homeless are mentally ill. And that is absolutely crazy - I think there should be no-cost facilities for the mentally ill. I think it's criminal that people who clearly have significant issues are digging through the trash cans for food.

In my ideal scenario, anyone pushing a cart, talking tho him/herself and eating out of the dumpster at McDonald's (or any of the million variations of the above) would be put in a facility - and these facilities would be nice - staffed by professionals, good food, clean rooms, plenty of care and funded by the state's taxpayers. I know everyone hates taxes, but personally I'm tired of seeing the homeless in every corner. And if all residents paid, there would be no difference between Irvine and LB in terms of the number of homeless on the streets.

And yes, agree, it's NIMBY'ism but what isn't? We don't want coal plants here, that's NIMBY, we don't want state prisons or any number such things. Why is it so bad to not want crime, gangs, graffiti and poverty?

Just Wondering
@ Greet-- Now you're arguing that the heavy police presence in Bixby Park (the team as you put it)was outnumbered by the Occupy movement and thus their presence was justified? Are kidding me? That was NEVER the argument. The argument is that the heavy police presence was unwarranted in lieu of the gang activity that plagues the West side.

Nice try trying to spin the issue, again.

And yes, it's possible to characterize your words without quoting them verbatim. I think I have summarized your rants pretty accurately. If I haven't, you'll have to explain how your justifications for the actions of the LBPD differs from how I claim you justified their actions.

Bottom line, you justified their actions time and time again, even when it was evident that their time would have been better spent elsewhere in the city (West Division.)

Let me update my assertion-- ANYTHING the LBPD AND John Greet feels MIGHT be untoward, justifies whatever action the LBPD sees fit.

Karen
I work with a dozen police officers of all levels and find them to be professional, caring individuals trying to do the best job they can with limited resources. Commander Levy is one of the finest. Officers put their lives on the line daily never knowing if someone they approach might have a gun and be willing to take a shot at them. There have been four attempted cop killings in the last several years to my knowledge. Identified gang members, while a small percent of the total population, committ much of the crime in Long Beach. I think the medpot clinics have brought more crime to our community than the gang members as drug use and sales contributes to much of the crime. Access to guns allows those with quick tempers and low impulse control to easily make a poor decision. I live downtown in a high gang area and see the efforts the police make to keep our community safe. We need more town halls and conversations to let gangs and criminals know illegal behavior will not be tolerated. We also need more services for struggling families and individuals who feel they have no other options but crime to survive.

Just Wondering
@ Karen- "Officers put their lives on the line daily never knowing if someone they approach might have a gun and be willing to take a shot at them"

Really? Guess what? So do many innocent residents of the West Division.

"I think the medpot clinics have brought more crime to our community than the gang members as drug use and sales contributes to much of the crime."

Really? Seriously? Legally operating med-pot clinics have brought MORE crime to our community than gang members?

Are you, yourself, on drugs? How is that possible? Did one of the dozen police officers you work closely with tell you that? Or is it just something you want to be true so you thought you would just throw it into the mix?

And I thought Greet made ridiculous pro LBPD assertions...

Just Wondering
@ Apologies-- It's one thing to have a NIMBY attitude regarding an issue that may come to your city, but it doesn't make sense to have an NIMBY attitude about something that is ALREADY in your city. In other words, it's already in our back yard, now you want to foist onto someone else's backyard? Does that seem fair? The answer to Long Beach's problems is not to pass them off to someplace else.

John B. Greet
Sorry, Just, you simply refuse to see your errors here (rhetorical and otherwise.) You seem more interested in being right than in having an open and honest discussion based upon facts and upon the things I actually say.

You seem unable to argue the merits of my actual points and, so, find it necessary to misstate them and then attempt to argue from those false premises.

Very well. You do your thing and I'll do mine. The facts, as always, speak quite clearly for themselves.

Be well!

Surely we know
Anyone who reads the LB Post comments more than a handful of times knows that John B Greet is always pro-cop, always defends their actions, excuses their mistakes and in general serves as the unofficial spin-master of all LBPD related stories or opinions.

The closest he ever comes to a criticism or even a reality check are his assertions that "if" a cop or the dept does something wrong it should be dealt with - but it's always an "if" that seems in his mind to be a far-fetched and unlikely occurrence.

Apologies
No, I don't see that it's a problem to move poverty, gangs and violence to someone else's backyard - particularly to areas that are probably beyond hope anyway - Santa Ana, Compton, Paramount come immediately to mind. Long Beach is salvageable, I don't think those other places are - or at least not easily.

Is there a solution to crime and poverty? I have no idea, if there is it would be so completely politically incorrect to not even bear suggesting. From what I've read and observed, those things are legacies passed from generation to generation with a few exceptions where a child here or there manages to get out, but mostly welfare mothers raise welfare-dependent children into welfare-dependent adults. Fathers who perpetuate violence end up with children who carry on the violence. How do you stop that from happening? If you could remove kids from those environments really early, like before kindergarten, maybe they'd stand a chance but that's never going to happen. So that 23 year old who is robbing a liquor store is probably going to have a son who in 15 years will be apprenticing for a life of crime.

That welfare mother's daughter will probably be pregnant at 14 and the girl friend of the 17 year old holding up the 7-11.

Just Wondering
@ Greet- You'll have to explain where my interpretation of your rhetoric is inaccurate, in regards to your justification of the LBPD's actions. As you, yourself, said,"I do not attempt to justify anything that is not, in fact, reasonably justifiable." Unfortunately Greet, when you do that you make it clear to everyone that you have ALREADY determined what is or isn't reasonably justifiable. As you see it.

And therein lies the problem.

Now, I'll give you a chance to explain yourself. Justify the "team" of officers sent to monitor a handful of non- violent Occupy protesters in Bixby Park, while blocks away in the West Division gangs are firing guns and killing residents.

@ Apologies- If you really think the right thing to do is to ship out all the gangs to other cities, I have to ask--Do you have a moral compass? Would you want your neighbor throwing his dog's poop on your yard because he saw your dog's poop on it already? That's a pretty close analogy to what you think is the right thing to do. Besides that, do you seriously think the gangs will all just stay in Santa Ana or Compton? What about the cities that boarder them? You certainly either are not getting the big picture or you have a very skewed sense of entitlement.

And what about all the multi-unitdwellings that have spawned the gangs? Do you want the city to buy them all and bulldoze them? Because if they don't they will just fill up again with low-income residents, and the population density will be the same, with same types of problems developing.

You don't handle your problems by giving them to someone else, especially someone struggling with problems of their own.

John B. Greet
@ Surely: You are mistaken. I routinely condemn police misconduct once it has been proven.

Unlike some, however, I require objectively verifiable proof before I condemn a person (cop or not) of any wrong-doing.

Does some wrong-doing sometimes go unproven? Sure. And I think that is unfortunate. But, at least for mke, condemnation and punishment require proof. Perhaps you feel differently.

Not everything people condemn the police for amounts to misconduct. Just as others are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, I apply the same standard to police officers who are no less deserving of that consideration than anyone else.

Apologies
So now I'm wondering, Just wondering, what's your solution to the gangs and violence? If not moving them out, what's the answer?

How many billions of dollars have been dumped into gang-prevention programs, yet the gangs seem just as robust as ever. How many breakfast and lunch programs are there to make sure kids are fed and can therefore focus on learning, still what percent of those kids stay in school to graduate - I'd be astounded if it was more than 10%. We have aid to families with dependent children and all that seems to do is encourage women to have more children to get more money. It seems like all the programs meant to solve the problem are either neutral - do no harm but also do no good, or actually exacerbate the problem by encouraging what they are meant to abolish. So what's your solution?

I still say learn from Irvine, make it impossible for them to survive there. If you think Irvine doesn't put up with the homeless, imagine what it does with gangs.

And yes, in my ideal scenario all those crappy high-density apartment buildings are bulldozed and in their place are single family homes with yards and a price tag that ensures the owners are from the employed middle-class.

Just Wondering
@ Apologies- I don't pretend to know how to solve the problems of gangs in LB, or anywhere, for that matter. If I did, I probably wouldn't have time to be submitting responses to articles in the LB POST.

However, I will say that as long as we have a heavy Christian influence in this country that forbids birth control because it's a "sin" against God, we are going to continue to have the problems brought on by overpopulation and population density.

Until we overhaul our public assistance programs that reward welfare mothers with more money for each child they bring into the world, and penalize financially families on public assistance if the father lives in the home, we are going to continue to have these sorts of problems.

And--maybe bulldozing some of those apartment buildings and building community centers in their place might be a start.

Pam
Whenever I see "Mike Ruehle" on a post, I know he's going to say something dickish! I really wonder why he hates the LBPD so much? Why is that, Dick, I mean Mike?

albino
Can people stop responding to APOLOGIES. He's a person with lots of opinions and very little information. He or she clearly doesnt know the first thing about socialoogy, urban planning, mental illness, the public health system, etc etc ad infinitum. He's probably 16 years old.

Irvine cant be compared to long beach. Irvine has little public space, few dense areas if any, little public transit. Homelessness there is near impossible - you would be arrested quickly.

In big cites, it's the opposite.

I love how apologies suggests "free mental health care" funded by taxpayers, but then goes on to attack every social service program in existence.

I wonder if he knows that there already is free mental health care in california.

clue-less

BG
All of johns statements end in
"if it can be proven", so if it is'nt the volumes and volumes of citizen complaints must mean nothing.
There was another guy who was also famous for saying "try to prove it"
So I guess Al Capone never murdered anyone cause it was never "proven", all the accusations must have been just that according to greet logic, all that was PROVEN was that the poor guy cheated on his taxes, like everybody else.
Easy to smirk when you know the fix is in when trying to PROVE something against powerful rich people or police officers.

To Albino
Albino,

I am NOT clueless and neither am I rude or a name-caller as you seem to be.

Can you not see a pretty big distinction between funding mental health facilities for homeless people who are clearly not just down on their luck but actually have issues like schizophrenia and welfare programs that seem to work as incentives for single mothers to have even more children they can't afford?

I know Irvine pretty well, have worked there for going on 15 years and I don't think it's "big city" vs. "small city" even a little bit.

It's zero tolerance vs. "come on in" when it comes to homeless, gangs, poverty and all the rest of it.

Irvine has a lot of dense housing, it has a huge university, it has far more townhouses than detached dwellings.

Jim Lewis posted a link to an Irvine blog about a man's experience posing as a homeless person - I think your theories are way off base about the reasons why Irvine doesn't have homeless in every doorway - it's not because of mass transit, it's more like mass intolerance.

www.newuniversity.org/2006/10/features/the_homeless_of_irvine14/

And I'm not 16, I'm not stupid, I have a graduate degree and I'd be happy to match you IQ point for IQ point.

I'm just realistic - things go the way they do because people LET them. This city decided it would be tolerant of poverty, it would be sympathetic towards the under-served, it would be a sanctuary for anyone with a problem. As a result, that's mostly what we have - poverty, gangs, homelessness, unemployed way above state average, above average high-school drop out rates, and above average crime rates.

So Mr or Ms Albino, go ahead and make a compelling argument that the city isn't the ghetto it is because of every stupid decision it made.

PS to Albino
One more thing, you mention the free mental health care to everyone in CA. Why do you suppose the homeless who walk around talking to no one, digging in trash cans, sleeping in parks aren't availing themselves of the free counseling? Because they don't realize they have problems perhaps? And I'm not talking "free mental health care," I'm talking about full time residency in a facility. I don't think that's free in California - and it shouldn't be up to the homeless person to decide whether or not he/she wants to be in a facility. If they are walking around in filthy clothes, talking to themselves, eating from a trash can, urinating in public or just in their pants, it's not an option, they ought to be in a facility, no free choice involved.

Get to know Joe
I met Joe Levy a long time ago as a Homeowners Association Rep and he went to school with my brother. You can say nothing but good things about the guy because he is clearly a 'cut above'.

Joe is a fine fine man of exceptionally good character. His honesty,dedication and sacrifice is well known.

He does all that he can for this town and if he is involved here then we are all very fortunate.

If Joe sees a path to improvement then given co-operation and support, it is going to happen.

Good luck Joe, keep up the good work ! You are definitely one of the good guys.

John B. Greet
@BG: Not "all" of my statements. You might consider reading them again a bit more carefully.

I would guess that a number of officers in Long Beach are disciplined for instances of *proven* misconduct in any given year.

I rather doubt that they would agree with you that "the fix is in."

Lb rider
Truth is Long Beach has been full of gangs and crime. All my life here it has been the same. 38 years. So this super cop and his goons are dreaming if they think there going to change anything in a couple weeks. Just saying. As for B Greet he's the kind of guy that will call the man on you for smoking in a park and at the same time condone an old homeless lady getting shot by ten cop for having a pocket knife out. Just ignore him hes clearly out of touch with humanity:) Also for all those people that keep talking about all the fantastic rights they think they have. I'm here to tell you that you have none just ask any so called peace officer:)

albino
Like I said, you really dont know what you're talking about, and your "PS to albino" post proves it. Everything you've talking about is a very longstanding, prominent public policy issue constantly grappled with by elected, social service workers, police, etc. There's reams written about it available, but you speak as if you're the first person to think of this stuff.

Americans have rights, whether homeless or not. You cannot force someone to get mental health treatment or live in a certain place unless:

You 5150 them as a danger to themselves or others or as gravely disabled. Dirty clothes dont meet those criteria. Dilerium, malnutrition, etc might.

OR: They are conserved, which takes a court hearing.

It's not as if the people actually involved in this work (as opposed to you, standing on the sidelines ignorantly cheering and moaning) dont grapple with this every day - balancing individual rights with the community's desires, deciding who should be hospitalized, conserved, institutionalized, released, etc. You act like you're some sociology genius with all the answers, not realizing you're coming into an ongoing conversation involving people with more experience and knowledge about these issues in their little pinkies than you have in that High IQ brain of yours.

And yes, if you are indigent, mental health treatment and a residence are, essentially, free. You may have to pay for them, but you're getting a check just for that purpose from the government, so that's free to you. Obviously, at the end of the day, nothing's "free"; someone pays. But it's not generally the recipient of services when you're talking about severe mental illness.

As to irvine vs long beach: are you really going to argue that public transit, density, and public spaces have nothing to do with it?

Whatever your degree is in (business? math?) it sure ain't social sciences.

orangino
APOLOGIES:

just compare three things - population, home values, and property taxes, irvine vs long beach. You will quickly understand why Irvine can do what long beach cant, why the demographics bring certain businesses to long beach that dont go to irvine (99 cent stores, for instance), why the cops have time and money to harass bums instead of arresting gang members (the irvine crips?) etc.

You may as well ask "why cant the city of los angeles deal with homelessness like we do in alisa viejo?"

just so ignorant.

Agree
Orangrino,

I totally agree that it's home prices, taxes and demographics (population) that are the difference between Irvine and Long Beach - that's precisely my point.

Somewhere along the line LB made a string of stupid decisions. It let the RDA tear down single family homes and replace them with high-density, ugly apartment buildings that soon filled up with low income, high turnover tenants. That dropped property values. It also shifted the demographics from mostly employed, mostly middle class to unemployed and living at or below poverty levels.

That change in housing and home values/prices and demographics led to a population that doesn't value education, that isn't career-oriented or upwardly mobile. It's a population that is fine with trash in the streets, broken plastic toys in the yard and riff-raff hanging outside every 7-11 and baby mamas begging (often in Spanish) for money in the more affluent areas.

That was all compounded by other stupid (in my opinion) decisions that continued to erode the middle class such as grants to shelter the homeless, more low-income housing and community centers which is just PC-speak for subsidized gang hangouts.

The city never deals with the root causes which are lack of education (a lot of drop outs) which eventually equates to an under-employed population that barely gets by and is often subsidized by various welfare programs. And then that is the legacy passed from generation to generation. Then throw in some crime on top of it and there you have Long Beach - Slum by the Sea.

As for your theory about 99 cent stores, there's one in Foothill Ranch which makes Irvine look low income by comparison.

Long Beach COULD change I believe. In the same way it tore down the neighborhoods, it can tear down the slums.

Irvine does police gangs and homeless right out of its borders, Long Beach could surely do that if it wished - but apparently it doesn't - it prefers to simply sink lower down the economic food chain.

Paul
Get to know is right. Residents should know that Joe is a cop that they can trust and work with in confidence.

To Albino
Albino, You are making a lot of assumptions and declarations that aren't true. I never said the issues of homelessness, crime and social policy hadn't been debated and grappled with by many for years. Of course they have, but grappling with an issue and solving it are two very different things.

It occurs to me that perhaps your wrath and indignation are because you know that for all the policy papers, social debate and research, nothing has been solved. Reams of papers don't equal adequate solutions.

As for your point that the mentally ill pay and are then reimbursed - I'm wondering how the post office delivers mail to people who live in public spaces with shopping carts. How does the address read exactly? To: Long haired homeless man who can usually be found on Anaheim near Temple - seems unlikely given the post office's insistence on numeric addresses with zip codes.

As for individual freedom, that's great for those who are mentally healthy, that sort of loses its appeal when we're talking people who clearly are not functioning within the band of normal.

And no, I don't think the public space, housing and mass transit are the barriers to homelessness in Irvine, I think it's a mindset that is consistent across the residents, businesses and police force. Long Beach has developed a culture of poverty and we all get to live with everything that implies.

Eagle Eye
Good to see people pulling Greet's card.

As I told you before Greet, by serving as a police apologist, you are part of the problem, and not part of the solution. Us normal citizens are not anti-police, we WANT police! But we want them to be accountable to us, the citizens who hire them and pay their salaries.

What we DON'T want, is a corrupt system where the police force and politicians work together to cover things up, and cover each others back. The fact that you don't get this is indicative of the common cop's mindset, which needs to be broken.

John B. Greet
@LB: You could not be more greatly mistaken. I am on record as being very much against expanding the city's non-smoking ordinance to include public parks. If you are referring to Marcella Byrd, she was unfortunately shot and killed not "for having a pocket knife out" but for stepping toward a police officer while raising her arm in the hand of which she had previously been wielding an 8" knife in a threatening manner.

The Byrd shooting was tragic, but was deemed justifiable because the officers acted in clear self defense and after attempting to first stop her, twice, using bean bag rounds.

@ Eagle: As I told you before, I do not condone or excuse police misconduct. I never have and never will. Unlike most who engage in their habitual knee-jerk condemnations, however, I prefer to learn more of the facts before I reach a conclusion one way or the other. Pity you and I don't seem to share that preference.

Just Wondering
The problem with Greet is he refuses to acknowledge that the Blue Code of Silence exists, and the only "facts" he accepts, before he makes his "conclusions," are those put forth by law enforcement personnel.

Credibility
Greet has what is commonly known as a credibility issue - he has none - you can tell from the multitude of posts just about everyone sees right through his insistence that everyone else lacks the intellect and savvy to understand the pursuit of facts and truth.

What I don't understand is his motivation - it's not like his pension gets a 10% markup for his endlessly sycophantic posts - the ever-predictable "Good job LBPD."

John B. Greet
@Just: You are mistaken.

I have never denied that some in law enforcement sometimes fail to speak up when they should. I think this can be said to be true of all professions.

I would dispute, however, that the occurrence of improper silence is to any degree institutional in law enforcement. It just seems to suit many chronic complainers to assert that it is.

Have there been high profile instances where individual groupings of cops have engaged in conspiracies of silence? Of course! But I think they have been the vast exception, not the rule, and high level media and public notice occurs precisely because these situations are true abberrations and not to any degree indicative of overall practices in professional law enforcement as a whole.

@ Credibility: I choose to offer praise to cops where I believe praise is well-deserved. I sometimes offer condemnations when I feel that has been deserved as well. Can you prove otherwise?

Proof
Greet,
Without having some kind of search function to go through thousands of your posts on this website, it's hard to cite any examples of times you've defended indefensible police actions, I do remember one post you made recently - I don't remember the article but it had to do with a cop who had been charged with domestic violence, I believe. And you made a comment that "to your knowledge" there were no bad cops in the entire LBPD. Those kinds of comments smack of either delusions on your part or what many readers here perceive as your inability/unwillingness to ever admit that cops aren't always shining examples of fine behavior. Or to acknowledge that some are sleazy, some are duplicitous, some are unworthy of your endless praise. And I know, this isn't proof, you still will contend these are not facts. But doesn't it seem a bit preposterous that you could say "there are no bad cops in the LBPD."

Isn't that something we all learned in grade school, that whenever a test question says "all" or "every" or "never" the answer is false because there's always an exception. But not in your PD, no exceptions, all are paragons of virtue.

Just Wondering
As usual Greet tries downplay the existence of the Blue Code of Silence when he states "some in law enforcement sometimes fail to speak up when they should" and again, when he states 'I would dispute, however, that the occurrence of improper silence is to any degree institutional in law enforcement."

Which, of course, is a ridiculous statement, when you consider that the Blue Code of Silence exists as an UNWRITTEN rule among police officers in the United States.

Of course you'll dispute its occurrence isn't institutional Greet, you're just adhering to the code.

John B.Greet
@Proof: Unlike some here, I am not inclined to accuse people, cops or not, of unlawful, unethical, or even simply improper conduct without proof. You seem to have a problem with that. Perhaps you should ask yourself why.

@ Just: I have answered you directly and sincerely, and given you my perceptions based upon my personal and professional experience after almost 30 years in professional law enforcement. You are free to accept that or not, or to characterize it however you like. You are likewise free to denigrate and disparage every law enforcement professional for the bad acts of a comparative few and to paint evey good and hard-working cop with the same broad brush of assumption and suspicion.

I am interested in accusing only those who give me just cause, and in condemning only those who are proven, to me, to actually be guilty.

You seem to have a different approach. Let me know how that works for you.

Just Wondering
@ Greet-- You may have answered me directly and sincerely, but-- I don't recall asking you any questions.

And gee, thanks so much for giving me the freedom to "accept or not" and "characterize however I like" your pro-police statements. Thanks Greet, that's awfully big of you!

FYI, you really don't need to remind me, or anyone else on here, how we may, or may not, interpret whatever we read on the Post, or any other publication, for that matter.

And, you don't need to remind anyone that we're free to voice criticism of any public servant. We're Americans, we already know that. But-- you do yourself and the LBPD a disfavor when you suggest we "denigrate and disparage every law enforcement professional for the bad acts of a comparative few and to paint evey good and hard-working cop with the same broad brush of assumption and suspicion."

Nobody does that. Everyone knows there are good cops and bad cops. But-- for you to suggest that, demonstrates the isolation and solidarity brought on by the prevalent "police culture" that leads to an "us against them" mentality, which in turn encourages officers to feign ignorance of another officer's wrongdoing, or encourages officers to back each other up.

Like you Greet, everyone else is also interested in "condemning only those who are proven...to actually be guilty." Unfortunately, "the bad acts of a comparative few," as you term police officers guilty of corruption, and the Blue Code of Silence, make it very difficult for the general public to know the truth, and therefore, we need to, initially, "paint evey good and hard-working cop with the same broad brush of assumption and suspicion." Just as cops do when they eliminate suspects. It's a combination of due diligence and critical analysis.

Let me know how that works for you.

Escape Route
Greet, you always give yourself an escape route for you police apologist BS. You say you are only interested condemning those who are proven TO YOU to be guilty. Since you let yourself be the ultimate judge, the cops will always have a free pass in your mind.

I have to hand it to you for one thing, you stand your ground no matter what - I don't think I know anyone else who can remain so convinced he or she is right in the face of so much opposition. I'm not sure if that makes you a paragon of self-assurance or a fool, but it doesn't really matter because it's obvious you will wear those cop blinders and call them the spectacles of truth until the day you die.

John B. Greet
@Just: It seems clear that you are not interested in open, honest, and respectful dialog based upon facts. It seems clear that your true purpose is simply to be argumentative, rather than to attempt to make an argument. This is unfortunate because little of a constructive nature can ever be accomplished through such an unproductive approach.

@ Escape: That is correct: Because I would be the one doing the condemning, a person's guilt would first have to be proven to me. This in no way makes me the ultimate judge for anyone but myself. Aren't you the ultimate judge for your own personal judgments? If not, I certainly think that you should be.

No one gets a "free pass" in my mind. I simply prefer to extand to individuals (cops or not) the benefit of the doubt until they, personally, are prven tome to no longer deserving of such. There have been a number of former cops that I have personally come to believe were guilty of serious misconduct, including various crimes. I have never been shy about publicly condemning them. But I will not accuse, let alone condemn, any person without proof. I find it amazing that some on these sites seem so willing to do so.

Just Wondering
@ Greet-- Are you kidding me? You'll have to show me in my post where I exhibited anything that wasn't "open, honest, and respectful." It was YOU Greet, that so pompously reminded us how we had the freedom to "accept or not" and "characterize however" we like the content of your posts.

My guess is you're at a loss for words, NOT that you've suddenly taken issue with a confrontational tone. Otherwise, you would have countered my clear and concise assertions with, what you consider, logical, albeit pro-police, rhetoric.

Your silence speaks volumes.