CM PRESS # 379

CAUTION: DON'T OPEN A NEW JOB CENTER UNLESS YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO DO SO

As the Costa Mesa City Council studies the day worker ordinances from Orange, and hopefully from a couple of other communities, the CM PRESS suggests that the Council move very slowly 1n opening a new job center and that it only do so if no alternatives are available.

Once you open such a thing, you might find that you're stuck with it for 17 years--like the last job center.

And, if one is opened, do not put it on the Westside or in the north part of the city. Put it on the Eastside and have it run and be paid for by a private company, not the city.

Those pushing to have a new job center opened, such as Steve Smith, who writes a column for the Daily Pilot, seem to be exaggerating the count of loitering day workers around the city in order to make the City Council think it's a bigger problem than it is.

The only reason a new job center should be opened is to meet "reasonable, time, place and manner" requirements so that loitering day workers can be arrested by the CMPD if they do not use the job center.


HERE'S THE PROBLEM WE FACE IF WE OPEN A NEW JOB CENTER

Even when we had the old job center, the cops wouldn't arrest loitering day workers.

So, if we open a new job center, will the CMPD now enforce our ordinances? Why? What's really changed?

In CM PRESS # 375, we recounted a recent incident where the CMPD ignored a citizen's call to enforce an ordinance that is in the same general category as the day worker ordinances.

And, to repeat. It's seeming more and more that the CMPD isn't being run by top brass but by mid and lower level personnel, with a Return to Reason agenda, who seem to decide all on their own which laws to enforce.

And, these mid and lower level personnel have all sorts of passive resistance tricks to not enforce our laws. "Unable to locate," is one of their main ones.

A couple of years ago, a citizen called the CMPD repeatedly over a couple of month period to report a problem vending truck. Finally, the citizen told the CMPD that he was going to observe and film the non-action of the CMPD regarding this truck and show the film at a City Council meeting.

Then, and only then, did the CMPD finally approach the driver of the truck, who was selling to a bunch of kids. And, guess what? The guy turned out to be a felon and was not supposed to be around children and there was a warrant out for his arrest.

IF THE COPS WON'T ENFORCE OUR LAWS, WE SHOULD NOT OPEN A NEW JOB CENTER. PERIOD. AND, IF WE DO OPEN ONE, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO QUICKLY CLOSE IT AGAIN, IF LOITERING PROBLEMS CONTINUE. WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER JOB CENTER AND LOITERING AT THE SAME TIME AS IN THE PAST.

Last week, the Pilot ran a column about possibly opening a new job center. LINK

Then, the PILOT cheerleader for a job center, Steve Smith, chimed in with manipulative praise for Mayor Bever for the latter's talk about opening a new job center.

First Smith writes this:

Steve Smith wrote on May 29, 2008 10:42 PM:

" Eric, you are to be commended for jump-starting this program, but we have different memories of the Job Center. I was a Westside resident when it opened and I recall an immediate positive impact with almost no day laborers on Placentia. That's because the opportunities for work were centralized. The program worked. So let's open a new one. And sure, let's go ahead and require proof of the right to work. Anyone here illegally can get a good fake ID for a few bucks but the rule will make some folks happy. "

[Notice more praise for Bever who Smith says is to be "commended"] [Then notice how Smith seems to indicate that it's okay if people have false ID cards as he writes it "will make some folks happy." Read, it'll shut the critics up and, hey, the illegals can get phony ID cards and who cares?]
---------------------------

Then Smith writes:

steve smith wrote on May 30, 2008 5:51 PM:

" Bottom line: Closing the Job Center was a mistake. Eric Bever is brave and smart for suggesting it may be worth re-opening. My comment on the ID's is not in jest, it is based on fact and on precedent. You see, there is no requirement to check the validity of the ID and so it will not be checked. The ID proof requirement is toothless. Again, not an opinion, a fact. Now, in stead of attacking ME, please address the issue and offer a realistic solution to the problem. I've been giving mine for 2.5 years. "

[Notice the bootlicking praise obviously written to try to manipulate Bever toward opening a new job center.

It's Smith's latest transparent attempt at child psychology.

We all prefer praise to brickbats, and Smith apparently thinks Bever is easily led with carrots and sticks. It's as though Smith is saying to a five year old kid: "If you do this my way, I'll give you a piece of candy. If you don't do it my way, I'll spank you. Now, which way will you do it?"
----------------------------------
Finally, Smith writes in answer to a post from another reader:

ssmith wrote on May 31, 2008 10:15 AM:

" Mike J.: The fake driver licenses and Social Security cards used by illegals are almost always fake & do not use identities of others. The names and numbers are made up. These IDs are not for theft, they are for getting work and so they do not have to be real. The users know that very few places will check authenticity. Stealing an ID is another class of crime these crooks want to avoid. Plus, it's too labor intensive and time-consuming for what they charge. This information's coming from me, an ID theft victim of about 24 months ago. "

[Notice how Smith indicates it's okay with Smith that illegal aliens have fake IDs, because "These IDs are not for theft, they are for getting work and so they do not have to be real"]

Folks, that comment is absolutely outrageous and shows the type of thinking we've been seeing in this city from the likes of Smith for many years.
# # #

GANG ACTIVITY FRIDAY NIGHT IN THE FILLMORE SLUM

The CMPD reported gang activity in the Fillmore slum on Friday night. Here's your multiple choice exam about that gang activity:

The gangs were:

a. White gangs
b. Chinese gangs
c. Latino gangs

If you're a member of Return to Reason, you probably picked "a." Sorry, that's not correct. That's almost never a correct answer in Costa Mesa. The second choice "b." is also incorrect. That also is almost never a correct answer in Costa Mesa. Answer "c." is almost always the correct answer in Costa Mesa.
# # #

Those are our opinions. Thanks for reading them.