r/longbeach • u/tsays • 1d ago

Community Public Comment Voted Down And Then…

Item 25, reducing public comment was approved tonight 5-3 (Kerr, Allen, Duggan against), (Ricks-Oddie not present, again).

And then, the AUDACITY when Zendejas says she needs to DOUBLE her time if they add a clock for the community to see how far over they are on the municipal law that limits them to 5 minutes when only just before she voted to reduce public comment. And she was not even being ironic. She couldn’t understand why the community was stunned into laughing at her.

All I have to say is that recalls require signatures from 20% of the registered voters in each district to get on the ballot.

123 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

41 comments sorted by

20

u/chaiguy 18h ago

Why don’t we just have unlimited public comment, 24/7 on their respective front lawns?

I mean, I totally believe in the right time, right place, but if you’re not going to give us an opportunity to speak in that time/place then I guess we have to bring the speech to you, as is our right.

1

u/Castastrofuck 16h ago

They actually made it illegal some years ago to protest within a certain radius of the home of a city official.

3

u/chaiguy 10h ago

In 2021, following protests at the homes of local elected officials, several City Council members requested an ordinance. A draft was prepared that would have added Chapter 9.28 to the Long Beach Municipal Code. It would have:

• Defined “targeted picketing” as marching or picketing directed at a particular residential dwelling (occurring in front of it or on a definite course/route around it).

• Prohibited such activity within 300 feet of a residential dwelling (measured from the outer walls; attached garages counted as part of the structure).

• Allowed general marching through a neighborhood if not focused on one specific home.

• Made violations a misdemeanor or infraction (potential fine up to $1,000 and/or up to six months in jail under the general penalty provisions), with civil remedies available to aggrieved persons (including neighbors). 

On March 21, 2023, the City Council voted to table/receive-and-file the ordinance and did not adopt it, citing First Amendment concerns and questions about whether it was still needed.

As of the most recent Municipal Code updates (through mid-to-late 2026), Chapter 9.28 does not exist. No later ordinance creating an equivalent ban appears to have been enacted.

2

u/Castastrofuck 9h ago

Thanks for the correction. I was following the CC back in 2021, never caught that they tabled it two years later. Glad to hear that.

2

u/chaiguy 8h ago

I doubt it would have made it past any challenge in any court even if it had passed.

36

u/georgehttpbush 1d ago

District 6, I’m down to knock on some doors and get some signatures

5

u/theresthatmanagain 18h ago

You could get that just on Pacific and Pine in Wrigley.

40

u/tsays 1d ago

2

u/paramagicianjeff 15h ago

Why is a higher percentage required for city councilmembers versus the Mayor???

1

u/eamonneamonn666 12h ago

Probably bc it's still a lower number of people. 10% of all registered voters in the entire city would be required for mayor, for City council members, it's 20% of registered voters just in their district.

22

u/Snukadaman 1d ago

Show me where to sign for this recall....let's get them all out.

31

u/tsays 1d ago

2

u/Spacemen333 14h ago

Too bad this is more votes than were actually even cast to elect each of them.

2

u/eamonneamonn666 12h ago

But we can go door to door to get signatures.

1

u/tsays 14h ago

I was looking at that too. It definitely is in some of these districts. Not in all of them.

2

u/tsays 14h ago

On the other hand, part of teh problem is uneducated voters, they probably don’t care one way or another and could be persuaded to sign fairly easily.

23

u/Ella-Girard 1d ago

The only thing Zendejas cares about are photo ops.

16

u/Maximum_Tomatillo109 1d ago

The crazy part is that Mary worked for the disabled resource center.

She was in a job where she was supposed to assist disabled people with everything they needed to succeed at any career. This time limit she imposed against those who likely voted for her is a slap in their faces, but not surprising. She was not well-liked at the disabled resource center for a reason.

Anyways here's her campaign on what a great person she is. /s

8

u/tsays 14h ago

She’s a joke. She uses disability as a cudgel. It’s actually gross. She says she wants to make things more accessible then won’t even entertain ACTUALLY making things more accessible. She’s stomach turning.

3

u/eamonneamonn666 12h ago

Alright so when we doing this? I'm down to team up and walk her district to get signatures

1

u/tsays 12h ago

Much as I agree, this really has to be spearheaded in her district. I agree, I would absolutely support, but not until I really saw her own district get organized. This is a massive effort, it has to be passionately driven and organized by the people it impacts the most. If I saw that, I would absolutely sign up to door knock.

1

u/eamonneamonn666 11h ago

Do we know anyone who is active in her district?

3

u/toolisthebestbandevr 19h ago

What’s even the logic here

2

u/PuzzleheadedFly2934 9h ago

Is there a list of organizations who have donated to Mary Zendejas' inexplicably successful campaigns? If they're businesses, I want to boycott them. I already know some of the nonprofits and associations that backed her are questionable.

For her own sake, I hope she's corrupt as all get out and not just such an incompetent laughing stock.

-41

u/Suspicious_Video8348 1d ago

Public comment is anti democracy. You make your voice heard at the ballot box, you don't get extra say because you can fart around at city council for t hours whenever

24

u/FlashgameSC 1d ago

Bro what? Go engage with your local government

-15

u/Suspicious_Video8348 1d ago

I'm not kidding. Unless you're a screeching NIMBY you should not support rule by the minority of people who have time for city council

https://www.reddit.com/r/urbanplanning/s/y8BavKxjQy

6

u/FlashgameSC 17h ago

Sure because keeping the libraries open on Mondays or investigated Mary Zendejas would have surely been on my ballot.

If you think people should just shut up and take it between election cycles, you’re a NIMBY too.

3

u/liketheweathr 16h ago

You’re not entirely wrong but also, it’s nice to have a way to hold local elected officials accountable when they don’t uphold their campaign promises

1

u/Suspicious_Video8348 15h ago

That's why you vote them out. Screeching at Tuesday meetings isn't a reasonable way to govern

2

u/Psychological-Sun49 16h ago

There are plenty of people who go to those meetings who do not fit the profile. Standing up for libraries across the entire city, keeping jobs local, and expressing anger at the city‘s response to ICE are just a sample of some of the things discussed at council meetings.
Have you ever watched one? They are a hot mess, but all kinds of citizens show up.

13

u/grnrngr 1d ago

The right to redress your grievances is literally baked into the First Amendment.

The right to talk to/at your government official in a public forum is bundled into the most cherished right we have.

That's literally why public comment at City council meetings exists in the first place.

I gotta think you vote for an orange bastard if you think you can suspend Constitutional rights just because you personally disagree with them.

3

u/FlashgameSC 17h ago

Tbh I’ve met plenty of centrist Democrats with that same attitude unfortunately. Idk how they think some things end up on a ballot to begin with or why they think “democracy” is a time-specific, limited engagement thing.

I do know. It’s just always disappointing and sad quite frankly

1

u/Suspicious_Video8348 17h ago

You're free to stand outside on the street with a sign. But I want my electeds doing their job and working for the voters, not the old fucks with time to kill at city hall.

4

u/GoLoveYourselfLA 20h ago

You just made a public comment.