Kazanjian Can’t Talk About “Safety”
Here we go again. Anything to use as a weapon against this administration, which plays by fair rules and makes decisions in a far more open fashion than “they” (the GOBs) would like, eh? Anything to get a quote in the paper against Lynch and anyone who has ever dared just do their job.
Opportunistic. I suppose that makes some of these people politicians, though not in a good way.
The fact is, C. Kazanjian should be the last person throwing stones about safety. Not by a long shot. Here are some photos of his (condemned and empty) properties on Market Street in the Acre. You can click on the photo to see a bigger version. Tell me honestly, how are these properties not contributing to blight, safety problems, or poor economic development in this city?
Every time Kazanjian speaks about safety, theft, or economic development, I’m going to post this photo. If he continues, maybe I’ll photograph some of his other equally blighted properties. Just keep doing it until it sinks in, or people finally realize what the definition of a hypocrite is.
Now, to address the actual complaint. I’m not diminishing (nor is anyone) the seriousness of theft at the library. However, are we now going to bar the doors, go on lockdown, and spend all sorts of money on (more) security details? Thefts, as unfortunate as they are, especially for the person who lost their expensive equipment, happen. The library is near the police HQ. It’s got security measures in place, including cameras. How is the fact that the library has expanded security guard hours “turning a blind eye,” exactly? If Kazanjian’s so concerned about the library, why isn’t he offering a solution, instead of just attacking the administration? Oh, right. Maybe he’s not interested in a solution, but an issue to pretend to run on in the next election.
As to the “numerous letters” he’s received about safety at the library, it seems that all the reports that have been investigated have indicated that actually, the library is not the drug-filled crime haven he would like you to think it is. As Mimi posted (bold mine):
I have come to my conclusions based on the facts. I read the 7-page report (dated 2.29.08) prepared by Assistant City Solicitor, Bryan Leahy. He prepared this report, (which looked at LPD records regarding the Library for the past 3 years) in response to a Council motion on the Pollard Memorial Library security and safety.
The report outlines all of the type of calls made to the LPD, even those that had nothing to do with the Library but because they took place near the building, there were assigned to it.
This is his part of his conclusion: [LPD records] “show that generally speaking the Library is safe, secure and crime free. Any allegations that crime such as drug, arson, vandalism, assaults and threats to employees or (patrons) regularly occur at the Library are unfounded.”
Take it up with the LPD or the Assistant City Solicitor if you want to disagree with their findings, but you’d better back it up with facts, not rumors and innuendos.
And if you want to talk about fixing the safety issues this city faces, you maybe should take the log out of your own eye instead of accusing everyone else of not caring.
