Carne Asada is not a Crime

Update on Taco Truck Legislation

Ξ September 24th, 2008 | → Comments Off on Update on Taco Truck Legislation | ∇ Uncategorized |

Fellow Taco Lovers:  We received the following statement from the attorney representing the East L.A. taqueros concerning the county’s latest attempt to enact it’s anti-truck legislation:

On Friday, September 19,2008, Judge Dennis Aichroth of the Los Angeles Superior Court, in Division One of the East Los Angeles Courthouse heard arguments from both side in the so called “TACO VENDOR ORDINANCE CASE.”

Previously, on August 27, 2008 Judge Aichroth had declared Los Angeles County Code Section 7.62.070 “unconstitutional” on various grounds, including ambiguous language, restraint of trade, not for the “public safety,” etc.  The arguments on September 19th related to the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office seeking to have the Judge reverse his decision.  The motion made by the DA was for “Reconsideration” of the decision.

After granting the District Attorney the right to file certain “Declarations” by Deputies of the Sheriff’s Department, along with “Exhibits,” the Judge announced that he was NOT CHANGING HIS ORIGINAL ORDER of August 27th, holding Section 7.62.070 of the Los Angeles County Code UNCONSTITUTIONAL.  The TACO VENDORS were represented by Attorney Philip C. Greenwald.  The DA was represented by Deputy DA Steven L. Gates.

The Vendors have won an important victory in their quest to be permitted to sell in the unincorporated territories of Los Angeles County without having to move every 30 or 60 minutes a distance of one half mile during every 3 hour period.

The District Attorney’s Office now has the option of filing a  notice of appeal, which it is reported will likely occur between now and September 26th.  That date is the last day such a notice can be given.  The Los Angeles Times, among other members of the press, had taken the position, from the moment that the subject ordinance was enacted on April 15, 2008, by the County Board of Supervisors, that it was bad legislation which needed to be “repealed.” 

The Sheriff’s Department has not been enforcing Section 7.62.070 since August 27th when Judge Aichroth issued his ruling that the ordinance was “unconstitutional.”  The Taco Vendors (as well as all other street vendors) are overjoyed by the recent action of Judge Aichroth.

In short, the county loses again but isn’t ready to admit defeat.  We’ll keep you updated as this continues to play out.

Who’s That Behind Wikipedia?

Ξ September 14th, 2008 | → 4 Signatures | ∇ Uncategorized |

Earlier this year, our petition received some bitter posts from someone using the handle “The Real East Los.”  The poster said, among other things,

“Wow, look at all these outsiders thinking they know what’s best for us poor brown folks.  Twice a year they put down their quiche and lobster bisque to come slummin’ in the Eastside for some tacos – except those of you who stop by more often after scoring some weed in the projects.  […]  All you uppity white folks can get back in your Range Rovers and head to the Westside for some goat cheese pizza and creme brulee — and let us Mexicans work this out.”

And later,

“This policy affects ONLY UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY.  About 99% of you who signed on are outsiders who slum in the Eastside every once in a great while.  This policy applies to taco trucks EAST of Indiana St.  […]  Most of you gringos don’t venture this far into the Eastside anyway.  You can still drive over the bridge, score some weed, get some tacos, and head safely back home before the big bad brown folks get you.”

There’s a lot to say about these comments, but the obvious points are these: Clearly “The Real East Los” is well versed with the law, and quite familiar with the specifics of where the county/city line is.

Now, there’s also something much less obvious about this post that we noticed.  Every time a comment is posted, the IP address (essentially a unique internet ID) is noted.  Interestingly, the IP address (159.83.252.234) for the two posts is registered to the County of Los Angeles.

Stay with me, because it gets better.

In  April, somebody took the time to post a section about the controversy on Gloria Molina’s Wikipedia page.  On September 10th, the entire “Controversy” section was wiped out, white-washed like a mural in the Arroyo Seco. Fortunately, Wikipedia also notes the IP address of anybody who makes a change to an article.  Want to guess the address responsible for this change?

That’s right, the exact same eleven digits: 159.83.252.234.

On several occasions, going back to December, Gloria Molina’s page has had any section regarding controversy (tacos or murals) erased by somebody at the same address. Furthermore, this same IP address has changed passages to the articles of fellow supervisors Mike Antonovich, Don Knabe, and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors article.

In all fairness, it’s impossible for us to identify any specific county office, official, or department responsible for these racially loaded posts and Orwellian Wikipedia edits.  Nevertheless, this underscores the absolute necessity that we avoid complacency and insist our elected officials represent the majority over the “Big Taco” minority.

Notes:

See the posts from “The Real East Los” here (#379 and #384), and here (#14).
The registration info for 159.83.252.234 can be found here.
One of the many Wikipedia edits can be seen here.

Our internal view of a posting:

Round Two

Ξ September 13th, 2008 | → Comments Off on Round Two | ∇ Uncategorized |

Apparently closing emergency rooms, disastrous public transportation, and overcrowded jails are on the backburner while the county refuses to give up on an unpopular and illegal piece of legislation.  The supervisors’ poorly written law was thrown out of court recently not only because it violated state law, but also for being “ambiguous” and a “naked restraint of free trade”, in the words of judge Dennis Aichroth.  Nevertheless, our elected representatives are going to appeal Judge Aichroth’s ruling in a hearing set for September 19th.  Supervisor Molina recently released a reaction to the judges ruling saying in part, “the residents I represent have continually made clear to me [that] catering truck regulation remains a top priority”, and she promises to “continue to fight for them”.

The domain www.saveusfromtacotrucks.org has yet to be purchased, and comments on our site are running about 500 to 1 in favor of the trucks.  Thus, I am left to assume that the supervisors are covering their eyes and plugging their ears in the hopes that this storm will pass.  They are depending on our apathy to let them run unchecked over one of the most unique aspects of LA culture.  Stay involved!  We are garnering national media attention and it is imperative to keep the pressure on.  Insist that our elected representatives advocate for all of our interests, rather than those of the politically well connected few.