MTOPP v CB9 - Spring, 2015
Comments
-
This meeting was the wildest I've seen. I arrived on the scene around 6:45 and Alicia was in the middle of the room ranting and acting the fool about the Board and development in general/in the neighborhood. There was some back and forth between Alicia, Quest Fanning, Rabbi Goldstein, and another guy (it was basically them all against Alicia); when anyone spoke out against Alicia, they were shouted down/insulted by the protest group.The Board started showing up around 7pm, at which time an NYPD officer came over and asked the protesters (who had taken up every seat at the tables) to move to one side of the room to give the board space to conduct its meeting. To this, Alicia shouted "NO" and started banging the tables, behaving as she typically does. This went on for some time before the NYPD finally had enough and came to take her away.That's when all hell broke loose (The Q's video shows some of it, but it was much worse!). While sliding across the floor to get away from the cops, tables were being flipped over (one almost landed on Alicia's head) and there was literally a tug of war going on over Alicia's body between the NYPD and some of Alicia's supporters (I expect charges to be brought against some of those community members if they are ever properly identified as what they did was dangerous/definitely not OK). Then you had protesters running up and cursing out/getting in the face of the Board members and just acting the fool. It was really a sad spectacle.I'd post the brief, but telling video I took on here if it was allowed/I knew how.Can't wait to see what next week will bring.
-
To post a video here, first you must upload it to youtube, and then insert the link here.
Yes, I think next week Alicia might get some help from the various versions of Charles Barron that NYC has in residence.
I am interested in seeing how the NYPD handles it.
-
-
That was noisy.
I have heard at some point during this week or next, the civil court judge may make a ruling re: MTOPPs lawsuit against CB9.
It has been such a shitshow of bad behavior and incompetence that I don't know how I would rule.
If CB9 can get this resolution to DCP, MTOPP will eventually go away, and CB9 can hopefully gain the skill set needed to run a typical mtg.
...one in which some local businessman thinks the entire meeting should be focused on getting his Sanitation fine dismissed, or something. -
BTW, a reliable source informs me that Alicia is still in custody and won't be seen until night court. She spent the night in jail.
This is in contrast to prior arrests wherein she was just given a violation or desk appearance ticket.
One person opines:
They can definitely make the case for resisting arrest, just based on the video. I was informed that she also kicked the cops arresting her - that might make out a felony (what would ordinarily be a misdemeanor assault becomes a felony if the victim is a cop). I also heard she assaulted Pearl Miles. That could get her a misdemeanor assault charge and an Order of Protection preventing her from being in the same room as Pearl Miles (which would bar her from future CB9 meetings). -
Oh, damn. Well, I'm not surprised. The NYPD has to send a message that this won't be tolerated; they can't doing the same thing over and over. And, as I mentioned before, yesterday's antics (both by Alicia and by her supporters in getting physical/abusive with Board members and playing AB body tug of war with the NYPD would make me believe that the police will not be as "laid back" as they have been. What occurred yesterday could have been very different, and in a bad way.
-
I doubt that Pearl Miles (or another board member) would be able to get a Order of Protection without a successful charge of misdemeanor harassment.
I kind of hope that Pearl is not the one who has to carry the load. If I get a wish, it is that the NYPD gets a resisting arrest charge to stick and gives her a court date in the distant future.
Until that court date, they basically have the ability to arrest her for more serious charges.
...having a pre-existing open case is rarely good for a defendent. -
I agree, though she'd likely be charged with resisting without violence, which I don't think presents the same problems as resisting with violence.I think that Pearl or another Board member going that route would only be asking for even more trouble. As last night showed, there are a few individuals who are willing to get in other's faces/get physical (and while I didn't catch this on film, there were some items--soft items, but that's not the point--thrown at Board members). Pearl, or any other Board member, going after their leader may be taken as a personal affront for which there is a "need" to retaliate. The funny thing is that Alicia Boyd, who, despite her behavior, is a highly intelligent woman, doesn't seem to engage in violence herself. No, her "followers," many of whom seem to be mentally unstable, do that dirty work.
-
Yes, much of her appearance is an act, but her followers don't seem bright enough to realize same.
I discuss that a little above, re: the last mtg.
Her followers believe they are on a righteous crusade against hegemony and racially based oppression.
If I thought that was true, I would be a follower too. -
Word has it:
The DA's office is charging Resisting Arrest, Obstructing Governmental Administration and three counts of disorderly conduct. They will not be asking for an Order of Protection.
Which means she could be back at the next CB9 meeting. -
"If I thought that was true, I would be a follower too"I doubt that Mike; A.B.'s followers are pretty much a bunch of wingnuts and moonbats who've been taken in by an agent provocateur.
-
Aren't such qualities needed to think that hegemony and racially based oppression are true in this case?
BTW, CB9 votes on the ULURP Committee's recommendation on Tuesday, May 26 at 7 p.m.
260 Eastern Parkway, in the school building.
-
Yeah, but they're often led by a slightly more functional wingnut rather than a cynical provocateur with a totally different objective.
-
-
Rachel's piece, which includes my video: http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20150520/crown-heights/video-activist-arrested-amid-vote-on-controversial-crown-heights-rezoningI received a request (DNAInfo never contacted me, which I'm OK with in this instance as Rachel didn't try to take credit herself/for DNAInfo) to use the video from a member of the media, which I granted, provided that they acknowledge that a member of the www.Brooklynian.com community gets credited (we were just talking about getting the site even more exposure, and I'm glad to help in any way, especially since I rely on this site for a lot of my news about Brooklyn). I also just put up such a message on the video itself (I don't want to use my actual name as it takes away from the anonymity . . . plus, I don't want to be hounded by MTOPP, etc., when I'm at meetings filming). @mod and @whynot_31, if this is not OK, I'll email the reporter with new instructions and will change the language I put on the video page.
-
Sounds good to me. Let's see if the media grants our requests.
Note, I believe that once you post something on Brooklynian, youtube etc, it becomes public domain. So, they are under no obligation to cite the source.
I try to cite my sources whenever possible, because I believe it is the polite thing to do and it tends to make me more credible.
I try not to get annoyed when media uses my content without citing my avatar or Brooklynian, because life is short.
-
Ok, cool. Yeah, that's what I figured, too. Still, like you wrote, it would be nice.
-
We are digressing a little from the topic at hand, but I will state one of my favorite articles was published by the NYT in 2009.
In it, they talked about these new things called "blogs" (which needless to say had already been around for several years) and include a quote from whynot_31.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/nyregion/thecity/11blog.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
....reading it brought to mind when Columbus "discovered" America, and still has a similar effect.
Let's now return to our theme:
The Tuesday May 26, CB9 Meeting could be really messy. Given everything that has gone on, I'm not sure it would be appropriate to clap if the motion is passed by the larger board.
-
Posting anything online definitely does not make it public domain. However, for full copyright protection, it is best to include a copyright notice when posting, either in your real name or in a commonly used pseudonym (your screen name might be sufficient).
-
It's not public domain. Our Terms of Service specifically states you can not redistribute.
[Edited for brevity]
The Website Content is protected by state, national and international copyright, trademark and other intellectual property laws, and is the property of Service Provider or its licensors. The copying, reproduction, publication... other use or change by you of any such Website Content is strictly prohibited.
You may not in any way make commercial or other unauthorized use, by publication, re-transmission, distribution of material obtained through the Website, including without limitation the Assets or Website Content, except as permitted by the Copyright Act or other law or as expressly permitted in writing by this TOS, Service Provider or the Website.
So basically: ask before sharing and give credit where it's due.
-
I think the question comes down to how much (or how little...) work one can do before someone can/should publish something without listing their sources.
For example, look at this thread:
http://www.brooklynian.com/discussion/comment/561570#Comment_561570
and then the article that DNA publishes:
https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20150519/crown-heights/17-year-old-injured-franklin-avenue-shooting-crown-heights
They appear to just zoom in on the carriage photo, and -despite being asked to credit Broooklynian on the thread- do not do so in the article.
I'm all for local reporters using this board as a resource and helping reporters make deadlines, but it seems that DNA is getting lots of stories from us, doing some additional work, and then not citing us as a source as much as I would.
[Update: The member who posted the photo was contacted by DNA.info but requested to remain anonymous. The member did not explicitly request that Brooklynian be mentioned. However, it is good practice to cite one's source (in this case Brooklynian) whenever it is a significant basis for one's product.] -
Yeah, but they're often led by a slightly more functional wingnut rather than a cynical provocateur with a totally different objective.
@bobmarvin -
It seems she has decided the police are now among her (their?) opponents. She sent out this email today:
--quote--
Good Morning Neighbors
The fight for our homes and community is escalating!
We are going to the Police Council meeting TONIGHT
May 21, 2015 at 7:30
at MS 61 Empire Blvd and New York Ave
across the street from the 71st precinct.
to Demand a stop to this continued violation of
the law by the police and it behavior toward the people.
On Tuesday, Again The Police violated my rights
by arresting me, with just a witness complaint.
The alleged offense is snatching a paper out of Pearl Miles hands!!!
There are certain arrests that cannot be made unless
the police themselves witness the act
and then my rights have to be read.
The officers never came up to me to discuss
what was the charges, why they were arresting me
and then never, ever read me my rights!
Either in the car or at the precinct!
From this video it is clear that the people
did not want this vote nor that a legal vote was taken.
First a motion is considered dead if a vote can not be taken
unless what is known as a secondary motion is voted upon.
For example the phase "I move to table this motion...."
On March 16, 2015 This did not happen!
A vote was attempted and couldn't be done
and Bed Edwards adjourned the meeting.
Thus the motion is dead!
Two at this meeting on Tuesday, May 19, 2015
The meeting did not commence or even begin.
No quorum was created - According to them they had
a vote of 10 yes, 1 no and 1 abstention.
There are 24 people on this committee (despite several being illegal)
The laws states you have to have "over 50%"
to make quorum! Thus they need at least 13 people present to make quorum
So even according to their records there was none.
However this meeting never began,
a motion was never presented on the floor for a vote
Quorum was never reached
names were never called etc..
If the community interrupts a meeting so that business can not
be done then business can not be done!!!
That is wishes of the community!
The voice and decision of the community!
That is democracy in action!!!
Community Board 9 refuses to understand the word
"Community" We are the community, not spectators at a sport!
We have a right to participate in the decisions that are planning
to be done to our community!
We will not sit by and allow any person or entity to make
those decisions for us,
if they are not representing our voices
our wishes and our thoughts!
And yet you will see these board members attempting to
vote within themselves as if the community's wishes
and the law don't exist!
This board believes they can break every law
and then try to pass something illegal without any repercussions.
But you know who is at fault Eric Adams'
and everyone of our Elected Officials
For months we have been protesting the continued abuse
and violation of the law exhibited by CB9
and for months our Elected officials have hid and not even
come out!!!
But that time is over!
We will be going to these "representatives" and demanding
that they intervene for the people!
We will me demonstrating on June 10 from 11-1 pm
in Front of Eric Adams office. so please come out!
We will be demonstrating at the next CB9 meeting
On Tuesday, May 26, at The School of the Deaf
because Laurie Cumbo is suppose to be presenting to the community
However, She refused to even face the community
but is sending her "representative" to speak with us.
This is unacceptable!
The people did not vote in her representative!
How dare she put herself on the community Board agenda
and then refuse to appear herself!
You can see right there in the film.
One of the white board members grinning and smiling
who has been pushing to up zone our community.
This man has called people names at meeting
and even has an harassment complaint filed against him
because of his behavior and yet he has been empowered
to make decisions for us.
This Board needs to go!
And an investigation needs to happen!
Please come out Tonight and Spread the Word!
Alicia,
www.mtopp.org
(718) 703-3086
--end quote-- -
@booklaw @mod @pheightsresident -
I was able to get a response back from Rachel's supervisor. Here is it is:
I believe all is well, and hope that we have resolved the issue going forward. -
Thanks, @whynot_31, @mod, @booklaw!
And, man, what an email from AB. I may attend the precinct council meeting, but am not sure. Will definitely be at the full CB meeting, though. If she's right about quorum (as she was in the past), then that's another mark against CB9.
As to the bad arrest allegations: if she wasn't mirandized, which I find hard to believe, even given the chaos of the situation, that's not good. Aside from that, even if she is correct about the obstruction charge (I just don't know), assuming this is the charge linked to the alleged Pearl Miles paper incident, the police had ample cause to make an arrest on the disorderly charges alone. And she certainly didn't help with the resisting. -
It should be interesting to see if she believes that the NYPD is also subject to community input.
IE By filling a meeting with your supporters, does one get to decree that the majority of the participants do not object to a given behavior and it is therefore legal?
(Spoiler Alert: No)
Re: CB9
I suspect that the judge deciding the case will order that CB9 will follow certain protocols. It is my understanding that community members can be on the subcommittees, but that Eric Adams and local politicians get to appoint the actual voting members.
So, the subcommittees can be legally muted (mooted?) if the politicians perceive that a portion of the community (ie MTOPP) will try to go against their interests.
-
community members can be on the subcommittees, but that Eric Adams and local politicians get to appoint the actual voting members.
So, the subcommittees can be legally muted (mooted?) if the politicians perceive that a portion of the community (ie MTOPP) will try to go against their interests.
Voting membership on a CB subcommittee can include both appointed CB members and community members. Each board can set its own rules for how to determine whether a 'community member' is a voting member of a committee. The only rule in the NYC Charter is that the chair of any committee must be an appointed CB member.
As to whether AB is right about the quorum (12 out of 24), depends on whether CB9 has a different rule for quorums at the subcommittee level. If it's a majority, like it is at the board level, then she's got a point, and CB9 has stepped in it again... -
Thanks @wax
Such rules seem intricate to the degree that the judge may give the board members some leeway in implementing them, especially in light of how many of them are new this year:
http://theqatparkside.blogspot.com/2014/06/cb9-votes-in-almost-entirely-new.html
If the new board members asked for help understanding the rules, and did not receive such from the BPs office, they were almost set up to become incompetent.
While such incompetence should be easy for the judge to find, the situation is not going to get any better until/unless they get an array of competent people who are willing to be yelled at, while earning no money for doing so.
I don't see a line of applicants. -
Just noticing that the video that accompanies AB's email actually appears to show her taking a sheet of paper from in front of Pearl Miles, in the clear view of many, possibly even in the view of the NYPD.
-
Are you aware of the adages:
"It is sometimes best to give your opponent the microphone"
OR
"Make sure what you are about to state does not further your opponent's cause"
??
....seems to me she gives the ADA a stronger case re: the "Obstructing Governmental Administration" charge.
But we should remember, that in her mind, all of her actions are justified; She is on a mission from god to expose and tear down the forces of evil. -
That's the thing. She intentionally linked to this video knowing what it showed (or that's what I assume). This reaffirms my belief that she's out there to make herself a martyr. Now, if she actually posted the video herself from one of her cameras, my view is strengthened. What a mess.
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds





