I couldn't find anything about needing 100 or more residents to determine whether an issue is important, or his contention that if there are less than 10, or two or three, then it does not merit any concern.
In fact, it seems to me that the 1st Amendment guarantees an individual citizen the right to bring a grievance before the appropriate government body — in this case the City Council.
I recall one case where a homeowner's property was continually flooded, with subsequent property damage, during the rainy season. In this instance, the resident stated that the city first admitted, then denied, any responsibility and then got a run-around from city staff members.
Is this not a legitimate reason to take the matter before the City Council?
Abkarian seems to take particular issue with those individuals who choose to speak before the council each week. Should there be a limit on how often they can appear? I think not. Do they not have the right to express their grievances?
I believe that the council and the general public can distinguish between those individuals with legitimate issues and those who like the sounds of their own voices.
Does Abkarian really believe that the council would have dealt with the issue of illegal outdoor grilling and lack of code enforcement had they and the public not been reminded each week about the city's lack of action?
I understand that Abkarian is an attorney. Perhaps he was absent the day that his constitutional law class discussed the 1st Amendment.
In case he or any other citizen is interested, Rep. Adam Schiff's office can provide copies of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
They are free and available in quantity.
DAVID A. FORTUNE is a Glendale resident.