City council meetings have a well deserved reputation for being boring, and the Long Beach meeting was no exception. What distinguished this one was a presentation at the very end, about anarchists, by Tom Reeves, City Pposecutor for Long Beach. The purpose of this presentation appeared to be to justify the expenditure of police force to the May Day 2001 demonstration in the city.

Reeves started with a chart proclaiming that, of all the misdemeanor arrests made, 97% were successful convictions. Then, he displayed the protest flyer, and said that “the flyer was for a riot.” The presentation concluded with photos of demonstrators clad in home made cardboard and plastic armor. As an aside, Reeves pointed out that the convictions resulted in community service hours that would benefit the city.

During the followup comment period after the presentation, people involved with the case countered that 58 of the 62 cases, or 97%, were plea bargains by frightened young people, and of the remaining three, only one was found guilty.

Michal Novick asserted that the LBPD irresponsibly opened the city up to civil cases by using “less lethal” rubber bullets against the demonstrators. Jeff Kerns explained the tactics used by the LBPD to herd the demonstration down a street so they were surrounded, before beating them with batons and using tear gas. Sharon Cotrell demanded a written report, because the presentation was given only one line in the agenda; the implication seemed to be that this was a biased presentation to lobby the city council. She also pointed out that the three cases that went to trial were not anarchists, and the guilty verdict was rendered to a animal rights activist. Katie and Alyssa also commented, explaining anarchism and why they wore masks, and Jim Star mentioned that the LBPD videotape of the event showed police violence.

Despite the late notice, and the one line announcement in the agenda, around a dozen people showed up to the meeting to see the presentation, and eight commented on it.