Bolsavik recounts an interesting story about Tyler Diep and Citryst Restaurant on his blog August 15th.
Tyler Diep’s pre-emptive apology
Apparently having learned a lesson from Andy Quach’s false denial, his fellow member on the Westminster City Council Tyler Diep (pictured) decided to come clean on an issue 
that has not even been made public yet.
In today’s issue, Diep speaks to a reporter of Nguoi VietDaily News (not the Bolsavik) and apologizes for his involvement in stopping an investigation of a Little Saigon drinking hole.
The events took place in February 2009, two months after Diep took office. In his public apology, Diep states that as a new council member, he was still “inexperienced†and did things he shouldn’t have.
The drinking hole at issue is Citryst, at Brookhurst and McFadden. On Nguoi Viet,the owner said her place is not a “bar.†Obviously, whether something counts as a “bar,†or a “pub,†or just a plain old drinking hole, is all in the eye of the beholder, and the Bolsavik doesn’t consider it an issue. Read more of Bolsavik’s StoryÂ
Turns out this incident was the one from February 6, 2009 referenced in the Police Department recommendation to terminate Citryst’s Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that I wrote about on Friday.
I have been getting stonewalled by the Westminster Police Department in responding to my requests for more information, including regarding this specific incident. First they didn’t respond at all, then I received an email from Chief Hall directly saying that they were working on my requests. When I followed up with him a couple days later, he referred me to an attorney working for the city. She told me on Friday that they would “have something for me on Monday.” With Tyler’s pre-emptive apology, it seems more like a delaying tactic to me rather than waiting for one additional piece of information as I was told.
From what I can tell, it seems that Tyler and Quach are up to their eyeballs with this restaurant and its problems. No wonder they shoved the CUP suspension off the table. At any rate, as soon as I get the information I have requested from the City, I will share it with you. Something tells me, this will be a busy week.
Chris,
You requested a lot of material. It should come as no surprise that other media sources have made similar requests as well, though not identical. I requested staff to locate, duplicate and produce the materials.
All information was then forwarded from my office to the City Attorney for review. The attorney reviews the documents and recordings to ensure we have not disclosed any information that should be kept confidential. [The CPRA requires broad disclosure but also contains many individual exceptions].
All of this has occurred within the statutory 10 day time period set forth in CA. Govt. Code Section 6353(c). Indeed, we have not yet asserted the need for an additional 14 days, as permitted under the code under subsections (2) or (3).
While I do not know County of Orange policy for the release of public records, I wouldn’t be surprised if you were subject to a similar procedure. While this may not be as prompt a reply as the requestor often hopes for, it falls far short of “stonewalling.”
Chief Hall,
Thanks for responding, but for the record here is what I initially requested. I am trying to figure out why it takes 10 days for information that has already been released to other media outlets to be vetted. Hence, my feeling of being stonewalled.
—–
I would like to request if available, any photos of the vehicle accident scene for this incident. An addition if there is a booking photo I would like that as well.
Also, in reading the Register story yesterday, I noticed that the Register reporter had access to transcripts of the responding/investigating officers’ individual conversations “wire recording” I think it may be called. If possible I would like copies of those same transcripts and the actual recordings if available.
Finally, can you provide me with the time of the initial 911 report of the incident, the time that the first responding officer arrived at the scene, and the approximate time of Assemblyman Tran’s arrival on the scene?