Belmont Shore’s late night safety concerns turns into citywide discussion

An item originally focused on late night safety concerns in Belmont Shore has resulted in a citywide study on gun violence, after an uneasy back and forth at Tuesday’s city council meeting. 

Councilmember Kristina Duggan, who represents the Belmont Shore corridor in East Long Beach, asked for a late night safety plan for her district following its third deadly shooting in the last 18 months. On Oct. 25, Long Beach resident Jeremy Spears was shot and killed by a man and a woman following an altercation at a bar on Second Street, according to police. 

The immediate reaction was to crack down on nightlife in Belmont Shore, which residents say has gotten more intense in recent years. Two other people have been killed after leaving bars in Belmont Shore in the last 18 months. 

Bars and nightclubs along Second Street have agreed to a 30-day midnight, curfew rather than the typical 2 a.m. closing time, while the City creates a long-term plan. 

“From the beginning I said I wanted this time to be different,” Duggan said. “We’ve had three homicides in less than 18 months on Second Street and I didn’t want just a few weeks of increased police presence and then go back to the same situation.”

While a permanent earlier closing time is still a possibility, the majority of Duggan’s proposals so far rely on a heavier police presence in Belmont Shore. The City is considering increasing walking patrols, reactivating a police sub-station, holding more DUI checkpoints surrounding the corridor and targeting “nuisance issues” like public drinking and unauthorized vendors. 

Long Beach Chief of Police Wally Hebeish said police are already working overtime in order to patrol the city at all times. As of now, the four divisions of Long Beach (east, north, west and south) have the same amount of officers patrolling. According to the Long Beach Police Department (LBPD), officers responded to the shooting on Oct. 25 within two minutes. 

“With the mayor’s vision of becoming an entertainment destination, [with the] upcoming FIFA and Olympics, we’ll be welcoming a lot of people, international people, to Belmont Shore and to Long Beach,” said Belmont Shore Business Association President Heather Kearn. “We need a strong coordinated plan for community safety, one that protects our neighborhoods, our visitors and small businesses that make our city thrive.” 

Councilmembers Push for Citywide Study

Councilmember Tunua Thrash-Ntuk, who represents District 9 in North Long Beach, pointed out there have been 11 violent murders in her district this year alone. As a result, she asked that Duggan’s suggestions be tweaked to address violent crime citywide. 

According to police data, there have been 30% less murders in Long Beach than last year, and 35% less shootings in the same timeframe. 

Thrash-Ntuk made four recommendations to shift the proposed motion from a Belmont Shore-specific plan to a citywide lens: 

1. A feasibility analysis for more walking beats citywide, not just focusing on Belmont Shore, so the City can identify “high need public safety hotspots.” The goal of this would be to see which areas of the city have high levels of violent crime and would benefit from more police presence in the form of walking beats. 
2. The original motion focuses on bars and nightclubs. Thrash-Ntuk’s request is for the motion to look at all alcohol-serving establishments, smoke-related institutions and liquor stores. 
3. With the data compiled, Thrash-Ntuk asked the City to examine how to assign resources “equitably,” so they go to the areas of highest need. 
4. Thrash-Ntuk said the “data shows that peak times [of violent crimes] are different” throughout the City; Belmont Shore’s peak times are when the bars and nightclubs close. Her recommendation is for the City to look at peak hours across the city, not just around 2 a.m. “to create a holistic safety plan … not just late night bars.” 

To meet the expansion of her requests, she requested a report back in 90 days, rather than the original 45-day plan. 

“I brought this item forward because it’s specific to Belmont Shore. I love your recommendations, but that might be something that could be brought separately,” Duggan said, as residents from Belmont Shore, nearly half of them being business owners in that area, clapped in support. “This is for my district and as I said from the beginning, each of us, each of our offices focuses on specific issues in our district and this is an issue in my district. I respect when ABC [alcohol sale] licenses come up in different districts … and respectfully defer to that councilmember.”

Duggan declined all of Thrash-Ntuk’s requests, drawing more cheers from the audience. 

“Part of what you’re asking is a level of dedicated resources that then impacts other parts of the city,” Thrash-Ntuk responded. Duggan insisted that she’s only asking for a report back, and Thrash-Ntuk pointed out that she’s also only asking for a report. 

Duggan again declined Thrash-Ntuk’s request. Councilmember Suely Saro, who represents district 6, said she agreed with Thrash-Ntuk that the item should be recognized as a citywide issue, and wouldn’t support the item without Thrash-Ntuk’s revisions.

“By doing a study in Belmont Shore, it doesn’t bar us from being able to do a study that’s more comprehensive around data. I think that would make not just residents in Belmont Shore feel safe, but all of us in our surrounding districts,” Saro said.

District 1 Councilmember Mary Zendejas also voiced her agreement with Thrash-Ntuk, and asked Hebeish how the LBPD allocates police patrols. Hebeish said it’s based on crime data, workload capacity, demographics and population density within a community. As of now, police patrols are divided evenly among the four divisions. 

Zendejas pointed out that her district in downtown Long Beach has had three deaths due to gun violence in the last eight months. 

“We have the same concerns so that’s why I absolutely agree [with Thrash-Ntuk] because everyone should be feeling safe,” Zendejas said. She made another motion to add Thrash-Ntuk’s requests back in. 

Richardson made yet another motion to essentially combine the two: a report specifically on Belmont Shore to return to city council in 45 days, and a citywide report to return to city council in 90 days. 

“Well, I have to say I’m disappointed, but we’re going to collaborate on this and have a report back because I’m always looking out, as you all know, I work for the good of the city as well as my district,” Duggan said, though she still supported the revised motion.