From Rialto to Riverside and back again

One year ago, the Rialto Police Department faced being disbanded and its services contracted to the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department.

Now, in 2007, current police chief Mark Kling said that it was a different police agency, according to an article in the San Bernardino Sun.


Rialto's police department one year later


First up, is trying to fill 27 vacancies that remain after an exodus of police officers left the department including at least six who went to the Riverside Police Department in December 2005. The vacancies make up over 25% of the officers in the agency.

The department had been through six chiefs in nearly as many years including Michael A. Meyers who departed in the wake of controversy that occurred last year when the department which has a long history of corruption and police misconduct was nearly disbanded by the city council.

The department also had many law suits filed against it regarding wrongful deaths and excessive force incidents including the fatal shooting in December 2003 of Demetrius Swift. Three years later, a federal jury decided that the officer who killed Swift had used excessive force and awarded his family $225,000.

Dale K. Galipo, the attorney for Swift's family, said that jurors had told him they voted in his favor because among other reasons, they found the testimony by police officers was inconsistent and that the ballistics evidence showed that the shooting happened at a greater distance than alleged by the officers.

In the late 1990s, the NAACP sent complaints of police misconduct including excessive force and racism to the U.S. Justice Department.

The situation with Meyers and the department came to a head after the city voted to disband the police department and hand off its operations to the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department by signing a contract with that agency.

The Rialto Police Officers' Association complained that it was being done without their knowledge and in violation with their collective bargaining rights. The community showed up enmass to support Meyers and to advocate for Rialto to keep its own police department.

Rialto Police Department in turmoil


The city council ultimately changed its mind and kept the police department, kicked Meyers out and picked an interim chief while it searched for a new one.


What lies ahead for Rialto is anyone's guess.

(excerpt)


Frank Scialdone, the former Fontana police chief who was Rialto's interim chief from December 2005 until Kling took over, said it will take Kling a long time to achieve his vision.

"He's got a tough job ahead of him," Scialdone said, noting that "the average officer doesn't like change that much."


The Press Enterprise's article on the recent changes in Rialto's police department also appeared optimistic. Kling said that the department had filled 14 of those 27 vacancies.

(excerpt)

"The way things are going, I feel confident that my recruitment goal of being fully staffed will be met by August 2007," he said.

In Riverside, notices are circulating to attend tomorrow's city council meeting in order to address the situation involving the conversion of an assistant chief position and at least one deputy chief position to being both "at will" and contracted through the city manager's office. The notices state that the community is concerned and that it's time to return the police department back to the police chief, rather than hand it off to the city manager's office.

I wasn't aware that the police department needed to be given back to the police chief to run, but I am aware that this agency hasn't been quite the same since last summer, about the time that both the city manager's office and the city council bailed on the promises they had made to the community regarding the continued implementation of the Strategic Plan. It took the department a while to bounce back from that setback if it has indeed done so and yes, the question has come to mind about who exactly is running it. It's a question that I'm asked almost every day in recent months as if I would know the answer to it.

But it's not just the police department that's been the subject of these types of questions. It's common to hear similar concerns and questions about other departments in this city as well.

I also wonder who's running the Human Resources Department these days since its former director, Art Alcaraz abruptly resigned over a year ago in the wake of allegations that hiring practices weren't being properly adhered to by that department. Not that those allegations hadn't plagued the city before and indeed they had, coming from employees in different city departments, but this time there seemed to be a sense of urgency attached. Then Alcaraz was gone, with a confidentiality clause attached to his resignation and people were left shaking their heads.

Last year, the Human Resources Board tried to get some information from the city regarding its practices with its employees and the city stonewalled the board to the extent that its chair, Gloria Lopez resigned in frustration.

I also wonder who is really running the Development, Public Works, Parks and Recreation and other city departments. I've had people ask me these things and haven't known what to say in response. There are those who are put in charge and then are those who put them there who don't appear satisfied to leave it at that.

So now the police department's become the center of concerns and questions by the community, in light of the situation involving the "at will" positions and who is really behind them. Now questions are being asked about this city department in terms of who's making the decisions at different levels of its operations just as they've already been asked in different places.

There can and should only be one answer to these questions and that is that it's the police chief who is in charge of overseeing the police department. He is in charge of hiring, promotions, management appointments and disciplinary actions including terminations. After all, it's in the job description. It should be clear that it is the police chief who runs the police department, but then this is Riverside and suddenly you have community members who are concerned that the police department needs to be given back to the police chief.

Concerns like these don't develop and flourish inside a vacuum. Something provides the seeds and then the fertilizer to bring them to life, which is what is happening in Riverside.

The community leaders didn't really step to the plate when the Strategic Plan's implementation stalled last summer and community members had inquired into that process. It is hoped that they can step up and ask the questions and raise the issues with this latest situation, which is stemming from the same problems that had plagued the implementation of the promises made at the March 28, 2006 workshop regarding the future of the police department after the dissolution of the stipulated judgement.

But the city has not made it a point let alone a priority to listen to the concerns of city residents, as has become clear in recent weeks with individuals including elderly women being expelled from meetings by police officers and receiving letters from the city attorney's office threatening them with arrest for "disruption" of a public meeting. More restrictions are expected to come down from the city council's new quartet of members that appear to oppose public participation in government.

Some questions which have arisen in discussions with others are the following. If a survey was taken, these ones would top the list of concerns among community members.



1) Who are the involved employees contracting with?

2) Are they serving at the pleasure of Chief Russ Leach or City Manager Brad Hudson? Who has the role of terminating their "at will" contracts?

3) How many sworn positions in the police department will be "at will" positions? Why was the process changed and by whom?

4) Of those offered this option so far, how many have accepted? How many have refused?

5) Is the city manager's office influencing the promotional process? And if so, to what extent?

6) What is the police department's response?



Conversations over the weekend have made it clear that there's quite a bit of concern on this issue, but not much in terms of information among the public of what exactly is going on and its impact on the police department. There also appears to be concern in the police department not to mention the city's other labor unions as well. Concern about the status of the police department and the job security of the three involved employees, considering how many people of color serving in "at will" positions have either been fired or have left the city's employment ranks.

What has apparently been happening to the police department has been happening to other city departments, including several which are being micromanaged by the city manager's office like the library where the personnel there apparently need to be told where to shelve the library books.



For those who are concerned about what has happened or have questions about it, you can contact your elected officials at City Hall, by calling (951) 826-5991 or email the following people.


rloveridge@riversideca.gov

dbetro@riversideca.gov

agage@riversideca.gov

asmelendrez@riversideca.gov

fschiavone@riversideca.gov

eadkison@riversideca.gov

nhart@riversideca.gov

sadams@riversideca.gov


And for Betro, Gage and Adams, it's an election year.