Election 2006: Anyone but Betro makes for a peaceful forum?

Not surprisingly, the Press Enterprise still hasn't written anything on the ethics complaint that has been filed against Councilman Dom Betro and it's likely that there won't be anything written about it any time soon. The posting I wrote yesterday on what happened at the city council meeting on Tuesday night elicited some responses from people who attended a candidate forum that took place for Ward One candidates at Back to the Grind last night.

I also spoke with quite a few individuals yesterday who were dismayed by what happened at Tuesday night's city council meeting. They lived in odd-numbered wards and were still trying to decide who to vote for to represent them. Several of them said how put off they were by the arrogance shown by those currently sitting on the dais at the weekly meetings. All you can tell them, is that they have the important right to vote in this election and they should educate themselves on the issues and exercise their power wisely.


As of yet, the Press Enterprise's editorial board has been quiet on this latest episode in Election 2007 but don't be surprised if you see an editorial in the newspaper about how awful these individuals were for filing a complaint against Betro.

And that's what disturbing about these latest allegations is that Betro's own supporters are not coming forward to speak on his behalf by saying that the Betro that they know so well could not possibly be engaging in such behavior. What they're doing instead is coming up and apparently trying to say, well look how badly these activists were behaving!

The problem with that strategy and how it's been carried out is that the "awful" behavior that these individuals are complaining about was simply a demonstration where people were holding signs and passing out fliers to people walking by.

Will there be an editorial on this situation, people have asked. Will there be a column by Dan Bernstein about it? Reporter Doug Haberman is probably thinking about it, or maybe his editor is thinking about it.


What's interesting is that what's left of the fairly good staff at the Press Enterprise (which has lost more than a few of its high-quality veteran reporters lately and the good reporters remaining don't seem as happy as they should be) recently moved into a building that was named in honor of its prior owner, the same owner who not too long ago wrote a letter that was published in the Reader's Forum complaining about what Belo Enterprises had done to his newspaper during the brief time they had owned it at that point!

I wonder if he'll show up to the dedication ceremony.


At the forum and afterwards, many interesting conversations took place. The candidates stayed after the forum to answer people's questions and didn't make it seem like there was another event to rush off to attend. They even talked to each other, which is really nice to see at a public forum. Of course, Betro four years ago would fit with this group, back when he was grass-roots and appeared committed to listening to all the different voices out there. But what has been commented on a lot during this particular election cycle is how things have obviously changed on that front.

One comment he made that was telling, was that he had complained to a community group about how the developers were breaking down his office door yet those who he thought would be allies of his weren't coming to him with their concerns. If there was still enough of the old Betro left, he would have seen that there was perhaps a cause and effect relationship there.

Another man that I met at the forum said that he had also been passing out fliers near the Fox Theater the same night that activist Kevin Dawson and his daughter had their runin with Betro. This man said that Betro had taken one of his fliers, crumpled it and threw it in his face. Later, some individuals tried to confiscate this group's fliers allegedly to provide a few copies for their friends who might be interested in them.

It's not clear whether there will be an ethics complaint filed in relation to this incident.

No news yet from City Hall on when the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee will be hearing Dawson's complaint and which council member will be substituted in for Betro this time. But what the process revealed the first time around is that when it comes to hearing and deciding on the outcomes of ethic complaints filed by members of the public, the city council will vote along the lines of the current political alliances along its members.

And if you want to know what those lines are, pay attention to who on the dais is endorsing whom during this current election.

Meaning that this is a great time to file ethic complaints against Councilman Art Gage. Not so good for complaining against members of what has been called BASS, given that three of its members are on the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee. This means that although Councilman Steve Adams has run into some problems with the residents of his ward regarding allegations that his conduct violates the ethics code,that as far as any ethics complaints may go, he's probably safe for now.

The members of the committee that was created to implement the creation and implementation of an ethics complaint process came up with a good idea, which was to allow a committee of city residents including members of this panel to hear and decide upon the complaints involving elected officials. But what these panel members need to do first, is to come out publicly and advocate for a fair and just process and so far there's been a lot of silence on that front.

Last night, Dawson learned more about the complaint process that lies ahead of him, a process where his conduct not Betro's will be scrutinized. A process where he, not Betro, will be put on trial. A process where he, not Betro will be faced with a system that was not created to address ethics violations involve city officials but to sidestep them and to provide elected officials with yet another mechanism to discourage public participation.

Yet Dawson remains determined to go forward.

The outcome of the first ethics complaint(actually the second as the first was thrown out on a technicality) could have gone either way. There were ways that the committee could have been favorable to Betro and held its head up high as it left the room. However, what was flawed was the process and by choosing the process that they did, those who made the decision did not leave the room with their heads held up high. A pattern that may repeat itself again when the complaint reaches that committee, especially if it happens before either the June election deadline or if there's a runoff for Ward One, the election in November.

Dawson is an interesting guy, who is one of several people who originally had fairly good relationships with Betro until they faced his vitriol firsthand or witnessed it happening to other people one too many times. And despite how Betro's supporters tried to paint the activists who protested at the Fox Theater as "new comers", Dawson has quite a lengthy history of activism in Riverside and he's not the only one who has that experience who's been painted with the "outside agitator" brush.

The forum itself, was an interesting affair. No tantrums. No outbursts. No people storming out in a huff. No arguments. But then again, no Betro present. And no press either, because I guess they were wherever Betro was.


It was also nicely run by Aric Isom who also has a blog, here and who also provided tasty refreshments.


Three candidates showed up, sharing their ideas for a better Riverside. I guess several DANA members who showed up didn't like what they saw because they left in a huff about halfway through. Other former DANA members stayed, enjoyed the forum and shared their experiences working with a group that they felt was not accomplishing what they had hoped.

It was nice to see how the candidates supported each other and their efforts even as they are in competition with one another. The deep religious faith that Derek Theiser and his wife have in his decision to run for office meshed nicely with Michael Gardner's perspectives on how to improve areas outside of the downtown and Pepper's commitment to fight for people who feel unrepresented.

Saddest story of the night? When several candidates said that when people from the downtown area donated to their campaigns, they donated or wanted to donate in $99 amounts. Why? Because according to state law, this is the maximum donation that can be made without the individual's name being reported on the mandatory campaign disclosure statements which made it clear that they didn't want other people who might read these public records to find out that they had made these donations. When people are afraid to let certain other candidates know that they donated money to a political rival, that is when something is wrong with the election process.

What did Jimmy Stewart call this, in It's a Wonderful Life, life in Pottersville?




Not much more coming out of Ward Seven on the alleged incident when incumbent councilman, Steve Adams called ward resident Jim Martin a liar and complained about him before Martin even took his seat at the candidates forum. Martin has been spending a lot of time at City Hall, accessing public documents and city council minute records on the city's involvement with the Ag Park project in the La Sierra Area, particularly its ties to engineer Chuck Cox who works for a construction firm owned by one sitting councilman.

The city council hates it when Martin appears at the meetings and uses his three minutes not just to express his opinion on the issue but to educate the public on what's going on with it. Not so much with what city council members are saying about it on the dais or in the press, but the long paper trail that they have been leaving behind them that's available to anyone courtesy of the California Public Records Act.

Martin hasn't said anything that he couldn't back up with a public document or two, so if he's indeed a liar as Adams has called him more than once, then are these public documents where these lies would actually be coming from?

Other candidates in Ward Seven like Terry Frizzel and Roy Saldanha expressed their concern and deep disappointment in Adams' behavior at the forum. Resident and property rights activist Yolanda Garland and other residents also condemned Adams' action and Garland should know, because Adams has slandered her from the dais as well. Garland has even had council members order police to "escort" her out of the chambers, simply for coming down to the podium and responding for an offer of proof asked for by a councilman.

Three others were also faced with expulsion on Feb. 27 and Marjorie Von Pohle, 89, said that the police would have to carry her out. According to several police officers who spoke on the issue at a community meeting, it was Deputy Chief Dave Dominguez who refused to allow the city council to politicize his job responsibilities and those of his officers. As a result, the four individuals were not arrested. But word is that the city manager's office was unhappy with Dominguez because he's not a "yes man" which is the kind of management personnel favored by that office. Community members have said that it's their support of Dominguez and his involvement in the community that has been instrumental at keeping the city manager's office at bay but it's still a sad state of affairs that's apparently not an uncommon one in the city's employment ranks.

There's been quite a few outstanding employees in this city who have become "at will" and then have left the city and been replaced by people who either worked for the County of Riverside or for Asst. City Manager Tom De Santis either in this county or in San Bernardino County. This includes Analyist Mario Lara who despite having no training let alone the six months training given to his predecessor, Pedro Payne is currently in charge of the Community Police Review Commission.

Others fear that they are going to lose their jobs simply because they want to act as independent heads of their departments or divisions and not be micromanaged by the city manager's office.

Controversy also surrounded Adams in relation to signs and brochures that he has been posting or circulating that were used in his election four years ago and stated that he had the endorsement of the Riverside Police Officers' Association. That was true back then, but this time around that union's PAC opted to endorse Saldanha instead. If that's the case, then Adams shouldn't be clouding that issue by stating or even implying that the RPOA is endorsing him.



Dan Bernstein wrote an interesting column about Riverside Police Department Sgt. Marcus Smail's decision to move into a house on Antitoch Street which had been the location of the fatal shooting of an 11-year old boy not long after his family had moved there.

(excerpt)



RPD Sgt. Marcus Smail remembers when the first who-wants-to-buy notice went out. "Nobody answered." The next note asked who wants to lease (with partially subsidized rent)? Smail, 48, answered the bell. His existing lease was about to run out. He and his wife wanted to buy, but not in this market. They moved to Antioch Avenue on New Year's Day.

"There were candle memorials for the little boy," recalled Smail this week, sitting in his living room. The boy was killed just down the hall. The Smails moved in during the anniversary of his death. "We didn't move the candles for a few days."

Four months later, they're settled in. The living room is decorated with Beatles and Sinatra art. The pool looks inviting on a sizzling morning. The Smails are growing tomatoes.

"I'm not trying to keep a secret about who I am," Smail said. "I do my own yard work; I hang out, smoke a cigar." The neighbors come by. They call if they see something suspicious. The sarge doesn't mind.

After 25 years on the force, he wants to "give something back." One way he does it is by cutting red tape. It helps when a cop calls code enforcement. "They even cited me," he laughed. Dead trees. "I said fine."



Actually, isn't it a fine? Though it appears that Smail and his new neighbors are a good fit.



A coalition of activists and community leaders in Los Angeles has requested all of that city's police department's internal records into the incident on May Day when over 60 riot police officers charged a park, striking people including media personnel with batons and firing less lethal munitions at them.


(excerpt)


In a letter to police Chief William Bratton and top leaders of the city's civilian Police Commission Wednesday, the coalition formally requested copies of all videotapes of the incident, policy documents, the names of all officers involved, communications on the use of force at the event and memos between elected city officials.

"This will definitely help prevent any cover up," said Peter A. Schey, president of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, one of the groups involved in the request.

Police officials said they had not reviewed the letter but were committed to a transparent investigation.

"As the chief has said, transparency is something we believe in," said Sgt. Lee Sands.



Police Protective League president, Bob Baker called the request "preposterous" saying that the department had nothing to hide in that law enforcement agencies keep their investigations transparent to the extent that the law allows. What Baker doesn't say is that he and others like him will fight like tooth and nail to minimize the information that the public is allowed to know about the conduct of the officers they employ with their tax dollars.

The law suits didn't end there.

A coalition of immigration rights group filed a law suit in U.S. District Court alleging that their rights were violated by the police department's officers who charged MacArthur Park.

Baker would be much happier about the situation out here in Riverside, a city which several weeks ago behind closed doors reinstated two police officers who were fired by Police Chief Russ Leach last year allegedly for some pretty serious allegations that apparently were sustained. This action was done in two closed sessions, in two separate votes that took place on March 20 and April 10. The CPRA states that any vote taken in closed session on a reportable action is to be announced by the city council and included in the minute record.

On March 20, the city council voted 6-1(with Art Gage dissenting) to authorize the city attorney's office to file a writ in Riverside County Superior Court to appeal the arbitration's decision to reinstate the two police officers in the case of Emilio Angulo and Juan Munoz vs the City of Riverside.


Then on April 10, the city council voted 7-0 not to appeal the arbitrator's decision and to reinstate the two officers back on the force. That decision would leave anyone shaking their heads as to how the city council could have done a 180 degree turn on the careers of two police officers.

What turned the vote around is anyone's guess.

For more information on the firing and reinstatement process involving these two officers, wait about six months and there will probably be an article in PORAC magazine all about it. Until then(or the passage of A.B. 1648 and its Senate counterpart), that's pretty much all that can be gleaned about this episode.

But is this a confidence vote of some type for Chief Russ Leach who fired these two officers? Let's look at the actions that have taken place lately in the city.

First there are moves by the city manager's office to do what some have alleged, which was to handle the promotion process for the police chief. When that came to light, that action apparently was stopped by the city council after receiving legal advice from City Attorney Gregory Priamos.

Now the city council is handling Leach's power of disciplining his officers for him by overturning an employment termination. How many different ways can City Hall say that it has essentially issued its own "no confidence" vote in Leach and has decided that a much better choice in that spot, is someone like Asst. City Manager Tom De Santis?

With a city council that is fairly preoccupied with what City Manager Brad Hudson can give him with the Riverside Renaissance which was the mother of all wish lists, Hudson appears to get much freer rein when it comes to giving De Santis chores to do involving other city departments than was enjoyed by previous city managers.

But what's been going on in the police department is both interesting even as it's disturbing.

As someone told me, he's got the car, he's got the concealed permit, does he have the job already? Many employees in the police department seem to think so as was shown by their recent rally at City Hall.

As for De Santis, if it's true that he is the city's new head librarian, this still might leave him with a few hours left in the day to do something else.

Now, it's probable that there won't be crowds of anybody at City Hall supporting Leach's right to discipline his officers, as there were when his right to promote officers was apparently a subject of some debate in the same venue.

And it's kind of funny because the biggest argument by police officers is that they hate civilian review because internal affairs already does such a great job at investigating the department's police officers. At least it does, until it finds against them. Will there be any police officers appearing before the city council defending the job done by the internal affairs division in this case? Probably not.

Basically, it's mostly about defending the mechanism that backs your officers and prevents them from being disciplined whether that's internal affairs, the arbitraton system, the city council or even in some cases, the CPRC.

The internal affairs division is the good guy until it rules against the officer. Then it's the bad guy who made the bad decision, and the arbitrator is the good guy, if he or she reinstates the officer. Of course, if he or she doesn't do this, then it's up to the city council to serve as the applier(or not) of discipline for the officer. If you run out of good guys, I guess the officer remains fired, but the growing reality is that in the state of California, many officers are eventually reinstated to their departments, retired out because their departments don't want them back or they move on perhaps to "second chance" agencies like Maywood Police Department.

Some like the officer who worked as a police officer for the University of California, Los Angeles and tased a student there, did get fired twice, were reinstated at least once and still find themselves in the situation where they can be fired again. For them at that point, Maywood Police Department is hiring, at least it was before the state initiated a pattern and priactices investigation against it for among other things, its hiring practices.

And oddly enough this interesting standard even applies to the CPRC when it clears police officers during its complaint deliberations, as I'm sure that more than one police officer professed his or her love for the CPRC(albeit probably not in the presence of other officers) on occasion when the CPRC issued a finding in his or her favor.




11Alive posted a story about a police officer in a city in Michigan who confiscated marijuana, then took it home and with his wife, baked some brownies with it.

He won't be facing criminal prosecution but his employers weren't too happy with him. As a result, there is going to be an investigation.


(excerpt)


The police department's decision not to pursue a case against former Cpl. Edward Sanchez left a bad taste in the mouth of at least one city official, who vowed to investigate.

"If you're a cop and you're arresting people and you're confiscating the marijuana and keeping it yourself, that's bad. That's real bad," said City Councilman Doug Thomas.

Sanchez, who resigned last year from the department in this Detroit suburb, declined comment Wednesday to the Detroit Free Press. Police Cmdr. Jeff Geisinger did not return calls seeking comment.

The embarrassing episode came to light when Sanchez called 911 and told the operator that he believed he and his wife had overdosed on marijuana and were dying.

When faced with the reality that he was going to be in trouble, Sanchez first blamed his wife, then said that he had removed the marijuana from his own squad car.