Election 2007: Where thou, Art?

Councilman Art Gage is heading off to the runoff election this autumn to face off against his rival, William "Rusty" Bailey who in a squeaker of an election narrowly missed winning the Ward Three seat outright. Both will head off to the final round this November along with the two top finishers in the three other wards. May the best men or women win but more importantly, may the voters win.



The addition of 3,000 tallied ballots changed the percentages each candidate received a little bit but did not alter the outcome in any of the races. That was the one where the city's voters living in the odd-numbered wards sending a loud message to the incumbents who ran for reelection that there will be no easy victories, free lunches or waltzes in the park for them this time around.

No incumbents winning by a landslide, then deciding next year to jump into the mayoral race. The two incumbents who were prominently featured in a recent edition of Inland Empire magazine talking about their mayoral aspirations for next year will now be fighting to stay on the dais this year. And that is exactly as it should be.

People are elected by the voters to serve as their elected representatives. No one is entitled to have that job but must earn it, and what's been permeating from the dais this past year is this feeling that the council members were not public servants accountable to the voters but that the city residents are accountable to them.

As repayment, the majority of the voters in three wards cast votes for candidates running against the incumbents including 56% of the voters in Ward One, 56% of the voters in Ward Three and about a whopping 66% of the voters in Ward Seven.

Hopefully, the incumbents who are running as well as those sitting on the dais heard the voters loud and clear. The newly polished, less accessible, leave-us-alone form of city government which recently turned its secretarial pool and cubicles in for legislative aides and spacious offices may have to reinvent itself once again. And it only has five scant months to do so. So they should like, start tomorrow?



Gage and Bailey probably spent most of today awaiting the final results in this nail biter of a race which pushed Bailey another fraction of a percentage ahead of Gage and narrowed the gap between Councilman Dom Betro and challenger Mike Gardner in the Ward One race. Also finishing strongly was Ward Seven candidate and former mayor, Terry Frizzel who will go up against barely-there incumbent Steve Adams in November as well.



Both Gardner and Frizzel ran on grass-roots campaigns spending far less than their rivals who broke the bank trying to win seats that pays about half annually as what they spent during their campaigns.

People anxiously waited most of the day for the final returns on Election 2007 to be posted by the county's voters' registrar. Now what lies ahead is an even longer wait, as the candidates will probably meet with their campaign teams, cut back on their vacation time and begin raising money in earnest to pay for all that advertising that will be flooding the mail boxes of city residents closer to the election and all the signs that will be popping up like mushrooms advertising the various candidates.

In the meantime, the saga of River City still continues.







"Just remember this, Mr. Potter, that this rabble you're talking about... they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn't think so. People were human beings to him. But to you, a warped, frustrated old man, they're cattle. Well, in my book he died a much richer man than you'll ever be."




---George Bailey (Jimmy Stewart), It's a Wonderful Life




Salvador Santana's newsletter, The Truth is out in print and features a story on how he, Theresa Andrawis, a downtown business owner and Ward One candidate Letitia Pepper took a certain local gorilla out to the Mission Inn perhaps to sit and chill out over a banana daiquiri. They were met by security guards who wanted to apprehend said gorilla who allegedly was wanted by the Riverside Police Department for visiting local businesses with a sign that read "Don't monkey around! Anyone but Betro!"


This caused such a stir in the normally pedestrian downtown shopping mall, with several business owners receiving visits from said gorilla, who on one occasion performed a strip tease. The business owners were supporters of incumbent Dom Betro, having his campaign signs in their windows and were at a loss of what to do and who to call to deliver them from the dancing simian so they apparently phoned the Riverside Police Department to well, pick the hairy perpetrator up.

The mood downtown has been fairly somber lately, what with business owners having to worry about Smart Park's impact on their sales and the impact of Riverside Renaissance on their futures. So for most people, the presence of the gorilla in their midst probably perked things up for a little while.

Other candidates running for Ward One said that they had asked businesses to display their signs. Several business owners on the downtown strip said they would really like to do so but they feared the repercussions they might face if they did. These are sad times we live in if this is our reality.


Why are people so leery, including small business owners in the downtown area? Perhaps, because they are looking around them and seeing business owners like themselves being pushed out of their businesses by the threat of eminent domain. Perhaps they wonder if they are next in line on the chopping block.


The most recent example was the Kawa Market, owned by an Asian-American family in the Wood Streets neighborhood for nearly 20 years. The small market has been in business much longer than that, having a rich history behind it going back to World War II. This business was targeted by the city for eminent domain and make no bones about it, that's exactly what would have happened if the Guans hadn't taken the money offered to them by the city. That's how it begins, with the city offering a business owner with a price that might have been paid for their property up to five years ago. Then even as real estate is skyrocketing everywhere surrounding that parcel of land, the city will do another assessment and insist that the value of the property is actually dropping. So the amount of money offered to its owners will start dropping as well before the city lowers the boom.


Having seen up close the process which ultimately leads to what the Guans and other business owners were forced to do, I can understand why they took the money and didn't fight it. It's a battle that can't be won in the current climate and what happens is that you spend more of your money fighting to get less from the city. There really is no other way to go except to support the efforts of those who are trying to put a ballot initiative to the voters on imposing restrictions on the use of eminent domain for the benefit of private developers. At least then, the voters in this city would have the choice, yes or no.

But the actions taken by the city showed that it knew what the answer overwhelmingly would have been to that question.

Alas, that organization was hit by what is called a SLAPP suit by the city attorney's office. A SLAPP suit is filed by a local government against an individual or an organization usually based on allegations of defamation of character or as was the case here, because the city felt that it needed to "assist" the organization. Only the organization was engaging in the collection of signatures as part of a democratic process, not violating any laws or statutes and the only assistance it needed from the city was to honor the process that is currently in place for putting an initiative on the ballot.

What stamped this litigation filed at taxpayers' expense as a classic SLAPP suit was that it asked for the organization to pay the city's attorney's fees which currently are set at about $150,000. Cities and counties take that step to intimidate or chill the individual or organization's free expression or participation in a democratic process. So the decision that was to have been left to the voters will have to wait while the city's legal division directed by the city council killed it with kindness.



The Guans and the Kawa Market put a face on the side of the Riverside Renaissance that the city didn't want anyone to see. When the city council held its ceremony at the Riverside Municipal Auditorium where the mayor and council members sat on a stage and unveiled the Riverside Renaissance, they didn't talk about families like the Guans. They didn't talk about the owners of the businesses lining Market Avenue who had steadily paid business taxes to the Riverside Downtown Partnership for improvements they would never see. In fact, the lack of renovations done in their area would later be used against them. It's called "blight" you know, when the city neglects to improve an area where businesses exist. And so, now those businesses won't.





There was no discussion while twin lines of members of the Greater Chamber of Commerce approached the podiums to give their unwavering support of the proposal, about the comments that city council members made to the previous owners of the Fox Theater, which was seized through eminent domain several years ago. One council member stood up and said, enough talking, let's just take the property now. And take it they did, as the young children of the family that owned it stood sobbing in front of a reporter covering the story from the Los Angeles Times. The city gained a building that will cost it millions to renovate and maintain and it's unlikely that most of that money will be earned back if the only use it has is to host plays that few people will be able to afford to attend on a regular basis at current ticket prices.


Now, those who represented the first and third wards where these businesses resided on the city council are now themselves having to fight to keep their jobs five months from now. And it wouldn't be hard to guess that perhaps what happened to Kawa Market is one reason why.


Now that city residents are seeing the personal toll that Riverside Renaissance has taken on the dreams of some families, they are looking at it again. They're looking also at the future in a world where the economy ebbs and flows and that everything that goes up, eventually comes back down again. They're looking at the impact that fulfilling every item on a 20-year long wish list will have on its abilities to update its infrastructure and provide city services to the residents including those who are expected to join it through a series of annexations.

All the city council members see is Brad Hudson in the role of the fairy godmother promising to grant them their every wish with the icing on the cake being, huge signs popping up all over town with their names in the marquee. Signs that advertise a particular production starring [insert ward council member(s)] and co-starring in smaller roles(and font) [insert mayor and remaining council members]. Then the heads begin to swell and the dais gets even more crowded.

The council members become more prone to sighing, looking at their palm pilots, leaving the room, talking with one another especially Councilwoman Nancy Hart who chats up Adams and Hudson who appears to have one single ongoing conversation with City Attorney Gregory Priamos which appears to defy the stories that the two men don't get along. In the midst of this commotion, people come up one by one to have their three minutes at the podium.

Not that the public has much opportunity to speak out on Riverside Renaissance because the vast majority of money approved to be spent on these projects is approved through items placed on the consent calendar. And if you recall, no member of the public has been able to pull an item from the consent calendar since July 2005 when the city council backed by several city residents sitting in the audience who spoke on its behalf, voted 6-1 to pass a motion to implement new restrictions on public participation at city council meetings.

Then elderly women found themselves on a list of personas non gratis at city council meetings beginning last year when Mayor Pro Tem Ed Adkison barked at police officers to remove an elderly woman from the podium who had exceeded the three-minute speaking rule. That woman had appeared before the body seeking assistance and perhaps, a sympathetic ear because a city-owned pipe had burst and flooded her property.

One very embarrassed police officer found himself in the position of having to gently escort her away from the podium.

Then the next year, there were several more who faced a similar fate from the same city council, actually one or more of the four who currently make up the BASS quartet.

One of those who nearly was ejected from the chambers by police officers was Marjorie Von Pohle, who is 90 and has been going up to the podium weekly to call the city council on its actions of restricting public comment. Von Pohle who rarely misses a meeting just looked up at the two police officers from her seat with an engraved plaque bearing her name on the back of it and told them they would have to carry her out. Wisely, the city council decided to allow her to remain.


Instead of the Queen of Hearts yelling out, off with their heads to whoever displeased her, Riverside has Mayor Pro Tem Ed Adkison banging his gavel and barking, "point of order" usually with another councilman or two chiming in agreement in the background. That happened again several weeks ago, when a man who was upset because of crime and the shortage of police officers in his neighborhood found himself being escorted from the chambers by two police officers for exceeding the three-minute rule. One of the officers spoke softly to him, patted him on the back and led him out.


It's a tribute to two deputy chiefs and the officers under their command that no one has been arrested so far at the meetings. Several police officers came to a community meeting and complained about the actions of the city council on those occasions, about being caught in between a rock and a hard place. One of those deputy chiefs who intervened apparently found himself between a rock and a hard place as well, having earned the ire of Hudson's office and community members were unhappy about that.



The police department's officers have themselves congregated at City Hall twice during the past six months to protest against actions done to them either by the office of City Manager Brad Hudson and the city council. Their rallies followed those conducted by both the SEIU and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, both unions which also represent city workers. The long, hot summer of contract negotiations among the city's six labor unions led to three law suits, one strike vote and numerous rallies at City Hall before the contracts were finally signed.

The work force has never appeared more frightened or unhappy as it has been since the city hired Hudson and Hudson brought along his cohort, Asst. City Manager Tom De Santis and the micromanaging apparently began. The city lost hard-working employees particularly men and women of color to resignations and terminations and apparently saw a record number of terminations being appealed last year.

But back to the gorilla, who was about to find itself on the wrong side of the law while it was socializing with friends at the Mission Inn. The Riverside Police Department was notified and with Pepper's assistance set the record straight and the gorilla was allowed to take its breather from the campaign trail in peace.

And what's fitting about the saga of the gorilla, is that in real life, it's played by a female senior citizen, the favorite demographic group of choice to be expelled from city council meetings by those currently sitting on the dais.

Sometimes life is just so, ironic.








In Los Angeles, the police department is continuing to investigate a complaint filed about the alleged assault of a Black mentally ill woman that took place last weekend, according to the Los Angeles Times.

If you want to read a good example of how biased complaint investigations can be in the LAPD, just read the following statement provided by recently promoted Capt. Andy Smith. A statement he made to a newspaper reporter working on a story about the incident as an officer representing a department currently under federal consent decree. The expression of a department's "vanishing police culture" doesn't get much more bolder than that.


(excerpt)



"I'm hoping a video will surface," Smith said. "We'd love to see a video of this because we think it'd indicate exactly what our officers did" was exaggerated by witnesses.




Which kind of tells you that this investigation is probably over before it even began. But it's statements like this that might further compel the city's residents to push for a civilian review board of its own to be implemented in addition to the Los Angeles Police Commission which already exists. Smith and others like him will probably be shaking their heads in puzzlement as to why community members don't come forward to provide eyewitness accounts to police either of crimes that take place or incidents involving police misconduct. Because they're all liars of course.

The sensible thing for Smith to have said was that the investigation into the troubling incident is currently ongoing and being taken seriously and treated in a professional matter. But statements like these are free advertising for the importance of civilian oversight and review so if this is the way the department is going to conduct itself, by all means keep these statements coming.


Smith might be busy circling the wagons around the department but the city council in Los Angeles has asked for three officers involved in the controversial May Day incident to appear before the body to speak on and to answer its questions about the incident, according to another article in the Los Angeles Times.

This the incident that took place in MacArthur Park when over 60 riot police officers charged into there where hundreds of people were peacefully assembled. The officers were videotaped hitting people including media representatives with their batons and shooting less lethal bullets at them.

At least four investigations were launched in response and one deputy chief was demoted and is in the process of retiring from the force. Three other officers still remain off of street duty pending further investigation into their conduct.

Chief William Bratton had presented a report on the progress of his investigation first to the Police Commission then the city council. Neither appeared pleased with what he had to say and pressed him for more information and answers to their questions.


(excerpt)



After grilling the chief for the second time in two weeks, several council members said they were frustrated and dissatisfied by the answers provided so far about the fracas that injured 42 people, including seven officers.

Bratton said he doubted the deputy chief and commander whom he had reassigned after the incident, and a captain on the scene, would testify before the council. That is because they may be subject to a personnel investigation of their roles overseeing the police response at the immigrants' rights rally.

"I sincerely doubt that any of them will appear," Bratton told the council.

Council President Eric Garcetti responded by noting that the council has subpoena power to compel the appearance of LAPD managers. Garcetti and Councilman Dennis Zine said they would consider using that power, although both said it may not be the best approach and they were hoping the command officers would cooperate.

"I'm not ruling out anything," Zine said.

Zine noted that Bratton did not appear at the scene of the May Day rally until after the confrontation was over and officers had used batons and foam rubber bullets to disperse the crowd. Police said they acted after some in the crowd began pelting them with rocks and bottles.

"If we want to be transparent and open about this, we need to find out the state of mind of those in command," Zine told the chief.

Councilwoman Janice Hahn said the chief's explanation to the council has been a "bureaucratic attempt to defend what had happened" and has not addressed all of her concerns.

"Many of our questions were not answered last week, and I know none of my questions were answered last week," Hahn said.



Any of these council members interested in running for office out in Riverside? The even-numbered seats are up for grabs in two years.