Reflections and reasons

There's often a lot of discussion in the community about elected officials and how they respond to constituents. Whether they respond at all, and if they do, how they behave especially in the face of criticism of their actions.

My councilman responds most of the time that I contact him on an issue. We have next to nothing in common politically but he does respond though sometimes he does it before I can get a sentence out.



Councilman Dom Betro, who's not my councilman, responded in a way one time that shocked me at the time. I had heard stories of how he loses his temper on occasion, had trouble believing them but I was about to experience that side of him up close.



I was at a community meeting at the Coffee Depot the first week in October 2006. We were at a point in the meeting where it was time to raise community or civic issues. The issue that arose involved the implementation of promises the city council had made six months earlier concerning the police department and the implementation of its Strategic Plan. I had expressed some concerns to city officials because the city manager had failed to carry out the will of the city council on this issue since its passage and it appeared that instead of holding his feet to the fire, members of the city council instead were running interference for him in ways that were probably inappropriate. Their focus should have instead been on holding their direct employee accountable and directing him and his office to carry out their wishes but they appeared reluctant to do so even those who did get involved.

Betro may not have liked me raising doubts about the city's actions or rather inaction in relation to this issue. He told this group of people including many of his supporters that one key component of the implementation of the Strategic Plan was done, that it was awaiting its final paperwork and that the process might be completed in enough time for the presentation of a progress report on the police department that was only five days away.

I sat there in total disbelief. I had been doing my own inquiries and investigations into why the promises that the city council had made in a 7-0 vote in March 2006 after the dissolution of the stipulated judgment hadn't been realized. Over a period of several weeks, I had talked to several individuals including one from the city who had contacted me to tell me that there were problems with the way the city manager's office was handling the situation and that this office was dragging his feet on it hoping it would go away. Another individual in this equation contacted me after individuals in one of the state's departments had been reading my blog on what I had written on the issue last autumn and contacted him. What both of these individuals had in common was that they deeply cared for the welfare of the police department while it navigated through a particularly difficult period after its five-year court mandated reform process had been lifted. My conversations with both of them made that clear to me and that concern played an important role.

I think that's a large reason why in the end, it finally did work out despite the deep dysfunction at City Hall which led to a city employee doing something which while it was a righteous act, it was not indicative of a healthy climate in our city that had been hoped for after the process to reform the department was left to its stakeholders. This is something that needs to change and the community has to take the responsibility of working towards that. Hopefully, that's been happening since.

Both conversations took place after I had submitted CPRA requests to the police department for information in several areas and they provided responses to some topics. However, on such fundamental issues such as producing copies of the documentation of the goals and plans for addressing the challenges of personnel hiring and training, the responses to my CPRAs from the department stated that after conducting searches for these records, none were found. If anything was going on and there's no way to know from the outside whether it was or not, there didn't appear to be much of a paper trail.

Councilman Frank Schiavone did tell me when I had addressed my concerns to him, albeit while reminding him of statements that he had made at the workshop that he would work at resolving the issue until it had been done the way it was promised at the city council meeting. His response did surprise me but he did seem like he wanted to correct the situation in some matter and I guess, off he went or so I later heard.

The actual process of fulfilling what the city council had promised was a much longer way from being realized than Betro had claimed to a group of city residents looking to him for answers to their concerns on the matter. After my inquiries, research and weighing what individuals had told me, I knew this for sure and pretty much had figured out what had happened instead so I wasn't happy to hear Betro's assurances that everything pretty much had been taken care of in terms of what the city council had promised. Only, because people counted on him for the truth and he didn't give it.

I questioned what he had said at this meeting, but not in a disrespectful way or a way that put him in any difficult position. I questioned him because none of the people I had spoken to or the written responses I had received from the city on its progress implementing its promises indicated anything but that the process was in limbo or at a standstill.

And it was in limbo because the city manager's office allowed it to be and the city council wasn't paying much attention to what it told its city manager to do after it had done so. And what little was done appeared to do little to improve the situation because there was a reluctance to simply order the city manager's office to fulfill its task which would have solved the problem.

However, many of the community leaders didn't appear to be doing so either to address this problem, something that it turned out troubled at least one state representative from the office that had overseen the police department for five years. What then State Attorney General Bill Lockyer had admonished the three partners to do to ensure continued improvements in the police department had not come to light during its first test, which is the first six months or so after the dissolution.

I don't know even today why it was wrong to express doubts in Betro's words or express concerns about an elected official making statements that were 180 degrees different than those I had heard from others I had talked with about the situation.

So, like some other people had reported, I was on the receiving end of a yelling Betro who had said I had lost all credibility, in part I guess for a speech I gave in September 2006 supporting the right of the Riverside Police Officers' Association and other city unions to due process at the negotiating table for their labor contracts. After hearing accounts provided by the heads of different city bargaining units, it appeared that the labor negotiations at City Hall sounded like they were being conducted in a way similar to property negotiations by the city manager's office and city council and this had caused fear and dismay among many city employees from different backgrounds.

Only there apparently wasn't anyone in the city manager's office who really came into that position with a lot of experience in labor issues including those involving unions and it showed along with what at least appeared to be a lack of respect in the process for the parties. The labor unions had the most contentious labor negotiation period in the city's recent history as a result. Members of several bargaining units reported retaliation against them and others during this time period including by elected officials.

Speaking of credibility, look at Betro's campaign donation disclosure list or read this article and you'll see that he's taken $10,000 from the RPOA since the union's PAC endorsed him in March. If it was as bad as he called it last year, the union obviously wasn't bad enough for Betro to refuse its endorsement and its money months later. But the union wasn't "bad", just a scapegoat serving as something for Betro to blame in order to draw attention away from the failure of the city manager's office to deliver on several fronts last summer and autumn and the failure of the city council to hold its employee accountable instead of running interference for him.


What I couldn't understand is why Betro didn't tell this community group the truth that it put its trust in him to do so. There's absolutely nothing wrong with telling your supporters or city residents for that matter that you've not delivered on a promise made, but are doing your best to work on it as long as these statements are truly backed through action. The problem is, it's not clear they were at that point in time. But to say a process that had been promised since early spring was a done deal awaiting final paperwork is dishonest and it's disrespectful to everyone involved. If there are problems, you say that there are even if you can't specify what they are and that you're working on them, again if that's the truth then that's an appropriate statement to make. You do not lie to people or give them false information to make the situation and yourself better than what they really were. That's not what our city's elected officials are supposed to be doing and I don't think the Betro of perhaps, 2004 would have acted in this manner. But this is clearly a different Betro than we saw then.

The situation did resolve itself through efforts that bore fruit, but still why sell something to a group of individuals as being done when the reality is much different? It makes me wonder what else is being sold to city residents as being "done" that's really anything but. Are there projects involving Riverside Renaissance for example that are "done" but not really? Most of the projects being listed under the banner of "Riverside Renaissance" had or have nothing to do with it. Some of them truly were done deals before the idea of applying renaissance philosophy to this city's development was even a germ of an idea in the city's consciousness but still the current city government takes credit for them anyway and actually uses them to blast their predecessors who laid the groundwork for those particular projects. The truth is, "Riverside Renaissance" combines prologue and present.

I tried to remember when the last time I had an elected official yell at me and I couldn't because it never had happened before in my entire history in Riverside except once when Councilman Ed Adkison bellowed from the dais that I was "out of order" for directly addressing my city councilman in my public comments. Two days later, he apologized for his behavior. I suppose there's always a first for everything.

Still, the experience which according to the accounts of other individuals wasn't all that unique, as it turned out did stick only because it made Betro appear to be a cautionary example of how power and status can change people if they don't see either coming and prepare themselves ahead of time to deal with the tempations both can bring. Looking back, this Betro was not the Betro that ran for office and won against fairly tall odds in 2003. I'm not the only person to notice that, just the latest.

It's one reason to be hesitant for working on grass-root campaigns, not because there should be an expectation that elected officials owe those who put them in office but because these types of personality changes that occur in elected officials not prepared for the perils of elected office are often frustrating for those who participate in those campaigns who aren't there to go along with the ride up the political ladder but to make serious change in their city.

After all, what's facing Betro is another candidate running on a "grass-roots" campaign against the candidate who's spent the most money on the election so far. And the cycle continues onward.

I saw a bit of the newer personality when he responded to the pleas of business owners facing the specter of eminent domain or "friendly condemnation". His own followers brand his actions including the use of eminent domain as "courageous" or showing "courage" but whether or not the taking of properties such as the Fox Theater was necessary or not or done because as some have said, "we" deserve better than what we've got, the one thing that it definitely wasn't was an act of courage.

What's the oddest argument to defend the platform of Betro and other BASS quartet members so far is this argument that "we deserve better" and "we need to learn we deserve better" which is some way of equating the self-esteem of individuals(by learning that we should raise our expectations of what is deserved) with the development of this city. So, while "we" deserve better through the development of this city's redevelopment areas, those who own businesses within these areas and contributed sales taxes in the coffers of the city and "advocacy"organizations such as the Downtown Neighborhood Partnership(which was established solely to enhance the prospects of the Mission Inn Hotel), "they"(meaning these property owners) deserve only to be forced to "settle" with the city or lose their properties to eminent domain. The weakness of this argument is that there's no solid principled philosophy which condones the increase of one's esteem through the ideal that one deserves better that advocates doing so at the expense of others.

Though others may disagree.





Here's an interesting opinion piece about the planned renovation of the downtown pedestrian mall.

I hope it looks nice at its end but it's also pretty much another smack in the face to those who businesses which were threatened with eminent domain on Market Street who had to spend years watching their hard earned business revenues go into a tax to the Downtown Neighborhood Partnership to pay for improvements in the pedestrian mall. They never themselves received the promised improvements on their streets and in fact it was the failure to deliver by the partnership which made it easy for the city to call their area of downtown "blighted" and thus set them up for threatened eminent domain.

Now, with their businesses gone, they can sit and watch the city pour more funding into improving the pedestrian mall that their own money had been used to improve it some years ago.


The article's author, Bill Gardner, has some ideas, but he's concerned about history being swept away from one of the city's oldest areas.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)


My comments reflect several hours reviewing those plans. As I've said, the final proposed mall design does not respect the character of Riverside's downtown. And, to paraphrase a noted saying, "If you don't respect you must reject."

It's not too late to revise the plans to reflect the historic charm of the mall, but it will take a substantial citizen effort to achieve it. Contact your City Council representative to voice your concerns about this project, which is vital to revitalizing downtown Riverside.




Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco who apparently played some role in appointing the new sheriff in town wrote a blistering article in the Press Enterprise


(excerpt)


The law in question is found in Penal Code § 538d(c), which broadly states: "Any person who willfully wears, exhibits, uses, or who willfully makes, sells, loans, gives, or transfers to another any badge, insignia, emblem, device, or any label, certificate, card or writing, which falsely purports to be authorized for the use of one who by law is given the authority of a peace officer, which so resembles the authorized badge, insignia, emblem, device, label, certificate, card or writing of a peace officer as would deceive an ordinary reasonable person into believing that it is authorized for the use of one who by law is given the authority of a police officer, is guilty of a misdemeanor."

The law specifically does not provide exceptions for badge collectors, security guards or others. While some may prefer to carry a badge without the arduous law enforcement training or the routine exposure to injury or even death from criminals, the law does not recognize those as appropriate exceptions.

The law does prohibit a badge for nonsworn persons that resembles the authorized badge of a peace officer. The attorney general states that badges in the shape of a shield, star or both are the type likely to "deceive an ordinary reasonable person into believing that it is authorized," and therefore are unlawful in the hands of a nonsworn individual.

In reviewing the law with the police chiefs of Riverside County and a representative of the Sheriff's Department, all agreed we have a duty to enforce this law that clearly prohibits non-law-enforcement individuals from having badges that would mislead the public. Steps have already been taken to recall any badges that may have been issued to nonsworn personnel.







Speaking of Pacheco, Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein took him to task for his late penalty involving the 2002 homicide case of Markess Lancaster, a 13-year-old Black honors student.

On the eve of a murder trial that was five years in the making against an Eastside Riva gang member who was driving the vehicle that was used by the individual who shot Lancaster who was in another car, the District Attorney's office decided it had a change of heart on exactly how it wanted to proceed on the case. The office wanted to pursue it as a capital murder case, asking for the death penalty instead.


(excerpt)


Last Tuesday, a dumbfounded Judge David Wesley -- part of the judicial strike force dispatched to unclog RivCo courts -- tried to decide what to do.

Wesley: "I think it's unconscionable that the prosecutor's office would wait five years into a case to tell (defense) counsel that they're going to seek the death penalty ... And I also think it's unconscionable if the District Attorney told them they were not seeking the death penalty for the District Attorney then to change that position after counsel had already announced ready for trial."

Grech wanted the judge to derail the DA's attempt to seek the death penalty. The judge didn't know if he could do that. Defendant Serrano faced the prospect of a year's delay while his lawyer amped up for a death penalty case.

Judge Wesley: "I think, in effect, it does affect his speedy trial right." (Welcome to Riverside County, your honor.)

Ingrid Wyatt, speaking for the DA, said the case "had never been reviewed. A decision had not been made before and now it has. There is not a time limit on when the decision can be made."

Deputy DA Alan Tate seemed less certain about things, telling the judge: "I don't think this situation -- you know, I agree, we made errors in this case ... procedures changed this year, things fell through the cracks, there were some mistakes made. And as soon as we realized the mistakes had been made, we tried to correct them."


It's like Bernstein said to the strike team judge who's here to deal with a 1,000 trial backlog, welcome to Riverside County.

Actually River City County.




Columnist Cassie MacDuff wrote about the ruling on a class-action law suit representing jail inmates in San Bernardino County that determined that indiscriminate strip searches were a violation of the Constitution.


(excerpt)


San Bernardino County jail commanders see nothing wrong with the way they routinely conducted mass strip searches of inmates brought back from court appearances or transferred between jails.

As far as they're concerned, the searches -- in which 20 or more inmates would be lined up against a wall in a jail corridor, forced to strip and expose their genitalia while other inmates and deputies walked by -- conformed to the law.

"We don't think we were doing anything wrong," said Deputy Chief Glen Pratt, who oversees the county's correctional facilities.

A federal judge disagreed.

The searches were unconstitutional because inmates were searched indiscriminately, rather than only those suspected of having contraband, U.S. District Judge Stephen Larson said in a recent order.

His order ended a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of inmates wrongfully searched.

The county agreed to pay $25.5 million to the plaintiffs and to stop conducting such searches. Now, only inmates reasonably suspected of carrying weapons, drugs or other contraband are strip searched.



San Bernardino County Sheriff Gary Penrod is unrepentant and remains convinced that this correctional deputies weren't violating the Constitution in the searches they conducted. But the county's requirement to change its policy and to pay out money in litigation states otherwise.




Papering judges is a big trend and in San Bernardino County, members of the Public Defenders Office are papering up a storm in terms of expressing their problems with how Superior Court Judge Arthur Harrison treats their clients.

Some court watchers say that there's an ongoing power struggle between Public Defender Doreen Boxer to gain control of the judicial process system.

Contrast this with Riverside County where it's the District Attorney's office that goes on papering binges towards one judge or another.


(excerpt)


In Riverside County, Superior Court Judge Gary B. Tranbarger has been hearing civil cases since April because prosecutors have effectively blocked him from hearing criminal matters.

The district attorney's office made a bid last spring to disqualify Tranbarger for bias in a death-penalty murder case, and automatically filed to keep him off criminal cases while the disqualification challenge was considered by an out-of-county judge.

In August, the judge ruled Tranbarger did not show bias against the prosecutor, but afterward District Attorney Rod Pacheco said his office would continue filing instant challenges against Tranbarger, and the judge has continued to hear civil cases.

Ongoing Struggle

Brennan, the USC professor, said public defenders and district attorneys are always locked in long-term struggles to influence the court.

Brennan, a defense attorney for 35 years including a decade of appearances in San Bernardino County, said the county's district attorney has traditionally had more influence than the public defender's office.

He said he suspects the public defender may be behind the papering because four additional deputy public defenders filed motions supporting Knudsen.

Brennan said judges get reassigned before rifts with the district attorney or defense attorneys turn into wars.

"No individual judge wants a long-term battle with either office," Brennan said. "He has to stand for re-election every six years."




What's interesting about this article is almost a footnote. It stated that the caseload heard by San Bernardino County's judges is higher than that in Riverside County. San Bernardino has the fourth highest caseload in the state and Riverside County, the sixth. Yet it is Riverside County that reached a crisis so severe in terms of its trial backlog that it needed to borrow a dozen retired judges to hear trials until next June. Which goes to show you that the crisis in Riverside County isn't really simply about a shortage of judicial officers on the bench.









Mums the word from the Santa Ana Police Department on why lethal force was used on a car thief, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The department's silence on the shooting death of Kevin Rene Powell, 41, continued after sketchy details were released on the case and questions were referred to the Orange County District Attorney's office instead.


(excerpt)


"There really has to be a credible, actual threat," said Sam Walker, a professor of criminal justice at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. He said the circumstances of the shooting -- its location in a crowded area near a freeway and the number of shots -- made him wonder if officers overreacted.

Police said the encounter began when Powell sped away as officers tried to pull him over Tuesday near 4th and Main streets in Santa Ana.

Police have acknowledged firing at him two different times, first at Dyer Road and Hotel Terrace Drive. The second time occurred after Powell drove down the embankment of the 55 Freeway at MacArthur Boulevard and came to a stop.

Witnesses said eight to 15 officers fired as many as 20 shots at the SUV. A female passenger emerged unscathed and was arrested on suspicion of parole violation.

Police said Powell had a history of weapons and narcotics violations and there was a warrant out for his arrest on a narcotics violation.

Walker said that in an adrenaline-charged moment, officers can forget the rules. Santa Ana Police Department policy allows officers to use deadly force to defend themselves or others from the threat of death or serious injury, or to prevent the escape of a suspect in a violent felony who poses an immediate threat to others.









An off-duty law enforcement officer in Wisconsin shot and killed six people and injured others on a rampage, according to the Associated Press.


(excerpt)


The suspect was 20 years old and worked full-time as a Forest County deputy sheriff and part-time as a Crandon police officer, Sheriff Keith Van Cleve said. He would not release the suspect's name but said he was not working at the time of the shooting.

A seventh shooting victim was in critical condition at a hospital in nearby Marshfield, said Police Chief John Dennee. A Crandon police officer who fired back was treated for minor injuries and released.



No motive for the mass killing is known at this time but in other cases, it is usually related to some form of domestic violence, which is much more common in law enforcement officers than in the general population. Jenny Stahl's 14-year-old daughter, Lindsey who was sleeping over at a friend's house was one of those killed.


(excerpt)


"I'm waiting for somebody to wake me up right now. This is a bad, bad dream," the weeping mother said. "All I heard it was a jealous boyfriend and he went berserk. He took them all out."

The State Patrol and the Crandon Fire Department detoured a steady stream of traffic from two blocks of U.S. Highway 8 in the downtown area. Some residents stood in nearby front yards.

Marci Franz, 35, who lives two houses south of the duplex, said gunshots awoke her.

"I heard probably five or six shots, a short pause and then five or six more," she said. "I wasn't sure if it was gunfire initially. I thought some kids were messing around and hitting a nearby metal building."





In the World Rugby Cup, France sends the All-Blacks an early ticket home, 20-18. So now the Kiwi team goes into hosting the World Cup at home in 2011 having not even made it into the semis this year. This sheila thinks that's a sad state of affairs but it's all puckaroo. Buggers anyway!

They still deserve a chocolate fish.




If you like either television programs or motion pictures, enjoy them while they last. The Big Four are heading into strikes, two beginning in October and two more next June.