Chinatown: The Riverside City Council spanks Jacobs
"It's a major issue. Be careful."
---Kevin Akin speaking on Chinatown at the city council meeting.
"It didn't happen."
---Ward One Councilman Mike Gardner about allegations that the city council verbally okayed the violation of the municipal code by Jacobs' employees.
"We may have lost Chinatown" through the city's "final Chinese Removal Act".
---UCR Archaeologist Scott Fedick about the bulldozing of the site that took place from Feb. 14-16 in an attempt to head off a temporary restraining order.
Verbal spankings were the order of the day from the Riverside City Council against developer and campaign contributor Doug Jacobs for his three day of reign of bulldozing on the Chinatown site during the holiday weekend earlier this month. One council member even announced he was donating his campaign contribution that he had recently received from Jacobs to the Save Our Chinatown Committee after listening to the testimony at the meeting.
If you recall, Jacobs was cited by the Riverside Police Department twice for violating a municipal ordinance that prohibits creating a noise disturbance on Sundays and federal holidays, including Presidents' Day, which was held this year on Feb. 16.
In news articles, Jacobs defended his actions which were also captured on video and witnessed by numerous people over the three days by saying he was following the treatment plan approved by the city council and the conditions of the permit.
Speakers at the city council meeting alleged that Jacobs' employees had told people that the police department and the city council had given them verbal permission to use noisy equipment on days were it was in violation of the city's municipal code, an allegation several city council members denied. The police department (which is currently short at least a dozen officers and four supervisors) sent officers in response to complaints on Sunday, Feb. 15 and Feb. 16 and both days employees didn't obey the officers' orders to stop the machinery and so they were cited by the police. Those citations will be processed by a judge in traffic court in Moreno Valley at a later date and could result in fines.
The schedule of work done by heavy equipment on that weekend in what speakers called, the "Valentines Day Massacre" were as follows:
Saturday, Feb. 14: 7 a.m.-7 p.m.
Sunday, Feb. 15: 7 a.m.-9 p.m.
Monday, Feb. 16: 7 a.m.-9 p.m.
Pictures and videos of what happened that weekend are available for your viewing pleasure here.
Jacobs admitted doing the work and knowingly violating the ordinance and his permit but claimed he did it to beat the restraining order, which was filed on Friday Feb. 13 and was to be heard in Riverside County Superior Court on Tuesday, Feb. 16. He said that if it were approved (and it was continued for about a week) then he would have no opportunity to prove that there were no artifacts.
It's good that the city council members who spoke, did indeed speak but if a group of concerned people hadn't gone to the meeting and addressed them on this issue, would these words have been said that needed to be said? As of the day of the city council meeting, only Ward One Councilman Mike Gardner (who includes the Chinatown site in his ward) had criticized the action, calling it a "conscious violation" in the Press Enterprise.
None of the other said anything publicly.
Dozens of people demonstrated with signs outside the city council chamber before the meeting and passed out fliers and buttons, with "Save Chinatown" on them. Some of them stayed to speak at the meeting.
Jean Wong, a member of SOCC, provided a descriptive picture at the city council meeting of the 11-12 bulldozers and backhoes that dug up huge chunks of dirt instead of using smaller tools more commonly associated with an archaeological excavation. The committee still doesn't know the extent of damage done to the site and any artifacts. In a newspaper article, Jacobs claimed his digging only yielded a few pieces of broken pottery.
Kevin Akin challenged the city council members who accepted campaign contributions from Jacobs while running for election to return them to sender, unspent. He said it would be one of the major focal issues of the current city council election and apparently some people took him to heart. He claimed that Jacobs had lied in court declarations claiming that he spent $1300 a day on security for the site yet no security guards were ever seen and that if they paid that much for security, "you can find them".
Another archaeologist from UC Riverside, Scott Fedick, said that the excavation bore little resemblance to the one outlined by Jacobs to the city council which would cost $2 million. Another speaker said that the archaeological expert hired by Jacobs to perform his excavation didn't appear until 9 a.m. which was two hours after the destruction on the site had begun.
Deborah Wong said that the city council was "on the wrong side of history" but "It's not too late to roll back" from being a city council which would go down in history as being responsible for the destruction of a national historical site.
The city council listened and then some of its members responded, in condemnation of Jacobs' actions.
Councilman Andrew Melendrez said that Jacobs had been "insensitive" and that it was up to the city council to restore the trust of the city in it after this episode.
Gardner said that the city council had never told Jacobs that he would be able to violate city codes and they couldn't do that (nor could the police department) unless they were amended. He stood by his words in the newspaper article saying that Jacobs clearly knew he was violating the ordinance.
"I'm concerned by his decision not to follow the terms of the permit," Gardner said.
Councilman Frank Schiavone expressed his disappointment in Jacobs, saying what he did was deliberate and disrespectful. He said that if Jacobs had said he was going to violate the city's code and bring 12 pieces of heavy equipment to dig up the parcel the way he did, the city council never would have approved his permit and treatment plan. He said he was offended that Jacobs had justified his actions by saying the city council had given its approval.
Then he offered to contribute his $250 campaign contribution he had received from Jacobs at a recent fundraiser to the SOCC, which accepted it.
Schiavone added that he spoke with an absent Councilman Rusty Bailey (another recipient of campaign contributions from Jacobs) and he was also very dismayed with the chain of events.
City Manager Brad Hudson spoke up at some point after Councilman Chris MacArthur had also voiced his displeasure and denied that city staff was involved in allowing Jacobs to violate the permit and the code in anyway.
There had been a lot of silence on this issue since the weekend of the bulldozers and backhoes but that silence was broken on Tuesday night, Feb. 24 in large part because people cared enough to come to the meeting to speak out on an issue that they're passionate about.
The temporary restraining order for the Chinatown parcel has been granted by Judge Sharon Waters on the morning of Tuesday, Feb. 24. Now the exchange of paper work via briefs submitted to the court will begin in early March. The date of the hearing on the preliminary injunction will be on March 20. More can be read about the hearing here.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
In issuing the temporary restraining order, the judge expressed concern about the handling of possible archaeological artifacts yet to be found, said Michelle Ouellette, an attorney representing Jacobs. She said archaeological digging with smaller tools still must be done.
The 4.2-acre site is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. It also is a city and county landmark and a state point of historical interest.
The Save Our Chinatown Committee wants a memorial park built there.
But the group knows that even if its lawsuit succeeds it would not stop Jacobs' project, and only force further environmental review, Sagara said.
"This isn't just like any other piece of property," Sagara said. "It's a special place. It deserves special attention."
Here are the court proceeding minutes:
EX PARTE HEARING RE APPL FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER & OSC.
02/24/2009 - 8:30 AM DEPT. 10
HONORABLE SHARON J. WATERS, PRESIDING
CLERK: C. ZUNIGA
COURT REPORTER: K. BURKS
SAVE OUR CHINATOWNCOMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY JOHNSON & SEDLAC - RAYMOND JOHNSON AND VEERA TYAGI PRESENT.
KRISTI SMITH REPRESENTING CITY OF RIVERSIDE PRESENT
MICHELLE OUELLETTE REPRESENTING CITY OF RIVERSIDE PRESENT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ATKINSON, ANDELSONLOYA RUUD &ROMO - JOHN DIETRICH PRESENT.
JACOBS DEVELOPMENTCOMPANY, INC REPRESENTED BY BEST, BEST, & KRIEGER - MELISSA CUSHMAN PRESENT.
ARGUMENT PRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER GRANTED
HEARING RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SET 03/20/09 AT 08:30 DEPT 10
HEARING RE CEQA SET 06/29/09 AT 09:00 DEPT 10
COURT ORDERS NO BOND TO BE POSTED AT THIS TIME.
COUNSEL AGREE ON THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE:
TRANSCRIPT TO BE PROVIDED TO PLAINTIFF BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS 2/25/09. PLAINTIFFS OPENING BRIEF
NO LATER THAN 3/3/09. DEFENDANTS BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 03/10/09. JOINT OPPOSITIONS AND REPLYS NO
LATER THAN 3/16/09.
COUNSEL STIPULATE BRIEFS SHALL BE LIMITED TO 20 PA TES, 20/20/12.
COUNSEL STIPULATE TO SERVICE BY FAX OR EMAIL.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD CERTIFIED BY 3/20/09, MAY BE LODGED WITH REPLY PAPERS. RESPONSIVE
PLEADINGS NO LATER THAN 3/27/09. OPENING BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 5/1/09. OPPOSITION BRIEFS NO LATER
THAN 5/29/09. REPLY BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 6/15/09.
COUNSEL MAY PROVIDE COURTESY COPIES DIRECTLY TO TH E COURTROOM BY 6/15/09.
COURT ORDERS ALL REPLY PAPERS FAX FILED.
NOTICE WAIVED.
This draft of the 2007-08 annual report for the Community Police Review Commission provides information that was present in the preceding report at least partly.
It's important to have comparative statistics for the findings on complaint allegations submitted by the CPRC, the Riverside Police Department and the City Manager's Office (CMO) in order to evaluate the independence of the CPRC and whether or not its input in the process actually plays any sort of role in the outcome of allegations delivered by Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis or whether it's just a rubber stamp for the city and/or police department.
It's interesting to see the evolution of how disparate the CPRC was from the other two entities which were themselves almost identical in the figures provided in 2006 to where it more closely mirrored the police department which was the case in 2007. In contrast, there was a slight deviation seen in terms of the rate of complaints sustained by DeSantis when compared to the other two agencies.
Sustain rates on complaint allegations:
2006:
CPRC: 8.57%
RPD: 5.14%
CMO: 4.57%
2007:
CPRC: 7.23%
RPD: 7.23%
CMO: 9.64%
2008:
CPRC: N/A
RPD: N/A
CMO: N/A
What's particularly interesting is comparing and contrasting the statistics for allegations receiving the "not sustained" finding which is given up when there's not enough evidence (or bias) to make a determination on whether an allegation is to be exonerated, sustained or unfounded. Sometimes it indicates the quality (or deficiency thereof) of the investigation that was done.
2006:
CPRC: 37.7%
RPD: 6.86%
CMO: 14.8%
2007:
CPRC: 14.6%
RPD: 8.43 %
CMO: 9.64%
After perusing these interesting statistics, there's a question which begs to be asked. This and these, do have something in common?
But anyway, what were the most common allegations during the past few years?
2006:
1) Improper Procedure: 81
2) Discourtesy: 47
3) Use of Force: 12
Discrimination/Harassment: 12
2007:
1) Improper Procedure: 39
2) Discourtesy: 20
3) Use of Force: 7
2008:
1) Improper Procedure: 109
2) Discourtesy: 31
3) Use of Force: 16
More to come from the drafting and revision of the annual report in blog postings to come and that process begins at the CPRC meeting on Feb. 25.
The special prosecutor hired to help remove former San Bernardino County Assessor Bill Postmus from his office will submit a finding even though Postmus has resigned.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
"We should wrap it up as soon as possible," Supervisor Paul Biane said Tuesday. "At this point in time it looks like a waste of money to do it one more day."
The county so far has spent about $90,000 on the independent counsel.
The board approved a $250,000 contract last month with Los Angeles attorney John C. Hueston, who was a prosecutor in the case against Enron executives.
Soon after Hueston was hired, Postmus resigned. He left office Feb. 13.
Hueston has been working with county lawyers to "tie up loose ends" and prepared a report on his findings, but the investigation is all but suspended, said Mark Kirk, chief of staff for Supervisor Gary Ovitt.
A Colton city employee has been charged with embezzlement.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
Carol Anne George, 53, is accused of taking the money between January 2006 and this month.
The District Attorney's office filed charges against George on Feb. 19 after an investigation by the city and the Colton Police Department. George resigned Feb. 13, said Anthony Arroyo, Colton's human resources director.
City Manager Daryl Parrish said the incident caught him off guard. Once it was discovered, the city's response was swift and decisive, Parrish said.
"Sometimes you're surprised by the things people do," Parrish said. "I was a bit surprised."
Parrish said after the "potential impropriety" was brought to his attention late Feb. 11 and staff did a preliminary investigation, city officials notified the police.
More budget woes across the Inland Empire when it comes to cities and counties having to readjust their budgets.
In Rialto, the decision to create a new public information officer position has been approved by the city council but the filling of the new position has wisely been put on hold.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
A city council member in Lake Elsinore is the focus of a recall effort.
Moreno Valley is looking at making more budget cuts and freezing more positions. Not to mention laying off 10 more city employees.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
Projections for all major revenue sources are falling short of previous estimates, including property taxes, utility user's taxes and sales taxes, city Administrative Services and Finance Director Steve Elam told the City Council during a mid-year review of the 2008-09 budget.
The situation is expected to grow even worse for the 2009-10 fiscal year that begins July 1, he said.
"Based on information we have ... we're forecasting a general fund revenue shortfall of $8.4 million," Elam told the council.
The council voted 4-1 Tuesday to authorize City Manager Bob Gutierrez to make the necessary reductions to balance the city 2008-09 budget, including laying off 10 employees and eliminating 12 vacant employee positions.
Councilman Bill Batey voted against the cuts.
"The decisions we make are going to affect families for a long time," Batey said prior to the vote.
The employees are expected to be notified this week, Gutierrez said. Nine out of 10 of the employees are from development services, whose workload has been substantially reduced during the economic downturn, Elam said.
More budget cuts in Fontana.
This happened in Dallas. An officer was actually fired twice for sexual misconduct.
(excerpt, Dallas Morning News)
Law enforcement experts see Williams' 20-year career as a prime example of a problem police departments have faced for years: How does a city rid itself of an officer whose record is riddled with serious misconduct allegations if you can't prove he's guilty or if he keeps getting his job back?
The experts cite lack of evidence, questionable witnesses and sloppy investigations as key hurdles to keeping problematic officers off the streets. An appeals system that in the past has overturned many firings exacerbated the difficulties. David Kunkle has seen 12 of his 62 firings reversed since he became Dallas police chief nearly five years ago.
Keeping an officer on the job after he's been repeatedly investigated has its own risks.
"You are opening yourself up to huge lawsuits and one of the charges will be negligent retention, which means that you knew you shouldn't keep this person as a police officer but you did it anyway," said Penny Harrington, an expert on police employee misconduct and former chief of the Portland Police Department in Oregon.
Williams declined repeated interview requests. Phil Burleson Jr., Williams' attorney, said he is innocent of the allegation that led to his firing last month.
"It's just an irate girlfriend; I don't understand the big deal on this one," said Burleson. "We believe that the termination was not justified."
Of the other complaints during Williams' career, Burleson said, "He says they've all been fully investigated and found that he didn't commit those allegations."
In St. Louis, Missouri, corruption has led to doubts being cast on over 1,000 cases.
(excerpt, St. Louis Post-Dispatch)
The cases against Bobby Lee Garrett, 48, and Vincent T. Carr, 46, have already caused the St. Louis circuit attorney's office to drop 47 pending cases, including 41 felonies, Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce told the Post-Dispatch.
Joyce's office will review 986 convictions to see whether Garrett and Carr played a significant role, and the U.S. attorney's office has identified 45 to 50 more cases to look at.
"Needless to say, I'm outraged by the conduct of these officers," Joyce said.
Because federal prosecutors were involved in the investigation into Garrett and Carr, they "put the brakes" on three cases before charges were filed, U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway said.
---Kevin Akin speaking on Chinatown at the city council meeting.
"It didn't happen."
---Ward One Councilman Mike Gardner about allegations that the city council verbally okayed the violation of the municipal code by Jacobs' employees.
"We may have lost Chinatown" through the city's "final Chinese Removal Act".
---UCR Archaeologist Scott Fedick about the bulldozing of the site that took place from Feb. 14-16 in an attempt to head off a temporary restraining order.
Verbal spankings were the order of the day from the Riverside City Council against developer and campaign contributor Doug Jacobs for his three day of reign of bulldozing on the Chinatown site during the holiday weekend earlier this month. One council member even announced he was donating his campaign contribution that he had recently received from Jacobs to the Save Our Chinatown Committee after listening to the testimony at the meeting.
If you recall, Jacobs was cited by the Riverside Police Department twice for violating a municipal ordinance that prohibits creating a noise disturbance on Sundays and federal holidays, including Presidents' Day, which was held this year on Feb. 16.
In news articles, Jacobs defended his actions which were also captured on video and witnessed by numerous people over the three days by saying he was following the treatment plan approved by the city council and the conditions of the permit.
Speakers at the city council meeting alleged that Jacobs' employees had told people that the police department and the city council had given them verbal permission to use noisy equipment on days were it was in violation of the city's municipal code, an allegation several city council members denied. The police department (which is currently short at least a dozen officers and four supervisors) sent officers in response to complaints on Sunday, Feb. 15 and Feb. 16 and both days employees didn't obey the officers' orders to stop the machinery and so they were cited by the police. Those citations will be processed by a judge in traffic court in Moreno Valley at a later date and could result in fines.
The schedule of work done by heavy equipment on that weekend in what speakers called, the "Valentines Day Massacre" were as follows:
Saturday, Feb. 14: 7 a.m.-7 p.m.
Sunday, Feb. 15: 7 a.m.-9 p.m.
Monday, Feb. 16: 7 a.m.-9 p.m.
Pictures and videos of what happened that weekend are available for your viewing pleasure here.
Jacobs admitted doing the work and knowingly violating the ordinance and his permit but claimed he did it to beat the restraining order, which was filed on Friday Feb. 13 and was to be heard in Riverside County Superior Court on Tuesday, Feb. 16. He said that if it were approved (and it was continued for about a week) then he would have no opportunity to prove that there were no artifacts.
It's good that the city council members who spoke, did indeed speak but if a group of concerned people hadn't gone to the meeting and addressed them on this issue, would these words have been said that needed to be said? As of the day of the city council meeting, only Ward One Councilman Mike Gardner (who includes the Chinatown site in his ward) had criticized the action, calling it a "conscious violation" in the Press Enterprise.
None of the other said anything publicly.
Dozens of people demonstrated with signs outside the city council chamber before the meeting and passed out fliers and buttons, with "Save Chinatown" on them. Some of them stayed to speak at the meeting.
Jean Wong, a member of SOCC, provided a descriptive picture at the city council meeting of the 11-12 bulldozers and backhoes that dug up huge chunks of dirt instead of using smaller tools more commonly associated with an archaeological excavation. The committee still doesn't know the extent of damage done to the site and any artifacts. In a newspaper article, Jacobs claimed his digging only yielded a few pieces of broken pottery.
Kevin Akin challenged the city council members who accepted campaign contributions from Jacobs while running for election to return them to sender, unspent. He said it would be one of the major focal issues of the current city council election and apparently some people took him to heart. He claimed that Jacobs had lied in court declarations claiming that he spent $1300 a day on security for the site yet no security guards were ever seen and that if they paid that much for security, "you can find them".
Another archaeologist from UC Riverside, Scott Fedick, said that the excavation bore little resemblance to the one outlined by Jacobs to the city council which would cost $2 million. Another speaker said that the archaeological expert hired by Jacobs to perform his excavation didn't appear until 9 a.m. which was two hours after the destruction on the site had begun.
Deborah Wong said that the city council was "on the wrong side of history" but "It's not too late to roll back" from being a city council which would go down in history as being responsible for the destruction of a national historical site.
The city council listened and then some of its members responded, in condemnation of Jacobs' actions.
Councilman Andrew Melendrez said that Jacobs had been "insensitive" and that it was up to the city council to restore the trust of the city in it after this episode.
Gardner said that the city council had never told Jacobs that he would be able to violate city codes and they couldn't do that (nor could the police department) unless they were amended. He stood by his words in the newspaper article saying that Jacobs clearly knew he was violating the ordinance.
"I'm concerned by his decision not to follow the terms of the permit," Gardner said.
Councilman Frank Schiavone expressed his disappointment in Jacobs, saying what he did was deliberate and disrespectful. He said that if Jacobs had said he was going to violate the city's code and bring 12 pieces of heavy equipment to dig up the parcel the way he did, the city council never would have approved his permit and treatment plan. He said he was offended that Jacobs had justified his actions by saying the city council had given its approval.
Then he offered to contribute his $250 campaign contribution he had received from Jacobs at a recent fundraiser to the SOCC, which accepted it.
Schiavone added that he spoke with an absent Councilman Rusty Bailey (another recipient of campaign contributions from Jacobs) and he was also very dismayed with the chain of events.
City Manager Brad Hudson spoke up at some point after Councilman Chris MacArthur had also voiced his displeasure and denied that city staff was involved in allowing Jacobs to violate the permit and the code in anyway.
There had been a lot of silence on this issue since the weekend of the bulldozers and backhoes but that silence was broken on Tuesday night, Feb. 24 in large part because people cared enough to come to the meeting to speak out on an issue that they're passionate about.
The temporary restraining order for the Chinatown parcel has been granted by Judge Sharon Waters on the morning of Tuesday, Feb. 24. Now the exchange of paper work via briefs submitted to the court will begin in early March. The date of the hearing on the preliminary injunction will be on March 20. More can be read about the hearing here.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
In issuing the temporary restraining order, the judge expressed concern about the handling of possible archaeological artifacts yet to be found, said Michelle Ouellette, an attorney representing Jacobs. She said archaeological digging with smaller tools still must be done.
The 4.2-acre site is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. It also is a city and county landmark and a state point of historical interest.
The Save Our Chinatown Committee wants a memorial park built there.
But the group knows that even if its lawsuit succeeds it would not stop Jacobs' project, and only force further environmental review, Sagara said.
"This isn't just like any other piece of property," Sagara said. "It's a special place. It deserves special attention."
Here are the court proceeding minutes:
EX PARTE HEARING RE APPL FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER & OSC.
02/24/2009 - 8:30 AM DEPT. 10
HONORABLE SHARON J. WATERS, PRESIDING
CLERK: C. ZUNIGA
COURT REPORTER: K. BURKS
SAVE OUR CHINATOWNCOMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY JOHNSON & SEDLAC - RAYMOND JOHNSON AND VEERA TYAGI PRESENT.
KRISTI SMITH REPRESENTING CITY OF RIVERSIDE PRESENT
MICHELLE OUELLETTE REPRESENTING CITY OF RIVERSIDE PRESENT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ATKINSON, ANDELSONLOYA RUUD &ROMO - JOHN DIETRICH PRESENT.
JACOBS DEVELOPMENTCOMPANY, INC REPRESENTED BY BEST, BEST, & KRIEGER - MELISSA CUSHMAN PRESENT.
ARGUMENT PRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER GRANTED
HEARING RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SET 03/20/09 AT 08:30 DEPT 10
HEARING RE CEQA SET 06/29/09 AT 09:00 DEPT 10
COURT ORDERS NO BOND TO BE POSTED AT THIS TIME.
COUNSEL AGREE ON THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE:
TRANSCRIPT TO BE PROVIDED TO PLAINTIFF BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS 2/25/09. PLAINTIFFS OPENING BRIEF
NO LATER THAN 3/3/09. DEFENDANTS BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 03/10/09. JOINT OPPOSITIONS AND REPLYS NO
LATER THAN 3/16/09.
COUNSEL STIPULATE BRIEFS SHALL BE LIMITED TO 20 PA TES, 20/20/12.
COUNSEL STIPULATE TO SERVICE BY FAX OR EMAIL.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD CERTIFIED BY 3/20/09, MAY BE LODGED WITH REPLY PAPERS. RESPONSIVE
PLEADINGS NO LATER THAN 3/27/09. OPENING BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 5/1/09. OPPOSITION BRIEFS NO LATER
THAN 5/29/09. REPLY BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 6/15/09.
COUNSEL MAY PROVIDE COURTESY COPIES DIRECTLY TO TH E COURTROOM BY 6/15/09.
COURT ORDERS ALL REPLY PAPERS FAX FILED.
NOTICE WAIVED.
This draft of the 2007-08 annual report for the Community Police Review Commission provides information that was present in the preceding report at least partly.
It's important to have comparative statistics for the findings on complaint allegations submitted by the CPRC, the Riverside Police Department and the City Manager's Office (CMO) in order to evaluate the independence of the CPRC and whether or not its input in the process actually plays any sort of role in the outcome of allegations delivered by Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis or whether it's just a rubber stamp for the city and/or police department.
It's interesting to see the evolution of how disparate the CPRC was from the other two entities which were themselves almost identical in the figures provided in 2006 to where it more closely mirrored the police department which was the case in 2007. In contrast, there was a slight deviation seen in terms of the rate of complaints sustained by DeSantis when compared to the other two agencies.
Sustain rates on complaint allegations:
2006:
CPRC: 8.57%
RPD: 5.14%
CMO: 4.57%
2007:
CPRC: 7.23%
RPD: 7.23%
CMO: 9.64%
2008:
CPRC: N/A
RPD: N/A
CMO: N/A
What's particularly interesting is comparing and contrasting the statistics for allegations receiving the "not sustained" finding which is given up when there's not enough evidence (or bias) to make a determination on whether an allegation is to be exonerated, sustained or unfounded. Sometimes it indicates the quality (or deficiency thereof) of the investigation that was done.
2006:
CPRC: 37.7%
RPD: 6.86%
CMO: 14.8%
2007:
CPRC: 14.6%
RPD: 8.43 %
CMO: 9.64%
After perusing these interesting statistics, there's a question which begs to be asked. This and these, do have something in common?
But anyway, what were the most common allegations during the past few years?
2006:
1) Improper Procedure: 81
2) Discourtesy: 47
3) Use of Force: 12
Discrimination/Harassment: 12
2007:
1) Improper Procedure: 39
2) Discourtesy: 20
3) Use of Force: 7
2008:
1) Improper Procedure: 109
2) Discourtesy: 31
3) Use of Force: 16
More to come from the drafting and revision of the annual report in blog postings to come and that process begins at the CPRC meeting on Feb. 25.
The special prosecutor hired to help remove former San Bernardino County Assessor Bill Postmus from his office will submit a finding even though Postmus has resigned.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
"We should wrap it up as soon as possible," Supervisor Paul Biane said Tuesday. "At this point in time it looks like a waste of money to do it one more day."
The county so far has spent about $90,000 on the independent counsel.
The board approved a $250,000 contract last month with Los Angeles attorney John C. Hueston, who was a prosecutor in the case against Enron executives.
Soon after Hueston was hired, Postmus resigned. He left office Feb. 13.
Hueston has been working with county lawyers to "tie up loose ends" and prepared a report on his findings, but the investigation is all but suspended, said Mark Kirk, chief of staff for Supervisor Gary Ovitt.
A Colton city employee has been charged with embezzlement.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
Carol Anne George, 53, is accused of taking the money between January 2006 and this month.
The District Attorney's office filed charges against George on Feb. 19 after an investigation by the city and the Colton Police Department. George resigned Feb. 13, said Anthony Arroyo, Colton's human resources director.
City Manager Daryl Parrish said the incident caught him off guard. Once it was discovered, the city's response was swift and decisive, Parrish said.
"Sometimes you're surprised by the things people do," Parrish said. "I was a bit surprised."
Parrish said after the "potential impropriety" was brought to his attention late Feb. 11 and staff did a preliminary investigation, city officials notified the police.
More budget woes across the Inland Empire when it comes to cities and counties having to readjust their budgets.
In Rialto, the decision to create a new public information officer position has been approved by the city council but the filling of the new position has wisely been put on hold.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
City Councilwoman Deborah Robertson cast the lone vote against creating the job.
She said she was concerned whether the city could afford it, given the uncertainty about balancing the city budget in the next two fiscal years without dipping into reserves.
She also expressed concern about a provision in the city ordinance establishing the job that excludes the public relations officer from reporting to the city administrator. In most California cities, she said, employees other than the city attorney do not report directly to the city council.
There is a potential for the public relations officer to be given conflicting direction, Robertson said. Under the Rialto ordinance, any conflicts would be resolved by the mayor.
Councilman Joe Baca Jr. defended the need for a public relations officer, saying he believes the city needs to "think outside the box.
"As we continue to grow, we need to continue to better inform the community" and develop good relations with the media.
A city council member in Lake Elsinore is the focus of a recall effort.
Moreno Valley is looking at making more budget cuts and freezing more positions. Not to mention laying off 10 more city employees.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
Projections for all major revenue sources are falling short of previous estimates, including property taxes, utility user's taxes and sales taxes, city Administrative Services and Finance Director Steve Elam told the City Council during a mid-year review of the 2008-09 budget.
The situation is expected to grow even worse for the 2009-10 fiscal year that begins July 1, he said.
"Based on information we have ... we're forecasting a general fund revenue shortfall of $8.4 million," Elam told the council.
The council voted 4-1 Tuesday to authorize City Manager Bob Gutierrez to make the necessary reductions to balance the city 2008-09 budget, including laying off 10 employees and eliminating 12 vacant employee positions.
Councilman Bill Batey voted against the cuts.
"The decisions we make are going to affect families for a long time," Batey said prior to the vote.
The employees are expected to be notified this week, Gutierrez said. Nine out of 10 of the employees are from development services, whose workload has been substantially reduced during the economic downturn, Elam said.
More budget cuts in Fontana.
This happened in Dallas. An officer was actually fired twice for sexual misconduct.
(excerpt, Dallas Morning News)
Law enforcement experts see Williams' 20-year career as a prime example of a problem police departments have faced for years: How does a city rid itself of an officer whose record is riddled with serious misconduct allegations if you can't prove he's guilty or if he keeps getting his job back?
The experts cite lack of evidence, questionable witnesses and sloppy investigations as key hurdles to keeping problematic officers off the streets. An appeals system that in the past has overturned many firings exacerbated the difficulties. David Kunkle has seen 12 of his 62 firings reversed since he became Dallas police chief nearly five years ago.
Keeping an officer on the job after he's been repeatedly investigated has its own risks.
"You are opening yourself up to huge lawsuits and one of the charges will be negligent retention, which means that you knew you shouldn't keep this person as a police officer but you did it anyway," said Penny Harrington, an expert on police employee misconduct and former chief of the Portland Police Department in Oregon.
Williams declined repeated interview requests. Phil Burleson Jr., Williams' attorney, said he is innocent of the allegation that led to his firing last month.
"It's just an irate girlfriend; I don't understand the big deal on this one," said Burleson. "We believe that the termination was not justified."
Of the other complaints during Williams' career, Burleson said, "He says they've all been fully investigated and found that he didn't commit those allegations."
In St. Louis, Missouri, corruption has led to doubts being cast on over 1,000 cases.
(excerpt, St. Louis Post-Dispatch)
The cases against Bobby Lee Garrett, 48, and Vincent T. Carr, 46, have already caused the St. Louis circuit attorney's office to drop 47 pending cases, including 41 felonies, Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce told the Post-Dispatch.
Joyce's office will review 986 convictions to see whether Garrett and Carr played a significant role, and the U.S. attorney's office has identified 45 to 50 more cases to look at.
"Needless to say, I'm outraged by the conduct of these officers," Joyce said.
Because federal prosecutors were involved in the investigation into Garrett and Carr, they "put the brakes" on three cases before charges were filed, U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway said.
Labels: business as usual, corruption 101, CPRC, Election 2009, judicial watch
posted by Five Before Midnight | 11:45 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home