CPRC: What happens when you assign a public report to puppets

The Community Police Review Commission will be releasing a biennial report, which was supposed to be an annual report but because of the intensive micromanagement of the CPRC by City Hall, there hasn't been an annual report released since 2006's.

And so at its general meeting on Wednesday, June 24 at 5:30 p.m, the commission will be discussing its final draft for its annual report.

Or as it's more appropriately titled, The CPRC : An Exercise in Revisionist History by Manager Kevin Rogan and His Puppeteer, Tom DeSantis. Further analysis of this "report" is to come in future postings. Because the commissioners don't do much these days except wait to receive their marching orders and have Rogan and by extension, DeSantis and City Attorney Gregory Priamos do all their thinking for them. How does the community see them? As a bunch of puppets with strings being pulled at City Hall. Sad but true, but if they actually went out and did more public outreach, then maybe there would be more to see to them and what they do than that.


However, the report begins with statements saying that "city ordinance" requires that the CPRC report to the city council and mayor on an annual basis. However, it's the city's charter which delivers that mandate under section 810 here. What's the difference in choice of language? Well, if you stick to the ordinance the city council could conceivably vote to amend it so that there wouldn't need to be an annual report for the public. However, because it's in the city's charter as well, only the city's voters can do that. In fact, it's intriguing how in the beginning of the report, there's no mention that the CPRC is even in the city's charter, only that it's included in the city's ordinance or in state governmental code.

Do the authors of this report, those being Rogan and his master, DeSantis not know that the commission is in the city's charter? Or do they choose not to know because alas, that makes it all that much tougher to get rid of the beleaguered and thoroughly gutted body? Hopefully, there will be some mention of the charter's influence and governance of the commission further on in this "annual" report.

In its "Mission" statement, it's also noteworthy how the language mentions the "independent investigation" of citizen complaints but doesn't mention any language at all having to do with the review and investigation of officer-involved deaths. The whole sad and sordid story of how that was manipulated by City Hall and its assortment of puppets will probably be presented in a sanitized version later on in the report.

Current Chair Sheri Corral writes the preamble letter even though Brian Pearcy actually chaired the commission in both 2007 and 2008, the years covered in this "annual" report. Her main goals are to remind the community that the CPRC is "advisory" which the community pretty much knows. After all, it was an "advisory" commission when it was still doing its job in an efficient manner before City Manager Brad Hudson was directed by members of the city council past and present to micromanage it. Corral never mentions the word "investigate" at all, nor does she mention the issue of officer-involved death cases and one of her main goals is to shorten meetings which she's done so by holding relatively few of them since her election in March. And the only part of meetings which has been shortened so far? The amount of time and opportunities that the members of the public can provide comments. Since she and Vice-Chair Peter Hubbard have been in their positions, the opportunities for the public to speak at meetings has been greatly reduced as well as the scope of what falls under the "purview" of the commission.

But she does a fairly good job in her letter parroting the instructions that City Hall has most likely given her.

Further reviews of this odious document to come but the only place that it belongs? Is in the city's shredder to be recycled. Maybe they should have the community members write these annual exercises in what the commission has actually been doing instead of the puppeteers at City Hall trying to soft-sell what they've been doing to it.




There appears to be a brand new captain's opening in the police department due to the possible sudden retirement of one of them who interestingly enough if that's the case, never mentioned retiring. Still, these things happen from time to time. One captain who abruptly retired in 2005 is currently the police chief of a small city in Oregon.

This situation will be watched with a great decree of scrutiny (and it should be) as well the person who will fill this position because of all the disturbing rumors about management positions being handpicked by City Hall, rather than Chief Russ Leach.

Are they true? There's a lawsuit being debated in U.S. District Court along similar lines and the perception seems to be that if you don't go along with the status quo of the micromanagement team of City Hall, you can't get promoted at the higher ranks. And if these are just perceptions, where did they come from?

If this situation is indeed taking place, then it needs to be addressed. Promotions should be about policing, not politics. And the fact that there doesn't appear to be much confidence in the promotional process especially at the upper levels means that this oft-cloistered process should be more closely scrutinized.

Hopefully, if there's a captain's position at stake, the selection process will be done fairly and everyone who applies will be given opportunity to make their case before the final selection process. But is that what really happens and are those words included in the vocabulary of the micromanagement team at City Hall? Highly doubtful. And will it take a lawsuit that's been filed to set things right again? That remains to be seen as any trial date is a while off yet.



But some officers have been promoted recently to the detective rank: Mark Ellis, Lisa Johnson, Terry Ellefson, Chris Williams and Jayson Wood.

Another situation to be watched closely will be supervisory numbers and ratios. The latest numbers cited by those who will cite them (because the department won't and you know that's bad news) are that they are higher than the 7 to 1 ratio. Expect that number to grow when mid-line supervisors start retiring this year. Until there's someone at the reins of this department who cares about this issue, it will just continue to worsen, to the point where the department will eventually be back, supervisory ratio wise, to where it was pre-consent decree. If anyone body has information on the accurate supervisory ratios at this moment in time, I would be interested in finding out.

It is unconscionable that the micromanagers at City Hall have allowed this situation to become worse while giving themselves pay hikes and giving them to department heads as well, while the officer levels remain lower and the supervisory ratios don't appear to be where they should be due to unfilled vacancies and lateral assigning sergeants to newly created positions (i.e. communications bureau). But someone needs to go into City Hall and get priorities back where they need to be.








In Minneapolis, a police officer who shot and killed a man was charged with domestic assault in relation to an incident with his girlfriend.



Some members of Atlanta's city council voted to subpoena some records from the police department including those involving the fatal shooting of Kathryn Johnson.

More information here.


(excerpt, Atlanta Journal-Constitution)




The Atlanta Committee on Council also issued a subpoena for records —- to be handed over to the review board —- on the December police shooting of robbery suspect Pierre George, 31, who was not armed.

About two dozen residents who hoped the committee would subpoena the records embraced after the vote.

They said it was a major step in the frequent battle between the Police Department and the review board over access to records, particularly in ongoing cases.

“It’s huge,” said Cristina Beamud, the board’s executive director. “It’s a notable step in the right direction. I’m happy. It will make it easier to conduct investigations.”

Police officials and aides to Mayor Shirley Franklin argued releasing records in ongoing cases could hurt the investigations because some of the information could become public.

Councilwoman Natalyn Mosby Archibong added a stipulation to the subpoena that requires, if necessary, the board to review some details of the George case in private.

A police spokeswoman declined to comment on the vote.

The review board expects to get the records about July 6, Beamud said.

Will the police department ever be returned to Chief Leach?

The incoming Ward Four Councilman Paul Davis had some interesting remarks to make about the present and future status of the Community Police Review Commission in the The Truth Publication Blog.


(Excerpt)



The CPRC and the Police Department are micromanaged by the City Manager Brad Hudson and his Assistant Tom DeSantis. I fully support Chief Russ Leach, but he has to run the Department without interferences. He's an excellent Chief, and I am kindly informing you that the relations between the Police Department and this Councilman will be better than those with the previous one."


That on its face is a puzzling statement given that both labor associations which include police officers as their members endorsed his rival, incumbent Frank Schiavone but it appears that both endorsement processes may have had their share of ripples and controversies and in the case of the Riverside Police Officers' Association, resignation from both its Political Action Committee and its board of directors. That doesn't sound like business as usual and indicates that there might have been some serious divisions between those who supported Davis and those who supported Schiavone. The president, Chris Lanzillo, said that because he was in that position he didn't participate in the endorsement process but while members like Det. Rita Cobb, Det. Brian Smith, Sgt. Pat McCarthy and Scott Borngrebe were believed to have cast endorsement votes for Schiavone, others like Det. William Rodriguez supported Davis. Some people said that the vote was split, others said the committee wasn't unanimous except the day the vote took place. Lots of confusion about a process which left some feeling that it needed to be changed, an interesting place to be considering the RPOA has its own elections in November.

Some members and former members believed that the PAC voted more through its emotions than it logistics. That was something which had plagued them in the 2007 elections as well where they were 0 for 4. They were 2 to 3 this time by backing incumbents but miscalculated in the Ward Four election, where they had a lot of division in their own ranks.

The situation involving the Riverside Police Administrators' Association is somewhat different. Some of its members view its dynamics as being less conflicted or turbulent than the much larger RPOA but because its members are higher in rank including at the management level, they may be more prone to micromanagement efforts by City Hall. This time around, something really odd happened with the RPaA. Initially, its president Bob Williams (himself a former and quite dynamic RPOA president in the early 1990s) said that the RPAA would remain neutral in this election and not do endorsements as it had during the 2007 elections. Perhaps a commentary on the stormy waters that the RPAA traveled during its endorsement process.

The endorsement process of that prior election had led to allegations by then president, Lt. Darryl Hurt and Lt. Tim Bacon that they were denied due process in the promotion process because they didn't endorse Ward Seven Councilman Steve Adams in his reelection bid. They alleged that both Adams and Schiavone (who at the time shared a house with Leach) made retaliatory comments that if they didn't endorse Adams or if other lieutenant hung out with those trouble makers, then they wouldn't be promoted. This led to allegations that someone besides Leach was way too influential in determining how promotions were done in the police department especially at the management level. To what extent that's been done is not clear, but someone joked that if they didn't back Schiavone and he won, they probably wouldn't get promoted for a position which was not ons at the management level. So there appears to be at least a strong perception existing that the police department's promotional process has become politicized thorugh the department's micromanagement by City Hall.

That led to a damage claim and lawsuit filed by Hurt and Bacon which is currently in the U.S. District Court and just completed a major hearing. So after the lawsuit, one would have thought the RPAA would be a bit shy about participating in endorsing in the 2009 city elections but by its end, its PAC had decided to endorse Schiavone, even though two of its members were currently suing him alleging political retaliation.

These two outcomes from the labor sectors provided insight into the politicization of the police department to the point where the participation in that system may be necessary for individual and group survival. And why would that be unless there were some outside micromanagement of the police chief by external forces at City Hall?

And all you people out there who are reading, raise your hands if you think the micromanagement by City Hall of the police department has made it a better agency? In upcoming blog postings, there will be some analysis and explanations including examples of why it has not done so. But clearly some must think it's a great thing because they endorsed the councilman who may just have been the one at the mast of S.S. Hudson while it has been going on. Hopefully, if this is the case, a changing of the guard will undo a lot of what has been done to the department in the past few years due to micromanagement by City Hall.

Rumors have ranged from "political emergency hire" without background checks to detectives being asked to "interview" or "investigate" meritless complaints initiated by the campaign of one person who ran for office in 2009, to promotions being traded for endorsements. Whether or not any or all of these are true remains to be investigated but an environment exists during the past several years that is tailor made for fears and perceptions to turn into rumors and that's only a possible explanation if the stories are not true. If they are, then that's a serious problem.



Many people have been watching what's been going on with the police department during the past several years especially after the dissolution of the stipulated judgment with the State Attorney General's office. They watched as the city council and mayor waxed enthusiastically of continuing the reforms of the stipulated judgment even after its dissolution and patted themselves on the back for their job well done. They then made promises during a March 26 workshop that they then directed Hudson, their servant to carry out. Only summer came, their minds wandered and Hudson dropped the ball. In fact, he tried to pull a fast one on several council members by reducing the terms of the strategic plan that he was instructed to carry out and then offer a police practices consultant a much lower quote in hopes that the consultant would turn it down and then Hudson would run back to City Hall claiming that the consultant was asking for an unreasonable sum of money and they couldn't afford him. But at some point Hudson realized he had to follow through on his direct orders because he then tried to get a high ranking deputy state attorney general to "lean" on the consultant to get him to accept the lower offer. Suffice it to say, the state employee didn't do this and likely passed the word to the consultant.

At the time, he was probably carrying out the agenda of a city official though it's not clear which one. Three years now, it's become more clearer who likely was involved in that fiasco at City Hall.

Anyway, fiasco or not, it all ended well because Hudson got caught (which became clear after a series of interesting phone calls were made after I had blogged on it a while), and a lesson was learned by this blogger that it only takes one, maybe two city officials to give the S.S. Hudson a big heave ho from its course and turn it back on its correct course. Still, even doing that it took a while for the barge to budge and carry out the orders of his own direct (if not very authoritatively inclined) employees, the city council.

It might have worked because the community leaders were slow to act when the promises made by the city council not to mention the police department itself quickly went aground. Those actions or lack of actions didn't go unnoticed up in Sacramento. And it might have interested Hudson and DeSantis if they had known who played the most instrumental role in undoing their (in)actions that summer regarding the continued reform and strategic planning in the police department. But then people can't do these things publicly from the city ranks when any act of defiance against micromanagement no matter how small is met with something akin to a political "off with your heads". "Heads" perhaps having a more literal meeting as heads of city departments.

This episode , which mercifully didn't have Hudson or DeSantis running around exercising such histrionics perhaps because they were too busy alienating the city's labor unions, proved to be disturbing on its own merits and looking back even more disturbing because it was the setting of a trend. A trend where the police chief began to vanish. Vanish from public meetings, at City Hall, community centers, parks, libraries and from inside the department as well. If you ask an officer when's the last time he saw the police chief, you might get a blank stare, a furrowing of the brow as they try to remember and if they do, it was a while ago. Many officers support the police chief and wished he were more visible, in the community and in the department so that there were more of a feeling that he was aware of what they were doing and supported them.

The department as of June 2009 appears not only managed but micromanaged and the one thing it's currently not, is led. And being a leader is much different than being a manager. When Leach came in 2000, he appeared intelligent, politically astute (and enough so not to be involved) and had great ideas for working in a department with no where to head but upward. And since it was under the state's consent decree within six months into his reign, he had much support there to bolster him and protect him from any attempts by City Hall to micromanage but at that time, the dynamic personalities interested in doing so didn't exist. That would come later on with the personalities who hired Hudson and those on the city council who gave Hudson and City Attorney Gregory Priamos free reign to micromanage the police department. Leach continued to vanish with other management personnel especially Asst. Chief John DeLaRosa stepping in for him, including at the top-secret ad hoc committee regarding the CPRC's investigative protocol that was concocted by Schiavone, Adams, DeSantis and Leach.

Oh, he appeared occasionally at meetings when Hudson and DeSantis needed him to terrorize people into believing that the CPRC's investigators were jeopardizing "criminal" investigations of officer-involved deaths (which is very ironic considering the city didn't believe these investigations were "criminal" in nature as recently as 2006, according to court documents). But he usually winds up contradicting statements on the same issue that he made to people in the community and when one of the community members are arguing against points made by Leach or one of his handlers, Leach can usually be seen in the audience somewhere nodding his head in agreement with the community members.

But given the relative absense of Leach, many people have speculated on who is really running the police department and the answers so far haven't been pretty. There have been more officer-involved deaths. There has been a tremendous backlog of complaints and internal investigations in the Internal Affairs Division, there's questons about how much budget money the department's getting for training its officers and about its Early Warning System. Not to mention its staffing levels on the civilian and sworn sides as well as supervisory staffing ratios which apparently are no longer averaging at 7 to 1.

These issues will be explored further in future bloggings as we examine the Riverside Police Deparment's foray into micromanagement.



Here are also some interesting online discussions from Officer.com where there's discussion of the dynamics of leadership in the police department.




This one deals with the drama surrounding the firing of probational police officer Jose Nazario back in 2007. Most of the discussion is being done by "TheInlandEmpire" whose identity won't be disclosed here. He initially said he was sure that Nazario would be return to the fold of the department because of a promise the chief made him if he were acquitted but then talks about the city manager's influence in the process.





The Chief told RPOA reps a while ago that he would hire him back right away if he was aquitted of these charges. As soon as the verdicts were read, Nazario walked right over to the Orange Street Station (across the street from the federal courthouse) and spoke to a Captain and Lt., who knew he was coming because phone calls were being made like crazy. The Chief opted to leave before Nazario got there (that wasn't a good sign)...but Nazario was warmly welcomed be the Capt. and Lt. He was told to re-apply and they would expidite and update his background to get him back on. As of yesterday, the City Manager (closed door session) indicated he wasn't just going to "create" another position for Nazario, and said it was up to the Chief if he wanted to re-hire him. He wasn't very welcoming to the idea of Nazario coming back. That's nonsense, because we all know the City Manager is the Chief's boss and tells him what to do. So far, I haven't heard what the Chief is going to do (or is told to do!)

The sad thing is, Nazario was on probation, and they don't have to hire him back. I'e been reading alot of comments (blogs) made about his aquittal in the L.A. Times, and there is alot of people voicing that he should have been found guilty (alot the other way too), "Shame on Larson" and pointing out that Larson was a Bush appointee ect..ect..ect.. I have a funny feeling his may get too political for Riverside P.D. I hope I'm wrong.



In this dicussion when it's clear that Nazario wouldn't get hired after all, this comment appeared from the same individual in the police department.


(excerpt)


It's all political now. The Chief of RPD is a retired Marine, and he would probably love to give Nazario his job back..but unfortunately he's only a political pawn for the city manager. He doesn't really run the show at RPD. Good luck Jose. Hang in there!!


So what does the rules of City Hall say? Is Leach supposed to "run the show"? Does he indeed?

If you look at this city's organizational chart you will find that the Leach is beneath Hudson with a solid line connecting the two men but there's also a broken line joining Leach with DeSantis. But that line's not broken at all, in fact it's more like a leash. And there's been enough disturbing issues coming out of the micromanaged department with a chief who some call a "political pawn" or even "puppet" of the city manager and even Schiavone himself. After all, if he and Leach lived together, didn't either think that these problems or at least perceptions would become an issue? It's almost impossible for them not to become issues.



Davis discusses the dual micromanagement of the CPRC as well and the politicization of that process including the selection of commissioners to serve on the body. This process has led to highly questionable appointments like that of current vice-chair Peter Hubbard who is the regional director of American Medical Response, an ambulance company that has a public safety contract with Hudson's office. The dual and parallel micromanagement of the department and CPRC will be fodder for a future column.






An officer involved shooting involving Riverside Police Department officers.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)


Police say the driver of a car tried to ram them and officers responded by shooting at the car. No officers were injured in the incident on Washington Street at the railroad tracks east of Indiana Avenue

Officers then caught the two suspects after they crashed their car through a lowered railroad crossing gate, then smashed into a light pole, said Riverside police Lt. Brian Baitx.

Both men were taken by ambulance to Riverside Community Hospital, but it's unclear if they were hit by police gunfire or suffered injuries in the crash, he said. Their names were not released.

"We don't know anything about the suspects at this time," Baitx said, adding that once they are released from the hospital they would be taken to the department's investigations division at its Magnolia Station.




A lawsuit filed by a community organization to preserve historic buildings downtown was ruled against by a judge.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)


In a June 4 decision, which the foundation received Thursday, Riverside County Superior Judge Mac R. Fisher said the city had properly followed the rules.

"The evidence shows that (the) city considered a number of reports analyzing the impact on cultural resources" and "considered a reasonable range of alternatives," Fisher wrote in his decision.

Councilman Mike Gardener and Mayor Ron Loveridge both said they are open to preserving the Spanish-style façade of the Stalder Building, which faces Mission Inn Avenue.

The façade, built in 1926, was designed by Henry Jekel, an important Riverside architect of the time, said Vince Moses, former the director of the Riverside Metropolitan Museum and historical preservation consultant.

The façade joined three buildings -- an 1896 fire station, a circa-1900 livery stable and a 1904 garage -- and complemented the style of the Mission Inn.

Gardner and Loveridge said Fox Plaza should to be redesigned because the six-story building with residences upstairs isn't feasible in today's economy and, with the Fox Theater just across the street, would be too imposing.

The preservation group welcomed the city's willingness to rethink the Stalder façade.

"That goes a long way in the direction we were trying to go through the (court) hearing, and we are looking forward to the conversation continuing," said David Leonard, Old Riverside Foundation president.





A Los Angeles Police Department detective facing capital murder charges for a killing back in 1986 said that her gun had been stolen. Now police investigators believe the lost gun was the murder weapon used.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



The overlooked theft report represents another missed opportunity by the original detectives who failed to link Lazarus to the crime 23 years ago. Lazarus had had a romantic relationship with Rasmussen's husband before their marriage and allegedly had threatened the victim shortly before the killing.

Lazarus, 49, was charged this week with premeditated murder. Prosecutors said they would decide later whether to seek the death penalty. Her arrest stunned LAPD colleagues who have found it hard to accept that one among them could have harbored such a secret for so long.

Lazarus' attorney, Mark Pachowicz, said he had not yet received any information from prosecutors regarding the allegedly stolen gun and expressed frustration over learning about it from reporters. He declined to comment further.





Oh, and for those law enforcement agencies who due to budget cuts or other reasons like nepotism or performance of political favors feel tempted to take shortcuts in the background checks of officer applicants or circumvent them altogether, read this story first.



An applicant for an officer position with the California Highway Patrol wound up being arrested himself on child pornography charges.


(excerpt,Los Angeles Times)


CHP officials, working in conjunction with the FBI on a multiagency task force, immediately launched an investigation of Christian Hernandez after he made the disclosure while applying to the agency in October, said FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller.


Hernandez also admitted having viewed illicit photos of a minor within a month of filling out the application, Eimiller said.

CHP investigators performed a consent search of the home where Hernandez was living and found child pornography on a computer he was using, including sexually explicit photos of a 5-year-old girl. The photos appeared to have been taken in the bedroom of the home where Hernandez now lives, Eimiller said.



The fate of civilian review in Fort Myers, Florida.


(excerpt, News-Press)



Push for a police review board stems from a desire for greater police transparency, an outcome Chief Doug Baker says he supports. In April, council approved a review board model that granted a city-appointed panel authority to review completed internal investigations of officer misconduct or policy issues using already-available public records. The board doesn’t have the authority to conduct its own investigations or issue subpoenas that would compel someone to testify or produce evidence.


Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union and Citizens for a Better Fort Myers Government have been working to educate voters on a proposal for a board that would be elected and hold investigatory and subpoena powers. It’s on the ballot for November, and it would review department policies and conduct independent investigations of police misconduct.


In the end, according to guidelines of each, both boards have only the power of recommendation, which they could make to either or both the police chief and city manager. The recommendations aren’t binding, and neither board could discipline an officer — that job lies solely with the police department and chief.




A deadline is being extended in Palo Alto for the creation of a police advisory group.



(excerpt, San Jose Mercury)



Members can come from anywhere in the greater Palo Alto area, including Stanford, Menlo Park and East Palo Alto, according to a statement by Interim Police Chief Dennis Burns and Palo Alto Human Relations Commission Chair Daryl Savage.

"The chief is seeking open-minded individuals who can communicate effectively, and who are committed to the mission and objectives of the group," the statement said. "High school and college students are welcome. Group members must be trustworthy and free of any felony criminal history."



Meanwhile in New Orleans, over 40 people have applied for the position of police monitor.



(excerpt, NOLA)



Interim Inspector General Len Odom, who has the final say in hiring, said applicants so far have "very broad-based, varied backgrounds," including several with law degrees and many with extensive law enforcement experience in local, state and federal agencies.


Applicants also hail "from sea to shining sea," he said, with submissions arriving from Florida, California, New York, Texas, Illinois and "all points in between." A handful of candidates from the New Orleans area also are in the mix, he said.

Odom said he has asked each member of a seven-person search committee to cull the entries by Friday and choose his or her top choices; the postmark deadline for applications is Sunday. Top picks will be discussed before interview invitations go out to two or three finalists, hopefully by mid-June, he said.

When the committee settles on finalists, "we will take their life apart," Odom said, conducting a criminal background check, psychological evaluation, urinalysis and a "suitability interview" to pinpoint personality traits.

Besides Odom, the search panel includes Police Superintendent Warren Riley, Chief Administrative Office Brenda Hatfield, Ethics Review Board Chairman Kevin Wildes, Councilman James Carter and two representatives from the police and prison watchdog group Safe Streets Strong Communities.




The New York Times tackles the issue of the danger of "friendly" fire in the wake of a killing of an off-duty Black New York City Police Department officer by a white officer.


(excerpt)




The New York New YorkPolice Department says such “friendly fire” killings are rare, and it could not provide accurate statistics on how often they happen. But a provisional list provided by the department of fatalities caused by mistaken identity offers some sense the problem. Of the five officers mistakenly killed by colleagues since the 1970s, three were black and one was Hispanic.

Christopher Cooper, a member of the National Black Police Association and a sociologist, lawyer and former police officer who studies this problem, says that incidents in which African-Americans are wounded or beaten up by colleagues occur about twice a year nationally.

In addition to the toll on the victims and their families, such incidents inflame racial tensions and undermine faith in law enforcement in poor and minority communities.

To fight this problem, police departments need to do a much better job of preparing officers to work in an environment where colleagues come in all colors and ethnicities — and of raising awareness about how even unconscious racial stereotypes affect how they see the world.




A sheriff in Florida got caught money laundering.

Yes, I know the applicant, No I don't, yes I do until I run out of daisy petals

In Riverside, the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee went through its annual exercise of selecting people either to appoint or interview for openings on the city's boards and commissions. It's always fun to watch and very educational when it comes to learning about how governments operate and how Riverside's board and commission selection process has fared in the wake of Measure GG's passage and "ward representation".

And who serves on the committee?

Mayor Ron Loveridge chairs it and Council members Frank Schiavone, Rusty Bailey and Steve Adams who all serve on the Governmental Affairs Committee also serve as its members. Which makes for an interesting time all around.


The current process is that for the majority of boards and commissions, they pick people to just appoint without interviewing them with the full city council like past city councils did. However, for the Community Police Review Commission, the Planning Commission and the Board of Public Utilities the process of appointment is different. Instead, the committee picks a group of candidates to be interviewed for final selection by the full city council. One would think that would make the process less political but in practice, the results have been mixed with the CPRC.

And this meeting was no different but that was mostly apparent by the selection of candidates for the Planning Commission and Board of Public Utilities, where commissioners coming up for reappointments were challenged by city council members unlike in the cases with most of the other boards and commissions. This will ultimately lead to a reconfiguration of the Planning Commission, which is probably the most politicized board or commission in this city. It might be worth looking back to see what this commission did during its past year to see if there's any clues to what led the city to this point to recreate it in other image.



Most of the reappointments for commissioners who had applied to serve second terms went through smooth as molasses, even as several committee members argued hypothetically about what to do if someone applied to be reappointed that a city council member from that person's ward objected to. Would they still reappoint that commissioner? Would they reject him? Would they interview him instead even if he wasn't a member of the three very special commissioners which undergo the interview process for every appointment. But it comes down to whether ward representation means that the commissioner represents the ward as a geographic area surrounded by boundaries or the city council person serving at the will of the voters within that ward. And that's where the lines are blurred because you have city council members who believe the commissioner or board member filling ward-specific seats represents the elected official who appoints him while others believe that this person represents the ward. Obviously there's a huge difference between the two philosophies.

Another legacy of Measure GG which is now a charter amendent.

It's not clear if that debate was ever resolved or settled by meeting's end. But Schiavone did raise a good point about trying to ensure that the limit a commissioner could serve without it standing for a full term, should be longer than one year. The current guidelines are not fair to city residents who volunteer their time and then find that their "term" is one single year.

Then there was a discussion about whether the mayor was exercising too much power under the current system in commission appointments at the expense of the city council members which was ironic because if you sat back and watched this meeting carefully, Loveridge in his soft voice and waving hands made about 80% of the selections and it's clear that none of the city councilmen picked that up during the entire hour-long meeting. But he's great at pushing what he wants and making others believe it's their own idea.

Still, even though there were many people who applied for spots on the board and commissions and brought with them a variety of experiences, qualifications and perspectives, very few of them even had any chance to really get the quality of review of their applications that they deserved. The process is still greatly weighted in favor of people with previous board and commission experience and not towards individuals who aren't connected in some way to City Hall. It's a shame in a city of 300,000 people with a lot to offer that the process has become so restrictive and more than bit elitist.

On one of the city's boards and commissions, two former employees of the city were quickly picked to be interviewed while other city residents who wrote enthusiastically of why they wanted to serve in these capacities were not even looked at by members of the committee. It's to the point where filling out applications and xeroxing copies of applications and accompanying information is a waste of paper and of trees because the only one who really reads the applications are probably people in the city clerk's office.

It's a shame that we have so many talented people who want to give of their time to serve and are denied the process that they probably think that they are getting which is to be treated equally and fairly by the selection committee. What was especially problematic were the city-wide appointments where the mayor said, "I'm looking for someone" and in front of him, is a binder filled with applicants who even though they applied through filling out applications and turning them in are not even considered at an equal level with some unknown person that the mayor is "looking for".


Why are they being encouraged to apply? Why are they filling out applications? Why are they submitting them for screening by a city council committee? If they apply for a board or commission where there's an "at large" opening and that lacks an interview process, they really aren't considered at all. And as one councilman said, the mayor really is making most of the appointments but they are giving him this power. There's nothing in the charter that states the mayor controls "city wide" appointments, they only fall under his jurisdiction if they are left vacant for more than 60 days which many of these openings were not because they were term expirations.

That's too bad, really. Because it's not just the applicant who misses out, it's the city. One way to facilitate that process would be to spread out the screening, interviewing and selection process out longer so that the city council doesn't cram all the interviewing and final votes into one marathon session. It should be spread out during part of January and February in smaller doses. This could maximize the number of commissions where interviews take place, reduce burnout from lengthy single sessions and still get the new commissioners sworn in and seated by the March 1 deadline. It would ensure the public that there's actually a process that's based on careful evaluation of the applicants and the maximum opportunity for face to face interviews with city council members. It's also helpful in that it enables city residents to get to know the elected representatives in their city and for their elected officials to spend at least a few minutes getting to know its volunteer pool.






The committee after some discussion picked the following applicants to be interviewed for the CPRC to fill a term which might expire in March 2010.



David V. Baker, Riverside Community College professor of sociology

Robert Garafalo, Riverside County Administrative manager

Robert Slawsby, director and Screen Actors Guild member

Allison Merrihew, comes from a family of law enforcement


The committee considered interviewing Riverside County Mental Health employee Claudia Smith who was the only African-American applicant but City Attorney Gregory Priamos said that there was a conflict of interest with her appointment even though current Commissioner Peter Hubbard represented American Medical Response on discussions about the same mental health intervention training.

Schiavone also mentioned that some unnamed Riverside County Sheriff's Department employees had called asking to apply but hadn't submitted applications. There's not enough known about each applicant to be interviewed to establish probability of him or her being selected.





More twists and turns in the journey of the CPRC to some sort of public forum involving some number of elected officials to discuss the current restrictions on its ability to abide by City Charter Section 810(d) which governs its power to launch independent investigations into officer-involved deaths.

Originally, Mayor Ron Loveride said here that the beleaguered panel would be sent to a Governmental Affairs Committee meeting this month. However, it didn't appear on the agenda for the Governmental Affairs Committee meeting being held on Jan. 7. Then rumors were that it would instead be heard by the full city council. Now it appears that it might be sent to a "special" Governmental Affairs Committee meeting or the full city council. This appears to be a city council that doesn't know what it wants to do with what's quickly becoming a hot potato. One city council member said that this issue involving the CPRC appears to be much bigger than what some elected officials originally thought. It's great that they finally realize what city residents already know. The CPRC was put in the charter to protect it from the city government because the voters realized it needed protecting and guess what? We were right and yes, a lot of city residents are and have been concerned about this issue.

It's been discussed in the communities, the churches, the meetings and has even attracted attenton from organizations outside of Riverside. People on the NACOLE email list who have been reading the articles addressing the most recent restrictions on the CPRC have expressed their concerns about it. And if need be, it will certainly be an election issue.




Is Riverside nurturing its young leaders?



Inside Riverside provides this update on the financial meltdown of Moreno Valley. The news isn't good and bankruptcy was one of the options on the table for what was once one of the nation's fastest growing cities.

And in California, tax refunds might not be issued this year but instead, you might receive IOUs. Which look like checks but can't be cashed because they'll bounce. They've only been issued once in the last 75 or so years and that was in 1992.




Should newly minted Menifee create districts?




San Bernardino County Assessor William Postmus admitted he had a drug addiction.





Closing statements were given to wrap up the ongoing federal corruption trial of former Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona. Both sides of the trial provided their final arguments.




(excerpt, Orange County Register)



Assistant U.S. Attorney Ken Julian said Carona – who was Orange County's highest law enforcement official from 1999 to 2008 – violated the public trust by accepting bribes.


"In 1998, the citizens of Orange County put their faith and trust in Mike Carona to be sheriff," Julian said. "What they didn't know was that Mike Carona cheated to win the election."


Carona's defense attorney, in turn, called the government's case "fatally flawed" and questioned the credibility of the former Assistant Sheriffs Don Haidl and George Jaramillo – saying they have agreed to cooperate with prosecutors and have a vested interest in bringing Carona down.


"When you charge someone with a federal crime, you better be right. You better be able to prove every allegation you make," said Jeff Rawitz, Carona's attorney. "(The prosecutors) have made several mistakes. The primary one was indicting Carona. Mr. Carona is not guilty."




In San Francisco, a man was shot by police officers while lying on the ground and it was caught on video tape.



(excerpt, Don't Tase Me Blog)



BART police officer struggling to handcuff a 22-year-old man stood up over the facedown Hayward resident and fired a single shot into his back while a handful of officers watched, a video taken by a train passenger apparently shows.

The attorney for the family of Oscar Grant III, fatally shot by an unidentified BART officer early New Year's Day, said Sunday he plans to file a $25 million lawsuit against the department and asked prosecutors to consider filing murder charges against the officer.

The shooting occurred shortly before 2 a.m. Thursday after five officers responded to the Fruitvale station to reports of a fight on a train, officials said, though they have not confirmed whether Grant was involved in the fight.

The new video, obtained by television station KTVU, shows two officers restraining a struggling suspect. While the man is lying face down on the ground, one officer appears to be seen pulling out a gun and firing a single shot into his back.

Civil rights attorney John Burris, known for his work in several high-profile cases involving police abuse and corruption, said at a Sunday news conference that the shooting was "the most unconscionable" he has ever seen. He said the Alameda County district attorney should consider filing charges of second-degree murder or manslaughter against the officer.

"I've drafted a notice of claim against BART for $25 million I plan to submit officially," Burris said, adding that the officer had violated Grant's civil rights and wrongfully caused his death.



There were also eyewitness accounts of the shooting.




(excerpt, Contra Costa Times)




Mario Pangelina Jr., whose sister had a 4-year-old daughter with Grant, said he was on the same train as Grant that night, but on a different car. He said he saw Grant's interactions with police immediately before the shooting.

"First, an officer grabbed Oscar by the neck and pushed him against the wall," Pangelina said. "Oscar didn't fight him, but he didn't go down either. He was like, 'What did I do?' Then another officer came up with his Taser and held it right in his face. Oscar said, 'Please don't shoot me, please don't Taser me, I have a daughter,' over and over again, real fast, and he sat down."

Grant was the only man in a small group sitting against the wall who was not handcuffed, Burris said, so officers grabbed him away from the wall and pressed him belly-down onto the ground.

"One officer was kneeling over his neck and head, and another standing over him," Burris said. "He was not kicking, and one officer was pulling on his arm. The standing officer pulled out his weapon and, within moments, fired the gun into Mr. Grant's back."

Burris said the bullet went through Grant's lower back and ricocheted off the ground up into his lungs, killing him.









The United States Justice Department has a list of recommendations on what it wants Austin's police department to do to improve its practices.



(excerpt, American-Statesman)

Austin police should further strengthen how they review incidents in which officers use force and create ways to make sure supervisors and others are properly evaluating such encounters, according to numerous federal recommendations to the department.

The document also said the department should change policies to make clear when weapons such as pepper spray and techniques such as choke holds should be used, and it recommends that all officers be trained in de-escalation techniques.

The report doesn't draw any overarching conclusions about the department, leading readers to reach differing opinions about its content.

"It doesn't describe a Police Department that has a systemic problem with its performance," Police Chief Art Acevedo said at a news conference, which also was attended by City Manager Marc Ott and representatives from several community groups, including the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

However, Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, who had helped seek the federal inquiry, said, "All I can say is, 'Wow.' It is pretty much an indictment of the way things used to be and is a blueprint for what needs to be done yet.

"I don't think it is as minor as the chief had spelled it out (to be)," Harrington said.

If the Justice Department gets involved, it never is.




The Justice Department also brokered an agreement with King County's jail system.




The failure of the Connecticut State Attorney General's office to protect law enforcement whistle blowers is the focus of a lawsuit filed by eight state troopers.


(excerpt, New York Times)

The lawsuit, filed Dec. 22 in United States District Court in New Haven, said that Mr. Blumenthal was unable to protect the whistleblowers from harassment and retaliation after they came forward and cooperated with a 2006 investigation into charges of corruption within the State Police.

“Statutorily, the attorney general’s office is placed in an untenable position to investigate whistleblower complaints and to represent those individuals they believe are retaliating against them,” said Norm Pattis, a lawyer representing the troopers. “The Connecticut State Police cases illustrate this.”

Mr. Pattis said that because Mr. Blumenthal must represent state employees, such whistleblower cases should be handled by another agency. The lawsuit also names two assistant attorneys general and an investigator from Mr. Blumenthal’s office.

Mr. Blumenthal said in an interview that he shared the whistleblowers’ frustration over his lack of statutory teeth to protect them from claims of retaliation, which he says has been limited by the Connecticut law.

“With all due respect, the lawsuit is an act of frustration,” Mr. Blumenthal said. “But the lawsuit cannot accomplish legislative change, and the lawsuit is factually and legally baseless.”




In Macon County, a complaint against officers has led to an investigation.


(excerpt, Macon.com)

Hill contends that officers with the department’s STRIKE Team entered his home and choked and assaulted his son that night. He maintains that police were acting on a bad tip as they tried to serve a “knock and talk” warrant on a man named Antonio Hill, a Florida man wanted there and in Macon who the officers mistook for TJ Hill.

The STRIKE Team consists of officers who target high-crime areas in search of people wanted for violent crimes. They help investigators gather intelligence, collect evidence and serve felony warrants, working with other agencies across the Southeast.

Police acknowledge visiting Hill’s home. They released some information about the incident in a preliminary police report, but no more pending the outcome of an investigation.

“Since the complaint was referred to Internal Affairs and the complaint is being investigated by Internal Affairs, we will just have to see what the outcome of that investigation will be,” said Lt. Dominick Andrews, who supervises the STRIKE Team. He declined to comment further on the allegations.

And in a victory for civilian oversight, the Atlanta Police Department turned over requested records to the city's oversight panel under threat of subpoena. The police department had been withholding the records for months.


(excerpt, Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

The Police Department’s refusal to release police officers’ statements about the incident marked the first sign of resistance and a potential power struggle between the police and the Review Board, which was created after an Atlanta police shooting of an elderly woman.

And the Review Board’s plan to ask for a subpoena from the City Council committee on Monday was its first move toward playing hardball.

The Police Department turned the statements over shortly after 10 a.m., less than an hour before the committee’s 11 a.m. meeting.

“I’m glad we got the documents,” Review Board executive director Cris Beamud said. “I think it’s a step in the right direction.”

Beamud said she believed the Police Department’s action is an acknowledgment that the Review Board is entitled to such documents. The city law enacted to create the review board gives the board “full access” to police reports and documents.

“The law is very clear,” Beamud said. “It requires them to turn over these reports.”

Atlanta police Maj. Lane Hagin is in charge of the department’s internal affairs unit that was withholding the reports.

He stopped short of acknowledging that city law requires the Police Department to release the documents, but said the department decided to do so last week.

“It’s the right thing to do for now,” Hagin said. “We made the decision to turn those documents over and wait to see what council does with the new ordinance.”