They're laid off; I get a raise and a police chief takes control

Library layoffs


Two part-time technical interns were laid off at the libraries in Riverside on Aug. 11, due to ongoing budget cuts. One day before that, the person working as the assistant library director became the library director and received a $15,000 salary increase.

Not long after two public works employees were laid off with the alleged fiancee of one of them claiming at the Press Enterprise's Web site that the director of that department had also received a generous raise not long before. The police chief signed a new contract in December for five-years of service. Was that contract at the same salary or did he get an increase? Police officers in his agency are looking at salary freezes, bonus/step up pay revocations (including for SWAT and Motor) and there were discussions to also eliminate shift differential pay. If it's true that department heads are getting or have gotten salary hikes in these difficult times while employees in their department have salaries and positions are frozen, or worse are laid off, what kind of message does that send?

Incidentally, if the police chief and his boss, the city manager both were authorized to receive the maximum salary raises currently allowable, guess which one would get the higher salary? The police chief would actually be higher paid than his boss.

Anyway, the libraries had already been hard hit by losing dozens of part-time pages last year and huge chunks of their budget. Renaissance projects to renovate them have been put on holding pattern (except for preliminary design phases) while other projects march forward.

Ironically, how did the fuss about the maximum salary increases set for about 40 executive and management employees begin? After a department head in the city received a large raise last year even as that person's department's budget shrunk by nearly one-third due to budget cuts caused by a decline in tax revenues.






[The building which houses both the Internal Affairs Division and the North Neighborhood Policing Center Station, about two doors down from Greyhound]


I'm back and it's mine.


Part of an ongoing series of Who's minding the department:


As reported earlier, Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach is back from his medical leave spent having spinal surgery and has announced to his department that he's back, beginning with a meeting held with his higher ups several weeks ago. He told them that the department is his department to run and that it will be at least in his charge until his current contract expires in 2013. He also said he would be instituting some changes that hopefully would help with some of the problems. It's very telling that a police chief would even have to make comments like that when the overriding assumption should be that any police chief should be in charge of his police department rather than City Hall performing that task. After all, some things shouldn't have to be said, but apparently in this case, a statement needed to be made and apparently that was done.

Now people are waiting to see what happens next.

But there's been a struggle of some sorts between Leach and factions at City Hall for several years now that even included the city council experiencing problems (not that it noticed) in getting the city manager's office to carry out its instructions on how the city would implement a plan to keep the department continuing on a forward path at implementing its Strategic Plan after its stipulated agreement was dissolved in March 2006. It culminated in the March 2007 city council meeting where members of the Riverside Police Officers' Association and the Riverside Police Administrators' Association congregated at a city council meeting to confront the city council and city manager about a proposal which had been withdrawn from the final meeting agenda (but had been placed by Administrative Analyst Jeremy Hammond on an earlier "tentative" one) to turn two deputy chief and one assistant chief positions into being "at will". Allegedly two of the more recently promoted management employees accepted these new terms as conditions of promotion but a third one who already held his rank flat out refused, believing that the city manager's office would use the classification change to terminate his employment.

Some controversy had arisen when the promotions of two of these employees were allegedly made when Leach wasn't even in town at the time. After he returned, members of the unions hoped that he would take up the issue with Hudson but it didn't happen. Instead, Leach like the city manager, city attorney and various city council members stood up one by one before the gathered audience of union members and community leaders and almost tried to make it seem as if they were all worked up about nothing. But fortunately, for the police associations, they had laid a fairly good paper trail.

Perhaps Leach's comments at the recent command staff meeting were done to dispel any innuendo that Leach's back surgery leave was paving the way for a medical retirement but it was clear at his meeting before his employees that he wanted to assure attendees and through the water cooler, everyone in the department that he wasn't heading down that path. Perhaps his comments were made to try to instill confidence in the employees under his direction that he was truly the leader of the police department and not City Hall. But his employees are waiting for action to prove that he's truly down with them.

This incident taking place at a command staff meeting might be the harbinger of more interesting developments in the drafting of yet another chapter in the book that details the power struggle allegedly taking place between Leach and several factions at City Hall over the police department that's taken place since City Manager Brad Hudson and his adjutant, Tom DeSantis came to town. Toss this group of individuals in with City Attorney Gregory Priamos and perhaps several council members and you have a lot of cooks in a crowded kitchen at the Riverside Police Department.

Police chiefs are usually appointed by a city council and/or city manager's office to lead police departments. But if they're like Leach an "at will" employee, they can also be fired and shown the door without being provided with any explanation. Meaning that if they step outside the parameters assigned to them by their bosses, they can be out a job and a salary that in Leach's case is in the high 200,000s. And after watching how the Hudson and DeSantis team have micromanaged the management employees connected to the CPRC, it's fairly clear that the two men keep a tight rein on their department heads. One former CPRC manager, Pedro Payne "resigned" not long after being ejected from a meeting by DeSantis over what else? Investigative protocol as it turned out.

Payne's "resignation" which was really anything but, sent a strong message about how the city manager's office intended to handle its department heads. How much autonomy do they really have, is a question often asked. But the number one question that's asked is who's managing the S.S. Hudson? If it's true that his office is micromanaging city department like the CPRC and the police department, then who's at the wheel?


Changing of the Guard?


Leach's alleged comments proclaiming that the department is his to run are interesting coming in the wake of some changes that were made in the city council during the past election. As everyone knows by now, Councilman Frank Schiavone who represented the fourth ward lost his reelection bid to challenger, Paul Davis. While Schiavone was in office, some speculated that he and Councilman Steve Adams directed Hudson and Priamos to institute sudden changes to the Community Police Review Commission regarding its investigative protocol for officer-involved deaths. The co-authoring of an op-ed article in the Press Enterprise fueled the concerns and the rumors that the two councilmen, one a former police officer were instrumental in trying to dilute the CPRC's effectiveness at implementing its charter-mandated power in relation to officer-involved deaths.

A third city council member, Nancy Hart just hitched on for the ride and didn't seem to have really read what she was signing onto because afterward, she expressed perplexion at the timing of the moves to change the CPRC protocol. Perhaps the trade off for her was an endorsement from Schiavone when she ran for office. After all, some political watch dogs say that he played an instrumental role in her getting elected to the dais in the first place, and that she had learned what it was like to offend him after she chose to endorse Bob Buster in the county supervisor race in 2008 and not Schiavone. Some people close to her campaign said the period that followed was the loneliest of her political career.

But Schiavone appeared to take the lead in that effort involving the CPRC, a move that might have reaped huge costs to him politically. And he used the Governmental Affairs Committee as his tool to accomplish it, just as he tried to use the committee the previous year to push a change in municipal election procedure to hold one-time mailin plurality elections, not long after learning he had only averaged a vote of 38% in Ward Four precincts when he ran for supervisor. Mercifully, that attempt was shot down when his proposal to do so met up with the city council and over a dozen angry speakers.

In fact, Schiavone strongly implied that he played some major role in the change of that protocol on his campaign Web site, a move which cost him votes in some critical precincts. His comments about his role involving the CPRC led that issue to being one of several that doomed his chances at serving a third term on the dais as several neighborhoods which had strongly supported him in the past swung towards Davis because they were also strong supporters of the CPRC.

Even the endorsement process for Schiavone vs Davis was difficult inside the Riverside Police Officers' Association which represents the department's officers, detectives and sergeants. Within the Political Action Committee, there were members who endorsed Schiavone and those who were actively involved in Davis' campaign. When the dust cleared, Schiavone received the PAC endorsement but not without some cost and controversy over the process, leading to the resignation of at least one long-time member. But both candidates had their supporters and detractors from inside the police department.

Even after Schiavone was endorsed, the freezing of officers' salaries and the denial of bonus and step-up pay for 80 police officers (which was followed by the loss of shift differential pay) allegedly led to some second thoughts about the endorsement as did concerns about the emergence of the Bradley Estates situation. That was when Schiavone became the first developer in recent history to have the city pay his legal bills in relation to a lawsuit over a project and he just happened to be a councilman. And that was according to Priamos' recollection.

Schiavone even shared his residence at one time with Leach though Leach moved out before Schiavone filed his campaign papers.

Some say that the police department also experienced quite a degree of micromanagement by some of the same suspects, impacting it in different ways. After all, several city council members have compared Hudson to a ship or even a wind up doll when it comes to serving the wishes of his direct employers, the city council and being able to change direction in how he's performing his job on a dime. So that if he were involved in any micromanagement of a city department, he had received direction from somewhere above. But if Leach is being given back the department to lead, then does that mean that there's been a change in instructions given to his boss?

So if Hudson and DeSantis are taking their hands off of one of their favorite toys (and its toys), where is the change in direction coming from?

One city council member met with Leach not too long ago while he was still on leave and allegedly Leach had expressed his wishes to have more autonomy over his police department. Was his wish granted? It seems to appear that way if Leach is able to express his intent towards claiming autonomy during a meeting with his command staff. However, is it for show or is he telling it as it is? That's what has to be scrutinized in the weeks and months ahead so that the more definitive answer may be known.





Retirements:

Lt. Brian Baitx, who led the audit and compliance bureau retired earlier this month. His position has been frozen. His position in the Bureau may or may not be filled but it appears to be just as likely that Sgt. Jaybee Brennan, an officer with three hats already will be placed in charge of it.

Lt. Bob Meier: He retires in September and is currently assigned to the Investigations. His lieutenants position likely will be frozen but Lt. Mike Perea will take over his duties in the Investigations division.

Det. Bill Barnes: He was retired and since an early 1990s MOU ensures the filling of detective vacancies, Officer Chad Collopy was promoted to replace him.

But what's coming down the road for both lieutenants and sergeants who are already facing shortages will just serve to make the situation more difficult to deal with in terms of maintaining close to 7 to 1 ratios between officers and supervisors, as well as ensuring that lieutenants serve as watch commanders on work shifts, without having to dip at the sergeant well too often.

Future retirements:

Lt. Rick Tedesco (December)

Sgt. Patrick Watters (medical injury)

Sgt. Don Tauli (December)

Sgt. Duane Beckman

Positions frozen:

Captains: 2

Lieutenants: 3 (unless the department decides to fill one of the four vacancies after December)

Sergeants: 3-4 (with at least three more retirements anticipated by December)

Officers: 19 (with about 11 new officers currently completing field training)

Civilians: At least 38


About 10% of the positions in the department, civilian and sworn, are currently frozen.




So if the retirements all go through (and one anticipated sergeant retirement got scrapped for another year) then the vacancy picture at the supervisory level could look like this:


Captain: 2

Lieutenant: 4

Sergeants: 6-7





Riverside Police Department Brian Money won a power lifting competition.

Money will be appearing at the Friday Morning Club's meeting on Friday, Aug. 21 at 10 a.m. at the Janet Goeske Center to speak on fraud prevention.





Riverside City Council voted to merge several of its redevelopment zones.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



A few residents raised concerns that money from their neighborhood would go to projects in another part of town, and others objected because of philosophical disagreements with how redevelopment agencies operate.

"We were told that redevelopment-generated funds would be spent in the area where they were generated," said Erin Snyder, vice president of the Northside Improvement Association. "We still have a number of needed major projects on the Northside."

She pointed out that residents were told their area could generate as much as $400 million over the life of the redevelopment zone, but so far only $11 million has been spent there.

Councilman Mike Gardner tried to reassure residents that redevelopment funds will be spent equitably, and he asked for the creation of an advisory committee that would include representatives of all the neighborhoods in the merged Downtown/Airport and Hunter Park/Northside areas. The council will vote on that proposal later.

"You have my pledge that I will not support taking all the money from one area and spending it in another," said Gardner, who represents most of the merged areas.




More city council actions



Another man dies while being tased while in the custody of Riverside County Sheriff Department employees.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Residents in the 28700 block of Alessandro Boulevard had reported to Moreno Valley police at 11:45 a.m. that the man was banging on doors and was walking in the middle of the road, the release stated.

Arriving officers reported the man became physically combative and they used the Taser as they tried to place him under arrest, according to the release. He was handcuffed and suffered a seizure. He was taken by ambulance to Riverside County Regional Medical Center where he was pronounced dead.






The wife of San Bernardino County District Attorney Mike Ramos speaks out. The topic of choice are the sexual harassment allegations raised against her husband.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



In a letter addressed to friends and supporters Saturday, Gretchen Ramos said allegations raised in a complaint last week that Mike Ramos sexually harassed and retaliated against a female subordinate are part of an attack against him.

"Let me be clear, my husband of 28 years has never harassed any employee," she stated.

District attorney spokeswoman Susan Mickey confirmed Sunday that the letter was from Gretchen Ramos.

The woman, whose name was not released, contacted Supervisor Neil Derry last week, claiming she had an affair with Ramos and was now being retaliated against. His office referred her to the Human Resources Department.

The district attorney denied the allegations in a statement Friday and confirmed that a human resources complaint had been filed against him. He called the complaint part of a "well-organized and well-funded effort" by those his office is investigating and prosecuting.

Five former assessor's employees, including former Assessor Bill Postmus and former Assistant Assessor Jim Erwin, have been charged as part of the investigation.

In her letter, Gretchen Ramos accuses Erwin of being behind the attacks against her husband and Supervisor Neil Derry of helping him. Erwin is Derry's former chief of staff but resigned following his arrest in March.

"In an effort to have jurisdiction over his case transferred to the attorney general, Erwin has been attempting to brand my husband as a womanizer who has sexually harassed a female employee," Gretchen Ramos said.






The latest San Bernardino County individuals to be investigated for wrongdoing are two fireman accused of using an anti-terrorism trailer to move personal belongings.






The city of San Bernardino is planning to rebalance its budget books.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



The biggest of the accounting changes would divert $500,000 in street maintenance costs to a fund underwritten by Measure I, a half-cent sales tax that county voters approved in 1989 to pay for transportation projects. Likewise, $200,000 for patrol car leases would come from fees charged to developers to offset the costs of providing services to their projects.

Council members questioned some of the shifts, asking whether the services or equipment could properly be charged to the outside accounts. Councilwoman Esther Estrada asked whether a city cultural development fund could properly pay for some library expenses, as McNeely proposes.

But Emil Marzullo, acting Economic Development Agency head, said the $1.3 million loan McNeely now is requesting would be much easier for the agency to furnish than the $5.4 million the city manager predicted he would need in June. State legislators also are seeking to levy redevelopment agency funds statewide.

In their only formal action, council members voted 4-2 to reject Councilman Chas Kelley's proposal to increase the loan to fill eight vacant firefighter slots.




A Washington Post columnist writes about D.C. and its higher rate of disorderly conduct arrests, including a case where a guy had $25 removed from his person by an officer who then said he was using that money to pay the guy's bail and that was as good as an admission of guilt.



(excerpt, Colbert. I. King)



A 2003 board study found that D.C. police made far more "disorderly conduct" arrests per capita than cops in other large cities. Sometimes, the board reported, it appeared that the arrests were retaliation for rude behavior by residents during their encounters with the police.
ad_icon

That's a serious error. Disorderly conduct laws apply to a breach of the public's -- not a cop's -- peace.

As the Office of Citizen Complaint Review (its name in 2003 when this ruling was made) noted, echoing the D.C. Court of Appeals, and courts in other jurisdictions such as Massachusetts, a "police officer is expected to have a greater tolerance for verbal assaults . . . and because the police are especially trained to resist provocation, we expect them to remain peaceful in the face of verbal abuse that might provoke or offend the ordinary citizen."

Too many citizens don't know that. They often choose to post and forfeit collateral to end the arrest and avoid having to appear in court, even though the arrest may be improper. True, no conviction. But the arrest stays on the books.

Since the 2003 report, the D.C. police department has modified its arrest procedures for disorderly conduct to make the collateral forfeiture process clearer. It has also provided more training about the law and arrest procedures, and it has stressed that officers must follow the law.

Residents are arrested in D.C. for disorderly conduct in large numbers: nearly 5,000 in 2007, more than 4,200 in 2008 and 4,469 this year as of Aug. 5. Many are probably arrested for good reasons: noise violations, blocking public spaces, etc.

But, as in the Gates arrest, some busts never make it to court.

In response to my request, the D.C. Attorney General's office, which prosecutes disorderly conduct cases in the District, provided data on disorderly conduct charges that were presented for prosecution (or "papered") and those that were dropped (or "no-papered") from fiscal 2007 to 2009 to date. It turns out that the juvenile-offenders section of the office papered 118 cases in that period, while 237 were dropped. (Fifty-six of the cases that went to court were dismissed either for insufficient evidence or as part of a plea.)

Before Election 2009 reaches the finish line, Election 2010 begins

"If you never have to dip into your reserves, then you don't have reserves. That's exactly what they're intended to do."

----Norco Councilman Frank Hall who just filed his papers to run for reelection.

"While we are laying off city employees, the City Manager authorized spending, for what I am told is somewhere near $1,000,000 on renovating the City Council Chambers. It may have needed the work, but explain to the city employees that have been laid off that a beautification project is more important than their families."

---Former Riverside Councilman and mayoral candidate, Art Gage on his blog.





"You have to sort of take the council's word that they're not going to rob you blind."


---Riverside City Councilman Mike Gardner, on the two redevelopment proposals which are the subject of public hearings at the next city council meeting, to the Press Enterprise.





"We think the settlement was in the best interest of the city."


---Riverside Supervising Deputy City Attorney Jeb Brown after the city settles a lawsuit filed regarding the officer-involved death of Terry Rabb. Incidentally, this is the second common quote issued by the city attorney's office, after the one it always issues that the [insert name] lawsuit being filed against the city is frivolous and will be fought vigorously by the city.







It's interesting timing or maybe it just happens so much in the City of Riverside that the timing is always right for the city handing out money but the city attorney's office just announced that it paid out a $75,000 settlement in the 2005 officer-involved death of Terry Rabb. Rabb suffered from diabetes and was experiencing "hypoglycemic unawareness" from low blood glucose levels when a friend called 911. That condition, an extension of hypoglycemic shock can produce bizarre behavior mirroring a psychotic breakdown or panic attack. It happens at some point to nearly 20% of all people experiencing type-one diabetes which Rabb had and those who do experience say that it creates a strong sense of depersonalization meaning that even when they are aware something is wrong, they can't do anything about it. The paramedics made comments about the condition affecting Rabb according to documents submitted as part of the police department's criminal investigation report.

Two officers were dispatched and after restraining him including with an attempted carotid restraint, Rabb experienced a cardiac arrest while sitting with his back against the couch handcuffed by the two officers and a city paramedic, according to reports and statements given to the Officer-Involved Death investigators.

The Community Police Review Commission investigated and reviewed the death and eight commissioners voted that the officers' actions were within policy. One commissioner, Jim Ward voted that it was not and tried to submit a minority report which was suppressed by the city. The reason? City Attorney Gregory Priamos backed the contention of several commissioners that a minority report could not be submitted unless the majority of the commissioners voted to allow it.

That's not how minority reports are handled. In fact, it's the opposite of how most professional investigative and review bodies handle them which is to treat them as an extension of an earlier vote on a case rather than put them up to a vote again simply to get included. It's already acknowledged that the majority of a body doesn't agree with the author of a minority report simply by the generation of that report. But then when you have a city that's scared for some silly reason (or not) over a minority report using its city attorney as a conduit for that fear to the commission, developments like this aren't all that surprising but are to be expected. But ironically, through that fear, the city wound up giving the minority report that it didn't allow to be included in the public report much more power.

Priamos got over his apparent confusion about what a minority report was to properly explain it to the commission a year later when Ward submitted a report in the Lee Deante Brown death case and it was included in the commission's public report. Either that or he simply received different instructions on how to interpret the meaning of a minority report from someone higher on the city's food chain than himself.


The Rabb public report minus its minority report can be accessed here.

The money the city paid out is certainly not a huge amount but the settlement is the last of considerably larger ones involving a series of incustody deaths both shootings and otherwise that Riverside Police Department officers were involved in during a period which lasted about two years between 2004 and 2006. But if the city still has an insurance carrier, another settlement to add to a pile of them isn't going to make that company very happy. But go to trial? Surely, you jest! The city hardly ever takes any cases to trial after having its shirt handed back to it four years ago.



The settlements are as follows:


Douglas Steven Cloud (2006): $800,000

Summer Marie Lane (2004) $390,000

Lee Deante Brown (2006): Between $200,000-275,000

Terry Rabb (2005): $75,000

Rabb who's been called a "useless parasite" by one of the Riverside County District Attorney's office's former investigators on the Press Enterprise site (and comments like that always serve to boost the public confidence in the ability of that office to make decisions on incustody deaths) had family members that sued, with one of the major concerns by them being that the police department institute training regarding how police officers interface with the mentally and medically ill or incapacitated. The police department developed and started implementing its 30 hour crisis mental health training for officers in 2007 and it was certified by POST in June of that year.

Rabb could have been anyone who suffered from "hypoglycemic unawareness". More than a few local diabetics believed it could have been them.

The CPRC determined that the officer's actions were in violation of the department's use of force policy in the Lane case and sided with the officers in the other three. However, interestingly enough, two other cases besides Lane led to the writing of minority reports, and in fact were the only incustody cases out of all 12 investigated and reviewed by the CPRC to have included minority reports.

The CPRC is currently in the process of drafting a majority report as well as at least one minority report in its investigation and review of the Joseph Darnell Hill case. The commissioners are still stumbling over exactly what a minority report is and how it relates to the majority report, but no minority reports on officer-involved death cases have been suppressed by the commission and/or city since the Rabb case.

The CPRC no longer independently investigates officer-involved deaths in pursuant to the mandate set by the city's charter. City Manager Brad Hudson and later, a majority of the city council voted to delay its investigations by up to a year or longer (as one case nears its first year anniversary). No agency can effectively investigate any incident six months, a year or later after it's taken place.

The current status of four officer involved deaths currently in limbo in terms of CPRC investigations. These delays are brought to you courtesy of the city council (through majority vote), Hudson and City Attorney Gregory Priamos. The majority of the commissioners ensure these delays as well since you'd have to poke them with something akin to a mental cattle prod to get them to even inquire as to updates about any of these cases.



Carlos David Quinonez, Sr. (Sept. 1, 2008): 341 days


Robert Luis Sanchez, jr. (Sept. 11, 2008): 330 days

Marlon Oliver Acevedo: (Oct. 31, 2008): 280 days


Russell Franklin Hyatt: (Jan. 17, 2008): 203 days




Speaking of the CPRC, only one meeting is planned on Wednesday, Aug. 26 at 5:30 p.m.

What took 470 days? A category I complaint filed with the Riverside Police Department to reach the CPRC. (source: this report). During that month, the CPRC issued one sustained finding on an allegation for two complaints investigated with the other one being a category II complaint that took 336 days to reach the CPRC. Neither complaint was finished being processed by the city before the one year mark.

Riverside will be playing around with its redevelopment areas again.


(excerpt)

If the merger goes forward, some residents will be watching carefully to see how the money is spent. Lenny Mercier, president of the Northside Improvement Association, said his group hopes the pooled redevelopment funds don't favor some areas over others.

Residents would like to see Main Street improved from First Street to Highway 60, and they'd welcome a grocery store in their neighborhood, he said.

While Mercier supports the city's redevelopment overall, "Not as much attention has been focused in our area," he said. "We just don't want to be left out."

Gardner said he can only answer that concern by saying he won't support lavishing improvements on some areas while others get none.

"You have to sort of take the council's word that they're not going to rob you blind," he said.

There's not a specific list of projects that would be done, Gardner said, but upgrades to the downtown library, museum and municipal auditorium likely would be included.

This agenda shows that the discussion will take place at the Redevelopment Agency meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 11 at 2 p.m. in the currently-under-renovation city council chambers at City Hall.

The second half of the hearing will take place that same day at the 6:30 p.m. session.


This report provides more information on the proposed merging of several of the city's redevelopment areas at the 2:30 p.m. hearing and this report covers the 6:30 p.m. session.

Most often, redevelopment zones are merged to facilitate the transfer of available funding that's designated for one of the zones to another for a project there.










I found this gem at the Inland Empire Craigslist which has been dominated in recent weeks by the discussion of more nationally focused issues like health care reform and privatizing the postal service. This anonymous individual seemed irked that these folks aren't paying much attention to his or her own rantings. But then again, it's difficult to compete with health care for the public's attention these days although this individual does try their best.


(excerpt)


Wow, the outer edges of the "Inland Empire" have found this site! This used to be all about Riverside, perhaps we need our own section - I think I know of someone who seems to know Craig very well. Perhaps she can talk to the powers that be. The recent postings are a distraction from what this site is all about, FBM'S ego and self-annointed expertise on all matters concerning Riverside, and her ever sarcastic "Have a Nice Day" closing. I did get a good laugh from her "go to Hell" in lieu of her usual comment recently. I know, I know, I'm a sicko for getting a chuckle over that. I visualized a temper tantrum.

I'm sure FBM has several comments lying in wait on the drama regarding the mayorial race in November. Poor Art Gage, he doesn't stand a chance! Of course, FBM is free to "say" whatever her knotted knickers desire on her blog and here, it's just too bad we can't rule "with prejudice" on her. Dismissed. You had your one chance. No repeating the same dribble here on Craigslist.



As for "ruled with prejudice" and "dismissed", that's exactly what Ward Four voters did with this individual's city council candidate of choice just two months ago. I suspect that he or she hasn't quite gotten over the consternation and shock over that loss.






The Press Enterprise's editorial board believes the public is owed an explanation as to why Riverside contracted with a janitorial services company while its owners were being prosecuted for workman's compensation insurance fraud.



(excerpt)




Those facts raise a series of troubling questions. Why, for example, would the city staff recommend a contract with a company facing insurance fraud charges? Some city officials apparently knew of the felony case, but did not see it as an obstacle.

And why did no one at City Hall inform the City Council about the fraud charges when asking council members to renew the contract? The council appeared blindsided by the news of a criminal case.

How come city officials apparently knew nothing about the years of unpaid corporate taxes, or the tax board's decision barring the company from doing business? Does the city usually not bother to find out if a contractor can legally operate in California?

And why would the city renew a contract, instead of sending it to bid and seeking a better deal in a year when the city froze pay, left positions vacant and made other cutbacks to save money?

Also, how does renewing a contract with a Los Angeles-based company fit with the city's focus on supporting local businesses? Is an outside outfit with legal trouble really that much better than any local company?

Such questions need answers, if Riverside hopes to avoid an erosion of public trust in city competence. Leaving Riverside residents wondering what City Hall was thinking only invites skepticism and suspicion. Maybe there is an explanation for this incident. If so, the city needs to make it public, quickly.





The simple fact is this, the city council needs to play a larger role in terms of insuring the accountability and transparency of City Hall. And it needs to pay a lot more attention to what its direct employees like its city manager are doing rather than signing away through public votes their responsibilities of doing such including when the council voted to stop approving inter department and fund financial transfers.





San Bernardino City Attorney Jim Penman has decided to run for mayor of that city again. Since city attorneys are elected in his neck of the woods, he's already an experienced politician.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

He said he was most disturbed by the City Council's decision in December to sever its graffiti removal contract with Los Padrinos Youth Services, a nonprofit group that hires recovering addicts, reformed criminals and at-risk teens.

"To cancel that program the way they did and throw those kids on the street is one of the most disgusting things the city of San Bernardino has done in the 23 years I've been city attorney," Penman said.

City Council members said they weren't satisfied with Los Padrinos' work. In the six months since the city took over the graffiti program, city crews were able to clean up twice as much, according to city records.

Jim Morris, chief of staff to the mayor, said the mayor's campaign will be about moving the city ahead by cleaning up blighted housing and graffiti.

"It's not a surprise he's running for mayor," Morris said of Penman. "He hasn't stopped running for mayor since last time."

Two other potential candidates have also taken out candidacy papers: Sir Isaac Lindsay and Rick Avila, a building contractor who also ran in 2005.

Columnist Cassie MacDuff writes about the anticipated contest here.



(excerpt)

The build-up to the run has been rumbling for several weeks, with Penman lobbing bombs at Morris, accusing him of improperly meddling in the location of a parolee homeless shelter at an office park where Morris' daughter was going to move her gymnastics studio.

Penman has referred the matter to the Attorney General's office.

Morris called the accusation baseless and said Penman is using it as "an opportunity to make political hay."

Morris had no conflict of interest since his daughter is an independent adult. Still, he asked her to look for a different location to avoid the appearance of a conflict.

In the phone interview, Penman told me that as recently as Monday night, he wasn't going to challenge Morris. But a number of recent developments changed his mind:

The decision to spend millions of dollars to build low-income housing in the trouble-plagued Arden-Guthrie neighborhood,

The canceling of the graffiti-removal contract with Los Padrinos, which trained at-risk youth,

And the hiring of a PR consultant while police and fire positions are left vacant, Penman said.

It's been a see-saw of sorts with rumors that San Bernardino County District Attorney Mike Ramos is being investigated leading to calls for an investigation of the rumors of him being investigated and then calls not to investigate him for investigating the rumors of him being investigated (or something like that). Now it's officially been straightened out for the confused public. Ramos has admitted he has received a complaint of sexual harassment which happened to be what the so-called rumors were about. Yes, another chapter is being written in scandal-plagued San Bernardino County.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



San Bernardino County District Attorney Mike Ramos released a brief statement Friday denying the employee's allegations and suggesting that they were linked to his office's corruption probe, which has led to the arrest of five former assessor's employees.

"This most recent attack on the district attorney's office and me is part of a well-organized and well-funded effort by some of those we are investigating and prosecuting," he said.
Story continues below

Ramos said he welcomed and would cooperate with an investigation by the human resources department. He declined to elaborate.

The complaint was filed less than two weeks after Supervisor Neil Derry's called for an independent investigation of rumors that Ramos had engaged in improper relationships with subordinates and colleagues.

Derry's office was contacted by the female district attorney's employee via email on Monday, he said. He later met with her and put her in touch with county human resources Director Andrew Lamberto.

The woman, whose name was not released, told Derry that she had been involved in an affair with Ramos and that she had faced retaliation at work because of it, Derry said.

She declined a request to comment through Derry's office.

Derry said she came to him because she didn't believe her complaint would be properly investigated otherwise.



Filing to fight it out for two council seats in Norco are four candidates.

Riverside Mayoral Election kicks off in technological style

And speaking of elections this autumn, this latest article from the Press Enterprise isn't news if you've been following local politics. The filing period for Riverside's mayoral office ended Friday with only two candidates getting enough signatures and that's of course, incumbent Ron Loveridge and challenger and former councilman, Art Gage.

Here's the campaign Web sites for both mayoral candidates running in Riverside this autumn if any prospective voters want to find out more information including where they stand on the issues.


Loveridge for Mayor 2009

Gage for Mayor



Gage has even taken up blogging. Here are some links to this thoughts on the city's spending habits and the recent contract debacle involving the city's original choice in janitorial services vendors.




Election 2010 begins...


At the Riverside County level of government, several politicians are loading up their campaign war chests with money for elections next year. Included are current Riverside County Sheriff Stan Sniff and District Attorney Rod Pacheco.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Sheriff Stanley Sniff, District Attorney Rod Pacheco and Supervisor Marion Ashley each raked in well over $100,000 in contributions between January and July, according to new campaign filings.

Supervisor Jeff Stone is not up for re-election for his county position until 2012, but he is running for state Senate and faces primaries in June. He brought in almost $61,000 in donations to his supervisor campaign and more than $242,000 for his state Senate run.

Local officials often build large war chests well in advance of elections, said Bob Stern, president of the nonpartisan Center for Governmental Studies based in Los Angeles.

"Incumbents are trying to scare away challengers," said Stern, an expert who helped write the state's campaign finance law. "It's also easier to raise money at a time when no one else is raising money."

Supervisors Ashley, Roy Wilson and John Tavaglione are expected to seek re-election in June. So are Pacheco, Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder Larry Ward and Auditor-Controller Robert Byrd. Sniff and Treasurer-Tax Collector Don Kent, both appointed to their positions, are campaigning for second terms.

Frank Robles, a retired chief deputy, filed in May to run against Sniff for sheriff. Since then, he has raised more than $67,000 and spent almost $24,000, according to his filings.

Sniff, appointed to his position in 2007, has raised almost $153,000 since January and spent about $44,000. He has about $198,000 in his account, filings show.

No one has filed formally to campaign against any of the supervisors, according to the county registrar's office.






Should elected officials be allowed to text or twitter during public meetings? As communication technology continues to move forward, questions like this come to the forefront in cities like Murrieta.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



City officials find themselves grappling with questions such as should an elected official be allowed to receive a text message from the public during a government meeting and should those messages be read into public record.

Murrieta Mayor Gary Thomasian even asked his colleagues at an Aug. 4 meeting to shut off their cell phones and personal digital assistants until the city attorney could research the issue.

They said they will revisit the issue at coming meetings.

A political expert said the debate over the use of electronic devices for public comment is unprecedented territory for city governments.

"This is a fascinating issue; the public is trying to extend the public forum to the virtual world of PDAs," said Jessica Levinson, the political reform director for the Los Angeles-based Center for Governmental Studies, a local government think tank.

"There is no doubt that the scope of the public's ability to participate in the decisions of local governments, albeit virtually, will be debated and litigated in the near future," she said.






An interesting column appeared in the Los Angeles Times alleging that when the going got tough, Bratton got gone. He announced his resignation as chief to take a high-priced security job not long after a federal court judge dissolved the city's eight-year consent decree with the U.S. Justice Department.



(excerpt)



The timing of Bratton's exit couldn't be worse. The city faces a fiscal crisis of unprecedented magnitude that will force the LAPD to do at least as much -- and perhaps more -- with far less. Hiring freezes, furloughs and budget reductions are bound to strain the department in deep and unforeseen ways, potentially threatening much of the progress that has been made over the last seven years. When the chief gave Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa his notice, he ensured that the department for which he professes such great affection will have to confront the grinding challenges ahead with a new chief and, inevitably, a new command staff. It's hard to escape the suspicion that Bratton was glad to lead the LAPD through an expansive era in which he had the vast majority of budgetary considerations his own way, but is reluctant to manage it through rough times in which simply hanging on to what's been achieved will be a triumph.

Bratton's decision may also have been influenced by City Councilman Greig Smith, who, since his ascension to the chairmanship of the council's Public Safety Committee, has demonstrated a pointlessly intrusive, almost absurd propensity to assert micromanagerial authority over the LAPD, involving himself in deployment and other issues that clearly exceed the lawmakers' competence. Bratton's impatience with this development has been obvious to associates, but handing off the problem of dealing with an overreaching council committee to a new chief won't help the LAPD one bit.


The lasting impression created by Bratton's abrupt departure is of a leader who was happy to occupy the spotlight when his department was riding high, wide and handsome, but unwilling to get his hands dirty -- and perhaps to dent his reputation -- when the going got institutionally tough.



It's not surprising to read about an ongoing power struggle between Bratton and City Hall. After all, just look at Riverside. But what's really disturbing is what also allegedly took place.



(excerpt)

That brings us to the troubling questions raised by Bratton's new professional association with Cherkasky. The two have worked together before, back when Bratton was between public assignments, and Cherkasky -- the former head of the international security firm Kroll -- is known to be an admirer of the chief. As the head of a new security firm, Altegrity, Cherkasky plans to build a brand around Bratton, using his reputation to secure not only international advisory jobs but some of the lucrative consulting contracts that Atty. Gen. H. Eric Holder Jr.'s Justice Department probably will be putting out for bid in the coming years. It's unlikely that Bratton would have been willing to leave his top spot at the LAPD while the department still was under the federal consent decree, and it was Cherkasky, in his role as court-appointed monitor, who advised the judge to lift the decree. Cherkasky's contract with the court officially ended June 15, and it's possible that there were no discussions of the new partnership before that date. "Possible" is the operative word there. In other words, the monitor gave the court advice that helped cement Bratton's reputation as the country's leading police chief, then just weeks later the two enter into a lucrative business arrangement built on that very reputation. (The worst thing about that sequence is that it casts an unwarranted shadow on the fact that the LAPD deserved to have the decree lifted because it had complied with its terms.)



What held up the LAPD's consent decree dissolution was that on the original expiration date in 2006, there were still reforms that needed to be completed and some of those that had been, had to be in place and working for at least two years before the decree could be dissolved. A couple of reforms weren't implemented including a controversial one that required the department to conduct regular financial audits on members of its special investigative units. One of the reforms which needed to satisfy the requisite two year period was the department's Early Warning System set up to track officers who were flagged for too many complaints, investigations or other set parameters.

Whether or not the LAPD deserved to have its decree lifted may be overshadowed by at the very least perceptions over a conflict of interest between Bratton and his new partner, Charkasky.


So it seems from a business standpoint, that two individuals benefited from the lifting of the federal consent decree and now they're going to be working together. And it creates a perception that can't be helped that the LAPD may have checked out of its decree before it should have done so. A situation which should be decided on its own merit.





Where are the hurricanes? Hint: It has something to do with the return of the planet's least favorite little boy.




The DDOS attacks on Web sites continue...



More on the DDOS attacks against Twitter, Facebook and Google's Blogger site on Friday.

Heads we settle; Tails we don't go to trial

***UPDATE*** Blogger experienced a DDOS attack today similar to those impacting Twitter, Live Journal, You Tube and Face Book. So far, the theory is that one Georgian (the country) blogger was the target of all these attacks, not the sites themselves and that it originated in Russia. Blogger flashed a strange error message for those accessing its blogs saying it had received too many automated messages from your network or you had to check for viruses or spyware on your computer. The message was put up to keep the site from crashing. Consquently, accessing this and other blogspot blogs could be hit or miss for a while.



Chief William Bratton of the Los Angeles Police Department shocked the city by announcing that he will be resigning this autumn.


(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)

Standing beside Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and John Mack, the head of the civilian board that oversees the LAPD, at a packed City Hall press conference, Bratton claimed he had accomplished what he set out to do as chief, but said it was difficult nonetheless to move on.

"There is never a good time to leave, but there is a right time," Bratton said. "It is the right time."

Bratton's decision took the city's political and police leadership by surprise. As Bratton flew back to Los Angeles on Tuesday night after finalizing the terms of his new job in New York, aides to his boss, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, said the mayor knew nothing of the planned departure.

Bratton informed the mayor of his decision to resign late Tuesday night, shortly after Villaraigosa returned on a flight from Iceland, where he had been vacationing for the last week. Villaraigosa did not provide any details of the conversation Wednesday, but a source familiar with the situation said Bratton was steadfast in his decision to leave.

A week ago, Bratton scheduled a meeting with the mayor for today, but did not specify what he wanted to discuss.

"With Chief Bratton at the helm, the Los Angeles Police Department transformed itself into a beacon of progress and professionalism, a department seen as a partner, not an adversary, no longer bound by the misdeeds of the past," Villaraigosa said.



Who will replace Bratton? And will it be an outsider or someone with an inside track?
Stay tuned for what will no doubt be a pretty interesting couple of months or so as the city struggles to find his replacement so soon after the department was released from its eight-year federal consent decree by a judge.





The library will be closing...earlier in Riverside


Expect to see a reduction of hours the libraries in Riverside will be open in the weeks ahead. Every library will be opening one hour later and close one hour sooner and on some days, branches will be locking their doors to city residents as part of the latest budget cuts.

The proposal to do this will be heading off to the city council for a vote (and hopefully a discussion) later this month.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

"The hours are more a product of our current economic situation," said Leonard Hernandez, who was interim library director for about six months before he was named to the job permanently July 27.

"We're making adjustments to, how do we efficiently provide service and how do we provide as close to the same level of service as we have now," Hernandez said.

The proposed changes still are being revised and likely will be presented to the council sometime in August, said Nancy Melendez, president of the library's board of trustees. The trustees give the final approval.

A draft proposal that the board discussed in July suggested operating every library but the Marcy and Casa Blanca branches from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Thursday, a two- or three-hour reduction for most locations.

Friday and Saturday hours would remain the same for all locations except Marcy, which would operate from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Tuesday through Saturday.

The Casa Blanca branch would close Mondays, while the Orange Terrace branch would be closed Sundays. The La Sierra branch would add Sunday hours.

The new computer-centered Arlanza branch would be staffed six days a week once it opens, which should happen in about a year.

With the massive layoffs of part-time employees and a lengthy delay to the renovation of the downtown library, it's not been the best of years for this long-time cultural institution in the City of the Arts and Innovation. Maybe next year.






Public Records Access Fees Make for Lines and Paralegals Setting up Office at Riverside Courthouse

Or

If you charge them, they will come

Not too long ago, the Riverside County Superior Court made cuts to its services and raised its fees in response to budget cuts in Sacramento. One of those changes was to eliminate the free service of being able to view and print court documents from civil cases online. To access those cases, you now have to pay a minimum charge of $7.50 to view even a one-page document and after 10 pages, you have to pay $0.07 up to a maximum charge of $40. Other counties like Los Angeles (which charges $4.75 per party search and Orange County offers you limited information online for free) have adopted the policy of charging people to access their public records online.

Perhaps the courts really hoped that by doing this, they were going to make serious money from online users but one outcome of tacking fees on theses services was that it caused more people to travel to the main courthouses in both halves of the county to access documents for free there and only have to pay $0.50 per page for copies. Which makes sense economically if you're interested in getting copies of documents that are not lengthy records.

People come to the basement of the old courthouse in Riverside to access records for free for all kinds of reasons. They search for probate records for deceased relatives, restraining orders in domestic violence cases or documents in criminal cases, small claims cases and traffic citations. And whereas the basement which holds seven computers, a couple of microfiche machines and an office used to be empty when civil documents were available for free online, now the people are starting to come back and line up just as they did before the courts offered online services.

Only now, it's several years later since the last time they came all the way from Perris and Moreno Valley even Murrieta and Menifee to access court records. The civil courts have slashed their administrative and clerical support to the bare bones and consequently, there's less employees to assist people than the last time they crowded the computer room.

In the room, there are seven computers. Two of them are reserved for attorneys and paralegals and there's currently a bit of a brouhaha among different parties at the courthouse to return access to them to the general public. So far that hasn't happened and the only thing that the public can access from them are forms for court actions like temporary restraining orders for example.

But with the people coming back, they are needed so that people don't have to wait as long. Besides them, five computers line the wall but not all five are available to the public. Because there are about four paralegals who come many days when the courthouse opens in the morning and they set up shop with their laptops and calculators and papers and pretty much spend the whole day using those three or four computers. Occasionally, they ask someone waiting if they only need computers for a short period of time and will allow them to do so but for the most part, you have to wait until they're done. Which doesn't leave someone who came a long way to get a copy of a probate document much time to do anything but try to beat the clock to get what they came for.

They joke about using them all day even as people wait in line hoping that they'll get a chance to look up their documents before the room closes at 4 p.m. On one day, they left at 3:30 p.m. but not before telling the clerk that they'd be back the next day at 8 a.m. to spend another day access records. The clerks laughed with them.

So a lot of the time, this leaves one computer, maybe two for the rest of the county. Which is not a lot and can make for long waiting times for everyone else. The polite thing to do is if people are waiting to use the computers is perhaps just to use them for a briefer period of time.

So far things have been fairly calm between the general public waiting and the paralegals who have set up shop in the courthouse basement but the summer's still young.



Heads We Settle; Tails We Don't Go to Trial



Occasionally, if you're lucky, you can still view records at the courthouse when the paralegals either are off elsewhere (and it's a great field with a great future even in a problematic economy but maybe the courts need to give them a bulk discount plan for internet records) and it's a bit more quiet.

And in the lawsuit filed by three current and former code enforcement officers against the City of Riverside, there was recently a protection order issued by a Riverside County Superior Court judge to seal the records that will be submitted by the city as evidence in the ongoing litigation. Records to be sealed include the performance evaluations involving former Code Enforcement Division Supervisor Mark Salazar (who allegedly was escorted out of City Hall at the end of his job stint). Also listed were a complaint and investigation involving an employee, Jana Cook and an EEOC complaint, investigation and settlement by employee, Anthony Bell.

But then it's not exactly as if the City of Riverside and the EEOC are strangers. Far from it, they are intimately intertwined in the city's troubled labor history to the extent that Black Public Works employees used to refer (and maybe they still do) to the city as the "plantation" complete with plantation politics.

Speaking of racial harassment complaints involving Riverside County, allegedly at least five or six grievances filed are being handled by one out of county attorney alone. But then that's not that surprising considering that it's been said that it's very rare for a Black man or woman to reach the management level or even just below that and receive a pension in Riverside. And some like Pedro Payne, Jim Smith and Tranda Drumwright (who was allegedly told by a current assistant city manager who once supervised her that she wasn't "management material") are either fired after filing complaints including with the state or "resign".

But the lawsuit involving employees Steve Livings, Mary Farfaro and Todd Solomon is so troubling in different ways including the city's decision to apparently banish several of its code enforcement employees to a metal shack amid toxic materials and without proper air conditioning or bathroom facilities in the corporate yard, the scene of some of the city's worst racial harassment and hostile working environment. The history there is so steeped with ugliness including human feces smeared on work vehicles and "KKK" and other racial slurs scribbled on walls as documented by former city employees, Rommel Dunbar and Anthony Joyner that one wonders if placing the employees viewed as trouble makers there was some kind of private joke in a city where allegedly sexist jokes are still told at luncheons involving city employees and some of these developers who do business in this city. If that's true, then that shows that Riverside hasn't progressed on that front much since the 1960s when allegedly elected officials used to hang to wet their whistles after meetings telling racist and sexist jokes at local watering holes.

And if allegations that Salazar sexually harassed employees including lifting the back of a female city employee's skirt and then making a sexual joke are true, then that and the many other allegations of ableism, sexism and retaliation for filing complaints will just mean that the city will irritate its current insurance carrier further by settling yet another case rather than going to trial. Because allegedly the insurance carrier has asked the city to try more cases rather than keep settling them all.

And even before now, one plaintiff who received a high settlement when a family member died in an officer-involved shooting was told by her attorney that the money paid to her was taken out of a city fund including possibly the general fund because the city lost its insurance carrier. She provided that information at a general meeting of the Community Police Review Commission not long after that case was processed by the commission. And others have said that the city is "self-insured" which is just another way of telling the city's residents that they're paying for the settlements. If this is the case, it doesn't give the city much motivation to stop creating the conditions which lead to these lawsuits in the first place if it believes it's got cash to throw away, ironic during a time when it's laying off employees. Implementing a professional work environment in some areas where history has shown that it's been lacking would be a good start. Because every settlement the city signs off on and pays off comes with an agreement between the parties that the city doesn't have to accept or take any responsibility.

City Attorney Gregory Priamos has gotten quite skillful at telling the press that every lawsuit and claim for damages is "frivolous" and the city will fight the allegations vigorously. Oh really? Then why did the lawsuit filed by the Douglas Steven Cloud family become the second highest financial settlement involving a wrongful death lawsuit in recent history less than two years after it was filed? After all, the only way the city would get close to spending that amount of cash on litigation would be if the case went to trial. After all a racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed against the city in 1997, took nearly seven years to hit the $675,000 mark.

Why did the city get its shirt handed back to it in a racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation lawsuit that went to trial, one it could have settled for $200,000?

But why should the city go to trial? Surely, its insurance carrier that allegedly is irritated that it hasn't has heard of the following two words.

Roger Sutton.

That's why it will be a snowball's day in Hell before the city ever tries a lawsuit under the jury trial system again particularly over any labor issues. And how many reasons are there? About 1.64 million reasons. And the money paid out is only part of it. Trials have a funny way of being hard to control even as parties for both sides appeal to the trial judge to limit the scope of testimony and the allowance of evidence. Sutton's trial twisted and turned away from one officer's removal from a police department division to men of color holding higher ranks in the police department testifying on the witness stand about hostility at the highest levels towards Black and Latino management employees during the 1990s.

It's difficult to estimate how much impact that testimony had on the jury's award but it would be naive to say that it had no effect. The issue that is really known is that when you take a case like this to trial, one with a colorful cast of characters with plenty to say, a list of allegations including some rather shocking ones and the plaintiff's represented by anyone from Morrison and Forrester then there's a tremendous risk that the testimony might take on a direction of its own and head off in the direction least anticipated and certainly least wanted by the city.

And that's what happened in the Sutton trial.


"Jerry's Kids": Term of endearment or insult?


"Jerry's kids" may have been a term of endearment as one current management employee testified at Sutton's trial or it might have been viewed as an insult to those who were placed in that category. "Jerry" in this case, wasn't "Jerry Lewis" who helps raise money for Muscular Dystrophy through telethons and other means. It was former Chief Jerry Carroll who didn't testify at the trial. At the time both parties were warring it out in court, he was allegedly in Costa Rica having moved on with his life. The use of "Jerry's Kids" in a way that was demeaning says something about both those who would use a term like that and those who were the targets and would be insulted by it. In both cases, it indicates prejudice against people who are disabled, because to be offended by it, you have to be offended by being compared to in this case, disabled kids. To be able to use it with a demeaning intent, you have to feel that there's something wrong with these children as well.




Exclusionary rule: a rule that provides that otherwise admissible evidence cannot be used in a criminal trial if it was the result of illegal police conduct

(and that's only one of its definitions)


And mentions in depositions of "exclusionary rule" which in this case had nothing to do with illegally conducting searches of people's residences, by men of color in management or at the supervisory level opens up the same cans of worms as well. Because face it, if you have people testifying about racial animus at the higher levels, how is the jury not going to at least consider that the trickle down theory might be the least of what applies in this case at the levels that are being managed or supervised?

After all, the police department's seen only two Black captains and neither of them felt like partying when they closed the doors on that chapter of their lives. In fact, at least one of them was quietly told that he might as well as retire because his current rank was the highest it would ever be. So he ended a rather lengthy career where he had never failed to be promoted the first time he tried, with a retirement but no party.

In the 1990s, the police department had its first Latino deputy chief in Mike Figueroa. Since then, three male Latino officers have ascended up to the upper management positions of the department although initially two of them were asked by the city manager's office to accept a condition of serving "at will" to be promoted. A third who was already a deputy chief knew that his career longevity at the police department depended on him refusing to accept that condition which essentially meant that upper management employees in the department wouldn't have the protections that came with their currently classified positions as captains. And some say that even captains would be placed in a situation of being in the "at will" category.

It was all moot when the city attorney's office came out of the shadows of a controversy and informed both the city manager's office and city council that public safety management positions couldn't be converted to "at will" positions. One wondered why the city attorney didn't pass along that little bit of information earlier in the process, until one remembers that Priamos like his predecessors has two responsibilities. The first is to protect the city council and mayor and the second, is to minimize the risk of civil liability to the city.



Filed one day; Settled the next

Okay, the lawsuit filed by a former probation Riverside Police Department officer who spent about two weeks working in the department before she was fired didn't settle quite this quickly but within two months of the city being served by Kelsy Metzler's attorney, the lawsuit was settled confidentially and quietly behind closed doors. She filed the lawsuit after allegedly being fired by the department not long after she had filed a sexual harassment complaint while attending the Riverside County Ben Clark Training Academy. There, she had alleged that she was sexually harassed by a male student currently working for the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. In her lawsuit, she had alleged that she had been told by two police officers that the department wasn't happy with her for filing the lawsuit and her academy supervisor refused to let her see a copy of her own complaint let alone be updated regarding its progress.

After she was fired inside a room at the police department, she alleged that while trying to apply for other law enforcement positions, she was blackballed and found out that someone was telling them that she slept with the academy's instructors. If she were subjected to an investigation for allegedly doing so, then it would seem that the instructors would also be investigated for inappropriate fraternization with students. And if she were found guilty, it would seem that they would be as well and actually disciplined more severely because of the positions they held and the power differentials that exist between instructors and students in any academic or learning environment. Unless there's some archaic double standard in place.

The interesting thing about her termination from the department was its timing. She was fired when she was going to the police department on the first day of the field training program to get her assignment. Which makes you wonder about the field training program and how it treats female trainees versus male ones in a department with a dismal retention rate of female officers compared to male ones (and "dismal"was the word chosen by the police chief) and over the past year or so I've heard some interesting if rather disturbing things about it. If they're true, then another expensive payday might be down the road for the city if any litigation is ever filed. Because after all, it's not the Internal Affairs Division that's conducting the trial. It's not taking place in the boardroom at City Hall. It's taking place in a public forum, which is the last place the city wants to air its unpleasant business.


But then again, the history of women complaining about different forms of sexism in this department being what it is, it could have a chilling effect on litigation filing. Just ask Christine Keers and that was over 10 years ago.But one thing that you can be certain of, is that if a serious problem exists then some day it's going to rear its head no matter how much people try to prevent that and bite. It might not happen right away but it will happen. If there's sexism in the department for example, the city will wind up paying millions of dollars (and some cases settle for much more paid out in the Sutton case) in litigation because it didn't make it go away. But the department as does the city always has a choice. Deal with it now or pay through the nose down the road.

And that will be the case with most any problem. Deal with it now or pay a lot more later on, either through a $22 million consent decree or hefty settlement or trial payout.

Call it the Sutton rule.


Still, if anyone knew to ask Priamos his assessment of the Metzler lawsuit, no doubt he would have said publicly that it was "frivolous" and that the city intended to vigorously defend itself from the allegations raised in it. But exactly how vigorously did it fight? The case hadn't even reached the judge's decision on the motion of demurrer before it was dismissed with the reason being the case was settled.

And if this case had gone to trial in Riverside County Superior Court years in the future (given how backlogged the civil trials currently are), what would have happened? Would the testimony have as much to do with the original case or would it paint a larger portrait of the police department in terms of how it treats its female officers? Would the city want to find out at trial?

The city apparently provided an answer to that second question fairly quickly.





Captain, who thou art picks you?


Also unlikely to see a trial date that actually results in a trial by jury is the lawsuit that's been filed by two police lieutenants, Tim Bacon and Darryl Hurt which was recently bifurcated, meaning that the issues raised by the plaintiffs will be played out in two different court systems, even though the lawsuit was originally filed in the U.S. District Court. After the debacle involving the Sutton trial, it will also be a snowball's chance in a very hot place before the city allows this case goes to trial no matter how "frivolous" the city attorney's office claims it is and how vigorously the city is fighting it. As we've seen in so many other lawsuits, the first year or so the city spends litigating its problematic lawsuits is all for show. It's like poker, with the bluff being that the city will allow the case to go to trial if the plaintiffs don't drop it and get the judge to charge them with the city's attorney fees. Call them on it in a case with any merit and the city's bluster will collapse like a house of cards and the case will be settled probably within six months to a year.

And if it keeps settling so many cases for much longer, it's likely that the city and any insurance carrier who pays out on civil litigation will part company at some point. Because insurance companies usually don't like being used like ATM machines by their customers.

The wide-sweeping lawsuit which raised allegations of mishandling of promotions by apparently handing them off to City Hall to carry out also highlighted a kind of power struggle taking place over control of the department between the city manager's office and its at-will employee, the police chief. With allegations of two council members threatening the lieutenants that they would be denied promotions for opposing them and city management employees telling them to "be careful" if they voted to sue the city on labor issues, it would be very interesting to see how a presiding judge in either federal or state court would handle the witnesses testifying in this case. But it's unlikely the city would risk a trial which would thrust issues that it prefers to keep behind closed doors out into the public arena in this case especially when considering the much wider scope of prospective witnesses testifying for either side, including current and former council members, city management employees and employees including the police chief from the police department.

If the allegations are true (and they actually make sense considering some observations I've noticed during the past several years), then any trial will probably wind up being open season for disclosure of exactly what relationship exists between City Hall particularly the seventh floor (but a healthy dose of reality from the fifth floor as well) and what appears to be a micromanaged police department. Just like the politics of management from a racial prism were aired out through testimony in the Sutton case, that's what could happen at a trial here as well with several different issues. Subpoenas tend to expand the scope of testimony at trials because after all, even a "hostile" witness can be more forthcoming on the witness stand if it's against their will to be there and talking can't as easily be held against them by irate bosses including those on trial.

What will be fascinating is to see how the management employees at City Hall and the police department testify and also how former Councilman Frank Schiavone and current councilman, Steve Adams fare on the witness stand under cross-examination as well. If you remember, both are alleged to have made statements indicating that they played some role or had some influence of the promotional process. According to the lawsuits, Adams allegedly told one lieutenant who campaigned against him that he would "never fucking get promoted" and Adams is fairly well known for his rather...colorful choice of language.

Unfortunately for the city, the prior living arrangements of the police chief and Schiavone won't help its case. If either or both are asked to answer questions about that on the witness stand, then that might just inch the blank check to the jury that much faster because how do you place the appropriate amount of separation between the two when one of them is being accused of influencing promotions in an inappropriate manner and the other one is encharged with making them?

That task might be tough on a jury but it would be much more difficult for the city's attorneys to sell that there's no issue involved at all but if the city goes to the trial, it will have to try. Just like in the Sutton case when they had to try very hard to paint that officer as a long-time loose cannon and disciplinary problem after his attorney methodically displayed 10 years of pretty positive employee evaluations by his supervisors using the court's Elmo projector. When you pit a plaintiff's argument with a strong paper trail against a Teflon defense by the defendant, what do you think is going to happen?

But then a lot of the blame for not recognizing any potential for problems involving conflict of interest would fall on the shoulders of City Attorney Gregory Priamos who it seems really needs to attend some seminar training on exactly on that topic (after he stumbled so badly on the appointment of the regional director of American Medical Response serving on the Community Police Review Commission) including that which could increase the city's civic liability so that he can better perform this function that he has designated for himself on these issues.

Also problematic for the city would be any testimony that City Manager Brad Hudson and Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis tried to retaliate against any of the Riverside Police Administrators' Association members (in this case its lieutenants ) for how they voted on whether or not to pursue legal action against the city. The sole purpose for obtaining such a list from the bargaining unit would be to find out which lieutenants had been "naughty" and which had been "nice" and to take some sort of action against those who voted to initiate litigation which the RPAA did concerning its health benefits package in 2006.

And allegedly one or both of the city management employees had told the two plaintiffs to "be careful" and they were issuing orders to high-ranking members of the department's management team to engage in retaliatory actions against the plaintiffs. If this is the case, then it would seem that there would be quite a puppet show going on with one department's employees having their strings pulled by the other. And if evidence through testimony and other means was produced in a public trial, it might put both entities in a position where it might be difficult to recover from and not just financially. And if it's true that you have an assistant city manager running around like a little Napoleon manipulating or trying to manipulate the department's management team, that's something that a city would definitely not want a jury (not to mention everyone else) to learn about through a trial.

Complicating the case and potentially embarrassing the city even further is that some of the allegations in the lawsuit opened the door on airing the entire episode that took place several years ago concerning the issuance of gun permits to Hudson and especially DeSantis who didn't even live in Riverside as everyone discovered when a woman in the city he does live in called 911 on him accusing him of brandishing a gun at her.

A complaint apparently was actually filed with the county grand jury against him and the Sheriff's Department (which took the report from the woman and was assigned to investigate it) but like many cases, it dissolved before it went very far.

In rare cases, out-of-city residents can be granted conceal and carry weapon permits by police agencies in another city but that didn't happen with DeSantis. Instead, the permit wound up being issued by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department so likely his case wasn't one that qualified for that exemption. The jury might be like everyone else scratching their heads as to why a mistake was made giving a permit to someone who lived in another city when it should have been caught fairly easily before the permit was even issued.

Instead, it was after the Press Enterprise came around asking questions that the permit for DeSantis was revoked. But it's amazing how many people including Second Amendment advocacy groups will be interested in following the testimony in any trial which addresses the permit issue, given that there was some active discussion of how stringent Riverside's police department usually is with people who aren't working in City Hall to the point where some individuals were considering a class-action lawsuit challenging the process. Also, that's one thorny issue that once it gets talked about on the witness stand, it will be difficult to contain within any narrowly set boundaries that the city might hope will keep it under control.

At any rate, if this case makes it to trial, it certainly will be an interesting endeavor but it's not likely that the city will want to take it that far no matter what its official position is now.





Press Enterprise Columnist Cassie MacDuff has one of the funnest jobs out there. She gets to write on all the political scandals in San Bernardino County that are putting it on the map and she's written some very good ones.





What language is easiest for English speakers to pick up? The answer is here. And it's true that the most important rule about learning a language is "use it or lose it". Although if you learned it once, you can can refresh your skills fairly easily since vocabulary is usually the first to go. At least that's what I hope.

National Night Out comes to Riverside

Bobby Bonds Park in the Eastside was the setting of one of the dozens of events taking place in Riverside on Aug. 4 to commemorate National Night Out. At least a dozen similar events took place in the Neighborhood Policing Center East and another dozen in the North NPC, according to Capt. John Carpenter who oversees the policing operations in both areas. Military personnel, police, fire and both Mayor Ron Loveridge and Ward Two Councilman Andrew Melendrez dropped by to check out the exhibits during the evening event.

Both the current NPC East Commander Vic Williams and the former one, Larry Gonzalez also appeared at the event. Gonzalez said he missed serving the Eastside but enjoys his new stint as the head of the METRO/SWAT and Aviation Divisions which was represented by SWAT officers, Brett Stennett and Vicente De La Torre. Sgt. Jay Greenstein who is currently assigned to the detectives division of the NPC East for the next two years also enjoyed the event.

[Officer Byrd takes a break from performing]

[Former NPC East Commander and current head of Special Operations, Larry Gonzalez (l) and Greenstein at Bobby Bonds Park]

[K9 Officer Ray Soto, "Toughest Competitor Alive" and his partner, Carat who've worked together since the retirement of Xian.]

[Sgt. Jay Greenstein, of the East NPC talking to the partner of "Officer Byrd"]






[Community members who dropped by the event checking out a military helicopter.]











Mayor Ron Loveridge who's running for another term in Riverside wrote that Riverside needs to embrace its labels or its identity.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

Among the most important messages conveyed when approved at the City Council meeting was the speed with which we must move. At City Manager Brad Hudson's request, the marketing team has already begun. The city Web site has been updated, electronic freeway signs will be emblazoned with the new slogan, and revisions are being made to city materials.

Future marketing plans include developing commercials to air on Channel 3, movie ads to play in theaters, and posters and postcards. Internet marketing outlets such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter will also play a role.

This is a call to action for our arts, business, education and civic sectors. Cross-promotional marketing with local organizations and businesses such as the Riverside Arts Council, The Mission Inn, and the Convention & Visitors Bureau will embed this new identity.

Even during the recessionary economy, perhaps especially during these trying times, Riverside must focus on creative, forward-looking goals and policies that inspire the best in all of us. Riverside is an exciting, urban, diverse and successful city characterized by the best in arts and innovation; it is time that we trumpet that message loud and clear.

What might work really well is to do the work on these areas and let those who enjoy the fruits of your efforts build your reputation for you. Creating labels is kind of like putting the cart before the horse. Before Riverside should market a brand name like "Arts and Innovation", which was its second choice behind "Arts and Culture" which led to a possible threatened lawsuit by another city, it should establish a track record of living up to that title. Business companies may be attracted by catchy logos and slogans but they'll soon enough look at a city's track record to back up those labels.

It would be better including economically speaking if Riverside's events and things like, festivals (back when it had them) could attract businesses and they would say, now this is the City of Arts and Innovation! Not okay, well you're the City of Arts and Innovation but your museum is struggling to keep its employees, your library building is getting old, your children's museum is long gone and your major cornerstone theater doesn't have a private foundation or two grounding it. You have some artistic festivals like the Thursday Arts Work but you need more, because after all, look at Coachella Valley and Indio and Temecula with their arts and cinema events that have national and even international reputations, although your annual movie festival is a good start.

As for art galleries, weren't some of those downtown in danger of the big Eminent Domain sweep several years back and artists and musicians had to band together to save them? That's the kind of spirit in your local talent that you want but not aimed against City Hall.

Beautiful murals going up but in one great irony, the talented artist was sued by the city for another form of expression and innovation in the political and public expression arenas that are steeped in the United States Constitution.




Contract Revoked!


Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein deserves credit for bringing this story to light. Nothing like putting a spotlight and some public exposure on a problematic situation of when the city attorney and city manager's offices decided to recommend renewing a contract with a company that had a serious dark cloud hanging over its head. Several city council members including Ward One Councilman Mike Gardner expressed concern about it and pulled the item from where it had been slipped on the consent calendar.






Read it and Sweep highlights some of the events that happened off and on the dais regarding the city's decision whether or not to keep doing business with a custodian firm run by two employees who had been charged with felonies in relation to workman's compensation insurance fraud.


Now City Hall has announced it's revoking that contract.


(excerpt)

Councilman Mike Gardner said Monday the city "will sever our business relationship as quickly as possible" with Sherman Oaks-based Bell Building Maintenance Co., which the state Franchise Tax Board said did not pay corporate taxes from 2004 to 2008. Officials expect to rebid the janitorial contract.

The California Department of Insurance said in April that Chan Hee Yang, president of Bell from at least 2000 to 2005, and employee Andrew Kim were arrested on suspicion of conspiracy and fraud for allegedly underpaying insurance premiums as well as payroll, unemployment and state disability insurance taxes.

The department said the company underpaid more than $6.3 million from 1998 to 2006.

The city of Riverside hired Bell in 2005 to clean its nine community centers as well as pools and park restrooms, parks director Ralph Nuñez said, adding, "Up to date we have received quality service."

The City Council was set to renew the $272,500 contract last Tuesday when Gardner pulled the item from the agenda after learning of the fraud case.

City management staff was aware of the case, Gardner said Monday, but they probably believed it was safe to proceed with the contract because the charges are pending, and a clause allows the city to cancel the contract in 30 days. City officials said they did check to see that Bell's insurance premiums are up to date.

Not surprisingly, the article attracted some comments on the newspaper's site.


(excerpt)



How in "heck" did this company go for five or more years not paying taxes and insurance and still get a Government contract with Riverside?Where are the audtis and monitoring that is required each year on these contracts? Obviously Mr. Hudson doesn't require a "line item budget" for everyone?



PunkassJBrewster 8 hours ago wrote:

yet another illustration of why outsourcing hurts more than it helps. Keep city jobs in the city to be done by citizens.


AmericaFirst 9 hours ago wrote:

whoozincharg....You took the words right out of my mouth, or in this case, my finger-tips.

It always ticks me off when I read about Riverside awarding a contract to an outside company.


whoozincharg 11 hours ago wrote:

We are encouraged to " SHOP RIVERSIDE ".

But it's okay for the City to hand out quarter million dollar contracts to an alledgedly corrupt firm in Sherman Oaks.

So what doesn't smell about that ??




Cheese and Crackers and the Bill


Here someone wrote about an alleged new requirement by the city to all people participating in the Downtown Thursday Art Walk that they must pay for permits to serve any kind of food, including apparently cheese and crackers, the favorite staple of artist exhibits everywhere.


Where's this money going? Please, just don't say it's the Riverside Downtown Partnership. Because unfortunately, they don't exactly have the best history of representing downtown businesses equally. Some now-gone businesses paid their tax money to the Partnership only to watch the exterior improvements they helped pay for limited to the pedestrian mall which wound up having to be ripped up just a few years later for between $10-$12 million worth of renovation which included replacing most of the infrastructure such as water pipes. And unfortunately, Main Street Riverside (or whatever it will be called) isn't the only street that has been improved externally for replacement of what lies beneath the roads including an antiquated sewer system.





Inland Empire city budgets are being hit hard by declining sales tax revenues.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



"We're not expecting a turnaround any time soon," said Paul Sundeen, chief financial officer and assistant city manager in Riverside. "We had projected that our sales tax would come in for the entire year (fiscal 2008-09) at about $43.6 million. We are now concerned it may drop to about $42.6 million, or $1 million less than was contemplated."

Riverside posted a 19 percent drop in sales taxes in the first quarter, on top of previous declines.

Overall, a chart compiled by the California State Board of Equalization shows 15 cities in Riverside County saw double-digit declines in sales and use taxes over the past year, and 10 cities in San Bernardino posted double-digit declines. Those are preliminary figures for fiscal 2008-09, which ended June 30.

As sales tax dollars shrink there are important implications because cities typically rely on that pool of money as their second- or third-largest source of revenue.

Redlands, for instance, relied on sales taxes for nearly 23 percent of overall revenue last year, behind property taxes.







Riverside County Public Defender Gary Windom receives an award.




However, the Press Enterprise Editorial Board had more words of criticism for Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco over the court room debacle that's been going on for several years now despite outside intervention from an emergency task force of judges dispatched by the state's highest court.


(excerpt)

The district attorney's case management philosophy -- a primary cause of the court logjam that state budget cuts will now exacerbate -- has long needed adjustment. In a report last year, 4th District Court of Appeal Justice Richard Huffman criticized the DA's "very restrictive policy on plea bargaining" as a central cause of the court congestion. Huffman also noted that Pacheco "does not acknowledge his responsibility to limit ... the criminal cases taken to trial to the judicial resources available within Riverside County." The county grand jury echoed those judgments in a report released in May.

Pacheco's office disagrees. Responding to Huffman's report, Assistant District Attorney Chuck Hughes said that his office can't control how many crimes are committed. He added that the courts "can't wash their hands of their obligation to provide courtrooms and judges to hear trials in our county."

But that position is law-and-order politics, not a serious approach to serving justice. Other counties manage to balance civil and criminal cases, even with challenging crime rates. And settling some cases out of court is simply efficient lawyering -- it saves taxpayers' money and often can achieve the same result as taking a case to trial.

Of course, Pacheco is not the only cause of clogged-up courts. The county has barely half the number of judges the Judicial Council recommends. Both defense lawyers and prosecutors seek too many trial postponements, and judges are too lenient in granting them -- a point the court emphasized in last week's decision.

But with the courts' hours cut, new judgeships delayed and state budget shortfalls likely for years, Pacheco holds the key to relieving court congestion in Riverside County. The district attorney needs to subdue his political instincts and begin to responsibly exercise his discretion.

San Bernardino County Supervisor Neil Derry wants to investigate the District Attorney's office that has been quite busy in that county investigating everyone else in politics it seems.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

This is the most opportune time to call for an investigation into these allegations of misconduct. Ramos and my colleagues on the Board of Supervisors would have you believe that an investigation will distract from, and impede, an ongoing investigation.

The district attorney is in the business of conducting investigations. That is his job. It would seem that the argument he and others want to make is that district attorneys can only be investigated after they are no longer in office. That is an indefensible argument.

More to the point, these investigations are being conducted by the Public Integrity Unit. Ramos is supposed to have an arm's-length relationship with this unit, ostensibly to protect the public from corrupt officials, not inoculate himself from being held accountable for his own actions.

Ultimately, the people who are saying that there is no smoke here are the very same ones that ignored the four-alarm fire that raged in the assessor's office.

Another politician gets arraigned. This time it's a councilman from Rancho Cucamonga who is pleading not guilty.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Court documents state that Gutierrez often performed political or city work while on county work time, a violation of county policy and state law. On several occasions he submitted work records that claimed he was in the assessor's office in San Bernardino all day, but cell phone records showed otherwise, prosecutors say.

Gutierrez also sought mileage reimbursement from Rancho Cucamonga for attending city functions on days when his work records claimed he was in the assessor's office, the court records show.




How much is San Bernardino County paying for a settlement in connection with a controversial shooting of a U.S. airman several years ago? About $1.5 million.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



The agreement between the county's attorneys and Elio Carrion comes just days before the two parties were to begin a civil trial in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.

If approved by the county Board of Supervisors later this month, the settlement would effectively close the book on drawn-out legal proceedings surrounding the Jan. 29, 2006, shooting that sparked national debate when it was captured on videotape off a darkened Chino street.

"The county had tremendous respect for Mr. Carrion," said Dana Alden Fox, a lead attorney representing San Bernardino County. "It was an unfortunate shooting, and we respect the fact that he worked hard to get better, got back to work and got back to his life."

Attorneys for Carrion could not be reached for comment late Tuesday.






A Boston Police Department officer was suspended for making a racial slur about Henry Louis Gates, jr. calling him a "jungle monkey".





Suspensions of police officers in the Atlanta Police Department add up in time and pay especially since there's a backlog of case hearings.


(excerpt, Atlanta Journal-Constitution)



Lengthy suspensions such as Longe’s are not unusual in the Atlanta Police Department. Six officers who were suspended after the notorious Kathryn Johnston shooting in 2006 remain off the job with pay even though federal and state authorities have determined five of them will not be charged with crimes, leaving the city free to pursue firing or reinstating them. (The sixth is being investigated by prosecutors on an unrelated case.)

These officers are among 26 suspended cops on a list Atlanta police recently provided to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The list, from late May, includes several officers facing serious charges including sexual assault, felony domestic battery, aggravated assault and even murder.

While the number of suspended officers represents a fraction of the APD force, it is far higher than any other large metro Atlanta department.

Seventeen of the 26 suspended officers have not been charged with crimes and have continued to earn paychecks, most working administrative duty without a badge and gun. This is at a time when high-profile crimes and a shortage of cops on Atlanta’s streets have become hot-button issues, prompting a new crime-fighting plan announced last week by Mayor Shirley Franklin and Police Chief Richard Pennington.

The cumulative amount of pay the 17 suspended officers have received — about 290 months’ worth of salary — could put at least 24 officers on the street for a year.




Job opening:


EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
CITY OF MIAMI CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP)

Salary Range: $80,000-$135, 000 Annually. Closing Date: When a sufficient number
Salary dependent on qualifications and experience. of qualified applicants have applied.
Apply Immediately!
.
The City of Miami Civilian Investigative Panel (CIP) seeks an Executive Director for the overall operation and management of the Office. The individual is appointed by and reports directly to a 13-member volunteer Panel. This is a full-time, unclassified, executive level position.

RESPONSIBILITIES: The CIP Executive Director is responsible for the organizational development and management of CIP office and staff, and coordination of the activities of the volunteer Panel. Establishes goals, policies and procedures for the CIP and ensures staff compliance. Coordinates research and analyses of police policies, procedures and activities to enhance public accountability and professionalism in the delivery of services. Writes reports for review by Board members. Researches funding opportunities to further the cause of the CIP's mission. Conducts budget forecasting and reviews. Responsible for the community relations and outreach functions for the CIP. Ensures that staff and CIP members comply with training and development requirements. Coordinates and/or hosts training conferences or workshops. Coordinates and facilitates meetings of the CIP. Responds to directives and requirements of the Panel. Meets regularly with the City Manager or his designee, police command staff, interdepartmental personnel, community organizations and citizens on matters of mutual concern. Forms alliances with national and international civilian oversight entities, law enforcement and related agencies to develop and implement policies to enhance the oversight process. Performs other duties as required.

QUALIFICATIONS: A Bachelor's degree in Business Administration, Criminology, Criminal Justice, Political Science, Education, Psychology, Public Administration or related field. Five years of management experience required in one of the listed fields. A Master's degree or a Juris Doctorate degree may substitute for the above requirements on a year for year basis; however, it shall not substitute for the required supervisory experience.

SUBMIT EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION, RESUME, COPY OF DRIVER'S LICENSE AND EDUCATIONAL CREDENTIALS TO:
Thomas J. Rebull, Chairperson
Civilian Investigative Panel
Executive Director Recruitment
155 S. Miami Avenue, PH 1B
Miami, Fl. 33130
Information and Application may be downloaded at www.miamigov. com/cip.
The City of Miami is an equal opportunity employer and does not discriminate. Eligible veterans receive preference in employment in accordance with Florida State Statute 295.07. If veteran's preference is being claimed, it must be indicated on the application form, and proper documentation must be submitted with the application.





Wi Fi Upgrade Update:


There were some outages in parts of the city after the city fine tuned its Wi Fi network on Saturday afternoon causing access points in some areas to go down. AT&T's Wayport dispatched technicians today to repair several access points with network connections that went down in Canyon Crest. By nightfall, they were back in service and loading pages at a very high speed.

One thing about the Wi Fi is that even though it has problems, its technical support has always been excellent.









Event:



Riverside Neighborhood Partnership Annual Meeting and Caucuses will be held to among other things elect representatives to the Riverside Neighborhood Partnership. Just hope that you don't get elected and the city sends you a letter announcing a sudden change in the rules voiding the election.

Saturday, Oct. 24 at 9 a.m.-Noon

Stratton Community Center, Bordwell Park, Eastside