Election 2009: Who's your mayor?

Riverside, the "Most Livable City" and the "City of Arts and Innovation" has adopted a new nickname: a "recovery zone", a designation for cities in the country worst hit by the recession. As titles go, it's not quite up there with "City of Arts and Innovation", "America's Most Livable City" or the $38,000 champion, the "All-American City", but it's not bad because it might bring in some stimulus cash unlike its predecessors. And if you have to sell the city's estimated 14% unemployment rate and its hideously high housing foreclosure rate, you might as well get some dollars coming your way.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

The City Council voted Tuesday, 6-0, to declare Riverside a "recovery zone," which makes it eligible for the funding. Councilman Andy Melendrez was absent.

To qualify as a recovery zone, a city must have a significant level of unemployment, poverty, home foreclosures or other economic distress.

Riverside's unemployment is about 14 percent, and foreclosed homes represent about 4 percent of the city's housing stock, which is "relatively small compared to some of our neighboring communities, but it is still higher than we'd ideally like to have it," Assistant Development Director Kevin Palmer said earlier Tuesday.

In the midst of all this relabeling of the city, there's a mayoral race going on in Riverside and as you know, two mayoral candidates who have declared are squaring off. Riverside's somewhat removed from the days when individuals who have been charged with manslaughter for stabbing someone literally in the back faced off against those accused of more figuratively, stabbing people in the back (as most politicians are accused of one time or another) but despite the lack of colorful backgrounds of some candidates, the mayoral race proves to be a memorable contest even if the forecast might appear one-sided on paper.

This year should be no exception, with perennial incumbent, Ron Loveridge facing off against former councilman, Art Gage. Loveridge hasn't lost an election for either councilman or mayor for a long time if ever. Gage lost his reelection bid just two years ago to current Ward Three Councilman Rusty Bailey.

Unlike some people, I don't look at Gage's entrance in the mayor's race and laugh at it like it's a joke. It's good that someone stepped in the race to try to make an election out of it rather than a coronation like you often find in some of the county law enforcement and judicial contests during most election cycles. In a contest between two candidates, the issues impacting a city are more likely to receive an airing in both debate forums and in the media as well than in a one-horse walkover. Issues like the economic downturn and its impact on the city's general funds, layoffs and this ever-present reserve of $45 million that we keep hearing and reading about. Is there a much touted financial reserve? Probably. Is it anywhere near that amount? Not very likely. Will it be spun one way or another during this election cycle? We'll have to wait to find out.

Hopefully, more political debates involving the candidates will be held to give the voting public more access to learning about where their candidates stand on the issues, meaning that you won't have to shell out major dollars for a lunch or dinner in order to hear the mayoral candidates talk on the issues impacting this city and how if elected as mayor, they will address them with what few powers they will have in a city with a weak mayor system. Of course, the influence and power of most mayors is felt behind the scenes and as the chairs of city council meetings. A power that Loveridge has developed and welded skillfully during the past decade or so.

But it's commonly speculated that Loveridge was originally going to step down when his current term was up rather than bother raising a campaign chest (which he does very effectively)and waging another trip down the campaign trail which can be pretty extensive in a citywide election. After all, Riverside's growing into a fairly big city, both area-wise (through annexations) and population (through births, immigration and annexations), certainly much bigger than it was when Loveridge first took office in early 1994.

The guy has his own page on Wikipedia but maybe at the time the thought of fighting over an abbreviated term (as part of a election renovation package approved by voters several years ago) didn't really appeal to him.

Loveridge allegedly changed his mind about not running when he decided he wanted to be the next president of the League of Cities, a national organization of elected officials from different cities. In fact, 2009 was previously speculated by the media including the Inland Empire Monthly magazine of being a wide-open election and it ran an article interviewing two men who were council members at the time who flirted with the prospect of running for the mayor's position. Today both of them are unemployed by the city and one of them, Gage is indeed running for mayor but he's running against Loveridge.


Lately, Gage has become a populist of sorts, just check out his platform on his Web site. The guy who used to be backed by the once idolized but currently reviled developer, Doug Jacobs (boo! hiss!). Jacobs, (who's the city's current equivalent of Darth Vader until he's replaced and returns to being Anakin Skywalker), was associated with Gage when they were planning to try out Eminent Domain on homes near the Magnolia Center. But now Gage is presenting himself through this platform by turning the focus away from ED (which isn't mentioned on the page at all). Instead, he's retraining his focus towards emphasizing the infrastructure portion of the Riverside Renaissance over the picturesque portion (which includes the infamous downtown business seizures) which makes more sense than digging up street dividers to put drought resistant foliage on them or widening streets and then having to dig them up later to fix water mains and replace sewer systems. This distinction wasn't made by any elected official who starred in the Renaissance unveiling and love-in at the Riverside Municipal Auditorium several years ago and anyone who brought it up was treated like a skunk would be at a pool party.

And it would be refreshing to see a political candidate including in the mayoral race start asking questions about where all this Renaissance money is coming from because of alleged double and triple billing on some projects and a lack of listed financial source on some Riverside Renaissance projects that have gone to project engineers. Not to mention, the question that begged to be asked. How long did it really take the city to find out that a former development employee was trying to embezzle money from the Magnolia Police Station capital project to finance his landscaping expenses (and apparently those included on a list of clients all looking to get theirs done too)?

Paul Davis, the new councilman in the fourth ward ran on a platform of financial accountability including with Riverside Renaissance which has done few or no favors in getting its supporters on the dais elected so far. And he's done some action in that area but what of the mayoral candidates? What can they promise in this area?

Free Speech for Me but not for Thee

Gage talks about increasing public participation at city council meetings by making them more user-friendly, first by trying to push for the reversal of the infamous July 2005 which imposed restrictions on public participation at city council meetings including banning the public from being able to pull items from the consent calendar. That motion was pushed and passed by the city officials like Betro and Schiavone who claimed to be in favor of enhancing public participation. Gage also wants to push for the revoking of the use of speaker cards for public comment, fully recognizing that these cards provide the mayor or mayor pro tem of the meeting to exercise power over who gets to speak, when and in what order. Loveridge has put this power to full use allowing the people he likes including those who have endorsed him to speak first and shuttling those he dislikes towards the end of the list of speakers, perhaps hoping that by the time those speakers are gotten to, most of the audience will have left.

Gage can afford to take a stand on the issue of the consent calendar because he cast the sole (and some watchdogs say, very safe) vote against it. Most of those who voted in favor for restricting the expression of city residents at meetings are no longer on the dais but those who ran at least partly on platforms to liberate public participation have yet to even do an iota to act on their pledges. Would Gage be any different if elected? Perhaps, but it's not like he can cast a vote (except in a very unlikely tie) though he could veto any further restrictions which could come down the pike as long as only four council members supported them.

I (heart) the CPRC (but my fingers are crossed)

There was a time for both Loveridge and Gage when they said they supported the CPRC. Loveridge back in the turbulent year of 1999 when he was quoted as saying that he thought the value of civilian oversight was "symbolic". He must have been shocked when his creation, the Mayor's Use of Force (where he could have come out looking like Frankenstein) came up with the recommendation to research various forms of civilian review to see which one would best suit Riverside. He recovered and eventually the city council passed the weakest form of civilian oversight it could back door into a vote (over a stronger, more independent model it fronted in public) and since then, his support of the beleaguered and currently micromanaged commission has waffled from threatening to veto against any attempt to gut its budget in 2004, when Gage in fact had proposed a motion to do just that, to tacitly supporting the recent decision to gut its charter mandated ability to do investigations of officer-involved deaths. And yes, gutted is the perfect word to use and anyone doubting that, should ask themselves just two simple questions.

How many officer-involved deaths have taken place since the Hudson directive? 4


How many investigations have been initiated involving these deaths, including two that have passed or are approaching their first year anniversaries? Zero

So that should quash any doubts that the city's true intent wasn't to delay these independent investigations, it was to eliminate them. And it's likely that both Gage and Loveridge would support the quashing of these investigations, and it's likely that Gage would be the louder of the two. After all, Gage pushed a motion to gut the funding of the CPRC by up to 90% (to put its budget in line with that of the Human Relations Commission) and he called the commission a piece of junk or trash at an evening city council meeting not long after. A comment he has never apologized for making. However, when he first ran for city council and got elected, he said that he had supported it, but having received over $13,000 from the Riverside Police Officers' Association's political action committee during an era when it refused to support candidates who didn't oppose the CPRC, pretty much belied his words which incidentally came back to haunt him after his 180 degree turn on the CPRC became apparent certainly by the "trash" comment.

However, despite that at least a voter knows he can't stand the CPRC and will act accordingly, whereas with Loveridge, he will stand by and tacitly support the gutting of the CPRC's charter powers and then say he's actually helping it perform better and be more accountable to city residents. So while you have two candidates who really are not supporters of the CPRC, at least one is more honest about it than the other but the actions of both when they were in positions of leadership, whether executive or legislative, speak louder than their words.

And really, the last thing the dais needs is another elected official who claims to be a staunch supporter of the CPRC who then votes to dilute its charter powers, in other words, killing it with kindness. The voters in the past two elections certainly haven't been fooled.

Who's endorsing who?

Loveridge has already picked up one media endorsement. He'll probably pick up quite a few more endorsements. But what's more telling is that just when you thought you didn't need a reminder of how the city council is an exclusive club, you'll be reminded once again when it pretty much gives a blanket endorsement to a fellow dais mate. And sure enough if you check Loveridge's scrolling endorsement list on his campaign site, you'll find that virtually everyone in the current city council is endorsing him with the sole exception of the most recent addition, Councilman Paul Davis. Davis, if you recall, was endorsed by Gage in his successful election but so far hasn't publicly endorsed either candidate. So the city council is one short of being a big happy political family.


What's fascinating to see isn't when long-time city council members endorse their fellow incumbents or even when past city officials like Ed Adkison, Dom Betro and Frank Schiavone (all of whom endorsed Loveridge over Gage), it's when the more recently elected officials like Rusty Bailey and Mike Gardner do it, because after all, when they ran for election, they ran against candidates who were endorsed by the partial city council (in Bailey's case though Schiavone played a huge role in his election campaign thus pretty much owning him for a while) or the entire city council as was more the case in the 2007 election where Gardner beat Betro in a squeaker that kept people in suspense for nearly a month.

How quickly they learn the game and become part of it. Just like Betro and Gage before them, only it remains to be seen whether they'll parlay their lessons into reelections two years from now. And how any challengers particularly if there are any grass-roots campaigns launched (which right now looks more likely in Bailey's ward) and how these candidates will view the incumbents during that election cycle. Interesting also, because what the last two election cycles have taught any aspiring candidate or election consultant (and there's quite a few of them out there) is that you don't need a ton of money to win an election (at least not on the council although it still might be to win the mayor's race). You need a good amount of money to work with, but more importantly than that, you need a good campaigning team of foot soldiers to canvass the voters preferably door to door and a lot of shoe leather.

Betro won his election on the campaign trail, not the money trail. He lost his reelection bid to Gardner who won on the campaign trail, not the money trail. And neither incumbent Nancy Hart nor challenger Davis raised a ton of money to wage their successful campaigns in Wards Six and Four during the last cycle. The only winners of high-priced developer funded campaigns in recent years have been Bailey and in another two-round squeaker Adams. It will be interesting to see how Gardner fares in 2011 and Davis fares in 2013 (if either or both choose to run again) and just as importantly, what kind of campaigns they will wage. Will either make Betro's mistake? It all remains to be seen and there's plenty of time to find out.


Loveridge's endorsement list is here. Gage is asking for endorsements here but hasn't provided a list online yet.






Loveridge's campaign site is here and Gage's is here so read up on them before you vote.






Residents of the city and the county square off again over the controversial closure of Dufferin street.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Bonnie Salazar, who lives at the corner of Stewart Street and Dufferin Avenue, has waited a long time for the road closure, which she said was supposed to happen six years ago. For her and others who had to deal with large amounts of traffic on a street that wasn't equipped for it, she said, the closure has been a relief.

"I think that we still have a few people that honk when they go by, and I know they're unhappy, but they didn't have a freeway in front of their house," Salazar said.

However, county residents in subdivisions south of McAllister say it made things worse for them.

Alicia Hoyer, a county resident who organized a community meeting on the issue in August, said she's worried because her son needed medical attention in May, and ambulances and fire trucks have typically gotten to her neighborhood through Dufferin.

The city promised to install emergency access gates when the street closure was approved, but that won't be done until permanent changes are made to Dufferin. The work should be done by December, said Tom Boyd, the city's deputy public works director. For now, temporary barriers block the street.

Instead of taking it quietly, some county residents have been pressing city and county elected officials to find a solution -- reopen Dufferin for now, build Street A, or extend Stewart Street to connect to McAllister Parkway.

Residents also have opted to vote with their wallets, launching a "Shop Corona" campaign once they learned the city planned to close the street.

County resident Jerry Close said he buys his woodworking supplies at a Corona store instead of the Lowe's in Riverside, and he doesn't spend money at the Galleria on Tyler any more.





Has the Riverside County Superior Court system eliminated its backlog on trials?


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



There is still a huge caseload in civil and criminal courts, including about 49 pending death-penalty cases, which can take on average 10-to-12 weeks of court time. Neighboring San Bernardino County has 11 pending capital punishment cases, by comparison.

Riverside County's judges and commissioners are far fewer than the population requires, and rely on a supplement of retired judges to help keep things running.

On Aug. 26 there were 16 retired judges hearing cases in Riverside County, about 21 percent of the county's 76 funded judge and commissioner positions. A caseload study used by the state Judicial Council says the county should have 142 judicial positions.

One year ago there were five courts available in Riverside County to hear civil trials, four of them initiated by then-presiding Judge Richard Fields and specially funded by the state Administrative Office of the Courts to reduce the county's civil case backlog.

The fifth was Superior Court Judge Gary Tranbarger's court. He is automatically challenged by the district attorney's office to block hearing any criminal case assigned to him.

Now there are eight courts dedicated to hearing civil trials. Cahraman ordered one open in February, under objection from the district attorney's office, and has opened two more since

"It is up to the court to assign courtrooms," Chief Assistant District Attorney Sue Steding said in a recent interview. "The court is well aware of the issues of criminal case backlog, and the issues that need to be addressed with that."

Civil trial judges are still being used for criminal matters. There currently are 12 courts formally designated to hear civil trials.

But having eight courts available has stepped up the number of resolved cases. They either go to trial or settle with an open courtroom waiting.

From January to June of this year there were 145 civil trials, on track for 290 for the year -- "More than we have ever done," Cahraman said.





Speaking of criminal trials, will there be a change of venue in the case involving a high-ranking fire fighter from the Los Angeles County Fire Department who's been charged with animal cruelty?





An Early Warning System devised for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department appears to be working quite well and has shown a relationship between the number of complaints a deputy gets, sustained or not, and the amount of trouble that deputy causes the department.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)




The study concluded that there is a strong link between the number of complaints filed against a deputy -- proven or not -- and the possibility that the deputy will eventually get into serious trouble and become a liability for the department

The monitoring system, which tracks complaints, conduct and use of force, was established in 1993 after a scathing report by a special commission found a "disturbing" pattern of excessive force and mistreatment of minorities in the Sheriff's Department.

The early-warning system was the first of its kind in the nation, according to Merrick Bobb, special counsel for the county Board of Supervisors.

Known as the Personnel Performance Index, the system has succeeded in identifying deputies with a likelihood of getting into trouble and has allowed the department to mentor the officers and monitor their behavior, Bobb said.

"An outstanding officer suddenly going bad is rare," he wrote in his semiannual report on the Sheriff's Department. "Far more often, the thinking goes, officers involved in an incident especially harmful to the department or the community have a history of substandard or worrisome performance."

The study examined the records of 561 deputies and found that officers who had been named in use-of-force complaints, even if the accusations were unproven, were more likely to be involved in shootings and successful lawsuits against the department.

For every four to five allegations of improper use of force lodged against a deputy, there was an average increase of one shooting, Bobb said.

Although the system cannot predict whether a deputy will become involved in a shooting, Bobb said it "can say deputies with five allegations are generally more likely to be involved in more shootings on patrol."






Is the Pittsburgh Police Department trained on how to address the First Amendment? The ACLU in that city is going to court to find out.





In Rhode Island, a state police officer punched out a sergeant at a fund raising event.




Jericho Police Department in Arkansas is under investigation.

The investigation stems from this disturbing incident where a fire chief was shot by a police officer inside a courtroom over a dispute involving speed bumps. That's taking the tension that exists between the two professions a little bit too far. The fireman is recovering but not surprisingly the incident has attracted investigations.


Also the subject of a deepening probe is the New Orleans Police Department which is being investigated by the United States Justice Department.


(excerpt, The Times Picayune)




Federal agents, meanwhile, have been studying police e-mails and documents obtained by subpoena -- as well as through a surprise search warrant executed on the New Orleans Police Department homicide office -- in an attempt to ferret out exactly what happened in the chaotic days after the storm.

The feds also have sent subpoenas seeking photographs to The Times-Picayune, and they have ordered a former photographer for the paper to testify before the grand jury.

Observers and authorities say the investigations, and the charges they are likely to result in, could shake the very foundation of the New Orleans Police Department in ways that haven't been seen since the Len Davis murder-for-hire case in the mid-1990s. Davis, who essentially ran a drug-protection racket comprised of fellow NOPD officers, was sentenced to death for ordering the execution of a woman who filed a complaint against him.

But the reverberations from the new cases could extend well beyond the department. The cases are likely to get international publicity and heighten already-deep mistrust of the Police Department. And, as did other notorious Katrina cases -- such as allegations of euthanasia at Memorial Medical Center and of gross neglect at St. Rita's nursing home -- the cases will force New Orleanians to confront an uncomfortable and perhaps unanswerable question: How accountable should people be for the actions they take in desperate times?

Led by prosecutors from the U.S. Department of Justice civil rights division and conducted by FBI agents, the simultaneous federal investigations are focused on two separate police actions -- one on the Danziger Bridge in eastern New Orleans and the other in Algiers. Federal authorities are also exploring allegations of vigilante violence by civilians in Algiers Point.





After changes were made in Milwaukee Police Department's complaints system, the number of them increased.



(excerpt, Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel)



He attributes the jump to the fact it has become a lot easier to file a complaint since an overhaul of the commission last year, pilot changes that were formally adopted this summer.

"We're much more accessible," Tobin said, and registering a beef about a police officer "is a much different, much simpler process."

Prompted by a consultant's report, a Supreme Court opinion and growing citizen frustration, the commission announced last year major changes in how it would handle complaints. The Milwaukee Police Association sued the agency, saying the new approach was unfair to officers.

But the lawsuit was dismissed last month after the commission and the union agreed to new parameters about mediation. The commission agreed that its investigators would follow the same rules of notice and representation for officers that apply when the department's own Professional Performance Department investigates officers internally, according to Tobin and union president John Balcerzak.

"I commend the city," Balcerzak said. "They kept the integrity of the process but heard our concerns."

Last year, the commission accepted a record 120 formal complaints. This year, however, it began distinguishing complaints as formal or informal. The majority of this year's complaints - 122 - were of the latter type. More than 90% of them had been closed by the time of the report. Tobin said they are often more like inquiries than complaints, by residents who want to know if something an officer did or didn't do is standard procedure. They get a "rapid resolution," in the form of a response from a police supervisor, which Tobin reviews.

Of the formal complaints, 42 were still under investigation in July.





Race Day for Rachel Alexandra

provides kind of an interesting look at an afternoon in the life of a racing legend in the making.

Happy Labor Day to Riverside's city employees

The mayoral election got off with a bang as the first political debate of the season pitted incumbent Ron Loveridge against challenger and former councilman, Art Gage. Of course, since it was sponsored by the Greater Chambers of Commerce in Riverside, you had to pay to watch it. If there's any similar debates that can be accessed by prospective voters for free, hopefully they'll be sponsored by organizations like the League of Women's Voters and Latino Network. in the next couple of months before the votes are tallied the first Tuesday in November.

Until then, most of Riverside had to read about it.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

Loveridge and Gage squared off Wednesday for the first time at a mayoral candidates' forum at the Riverside Convention Center. About 80 people attended the event hosted by the Greater Riverside Chambers of Commerce.

Gage started talking about the city's economy right away, using his opening comments to suggest that the city revive an incentive program that discounted utility bills for new businesses.

He also said the city needs to recruit big companies, and he criticized how long it took to get two recent restaurant projects approved.

"We have to become the business-friendly city," Gage said. "We are not that -- not when it takes two years to put in a restaurant."

Loveridge said city officials are bringing "a laser-like focus" to improving the economy, noting that a report due out by December will offer short- and long-term strategies to boost business in Riverside.

He said he's working with other city officials on new approaches to encourage residents to shop locally, and they're pushing the city as the place for a stop on a planned high-speed rail line.

"The next several years, economic development must be the most important goal," he said.

Not surprising, the anonymous commenters at the PE site had plenty to say about this debate and the election season is still very young!


(excerpts)




I'm all for improving the cities economy and workforce..but if the city keeps relying on the good ol' construction/warehousing & manufacturing....we won't get very far. To keep this City moving they need to find ways to recruit money generating big business with a vision of diversity in the outlook. We can't progress with the basics (warehousing, manufacturing and construction)..they are not reliable when things take a downward turn..as we've seen.

Bring in a mixture of banking...law firms..software companies..medical/research...those provide a diversity and plethora of jobs for the city..and pay well. with those..come money, a highly skilled work force and a wall to hold the region up during a 'recession'. Breaking away from the current job base and relying on home building (which fell hard as we just seen) is the first step.

If leaders would work together instead of as numero uno and put into place the plans they say are so grand and needed and not putting off for another 30 years..things will start to work as visioned. But to reach that vision..uh...it takes more that just blah blah blah talk used to get elected. Worry about the city, it's citizens and stick to your words is what part of it comes down to. Don't use 'economy' just for election purposes..actually do something besides talking about it..get the city moving.





CS, There is a lot more to it. Bottom line, Riverside is NOT business friendly and are very unethical.

I have read some of your other post and agree with you :-)





I HAVE LIVED IN RIVERSIDE SINCE 1950 AND RIVERSIDES "FATHERS" HAVE ALWAYS SHUT DOWN NEW AND/OR BIG BUSINESS. IT WOULD HAVE SEEMED THAT THEY WANTED A "SMALL TOWN" FOREVER. NOW THEY WANT TO OPEN RIVERSIDE UP, BUT TO WHO'S ADVANTAGE? DOWNTOWN IS A JOKE, BUT SOMEONE IS MAKING A LOT OF MONEY FROM IT. WHEN WE NEEDED INDUSTRY ON THE OUTSKIRTS, THEY WERE TOLD NO. I REALLY DO NOT GIVE A DAMN WHO IS MAYOR, THEY ALL LIE, WHICH IS EASY TO TELL.............THIER LIPS ARE MOVING. BUT, I SURE WOULD LIKE TO SEE RIVERSIDE AND IT'S PEOPLE'S ECONOMIC'S TO BE TAKEN UP A STEP OR TWO.



What a surprise. Loveridge has another report due out in December. I guess that one will be just as helpful as the mountains of reports that have accumulated in his offices for thirty years. For heaven's sake, Ron, do something for a change!



Gage - I really want to support you. Recuiting big companies that are NOT looking for minumum wage workers is paramount. It will solve most of our problems. Loosen the credit log jam, are you crazy? There is NO log jam. There are multiple offers on every decent home in the city. Just stay very focused on bringing lots and lots of medium and high paying jobs to the area and you will be a true hero of Riverside and the surrounding areas.




Some are especially critical.


(excerpts)



Loveridge is a crook. I am a Riverside businessman and Loveridge must be getting money put in his back pocket to allow companies that win bids not to comply to the specs on the bid sheet. I brought it to his attention by email and his response was 5 words and his initials ROL.

So loveridge. I hope you rot in hell with all your other crooked buddies in your clan.






Both are too old and no new ideas. Gage might be senile if he thinks that Riverside could become like the OC Performing Arts Center.



Both are an embarassment. One slightly more than the other.

Flip a coin.


Ouch, ouch and...ouch.

A Victory for Chinatown

A ruling by a Riverside County Superior Court judge might have put an end to developer Doug Jacobs' construction of a project on that historical site. Both sides, the Save Our Chinatown Committee and developer (and campaign donor) Doug Jacobs said on the record that they "won" the decision. It remains to be seen exactly what will happen but it was a great outcome for the SOCC, even if Jacobs, the Riverside County Board of Education which sorely needs the cash (with the city fulfilling its designated role as the land dealing middleman) come up with some kind of financial understanding behind closed doors. After all, it wouldn't be the first time that's happened.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




The Save Our Chinatown Committee on Friday claimed victory in the decision, which said a pending deal to sell the Chinatown site can't be completed because the seller didn't follow the law.

Committee members said in a written statement they believe the ruling "opens the way to a possible settlement that will preserve the site."

The Tuesday ruling from Judge Sharon Waters did not stray from a tentative ruling she issued in July. It could slow or potentially derail developer Doug Jacobs' plans to put a medical building on the site.

Jacobs made a deal in 2007 to buy the 2.3-acre site from the Riverside County office of education. The city of Riverside later approved Jacob's development plans.

The committee challenged the land sale and the city's approval of the medical building. Waters' final ruling maintains the city's actions followed state environmental law, but the education office did not follow procedures for selling surplus land.

Riverside County board of education officials are disappointed with the ruling and "believe the court misapplied the relevant law to the circumstances of this case," a written statement from board President Adolfo Mediano Jr. said.

The board will review its legal options, Mediano said in the statement.

Why has the CPRC shrunk?

The Inland Empire Weekly comments briefly on the Community Police Review Commission's decision to ban minority reports and one of its main points is how the vote to attempt to eliminate dissent registered at 4-2 on a commission with nine members. It concluded that not everyone showed up and it's right concerning two out of three of the commissioners missing in action as of late.



(excerpt)


Speaking of marginalizing itself, the commission’s 4-2 vote means that three members of the nine-member commission didn’t even show up at the meeting.



Actually, one of the missing commissioners doesn't exist at all, at least not until the latest one appointed passes his Live Scan and is sworn in to his position. But the other two, John Brandriff and Brian Pearcy have either not shown up lately for night sessions (Pearcy) or have a history of missing key votes (Brandriff). In fact, if both of them miss the same meeting, then you know something's up or something's coming up and that's a shame because they both bring a lot to the table. Both of them are more than capable at throwing questions out that the rubber stamping contingent can't answer without trying to punish them through another blanket vote stripping away some vestige of independence the commission enjoys.

It's just that one wonders if it's a question of whether or not they want to sit at the table anymore.

Rumor is, that they're tired of attending the meetings which have deteriorated under the appointment of a series of essentially commissioners with ties to City Hall (including the chair and vice-chair) who use their majority to whittle away at the CPRC's powers. Still, if you're sworn onto a commission, then you have to show up even if it's turning into an exercise in masochism. The residents of the city which they are purportedly representing deserve no less especially in these difficult times during severe micromanagement by City Hall and its puppet show. After all, judging by exit interviews performed on city residents who leave the commission's meetings in total disgust, it's not easy for them to sit through these spectacles. The least the commissioners can do is to do their part and sit there as well.

The CPRC's Newest Commissioner, Aspiring Politician?

The latest commissioner to be appointed to the CPRC, Rogelio V. Morales once ran as a candidate in the 2008 Democratic Primary for the 44th District hoping to be chosen by voters to face off against incumbent, Ken Calvert. Of course that didn't happen but here is more information about his background and his political stances on different issues. This part of his career didn't come up in his interview. As you can recall, this primary was particularly contentious with allegations of smearing all around. Of course, the candidate who made it out of that process didn't beat Calvert but came closer to unseating him than any other Democratic candidate since Calvert's been in office representing his campaign donors more than his voting constituents.

The blog, Liberal OC includes comments by visitors about the Democratic Primary candidates including Morales here.

The Other Election

Some time this year, there might be elections conducted by the Riverside Police Officers' Association to fill positions on the board, including that of the presidency currently held by Det. Chris Lanzillo who defeated the prior incumbent Det. Ken Tutwiler who had defeated the previous incumbent, Sgt. Pat McCarthy. It's difficult to remain at the helm of this contentious and somewhat splintered union these days (not surprising considering the rapid growth in the department particularly this union's membership in the past 10 years) and it's clearly very difficult to serve in this role so anyone who tries to do it deserves some credit for taking the leap and giving it a shot. And as the composition of the police department changes especially with a flood of newer and younger officers, it's become an even more difficult job to navigate through. You may not always agree with them or their views some or all of the time, but it's not an easy road, something for the new president-elect (if there's one) to keep in mind. And Labor Day in part is to salute the efforts of union leaders and their members, past and present.

Of course, it's the city officials and their department heads who probably have the day off. Many of the city's employees are out there working anyway including public safety employees and others providing the city's essential services.


But you learn by doing and just like elected officials elsewhere, sometimes what you've gotten yourself into, isn't clear until you're sitting in the hot seat. After all, just look at the Riverside City Council for a clear cut example.

An officer or two belonging to the union have dangled the possibilities that they might run for the top spot (and it's not clear at this point whether they'll face off against Lanzillo) including one who would be a blast from the past. But as for being serious about tossing their hats in the ring, it's a watch and wait proposition at the moment as is the case in many election proceedings.

Rumors of another serious issue which might come up for the vote of the union's membership are also floating around. If this rumor is true, it could change the infrastructure of the union in ways that other similar associations and protective leagues have seen but so far, not in Riverside.

Happy Labor Day Riverside

These are difficult times for the city's labor unions as another union, the SEIU General Unit which is the city's largest has discovered this year.

The union said recently that what has been written in the Press Enterprise about its operations including the controversial vote among the membership involving the 2% raise was promoted by Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis who ran to the publication not long after being placed in charge of labor negotiations by his boss, City Manager Brad Hudson even after the botched job he allegedly did (according to at least four of the city's bargaining units) during the long hot summer of 2006.

That summer, if you recall, saw strike votes by the SEIU, lawsuits filed by the SEIU, the RPOA and the RPAA and rallies packing City Hall by all these bargaining units plus the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Representatives of these unions said that once DeSantis left the bargaining table, contracts were more quickly signed and they also said that prior to that, the negotiations had been more arduous than during any other time in the city's recent history. Their major upset with DeSantis was his alleged tendency to put promises on the table and then when people agreed to them, he'd withdraw them. Sounds like that game that Lucy of Peanuts used to play with Charlie Brown involving a football. Was that the case? At any rate, the contract negotiation season was quickly wrapped up when he was removed from the equation.

But DeSantis is back in the process and once again naturally, there's turmoil. The SEIU allegedly told the city that it would only vote for the 2% if the city would assure them there were no layoffs. The city at the time wouldn't say yes or no. The SEIU also noticed that the despite the worsening budget picture, some of the city's department heads were getting pretty good-sized raises including one of the department heads who ironically or not is blaming the layoffs of city employees on the SEIU's increase.

Not to mention that if the SEIU voted to rescind the 2% raise, it might involve reopening its current MOU with the city which it would be understandable if there's reluctance to do that because then the city could declare open season on any other term involved in the MOU, as it's shown a history of either ignoring or going against MOU terms in the past, according to the SEIU.

One of the most recent layoffs involved a librarian who also worked as a union steward for the SEIU. More layoffs are probably coming and the SEIU will be blamed by Human Resources Director Rhonda Strout and presumably her employers in the city manager's office who she's speaking for, but when will the city including the city council begin to take serious looks at the raises allegedly given to at least several department heads including Strout last year?

For example, is it true that Public Works Director Siobhan Foster got a 15% raise even as at least two of her employees were fired as alleged by one individual? Did Police Chief Russ Leach get a raise when he signed his latest five-year contract even as officers and civilian workers in his own department face salary freezes, loss of merit raises (which is city-wide) and problems with staffing and providing city services (especially in the civilian division including timely report writing) to the public? Why aren't the issues of these raises getting any attention or eliciting any comments to the media? When DeSantis went to the Press Enterprise about the actions of the SEIU (and that's not to say it's wrong to have concerns and issues with what happened), did he mention these raises? And when they're laying off employees and blaming the 2% raise on the layoffs, do the individuals doing the blaming including apparently Strout mention about the raises that any upper level employees received including their own if that is the case?

That part's doubtful.

Some say, that the management level at City Hall has gotten a bit top-heavy since Hudson was hired by the city with some management employees allegedly left with no employees to well...manage. Any salary increases given during a time when the city management should have known the city was going to have to do more with less needs an explanation before anyone else can be blamed for getting raises.

And speaking of Leach's raise if he received one, look what's been done to his department. Although if Leach had received his maximum authorized raise, he could have been making a larger salary than his boss, Hudson. Yes, it's true, according to that list. Quite a few people who saw it were scratching their heads at that one.

The police department will be down two captains, four lieutenants and around eight sergeants by the end of the calendar year which incidently is the time that the five-year Strategic Plan instituted by the state attorney general's office will expire. And the civilian division of the department faces even more shortages as overall, the department's vacancy rate is around 10%. And that's according to figures given by Strout who may be painting a rosier picture of the city's current state of address than really exists.

According to Leach, the department was to institute a new five-year blue print to pick up where the current one leaves off but if you are at least proposing to have command staff members man watch commands to replace vacationing lieutenants and no upward movement in the department even as people at the middle level are retiring in part because of the lack of potential advancement, it's difficult to be able to exercise the vision of future and long-term planning of departmental growth and operations.



Last December, the city published a list on its site regarding the lifting of the maximum raises for about 40 key positions in the city, which ranged from a small increment to several over 15-20% from prior ceilings listed for January 2008. The document which was far from private, was apparently published due to problems with the city not doing so which led to issues arising from the retirement or rather planned retirement of a city employee last year. This employee allegedly had difficulty getting Calpers to pay him compensation for his salary because it hadn't been posted by the city. Whether that was a pattern with the city management's office or just a simple oversight isn't clear but at any rate the list got posted. It created a stir after being referred to on this blog several months ago among several city officials but it's too bad that any raises given out to any employees on that master list didn't create as much of a visible concern by the city.

And then of course in the somewhat smaller Riverside Police Administrators' Association, there's been allegations including those filed in lawsuit in U.S. District Court of retaliation against past presidents and members of its short-lived Political Action Committee.





A state bill to help keep Citrus Park in Riverside from closing stalled in Sacramento.





The Riverside Golf Club has closed its doors. It filed for bankruptcy, while owing the city over $300,000 and causing a couple who paid thousands to get married there to lose all their money.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

Howsmith filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Aug. 14, according to the bankruptcy document. A Web site lists Jacklyn Smith as the president of the Riverside company founded in 1979. No one answered at the phone number listed at the same address as the Riverside Golf Club.

Wednesday, John Lee Brown and Dimitra Kelly stood outside the locked gates of the parking lot of the shuttered clubhouse and banquet hall at 1011 N. Orange St.

They'd invited 100 guests to their wedding Saturday.

"This is a tragedy," said Kelly, 40, who said they'd sunk $8,000 into the kaput celebration. "We had our rehearsal dinner there last Friday. They just faxed me the seating arrangement yesterday."

Christopher R. Barclay, a trustee for Howsmith Corporation, was on the premises Wednesday. He refused to comment and ordered a reporter to leave. Rancho Cucamonga-based Dennis Baranowski, the corporation's attorney, could not be reached.

"It's a shame it's closing," said Jerry Seinturier, 56, who remembers the golf course from the 1950s. He plays in the golf league at Bourns Inc. where he works, but learned Wednesday morning that their evening round and banquet had been canceled. The greens had withered to browns over the past two years, he said, but the price was right: $10 for walkers, $15 for riders. "I have no idea where we'll play now," Seinturier said.

For starters, they need to refund the couple the money they paid for their wedding. As it turned out, the couple will get their wedding because of people and businesses willing to help them but the city is still out hundreds of thousands of more dollars it threw at a business to entice it to either move or stay in Riverside.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

Dimitra Kelly and John Lee Brown, who had planned to marry at the golf club Saturday, also are unlikely to recover the $3,000 they spent for the hall and appetizers.

But Kelly said Thursday their wedding actually may turn out better than expected, with offers of a replacement site and other kinds of help pouring in.

A local church, another golf course, even an American Legion unit were willing to host Kelly and Brown's nuptials. People have called volunteering to clean up after the wedding or call the 100 guests to tell them the new location.

The city pitched White Park as a location for the ceremony, and the couple met Gardner there Thursday afternoon to check it out.

Standing amid the flowering trees in the park, Kelly said she was surprised but grateful for the help.

"Whatever the tragedy was, it's being turned around instantly, not even 24 hours later," she said.

Later Thursday, Kelly said by phone she decided to go with Indian Hills Golf Club, which gave her a deal with some freebies and promised to be most like the venue she lost.

Moreno Valley's city manager has announced that he will resign soon but any relationship that his departure has with the filing of seven misdemeanor charges against him in San Bernardino is mere coincidence.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

"Absolutely not," Gutierrez said in a phone interview Thursday. "It's a completely personal decision so I can pursue my hobbies and interests."

He added that he wanted to avail himself of a "golden handshake" offer that would allow him to retire with credit for two extra years beyond his 32-year career.

The charges filed against Gutierrez stemmed from accusations that he harassed and spied on an ex-girlfriend who lives in Upland. Prosecutors charged Gutierrez, the city's top administrator for four years, with three counts of making harassing phone calls, two counts of unlawful computer access and fraud and two counts of identity theft related to accessing phone records.

The investigation began May 5 after Upland resident Ruby Carrillo told police that she had been receiving constant harassing phone calls over a two-month period, according to an affidavit. Prosecutors allege that Gutierrez used the woman's personal information to access her computer and obtain phone records of incoming and outgoing calls made on her home phone and cell phone, said San Bernardino County Supervising District Attorney David Hidalgo.

Gutierrez is scheduled to be arraigned at 8 a.m. Tuesday in Rancho Cucamonga.

The state takes a closer look at the scandal-ridden San Bernardino County's Assessor's office.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



State Board of Equalization spokeswoman Anita Gore declined to say if workers have found any signs of improper changes to the county assessment roll. A full report will be released no later than February, she said.

Postmus, once one of the county's most powerful political leaders, was San Bernardino County assessor from November 2006 until he resigned in February following his arrest on drug charges.

Experts from the state Board of Equalization visited the county last spring and summer and sampled part of the 2007-08 assessment roll. They also interviewed Postmus and his staff and reviewed other records, officials said.

The state Board of Equalization survey was regularly scheduled. But the agency's upcoming report will mark the first in-depth outside scrutiny of any of the thousands of property reassessments granted during Postmus' rocky 27 months as assessor.

In May, a county-commissioned investigation included unproven allegations that Postmus tried to help friends on assessment matters, such as by reducing properties' assessed values to lower their taxes. A Press-Enterprise review of county data found no notable reassessments involving some two-dozen known Postmus allies and political associates.




Come clean is what Press Enterprise Columnist Cassie MacDuff is asking but that's easier said than done for a county government embarrassed by scandal after scandal.


(excerpt)



But unlike Aleman and Hlawek, more county officials accused of wrongdoing have blamed others for their errors or claimed to be the victims of unfair prosecutions and political vendettas.

Former Supervisor Jerry Eaves blamed clerical errors when he failed to report trips taken at the expense of county contractors. Former Assistant Assessor Jim Erwin claims he is being unfairly prosecuted for failing to report a gift and trip. Former Assessor Bill Postmus, charged with nine felonies including misuse of public resources, claims he is the target of a political vendetta.

Where's the remorse?

Another tactic is silence. That's the road being taken by the two county fire chiefs caught using a department trailer to move one's household furnishings from Running Springs to Yucaipa in July.

Fire Chief Pat Dennen could have publicly admitted to an error in judgment when he was caught helping Deputy Chief Dan Wurl use a department trailer to move his family's belongings in July.

He could have stepped forward and apologized to the public for misusing taxpayer resources. But Dennen and Wurl have zipped their lips, at least publicly.




Meanwhile, the newspaper's editorial board takes on the shenanigans in Canyon Lake.



(excerpt)



Elections can change council majorities and city policies. That is how democracy works, and elected officials need to be comfortable with that fact. And while local issues can often induce strong passions, elected officials let such disagreements obstruct working relationships at their -- and their cities' -- peril.

The trick to politics is disagreeing without being disagreeable -- a skill the Canyon Lake council has yet to learn. A council that lets infighting distract from other public priorities poorly serves city residents. Canyon Lake's council needs to focus on the future, and not on refighting past battles.



The city council in Erie wants its new civilian review board put on ice.


(excerpt, Erie Times-News)



A majority of Erie City Council members said Wednesday that they support the idea, but the group stopped short of asking city lawyers to write a law creating a citizen police review board.

Council tabled a resolution asking the City Solicitor's Office to draft a law establishing the board after several council members asked for community input before passing the resolution.

Others said questions remain about the makeup and powers of the board and said the Solicitor's Office needs direction in crafting the law.

Councilwoman Rubye Jenkins-Husband, who sponsored the resolution calling for the board, called the move a delay tactic.

"We need to find a way to do this," Jenkins-Husband said. "We know there are problems out there. The citizens are asking for change."









The lady is a champ! Super filly Rachel Alexandra might have sealed up Horse of the Year honors in this race.

Discussion of Ethics Code changes to go to City Council

`The Discussion of Ethics and the Ethics of Discussion

[Councilman Andrew Melendrez who chairs Governmental Affairs, Councilman Rusty Bailey and City Attorney Gregory Priamos discuss the ethics code and complaint process.]




[Councilman Rusty Bailey (l) and City Attorney Gregory Priamos hear public comment at the annual review of the city's ethics code and complaint process held by the Governmental Affairs Committee]

[From left, Linda Dunn of the Group, Gladys Walker, Chair of the Human Relations Commission and Barbara Purvis from the League of Women Voters speak out at the Governmental Affairs Committee on their recommendations to improve the implementation of the ethics code and complaint process]






"A man is truly ethical only when he obeys the compulsion to help all life which he is able to assist, and shrinks from injuring anything that lives."


---Albert Schweitzer




"On the whole human beings want to be good, but not too good, and not quite all the time."

---George Orwell



"Action indeed is the sole medium of expression for ethics"


---Jane Addams




"Cowardice asks the question, 'Is it safe?' Expediency asks the question, 'Is it politic?' Vanity asks the question, 'Is it popular?' But, conscience asks the question, 'Is it right?' And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because one's conscience tells one that it is right."


---Martin Luther King, jr.





What: Governmental Affairs Committee's annual review of the ethics code and complaint process

Where: Mayor's Ceremonial Room, City Hall

When: Wed. Sept. 2 at 4 p.m.




The Governmental Affairs Committee met at City Hall to conduct its annual review of the ethics code and complaint process. Its task was to come up with any recommendations that it believed were needed to forward to the city council at a meeting in about two weeks.

Over a dozen concerned city residents attended the meeting held in the Mayor's Ceremonial Room. Many spoke giving their recommendations to improve a very problematic process and many of the ideas which were expressed were similar in nature.

At the helm, was new committee chair, Councilman Andrew Melendrez who took over from the recently ousted Frank Schiavone who had presided over many a whitewashed annual ethics review process. Councilman Rusty Bailey attended the meeting but his colleague Steve Adams took a bye after injuring his leg again yesterday.

Unlike last year's review, the chairs and vice-chairs of the city’s board and commissions were actually invited to the meeting and those who attended included those from the Board of Public Utilities, the Park and Recreation Commission, the Resources Board and the Human Relations Commission. Those not the meeting included Sheri Corral and Peter Hubbard from the Community Police Review Commission who probably felt that they had attended too many meetings at City Hall already. Still, since these board and commission officers were invited this year, this means that the Governmental Affairs Committee won't have to repeat this entire process within a week.

Melendrez opened the meeting by asking the officers from those boards and commissions which recommendations they had come up with during their own annual review of the ethics code and process. Only the chair of the Board of Public Utilities had any suggestions to make and that was the inclusion of language in the core values section of the ethics code which would encourage members to attend meetings regularly. Apparently his board had experienced difficulties meeting quorum levels at its regular meetings.

There was some interesting preamble though to liven things up and to try to paint Riverside as the forefront of the movement in this region and even the state, at developing an ethics code and complaint process. At one point, someone said that this city was the only one that conducted an annual review of its code which meant it was especially visionary and thus praiseworthy for its fortitude in moving forward in this way. Pity the same accolades weren't applied to the Community Police Review Commission several months ago when it allegedly was the only form of civilian oversight in the state that conducted independent and parallel investigations of officer-involved deaths. Instead, the CPRC was viewed as a deviant, engaging in destructive and disturbing practices that needed to be stopped even though the sky hadn't fallen. It's interesting how selective city officials can be with their choice of adjectives from one situation to the next and forget that what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.


After he was done speaking, Melendrez began taking comments from the public. His style of conducting meetings was to give people their allotted three minutes to speak but allow them to answer questions asked by council members serving on the committee. The previous day, Melendrez said he was prepared to chair his first Governmental Affairs Committee meeting even while discussing such a contentious issue and he clearly was up to the task even as Bailey tried to dictate the direction that the meeting was headed. Part of this was because only two out of the three members were in attendance leaving Bailey in the position of having to propose any motion for action taken by the committee since committee chairs can't make motions. Yet, even if Adams had attended, it's likely that Bailey would have headed off on the same course.

The Group’s Chair Vaughn-Blakely has her recommendations that were compiled by her organization which had been at the forefront of the struggle to bring an ethics code and complaint process to Riverside. It had made a presentation to the Charter Review Committee on the process during its meetings in 2004. It pushed the charter committee and later the city council, to produce what would be called, Measure DD which would allow the voters to decide whether or not Riverside’s City Hall needed an ethics code and complaint process. Over 70% of the city’s voters decided that the city did need these things and so the ethics code was added to the city’s charter.

A research committee was selected by the mayor and city council to research how to put together and implement an ethics code for the city's charter and how to develop a complaint process which promoted accountability and transparency, two qualities which were universally sought but sorely lacking in the final product.

That was only the beginning of the battle to ensure that any ethics code and complaint process would include teeth and actually promote accountability and transparency in City Hall. Until then and some say after, only the public was expected to be ethical and professional at City Council meetings, not the city council members and this was backed by the quantity of letters being sent out by the City Attorney’s office to city residents compared to those being sent out for etiquette violations to elected officials. The threatening letters which were CCed to Police Chief Russ Leach were viewed as intimidating by those who received them and yet, members of the city council, albeit mostly ones who no longer sit on the dais would call city residents liars and say they had no ethics or class. With the change in composition in the last two city elections, this kind of acting out by elected officials has faded somewhat.

People polled during the election said that one major reason for voting against incumbents was that they felt that these individuals were rude at public meetings that they either attended or watched at home on cable television. Not to mention the city's decision to lease out office space at City Hall to a private company, the arrest and conviction of a development employee who once worked for Riverside County under now-City Manager Brad Hudson for embezzlement, the Bradley Estates debacle and grand theft and a certain 911 phone call that was made against an assistant city manager, all of which have made Riverside if not as scandal-ridden as its sibling on the northern part of the Inland Empire, worthy of further examination and scrutiny.

Vaughn-Blakely told the committee that the Group continues to monitor the implementation of the ethics code and complaints even four years after that took place. She mentioned that other cities including Grand Terrace, Temecula and San Bernardino County were researching the issue of whether or not they needed to adopt codes of ethics. She added that there needed to be more outreach by City Hall about the adopted code and the process of filing complaints.

"It needs to get outside of the walls and the TV station,” she said and out into the communities

The strongest and likely most controversial recommendation that came down from the Group not to mention nearly everyone else in attendance was the need for a committee of people who could independently deliberate and decide on complaints involving elected officials. Vaughn-Blakely suggested a panel of retired judges to do the job. Having a city council manned body like the Mayor’s Nomination and Screening Committee continue to do that task would be a huge mistake.

"We feel that is tantamount to the fox guarding the hen house", Vaughn Blakely said.


Barbara Purvis who’s a member of the Group and the League of Women Voters recommended that the city use the city clerk's survey and get copies of them circulated out to the public. She added her voice to the choir regarding the necessity of an independent and unbiased review panel.

"Even the perception of bias is not something that the city should continue to have," Purvis said.


Becky Diaz from the Community Settlement spoke next from a “community perspective” in support of the Group’s recommendations. She said that an independent or ad hoc committee to do a review of the complaints would promote transparency. She wanted to send the message that government promotes transparency which she believed would increase community engagement.

“People are intimidated to go to CC meetings because they are afraid they will be ganged up on,” she said, and added that the process of city council would be too large for them.

Ken Stansbury, formerly of the Riversiders for Property Rights told the committee he was so moved by Diaz' words that he had to speak. He told everyone there how he had tried to exercise his right to process and transparency but was sued for his effort by the city through a SLAPP suit. He and other members of the organization (which tried to circulate a petition to put an initiative on the city's ballot against Eminent Domain which benefited private developers) were threatened by the city with paying its attorneys' fees which is the very definition of a SLAPP suit (even though the city's attorneys denied this was what they were doing).

“A Renaissance has to have the reality of transparency and you can't sue people for trying to use the process of putting something on the ballot,” he said.

He added that he had spent a couple of years on the bad end of a stick. Ethics is necessary to have a place to discuss issues.

"It has to be real," Stansbury said.

Linda Dunn, of the Group asked about the time frame of complaints, including when they will be heard and a ruling issued by the deciding body. What's the time line and will the person be told about it? What's the role of the city attorney in the process? These were her questions that she and everyone else waited to see who would provide answers.

Melendrez tackled the last one first.

"The role of the city attorney is advisory," Melendrez said, “We look at the complaint and speak to the attorney."

But part of the problem has been that even though the ordinance states that Priamos' role is to be "advisory" in nature, it's clear that some current and/or former elected officials wanted him to do more than that. In fact, even though the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee as a venue for hearing complaints has been criticized, only one of the handful of ethics code complaints filed against elected officials actually made it that far. In at least two other cases, the complainants were shocked to receive letters of closure from Priamos regarding their complaints.

One complaint was dismissed because the city government apparently through direction to Priamos had decided that third-party complaints against elected officials would not be allowed, despite no language at the time in the process forbidding those complaints from moving forward. The second complaint, was also disqualified on the basis of language that didn't exist in the defining ordinance...at least not at the time the complaint was initially filed.

Kevin Dawson, Save-Riverside talked to the committee about his experience with filing a complaint against former Ward One Councilman Dom Betro and how instead of receiving a letter that it was going to be reviewed by the Mayor’s Nomination and Screening Committee, he received a letter from Priamos disqualifying his complaint. Later on, Betro who was running for reelection and Schiavone who had endorsed him had convened a Governmental Affairs Committee meeting with the intent of inserting language stating that an elected official had to be acting within his official capacity to be subject to complaint in the ordinance.

"After the fact, they fixed the code so that a complaint like mine could never be filed again,” Dawson said.

He said that the two men had carried out the action for a "self-serving" purpose and Dawson wanted the language revoked because it was added inappropriately by individuals who have a conflict of interest in the situation.

Jim Martin spoke up saying that he had received a letter from the city from CA for absolutely nothing.

“I felt at the time I was being attacked by a gang of seven who had a private attorney,” Martin said.

"My attorney"

Martin touches on another problem with some of the city's elected officials and that is that they tend to view and even on occasion (i.e. Councilwoman Nancy Hart) call Priamos "my attorney", meaning that he represents them as individuals rather than as a governmental body. That might be one belief system that caused problems for Schiavone when he became involved in what became the Bradley Estates episode. And Priamos has told people on occasion that his number one responsibility is to protect the city council and mayor. When he was allegedly asked "from what", apparently Priamos wasn't able to provide an answer.

The complaints of ethics need to be handled by someone outside the city government, Martin added.

After public comment was taken, the committee members spoke on the changes they wished to recommend for implementation by the full city council in several weeks.


Bailey said he already had a motion in mind. He agreed with the Groups recommendation and that the complainant should receive a notice in writing within 60-90 days of lodging the complaint.

He agreed with several speakers’ contention that the city council annual review of the code and complaint process should be held as a public hearing held at night rather than being included on the consent calendar.

Priamos piped up and said that it's never been on the consent calendar. But Vaughn-Blakely and Purvis disagreed with his recollection and said that it has been on consent calendar at least once and that they had complained to Schiavone who had finally changed it and put it in its appropriate place. Priamos agreed that it should never have been on the consent calendar.

"Last year, it was on the discussion calendar," Priamos said, "I do know that."

Bailey wanted to codify that recommendation seeming a bit perturbed by it. However, Melendrez said, it should be kept as a public hearing.

Vaughn-Blakely wants to know what's the resistance to it being a public hearing. Priamos said that the concern is to have it at night so it's a maximum attendance and that most public hearings are held during the day sessions of city council meetings. Which is an odd thing to be concerned about considering that public hearings are often heard during the evening sessions pf city council meetings including the one held the previous night and they are often scheduled to take place at 7 p.m.

Vaughn-Blakely argued that the difference between putting it on the discussion calendar versus conducting it as a public hearing was the process in terms of gathering opinions for and against and then giving both sides the opportunity to present their cases to the city council. .

Let the public know that you want input and to come down and provide it, Purvis added.

Do Politicians have their own Code of Silence?

.
Bailey resisted a bit at addressing the recommendation which he called the most controversial on the list which was to have an independent body of retired judges handle the complaints, otherwise known as the most popular suggestion posed at the meeting by those who attended. Bailey threw up the flag right away, citing his military background beginning as a graduate of West Point Academy. It's interesting that he objected to retired judges considering his own father, William Bailey, Sr. is one. And Bailey's father hadn't been completely uncontroversial while he was on the bench.

At a criminal trial in 2001, he allegedly got in an argument during a motion to dismiss with Riverside County District Attorney's office prosecutor John Aki over the veracity of the testimony of a Riverside Police Department officer (now retired) and essentially called Aki's only witness in this particular case, the officer, a liar by saying he wouldn't believe anything he said. Within three months of the trial, the officer retired from the department with eight excessive force allegations coming out of the Pitchess motion (which covers a five-year period and was the subject of several motions even after the judge conducted an en camera hearing), a domestic violence investigation and about 11 years in the agency, according to court records submitted in relation to this trial that led to the acquittals of two women and the dismissal of charges against one man by Bailey, Sr. The city later settled litigation in federal court with the city tying into this case.


Still, Bailey, Jr. seemed tempered somewhat by the whole idea of retired judges deciding whether the behavior of elected officials including presumably his was an ethics violation. So what was his argument? One that if you consider where you've seen or heard it before, should seem very, very familiar.

"I believe in policing your own ranks," Bailey said. "You would be giving up responsibility that we ultimately have away."

The city council would be giving that responsibility to a group of whoever to censure other elected officials, Bailey lamented. Yet what he doesn't appear to realize is that the city council has a poor history of policing itself. Council members have called members of the public liars and classless even while other city council members laugh at what they've said. Some of them appear appalled but sit there quietly as if politicians have their own code of silence similar to that which pervades many law enforcement agencies. And unlike law enforcement officers, politicians have much more power in their grasp so they have no excuse for a failure to report or to act due to concern about retaliation by management or by peers. Unlike police officers, they won't be retaliated and run out of their agencies and any code of silence they have isn't tied into survival as it might be in law enforcement. They don't have their decision on whether to act or not based on how safe they will be in the field when they need other officers to back them up in dangerous situations. So what is the purpose of any Code that they have, if Bailey's comments hint that there is one at least from his perspective?

Still, Bailey pressed forward with his contention that no one need to look at elected officials' behavior except themselves.

"It's our responsibility to do that," said Bailey.



Melendrez, disagreed with Bailey’s contention saying that the view of the community as a whole doesn't think the council is doing that to itself regarding its own behavior. Distrust of community members towards professions which believe they can self-investigate or self-police has always been a factor in relations between law enforcement and community members and as Melendrez pointed out, between elected officials and community members as well.

But Bailey does put an interesting spin on his argument. One that does have some merit.

"And you've seen the community's response to that," Bailey said, implying about the recent role of municipal elections of kicking incumbents out of office.

Not that Melendrez appeared to be moved by his words. In his political career so far, they haven't had much application.

The community wants the ability to trust the code and because of what's happened in the past they have lost that trust, Melendrez said.

Bailey reiterated that voters have taken care of that.

"Are those people here anymore," Bailey asked.

He's probably referring mostly to the incumbent he ousted in his election in 2007, former Councilman Art Gage who's running for mayor this time around but quite a few faces have disappeared alongside that of Gage from the legislative side of the dais anyway.

Melendrez said that anytime it's taken outside the group, that it's only recommendations not binding decisions.

"It's up to the council to set up the parameters of what's going to happen to the individual after an independent review,” Melendrez said to soften Bailey up regarding his concerns about being reviewed by an independent body.

Bailey said, I am ready to make a motion. But resisted the idea of independent review of city council conduct a bit longer.


“It might help with perception but it's not going to happen with reality,” he said, “With accountability comes to responsibility."

He seemed to believe that others outside their ranks were in no position to judge so he said he wanted elected officials to be added to any review panel that would include retired judges.

"People who walk in our shoes have experiences and have the abilities to police our own ranks,” he said.


Of course, that's a very select club of individuals indeed even if you threw in some retired elected officials.


Melendrez wanted to add two more things including a recommendation to adopt Dawson’s suggestion about removing the language amended at the 2007 Governmental Affairs Committee meeting.

"I believe as public officials we need to be on our best behavior at all times," he said.

That shocked some people and it will be interesting how the full city council handles that move by Melendrez, along with the call for the creation of the independent panel of retired judges or as Bailey would have it, political officials with maybe some retired judges. And it might be entertaining to watch as well.



The recommendations head now to be heard and decided upon by the full city council in about two weeks.







The controversy over the use of tasers by police comes to Riverside County with three deaths recorded by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Extreme agitation, whether from drugs or mental illness, is a common factor in deaths during encounters with police, studies show. As more police departments use Tasers, more deaths in custody are accompanied by Taser shocks. It's not clear what role, if any, Tasers play in these deaths. But some worry the electric shocks from Tasers can cause potentially fatal cardiac problems.

"These are supposed to be nonlethal weapons, and yet we're seeing increasing numbers of deaths," said Hector Villagra, director of the Orange County office of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California. "The risks are not completely understood."

TASER International, the company that manufactures Taser stun guns, says the vast majority of Taser deployments have resulted in minor or no injuries. The company says stun guns can help save lives by allowing officers to quickly subdue suspects without more violence. Police, too, defend stun guns as a tool to avoid more serious injuries to suspects, as well as officers.

Groups such as the ACLU and Amnesty International have urged police to use greater caution with stun guns, pointing out that research is inadequate and that hundreds of people have died after receiving shocks from Tasers.

Villagra's office in January issued a letter to the Orange County Sheriff's Department requesting that officials revisit their policy regarding the use of Tasers after two deaths last year. The ACLU cited a 2006 study of deaths following Taser shocks that showed more than 75 percent of the cases involved illegal substance abuse, and a 2002 Seattle Police Department study that showed 60 percent of those shocked with Tasers were "impaired, often severely, by alcohol, drugs, or a mental illness or delusion."

"Perversely, what happens is that the population the Taser gets used against most often is the population that is most at risk," Villagra said.






The whistleblower who allegedly told on two high-ranking San Bernardino County Fire Department employees now under investigation alleged she is facing retaliation for her efforts. Never a dull moment in the corrupt county.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



In a claim filed Monday, Tina Sutera, an administrative supervisor for the San Bernardino County Fire Department, contends the county is actively working to terminate her and to make her job unnecessary.

The county locked Sutera out of her office, went through her files and computer and transferred her assistant to create increased workload, according a copy of the claim provided by her attorney.

"An atmosphere of fear and paranoia has been instilled at the Fire Department due to the witch hunt perpetrated against Sutera," the claim reads.



Furlough days are coming to Riverside County's workforce.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



"This has been a tough process as we talked early on through these negotiations. The relationship, as you know, has not been that great with SEIU, but I think we have started a new day here," Supervisor John Tavaglione told union members at the board meeting. "The need for us to work together in the coming years is critical."

The board also reviewed the county's challenging budget situation and honored former Supervisor Roy Wilson. Tuesday was the first regular meeting since Wilson's death last week of unspecified health problems.



The county's new labor agreement with the 6,000-member service workers union is retroactive. It takes effect as of Aug. 1 and lasts until the end of this fiscal year, June 30, 2010.

The union agreed to unpaid furloughs equivalent to two days a month, which the county says will amount to a 10 percent reduction in salary costs. Human Resources Director Ron Komers estimates the savings at about $48.4 million.

The county agreed to some union demands including undoing recent changes to overtime policies that had reclassified certain union employees as no longer eligible for overtime.

Union members voted Monday to ratify the contract with more than 90 percent in favor, according to SEIU.

Supervisors voted 3-1 Tuesday to approve it.

Supervisor Bob Buster voted no, saying he was concerned about the overtime changes. More employees will now be eligible to claim overtime, and staff expects that will cost the county at least $4.6 million more this year, he said.





The Orange County Register files for bankruptcy. Hardly shocking, given the state of print journalism in this country.




Beaumont, Texas city residents want a civilian review board.


(excerpt, KFDM)


"I'd like to challenge city council to select a person from each of their wards and that way citizens can feel involved and not shut out. Right now they feel shut out of the process," said Vernon Durden.

"I think the council always considers what citizens bring to us," said Mayor Becky Ames.

The requests before council come one day after the Jefferson County District Attorney's Office released dashboard video of a Beaumont traffic stop.

The meeting was calm and the speakers level headed. They asked council to re-visit and long-time issue that's been raised in Beaumont over and over again. A citizen review committee.

"This is just a committee to review information. Not to try to administer the law or understand the law. We understand the situation that happened and see them in an objective way," said Paul Brown.

Brown suggests the committee would review and advise on internal affairs department's handling of complaints and hear appeals from officers and complaintants and publicly reports its findings.

"It's all about transparency in government and that's the best thing it puts citizens at ease. It's an option. We'll weigh that option," said Councilman Jamie Smith.










The tasing of a 76-year-old man in a Wyoming town creates an uproar among the residents.



(excerpt, Associated Press)



"To me it doesn't matter if this was a town of Glenrock's size or New York City. This kind of stuff can't go on," said Grose's son, Mike. "It doesn't matter if there's 10 officers or a thousand, this is just totally unacceptable. We're taught to respect the law, not fear it."

The fracas at the annual Deer Creek Days arose from confusion over whether members of the tractor club could deviate from the parade route shortly before it ended.

Grose wanted to head directly to the town park for a tractor pull like in previous years. But the police department had a different plan, which apparently was not communicated to the tractor drivers.

As a result, Grose encountered a Glenrock officer attempting to direct the tractors along the regular parade route. Grose said he drove around the officer. The officer said he was struck by the tractor and injured his wrist, according to a state review of the incident.

"He, for some reason, said no, and I, for some reason, thought to myself yes," Grose recounted.

The police chief said the officer then chased Grose on foot until a fellow officer joined the pursuit in a police SUV and caught up to Grose's tractor. The police pulled in front of the tractor, and the tractor came to a stop as it bumped the SUV.

That is when the officer shocked Grose with the Taser. Grose eventually managed to pull the tractor around the police SUV and to a parking area down the road. An angry crowd formed as police kept ordering Grose off the tractor. Police did not arrest Bud Grose because of the tension at the scene, Sweet said.

"At the time, it was very close to having a riot right there, and that probably would have created a full-scale riot," Sweet said.

Grose's son, Mike, agreed. "There was some very good people there ready to make some bad choices that would have affected them for the rest of their lives," he said. "That's the point it had gotten to."









Sept. 8-14 Racial Equality Week

Oh, I went and did it. I started playing Sim Horseracing. Proud Sheila, my virtual three-year-old roan filly by Blaze the Green walked the shed row today, will jog a lap tomorrow and will be be taken to the track the day after in a 2 f blowout (aiming for around : 48) tomorrow to prepare for her racing debut at 7 1/2 fur on the dirt in a MSW this Sunday afternoon up in Canada.

I think I should have started with an Appy.