Is the current city council part of an "era of change"?

“The interview of Officer Goodrich was so replete with leading questions and ‘questions’ which misstated prior testimony of Officer Goodrich that it raised questions in the minds of the panel members as to what was actually the subject officer’s version of the occurrence (as opposed to the interviewer’s version).”


----Las Vegas Citizens Review Board on an internal investigation similar to what civilian oversight mechanisms have said in Boston, Riverside and other places.





Riverside Police Department Officer Felix Medina and other officers in the Riverside Police Officers' Association helped out the family that got its Christmas presents stolen in the spirit of the holiday and community policing.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

A burglar had forced open the window of one of the daughter's rooms, ransacked every room including the kitchen and took about $10,000 worth of goods including their television, computer and all of their Christmas presents, said Lt. Chuck Griffitts.

"It was just like the world coming to an end. We felt violated. It was terrible," said Robert Tamayo, who works in Hacienda Heights as a ground worker.

He said his 8-year-old daughter was not able to open her Hannah Montana guitar and none of the girls could open the clothes their parents bought and wrapped for them.

Medina, who has been on the police force for about 10 years, took a report of the burglary and tried to console the family by telling them how he felt 11 years ago when his home was burglarized.

"I told them everything I had felt, how I had been in their same shoes."

One of the Riverside County Superior Court judges has moved up to the state level for most of next year.




If Riverside says bye bye to Greyhound who will be responsible? Former Councilman Dom Betro rears his head to point fingers again as if he's been the champion of Greyhound all along which is interesting to hear. But at least he took a trip on it and does seem to understand the real demographics of its ridership while the majority of the city council seems to think that all Greyhound passengers are criminals, hoodlums and felons. While he makes some good and interesting points, he rewrites his own role on the dais as if he's some champion of public participation when he was the one who led the motion on July 12, 2005 to take away the public's right to pull items from the consent calendar. Yes, Betro led the motion to eliminate those rights, the same rights that people rightfully believe now should be restored. And he sounds like he's running for office again. If so, I guess we'll find out soon enough which office it is.

It's interesting how history can be rewritten after such a short period of time. This hasn't been the first nor will it be the last time an elected official past or present has done so on the Greyhound issue. So you can't really blame Betro if he gets nipped by the same bug that has affected some of his former dais mates as well. But Betro was one of the most promising elected officials in Riverside's recent history, who just didn't quiet live up to that promise and wasn't reelected, an outcome made somewhat inevitable by his emotional outbursts which some of us have experienced firsthand. Face it, if his vision was what everyone in Ward One (and not just the downtown which is only a portion of a sizable district) wanted, he would be voting on issues instead of writing opinion pieces every time he senses that his successor, Mike Gardner's vulnerable.

But what's interesting is even in his letters and opinion pieces, Betro restricts his vision of worthwhile topics to tackle by focusing on the downtown area. He doesn't write hundreds of words about the Northside. He doesn't write hundreds of words about the Wood Street area.

Just downtown. So he hasn't learned much from his election loss.

At any rate, he presents his argument to the readers of the Press Enterprise.



(excerpt)



Problems encountered along the way included city management's fear that placing Greyhound near the Metrolink station would alienate funding relationships with the Riverside County Transportation Commission. Some City Council members just didn't agree that this was the right location for Greyhound.

This created a stalemate, allowing staff members to continue to drag their feet on relocating the bus depot by coming up with unacceptable alternatives such as moving Greyhound to the north side or out to city property near Interstate 215.

The city is losing Greyhound service because at this critical time, there is a lack of leadership and competence in city government when it comes to dealing with downtown issues.

We see this when Brown Act compliance gets stretched, eminent domain is abused, city funds are wasted, a whole class of city residents is discriminated against and a progressive approach to improving transportation strategies -- downtown and in the rest of Riverside -- is sacrificed.




Eminent Domain get abused? Come again, Mr. Betro? Some of your campaign donors who benefited from the use of eminent domain downtown might be shocked at that statement.


Didn't the predominantly minority small business owners including the family who owned the Kawa Market on the Wood Streets constitute a class that was getting discriminated against during his reign on the dais? And didn't they have their lands handed off to White developers?

Still, Betro raises some interesting if after the fact points but once again, his ego gets in the way.

This blog discusses the legacy of Betro and other former city council members in contrast with what the author believes has transpired with the newer ones this last year. This person considers themselves an insider of sorts and there's still enough of the older council left that it's still almost an insider's paradise even with the ouster of Betro. This is in large part because the current city council has handed off most of its responsibility and certainly the more transparent part of its job to the city manager's office and the more insulated a government is when it comes to handling its business, the more reliance people have on "insiders" to find out even the most basic information on the operations of their own government. That's one reason why except perhaps for a quick consent calendar vote, most of the people in this city probably don't know where the decision making happens.

But since 99.99999% of Riversiders either aren't insiders or don't trust them much, it remains to be seen whether this analysis will prove useful in determining who will win the upcoming elections next year.

This blogger is very impressed with at least two of the new politicians on the city council, praising two of them but taking a harsher view of the third one.

And that's where the most interesting observations were made. Those provided of Ward Three Councilman Rusty Bailey. It's not just Bailey's critics that think there's a difference between him as a candidate and him as a councilman. Many of his campaign supporters are asking that question as well. There's a lot of Bailey that is still unknown after one year spent in office.

(excerpt, Inside Riverside)

However, Bailey the candidate and Bailey the Councilman are very different individuals. Bailey who promised to bring strong leadership to the Riverside City Council has done no such thing. Instead he has shown himself extremely adverse to risk, he has failed to bring any innovation or new thinking to City Hall, and behind the scenes he is known to be extremely petty. It is also said that Bailey had to give up his teaching gig at Riverside Poly because he could not handle the rigors of both jobs.

The worst thing that is coming out about Rusty Bailey is that he is developing a reputation as one who rewards his supporters and donors while taking steps to punish those who opposed him or supported Gage's re-election. Earlier this year Bailey returned a contribution from the Riverside Police Officers Association. Rumor has it that Bailey thought their $5000 donation was too small. He has let them know he was going to make the PD pay for backing Gage, possibly in negotiations for their next contract, possibly in layoff of Riverside Police Officers should the recession continue past June 2009.

If he's going to stick it to the police union out of some sort of revenge plot as sworn in this passage of this blog, its author is right, that this will be obviously fairly soon if this is indeed the case. But laying off public safety officers will not help him down the line if he truly wants to be mayor of this city. And it's possible that the city council could just hand over labor negotiations to the city manager's office and we all know how well that turned out during the summer of labor negotiations for at least five of the city's bargaining units in 2006.



His observations of Councilmen Mike Gardner and Chris MacArthur contain valid points, but his or her portrait of the overall dynamic of the city council is overly optimistic. Because the lack of discussion and debate on city council issues doesn't mean that meetings are more peaceful or even that a governmental body is more in harmony. What it can show is that city leaders may not be nearly as engaged in this process as they should be.

Does that mean arguments, stomping off the dais, personal attacks and going back to elected officials calling each other "liars" outside of each other's earshot? This behavior isn't necessary and it's not the obligatory contrast to the dynamic mentioned above.

Those holding minority views on issues might believe that until they have "the votes" or "the votes" change, that they have to remain quiet on issues on the dais. Those claiming to hold majority views might actually be expressing a collective view on issues that isn't necessarily accurate because there's a lack of public discourse on certain issues by the city council as a whole.

The paragraph about the newly refined Councilman Steve Adams, is interesting considering how individuals have said that Adams was allegedly going around telling people how he and another councilman have made joint efforts to shut down public participation from those "critics" that they and now, Inside Riverside have derided. But if there's any conduct problems, they can't be attributed to the new members, it's just a question about whether or not there's enough leadership from the new sector to effectively rein in some of the boisterous attitudes as they are called of two of the more senior members. If they can't do it, perhaps Election 2009 might just create some newly kinder, gentler people on the dais.

But is it a more transparent city council like this blogger stated? Is this really the Era of Change?

The answers are no to the first question as both the back room deal involving Greyhound and the mishandling of the Community Police Review Commission provide ample evidence to a more pessimistic view of the transparency factor of this ruling class.

As for it being the Era of Change, it's too soon to answer that question. What will prove to be interesting is whether it answers itself or not during the upcoming political campaign wars of 2009 coming to a venue near you.




Riverside placed third on Yahoo's list of the worst housing markets in the country, behind Los
Angeles and Stockton.


The projected change in 2009 off the current median price will be a nearly 24% drop in value.







More bus stations are being built in Riverside County if not Greyhound stations. The Riverside hub will stay in its current location downtown rather than be moving to the Marketplace area while faux crime magnet Greyhound Bus Lines gets evicted next month.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




"This does more good for public transit than any other thing we could do," said Bob Buster, a county supervisor who serves on both the bus board and transportation commission.

By supporting bus service at a time when the sluggish economy is making life hard for many workers, Buster said the county can convince people to use more public transit.

"This is a big part of all that integrated transportation network we see in the future," Buster said. "It is fast, it is cost-effective for the price and it is very flexible."

Buster said as public transit becomes a larger priority for Riverside County, the transportation commission should follow suit.

"(The transportation commission) can no longer view bus as a subordinate part of the overall transportation network," he said.

Part of building the new transit centers is an attempt to sync bus service with Metrolink commuter trains.

But not all the planned centers are poised to help easily connect bus centers with commuter train service. Stanley said officials chose to keep the Riverside center at its location on Fairmount Boulevard, adjacent to the Greyhound station that's slated to shutter its doors next month.

Officials had hoped to move Riverside's downtown bus depot closer to the Metrolink station off Vine Street, but Stanley said money might be better spent refurbishing the existing location.

"That reduces the cost to $3.5 million," Stanley told bus board members.





Inland Empire Weekly takes on Riverside's new "rent the cops" ordinance.




The New York City Police Department unveils its new alarm service for calls involving mentally ill individuals.

(excerpt, Newsday)



Under terms of the month-old initiative, a 911 dispatcher handling a
"triggering incident" -- anything from a "shots fired" call to an
assault in progress -- checks the address to see if it has been the
scene of three previous incidents involving an emotionally disturbed
person in the preceding 365 days, according to an internal NYPD order.

If so, the dispatcher tells responding officers about the previous
incidents and sends to the scene an ambulance and the Emergency
Service Unit, whose officers are best-trained to deal with the
mentally ill.

A police patrol supervisor, who is usually armed with a portable
Taser, is also sent to the scene.

The program is designed to strengthen what observers and critics have
typically seen as a police shortcoming. Two deadly confrontations in
November 2007, including one involving the man with the bottle, plus a
recent case in which a naked man fell to his death after he was jolted
with a Taser, illustrate the challenges police face in such
circumstances.

The NYPD is also working with mental health officials to identify
locations, such as group homes, that house the mentally ill, according
to Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne, the NYPD's top spokesman.

"You don't want to leave it to an officer -- hopefully the police
officer on duty is one who happens to remember who lives there,"
Browne says. "It's better if we know in advance about these
locations."







A police officer in North Las Vegas has been charged with onduty misconduct involving stopping women in vehicles and asking them for dates and sexual favors.


(excerpt, Las Vegas Sun)



A department spokesman says 40-year-old James Vernon Clayton was arrested Tuesday after a five-month investigation of claims by five adult women from Las Vegas and North Las Vegas.

Clayton is charged with misconduct by a public officer and oppression under color of office, felonies, and misdemeanor indecent exposure.

None of the women reported being physically harmed or sexually assaulted, although documents show that one alleged that Clayton exposed himself and tried to touch her.







Also in Las Vegas, the citizen review board is critical of how that department conducts internal investigations.



(excerpt, Las Vegas Sun)



Dick’s complaint became an investigation of a police investigation — a review board investigating the police who investigate police misconduct complaints. And this, beyond the fact an internal affairs investigation was allegedly so shabby, is the real story. It’s a sign, perhaps, the review board is evolving.

For only the second time in the board’s nearly eight-year history, internal affairs detectives were subpoenaed to testify before a hearing panel to explain their interview techniques. This was a real departure for the board, which has historically focused its investigations on the citizen’s accusation, the actual incident, rather than on Metro’s handling of the subsequent internal affairs investigation. This was a real departure for a board that can almost always be counted on to agree with the findings of internal affairs detectives.

Concerns about the way internal affairs investigations were being handled have been building for months, Citizens Review Board Executive Director Andrea Beckman said. Dick’s case was just the straw that broke the camel’s back.

But beyond these concerns, there’s something more significant: a board that is empowered enough, or bold enough, to investigate Metro’s investigators. And this change is a little harder to tease out.






The Police Commission has confirmed that the Department will be
submitting its response to the report (on the LAPD's racial profiling) at the Police Commission
meeting on January 13, 2009 meeting at 9:30 a.m. (at Parker Center,
150 N. Los Angeles St.).

The Police Commission is considering taking the unusual step of
agendizing community leaders and groups to speak on this issue. We
*must* get a considerable turnout or the Commission will not see this
as an issue it needs to take seriously. Also, we would like to turn
out affected community members who can share their stories.

Remembering 10 Years Later

From the Black Voice News





Remembering Tyisha 10 Years Later


Thursday, 18 December 2008

By Mary Shelton -- It began as all journeys do with a single step, after the shots were fired which were heard around the world. Most of Riverside slept through the night which would dawn into an era that changed the city forever.

Tyisha Miller, 19, never saw the faces of the four Riverside Police Department officers who took her life and they never saw hers until she was dead. Her relatives had called 911 for medical assistance and had told the dispatcher that Miller had a gun on her lap. Four White police officers arrived, with a combined level of experience of about 10 years between them and formulated what turned out to be a deadly plan.

Within seconds, 24 shots rang out from four guns and she lay dead, the fourth person to be shot to death by police officers that year in Riverside. Officers around her slapped their hands together, laughed and in some cases, made racist remarks. One police officer of Puerto Rican descent wasn't laughing and what he had to say would be heard around the world as well.

"If it will help her family, tell them we used black bullets," said Sgt. Gregory Preece. This remark and other cruel and racist statements made by officers as Miller lay dead were reported by Officer Rene Rodriguez to investigators after the shooting although it took months for them to come to light amid an atmosphere of confidentiality and secrecy.

Riverside woke up the morning after the tragic shooting to a different world. Members of the Black communities woke up to the death of one of their sisters and daughters. It would take several more weeks for most political leaders to realize that life had changed in this growing city and they had to respond to the crisis. The people of Riverside had already responded in force.
Just as African-Americans led the marches for civil rights in the South decades earlier, they led the protests in Riverside. They were joined by Latinos, Asian-Americans, American Indians and Whites, a sea of races united that the city hardly sees. Children marched alongside their parents. Rich people marched with homeless people.

At City Hall surrounded by police officers and as elected officials watched from above, community members and national leaders spoke for justice in the case of a young woman snatched away from life before her time. City leaders watched silently from City Hall while people demanded that change be born.

And even after these national leaders went home, hundreds of people returned week after week, always on Monday mornings and marched in rain, wind and the heat of summer. They marched when harshly criticized by those who wished they'd stop marching and stay home. They marched even when some of their own supporters told them to give the city the time it needed to do the right thing. They marched even while the city ripped news racks from a community
newspaper out of the ground and tossed them in the back of a truck because during times of upheaval, a newspaper printing history can be both the most frightening and liberating force.

They marched for the same reasons that King wrote about inside the jail cell in Birmingham on a roll of toilet paper.

"This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied." (King, Jr. 1963) Historians rarely ask the foot soldiers of a civil rights or social movement why they march and there's no one better to speak for those who do than themselves.

But for over a year, these individuals spoke with their feet with each step taken, with each word
spoken from their hearts. Their stories often fade in statements made by political leaders about
events that touched the lives of many people on anniversaries such as this one. Often these people fade away in the shadows, returning to their lives forever changed just as much as the
world changed around them because they marched.

But these are the people that the world requires. Without each individual person, no injustice can ever be undone, no tragedy can ever be rewritten into something positive and no change can ever take root and grow. The past can't be undone but the future can always be written.

So where is Riverside 10 years after the death of Miller?

Tremendous changes have been made in the police department through the collaborative efforts
of the communities of Riverside, the police department and the city. Over $22 million has been
spent on reforms recommended by the members of the Mayor's Use of Force Panel and mandated through a stipulated judgment with the State of California. In 2000, the Community Police Review Commission was born, a product of the community which demanded it.

"We don't ever want to go backwards," is a statement that's been said often, from community
members and police officers alike who lived through the period preceding the death of Miller.

But the city of Riverside currently lacks the leadership at its highest level that is required to
keep the department moving on the path it must take and in fact, appears intent on taking steps
backward.

The average officer today is 24 years old and less experienced than two of the officers who shot Miller. The police department is still about 70% White and 91% male in a city which is increasingly more diverse.

The budget crisis threatens staffing levels particularly at the supervisory level, which mirrors
similar problems in the years before the Miller shooting. The current city government seems
as disinterested in the department's struggles as they are in its accomplishments including the
creation and implementation of crisis mental health intervention training.

The police commission is under attack by political forces who didn't listen to the message
that voters sent in 2004 when they placed the Community Police Review Commission in the city's charter. These voters placed it there to keep it from the type of harm it's currently facing
now by those they elected into office.

That's why it's critical to keep marching, if not with our feet then with our hearts. Every individual
matters in this struggle and every voice is needed.





From Black Voice News



Editorial





As December 28, 2008 approaches, we stand on the threshold of the tenth anniversary of the Tyisha Miller shooting by four Riverside police officers. After this senseless killing of this Black teenager by four White officers, it set into motion a year long protest that will be a permanent
part of our communities history.

The Miller and Butler families, led by Rev. Bernell Butler, organized a Tyisha Miller Steering Committee with Pastor Jesse Wilson of Kansas Avenue SDA Church as president. There were other clergy serving on the committee as well as other community activists no one had heard of but are now famous. Week after week they would gather in front of city hall and raise the battle cry “No Justice, No Peace.”

During the struggle, national civil rights organizations, movie stars, and local and national politicians in the protest joined them.

The biggest news event came when they walked onto the Freeway and conducted a prayer vigil that caught national attention. Every major media outlet converged on Riverside including the BBC of England weighed in by conducting international interviews with the Black Voice News staff.

All of this activity caught the attention of the United States Justice Department and the California Attorney General’s office which imposed the first ever “consent decree” on a city police department’s It had an impact on police policies and assignments in the field. The four officers were terminated and forced change in police management and later in city hall.

The community activism led faculty at several colleges and universities to study various components of this shooting from media coverage, police relations, racial profiling, discrimination in hiring, promotions, performance evaluation of officers, officer training and the like.

One of the ongoing victories that came from the protest is the Community Police Review Committee, which new elected officials do not understand. This lack of understanding at city hall is leading to high anxiety once again by some people in the community. At one point in the past ten years the community’s trust level had improved but recently a rift has come in the relationship over the investigative authority and procedures of the committee.

While Tyisha Miller has gone, the memory lingers on and it is my hope that this city council and police chief will take positive action with the community before another incident will spark a community outcry or ‘No Justice, No Peace” protest.

What's hiding behind the curtain of the consent calendar?

"The issue is: Do the citizens have confidence in (the internal affairs process)? If they don’t, they’re not going to use it. … Give the people an independent investigation, not by a police officer."


---Ronal C. Madnick, ACLU





“What I see is a sort of a cross-examination of the person that is complaining, going after them in terms of their prior conduct. And I see a soft examination of the police officer, often asking them leading questions: ‘You had to use force, right?’ That kind of thing.”


---Howard Friedman, Boston attorney, whose observations weren't much different than those raised by the Community Police Review Commission in Riverside according to several of its annual reports available here.









There's this interesting comment in Craigslist to restore the consent calendar back to city residents so that they can pull items from this list off for discussion at city council meetings. If you recall, members of the public were able to do this until July 12, 2005 when a motion proposed by former councilman, Dom Betro and seconded by current councilman, Steve Adams was made and passed 6-1 with the only opposing vote coming from former councilman, Art Gage. Two of these elected officials are no longer sitting on the dais, having lost their respective election bids in 2007.


The minute order for that date reflects that vote, for item #55 under the title, "City Council rules of procedures and orders of business resolution" if you want to read it.







Restoring the right to pull items would be a long over due action but it's also an unlikely one unfortunately with the current city government in place. It's true that public expression and the release of public information from City Hall and its various departments has gotten more restricted in the past several years and the city council has taken great pains to keep direct employees on staff whose antipathy towards public expression and transparency is fairly equal to those individuals who give them their marching orders. The one thing that's transparent in government is that people don't seem to want it to be transparent.

There was no lack of leadership on the dais three years ago to pass this ban on city residents from pulling the items off of the agenda and so it passed with people speaking both in favor and against it. In fact, some of Betro's supporters actually supported what was going on that day and certainly didn't oppose the agenda item which approved other restrictions on public input as well. Several of them said how sick and tired they were of people going up to the podium and complaining and I suppose this was considered the appropriate response to that, but that's not the case if you hope to see an open and transparent government that is accountable to all of its constituents not just the ones with development firms and a lot of money.

And interestingly enough, some of the people who voted to pass this motion had wrapped themselves all around the Bill of Rights only weeks before protesting that they would never disenfranchise the public by restricting their ability to redress their government at its weekly meetings. But actions after all, speak louder than words and most often especially in government, they speak the truth and their words have such a low sales tag attached to them.


There's currently a lack of leadership coming from the dais on actions of openness and transparency from city government and plenty of leadership in the other direction. The city council's actions including some of their votes reflect that unfortunate trend in government.

But this is a good comment.


(excerpt)






Since the three newbies on the council have had a year to get their feet wet, 2009 would be a good time for them to make good on their promise to make City Hall more transparent by restoring the right of the citizens to pull items off of the consent calendar for discussion. For the past 3-plus years, the City has been engaged in an experiment of limiting discussion and dissent, and it hasn't worked. Has the rancor died down? Is the level of trust any higher? The answer to both of those questions is a resounding "no."

In fact, the council has been using the gag rule to load up the consent calendar with most of the policy and spending decisions, and reserving the discussion calendar for program updates and "receive and file" motions. One could argue that this is agenda abuse. Ward One councilman Gardner even campaigned on pulling items off the consent calendar that require $1 million in spending, but I haven't seen him do it. On one occasion he did comment on those expenses, but that falls well short of his campaign promise.

But Gardner is but one on the dais, and it will take 4 votes to change the rules. MacArthur, Hart, and Melendrez seem like the likeliest allies. Bailey is an enigma, but could be convinced. Adams is a definite no, but Schiavone, up for re-election, just might support such a change. So there is the potential for 5, maybe 6 votes on the council to make the change.

Now the bad news: the request for such a motion would likely have to come out of the Governmental Affairs committee: Adams (chair), Schiavone, Bailey. Those are the three likeliest "no" votes on the council, but Schiavone and Bailey might be persuadable.

Would restoring this right make for longer meetings? Certainly. Will it restore some trust? Possibly. Who knows, you might even have more people show up to voice their support for consent calendar items if they know they can speak to it. One thing it would do, however, is end the current agenda item shell game, because there would no longer be anywhere for the items to hide.

As part of the bargain, Councilmembers also need to show some restraint during and after the public comment period by not engaging from the dais. They should be encouraged to talk to constituents after the meeting or direct them to staff, but too many times a councilmember will take potshots from the dais. That's bad form, and below our expectations for our electeds. Our City is better than that, so act accordingly.

Nobody can guarantee that changing the rules back will make everything better. Most likely it will make things worse to some people, and better to others. Continuing in the same manner, however, is a sure ticket to more of the same, and is sure to engender more distrust. The meetings, as currently arranged, do their level best to discourage public interest and participation, and nobody should be in favor of that.




Well, nobody off of the dais anyway. There's plenty of reasons if you're on the dais to not support public participation and transparency in government but those reasons are not aligned with the ideals of living in a democratic republic of directly elected representation. They are more aligned with self-interest.


This individual is right in his observations of what truly is "agenda abuse" in that the consent calendar is turning into a dumping ground for high-ticket items including during the current economic crisis when more city residents are paying closer attention to exactly how their dollars are being spent. It's amazing how one city council meeting agenda can reveal just how much money passes through the consent calendar, and this commenter is right, in that the only items which really find themselves on the discussion calendar are "receive and file" items or public reports which elicit little in the way of discussion from the dais. And given how low the standard for acceptable conduct on the dais has become from those who engage in "potshot" making as this commenter mentioned and those who watch silently from the sidelines, it's clear that the dynamic of city council meetings is on quite a few people's minds.

Overcrowding the consent calendar makes it easy to hide items which really need to be discussed openly from accountability, which is ripe for abuse and serious problems in city government if in a wrong hands.

All you have to do is look what's happened in other cities and counties across the country where there's been scandals and incidents which breach the trust between residents and their elected government to know that all you have to do in this case is sit back and watch it unfold. And know that it's just as likely or not that Riverside itself could see similar problems in future years. If that's what happens, then it's truly unfortunate.


This commenter's correct in that such a proposal to restore the consent calendar likely wouldn't be sent to the Governmental Affairs Committee (unless of course it could be restricted further) and it's just as unlikely that any of its current three members would support it. Councilman Rusty Bailey's an enigma on some issues but not on transparency. His actions with the Community Police Review Commission show that transparency is not one of his stronger points and unless Chair Frank Schiavone unveils a kinder, gentler, opener side of himself as part of some sort of interesting if predictable campaign strategy, it would die in committee if it even got that far. Issues of transparency have been to Governmental Affairs before, but they don't come out of that committee looking anything but more opaque on view. Don't be surprised if a recommendation came out of that committee to bar people from speaking more than one minute on discussion calendar items.

So who would champion this form of transparency? Some people point to Ward Two Councilman Andrew Melendrez but even though he's probably the most popular member of the city council, he's also the least likely to make waves. Witness his quick deference as chair of the Public Safety Committee on the issue of the CPRC going there for discussion rather than to Governmental Affairs where it will be parsed down further in its road to becoming meaningless. Never mind that civilian review has been sent for policy review to that committee since at least the 1980s, he couldn't have backed down more quickly. Judging by the numbers of CPRC supporters in Ward Two, this could be an issue that he has to address during his reelection campaign.

Chris MacArthur is another possibility but it's not likely because he doesn't belong to any committee that could review the city council "conduct" code. Councilwoman Nancy Hart is pretty much a "me too" who will go along with the majority vote and this will be more apparent during her bid to stay on the city council next year. After all, earlier this year she signed onto an Op-Ed piece about the CPRC which she may have not even read carefully beforehand.

Councilman Steve Adams is the least likely and if he were smart, it would be the opposite because his behavior on the dais including against members of his own ward nearly cost him his reelection bid in 2007. But he didn't learn from his near mistakes and in fact, has rubber stamped his role as the "silver tongued" member of the dais so far during his term. Unfortunately, it's almost a given that Adams can be counted upon to make a comment that will embarrass others sitting next to him.



Here are some "sunshine" Web sites for local government accountability. They provide good resources including legal citations, articles on the transparency (or not) of local government, audits and reports of meetings and public agencies and even templates to help you write letters including requesting information under the California Public Records Act.


Cal Aware

California First Amendment Coalition





It's official. One of Hemet's fire stations has closed.




(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




City fire officials say that despite the closure Monday of the fire station, at 120 N. Hemet St., firefighters would do their best to respond to the surrounding area.

Some residents are lamenting the fire station's closure.

"It's probably not a good idea, but the city's in a bad situation," said William Adams, 50, who lives close to the shuttered station. He said he holds the city leadership responsible for not being careful with spending and allowing Hemet to fall into financial crisis.

"It's unfortunate that (the response times) will take longer, but what can you do?" he said.

The City Council recently approved making cuts and laying off personnel to deal with a projected budget imbalance of about $6 million in the 2009-10 fiscal year because of declining revenue from sales taxes, property taxes and developer fees.






About 60 more layoffs planned in Orange County's workforce.


(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



Word of the cutbacks came the same day that 1,000 angry workers stormed the Orange County Hall of Administration to protest previously announced plans to lay off 210 social services employees.

The social services cuts stem from a steep reduction in state funding that county officials said left them with no option but to eliminate jobs. In addition to the layoffs, the county has disclosed plans to require 4,000 social services employees to take two weeks off without pay next year.

Chanting "Chop at the top!" members of the Orange County Employees Assn. and other government unions filled the fifth-floor lobby outside the offices of the Board of Supervisors in Santa Ana and implored them to search for alternatives to layoffs.













A Melbourne, Florida police officer faces job termination in connection with sexual misconduct.




(excerpt, Click Orlando)



Melbourne police Officer Christopher Buccelli, a three-year veteran of the department, is still on the payroll but has until Dec. 30 to explain to the police chief why he should not be fired, according to Melbourne Police Department spokesman Cmdr. Ron Bell.

The latest internal investigation looked into allegations that Bucelli violated a no-contact order and may have harassed a prostitute and her boyfriend who spoke to investigators about the earlier incidents, Local 6 News partner Florida Today reported.

"He was served a notice of suspension prior to dismissal," Bell said.

That means Buccelli -- as part of department policy -- will have to appeal the finding within seven days and explain at a hearing why he should not be released from duty as a police officer, Bell said.

"The officer will have until 5 p.m. on the 30th to show cause as to why he should not be dismissed," Bell said.





The Worcester Telegram and Gazette did an indepth investigation into how the police department there handled citizen complaints. And guess what it found. It discovered that it had questions about the fairness and thoroughness of the investigative process, which isn't surprising given that many people across the same country have asked the same questions about that process in general and how it's done in their city or county in particular.


(excerpt)



While some observers question why Officer Mark A. Rojas was allowed to continue policing city streets as he accumulated an internal affairs file spanning more than a thousand pages, Chief Gary J. Gemme characterized the bulging file as a testament to the diligence with which his department investigates its own.

“I think it speaks to the thoroughness of the investigations by the Bureau of Professional Services. I think people should walk away with a knowledge of the thoroughness of these cases,” Chief Gemme said.

But others question how seriously police take internal affairs investigations.

In interviews, several people who have lodged complaints against Officer Rojas, 35, during his 12 years on the force derided the probes as half-hearted exercises in which the officer repeatedly was given the benefit of the doubt and investigators made little effort to verify claims of misconduct.

“In general, it’s rare that you’ll see internal affairs investigate complaints of police misconduct the same way they would investigate a crime, applying the same skills and finding and interviewing witnesses,” said Howard Friedman, a Boston lawyer who has specialized in police misconduct cases for 25 years.




None of this is surprising news to many people who believe that self-investigation of police misconduct is at best very difficult to do and at most, impossible to do. Gemme is clearly the latter based on how proud he is of creating a huge investigative file for Rojas, yet didn't address how an officer could have such a thick file and still patrol the streets. But similar arguments have been used regarding several officers in Riverside who have accumulated a large number of complaints and a large number of exonerated or unfounded filings. Including one who was the subject of comments allegedly made by now-retired Judge Steve Cunnison that in a criminal case involving an arrest by this officer tried in his courtroom, he felt that it was possible that the officer used excessive force in the arrest. Ironically, the lawyer who related this chain of events now works for one of the top police defense firms in the southern part of the state.

The jury acquitted the woman on trial of two of the more serious misdemeanor charges of assault and battery on a peace officer and convicted her on obstruction. She was sentenced to time serviced which was several days in jail after her arrest and summary probation. The officer has accumulated more complaints since that arrest including as recently as a month ago.




More database snooping by officers in Memphis, Tennessee.To add to the snooping that's been going on already.

Another blogger harassed

Threatening emails have been sent to a woman who blogs on law enforcement-related domestic violence. She's one of the top if not the top blogger in the country who tackles this issue and unfortunately, like some people who write on law enforcement issues, she probably hears from people who are unhappy with her activism. Now she's been getting emailed threats.

This is what one of the emails stated:



(excerpt, Behind the Blue Wall)



"When I find you and I will, your going to understand what it's like to be a fish out of water. God help you and your family. I tracked your IP address and I'm coming for you ...... you don't know when to stop and when you do it will be too late for you to start ever again."



Sounds like a threat, a threat of bodily harm or worse to her and her family. The emails have apparently been traced to a Palm Beach Sheriff's Department deputy who's been employed by at least three other law enforcement agencies during his career and has been in different kinds of trouble during his tenures. This blogger had been writing posts about this individual, Deputy Ira Peskowitz who has apparently made a career out of compiling a troubling laundry list of just about every type of police misconduct that's out there including domestic violence. Yet despite that or maybe because of it, he still remains employed by the profession which is supposed to be the antithesis of everything he represents. It might sound shocking to some people but it's not really all that surprising. At least one law enforcement agency boasted about hiring other agencies' rejects but found itself under investigation by outside agencies way after the fact.

More emails received from an AOL email address linked to this deputy were also received by this blogger, who not surprisingly is left fearful for her own safety and that of her family and who has received little in the way of any meaningful response from either the Palm Beach Sheriff's Department or the law enforcement agency in her own city which really isn't all that surprising. But if that's the case, then the chances that the responsible individual will be held accountable are pretty much next to zero. This is a profession that does very well at looking out for and after its own, most particular its bad apples even apparently those who might work for other agencies. One reason why civilian review boards and police commissions are popping up across the country just in case there are still people out there scratching their heads at where and why they are coming from. It's the almost instinctual way that officers almost always back up misconduct by other officers when it happens. Behind every "bad apple" there's at least one officer and probably more who kept their mouths shut to protect him or her. If they don't, then who will protect them when they need it?

That's what gave birth to civilian oversight and review.


I know and fully understand the feeling of being harassed by someone who left a trail back to a municipality which circled its wagons in response to a request for an explanation as to why a harassing email to me had the city's fingerprints on it. In 2007, I received the following email from a Yahoo account started under my name and with an address very similar to one that I used.

Mary, Mary with shorter (yet still greasy) hair -e.

Why do you hate people so?

Do you truly despise others?

Or, perhaps just your mother?

Or, maybe...just yourself.

The full header provided by Yahoo revealed the following:



eturn-Path:
Authentication-Results: mta209.mail.re2.yahoo.com from=yahoo.com; domainkeys=pass (ok)
Received: from 68.142.236.44 (HELO n6a.bullet.mail.re3.yahoo.com) (68.142.236.44) by mta209.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:17:57 -0700
Received: from [68.142.230.28] by n6.bullet.re3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Jul 2007 01:16:16 -0000
Received: from [66.196.101.132] by t1.bullet.re2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Jul 2007 01:16:16 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by rrr3.mail.re1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Jul 2007 01:16:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 28370 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Jul 2007 01:16:15 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=xDvCgPvGCzQPgI0QueBRrONM45GLbto29mHtinQtQprwZ9fytKJavlUl
FG20rnc8l3V/bsgNObLV83LOuSpEpiRlH3jfnYeGtfjIsq1wmc1VizaxpBIu7JSxX9/fr7wuUapX+Mfkcm1W24k9g9pHREbWZ0IL+RkKdFMUwNUVLNc=;
Received: from [192.248.248.66] by web45316.mail.sp1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:16:15 PDT
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:16:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: This sender is DomainKeys verified
Mary Shelton



According to IP-Adress locator, the IP address, 192.248.248.66 contained the following information.




IP address [?]: 192.248.248.66 Copy [Whois]
IP address country: ip address flag United States
IP address state: California
IP address city: Riverside
IP address latitude: 33.940399
IP address longitude: -117.395897
ISP of this IP [?]: CITY OF RIVERSIDE
Organization: CITY OF RIVERSIDE
Local Time of this IP country: 2008-12-22 22:31



I contacted the city for an explanation as to why a harassing email written in an account impersonating me was sent out through their computer network. I was essentially told by Information Technology head, Steve Reneker to contact Yahoo about the "alleged impersonations" because the city couldn't or wouldn't even provide an explanation as to how why its IP address appeared on a header with the harassment email. The city apparently believed that the appropriate response to this situation was to have Yahoo answer to a behavior that was done on a city-owned network that it had nothing to do with. That's called passing the buck in most worlds.

So can people write harassing emails on city owned equipment or using city-administrated networks do so with impunity. Unfortunately, the answer is yes. This is a much less serious example of how that is so than that involving the above blogger but the mentality is pretty much the same. It comes from pretty much the same place. And it's not a very good place at that.

Just as it was yes, when I was harassed for two years by still-unidentified (at least to me) individuals although I bumped into one of them on another site about a month ago. The writing style, syntax, punctuation and overall flair if you can call it that, were the same that I was subjected to for month after month filled with hateful posts where he harassed me and thumbed his noses at those allegedly investigating his antics.

It was like getting hit in the face by a blast of cold air. Being among his own kind considering how he identified himself and not the "whore" or the "bitch" or maybe even the "cunt", his manners were somewhat better than how he had behaved on my site with his friends. I had pretty much put the episode of cyber stalking behind me but when I read the familiar style of writing, it all came back in a rush. Just like it did when in the autumn of 2006, I watched the only cyber harasser who had ever been identified to me by a representative of the police department, receive a civic award from the city council. Only in Riverside can an officer get slapped on the wrist for conduct unbecoming of an officer and get a civic award in the same year. But then that might not be the case at all. Maybe that happens everywhere. Maybe it's when it doesn't, that is when an exception prevails over the rule.

So I know better than most what lies ahead for this woman if she insists that she live in a world where she can blog about the issues that matter to her and keep herself and her family safe from individuals like those who threatened her via email, who may or may not be the same people who are sworn to protect and serve people. But when someone states in writing that they're coming after you, it's going to make you fearful, it's going to make you always look over your shoulder and that's part of the thrill and the power these cowards exert over others. Just like when someone "prays" that serious harm comes to you or your family, or says they are coming looking for you with their friends in blue. But what's the incentive to not engage in this behavior if you're awarded after the fact? The decision to do just that sent a pretty loud message about some of the disturbing remainders of a police culture which was supposed to be stamped out by former State Attorney General Bill Lockyer's consent decree. In some elementary ways, this agency has a long way to go even as it's been successful in other areas of reform.

It's going to make you wonder if this person, that person or that person in that squad car over there is the one who wrote somewhere that they saw you that day. That they saw you the day before and the week before that and then paint that image they took from those sightings in disgusting and intimate detail. After all, they can afford to do so in Florida and they can afford to do it here, because their privacy under state law is more important than your safety. It's their playing field after all.

So having learned the reality of how the system of self-investigation works and just how well law enforcement handles its own problems in its midst, I can only hope that this blogger receives some form of justice and feeling of safety for having the life of her and her family threatened by some coward hiding behind anonymity but unfortunately, I'll be surprised if that actually happens because in law enforcement's current state, it can't as long as it thinks the "good" that its "bad apples" do when they're not engaging in bad behavior outweighs that bad behavior that they do and anyone harmed by said bad behavior, is just acceptable collateral damage. That's a pretty good explanation, as good as any as to why a department and a city would award an officer who had committed what it called misconduct.

I also hope that she never gives up her blogging though that can be difficult in the face of threats especially if you have children. But in the end as abhorrent as this behavior can be, it's a litmus test on whether or not your blogging is having an impact though that's not much consolation when it happens to you.

Eventually, you learn to live with it. You learn to take precautions. You learn to be careful about who you trust including police officers. It's not really fair because the vast majority of them are good people who work hard to keep people safe but unfortunately, there are members in their rank who hide behind them as justification to harass. Why not? They have all the protection in the world. After all, who's going to investigate them anyway? Their former supervisor who got transferred to Internal Affairs after working in the same unit? Their drinking buddy? Their best friend? The officer whose life they saved a month before by backing them up in a dangerous situation? One or more of the above?

But it's hard reading about it when it happens to someone else. Because an attack against one blogger is really an attack against all of us who address these issues.


In this particular case involving the city-sent email, about a week later, after I blogged about the email, I received the following one from a Charter Communications ISP in Riverside. That's the first and only apology I ever received from a cyber harasser to date.

I am writing to apologize for my previous letter. I'm most sorry that you were concerned that it was some sort of threat or harassment. It was not intended that way at all.

By choosing an address like yours and writing that note, I was simply trying to suggest that you look within yourself to learn why you might be so negative about so many things. I meant you no harm, and my letter was not well written therefore the intended message was not perceived.

No further messages will be sent from this address, as I will close it and will not re-open.

Again, I am very sorry. I wish you happyness and peace.

I got tips about the source of both emails but I'm not sure whether or not they truly indicated the person responsible or just who the most unpopular people on the city's payroll are.

But the harassment of this blogger is yet another sad example of what happens when you write on police accountability issues. Hopefully, she will be safe and able to keep blogging, shining a bright light on the issues that her harassers don't want to ever see the light of day.





Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein wrote about the lack of heat at Banning's jail facility.



(excerpt)

When I asked Chief Deputy Thetford, the man in charge of Sheriff Department "building facilities," why he didn't bring in portable heating units, his answer was chilling.

"Excellent question. I wasn't aware of this before this morning."

He'd heard about it shortly before he called me. He was getting ready to head out to Banning to see this mess first-hand.

"I'm not too happy," he said. (Which brings the number of unhappy people to 97.) "I just got off the phone with the facilities commander."

Glad someone reached Capt. Walt Meyer. When I tried, they almost patched me through to the jail's watch commander. But when I told the woman who answered the phone what I wanted to talk about, she put me on hold, then said I'd have to call the sheriff's PR man. When I asked for the number, she said I should already have it since I work for the paper. That must be how they do business out there: blankets for inmates, cold shoulder for everyone else.

In the most refined bureaucratic lingo, Thetford called the blankets and clothes "minimal mitigation." He said inmates "were being exposed to the weather" and called it "an emergency situation."

"One way or another," he said before heading to Banning for a warm little chat with Capt. Meyer, "it will be resolved today -- either by actual repair or some form of portable units being brought in."

A Los Angeles Police Department officer is under investigation by both federal agencies and his department for allegedly smuggling firearms to his security company in another country.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)




Officer Johnny Baltazar is accused of purchasing eight .40-caliber Glocks from the LAPD Academy store and secretly shipping them, along with two other guns and 1,530 rounds of ammunition, to Belize where he runs a company called Elite Security, according to documents obtained by The Times.

Baltazar, 49, who was assigned to the West Los Angeles Division, has been accused administratively by the LAPD with exporting firearms without a license, failing to declare firearms he exported and failing to notify his LAPD superiors that he was under federal investigation, documents show. He has been suspended with pay pending a disciplinary hearing that could result in his firing.

Such hearings, which were open to the public for decades, have been conducted in secret since a 2006 state Supreme Court ruling that limited access to police personnel information.

City Hall Blues: Will you be my marionette today?

I had some more conversations about what's going on with the Community Police Review Commission this week. For the council members who insist like Ward Three's Rusty Bailey that they don't get complaints about what's happening to the CPRC, would you like to trade places for a little while? Perhaps, the people who are unhappy with what's happening have been watching how city council members like Bailey (as mayor pro tem) have refused to conduct the business involving the city council's handling of the commission in a public forum. Not to mention that people in this city have watched how some city council members have conducted themselves at city council meetings over the past year or so particularly during the public comment periods and haven't been impressed or themselves have been worried that if they say something the city government doesn't like, they will be treated the same way.

But I've received numerous complaints from every ward in this city about what's been going on with the CPRC as of late and what's been written about in the daily press.

It's interesting to the point of being funny how some elected officials are claiming with an election year on the horizon that they are more amiable to people coming to meetings and criticizing them or "shouting" at them (which rarely has happened in truth) when some of these same individuals outside of election year have rolled their eyes, shuffled their papers, held private conversations with others on the dais, left the room, gone to chat with the city attorney, ordered the city attorney to send letters to these people's houses, sighed, grunted, laughed or called people liars, say they have no class, no ethics or whatever pops into their mouths before their brains can remind them that they are elected officials. But then election year brings kinder, gentler politicians into the arena and they remain that way until the final votes are tabulated in their respective elections. But there's a reason for that given the role that city council meeting decorum played against some individuals most notably former Ward One Councilman Dom Betro during Election 2007.

And it's unlikely that you'll see any elderly women getting removed from the podium or evicted from the chambers during an election year.

That's part of what makes the election cycle so fascinating is comparing and contrasting the behavior and mannerisms of elected officials during the election cycle and outside of them, of how politicians reinvent themselves to woo the voters' support. That's part of why two incumbents in the last election cycle didn't get reelected and a third had to struggle for every last vote to remain in office over a candidate he outspent by at least 20 to 1. Will that trend repeat itself? It's very possible but it's too early to tell.



The CPRC has some interesting stories around it, including one involving a commissioner who was deemed as being too mouthy by certain elected officials including one who decided that this individual needed some impromptu ethics training by city employees. Only this training turned out to be several hours spent in front of a certain city employee who lectured that individual in a way that made it appear that this was an attempt at reprogramming this individual who remained firm to his or her beliefs despite the attempt at retraining. The story was hilarious but it was also very sobering in the realization that the city council is not only whittling down the ability of city residents to participate publicly at meetings but at least several of them are actually involved in trying to turn some of the commissioners into their marionettes through the use of city employees.

And no matter what members of the city council might say or do to try to influence or retrain commissioners in things like "ethics", they have no right to impose their belief systems on the volunteers who put in their time and energy while serving on the city's boards and commissions. For one thing, micromanagement and retraining with personalized "ethics" training isn't included as information on the recruitment brochure. For another thing, it's likely that the majority of city residents who apply for board and commission spots and even those who survive the appointment process would not want to be shaped into what their elected officials want them to be.

It's no wonder that some commissioners like Ken Rotker on the CPRC are confused as to who they owe their allegiance to that they truly believe that they have to answer to the city council because the city council appointed them to their positions. Is this something that Rotker believed on his own or is this how an elected official explained the conditions of his service to him?

Under the city charter, the city instituted an ethics code in place and members of boards and commissions are required to receive training in the ethics code. This includes members of the CPRC. But this is a far cry from a city council member or two trying to push members of these bodies to undergo further "training". Perhaps it's the elected officials who engage in these practices who need to undergo further ethics training themselves. And the other city council members need to stand up and call this behavior for what it is, unacceptable and embarrassing to the entire governmental body. And if they don't know what happened, they really need to start paying close attention to what other individual city council members do or say on their collective behalf.

This behavior was very inappropriate and not even remotely close to being ethical behavior by those who are engaging in it, while publicly appearing to be "hands off" of the commission. The problem is that the city officials who aren't engaging in this behavior aren't saying anything in public regarding the CPRC either. The members of the city's boards and commissions who generously offer up their time need to be supported, in their ability to remain independent thinkers and they shouldn't be subjected to attempts to be reeducated by city employees on the city residents' dime.


Why is the CPRC the target of so many attempts to undermine it in different ways, ways which go beyond its ability to carry out its charter-mandated responsibility to investigate officer-involved deaths which can only be done in a thorough and timely manner? To find the reasons, common sense and plain logic would tell you to turn your attention to the law enforcement agency which it oversees through its involvement in the complaint process. To find the reasons, common sense and plain logic would tell you to look at various political forces inside City Hall and how they interact and interface with representatives of the police department including its current management. To find the reasons, common sense and plain logic would tell you to look at the interactions of the city council and its current city manager and city attorney and ask yourself is the dog wagging its tail or is the tail wagging the dog? The answer to that question might both dismay you and surprise you.

City governments hate civilian oversight and that's a universally known fact. Whether it's Columbia, Missouri, Atlanta, Georgia or Eugene, Oregon, whenever a civilian oversight mechanism is developed and implemented, it's almost always under duress. Meaning that the community members push for civilian review until the city or county government finally caves in and tries to co-opt the process or impose the weakest form of oversight that they can away with. Most particularly in jurisdictions where the labor unions in the police department are the most powerful political forces. So what's happening in Riverside is hardly unique but it's taken on some attributes which are not as commonly seen in other cities and counties, attributes which will be discussed in future postings.




The CPRC was called the "snivilian review board" by a blogger in response to the antics and intrigue surrounding the beleaguered commission brought to the city residents' by City Hall in Riverside in a somewhat belated response to the voters decision to go to the polls in 2004 and place the commission into the charter and hopefully off of the political football field. Sadly, the city council listened to the will of the voters for about five minutes before launching their greatest attack on Riverside's police accountability mechanisms about 10 minutes or so after the city dissolved its five-year stipulated judgment with the office of former State Attorney General Bill Lockyer. At any rate, the rush for instant gratification from weakening the CPRC was only briefly delayed most likely for appearances sake.

The CPRC also hasn't down outreach in years as evidenced lately by the last two monthly reports which aren't yet available online and by this report, that report and even this one. Members of some of the neighborhoods where the CPRC has done zero outreach in the past year attended the most recent meeting held by this commission, many of them coming in without any or very little information or knowledge about the CPRC, what it does and its history in this city.

Coming soon, will be another Web site which will provide information on the CPRC, its history and information about every step of the complaint filing, investigation and disposition process. Because the CPRC has failed time and time again in the past year to do appropriate outreach, even though some of its members have valiantly tried to accomplish this, the responsibility of outreach can no longer be left to the commission to do. Whether the city government is setting up the commission to fail at public outreach, the city manager's office is still hostile towards community outreach (through equating it with bias against the police department) or the commission and its agents have been rendered impotent by political influences at City Hall, it's been a serious problem.

More information about this new site will be available here and elsewhere soon.






The Los Angeles Times Blog catches readers up on the reapplication process of former Riverside Police Department officer Jose Nazario after his acquittal in federal court of manslaughter charges in connection with an alleged killing of Iraqi detainees in 2005 in Fallujah.



(excerpt)

As a probationary employee, Nazario had no civil service protection.

His application has to start from the beginning, meaning he will compete with other applicants, said Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach. That process is currently in the background-check stage.

Nazario may or not have an advantage. Leach was 20 years in the Marine Reserves and has several former Marines in his department.

"I have a soft spot for Marines," he said.

Another former Riverside Police Department officer who became a current one is Vincent Thomas who's been reinstated after the city bowed to the ruling issued by the State Court of Appeals last July. He'll be out in the field again pending a background check.

Nearly six years ago, Thomas was arrested on child molestation charges in relation to allegations made by a teenaged girl he had guardianship over. After two hung juries at trial, the San Bernardino County District Attorney's office dropped the case.


Speaking of blogging, there are quite a few interesting blogs in the Inland Empire, a hotbed of political intrigue and accountability issues where the Grinch steals Christmas.


A posting by this blog was referenced in iepolitics.com an interesting and informative blog on politics in the Inland Empire particularly from Southern California.


The rants and raves of Aric Isom is a very well known and very good local blog.

Inside Riverside, blogs about the antics and politics of Riverside County including the Sheriff's Department. This blog is back in action after a rather long sabbatical.


Save-Riverside, the blog of an activist organization in Riverside provides a lot of information including its goals and mission statements.


Inland Empire Craigslist Politics contains information and discussion on Inland Empire politics especially in Riverside. Key topics right now are the situation with Greyhound Bus Lines and Election 2009. Discussions have especially kicked off on the Ward Four council race which begins early next year.


Another blog which covers the Inland Empire is Big Bear Observation Post which deals with politics, government and law enforcement related issues.

The blog, IE Chatter gives indepth coverage of the sins and tribulations of civic governments throughout the Inland Empire whether it's the conviction of a former Murrieta councilman to city councils in different cities including Rialto voting to give themselves pay raises.


Inside Southern California wrote on the delay placed on a lawsuit filed by a U.S. airman against the San Bernardino County Sheriff deputy who shot and wounded him.

An interesting look complete with photos of the Inland Empire Democratic Committee organizations.

Riding in Riverside talks about commuting from one of the top regions for commuting in the state.


IE Papers is a blog about the coverage provided by the daily newspapers in the Inland Empire most particularly the Press Enterprise.




A downtown Riverside developer has responded to the collapse of the new housing market by reducing the number of units he plans to build and instead of building condos, he will be building apartments, bringing more rental units to the downtown area. This was exactly what many people watching the project believed would happen when the housing market took a plummet but the city officials of course nay sayed their criticism and concern.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




The economic downturn and expense of the previous m solé design -- which called at first for 104 condominiums wrapped around a central parking garage then shrank to 91 condos surrounding the garage -- forced the changes, Mruvka said.

Fresh & Easy is eager to open the market, he said. Brendan Wannacott, a spokesman for the chain, said he could not comment.

Mruvka said he is confident about filling the residential units.

"I'll find 48 people that want to lease it up," he said.

He expects the one- and two-bedroom units to rent for between $1,200 and $1,900 a month depending on their size. There are four sizes ranging from 778 square feet to 1,602 square feet, and most of the units would be the one-bedroom or smallest two-bedroom types.

The big challenge will be filling the other retail space, Mruvka said.

He already built the first phase of m solé -- the m is for Mruvka and solé is for sun -- 10 three-story live/work units on Market on the half block from Third Street north towards Second.

The 10 units started out as condos but Mruvka now has them for lease.

Only one person has moved in so far.







Dan Bernstein from the Press Enterprise dedicated his column to thanking all of his subjects in the past year.

You're welcome, Mr. Bernstein and thank you for everything that you do. You kicked some ass this past year as usual. Happy Holidays!






The Press Enterprise Editorial Board praises six retired judges who are handling civil trials in the hopelessly backlogged Riverside County Superior Court. It also scolded District Attorney Rod Pacheco's office for its role in the backlog.



(excerpt)

Riverside County undeniably holds more criminal trials than comparable counties do. State judicial reports show that Riverside County held 863 criminal jury trials in 2006-07, while San Bernardino County held 259. The numbers were 709 for Riverside County and 272 for San Bernardino County in 2005-06.

The counties, which have similar population figures, both have high caseloads and a shortage of courtrooms -- but only Riverside County's courts are overwhelmed. The difference is in procedures and policies. And in fact, San Bernardino County prosecutors say they take court congestion into consideration when deciding whether to file a criminal case.

Yes, Riverside County needs more judges, because the number of judicial positions has not kept pace with the region's growth. But the state's $40 billion budget shortfall probably rules out funding for new judges anytime soon. And certainly, the DA's approach in prosecuting cases is not the only factor in court congestion.

But the district attorney cannot simply ignore the practical limits on Riverside County's court system. The DA's policies reflect a political position, not a public-safety imperative. Other counties manage to protect the population without coddling offenders or clogging the courts with criminal trials. Riverside can do the same.

Not exactly a shock, but still surprising was the retirement of San Francisco Police Chief Heather Fong.


(excerpt, San Francisco Chronicle)

Fong told The Chronicle that she is not being pushed out by the mayor, who has publicly supported her, or by her critics, including members of the rank and file, middle managers in the San Francisco Police Department and the police officers union.

"None of us can be chief forever," said Fong, 52. "I felt I've accomplished a lot."

Still, she acknowledged in the interview, "It has not been an easy four or five years. There are people who thought they should have been chief."

The critics, she said, can apply for her job. "Now they'll have the opportunity."

Haines City's own police chief resigned in the wake of the arrest of one of his captains who allegedly lied about a sexual relationship he had with one of his female subordinates.





Two police officers in Mesa, Arizona are under investigation by Internal Affairs for different incidents.




A man in Santa Rosa died after being tased.

Communication and transparency, buzz words in the wake of Hound-Gate

As Hound-Gate continues to unfold at Riverside City Hall, Ward One Councilman Mike Gardner admits that mistakes were made by himself on the issue of the ouster of Greyhound Bus Lines from the downtown terminal and set the record straight to the Press Enterprise, the medium of choice these days for the city government when discussing issues with the city residents.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




I believe that the city should have taken steps to clearly communicate the parameters, including cost, of the settlement with Greyhound regarding the closure of the facility. While the city attorney was technically correct in saying there is no legal requirement to disclose the settlement information absent a specific request, meeting the legal minimum does not always make for good government.

I believe that responsibility for this oversight lies solely with the city's elected officials, and, in this case, mostly with me -- since the Greyhound station lies in Ward I, which I represent.

I was too focused on the issues surrounding the station and potential new locations, and not on the need for a public process in negotiating the settlement. I did not suggest that the council give staff clear direction to bring the final settlement back for council discussion and approval. For that I apologize.

I am a proponent of making government as accessible and transparent as possible. The Greyhound settlement is an example of the type of final resolution that I believe should be placed on the agenda for council ratification.



It's a good step in the wake of editorials and columns already appearing in the publication chastising the city government for back room discussions and secrecy involving first the latest round of restrictions against the Community Police Review Commission and now with, Greyhound. Wait a few days, and watch to see if the list of topics grows.

And at least Gardner comes forward and admits his mistakes when criticized about them. I once tried to correct a "mistake" made by his predecessor, Dom Betro when he made statements that the city was finalizing a contract with a consultant (who actually hadn't even heard from the city for several months) and was subjected to one of his screaming matches just for questioning the validity of his statement. And that guy can really yell.

Still, if Gardner ran for office on pushing for city government to be more responsive, more user-friendly and more transparent than he needs to do that pushing while he's in office. But that goes for any politician who ran for office espousing the same platform and even some of the city council's more recent converts to open and transparent government. You know the ones who always show up around election year. Transparency and accountability just doesn't seem to be one of this city council's strong points but then it hasn't been since the city council which fired former city manager, George Carvalho.

And what's interesting about the article is how Gardner challenged the ruling of City Attorney Gregory Priamos, not necessarily the legality of it but whether it was an appropriate standard for the city council to make a decision about regarding an issue. Whether or not meeting the minimum of a legal standard makes for good governance. A standard which could be applied to the situation involving Priamos stance involving the Community Police Review Commission which has so little independence that even its agendas and its budgetary allowance are in the hands of Priamos.





There's a very interesting dialogue of sorts going on here about this video tape where a man talks about Ward Four Councilman Frank Schiavone. I hope those arguing for and against different declared candidates in the Ward Four race don't wear themselves out before the filing deadline which is still several months away. In contrast, not much of a peep out about the three other local elections including the mayoral race which will take place in 2009. But then as stated earlier, Election 2009 hasn't even officially begun yet.

This comment makes allegations against the man in the videotape as not only breaking the California Political Reform Act but claimed the man's words violated some biblical test. Now if you want to follow this anonymous individual's train of thought wherever it goes, you could then say that the mention of the "biblical" test standard in governmental elections is a violation of the exclusionary clause of the First Amendment of the also-cited United States Constitution, but then that would show you how unusually stated it is. Although it was interesting to see the "biblical test" and the "habeas corpus" term used in the same paragraph because that rarely ever happens.

It's clear already even in these early days that this might be one of those most entertaining election seasons in the history of Riverside.








The Press Enterprise Editorial Board stated that troubled San Bernardino County Assessor Bill Postmus should leave office but the board of supervisors shouldn't spend a lot of money and time trying to oust him.



(excerpt)

Unless the board can find a way to oust Postmus sooner and at less expense, the effort to remove him makes little sense. San Bernardino County faces sharply lower revenue thanks to the economic slump, with near certainty of deep budget cuts. Supervisors can hardly justify spending $1 million or more on Postmus while reducing services to county residents.

And the removal process could still be under way when Postmus' term expires in 2010. But the election that year could bring Postmus' departure without the need for the extra spending.

A politician with any sense of shame, not to mention concern for the county's reputation, would have resigned already. Postmus vows to remain in office, to his discredit. But if the board cannot easily oust him, better to keep a close watch on his activities and let voters boot him in two years.

The investigation into two feuding council members in Banning takes an interesting new turn as controversy erupts about the expenditure of an inhouse investigation into the matter.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



City officials hired attorney Brenda Diederichs to conduct the investigation, and while they have not received an invoice for her firm's services, they anticipate it will total about $13,000, according to Banning's finance director, Bonnie Johnson.

Nakamura, who has the authority to spend up to $25,000 without the council's consent, did not approach the council on this matter.

Franklin said Friday that she wanted an investigation, but she does not think the one that was conducted was valid because, she believes, other people who are black were not interviewed.

"I think it was a waste of money the way it was done," she said.

Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition in San Rafael, questions why an investigation was done in the first place, since he says council members are not city employees.

"The city can have no liability," he said, adding that he views the investigation as a "colossal waste of time."





A state commission cleared one of Temecula's elected officials of a conflict of interest complaint.




A former Riverside County employee charged with embezzlement will go to trial.



More turmoil in Pomona after the ouster of its latest police chief.




Hemet is shutting down one of its fire stations in the wake of the budget crisis.




Testimony ends in the federal corruption trial of former Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



Michael S. Carona, the highest-ranking law enforcement official to be prosecuted in Orange County, has steadfastly denied charges that he sold the powers of his office for cash and gifts, hawked badges for campaign donations and even took advantage of a deputy's widow by steering her to an attorney friend in a kickback scheme.

But the former sheriff never took the stand. And the final witness called to testify in his legal soap opera was a no-show, underscoring the struggle by his defense team to line up witnesses, some of whom were reluctant to appear at the high-profile trial.

"They don't want to have their name . . . in the paper," Carona attorney Brian A. Sun told the judge this week.

Jurors in the federal trial, released for two weeks over the holidays and ordered to return Jan. 6 for closing arguments, will have plenty to ponder during the break.





Three police officers in Richmond, Virgina are facing criminal charges in connection with an assault at a local bar.


(excerpt, Richmond Times-Dispatch)

Ian McCloskey, the officer involved in the assault on Jan. 22 in a bar in Shockoe Bottom, was charged with obstruction of justice, a misdemeanor, because he threatened a witness after she accused him of carrying out the beating, prosecutors said.

"This is aberrant behavior on the part of the police," Richmond Commonwealth's Attorney Michael N. Herring said in disclosing details of the case to the Richmond Times-Dispatch. "But the overwhelming majority do good work day in and day out, and I continue to have faith in the work that they do."

Herring added that his office made the mistake of charging McCloskey with a misdemeanor assault, when prosecutors should have charged him with a felony, given the severity of the victim's injury and the "absence of mutual combat."

Herring also said Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney Matthew P. Geary used poor judgment in dismissing the misdemeanor assault charge. Geary did so -- and Herring approved the decision -- after McCloskey agreed to pay $5,000 to cover the victim's medical expenses.

Further, Herring said the Richmond Police Department improperly failed to inform prosecutors that the other two officers, Floyd T. Campbell II and William A. House, had failed to report the assault or properly investigate it.

In St. Louis, dealing with crooked police officers was a very difficult task.



(excerpt, St. Louis Post-Dispatch)



City police officers Bobby Lee Garrett and Vincent Carr stayed on the streets despite years of corruption complaints from lawyers and suspects.

They stayed even after their bosses heard a rumor of someone putting out a hit on Garrett for stealing his money.

They stayed until a week ago, when federal authorities arrested them on charges alleging they planted evidence, stole money, arrested an innocent man and dealt drugs.

Officials say that what sometimes looks like a lax attitude toward policing the police is really an illustration of how difficult that job can be.

Criminal defense lawyers said they had been complaining about Garrett and Carr for years.

One, Joel Schwartz, estimated that 50 to 100 of his clients over the years have told him Garrett planted drugs or stole cash. "I have had allegations from clients ... as far back as I can remember."





One of the worst police misconduct stories in a while comes out of Galveston, Texas with the filing of a lawsuit, stemming from an incident where undercover vice and narcotics officers beat and grabbed a 12-year-old Black girl and accused her of being a prostitute because she wore tight shorts.

She was hospitalized for injuries and then arrested after the fact weeks later, for "assaulting a police officer"



(excerpt, Injustice in Seattle)




Three weeks later, according to the lawsuit, police went to Dymond's school, where she was an honor student, and arrested her for assaulting a public servant. Griffin says the allegations stem from when Dymond fought back against the three men who were trying to take her from her home. The case went to trial, but the judge declared it a mistrial on the first day, says Griffin. The new trial is set for February.

"I think we'll be okay," says Griffin. "I don't think a jury will find a 12-year-old girl guilty who's just sitting outside her house. Any 12-year-old attacked by three men and told that she's a prostitute is going to scream and yell for Daddy and hit back and do whatever she can. She's scared to death."

Since the incident more than two years ago, Dymond regularly suffers nightmares in which police officers are raping and beating her and cutting off her fingers, according to the lawsuit.