Chinatown: The Riverside City Council spanks Jacobs

"It's a major issue. Be careful."

---Kevin Akin speaking on Chinatown at the city council meeting.



"It didn't happen."


---Ward One Councilman Mike Gardner about allegations that the city council verbally okayed the violation of the municipal code by Jacobs' employees.



"We may have lost Chinatown" through the city's "final Chinese Removal Act".


---UCR Archaeologist Scott Fedick about the bulldozing of the site that took place from Feb. 14-16 in an attempt to head off a temporary restraining order.




Verbal spankings were the order of the day from the Riverside City Council against developer and campaign contributor Doug Jacobs for his three day of reign of bulldozing on the Chinatown site during the holiday weekend earlier this month. One council member even announced he was donating his campaign contribution that he had recently received from Jacobs to the Save Our Chinatown Committee after listening to the testimony at the meeting.

If you recall, Jacobs was cited by the Riverside Police Department twice for violating a municipal ordinance that prohibits creating a noise disturbance on Sundays and federal holidays, including Presidents' Day, which was held this year on Feb. 16.

In news articles, Jacobs defended his actions which were also captured on video and witnessed by numerous people over the three days by saying he was following the treatment plan approved by the city council and the conditions of the permit.

Speakers at the city council meeting alleged that Jacobs' employees had told people that the police department and the city council had given them verbal permission to use noisy equipment on days were it was in violation of the city's municipal code, an allegation several city council members denied. The police department (which is currently short at least a dozen officers and four supervisors) sent officers in response to complaints on Sunday, Feb. 15 and Feb. 16 and both days employees didn't obey the officers' orders to stop the machinery and so they were cited by the police. Those citations will be processed by a judge in traffic court in Moreno Valley at a later date and could result in fines.

The schedule of work done by heavy equipment on that weekend in what speakers called, the "Valentines Day Massacre" were as follows:


Saturday, Feb. 14: 7 a.m.-7 p.m.

Sunday, Feb. 15: 7 a.m.-9 p.m.

Monday, Feb. 16: 7 a.m.-9 p.m.



Pictures and videos of what happened that weekend are available for your viewing pleasure here.



Jacobs admitted doing the work and knowingly violating the ordinance and his permit but claimed he did it to beat the restraining order, which was filed on Friday Feb. 13 and was to be heard in Riverside County Superior Court on Tuesday, Feb. 16. He said that if it were approved (and it was continued for about a week) then he would have no opportunity to prove that there were no artifacts.


It's good that the city council members who spoke, did indeed speak but if a group of concerned people hadn't gone to the meeting and addressed them on this issue, would these words have been said that needed to be said? As of the day of the city council meeting, only Ward One Councilman Mike Gardner (who includes the Chinatown site in his ward) had criticized the action, calling it a "conscious violation" in the Press Enterprise.

None of the other said anything publicly.


Dozens of people demonstrated with signs outside the city council chamber before the meeting and passed out fliers and buttons, with "Save Chinatown" on them. Some of them stayed to speak at the meeting.

Jean Wong, a member of SOCC, provided a descriptive picture at the city council meeting of the 11-12 bulldozers and backhoes that dug up huge chunks of dirt instead of using smaller tools more commonly associated with an archaeological excavation. The committee still doesn't know the extent of damage done to the site and any artifacts. In a newspaper article, Jacobs claimed his digging only yielded a few pieces of broken pottery.

Kevin Akin challenged the city council members who accepted campaign contributions from Jacobs while running for election to return them to sender, unspent. He said it would be one of the major focal issues of the current city council election and apparently some people took him to heart. He claimed that Jacobs had lied in court declarations claiming that he spent $1300 a day on security for the site yet no security guards were ever seen and that if they paid that much for security, "you can find them".

Another archaeologist from UC Riverside, Scott Fedick, said that the excavation bore little resemblance to the one outlined by Jacobs to the city council which would cost $2 million. Another speaker said that the archaeological expert hired by Jacobs to perform his excavation didn't appear until 9 a.m. which was two hours after the destruction on the site had begun.



Deborah Wong said that the city council was "on the wrong side of history" but "It's not too late to roll back" from being a city council which would go down in history as being responsible for the destruction of a national historical site.

The city council listened and then some of its members responded, in condemnation of Jacobs' actions.

Councilman Andrew Melendrez said that Jacobs had been "insensitive" and that it was up to the city council to restore the trust of the city in it after this episode.

Gardner said that the city council had never told Jacobs that he would be able to violate city codes and they couldn't do that (nor could the police department) unless they were amended. He stood by his words in the newspaper article saying that Jacobs clearly knew he was violating the ordinance.


"I'm concerned by his decision not to follow the terms of the permit," Gardner said.



Councilman Frank Schiavone expressed his disappointment in Jacobs, saying what he did was deliberate and disrespectful. He said that if Jacobs had said he was going to violate the city's code and bring 12 pieces of heavy equipment to dig up the parcel the way he did, the city council never would have approved his permit and treatment plan. He said he was offended that Jacobs had justified his actions by saying the city council had given its approval.

Then he offered to contribute his $250 campaign contribution he had received from Jacobs at a recent fundraiser to the SOCC, which accepted it.

Schiavone added that he spoke with an absent Councilman Rusty Bailey (another recipient of campaign contributions from Jacobs) and he was also very dismayed with the chain of events.

City Manager Brad Hudson spoke up at some point after Councilman Chris MacArthur had also voiced his displeasure and denied that city staff was involved in allowing Jacobs to violate the permit and the code in anyway.

There had been a lot of silence on this issue since the weekend of the bulldozers and backhoes but that silence was broken on Tuesday night, Feb. 24 in large part because people cared enough to come to the meeting to speak out on an issue that they're passionate about.

The temporary restraining order for the Chinatown parcel has been granted by Judge Sharon Waters on the morning of Tuesday, Feb. 24. Now the exchange of paper work via briefs submitted to the court will begin in early March. The date of the hearing on the preliminary injunction will be on March 20. More can be read about the hearing here.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



In issuing the temporary restraining order, the judge expressed concern about the handling of possible archaeological artifacts yet to be found, said Michelle Ouellette, an attorney representing Jacobs. She said archaeological digging with smaller tools still must be done.

The 4.2-acre site is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. It also is a city and county landmark and a state point of historical interest.

The Save Our Chinatown Committee wants a memorial park built there.

But the group knows that even if its lawsuit succeeds it would not stop Jacobs' project, and only force further environmental review, Sagara said.

"This isn't just like any other piece of property," Sagara said. "It's a special place. It deserves special attention."

Here are the court proceeding minutes:





EX PARTE HEARING RE APPL FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER & OSC.
02/24/2009 - 8:30 AM DEPT. 10

HONORABLE SHARON J. WATERS, PRESIDING
CLERK: C. ZUNIGA
COURT REPORTER: K. BURKS
SAVE OUR CHINATOWNCOMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY JOHNSON & SEDLAC - RAYMOND JOHNSON AND VEERA TYAGI PRESENT.
KRISTI SMITH REPRESENTING CITY OF RIVERSIDE PRESENT
MICHELLE OUELLETTE REPRESENTING CITY OF RIVERSIDE PRESENT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ATKINSON, ANDELSONLOYA RUUD &ROMO - JOHN DIETRICH PRESENT.
JACOBS DEVELOPMENTCOMPANY, INC REPRESENTED BY BEST, BEST, & KRIEGER - MELISSA CUSHMAN PRESENT.
ARGUMENT PRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER GRANTED
HEARING RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SET 03/20/09 AT 08:30 DEPT 10
HEARING RE CEQA SET 06/29/09 AT 09:00 DEPT 10
COURT ORDERS NO BOND TO BE POSTED AT THIS TIME.
COUNSEL AGREE ON THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE:
TRANSCRIPT TO BE PROVIDED TO PLAINTIFF BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS 2/25/09. PLAINTIFFS OPENING BRIEF
NO LATER THAN 3/3/09. DEFENDANTS BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 03/10/09. JOINT OPPOSITIONS AND REPLYS NO
LATER THAN 3/16/09.
COUNSEL STIPULATE BRIEFS SHALL BE LIMITED TO 20 PA TES, 20/20/12.
COUNSEL STIPULATE TO SERVICE BY FAX OR EMAIL.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD CERTIFIED BY 3/20/09, MAY BE LODGED WITH REPLY PAPERS. RESPONSIVE
PLEADINGS NO LATER THAN 3/27/09. OPENING BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 5/1/09. OPPOSITION BRIEFS NO LATER
THAN 5/29/09. REPLY BRIEFS NO LATER THAN 6/15/09.
COUNSEL MAY PROVIDE COURTESY COPIES DIRECTLY TO TH E COURTROOM BY 6/15/09.
COURT ORDERS ALL REPLY PAPERS FAX FILED.
NOTICE WAIVED.








This draft of the 2007-08 annual report for the Community Police Review Commission provides information that was present in the preceding report at least partly.

It's important to have comparative statistics for the findings on complaint allegations submitted by the CPRC, the Riverside Police Department and the City Manager's Office (CMO) in order to evaluate the independence of the CPRC and whether or not its input in the process actually plays any sort of role in the outcome of allegations delivered by Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis or whether it's just a rubber stamp for the city and/or police department.

It's interesting to see the evolution of how disparate the CPRC was from the other two entities which were themselves almost identical in the figures provided in 2006 to where it more closely mirrored the police department which was the case in 2007. In contrast, there was a slight deviation seen in terms of the rate of complaints sustained by DeSantis when compared to the other two agencies.

Sustain rates on complaint allegations:


2006:

CPRC: 8.57%

RPD: 5.14%

CMO: 4.57%




2007:

CPRC: 7.23%

RPD: 7.23%

CMO: 9.64%



2008:

CPRC: N/A
RPD: N/A
CMO: N/A



What's particularly interesting is comparing and contrasting the statistics for allegations receiving the "not sustained" finding which is given up when there's not enough evidence (or bias) to make a determination on whether an allegation is to be exonerated, sustained or unfounded. Sometimes it indicates the quality (or deficiency thereof) of the investigation that was done.



2006:

CPRC: 37.7%

RPD: 6.86%

CMO: 14.8%




2007:

CPRC: 14.6%

RPD: 8.43 %

CMO: 9.64%




After perusing these interesting statistics, there's a question which begs to be asked. This and these, do have something in common?



But anyway, what were the most common allegations during the past few years?



2006:

1) Improper Procedure: 81

2) Discourtesy: 47

3) Use of Force: 12

Discrimination/Harassment: 12



2007:

1) Improper Procedure: 39

2) Discourtesy: 20

3) Use of Force: 7




2008:

1) Improper Procedure: 109

2) Discourtesy: 31

3) Use of Force: 16




More to come from the drafting and revision of the annual report in blog postings to come and that process begins at the CPRC meeting on Feb. 25.





The special prosecutor hired to help remove former San Bernardino County Assessor Bill Postmus from his office will submit a finding even though Postmus has resigned.




(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



"We should wrap it up as soon as possible," Supervisor Paul Biane said Tuesday. "At this point in time it looks like a waste of money to do it one more day."

The county so far has spent about $90,000 on the independent counsel.

The board approved a $250,000 contract last month with Los Angeles attorney John C. Hueston, who was a prosecutor in the case against Enron executives.

Soon after Hueston was hired, Postmus resigned. He left office Feb. 13.

Hueston has been working with county lawyers to "tie up loose ends" and prepared a report on his findings, but the investigation is all but suspended, said Mark Kirk, chief of staff for Supervisor Gary Ovitt.




A Colton city employee has been charged with embezzlement.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Carol Anne George, 53, is accused of taking the money between January 2006 and this month.

The District Attorney's office filed charges against George on Feb. 19 after an investigation by the city and the Colton Police Department. George resigned Feb. 13, said Anthony Arroyo, Colton's human resources director.

City Manager Daryl Parrish said the incident caught him off guard. Once it was discovered, the city's response was swift and decisive, Parrish said.

"Sometimes you're surprised by the things people do," Parrish said. "I was a bit surprised."

Parrish said after the "potential impropriety" was brought to his attention late Feb. 11 and staff did a preliminary investigation, city officials notified the police.



More budget woes across the Inland Empire when it comes to cities and counties having to readjust their budgets.


In Rialto, the decision to create a new public information officer position has been approved by the city council but the filling of the new position has wisely been put on hold.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

City Councilwoman Deborah Robertson cast the lone vote against creating the job.

She said she was concerned whether the city could afford it, given the uncertainty about balancing the city budget in the next two fiscal years without dipping into reserves.

She also expressed concern about a provision in the city ordinance establishing the job that excludes the public relations officer from reporting to the city administrator. In most California cities, she said, employees other than the city attorney do not report directly to the city council.

There is a potential for the public relations officer to be given conflicting direction, Robertson said. Under the Rialto ordinance, any conflicts would be resolved by the mayor.

Councilman Joe Baca Jr. defended the need for a public relations officer, saying he believes the city needs to "think outside the box.

"As we continue to grow, we need to continue to better inform the community" and develop good relations with the media.

The community may or may not think the vote was a wise one and if so, that might become more apparent during Rialto's next municipal election cycle which may precede the coming of "better economic times".




A city council member in Lake Elsinore is the focus of a recall effort.




Moreno Valley is looking at making more budget cuts and freezing more positions. Not to mention laying off 10 more city employees.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




Projections for all major revenue sources are falling short of previous estimates, including property taxes, utility user's taxes and sales taxes, city Administrative Services and Finance Director Steve Elam told the City Council during a mid-year review of the 2008-09 budget.

The situation is expected to grow even worse for the 2009-10 fiscal year that begins July 1, he said.

"Based on information we have ... we're forecasting a general fund revenue shortfall of $8.4 million," Elam told the council.

The council voted 4-1 Tuesday to authorize City Manager Bob Gutierrez to make the necessary reductions to balance the city 2008-09 budget, including laying off 10 employees and eliminating 12 vacant employee positions.

Councilman Bill Batey voted against the cuts.

"The decisions we make are going to affect families for a long time," Batey said prior to the vote.

The employees are expected to be notified this week, Gutierrez said. Nine out of 10 of the employees are from development services, whose workload has been substantially reduced during the economic downturn, Elam said.


More budget cuts in Fontana.









This happened in Dallas. An officer was actually fired twice for sexual misconduct.


(excerpt, Dallas Morning News)



Law enforcement experts see Williams' 20-year career as a prime example of a problem police departments have faced for years: How does a city rid itself of an officer whose record is riddled with serious misconduct allegations if you can't prove he's guilty or if he keeps getting his job back?

The experts cite lack of evidence, questionable witnesses and sloppy investigations as key hurdles to keeping problematic officers off the streets. An appeals system that in the past has overturned many firings exacerbated the difficulties. David Kunkle has seen 12 of his 62 firings reversed since he became Dallas police chief nearly five years ago.

Keeping an officer on the job after he's been repeatedly investigated has its own risks.

"You are opening yourself up to huge lawsuits and one of the charges will be negligent retention, which means that you knew you shouldn't keep this person as a police officer but you did it anyway," said Penny Harrington, an expert on police employee misconduct and former chief of the Portland Police Department in Oregon.

Williams declined repeated interview requests. Phil Burleson Jr., Williams' attorney, said he is innocent of the allegation that led to his firing last month.

"It's just an irate girlfriend; I don't understand the big deal on this one," said Burleson. "We believe that the termination was not justified."

Of the other complaints during Williams' career, Burleson said, "He says they've all been fully investigated and found that he didn't commit those allegations."




In St. Louis, Missouri, corruption has led to doubts being cast on over 1,000 cases.



(excerpt, St. Louis Post-Dispatch)



The cases against Bobby Lee Garrett, 48, and Vincent T. Carr, 46, have already caused the St. Louis circuit attorney's office to drop 47 pending cases, including 41 felonies, Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce told the Post-Dispatch.

Joyce's office will review 986 convictions to see whether Garrett and Carr played a significant role, and the U.S. attorney's office has identified 45 to 50 more cases to look at.

"Needless to say, I'm outraged by the conduct of these officers," Joyce said.


Because federal prosecutors were involved in the investigation into Garrett and Carr, they "put the brakes" on three cases before charges were filed, U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway said.

Chinatown & CPRC: Back on the serving platter this week

****UPDATE****

Judge Sharon Waters grants Temporary Restraining Order to Save Chinatown halting all work by developer, Doug Jacobs at the site.




Riverside's Community Police Review Commission has finally brought its long-missing annual report back from the dusty storage bin into its orbit by placing an item on the agenda for its meeting on Feb. 25 that discusses its upcoming report. It's been ages since the release of a public report and the last one contained data that is now three years old. The Riverside City Charter Section 810 states that the commission is to provide a report of its activities to the mayor and city council annually, something which hasn't been adhered to during the past several years. With all the fervor about whether or not there were Charter violations involving the change in investigative protocol by City Hall, this worrisome potential violation slipped between the cracks.

But in a sense it's valuable to have both the information from 2007 and 2008 including a variety of statistics on complaint lodging and review to compare and contrast them with one another and to compare and contrast both of them with similar figures in 2006.




Sustained allegations:

2007:


Category 1: 0%
Category2: 10.6%

Total: 8.6% + 2 Misconduct noted



2008:

Category 1: 0%
Category2: 2.72%

Total: 2.2% +1 misconduct noted.


Compare that with 8.8% sustain rate in 2006 and 17% in 2005, figures calculated from data cited for those years. How do they fare against national statistics? The sustain rate for police agencies that are medium to large in this country on use of force complaints is usually 7-8%. Here are some interesting statistics involving several different law enforcement agencies for comparison including receipt of use of force complaints. Sustain rates for the Riverside Police Department by the CPRC for all Category I complaints including use of force complaints has been 0% for at least two years.



What's just as interesting is the relationship between the police department and the city manager's office (which is the final arbiter of complaint findings) in that according to the 2006 annual report, their statistics particularly in terms of sustained findings on complaint allegations were nearly identical in comparison with either and the CPRC. However, in 2006 and especially 2007, the gap in comparative statistics between the CPRC and the police department especially on sustained allegations had narrowed considerably.



Draft of 2008 annual report for all those who want to read it. It's being discussed at the CPRC meeting on Wednesday, Feb. 25 at 5:30 p.m.


The agenda for the CPRC meeting gets more interesting when the regular meeting adjourns and that of the Policies, Procedures and Bylaws Committee opens. The rebirth of this former standing committee has already placed it in the unenviable position of being the most micromanaged subcommittee for the CPRC, what with Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis waiting until 9:45 p.m. at one recent meeting to commander the subcommittee away from its chair, John Brandriff. If you really needed any clue to who was really running the CPRC, that brief interlude in its affairs provided a real education.

On the agenda for the subcommittee meeting is this item to play around a bit with the recently controversial P&P VIII in which section B has been used to justify the Brad Hudson directive-turned-protocol even when it's clear that it only applies to citizen complaints and not Officer-Involved Death investigations. But so far they're leaving section "B" alone. If they weren't, it's a good bet that the dynamic duo of Hudson and City Attorney Gregory Priamos wouldn't even allow it to be placed on the agenda.

Anybody who tries to claim otherwise in that Section VIII pertains to officer-involved death cases is perpetuating quite the con job on some easily duped city officials who know next to nothing about the panel even as one or two of them might be directing city employees to micromanage it. Because for one thing, the role and timing of the involvement of the Internal Affairs Division (as mentioned in provisions A &B) is different for death investigations when compared to complaint investigations because of the involvement in the former cases of parallel investigations within the police department including one whose work product becomes part of the public record after a period of time. And the internal affairs division provides its confidential work product to the CPRC commissioners before they even begin the review process. For the officer-involved death cases, there's an extensive review, investigation and review process that precedes any involvement by the Internal Affairs Division or any of its work product.

For another, the language in "B" (and probably most of the P&P) was clearly cribbed from Long Beach's model of civilian oversight which doesn't handle any type of investigations and/or reviews that aren't complaint driven.

For one thing, some unintentional humor was created when section E (3) when it states that the executive director is an agent of the commission. Maybe when the position was called that, this was true. But ever since it became a "manager" position, the manager of the CPRC has been an agent of the employer who signs his or her paycheck, not the commission as recent meeting dynamics have shown. Are you going to be an agent of the commission that can only ask you to do things or the ones to who you are "at will" to? That's not a difficult question to answer but it's been a contentious issue of CPRC dynamics for the past three years including the time when the previous manager "resigned".





Speaking of the CPRC, the people have been scratching their heads in the wake of the instructions from the Governmental Affairs Committee meeting earlier this month to establish some sort of meeting or process between a batch of city employees (all representatives of the cast of characters involved with the CPRC) and members of the community. But there's been silence from the Governmental Affairs Committee to the public since this motion whatever it really entailed was passed though it's been rewritten since. A sign of exactly what kind of leadership to expect from the city council which appears reluctant to make any public stance on this issue, especially during an election year.

It's likely that the Governmental Affairs Committee will let that motion die in committee, knowing that as long as it stays there, the status quo of the Hudson protocol is in effect and in actuality, doesn't require the vote of the city council. And it's doubtful that any of the council members in the even-numbered wards want to raise this to the point of becoming a campaign issue considering that none of those up for reelection have stellar records involving the CPRC.

Mayor Ron Loveridge never graduated to viewing it anything more than the "symbolic gesture" he once called it. Andrew Melendrez isn't sure what about it he does support. Frank Schiavone and Nancy Hart signed on to an op-ed piece supporting the Hudson directive-turned-protocol even though it didn't take Hart that long to back peddle from a written statement it's doubtful she even read carefully considering some of the questions she asked and the statements she made later on.






An article written to stop defiling Riverside's Chinatown site appeared in the Press Enterprise by an anthropologist at UC Riverside. It's in response to all the bulldozer activity that took place on the site over the holiday weekend including on the two days that Developer Doug Jacobs' employees were cited by the Riverside Police Department for violating a municipal ordinance against noise disturbance. One city council member, Mike Gardner, said it was a "conscious violation" but there's been silence on the dais about it including from elected officials whose campaigns were financed by Jacobs.




(excerpt)




The "archaeological excavation" sponsored by Jacobs over that weekend was said to have uncovered only some broken pottery from a small area that would later be dug up further by hand to see if there was any more.

Other than that, Jacobs is quoted as saying, "we're done" with the excavation.

Is it possible that Jacobs is trying to wipe his hands of any obligation to pay the full cost of properly excavating the site, analyzing the artifacts and then properly storing the recovered materials for future reference and interpretation, which would likely cost up to $2 million?

Fortunately, there is a possibility that much of the site still remains intact below the level that was torn out by the mechanical earth movers. Action must be taken now to put a stop to the wanton destruction of our city's cultural heritage.





More information on Chinatown Day events at the bottom of this posting.


They might be telling Riverside County departments that they have to do with out but several Riverside County supervisors making sure they have their county perks including customized cars.




(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Tavaglione and Ashley said their new SUVs cost more in part because they are environmentally friendly hybrids.

Both said many of the extras on their new vehicles came as part of options packages, so they were not aware of and did not request all of them. Other features, such as four-wheel drive and seating for as many as eight passengers, are necessary for their jobs, they said.

"My car is my office. I live in this car," Ashley said, adding that he shuttles among meetings, three district offices and constituents from Lake Elsinore to Cabazon.

"If my district wasn't what it is, I would probably be a driving a different car, a smaller car," he said.

Supervisor Roy Wilson, who has the largest and most remote district, said he is content with his 2007 Toyota Camry Hybrid, which seats five, has two-wheel drive and costs less than $35,000.

"To be using public funds to get a big impressive status-symbol car, I think that is the wrong message to send out at this time," said Supervisor Bob Buster, whose county car is a 2002 Chevrolet Impala. "We need to be saving that money in these hard times."




Amen, Mr. Buster. But all this fervor for expensive cars on the taxpayer dime goes on while the south-western area of the county finished among the top in the nation for foreclosed homes. Murrieta was at the top of the list but other county cities were on its heels.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Temecula was third and Perris fifth among Forbes' top 10 "American Post-Subprime Boomtowns" where a surge in foreclosures was followed by another surge in foreclosure sales, often at deep discounts from the homes' pre-foreclosure price.

Using data from Irvine-based firm RealtyTrac, Forbes examined every U.S. town with a population under 100,000. Temecula and Murrieta each hit the 100,000 mark last year.

In 2008, Murrieta had 814 foreclosure sales, according to the Forbes.com article published in December. The average sales price was $275,053. The year before, the average property price was $410,686.

In Temecula, 575 foreclosed properties sold in 2008, with an average sales price of $324,572 and an average property price the year before of $435,092.

Perris had 513 foreclosure sales last year. The average sales price was $184,064 and the average property value the year before was $319,745.





A city councilwoman in San Bernardino is trying to ask the employees there how to save money. This is in the wake of furloughs and threatened budget cuts to the city's departments including its public safety division.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



San Bernardino City Councilwoman Wendy McCammack, who cast the lone dissenting vote last week on an emergency deficit-cutting plan, has e-mailed all city employees requesting moneymaking and cost-saving alternatives.

McCammack said she has received some 60 responses to the appeal sent Friday.

"I'm asking the employees who have made suggestions to help me translate them into dollars and cents," McCammack said.

"When I've done that, I'll present it to the mayor and council, and they can choose to explore it or they can choose to do nothing."






An amazing story about a young woman and the deputy who rescued her when she was a toddler.





Will they revamp the civilian review board in Schenectady? Some say that answer is yes.


(excerpt, Times Union)



To that end, board Chairman A.C. "Budd" Mazurek this week presented a long list of suggestions to the City Council, aimed at streamlining the sometimes-tedious process, designed to ensure police are not abusing their authority.

High on the list is setting deadlines so cases don't drag on for upward of two years, which is not uncommon, Mazurek said. The last straw for the board, he said, came in December when the retired police officer who assisted them resigned in protest, in part because the city wasn't allowing him to do his job.

And Mazurek lamented that about 65 percent of the cases before the board are ultimately found to be inconclusive, often because police are not forthcoming with key evidence such as in car videos. There are two open seats Mayor Brian U. Stratton must fill to round out what is now a nine-member panel. Police Chief Mark Chaires conceded Friday the current system could use some fine tuning and believes the panel's suggestions, especially on setting time lines, is a good one.

Despite the problems, Chaires said his department's beefed up Office of Professional Standards has made steady progress.

"As internal investigations have gone up, the number of citizens complaints have gone down," he said, adding there were about two dozen citizen complaints last year. "We understand that efficiency, transparency and public confidence are all important."

Upcoming events:



Tuesday, February 24th, 2009

Day of Chinatown Support Activities


In the courtroom: 8:30 a.m.


Judge Waters will be hearing the request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in Department 10, at 8:30, in the Old Downtown Riverside Courthouse. A restraining order is supposed to stop any activity on the archaeological site until essential legal issues are resolved. Community members who want to show their support for the request to stop construction activities may attend the hearing. Courtroom behavior and appropriate dress are required. Participants will probably not be permitted to speak, but support is noticed by the court. The Courthouse occupies the block surrounded by Orange and Lemon Streets and 10th and 11th Streets – security check at the door.


In front of Riverside City Hall: 5:45-6:30 p.m.

A demonstration will begin as City employees and officials leave the building. Bring signs and other visual aides to express your feelings about the destruction of the Chinatown site and the failure of the elected city officials to protect our cultural heritage. Bring as many people as you can, tell the city bureaucracy that they have failed us, and that they need to take responsibility for restoring what can still be saved – including the reputation of our city in the international arena. In front of City Hall on Main St. near 10th Street.


At the City Council Meeting: beginning at 6:30 p.m.

Members of the public can make a 3 minute statement to the council. Anyone who has something to say about the destruction of Chinatown is encouraged to do so. Sign up for the speakers list by filling out a card near the entrance to the building. People who wish to bear silent witness at the meeting are also encouraged to attend. City Council Chambers are near the intersection of 10th and Main Streets.

For more information contact: Jean Wong, (951) 328-1239; Dr. Margie and Kevin Akin, (951) 787-0318; Deborah Wong, (951) 333-8121.







The long-delayed Chief's Community-Police Partnership Summit that had been scheduled to take place somewhere in the Neighboring Policing Center East is scheduled for Wednesday, March 4. 2009 between 6:30 p.m.-8:30 p.m.


It will be held in the far distant corner of the Eastern NPC in Orangecrest at the Orange Terrance Community Center 20010 Orange Terrace Parkway. So if you live out in that section of the city's largest NPC (by area), then it's yours to attend. The summits are being scheduled by the police department as part of the public participation component of its five-year Strategic Plan that was created and implemented during the stipulated judgment between the city and the State Attorney General's office in 2001. If you have any questions even those that are difficult to answer, bring them.

The moderator of the event will be the NPC Commander Lt. Larry Gonzalez.




Human Resources Board Meeting on Monday, March 2 at 4:30 p.m. in the fifth floor conference room at City Hall. Agenda: TBA


Governmental Affairs Committee meeting: Wednesday, March 4 at 3 p.m. on the seventh floor of City Hall. Agenda: TBA

Chinatown: Day of Action, Feb. 24, 2008

“Well, the requirement is to cooperate with the investigation. She was the victim of a crime. She needed to document as other officers do information, narrative information for a crime report.”



---Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach (in a deposition given in 2004) about former Officer Tina Banfill Gould's responsibilities under departmental policy #4.8 as he saw them.





“They tell me that you’re not the suspect. You’re a victim. The investigators are there to assist you and to help you through the process. However what they tell you and what actually occurs seem to be two different things. At least in my opinion. That’s how I felt. That’s what I meant by that’s what they tell you.”


---Former Officer Tina Banfill Gould in her deposition in 2004.





But I was thinking of a way To multiply by ten, And always, in the answer, get The question back again.

---Lewis Carroll

What do the above quotes mean? What does it mean when the city spends thousands of dollars of tax payer money to argue the opposite of what it's claiming as its position on the same issue now? That its department investigates its officers after they are involved in incustody deaths? That these really aren't investigations after all because the person to be investigated is deceased. That there are no interrogations but simply crime reports detailing the actions of the deceased against the officer to determine the culpability of the officers involved in their deaths. That there are interrogations done by investigators to determine whether or not the officers have committed crimes through their actions in these incustody deaths and the officers could face charges (although this is mostly hypothetical in Riverside County considering its lack of precedent*). Yes, there's a right to take the Fifth Amendment to avoid incrimination. No, there isn't because to do so means that you violate departmental policy by failing to provide a police report.

It's like the city were pulling off petals from a daisy. We do it this way, We do it that way, we do it this way, that way and it really doesn't make much sense if you have been following along with that exercise.

Not that the most recent display of angst about the integrity of the police department's criminal investigations of officer-involved deaths hasn't been interesting to follow even as it's increasingly difficult to swallow. And it's left to the city attorney (or his designees) to act as the legal adviser (for the city first, everyone else second) and defend both positions at different points in Riverside's history as if each of them were the absolute true one for all time. Not that it would be the first time for the city attorney's office which has walked this tightrope before when trying to protect the city from financial liability.

There is so much historically wrong with what City Hall has been doing in its latest round of micromanagement against the Community Police Review Commission. Not the least of which is its revisionist attitude about the history of the CPRC and the department's own exercise in conducting parallel investigations involving officer-involved deaths in Riverside during the past nine years. The people that are stumping for this revised history the loudest weren't even at City Hall (and in some cases, the city itself) when it played out. Yet they proclaim themselves to be experts on what has transpired since the commission was created through municipal ordinance in April 2000. And of course they are, of their own fictional vision of what was but not the truth.

They are defining this huge crisis that's taking place involving how the CPRC conducts its independent investigations. Its investigators are trampling on crime scenes of these incustody deaths before the tape has even been put down and they are contaminating the process, while trying to pretend that the fact that there's never been a whisper of complaint about this practice for seven years has no relevance.

In fact, their latest alibi is that they had no knowledge this illicit behavior of investigative protocol by the CPRC was even taking place until last June. Never mind that when June rolled around, it had been over 18 months since an officer-involved death had even occurred. The dynamic duo of the city manager and city attorney never ever mentioned what actually transpired, what bolt of lightning struck them from the sky during June that educated them on an investigative protocol that had actually been status quo for years. A protocol that they both knew about given their rather rigorous attentiveness to the commission in the past two years.

So that explanation by City Hall is obviously nothing more than a pile of bunk especially given that the commission had been likely submitting invoices or at least receipts for its investigative expenses to the city manager's office during this entire time. And if the city council is buying any such explanation from its direct employees then maybe they'll be looking next at beachfront property in Idaho. And if the public believes that the city council found out about this situation last June, then the same applies.

But what's been lost in this manufactured visit down a memory lane that never happened is that yes, indeed there was indeed trouble in paradise involving the issue of parallel investigations, only these problems didn't involve the CPRC at all.

Because if there were any problems with these parallel investigations, it sounds like they existed within the police department and in terms of the contrasting views that the police union and the police department (which appeared to have been an extension of City Hall even back then) had on whether or not police officers were actually being investigated for officer-involved deaths they were involved in.The police union was claiming that yes, the department did criminal probes of its officers for incustody deaths. The city was claiming, no it did not. It didn't investigate or interrogate its officers in these cases. They were victims of a crime after all and that was all.

Chief Russ Leach (who admitted he hadn't read the policy in question) gave testimony in his deposition which helped and hindered both sides of this argument.

While all this feuding was going on using tax payer dollars to defend the city's position, the CPRC was conducting 11 independent investigations with much less fanfare and pretty much no controversy. Certainly, no complaints from anyone, whether it was Leach, the police department or any member of the crowd at City Hall. Which is why they need to come up with the justification for this nonresponse by claiming that they didn't have a clue about what was going on until last June.

But that's to be expected given that most of the players in this latest installment to the ongoing storyline weren't even here when most of the history of the CPRC and what preceded it was unfolding.

It's interesting to see how the CPRC's being dragged into all this drama that existed very well without its inclusion. And how many people at City Hall from city council members to city staff are signing up for this representation of what never happened.



*Yes, there is lack of precedent for filing charges against law enforcement officers by the Riverside County District Attorney's office for incustody deaths and/or shootings. If you argue that this doesn't include the Daniel Riter case, you're wrong. Daniel Riter was indicted by a criminal grand jury and prosecuted by the State Attorney General's office.




More Riverside Renaissance projects have been completed even as the city's capacity for paying for other projects included under this banner has faded for now.



The city has also announced that it's finally sticking a house where the Kawa Market once stood. After nearly two years since it voted to add the Kawa Market to the list of businesses targeted for threatened eminent domain.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Eva Yakutis, the city's housing and neighborhoods manager, said the plan is to sell the house to a family with a moderate income.

The price will be based on an appraisal after the renovation is done, she said.

In Riverside County, a family of four earning up to $74,400 a year is considered moderate-income, she said.

The family will have to take out a mortgage but the agency expects to provide some kind of financial assistance, Yakutis said.

The family cannot rent out the house and if it sells the house, the family must pay back any loan the agency provided plus 10 percent of any equity earned through appreciation.





The recession has hit local museums hard including Riverside's art museum.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



The museum had reduced its original budget for 2008-2009 from $840,564 to $551,524, a 34 percent cut.

To deal with the reduced funds, interim Executive Director M.J. Abraham imposed a hiring freeze, eliminated overtime and contracted out some of the museum's work. She also slashed the number of exhibits for next year from 38 to somewhere between 15 and 20.

"That is an enormous amount," she said. "Our focus is on making (the exhibits) bigger and better, but narrow down the number."

Even the museum's restaurant is hurting. A year and a half ago, a new company took over the atrium dining area. Saffron, a restaurant and catering company that specializes in serving historic venues, invested $180,000 in remodeling and upgrading the museum's kitchen and dining area.

Co-owner Linda Rouyer said business had fallen so sharply the restaurant was unable to make its rent. Rather than close up shop, she negotiated with the museum.

"We went to them and told them, 'We've invested this much in this. We need to renegotiate this for a temporary time period,' " she said. "They reduced it slightly."





Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein continues his coverage of the backlog that's grinding down the Riverside County Superior Court system.



Speaking of which, another article on Rod Pacecho's application of the death penalty on criminal cases has led to this discussion on that issue.





Columnist Cassie MacDuff asks whether the Colton city government censored one of its critics or whether his words were erased by a technical gaffe.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




The glitch with the Grossich comments exposed that the city had no procedures to archive past meetings or even check regularly on hard-drive capacity. From now on, Fuzane will archive past meetings every six months to free up hard-drive capacity, Derleth said.

But those aren't Colton's only computer problems.

On Saturday night, as Derleth and DeAlwis e-mailed about the missing comments for a report for Tuesday's council meeting, a power surge caused the city's equipment to crash, DeAlwis said.

And during my meeting with Fuzane and DeAlwis, the entire array of hard drive, DVD recorder and video equipment lost power.

Councilwoman Deirdre Bennett worried that so much time was spent on the missing comments.

But Parrish and Derleth said when someone suggests a First Amendment violation, the city needs to take it seriously.

Derleth, DeAlwis and Parrish each said it was unfortunate Grossich's comments were the ones that disappeared. They understood that it seemed suspicious.

Grossich still is trying to find a technical expert who can tell him if the explanation is plausible. But he said, "I'm not an unreasonable person. If it's just an unfortunate coincidence, leave it at that."

Hope it never happens again.








Temecula's looking at making more cuts in its budget.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



The city has already cut 75 positions to close the shortfall, City Manager Shawn Nelson said Friday. All the jobs were part-time and without benefits, he said.

The City Council will consider almost $5.4 million in cuts and other adjustments during its 7 p.m. Tuesday meeting.

Every February, the council looks at the budget to see whether revenues and expenses are matching projections. Adjustments are made to keep the budget in line.

Last year, the council cut $2.46million after revenue fell $2.33 million short of projections.

Nelson called this year's adjustments the most challenging in his 18 ½ years in Temecula government.

He said the average Temecula resident shouldn't see a reduction in services. The city will not have to dip into its reserves this time, Nelson said.





But Redlands is spending money faster than it can reduce it budget.






The San Bernardino City Council voted to institute furloughs on its police officers. Now they might face a lawsuit.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)


"We've tried our best to reach a negotiated agreement," Mayor Pat Morris said. "This decision has the highest merit of the bad choices put before us."

Morris said city leaders, struggling to fill a $9 million budget gap on their $150 million general fund by the end of the fiscal year, had to cut their biggest expense, employee pay and benefits.

The furloughs, Morris said, avoid layoffs in the Police Department, a top priority in a crime-plagued city.

Council members voted 4-1 to impose the time off without pay, with Esther Estrada absent and Wendy McCammack dissenting.

The union's attorney says furloughs would violate the union's contract and Section 186 of the city charter, which sets a formula for determining officers' pay.

Police union President Rich Lawhead said the union will sue.

McCammack said Interim City Manager Mark Weinberg had overlooked millions of dollars in other funding sources. Weinberg disputed that.



Several questions have arisen from this debate that's been going on for quite a while now.


So is a lawsuit against the furloughs eminent?


Will the two sides be back at the discussion table?




Measure Z revenues which were designated by voters for public safety have fallen short of what was expected.


(excerpt, San Bernardino Sun)




In Nov. 2006, San Bernardino voters approved the Measure Z sales tax increase in order to pay for more police. For much of 2008, the stated plan was to finish the planned hires by June 30 of this year.

The economic downturn means that the promise will be delayed at best. City officials say that 34 officers were hired with Measure Z dollars, but there's not enough money to recruit the final six.

The previously expected force size with Measure Z in place was 356 officers.

Billdt said after the council voted Thursday that other budget cuts mean the Police Department will have funding for 334 officers approved at the close of the fiscal year.

But McCammack said the furloughs, by taking cops off the street, will amount to the Police Department's effective strength being reduced to 303 officers.

According to current projections, Measure Z is expected to bring in about $6.5 million, a figure that is about $500,000 short of what city officials anticipated when the current budget was crafted.




The San Bernardino Homicide Watch blog at the Press Enterprise Web site writes about the furloughs and the lawsuit which might result.




When it comes to mandating ethical standards, San Bernardino County Supervisor Neil Derry should practice what he preaches according to the Press Enterprise Editorial Board.

But that's hardly unique for this county's politicians as the incident regarding the $12,765 oversight shows.





A former San Bernardino County Sheriff's department deputy is going on trial on sexual assault charges. Some people think these types of crimes by law enforcement officers are blogged about too much. Of course, some of us think they occur too much including in the Inland Empire.



(excerpt, San Bernardino Sun)




Matthew Linderman, who was assigned to handle retail theft crimes in the High Desert, faces 28 counts, which include kidnapping, extortion, sexual battery, soliciting a bribe and soliciting a lewd act, involving women he encountered from 2005 to 2007.

After listening to testimony from case investigators, Judge Larry Allen determined sufficient evidence existed to move forward with the case against Linderman at a hearing Thursday in Victorville Superior Court.

In one case, Linderman arrested a woman after she allegedly stole products from a store at the Victor Valley Mall in July 2007.

Linderman put the handcuffed woman in the back of his cruiser, explained that he does favors and said he could reduce her offense to a misdemeanor, Sgt. Rod MacDonald testified the woman later told detectives.

"She said that Linderman asked for a 'Girls Gone Wild,'" MacDonald said, referring to the videotapes of young women who bared their breasts.

When the victim refused, Linderman took her to the sheriff's substation inside the mall, where she eventually removed her shirt. The defendant took photos and then touched her inappropriately, according to court testimony.

"She said she felt violated at that point," said MacDonald, adding that she was scared and intimidated by the possibility of going to jail.







The Stark County Sheriff's Department has filed a defamation lawsuit against a television station that covered a disturbing incident where a woman was stripped in county jail by male and female deputies. The YouTube video which is included in the posting includes surveillance video taken of the incident. Hopefully, when this lawsuit goes to trial, the department can explain why it violated its own policy involving officers not being allowed to perform strip searches or remove the clothes of people of the opposite gender to the jury.



Another woman came forward, one of five to report similar allegations about the jail.





The University of California, Riverside hired a new professor in its Media and Cultural Studies Department and that's Andrea Smith who was formerly from Michigan and was denied tenure there, a decision which led to protests and teach-ins which included some of UC Riverside's faculty.

Smith is one of the founders of INCITE! which among other issues addresses those pertaining to law enforcement in communities.

Welcome to Riverside, Andrea! And thanks to those who at UCR and other places including Michigan who stood behind her in her tenure fight.

CHINA TOWN ACTIONS

Tuesday, Feb. 24

In the courtroom: 8:30 a.m.

Judge Waters will be hearing the request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in Department 10, at 8:30, in the Old Downtown Riverside Courthouse. A restraining order is supposed to stop any activity on the archaeological site until essential legal issues are resolved. Community members who want to show their support for the request to stop construction activities may attend the hearing. Courtroom behavior and appropriate dress are required. Participants will probably not be permitted to speak, but support is noticed by the court. The Courthouse occupies the block surrounded by Orange and Lemon Streets and 10^th and 11^th Streets – security check at the door.

In front of Riverside City Hall: 5:45-6:30 p.m.

A demonstration will begin as City employees and officials leave the building. Bring signs and other visual aides to express your feelings about the destruction of the Chinatown site and the failure of the elected city officials to protect our cultural heritage. Bring as many people as you can, tell the city bureaucracy that they have failed us, and that they need to take responsibility for restoring what can still be saved – including the reputation of our city in the international arena. In front of City Hall on Main St. near 10^th Street.

At the City Council Meeting: beginning at 6:30 p.m.

Members of the public can make a 3 minute statement to the council. Anyone who has something to say about the destruction of Chinatown is encouraged to do so. Sign up for the speakers list by filling out a card near the entrance to the building. People who wish to bear silent witness at the meeting are also encouraged to attend. City Coucil Chambers are near the intersection of 10^th and Main Streets.

For more information contact: Jean Wong, (951) 328-1239; Dr. Margie and Kevin Akin, (951) 787-0318; Deborah Wong, (951) 333-8121.




Other upcoming Meetings:


Monday, Feb. 23 at 4:30 p.m. The Board of Library Trustees meets at the main library downtown.

The agenda includes this agenda report in which the big ticket item is the city manager's report on the library expansion and renovation project to the city council.




Tuesday, Feb. 24 at 3:00 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. Public hearing at 7 p.m. Riverside City Council meets. The agenda for the meeting is here. The public hearing addresses #16 which includes the following text.



16. Options to enhance Library, Museum, and Municipal Auditorium facilities - Mayor Loveridge and Mayor Pro Tempore Melendrez recommend continuance to March 10, 2009 (All Wards)


There is no hyperlink to back up material on the hearing available on the online version of the meeting agenda.





Wednesday, Feb. 25 at 5:30 p.m. The Community Police Review Commission meets and among other things on this agenda discusses the late-to-the-point-of-being-delinquent annual report that was the subject of the previous blogging. There's some interesting trends noted in the statistics for 2007-08 which will be discussed in future postings. One of which is the commission's percentage of sustained allegations in 2008, which stood at 2.2% which is probably one of the lowest figures of its kind in the country. In fact, it's probably lower than those generated by the internal affairs divisions of most law enforcement agencies.

Bulldozer alert: Chinatown and the CPRC

“They had a mission and that mission was to hire deputies. Unfortunately, it may have come at a price.”




----Michael Gennaco, head of the Office of Independent Review, which oversees the LASD which hired deputies with criminal records and that had been fired from other law enforcement agencies.





People have been asking for more information about what's been up with the Community Police Review Commission during the past year or so. Most of the attention in the past several months has been the actions taken by City Hall to bar the commission from conducting independent and timely investigations of officer-involved deaths as mandated by the city's charter. But the micromanagement by forces at City Hall including the dynamic duo of City Manager Brad Hudson and City Attorney Greg Priamos has had other detrimental effects as well as the shortage of full-time staffing for the commission since the "resignation" of the last full-time manager Pedro Payne in 2006.





One striking aspect of the CPRC meetings isn't what is being talked about but what's not and that's the annual report. It hasn't been mentioned at a meeting in quite a while. Does it still exist? That remains to be seen but it's certainly been upstaged by the latest round of actions taken against the CPRC.


Traditionally, the annual reports were released in March of each year, both in written form and submitted to the city council. Of course, when City Hall began its micromanagement in earnest following the public vote to put the CPRC in the city's charter precisely to circumvent this type of nonsense, the reports began to be a little less...annual.

Meaning that there hasn't been a report on the CPRC's actions every year as required by the city charter. The charter language doesn't specify the format of the reports in terms of whether they have to be oral or written but in the past, it's been known that even the oral reports given to the mayor and city council by the commission's chair were based on written work product created and voted on by the entire commission.



It's been a while since that's been done.





The importance of the commission's annual report was mentioned in two studies done of the CPRC, both which included lists of recommendations made to improve its function.

The Riverside Coalition for Police Accountability's five year report card on the CPRC released in October 2005 recommended that the annual report be stronger and more detailed in its coverage and scope. The evaluation written by Consultant Joe Brann (who was hired by the city) released in 2008 recommended that the commission ensure that its annual report is routinely released as the charter requires.



The annual reports are available online at the CPRC's site but the most recent report is this one which states that it's from 2006 but it was released later. However, the data that is included in the report on citizen complaints and also in terms of "trends and patterns" are from 2006. Photographs in the report also are from that time period including ones taken when the commission received its last session of training on the department's use of force policy and training which was provided by Lt. Larry Gonzalez and the department's tactical training team in February 2006. In fact, it's been so long since that was provided that at least two members of that team are sergeants today. Not to mention there were photographs included of a demonstration of the department's digital video cameras that took place while several commissioners who left in 2006-07 were still on the commission and other older photographs.

So what are the requirements according to the city's charter?

Riverside's Charter Amendment 810 is here. Section (i) states the following:


"Prepare and submit an annual report to the Mayor and City Council on commission activities."


But still no word about the annual report from City Hall which runs the CPRC and the commissioners who go along for the ride. The most interesting part of the last discussion of the annual report which took place quite a while ago was the addition of a new section which compared and contrasts the types of findings (and their percentages) by the police department, the CPRC and the city manager's office (which is the final arbiter on complaints and officer-involved death cases).



What's telling is that there's more correlation in findings between the police department and the city manager's office than there is between the CPRC and either of the other two agencies. The city manager's office. The only correlation between the CPRC and the city manager's office was in terms of the number of "misconduct noted" findings.



The city manager's office wasn't too keen to release this information. In fact when it was requested to be included, Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis built a straw man argument, meaning that he misstated the request and attacked it, telling the commissioners (who he apparently mistook for his employees) that they wanted something else, something much more innocuous and much more watered down. But several including John Brandriff and Jack Brewer said they wanted exactly what had been requested which quieted DeSantis down for several minutes.





Riverside might be too broke to redo its library but it's got enough money sue the city of Los Angeles and its ports because of their contribution to the increased rail traffic in Riverside.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




Riverside's suit says the Los Angeles Harbor Commission, which approved the China Shipping container terminal expansion in December, failed to analyze the impacts those additional trains will have on Riverside, including blocking emergency vehicles and causing pollution when vehicles idle at train crossings while the trains pass through the city.

More on the smack down between the two cities here.





Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein continues with his coverage of the Chinatown situation.




(excerpt)



Doug Jacobs, the Riverside developer who wants to build that med building, was so determined to excavate an old Chinatown site before last Tuesday's scheduled court hearing that his crews got cited not once but twice for violating the muni code over the long Presidents' Weekend. Riverside police ticketed the crew on Sunday (making too much noise on a Sunday) and again on Monday (making too much noise on a federal holiday).

Jacobs, evidently unfazed by the long arm of the law, said the archaeologist-observed digout unearthed a few shards of broken pottery. "If they got a restraining order," he explained this week, "then I couldn't prove there was nothing there."

But Riversider Kevin Akin, who joined protesters at the site, wrote, "It was shocking to watch the 'archaeologists' at work. They stood about, often looking in other directions when material was dug. . . . The work was done at high speed, all with heavy equipment."

It's back to court Tuesday as opponents attempt to send the med project into a permanent coma.




San Bernardino's finances are still touch and go despite its recent budget cuts.


(excerpt, San Bernardino Sun)

"The city is practically in the same situation that every family in America is now," 5th Ward Councilman Chas Kelley said Wednesday. "We're apprehensive. We don't know what's going to happen. We don't know if the stimulus program is going to work."

Kelley and three of his council colleagues - Dennis Baxter, Tobin Brinker and Rikke Van Johnson - voted Tuesday night to approve a package of budget cuts that includes 55 layoffs and a number of other difficult choices.

Recreational facilities are set to be shuttered. Branch libraries only survive thanks to a bureaucratic life-

support program that relies on volunteers. General employees and firefighters also have agreed to take 10 percent pay cuts.

Although police officers' and firefighters' jobs have been taken off the chopping block, the budget cuts won't be so kind to other city employees.

Parks maintenance would be hit hardest by layoffs. Interim City Manager Mark Weinberg's budget-cutting plan calls for 16 layoffs of the green-clad maintenance crews in Parks, Recreation and Community Services. Their duties are set to be handled by contractors.

Still, work continues onward.



In a city where even the police union has agreed to furloughs, the Redlands city manager said that if he's offered a pay raise, he just might take it.



(excerpt, San Bernardino Sun)



The City Council is in the process of conducting Martinez's yearly performance review. The council sets up a committee to give Martinez his review. The committee meets - first without Martinez present - to evaluate his performance. Later, the committee may choose to bring Martinez in discuss his performance with the committee.

"I haven't talked to them yet," Martinez said.

When the review is complete, the council could offer the city manager a pay raise.

"If they offered me a raise, I'd have to consider it," Martinez said Tuesday.

On Feb. 10 the City Council received a report detailing deep cuts made to city departments to help make up for $5.5 million in lost revenue by the end of the fiscal year on June 30.

Further budget cuts are ongoing.

Martinez said he would at least consider a pay raise for himself because of his track record. Despite the city's budget shortfall, Martinez said he has gone above and beyond the requirements of his job.





He's probably not the most popular employee in the city right now.






Good God! If Maywood Police Department's mess isn't bad enough because it hired officers who were fired by other agencies or who had committed crimes, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department decides to do the same thing! As shown in a probe done by its Office of Independent Review directed by former United States Attorney Michael Gennaco who while working for the feds was assigned on a pattern and practice investigation involving the Riverside Police Department.

He came to Riverside in the summer of 2006 to provide training on investigations which was sponsored by the Community Police Review Commission and attended by commissioners, Internal Affairs division personnel and community members.

But Gennaco's been pretty busy on his home turf as well.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



Among those hired were applicants with criminal records, drug and alcohol problems and financial woes. One recruit, for example, had been fired for excessive force from another police agency. Another was hired despite being a suspected car thief and resigned months later after being arrested on assault charges. A third candidate was a heavy marijuana and steroid abuser who had been arrested and convicted of underage drinking shortly before he applied to become an LASD deputy.

The report, written by the county’s Office of Independent Review, criticized the LASD for its 2006 decision to abandon a strict hiring policy, in which aspiring sheriff’s deputies were automatically disqualified if they failed to pass an exacting background check or any other part of the application process. In its place, the report found, the department adopted a more “holistic” approach that allowed applicants to be hired if officials determined they had reformed themselves or that past mistakes were insignificant.



Sheriff Lee Baca had not yet responded to this report when the blog reported it. But in this article he did say that there was no excuse for hiring bad candidates. After they had been hired of course.

Is Baca as clueless about this as he sounds? If so, then why isn't anyone asking questions about him?



Some of those candidates included the following.


(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)




One man was hired even after he lied in an interview, telling investigators that he had never been arrested or had any encounters with law enforcement agencies. In fact, investigators discovered that he had repeatedly been stopped by police for driving with a suspended license and that a judge issued a warrant for his arrest after he failed to appear in court. The background check also found that the recruit had disappeared from his base for three months while serving in the military and had been a suspect in a police investigation after he borrowed a friend's car and then refused to return it.

The man's time in the department was short-lived. He resigned during his first year on the job after being arrested on assault charges, the report found.

Another applicant came looking for a job several years after he was fired from another California police agency, where he had been investigated several times for excessive force and other misconduct. In one instance, he drove his knee into the back of a 60-year-old woman and twisted her arm. He also was found to have been arrested for driving while under the influence. Several other police departments had refused to hire the man, but the Sheriff's Department offered him a job. During his first year working in the county jail, several inmates and others complained that he was prone to "blow up at others" and "fly off the handle." He was eventually dismissed after throwing a shoe at an inmate.

A female candidate was admitted to the sheriff's academy despite nearly failing high school and dropping out of a community college before earning a degree. A subsequent investigation unearthed a web of gang affiliations and led to accusations that she was using her position in the department to access databases and provide information to gang members. She was allowed to withdraw from the academy.













Details of another investigation into the illegal use of a quota system this time by ICE agents in Maryland. These allegations arose several years before the more recent ones reported by agents assigned to a Border Patrol Station in Riverside.



(excerpt, Washington Post)




The Jan. 23, 2007, incident, described in ICE documents and shown in
security camera footage obtained by The Washington Post, offers a
glimpse into how Washington's directives on arrest targets might
have spurred officers in the field to stray from their mission and
stage a random sweep for illegal immigrants, possibly in violation
of ICE's stated practice.

Even as ICE's National Fugitive Operations Program has garnered more
than $625 million from Congress since its launch in 2003, critics
have long suspected that Washington's practice of setting goals for
apprehensions has led teams to bring in tens of thousands of
immigrants who have not evaded a deportation order or committed a
crime -- as opposed to being in the country unlawfully, which is a
civil violation.

Recently, researchers from the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in
New York and the Migration Policy Institute in Washington released a
report revealing a dramatic leap in arrests of immigrants who were
neither fugitives nor criminals in 2006 and 2007 after officers were
permitted to count non-fugitives toward their goal if such detainees
were encountered in the course of an operation.

When a reporter contacted ICE for this article, spokeswoman Kelly A.
Nantel disclosed that as of Feb. 4, ICE leadership had altered the
annual goal of 1,000 arrests for each team. Instead, each team must
now identify and target -- though not necessarily arrest -- 50
fugitives each month, as well as 500 a year as part of operations
with other teams.

Nantel cited new statistics showing that in the 2008 fiscal year,
the share of non-fugitive arrests by the teams dropped -- from 40
percent to 24 percent of arrests nationwide and to 6 percent of
those made by the Baltimore team. Meanwhile, the new secretary of
homeland security, Janet Napolitano, has requested a review of
fugitive operations.




"He will never hurt me."


These words were said by the fiancee of former Bolingbrook Police Department Sgt. Drew Peterson. One wonders if his current wife and any of his ex-wives said the same thing.



(excerpt, MSNBC)



Robach asked Raines what she would tell people if Peterson is eventually found guilty of one or two murders. “That I’m running the other way,” she replied, then laughed and added, “I’m just joking. I just don’t believe them. I don’t believe them. I don’t believe he’ll hurt anyone. He’s nice.”

In talking to TODAY’s Robach, Drew Peterson indicated that despite, or maybe even because of, his notoriety, he’s quite a catch — and that he’s had a full and active dating life since Stacy’s disappearance.

“Just being out there, it’s funny — women for some silly reason are attracted to me,” he told Robach. “I can’t explain it and I can’t understand it.”

Robach asked him if women are attracted to him because he’s regarded as a dangerous type.

“I don’t know,” Peterson replied. “See, once people start knowing me and my personality kicks in, I think people are attracted to my personality. So I think Chrissy is attracted to my personality. It is certainly not my good looks.”

During their joint interview on TODAY, Peterson and Raines didn’t seem to be on the same page when it comes to their future. Peterson told Robach he isn’t sure when the couple could marry — he still must divorce Stacy Peterson, whom he says he believes is still alive.






Riverside County's premiere fair and festival: This weekend in Indio, the city that doesn't kill its festivals.

Freezes and furloughs and that sweep by Oceanside

"It's a rarity for a police union to go along with something like this. We have a lot of officers who see the bigger picture. A lot of cities have old school Jimmy Hoffa-style unions and that doesn't always work. Pointing fingers at each other in hard times doesn't solve any problems."

---Redlands Police Union president Derik Ohlson on the furloughs

Another earthquake hit the Inland Empire but fortunately a fairly small one.

As stated in earlier postings, the Riverside Police Department moved several of its divisions into space at the downtown bus terminal which was vacated by the fire department's administrative headquarters. It began moving these divisions in December into a building which lacked signage and had other problems both inside and outside. The first division to move in was the Internal Affairs Division which vacated its office digs near the Riverside Plaza just before its lease expired and headed on downtown, leaving the city's General Services Division with only two weeks notice that this move was taking place.

This division spent its first month in a building with no signage indicating that the police department was even there. In fact, people apparently mistook the division for the Greyhound Bus Service. Hopefully what was going on in the interior of the building was better than how the exterior looked.

It was a pretty sad state of affairs and sent the message loud and clear that the police department, City Manager Brad Hudson or both thought the division was unimportant enough in terms of its function to justify being housed in a building appearing barely more than one step above habitable. Only three years out of the consent decree that focused largely on the operations of this division, how sad is that?

Not that difficult budget times don't foster difficult choices but did the move show city management at its best?

Various city employees provided different theories as to not only why the Internal Affairs Division had no signage but why it shouldn't have any signage. One of the explanations for the latter was that it was a private division. However, even though it had no signage, it included in its front lobby decor, pamphlets about the police department's complaint process. And why have pamphlets if you aren't directing some of your responsibilities towards outreach? Even though the door was locked.

So there's a police facility that houses the department's Internal Affairs Division and now its NPC for the North area and its doors are locked. That's a head scratcher.

It's moments like this where you have to wonder where most of these people were during the five-year and $22 million consent decree with Lockyer's office. Out to lunch? Must have been a very long multi-course one. But it's perplexing that so little planning could go into major moves involving two of the police department's divisions even considering the budget crunch. Hasn't anyone in the city manager's office had any experience handling the logistics of moving divisions around inside a law enforcement agency? Have any of them even had any experience with law enforcement agencies before coming to Riverside?

Eventually signs were placed on the front of the occupied space stating that it was a police department facility and housed the Internal Affairs Division and the new North Neighborhood Policing Center. They look good but why did it take so long to achieve the task of placing signs on a department facility?

Not long after, the NPC division of one sergeant and a team of officers began moving into the rather small space putting them in cozy proximity to the Internal Affairs Division which had spent about five years being geographically isolated from any other police divisions, a result of the recommendation of former State Attorney General Bill Lockyer to take such an action. This makes you wonder if there's not enough separation between the division that performs the department's administrative investigations and reviews and those it investigates. Everyone from department management to City Hall has been very assuring in their assertion that appropriate separation will be accomplished but no one has really explained what this separation will entail.

And that's something important that's missing given the extremely close proximity between the Internal Affairs Division and of the field operation division's policing facilities. One of the selling points of putting a NPC downtown at the terminal was because the squad cars used by officers assigned or working there would provide a visible deterrent to crime. However, they might also provide a visual deterrent to going to the Internal Affairs Division to be interviewed, whether you're a civilian or an officer.

Now, the opinions that exist about the usefulness of any Internal Affairs Division vary. Few trust it, fewer like it and it's hard to find anyone to staff it without providing incentives including career advancement because it can't be a popular assignment. These are issues which for better or worse have been grappled at by many a law enforcement agency across the country.

There's still a cement sign that reads "Riverside Fire Department" in the parking area in between the terminal building and Mission Inn Avenue. But the General Services division representatives said that those types of signs can take over a month to construct.

Even with three sergeant promotions within the police department, their numbers are still down by at least three. The promotions haven't been publicly announced as they have been in the past but they've been taking place as the department has grappled with staffing issues and hiring/promotional freezes at the officer and supervisory levels not to mention a large group of vacancies remaining in its civilian division. But no furloughs or layoffs being mentioned yet. If the police department faces serious issues financially, it will probably be the next fiscal year rather than this one.

At the Black History Parade and Expo, both the Riverside Police Department and Riverside County Sheriff's Department were missing in action in terms of running booths which include recruitment. The California Highway Patrol which is still hiring attracted some attention from people attending the event. The creation of new law enforcement officer positions was included in a stimulus package passed by Congress but the details of that part of it haven't been really explained since, not to mention what kind of impact any new positions would have on city and county law enforcement agencies.

But some of the sergeant positions and one lieutenant position in the Riverside Police Department have thawed since last July 1.

The sergeant positions which were filled are the following:

Randy Eggleston

Terry Meyer

John Romo



The ones vacant are the following:


Kevin Stanton

Leon Phillips

Lisa Williams (who moved to a newly created post in Communications)



The detectives promoted to sergeant positions were Dan Warren, Chad Milby and Julian Hutzler. All three of them shared a trait in common in that they all had lateraled out of the Oceanside Police Department several years ago and joined the Riverside Police Department. That led to some interesting and different reactions from different people to the fact that officers lateraling from Oceanside were 3 for 3 in this autumn's round of promotions. Previous blog postings outlined some reasons why Oceanside's officers might have an edge during a time when promotions are more scarce. Several of the laterals had applied to Riverside as detectives but lost that ranking when they transferred (even as they gathered higher pay as Riverside's officers were making more than Oceanside's sergeants, according to North County Times.) but they kept their experience. At least one of Oceanside's laterals has a Masters Degree. So it appears that they are bringing it into the process of promotions.

It's interesting to see what the impact of these promotions will be on future sergeant promotions when more positions become unfrozen which will happen sooner or later. What kind of response will it garner from applicants that are homegrown and those who lateraled from other departments and how will it impact how the process is viewed? How will the Oceanside pool of officers continue to impact the police department as a whole? Judging by the attention they've received and their associated identity of being lateral officers from a particular agency (which has apparently stuck with them for better or worse), they do appear to have made some degree of impact on the organization.

Riverside being a typical post-consent decree agency (not that there are many of those) is a very young department. Turmoil and consent decrees often cause more experienced officers to retire (or be retired) or lateral out and newer, less experienced officers are brought in to replace them. A dearth of experienced officers in different divisions often provides excellent opportunities for laterals who are brought into the agency to "age" it. This was an integral part of attempts to rebuild a police department like Riverside's which saw what some say, was a 80% turnover in a relatively short period of time. But laterals are only as good as the process is at recruiting, screening and scrutinizing their backgrounds especially for signs of bad behavior at their former agencies (which may be only too happy to get rid of them). There's no short cuts with this process that aren't going to come back and bite the agency back later. So laterals can be great, they can be bad but as a class, they are definitely a double-edged sword.

Police Chief Russ Leach has said often that Riverside's patrol officers are on average, 24 years old with about 2-2 1/2 years experience in the field. A huge proportion of the patrol division has less than two years experience including probational officers and that creates dilemmas when trying to fill slots in divisions which require more experienced officers including the Metro/SWAT and field training divisions. Laterals from Rialto and Oceanside filled some of those positions as well. Will this change if the department ever gets in the position where it's aging? Some people who've been paying close attention expressed doubts that this would happen within one generation and it's doubtful that the police department will reach the mean age of officers that it registered in the 1990s which was set in the early 30s.


Two other sworn positions, that of a deputy chief and a lieutenant remain vacant. It appears they will remain vacant for quite a while.






Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein weighs in on Chinatown. He speculates about whether developer, Doug Jacobs violated the municipal code with the city government's blessing.




(excerpt)



"I pulled all my permits on Friday and we're ready to go," Doug Jacobs, who's building medical offices atop Riverside's old Chinatown site, told The P-E. "We're doing everything with the City Council's approval."

He said that Saturday, Day One of a long weekend of bulldozing squeezed in before a court hearing on whether to stop the earthmovers in their tracks. The earth continued to move Sunday, under the watchful eye of the RPD. Monday, cops finally cited Jacobs' crew for violating the muni code, which outlaws too much noise on a Sunday or federal holidays. Councilman Mike Gardner: "It was a conscious violation." (Sounds like "the City Council's approval" to me!) Tuesday, all earth moving was suspended until a Feb. 24 court hearing.

Archeological teams or anthropologists supposedly observed the weekend excavation, but maybe they just got in the way. Without them -- and this weeklong halt -- those dozers could have made it all the way to...China.




San Bernardino has approved most of its budget amid a sea of controversy and turmoil.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



City Treasurer David Kennedy urged council members to act fast. Currently, City Hall is exceeding its income by $50,000 a day, $1.5 million per month.

"Moving things from fund to fund or borrowing money is not a solution," Kennedy said. "The only way we can do it is spending less or raising more revenue."

Members of the city police union, the only labor group to reject Weinberg's call for pay and benefit reductions, rebuked Mayor Pat Morris and his chief of staff for publicly questioning their empathy for other city employees and their grasp of the crisis.

One speaker, Officer Richard Everett, recited a list of ways in which city employees help their community, from filling potholes to rescuing accident victims.

"You've called on us time and again," he said. "We're calling on you now. Don't trash us."

Layoff projections have changed repeatedly in recent weeks. On Feb. 2, Weinberg set possible layoffs at as high as 130 against the city's total work force of 1,300. On Friday, he proposed holding seven positions vacant, with 60 employees to be laid off. And on Monday, the number rose again, to as many as 96 job cuts.





Redlands might be doing the furlough thing. And in a move that shocked many, the police union volunteered for the furloughs.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



Most surprising of all, officials said, was that the police union asked to take part in the deal.


"I have worked for seven cities, and I have never seen the police volunteer for furloughs," Martinez said. "There was not the typical whining about how the bad guys are going to show up and take over or how the sky was going to fall."

The police union overwhelming agreed to take 66 hours of furlough by June 30, and the firefighters union accepted a similar plan last month.

"I have no doubt there are people in my business who are watching and wondering if we were naïve, that maybe we should have dug in our heels," said Police Chief Jim Bueermann. "We could have played the public safety card, but these are different times, and we are not an island."

Bueermann said two of his men were confronted by police officers from other cities.

"They berated them for setting an inappropriate precedent," he said. "They were aggressively critical of our position and said it would make it harder for police everywhere."




More questions are being asked about the salary and perks provided for an aide working for one of the San Bernardino County supervisors.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




Jim Erwin, now the top aide to Supervisor Neil Derry, worked as a consultant to Colonies Partners from July through December 2006.

The developer eventually received a $102 million settlement from the county for its lawsuit over flood-control issues at its project in Upland.

Erwin received the watch Jan. 29, 2007, shortly after he began working for the San Bernardino County assessor's office.

He didn't report it at the time, but disclosed it as income last week in a revision to a statement of economic interests he originally submitted to San Bernardino County officials April 1, 2008, county records show.

Erwin was required by the state ethics code to report all income and gifts received in the 12 months before he took the assistant assessor job.

Erwin held the job for less than a year, departing after a disagreement with Assessor Bill Postmus, who resigned last week amid allegations of drug addiction and political misconduct.

Erwin acknowledged making a mistake and said he is likely to be fined for the omission by the Fair Political Practices Commission, a state watchdog agency that polices the ethics of public officials.

"I expect at some point some FPPC action," Erwin said.





More transparency through recording city meetings might help resolve a sticky situation that San Jacinto's government has with its subcommittees, according to the Press Enterprise Editorial Board.



(excerpt)



San Jacinto might serve that interest, and avoid the quorum conundrum, by recording the meetings for later perusal -- by Di Memmo or others who wish to watch. That move would sidestep legal questions while bolstering public scrutiny of government.

The council could spend more time debating who can attend subcommittee meetings, certainly. But surely the city has more pressing issues at hand than perpetuating this quarrel.








The Los Angeles Police Protective League is suing the city over the controversial helmet issue.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



The suit filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court named Chief William J. Bratton as a co-defendant and seeks a temporary restraining order against the city from taking any measures that would discourage officers from using safety gear when dealing with crowds during protests and demonstrations.

It also demands that the Los Angeles Police Department comply with applicable safety rules in future situations.

“The LAPD's own emergency operations guide clearly states: ‘Do not assign officers without helmets, vests and batons to crowd control missions,'" union President Paul Weber said in a statement. “We firmly believe the law is on our side –- helmets and face shields should be worn in large protest situations to prevent injury to officers and to help manage large groups of people who want to exercise their 1st Amendment rights."

The legal action grew out of a Jan. 10 incident in which an officer was hit over the head with a sign during a protest over the Israeli invasion of Gaza.

Officials with the Los Angeles Police Protective League say on-scene commanders decided officers should not immediately wear riot helmets out of concern the gear might escalate passions among the demonstrators.






More Atlanta Police Department officers in trouble with the law. Two of them are accused of sexually assaulting a woman.




A police sergeant was suspended in Albany, in connection with the arrest of another officer for driving under the influence.



(excerpt, Albany Times-Union)



The suspension of Sgt. P.J. McKenna comes as the department's internal affairs investigation is ongoing into the controversial circumstances of the Jan. 11 arrest of Detective George McNally on charges of driving while intoxicated and leaving the scene of an accident.

Dispatch records obtained by the Times Union last month raise questions about whether police may have delayed the arrest or abandoned their pursuit of McNally, who allegedly crashed his pick-up truck into a car on New Scotland Avenue that evening and drove off. An off-duty Schenectady officer witnessed the crash and gave chase in his Grand Cherokee as he called a police dispatcher and followed McNally across Albany into Bethlehem.






The police harassment case in Rutherford will have its day in court.


(excerpt, South Bergenite)



An internal affairs investigation, which was commenced after Grappone reported the incident to the Rutherford Police Department on Oct. 23, has temporarily been suspended while the harassment charge is dealt with.

"There’s a harassment complaint pending," said Captain George Egbert. "Once that's over, we proceed."

According to Grappone, nine other Rutherford officers showed up at the probable cause hearing in January.

"I could hear the collective moan of displeasure from the cops when the judge OK’d it for trial," said Grappone. "I think their showing up in court actually worked against them as the judge spoke of intimidation tactics."

The whole matter began on Oct. 23, according to Grappone, when he pulled up to the intersection of Donaldson and Mortimer avenues only to find the intersection blocked by an on-duty officer in his police car speaking to Nunziato, who was off-duty and standing outside the vehicle. Grappone says he flashed his high beams to inform them he wanted to pass through. Nunziato and the officer moved to the side to let him pass and as Grappone drove by he says he heard Nunziato shout a threat at him.

This led to a verbal dispute between Grappone and Nunzato until the on-duty officer told Nunziato to leave and told Grappone to pull over. Afterwards, Grappone says he immediately went to the police station to file a complaint.

Grappone subsequently took out an advertisement in the South Bergenite to generate interest in a protest he staged on Nov. 8 in Lincoln Park. The protest was eventually rained out and fewer than half a dozen people attended. He said he received phone calls from people who supported him, but who didn’t wish to attend a public protest.



Just when you thought racism was lessening in this country or at least hoped. This cartoon ran in the New York Post here.

It's caused controversy for the use of a monkey getting shot by police officers. Because monkeys and apes are often images used to depict African-Americans including Barack Obama and because Black men like Oscar Grant, Amadou Diallo, Irvin Landrum and Sean Bell have been shot and killed by police. Because African-Americans in Rialto and other cities complained about police officers calling them "gorillas". Because former Lt. Stacy Koon of the Los Angeles Police Department used to communicate on his mobile data terminal about "Gorillas in the Mist".

And so forth.

What was the Post's response? Lighten up, it's supposed to be funny.

From Feministe: