Just how many cooks are there in the RPD's kitchen?

Captain is no longer a position based on merit-It is a political position and City Hall will have a great deal to do with the next selection."


---comment allegedly made by a high-ranking Riverside Police Department representative according to Tim Bacon/Darryl Hurt v the City of Riverside




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



It's interesting if somewhat disturbing to watch the metamorphosing of the Riverside Police Department during the past few years ever since City Manager Brad Hudson and his sidekick, Tom DeSantis came to town. If you compare and contrast the police department before and after their hirings, you'll see two different agencies.

One run by a police chief. Another ran by a police chief with his strings getting pulled by a consortium of individuals at City Hall.


Though to give credit where it's due, it's not like the micromanagement of the police department began the moment the two men set foot in the door at City Hall. No, they waited, they waited until the State Attorney General's office had dissolved its stipulated judgment with the city first and then they took off on their courses, apparently with at least the blessings of a council member or two. Certainly, no one on the city council ever tried to rein in their energies and apparently none has tried so far to date.

But several individuals in the police department tried to respond through a variety of different channels.

Not too long ago, two lieutenants, Tim Bacon and Darryl Hurt, filed first grievances and then lawsuits in U.S. District Court to address issues of micromanagement which impacted them as individuals, as part of the leadership of the Riverside Police Administrators' Association and as a department as a whole. But it took them both a while to get there.

That lawsuit which was ultimately filed was recently bifurcated in U.S. District Court which essentially means that it was split into two parts. One section of it will continue to be litigated in federal court while the other will be sent to state court, which means Riverside County Superior Court's civil division. In what will now be two judicial venues, the allegations and issues that have been raised in these lawsuits will be discussed, debated, heard and ultimately decided one way or the other and what will likely be discovered along the way is the extent of the micromanagement which has taken place in our city's police department by factions at City Hall.

If you look at the chronology of dates on the respective lawsuits, you see that spring and summer of 2006 appeared to be in part, a major epicenter of when the lion share of the allegations began. This is not a coincidence. During this same period, quite a bit of tussling between Hudson and the police department's management was taking place. If you recall in late March 2006, the city council passed 7-0 a proposed plan on how to proceed with the police department post-consent decree.

For those who witnessed that workshop, they'll remember that the city council approved a plan to hire a consultant to audit the department's progress in implementing its strategic plan quarterly and the department would remain committed both to implementing the plan and various components of the stipulated judgment including maintaining the officer to supervisor ratios and lieutenants as watch commanders. But at the same time that the RPAA apparently struggled with attempts by Hudson and DeSantis to reclassify positions within the department, Hudson also was not carrying out the orders of the city council to secure a two year contact with the consultant.

In fact, he was apparently trying to reduce the terms of what the city council had ordered him to do and "lowball" the consultant in hopes that he would refuse the contract and Hudson could go back to the city council to say the consultant cost too much money. Hudson even tried to lean on a deputy state attorney general to get him to get the consultant to take less money but the deputy state attorney general wasn't having any of that.


These issues are being brought up because they parallel what Hudson and DeSantis were doing with the issues involving reclassification of positions in the RPAA to make them "at will" even though they must have known or should have known that this could not be done. And it seems that on both of these issues that Hudson and DeSantis mucked up during one brief summer period that the city council sat by and watched, either blissfully unaware of what the city management team was up to doing or not caring, as long as the city manager's office kept putting marquee signs all over the city with the names of elected officials prominently displayed advertising Riverside Renaissance projects. But it's not surprising that so much activity involving Hudson and by extension, DeSantis's increased involvement in the police department took place in spring and summer of 2006, which was mere months after the ending of the relationship between the city and the state over the reforming of the police department.

Was all this involvement by design or by opportunity or both? Those questions and potential answers will be addressed in future postings.


Both lawsuits contain many of the same allegations impacting both officers such as retaliatory actions and comments made against them. After reading these lawsuits, you just want them to not be true. Because if they are, then the police department is in such a deep stage of micromanagement, it will be hard to pull it out of it. In fact, it appears to be back to adopting similar patterns of behavior it showed in the 1990s if you read litigation filed during that time period, with a few extra twists thrown in.

According to the lawsuit filed by Lt. Tim Bacon, it all began when the city engaged in "numerous and unlawful actions" in attempts to both union bust the Riverside Police Administrators' Association by trying to enter into "at will" relationships with individual members of the RPAA including on one noteworthy occasion, two deputy chiefs and an assistant chief in the spring of 2007. The city began to advertise for openings in the department in trade magazines outside of the department and engaged in practices of favoritism which showed that there was favoritism being shown by City Hall to the point where the chief's promotional decisions were being usurped or overruled by others.

Bacon became concerned about what was going on around him so he became more actively involved with then RPAA President Darryl Hurt to address and remedy these outstanding issues. The RPAA leadership including Bacon would often help its brother association, the Riverside Police Officers' Association in garnering community support for many of the issues that bargaining unit faced.


What is "at will" and at whose will?


On or around May 19, 2006, Bacon and Hurt learned that the city had placed an agenda item for a meeting to change the classification of certain RPAA employees without having a "meet and confer" with the RPAA leadership. The mission of the city's endeavor was to create "at will" positions within the RPAA's membership.

On May 23, 2006, Bacon and Hurt met with Chief Russ Leach, and Councilmen Art Gage and Frank Schiavone to discuss these issues that had arisen. A huge crowd of police officers and community leaders showed up at a council meeting to protest this proposed action.

But according to the lawsuit, Bacon soon learned that there was backlash looming after a high-ranking department member told him that City Hall blamed him for the large community turnout at the city council meeting.

At about that time, Bacon received information from within the police department that Leach opposed the "at will" contracts but had little say in the matter or anything in the department because the department was currently being micromanaged by Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis upon direction or at least knowledge by City Manager Brad Hudson.


On June 29, 2006, the RPAA voted unanimously to sue the city for breach of contract on its MOU. But according to the lawsuit, Hudson and DeSantis didn't take that action very well and asked high-ranking police department employees to give them the names of everyone who voted for the lawsuit. Hudson and DeSantis indicated to high-ranking members of the department's management team that the RPAA including Hurt and Bacon should "be careful" because Hudson and DeSantis were "revengeful" and "retaliatory".

On July 18, 2006, the RPAA sued the city and after the city lost at the demurrer stage, it gave a "best and final" offer to the association which was rejected. Hudson and DeSantis demanded to know which members of the RPAA voted against the offer.

On Aug. 31, 2006, Hudson and DeSantis began making comments that they didn't like certain members of the RPAA.


In March 2007, Bacon joined the Political Action Committee of the RPAA to become more actively involved in addressing these labor issues.


That month, the city made another attempt to convert RPAA positions into "at will" positions, this time those of two deputy chiefs and an assistant chief. Crowds of people showed up at the March 27, 2007 meeting and the city discovered that it was unable to perform this action.



"Leach has no control over the department"


Between July 2006 and at least through May 2008, high ranking management personnel of the police department had allegedly informed members of the RPAA and the RPOA that Leach had no control over the police department and that most decisions regarding promotions, organizing the department and personnel changes were being made by City Hall.


At the March 27, 2007, organized efforts by Bacon, Hurt and others were made to get people down to the city council meeting to object to the illegal "at will" contracts. They also contacted Gage and Schiavone about what was going on. As a result of the outcry, the contract proposals were removed from the agenda and several management employees were promoted to those positions without being "at will".

The RPAA and RPOA members did express concerns at those meetings that further attempts to convert police positions to being "at will" would be attempted and members of City Hall began taking notes of who was speaking out.


Election 2007 also took place and both the RPAA and RPOA did not choose to endorse Steve Adams in his reelection for the Ward Seven council seat. In fact, Bacon and other members of these associations campaigned actively against a candidate who opposed Adams.

During that time, Bacon alleged that elected officials began making negative and derogatory comments about him and Hurt. He alleged that Schiavone told another department officer that if he wanted to get promoted he should distance himself from Bacon. Schiavone also inferred and expressed to officers that he would be retaliating against Bacon.

Adams allegedly told another officer that he would never get promoted because of his participation in activities involving a candidate running against Adams. Adams also allegedly told another officer that because that officer didn't back him for council and actively campaigned against him, he would "never fuckin get promoted."


On numerous occasions, Leach, Hudson and DeSantis indicated that Bacon would never be promoted due to his political and labor activities.



And what of those concealed weapons permits?


As a result of information and a followup investigation into the situation involving the issuance of concealed weapons permits by Hudson and DeSantis by Leach, Bacon discovered that Leach might have acquiesced to improper demands by those two men. The State Attorney General and District Attorney's office examined the city's actions. Although the source of the information to these investigative agencies was never relieved, the defendants of this lawsuit believed that Bacon was its source.


High ranking police personnel warned community members and activists that Bacon should be "careful of doing political stuff at the police department".

Around May 2007, a high ranking department representative informed Bacon that he was a "company man" and that he had information that the city was going to pay him back. The RPAA should not be involved in politics and that Bacon "should cease

In October 2007, Bacon and Hurt were told that they wouldn't be promoted because of their positions and ranks within the RPAA and that the "Captain is no longer a position based on merit-It is a political position and City Hall will have a great deal to do with the next selection."


On May 2008, high-ranking members of the police management team were told to "find something" on Bacon to lead to his arrest and/or termination.

January 2008, Bacon was passed over for a promotion for captain and a second captain's position [and now a third] have been left vacant.



Allegations:


DeSantis has ordered high-ranking police managers to take actions against Bacon which have adversely affected his reputation, career development and work schedule choices.


Since August 2005, Leach has been very limited in whom he can promote.


Hudson and DeSantis instituted a hiring freeze to adversely impact Leach's ability to promote including that of Bacon.


Leach has abdicated his responsibilities to ensure that hiring decisions be done equitably and lawfully.


Hudson, DeSantis, Schiavone and Adams have in fact directed, manipulated or made promotional decisions in the police department in violation of city rules, MOUs. As such, they are the defacto policy makers inside the police department.



Allegations of Retaliation:


When Hurt announced intent to file a grievance around Feb. 1, 2008, a few hours later he was transferred to the watch commander position and notified about the transfer through a department-wide issued email.



Some of Hurt's own legal action parallels events told in Bacon's lawsuit so much of what was written there applied to him as well.

But he also listed other allegations in his own lawsuit.


On Jan. 20, 2006, a former captain told Hurt that an internal affairs investigation had been opened against him which was entirely inappropriate and that the captain said he was just following orders.


On March 28, 2006, Hurt met with Hudson and DeSantis and told them he was the new RPAA president and informally tried to resolve MOU issues involving the RPAA. But Hudson and DeSantis weren't receptive so Hurt became meeting with Mayor Ron Loveridge and city council members about these same MOU concerns. They told him that they would speak to Hudson in an attempt to resolve the disputed issues as expeditiously as possible.


On Aug. 4, 2007, a high-ranking member of the department indicated that DeSantis "still had a hardon for plaintiff" because of his political activities.

In January 2008, a high-ranking member of the police department indicated that City Hall believed that Hurt and Bacon were responsible for the release of information on the concealed weapon permit situation involving Hudson and DeSantis (and his permit was later revoked due to not being a city resident).


On May 2008, high-ranking members of the police management team were told to "find something" on Hurt to lead to his arrest and/or termination.

January 2008, Hurt was passed over for a promotion for captain and a second captain's position [and now a third] have been left vacant.


Like Bacon, Hurt filed a grievance with the city and within a short period of time, was notified that he was going to be transferred to the watch command via a department-wide email.



So there you have two lawsuits filed which make very serious allegations of misconduct and retaliation from a cast of characters at City Hall. It also paints a picture of the police department with a puppet chief at its head and his strings being pulled by various individuals at City Hall who appear reminiscent of Machiavelli's Prince than city employees. And if that's the case, then no wonder there are issues taking place within the agency. And the strange thing is, that the city's tax dollars are being used to defend those who are alleged to engage in those activities yet there's been no information provided by the city as to whether or not it has launched any investigation into these serious allegations. Its immediate reaction is to label these allegations "frivolous" because those accused include elected officials and high-ranking direct employees of the city council. And then the city council with the straight face expects us to believe in the integrity of our so-called (yet voter-mandated) ethics code and complaint system.

If law enforcement agencies are incapable of investigating their own misconduct allegations, then so are cities, when it comes to addressing allegations involving their own employees. And as police departments including this city's have histories of retaliating against employees who do complain (including through initiating investigations through Internal Affairs), this city has the same problem. After all, one popular anecdote that circulates is that when Hudson met with a group of people in one department, he told them that he would answer any of their questions. Well, one person asked about the classification of department job positions and not only did she not get an answer, she allegedly received a two-week vacation from work courtesy of City Hall.

If that's how questions are handled by the city manager's office, then it's no surprise that rumors of departmental micromanagement are so pervasive at City Hall.

What the police department needs is a strong police chief, but that's not what it currently has and with Leach out on some form of medical leave for back surgery, people are asking if a retirement of some form is lurking in his future and if so, what would happen. But if that's not in the future plans, then what kind of police chief will Leach be or more accurately, be allowed to be without going the way of other mouthy "at will" employees?

Is the police chief happy with his reduction in status to being a political plaything for the current city management team? I doubt it. Does he have much say in the matter? As an "at will" employee, probably not because if you're "at will", you can be fired or pushed to "resign" just for opening your mouth.

But he needs to return to its helm and run the department, good or bad so at least he can be held accountable for its successes and failures instead of a team of people hidden behind a curtain at the "Emerald City" (borrowed from a city official's statement though I'm sure this wasn't what she had in mind) who really don't know what they're doing anyway except making a mess with the integrity of the city's police department and City Hall.

What the police department can't continue to have is Hudson and DeSantis micromanaging or running the police department from City Hall. If that is indeed what's going on, hopefully some day because of these lawsuits they will have to explain their actions in civil court, which won't be the private behind-the-closed-doors-environment that they most likely prefer but it will have to be in a public forum. And hopefully in that same public forum or similar, the former and current members of the city council can explain why if this was what was going on, why did they allow it to continue?



This situation is ongoing and sure to continue in the months ahead...

Hundreds witness the changing of the guard

A packed city council chambers at Riverside's City Hall witnessed the swearing in of two familiar faces and that of a newer one before beginning its evening session.

Incumbents Andrew Melendrez and Nancy Hart were joined by newly elected Ward Four Councilman Paul Davis to be given the oath of office by City Clerk Colleen Nichols. Elected officials of the past, including former council members Dom Betro, Art Gage and Maureen Kane joined residents of the even numbered wards, many of whom gave standing ovations when their council member's name was announced.

The politicking began right away when it came down to voting upon who would be given assignments on both city council committees and regional organizations. Many speakers went to the podium to ask the mayor and city council to appoint Davis as one of the members of the March Joint Powers Commission. Davis was originally picked by Mayor Ron Loveridge and Melendrez who served as mayor pro tem to be an alternate to Melendrez on that commission. However, Loveridge flatly refused to even consider having Davis become an active member of the commission and the city council voted against it. It was the first power play from the dais of the evening as Loveridge tried to remind everyone else that he's not just there to cut ribbons at ceremonies but a power player of his own.





The Riverside City Council spent nearly an hour trying to decide what to next call itself. Something to do with being the city of arts, culture...something like that.





Mel Opotowsky of the Press Enterprise analyzes City Attorney Gregory Priamos' role in the Bradley Estates Scandal. Something not really addressed in the earlier article which addressed the role of former Councilman Frank Schiavone.



(excerpt)

Priamos jumped in, replying that this use of a modesty veil was actually a badge of honor. He said in a letter that Schiavone deliberately hired another company to process the tract "to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest."

Huh??? By hiding it from the public, there could be no appearance of a conflict? Isn't there something in the city's code of ethics about accountability?

Legal folderol

Asked whether the issue was really transparency, not a conflict of interest, Priamos said in a phone conversation, "Could have, should have -- that's not for me. I was saying he had no legal obligation to reveal his interest, as he did -- and did do -- when it came before the city council" of which he was a member.

But let's get back to the legal and unprecedented wheel-of-fortune where Priamos arranged for the city to pay for the councilman/developer's legal bills. A dogged gadfly outfit with the apocalyptic name of Save Riverside put together a Web site report that starts when the City Council approved Schiavone's development Jan. 23, 2007; the approval included the requirement that he had to execute an indemnification agreement. Those routinely required agreements state that any legal costs incurred defending the tract approval would be paid by the developer, not the city.

Sure enough, the Friends of Riverside Hills sued both Schiavone and the city the very next month, saying he was squeezing too many houses on the property.

The Friends prevailed in a settlement that got much of what it wanted from Schiavone. The Friends also won agreement to collect $50,000 for its legal costs in the case.

Now comes the legal folderol that rationalized the city's picking up the legal tab for its councilman. Priamos claimed the Schiavone case was "intertwined" somehow with two other actions the Friends had filed against some basic city development ordinances.

Priamos engaged Best Best & Krieger to work on the city's Friends cases. And while they are at it, he tells the law firm, work on Schiavone's little problem.

The Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach has been currently missing in action since April because he's recovering from back surgery. I guess it took the Press Enterprise two months to notice he wasn't in the office. But that leaves an assortment of chiefs left to run the department, including those from inside City Hall.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




Leach said Tuesday that he hopes to return to work full time in July.

The spinal fusion surgery resulted from a job-related injury Leach suffered about four years ago, he wrote in an e-mail. Leach would not say how he became injured.
Story continues below

Leach had the surgery April 28.

He said he speaks daily with Assistant Chief John De La Rosa and the city manager's office. He also meets with staff members at his house.

"Again, simple fact is I'm still here, still in charge," Leach stated.





But that's been the question which is often most debated. Who really is in charge of the police department? The perception coming out of that agency is that it's a multiple choice question.






According to one of them, the Asst. Chief John DeLaRosa, it's not been decided yet whether the captain's position vacated by the retiring Mark Boyer will be filled with his replacement or whether it will join the growing list of frozen positions inside the police department. The current list of candidates for the captain's position will still stand for about two more months before people will have to be reapply(but not be retested). The list of frozen sworn positions now stands at two captains, one lieutenant and at least three sergeant positions with more retirements of both sergeants and lieutenants expected this year.

All the detective positions have been filled so far with Officer Lisa Johnson filling the one vacated by Det. Steve Pounds. However, testing for the detective rank is scheduled to begin next month.






The city's reaction to the blog posting about the alleged raises given to the city's department heads were that the raises were proposed as part of a maximum scale that was increased from January 2008 to December 2008 but that not a single department head accepted any of these raises. If the blog posting is truly in error on this issue, then an apology is in order but one has to ask as to why there would be incremental increases in these maximum scale salaries as they are called at the point in time when the city and all surrounding areas are entering into a major recession? An unprecedented recession which would certainly mean major budget cuts to city departments including loss of personnel or personnel positions. Why would such attention be placed into raising the maximum salary rate for department heads amid all this economic turmoil?

After all, are there documents that introduce incremental increases in maximum pay scales for the employees who have had salaries frozen or have not received bonus pay, or for those employees who have been laid off? This situation bares watching within the next fiscal year to see whether or not these raises exist solely on the piece of paper which listed them.

Seriously, most of the documentation released has been about what to cut, what to freeze and what to reduce in terms of services (i.e. a proposal to reduce hours at libraries and community centers) yet amidst all these mandates for cuts and reductions comes documentation that City Hall had planned to raise the maximum salary scales for department heads and other select employees by 15% or higher. Amidst what's going on with the rest of the city's economic picture, seeing documents about department heads having their maximum pay scales bumped up just seems a tad bit out of place out of the city's doom and gloom portrait of the economic situation.


One thing which would greatly clarify this issue is if these department heads and assistant city managers would in a public forum tell everyone that they will not accept any salary raises until the situations involving the employees in their respective departments improves as well meaning that positions are unfrozen, salaries are unfrozen and bonus and step up pay is received. The next city council meeting would provide a perfect opportunity to do so.




Portrait of a Hemet Police Department officer



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




Maddox, a Hemet native, has earned five "10851" pins that are named after the California Vehicle Code regulation number and refer to grand theft auto. The California Highway Patrol awards the pin to officers who excel at arresting car thieves and recovering vehicles.

To qualify for a 10851 award, officers must stop and capture at least six stolen vehicles while they're still occupied or arrest at least three crooks as they are driving "rolling stolens," Baker said.

Lt. Dean Evans said patrol officers such as Maddox tend to gravitate to certain areas while still handling all their regular duties.

"That's where he puts his extra time," Evans said.

In 2007, the latest year that figures are available, the Inland area ranked 20th nationwide with 27,188 auto thefts, according to a report from the National Insurance Crime Bureau.

That is down from 11th three years ago and 12th in 2003 in the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario metropolitan area, according to the report.





Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein salutes Yolanda Garland. Bravo.



(excerpt)



An irritant to some, a dogged champion of the little guy to others, there was no disputing that in her civic heyday, Yolanda Garland was a gadfly who lighted most often near the public microphone in the Riverside City Council chambers. The 79-year-old La Sierra resident, who weighed in most memorably in land use dust-ups, died this month of cancer.

The Unkindest cuts of all around us

A proposal to cut the hours that Riverside's libraries and community centers would be open as part of the latest round of budget cuts was nixed even before it even went to a city council budget workshop. Given how popular these resources are to people, that was probably a wise choice.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




City officials plan to add $321,000 to the proposed $6 million library budget in an effort to keep doors open more hours at the main library in downtown Riverside and the six branches citywide.

The City Council is expected to approve the annual budget, effective July 1, following a public hearing this afternoon at City Hall.

The libraries would be open for a combined 378 hours a week, according to a city report.

That's seven hours less than the hours posted last week on the city's Web site.

Similarly, a $101,323 boost to the $14.1 million parks, recreation and community services budget would preserve 1,732 public hours at community centers during the fiscal year, the report said.

Earlier this month, City Manager Bradley Hudson said in a public meeting that he planned to refocus library and community center hours to the busiest times.



So far it appears that Hudson etal have changed their collective minds but you just never know with that crew. Of course all the management personnel in Hudson's office including Hudson have not only not frozen their own salaries in solidarity with the city employees who might or will be facing that, they have instead gotten their own wages raised last December. Hudson raised his salary by 7% and his assistant city managers both got increases of 15%.



The Press Enterprise Editorial Board praised the Riverside County Board of Supervisors for sharing in the pay cuts being experienced by the employees in the county. But the Board also urges department heads to participate in similar cuts.



(excerpt)




People sacrifice more willingly when they know that others are sharing the burden. In requesting a 10 percent pay cut, Riverside County supervisors are sending a useful signal in a county that faces a $130 million shortfall in the 2009-10 budget year.

The county's department heads and 20,000 employees should in turn acknowledge that they, too, will need to make concessions to help preserve public services.

Supervisors Roy Wilson and Marion Ashley this month sought the salary reductions and urged other supervisors to do the same. Last week, Supervisors John Tavaglione, Jeff Stone and Bob Buster joined the pay cut movement. Auditor-Controller Robert Byrd, Treasurer-Tax Collector Don Kent and Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder Larry Ward have also requested cuts.



Pity that the city of Riverside has gone in the opposite direction with its department heads.



This blog posting which featured the raises that the city government gave to its department raises in December received quite a bit of response from readers, who were amazed that during some of the most fiscally difficult times in Riverside's history, the city government saw fit to give its department heads and some other management employees raises, while engaging in laying off other employees, installing hiring and salary freezes and in some cases, eliminating merit pay in many of these same departments.

Here's a recap of some of the raises that were given department heads on December 2008. These came off a document that listed the raises for executive and management positions at City Hall and other city departments. It's public information but apparently not the easiest document to find.






City Manager: $256,680 $275,004 $18,324 7%

Assistant City Manager: $191,316 $225,516 $34,200 15%

City Attorney: $203,850 $208,668 $5,088 2%

City Clerk: $131,820 $135,120 $3,300 2%



Department Heads:

Police Chief: $234,000 $277,176 $43,176 16%

Fire Chief: $221,208 $254,388 $33,180 13%

Director, Public Works: $173,928 $205,008 $31,080 15%

General Manager, Public Utilities: $193,740 $250,692 $56,952 23%

Human Resources Director: $148,908 $175, 524 $26,616 15%

Director, Planning: $165,660 $195,276 $29,616 15%

Director Parks & Recreation: $165,660 $195,276 $29,616 15%





If you look at this list, you will see that the department heads even in the face of the recession and resultant budget cuts, even in the face of what former councilman Frank Schiavone called "a global meltdown", the department heads still got rather generous raises while the employees they oversaw were laid off (especially if they were part-time), their salaries were frozen (as in the case of the members of the Riverside Fire Fighters' Association during their latest contract negotiations). In the case of the fire fighters, they were forced to engage in salary freezes while their new chief gets a 13% raise in salary.

What about the Human Resources Department which is facing some of the largest cuts and has frozen positions? The director herself receives a 15% pay raise.

Or witness the police department where the barely there police chief, Russ Leach, received a 16% salary raise while 80 members of his own sworn division were unable to obtain merit raises or step increases as promised by their MOUs. How could a city government that calls itself a cheeerleader for public safety vote to give a department head a huge pay raise while denying merit increases for so many of its police officers? If there's no money for these merit raises, then there's no money to give a department head a raise. That is if your priorities are straight.




Hiring by Express?

Rumor is that the son of a Riverside County supervisor was hired as a police officer at the Riverside Police Department away from another police department last year. The question is, did this officer undergo a thorough background check or was he the "political emergency" hire of 2008?

Every police officer and member of the public out there should be praying right now that the department didn't skimp on his background check (or provide him with $5,000 of "frozen" incentive bonus funds that were denied other applicants) when they brought on this police officer apparently in the middle of a hiring freeze.

Frankly, I hope this rumor is false because if it's not, then the others that were listed after it about other troubling issues just might be true as well and might warrant further scrutiny.




Riverside County will see very little economic relief in the next several years.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



"The next two years look pretty bad here, especially in Riverside County," said Adrian Fleissig, an economics professor at Cal State Fullerton and one of the study's authors. "California is lagging the nation in the recovery, especially Southern California. And Riverside County will be even a little more behind."

The county commissioned the economic forecast to verify and add detail to its projections for county revenue and to aid in budget planning.

On Tuesday, supervisors are set to consider negotiating a multiyear contract with the study's researchers at Cal State Fullerton's Institute for Economic and Environmental Studies. The cost of the study was about $24,000, county spokesman Ray Smith said.

"It validates the foundation we have used to do our multiyear budget planning, and that's a wise thing to have," Smith said of the report. "It's more reasons to believe in the numbers we've used in building budgets out over the next couple years."

Riverside County's executive staff instructed department heads to slash expenses in the face of what they say is a $130 million budget shortfall for the fiscal year that begins July 1. The year after that will bring yet more cuts, county Executive Officer Bill Luna has cautioned.


But taking huge budget cuts is Hemet.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



The city's $33.8 million general fund cuts about $4 million from public safety, $1.4 million from community development, $600,000 from administration and $500,000 from community services.

The number of city employees will drop to 332 positions in fiscal 2009-10 from 432 positions in fiscal year 2006-07, a 23 percent decline, according to an analysis by Thomas Kanarr, interim finance director.

Police and fire departments with 190 combined personnel three years ago will see their ranks drop to 145 in the next fiscal year. Hemet's community development department -- which encompasses planning, building, housing, code enforcement and engineering -- will be cut to 21 workers, or half of its staffing level three years ago.




Norco making concessions in its fire fighters' salaries might narrow the deficit gap in that city.




(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



The council will vote tonight on a $50.8 million budget that includes $16.5 million in general fund spending. City officials have been meeting for several months with firefighters in hopes of reducing their budget. They were unable to agree until Thursday.

That agreement rescinded preliminary layoff notices for six firefighters and eliminated firefighters' scheduled raises over the next two years.

Doing away with raises and extending other concessions firefighters made in January -- such as reduced holiday pay and paying for their own gym memberships -- is expected to save about $250,000 in the new fiscal year, Finance Director Andy Okoro said.

Norco Firefighters Association President Ron Laursen could not be reached for comment Monday.



City Hall in Moreno Valley will be placed on a four-day-a-week schedule.




The Los Angeles Police Department yielded good approval numbers in a recent poll, according to the Los Angeles Times.



(excerpt)



The positive opinions of the LAPD stand out as a bright spot at a time when Angelenos are feeling battered by the recession, highly critical of public schools and generally pessimistic about life in Los Angeles.

Four in 10 of the voters surveyed said they had seriously considered leaving the city in the last two years, most commonly because of the high cost of housing.

More than a third said they or a member of their immediate family had lost a job; 12% said their homes had been foreclosed. And only about 1 in 4 rated the quality of education at local public schools as excellent or good.

The poll of 1,500 registered voters in Los Angeles was conducted for The Times by two firms based in Washington, D.C.: Greenberg Quinlan Ros- ner Research, a Democratic firm, and Public Opinion Strategies, which polls for Republicans. The poll was conducted from June 10 through 16 and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.

The findings on the LAPD indicate that Police Chief William J. Bratton has made considerable progress on a centerpiece of his tenure -- reinventing the image of the department in the eyes of the public and, in doing so, moving the department and city beyond a past marred by incidents of police brutality and corruption.

Almost 8 in 10 registered voters said they either "strongly approve" or "somewhat approve" of the police performance today. The response was 18 percentage points higher than in The Times' last survey of the city, in 2005.

The percentages of blacks and Latinos who approve of the LAPD both rose by double digits since the 2005 survey, almost closing a long-running discrepancy between white and minority attitudes. Among Latinos, 76% approved of the department's job performance while 19% disapproved. Among blacks, the split was 68% to 25% and among whites, 81% to 11%.





Interim Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchins who's running for office next year cites the many improvements she believes have taken place in the department during her tenure.


(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



Using the end of her first year in office as the hook, Hutchens cited a number of changes she’s made in jail management, claimed to have restored public trust in the office and said she’d fire any deputy caught lying in so-called code of silence situations.

She also touched briefly on her handling of concealed weapons permits, saying there are roughly 200 fewer than a year ago. About half of the reduction resulted from her review.

The issues have been the most publicized and, in some cases, the most controversial in Hutchens’ first 12 months in office. The Board of Supervisors appointed her to fill the term of Michael Carona, who was convicted this year of witness tampering and sentenced to 5 1/2 years in federal prison.

A retired division chief in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department when appointed, Hutchens has never run for office.

Hutchens inherited a much-maligned jail management system, underscored by the October 2006 beating death of Theo Lacy jail inmate John Chamberlain at the hands of other inmates. A county grand jury and the Orange County district attorney issued a scathing rebuke of some deputies’ failure to do their jobs and later impeding an investigation of Chamberlain’s death, including lying to the grand jury.

Hutchens, flanked by her six-man command staff, said the changes include installing digital cameras in key locations and replacing paper logs of deputies’ activities with electronic logs that can’t be altered. Supervisory sergeants and lieutenants will inspect the jails more frequently on each shift and sergeants will work with the same deputies on each shift for more continuity, she said.




Hutchins talks more about her role in improving the department here.



The San Bernardino County Judge again refused to unseal the record in the case involving former County Assessor Bill Postmus.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



As he has before, Superior Court Judge Douglas Elwell said he could not release the information without damaging the district attorney's investigation or endangering confidential informants. The San Bernardino County district attorney's office has opposed unsealing the warrants.

"Release of that information would or could significantly impact the ability of that investigation to proceed in an unimpeded way," Elwell said.



The judge sealed 10 search warrants on Jan. 14, the day before investigators unexpectedly found methamphetamine inside Postmus' Rancho Cucamonga apartment while searching for information relating to his political activities.

Postmus has not been charged.

Elwell previously denied the newspaper's request on Jan. 30, Feb. 17 and April 15.

The newspaper's attorney, Al Wickers, asked Elwell to consider unsealing the documents with portions redacted. He noted that, with the county's release of an investigative report by attorney John Hueston last month, some of the information already is public. The judge denied that request as well.

Introducing the new city council

On Tuesday, June 13 at 6:30 p.m., the Riverside City Council will hold its evening session and one of the first orders of business is to swear in the winners of Election 2008 which were incumbents Andrew Melendrez and Nancy Hart and newcomer, Paul Davis.

Davis will take over representing the city's fourth ward from outgoing councilman, Frank Schiavone who served on the dais for two terms then lost his last attempt at reelection by over 300 votes. With him gone, the dynamics of the city council will change quite a bit and it will be interesting to observe how quickly they change and in what direction they take the city council particularly in its handling of its direct employees City Manager Brad Hudson and City Attorney Gregory Priamos. Who will be holding their leashes or be at their masts steering their courses? Like many questions that have been asked, the answers to those remain to be seen.


What many people have been wondering is who will be the new alpha dog on the dais if there is one. As many people who watched the meetings noticed, Schiavone appeared to pride himself as being the alpha dog and several other city council members seemed very deferential and almost intimidated by him when participating in discussions on agenda items or when casting votes. If the city council sees a new alpha dog to replace Schiavone, in all likelihood it will be Councilman Chris MacArthur, who some said has been eying that position in the past year. The trouble with MacArthur is that it's hard to separate his identity from that of his nearly-always present legislative aide. But just because the city council had an alpha dog (or in some cases alpha dogs competing for position) leading both its GASS and BASS quartets doesn't necessarily mean that will happen this time.

During both of those thankfully brief eras of power quartets, you had struggles for leadership taking place between Schiavone and former Councilman Art Gage (who was unceremoniously dumped from the power quartets when GASS between BASS) and also Schiavone and former councilman, Dom Betro during the latter days of base. It's no coincidence that none of these three men are currently serving on the city council anymore with all of them being voted out by their constituents although the margins of loss for some of them were smaller than others




So how does the council stand as of June 23?


Ward One: Mike Gardner, who has staked out a position of himself on the council which is one where he builds consensus with other members yet also stakes positions on his own including his attempts to stop the Schiavone/Adams driven micromanagment of the Community Police Review Commission.



Ward Two: Andrew Melendrez is now a senior councilman thanks to his reelection and thankfully is acting less and less like a junior one. People praised him for his ability to ask well-thought out questions on contentious and key agenda items but then bristled when he seemed to put his concerns aside and voted with the pack. Chinatown, round one was one example often cited and everyone saw how that turned out, but then Melendrez took principled minority positions after asking key questions on the issues like the CPRC and towing fees. That caused some people to blink their eyes open and take another look at him. But those eyes blew on open after as mayor pro tem, Melendrez took the opportunity to recommend himself as the chair of one of the city's most influential committees, the Governmental Affairs Committee and to add himself as a member of the powerful yet scandal plagued March Joint Powers Commission in one bold move. Wooowsieeee! That kind of behavior is going to renew rumors that Melendrez will be running for mayor in 2012.


Ward Three: Rusty Bailey, for being a West Point Academy graduate has yet to show any leadership since his election, a development which has surprised some of his supporters as much as his about face on some of the issues he had campaigned on including the CPRC. Some said he would be his own man but he seemed to follow around Schiavone everywhere like a loyal puppy dog (especially on the Governmental Affairs Committee) because he believed he owed Schiavone for his seat on the council and Bailey's too smart to settle for that. It will be interesting to see what Bailey does now that he's got no one to follow. Will he finally stand up and be his own council person or will he look for another alpha dog?


Ward Four: Paul Davis is the junior city councilman in this class and it will be interesting to see how he comes out of the gate and in what direction. People are leery of newly elected politicians after witnessing the conversion of Bailey to something at least the grass-roots contingent of his campaign didn't recognize so they'll be watching Davis more carefully. The key for him is to stick with his 14 point plan and to win converts to it, which on most of the points shouldn't be too difficult and to use his vice-chair position on the barely-there Finance Committee to put some of the budget checking back in the hands of the city council rather than just being handed off carte blanche and often sight unseen to Hudson's office.


Ward Five: Some say that MacArthur will use Schiavone's ouster as a means and opportunity to take over his position on the council as alpha dog, but the major problem with MacArthur is that some people get him and his rather zealous legislative aide confused with each other. A very difficult challenge to overcome for someone who wishes to step into the now empty shoes as the city council's leader. And is it he that holds those ambitions or is it his aide? There's a lot of unanswered questions about MacArthur who's as politically polished as they come which remain to be answered in the minds of people including those in his ward.


Ward Six: Nancy Hart is very difficult to figure out most of the time during council votes. Some say that she simply adopts the position of the last council member who spoke on an issue and others say that she could assert herself more often than she does, not an easy task for the only woman on a male-dominated legislative body. She remained fairly allegient to Schiavone after being totally frozen out by him for opting to endorse Riverside County Supervisor Bob Buster over Schiavone in last year's county race. Hart's closest supporters said the "freeze out" by Schiavone led to some of the most miserable days in her city council tenure. Still Hart clearly loves her ward and is very responsive to her constituents who live there. Maybe out from under Schiavone's shadow, she might start resembling the councilwoman she was several years ago on various issues including the CPRC.


Ward Seven: Steve Adams is in quite a pickle since the ouster of his partner, Schiavone and risks becoming marginalized by the rest of the council especially when his mouth runs away from him and he engages in some behavior like he did when he slandered an investigator hired by the CPRC. Because of that, Hudson's office had to march out its puppet, CPRC Manager Kevin Rogan to do damage control on that issue. Still, Adams the winner of this blog's 2007 and 2008 Golden Tongue awards has his moments when he actually stands strong on an issue that needs it. But with Schiavone gone, unless he picks up some other allies on the dais (not likely given his narrow squeaker of a win in 2007 and his almost certain ouster in 2011), he'll probably spend a lot of time whistling in the wind.




The city council's own version of musical chairs


One of the first acts taken by the newly reconfigured city council is to set up appointments to a long list of city council committees and county-wide boards. This task is traditionally left up to the mayor and mayor pro tem who in this case are Ron Loveridge and Melendrez. Melendrez surprised many people by suggesting his appointments to key city committees, including serving as chair of the Governmental Affairs Committee and serving on both the March Joint Powers Commission and the Riverside Transit Agency. Melendrez also put himself in for being vice-chair of the Public Safety Committee (which he chaired the last two cycles) and as a member of the Transportation Committee.

Newcomer Davis fared pretty well, with his key position being as vice-chair of the Finance Committee given that one of his commitments made when running for office was to look at the city's financial books and see if the money was being spent in a fiscally responsible fashion. Of course, one obstacle is that the chair usually schedules the meetings and this time, it's Nancy Hart. Let's hope that her record of scheduling meetings is better than her predecessor given how few times this committee met last year. According to records located at the city's Web site, the Finance Committee never met once in 2009, a far cry from just several years ago when it met once or twice monthly.

This is fallout most likely from the city council's decision to hand off most of its role in financial accountability of the city's budget expenditures to Hudson's office not too long after Hudson consolidated his own office with what once was a separate Finances Department that existed before his hiring.

Of course, the list of prospective appointments was included on the discussion calendar of the city council meeting on June 23 and will have to be approved by the city council through majority vote. Don't be surprised to see some wheeling and dealing and hear some complaints about assignments being made but it will be interesting if any major changes to the appointment lists are proposed.

It's too premature to see in which committees the biggest battlegrounds will be at this point.





Captain, where thou art the captain?


News is buzzing about the sudden retirement of Capt. Mark Boyer who until recently oversaw the Department of Investigations in the Riverside Police Department. No details have been provided about this sudden chain of events. News has also been buzzing over speculation as to whether or not this new opening will be filled or whether it will be left vacant due to budget cuts.



If they do fill this captain's seat, the current odds-on favorite appears to be Lt. Bob Williams who is currently assigned to the West Neighborhood Policing Center as its commander and is also the current president of the Riverside Police Administrators' Association. Speculation is that of all the candidates, Williams is the best politically connected but he's also been a lieutenant for quite some time, working a variety of assignments. Another name that has been dropped to challenge him is that of Lt. Mike Perea who if you recall was one of at least 15 lieutenants who tossed their names in the ring for the last captain's position, one that ultimately was given to John Carpenter. Perea is currently assigned to the Office of Personnel and Training on the hiring side and is Chief Russ Leach's liaison to the CPRC. Before all this, he preceded Williams as the commander in the West NPC and has also worked a wide variety of assignments.

If there is a captain's promotion in the works, this situation bears close watching given some of the allegations raised in the past including through ongoing civil litigation in U.S. District Court about whether or not there are influences on these promotions and who gets them welded outside of the police department. Who will be giving out the promotion if there is indeed one, the police chief or the city manager's office? We do know that at least one party has been removed from this alleged list at this point. And will it come down to experience or politics? Will anyone be warned to not hang out with anyone else to have a better chance?

All these questions remain to be answered.

Filling this captain's vacancy would of course leave a lieutenant position vacant which would bring vacancies at that rank up to two, with several more retirements of lieutenants anticipated by the end of 2009. Of course, if that position gets filled (and there are rumors about that) then that would leave a sergeant vacancy, which would add to the current list of three vacancies with at least three or more vacancies anticipated at this rank by the end of the year.





How many live bodies are included in the city's personnel listings in its preliminary budget report?



Speaking of vacant positions,there have been some contesting of the list of personnel positions in the city's preliminary budget that's available here. It seems that the city is apparently trying to inflate its roster of employees who are currently working when in some city departments, up to 33% or more of the listed positions may be frozen. Many more employees particularly part-time have been frozen than the city has admitted while it touts its employee retention record against other cities like Corona where every departure, frozen position or layoff of any full-time or part-time employee is included in their somewhat dismal percentage.

There's been focus on the mythology surrounding the listing of personnel in the police department included in that preliminary budget report but apparently other departments in the city have faced similar situations as well. How many city employees are there actually left working for Riverside? If you want to know the answer to that question, the preliminary budget document on personnel which will be discussed at a workshop on June 23 is probably not the place to look.

So how many of these "personnel" positions are live people working in them and how many of them are empty suits due to retirements, layoffs and other departures? If anyone has any idea what these true numbers are, there's an email address at the top header that you can use anonymously to send some more accurate numbers for different city departments. Because if the public is being presented with a preliminary report that makes it appear that the city is more fully staffed than it is, then the public is being lied to by its city government and/or its direct staff. And if these are indeed falsehoods being told, they are being told on our dime.



Another thing is that many of the city's cited figures are being given out piecemeal on a monthly basis by Human Resources Director Rhonda Strout to the Human Resources Board which has asked to receive information at each meeting on the layoffs for the preceding month. According to her, only about 3-4 people have been laid off in this city without being retired out or lateraled into another city assignment. She doesn't talk about part-time employees or nonunion employees because of course, they don't count. Only in cities like Corona which are being compared as a more negative example of the recession against Riverside. So it would be interesting to learn what the raw numbers of the layoffs of these non-human employees actually are in the light of day.


One example of a very misleading misrepresentation of a full-time position that's really not for example is right inside the city manager's own department. Listed under the CPRC (which has the misfortune of being umbrellaed under that department) are two full-time employees. The administrative analyst and the manager. Well get this folks, the full-time manager pulls in at least $150,000 each year and works about a 20 hour week. He can't work full-time because according to several members of the screening panel involved in his hiring back in July 2007, one of the first things he told them is that his PERS retirement doesn't allow him to work full-time and he didn't want to jeopardize it. Okay, so the city manager's office lied to the city's residents when they expressed their commitment to make this management position full-time but they went further and paid this guy more money to work less time than they paid his predecessor to work two different directorships.

But it's like there's been a lot of city employees who have fallen into some municipal version of the Bermuda Triangle, while the city's circulating reports that make it appear that it is more fully staffed than it currently is by conflating employees with positions in its reports, prefaced with rosy letters about how the city's fully staffed enough to provide all its basic services.







A councilman in Norco has criticized the labor contract of the city's fire fighters


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Councilman Malcolm Miller has pointed to the portion of the public safety budget spent on fire service. The $4.9 million that Norco projects spending on fire and paramedics this fiscal year is about 46 percent of the total spent on public safety, which includes police.

Data from the state controller show the average city's fire and emergency medical budget is about 29 percent of public safety spending. Statistics Norco gathered on area cities put Norco at the top of the range, with the next closest cities -- Colton and Murrieta -- each spending 39 percent of public safety dollars on fire service.

"The contract for the firefighters is too generous for Norco to afford, especially in this economic downturn," Miller said.

Norco firefighters' base salaries are determined by a survey of comparable cities. But Miller sees overtime costs, which are driven by contract requirements, as part of the budget problem.

Miller suggested two possible approaches to reducing overtime costs: "working short," or running three-man engines if the fourth scheduled worker is sick or on vacation, or switching from four to three crew members per engine permanently.



While Redlands is looking at other fund sources to plug up the holes in its deficit.




But in Lake Elsinore, the relationship between development contracts granted by elected officials and campaign donations made by those developers has come under closer scrutiny.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)





Mayor Daryl Hickman and Councilmen Thomas Buckley and Robert Magee collected the contributions during their annual fundraising events: Buckley holds a golf tournament in May; Magee sells tickets for a Super Bowl-viewing fundraiser; and Hickman sells $1,110 suite tickets for a San Diego Chargers football game in September.

In March 2006 and 2007, Buckley and Hickman also sold $1,000-per-person tickets to a suite for an Anaheim Ducks hockey game. Use of the suite was donated by the city's contract waste-hauling company, CR&R.

The three councilmen and developers say the timing of the contributions and the votes is a coincidence.

"My vote had nothing to do with contributions," Hickman said. "My concern is to move the city ahead and do what's right for the city."

"Everyone knows when I raise money," Buckley said. "It's the same time each year."

"The reason I have my event annually is specifically to avoid the appearance of conflict," Magee said. "I believe my record speaks for itself."

A Riverside Police Department captain goes bye-bye and who will fill his shoes?

The Riverside City Council will be hosting its weekly meeting on Tuesday, June 23 at 3 p.m. at City Hall when it will be hosting the public hearing on the preliminary annual budget for the 2009-10 fiscal year.

Here are some personnel figures for the police department for next year from the document itself:


It is important to pay attention to these figures even though some folks at City Hall would rather people not do so. Because in six months or so when the retirements of police officers and civilians began trickling in, these figures won't have as much bearing because the list here is not about people, but positions so looks might be more than a little bit deceiving. Why, because what if the people filling the positions are currently on "light duty" or on a variety of different personal or family leaves or administrative leaves? Over 60 employees in the police department, about 10% of them, were on some form of leave from their positions according to the latest report on departmental leaves submitted by Human Resources Director Rhonda Strout at a recent Human Resources Board meeting. It's not clear how many of these are sworn officers or the percentage of sworn officers on leaves including at the different ranks.

The figures of officers on light duty and leaves were also impressive when Bran performed what turned out to be his final audit in June 2008 when he warned the department of the impact of the number of leaves on staffing levels and the fatigue factors which could result from this issue. The city's response? Well, first DeSantis stood up from the big chair (as Hudson was no where to be seen) and said the department was "fully staffed" using some "fuzzy math" which the city refused to reproduce when asked on a CPRA request (substituting a link to the preliminary budget which was fairly useless) and then his second response was to ensure that this audit was Brann's final one given on the department despite the fact that he had a remaining six months on his contract. Because after all, paid consultants are beloved by city officials as long as they deliver good news.



Office of police chief: (Chief's office, Internal Affairs Division, Audit and Compliance Bureau)

captain: 3 (these include assistant police chief and deputy chief positions, one of these positions is frozen)
sergeants: 7 (Internal Affairs and Audit and Compliance Bureau)
lieutenants: 2 (Internal Affairs and ACB)


Personnel and Training: (Hiring and training of officers)

captain: 1 (oversees this division and Internal Affairs)
lieutenant: 2 (one for personnel, one for training)
sergeant:3
detective: 1
officer: 4


Field operations: (Patrol)

captains: 2 (each oversees two NPCs)
lieutenants: 12 (area commanders and watch commanders, at least one frozen)
sergeants: 31 (field supervisors, but some freezes here as well)
detectives: 16 (detectives assigned to the four NPCs)
officers: 198 (officers assigned to the four NPCs)

Transfer one lieutenant, 1 sergeant and 2 officer out of special operations to FO.
Transfer one sergeant out of special investigations to field operations.



Special operations: (This includes K9, METRO and Traffic among others)

Captain: 1
lieutenant: 3 (Traffic, and two lieutenants who oversee various other divisions in SO)
sergeants: 6
detectives: 6
officers: 41

Switching personnel with FO (see above) also moving one detective from CIB to SO.




CIB (Centralized investigative Bureau)


Captain: 1 (In charge of investigations)
lieutenant: 1
sergeant: 4
detective: 24
officer: 1

adding officer and detective to unit from SIB


SIB (special investigations bureau includes gang, narcotics and vice)

Captain: 0
Lieutenant: 1
sergeant: 3 (transferred one to FO)
detective: 22
officer: 1



These are the raw figures that City Manager Brad Hudson and his staff provided in their preliminary budget report on personnel figures. It's interesting because when Hudson's adjutant, Tom DeSantis challenged a figure on officer to supervisors ratios provided in an audit by consultant Joe Brann in June 2008, he tried to use these raw figures to create a ratio of about 4.5 to 1. When requested under the CPRA act, DeSantis and Hudson never actually provided the material where they took their data on this ratio but had the City Attorney's office write a letter of obstruction and interference which simply provided a link to the budget report which didn't actually include the relevant information on staffing ratios.

Yet if we use the same "fuzzy" math used by DeSantis last year, the figure for this year would be about 5.05 to 1 for all supervisors and 6.39 to 1 for sergeants. But this doesn't account for pending retirements, supervisors on light duty or personal leaves and it actually doesn't provide a reliable figure for measuring out average officer to supervisor ratios for these and other reasons including the fact that even "frozen" positions are funded in the budget for a period of time. But at any rate, the figures that DeSantis would reach for to cite during this budget to soothe the masses are higher than those he used in June 2008.

And the "fuzzy" math used by DeSantis and the figures cited above do not take into consideration the planned retirements of up to 6-7 more sergeants and lieutenants later this year and the abrupt retirement of Capt. Mark Boyer which took place some time this month. In his last assignment, Boyer oversaw the Investigations division. It's a bit of a shock because having talked to Boyer on occasion, the emphasis on the discussions were his plans for a somewhat longer career in the department than the one which ended this month.

The department hasn't commented on whether they plan to fill the position vacated by Boyer but if they do, so far the favored candidate for the job appears to be Lt. Bob Williams, the current West NPC commander and president of the Riverside Police Administrators' Association.

If the captain (and any resultant vacancies from this promotion) are filled, this situation will be highly scrutinized (as it should be) given the allegations made about promotions in the Riverside Police Department at the management level including in a lawsuit filed by two police lieutenants currently being litigated in federal court.

The staffing levels of the department and these promotional processes will receive higher scrutiny in this blog due to the important nature of both situations. And it appears that the department will be playing musical chairs again with its lieutenant contingent when it reconfigures itself sometime in the middle of next month. It will be interesting to see whether this is in response to or what impact it had on the reality that several more lieutenants are heading off to retirements. What will the supervisory picture look like in December, the time when the Strategic Plan mandated by former State Attorney General Bill Lockyer sunsets?

Perhaps this is an issue that Councilman Chris MacArthur as the proposed chair of the public safety committee can address, that is if he wins the spot on the council vote on June 23. Included in this discussion could be the staffing level of officers on the shifts, the addition of up to 15 when the stimulus money comes in (if it does and it's a competitive process for the funding) and what the department plans to do with its supervisory staffing levels to reduce its officer to supervisory ratio to 7 to 1 or better. Perhaps that can be part of Strategic Plan II which the department is purportedly working on to carry on for the next five years after its predecessor expires.








Later on at, 6:30 p.m. the newly elected council members Andrew Melendrez, Paul Davis and Nancy Hart will be sworn into their positions and the meeting will continue. One of the most pivotal items on the discussion calendar is this one which is the proposed reassignments for all the city council's standing committees and those of committee organizations throughout the county.

I blogged about the reassignments of committees after Election 2007 and quickly got into trouble with now-gone Councilman Frank Schiavone who called me a "racist" and said I had "no ethics" because I challenged the decision to appoint freshly sworn in councilman, Rusty Bailey on the Governmental Affairs Committee which traditionally is staffed by the more senior members of the city council. Melendrez had told just about everyone within hearing range that he had wanted to serve on this committee but was pushed aside in favor of Bailey and then appeared to go along with it. But what a difference that two years and one less domineering city council member makes! Melendrez, who's the mayor pro tem worked with Mayor Ron Loveridge to come up with these suggested rosters for the committee list.

And if you recall back in 2004, Loveridge was very upset when his pet charter initiative which if passed by the voters would have given him the role of choosing committee chairs, didn't in fact past the muster of the voters. But it's interesting to see Melendrez as Mayor Pro Tem take the bull by the horns and not only place himself on the Governmental Affairs Committee but list himself as its chair.

These committee lists are on the discussion calendar for a reason. Not because the city council really cares that much what the public has to say about it, but so they can argue amongst themselves in public for a change instead of behind closed doors. Will there be a quick passage of the list of committee assignments proposed by mayor and mayor pro tem or will there be some disagreements and even downright feuding over some of the choices?

How will Councilman Steve Adams cope with Melendrez chairing the Governmental Affairs Committee while he's third wheel? And how will Vice-Chair of Governmental Affairs, Rusty Bailey cope without Schiavone telling him what to do?

Melendrez will also serve as vice-chair of the committee he once chaired, Public Safety which will now be chaired by Chris MacArthur or his aide, depending on who you really believe runs the fifth ward.




The Chief of Border Patrol defends the practices of the Riverside office.




One embezzlement charge against a Riverside County Fire Department employee has been dropped.



And the new parking meters called "Luke" in downtown Riverside make their debut.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




Riverside voters narrowly chose the Luke kiosk that serves multiple parking spaces over the single-space meters during a city straw poll last year.

But for downtown parkers, the debate lingers.

"It used to be nice when you could just pay (at a single-space meter) and go in," said Robert Oshaunnessy, of LA, who was eating Friday at the Royal Falconer on Main Street. "People aren't prepared for it (the Lukes). I just wasted 10 minutes trying to figure it out."

Opponents complain that the computerized system is confusing, first requiring a person to enter a space number, and then confirm the amount paid and wait for a receipt.

The machines also don't show how much time is left on a spot.

Others have praised the new system as more convenient, moving the city in a right direction.

"It's very easy. I prefer to use my card and I don't always carry coins when I'm going to court," said Jay Lennox, a process server in Long Beach who was on his way to the Riverside Hall of Justice on Friday. "I wish they would do this in Long Beach."

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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




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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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








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



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

More information here.


(excerpt, Atlanta Journal-Constitution)




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

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

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

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

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

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

A police spokeswoman declined to comment on the vote.

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

Election 2010: Who will be taking on Sheriff Stan Sniff?

It's been interesting watching the postings here about the upcoming mayor's race, with commenters pitting incumbent Mayor Ron Loveridge against alleged challenger Art Gage. It looks like the second phase of Election 2009 is off to a start even before the deadline for candidates to file their paperwork to run for the title of Riverside's official ribbon cutter.

A lot of the focus on Gage is about his position on eminent domain in the wake of a rather controversial project that involved the only recently vilified developer, Doug Jacobs and the need to build office buildings within a neighborhood of houses near the Magnolia Center. Another hot issue are the ties between Gage and Jacobs which were allegedly built through their respective involvement in the Lincoln Club of Riverside County.

Most people expected the battle of the titans to take place involving the mayoral crown in 2012, but it's interesting to see that abbreviated term that was supposed to be Loveridge's swan song arouse a spirit of competition even before it really gets started.




But there's another election that's heating up even though it's being held in 2010 and that's the Riverside County Sheriff's race. Current (and appointed) Sheriff Stan Sniff might wind up facing against a retired Deputy Sheriff Frank Robles in the next election.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Frank Robles, a 35-year law enforcement veteran, made the announcement in a full-page newspaper advertisement. Robles most recently served as a Riverside County chief deputy sheriff before retiring in December 2007, and he is also a former Desert Hot Springs police chief.

"Riverside County's mix of large dynamic cities and small desert towns offers unique opportunities and distinct challenges for law enforcement," Robles wrote in the advertisement that appeared in The Press-Enterprise.

"To face these challenges, our Sheriff's Department demands independent leadership, rock-solid integrity and a leader who knows how to get the most out of limited taxpayer dollars."

Robles, 64, will face a well-funded incumbent. Sniff, who is facing election for the first time, already has amassed a six-figure political war chest.

Sniff was appointed by the Board of Supervisors in September 2007 by a 3-2 vote after former Sheriff Bob Doyle abruptly announced his retirement. Sniff had been fired by Doyle.

Sniff said he is proud of his tenure as sheriff and the changes he has put in place.

"I look forward to the public debate," Sniff said.





If you're at a complete loss of who to vote for, don't worry, this election doesn't take place until next year which leaves voters plenty of time to learn more about these and any other candidates before casting their votes. And it's an interesting process indeed because even though Sniff is the incumbent, he's not been election tested yet, given that he was "elected" by three out of five county supervisors several years ago.


Riverside County's Board of Supervisors is auditing the use of custodial fees after a complaint registered by District Attorney Rod Pacheco that his office is paying more money.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




Everyone really needs to sit down and sharpen their pencils and look at how these costs are being allocated," Supervisor Marion Ashley said this week of fees charged by departments such as Facilities Management and Information Technology.

"They all flow to other budgets. Everybody is trying to cut and save money and then bam! Here comes this big cost. We want to understand it," Ashley said.

Chief Financial Officer Paul McDonnell will lead an executive office review and an audit of the charges, known as internal service fees, to ensure they are reasonable.

Auditor-Controller Robert Byrd's office examines fee calculations annually, but the office will now dig deeper and scrutinize base costs, Byrd said Tuesday.





Another veil of secrecy is shielding Colton as it tries to select a new city manager. There's never a dull moment in Colton's City Hall, what with recall elections, questionable city managers and etiquette lessons for conducting public meetings.


(excerpt, San Bernardino Sun)




The council voted 4-3 Tuesday night to keep the document confidential with Mayor Kelly Chastain and council members Susan Oliva, Alex Perez and Vince Yzaguirre voting in favor of the measure.

Council members Deirdre Bennett, Richard DeLaRosa and David Toro dissented.
In March, Bennett and Colton business owner Gary Grossich requested Derleth produce a legal opinion that stated whether or not the city has been violating its Flow of Funds Ordinance by requiring its Electric Utility to transfer a portion of its revenues to the general fund.


The ordinance sets the utility's financial priorities, with payments to bond holders coming first and the transfer to the general fund coming lower on the totem pole, Derleth said.


Bennett, who voted against an 8.7 percent electric rate increase that took effect in May and another 8 percent increase that will take effect Nov. 1, has stated she believes city residents are being charged inflated utility rates so the utility can make bond payments and maintain the transfer. She has said electric rate increases would have been much less if the city abandoned the transfer.





The Los Angeles Police Department's Special Order 40 has been held up in court even as the department struggles to complete its consent decree going into its ninth year.


(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



The three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeal unanimously agreed with a lower court’s decision to throw out a lawsuit in which a Los Angeles man had argued that the LAPD’s policy violated federal and state laws.

In place since 1979, Special Order 40 prohibits LAPD officers from initiating contact with someone solely to determine whether they are in the country legally.
Police Chief Chief William J. Bratton and others before him have said the policy is an important tool, as it encourages undocumented immigrants who witness crimes to assist police without fear of being deported.

The judges rejected the claim of the plaintiff, Harold Sturgeon, that the order violates a federal statute, which prohibits restrictions on the exchange of information between federal immigration agents and other law enforcement officers.

They said he failed to show any instances in which officers had been punished by superiors or otherwise discouraged from passing on information.

The LAPD’s policy, the judges emphasized, does not place any limits on the information that officers can pass on to federal agents regarding a person’s immigration status.





Upcoming events:


Tuesday, June 23 at 6:30 p.m. City Council meeting and the swearing in of newly elected Ward Four Councilman Paul Davis. With the induction of a new council member, the city council will once again have to reconfigure their roster of committees. Each city council member serves on three of them, as chair, vice-chair and member at large. Will there be any tussling taking place during this round of committee reassignments? That remains to be seen but committees vacated by the ouster of Frank Schiavone include the Governmental Affairs Committee, Development and Land Use.


Wednesday, June 24 at 5:30 p.m. The Community Police Review Commission usually meets at this part of the month but under the new leadership,this commission has not met hardly at all so it's too early to tell whether or not there will actually be a meeting held this day. The Web site has one scheduled to take place inside that cramped Fifth Floor "Large" conference room but it's still no guarantee that any such meeting will ever take place.




The Riverside City Council in its infinite wisdom approved changes to sharply raise animal licensing and spay and neuter fees. One wonders what exactly this will do to the population of dogs and cats running around loose by next year. Perhaps they could have waited until after the economy improved to double the costs of spaying and neutering cats for example.




The Riverside Arlington library turns 100. City Hall has been celebrating this anniversary already by laying off library employees and approving generous pay hikes for assistant city managers and department heads and for trumpeting its intentions to improve two downtown cultural facilities and then saying, sorry we don't have the money to do anything (probably because it's already been spent securing land for the city's development friends including Mark Rubin and the only recently vilified Jacobs).