Oct. 13
Chico Enterprise-Record: Chico looks at crime, prison realignment and transients in the city
The hottest local issue in Chico for the past year or so has been the intertwined problems of crime, prison realignment, transients and the effect on the city, but especially downtown.
Not surprisingly, it has become one of two important issues in the City Council race leading up to the Nov. 4 elections.
Questions about the city’s budget problems and public safety are topic 1 and 1A on the campaign trail.
Judging from events of the past week, it’s obvious the city really doesn’t have a clue how it will make downtown safe and inviting again.
A week ago, the city government held the most unnecessary press conference in recent memory. It gathered various dignitaries and agencies on the steps of the Council Chambers — the mayor, the city manager, the Chamber of Commerce, the Downtown Chico Business Association — to say, in effect: “We’re going to do something about this, but we can’t tell you what.”
The press conference was to announce that downtown will be clean and safe for holiday shoppers, and that regular police patrols would return to downtown with dedicated officers on the beat. But that announcement appeared to be premature. Police Department officials immediately wondered where this new staffing would come from, seeing that officers are already being forced to work overtime to cover regular shifts. Since then, the department has asked for officers to sign up for downtown shifts on double time, but there have been no takers.
City Manager Mark Orme wouldn’t disclose when and where these extra patrols would be working or how they would be funded. It seems that even his police chief didn’t know. A plan apparently was still being figured out.
The whole episode felt like somebody feeling the pressure from constituents and addressing it by saying, “I know, let’s have a press conference.” That’s not the way to get the issue to die down. The correct way is to address the problem, and we’re still waiting on specifics. Will there be more officers downtown? When? How will the city pay for these officers? Will they be enforcing the city’s sit-lie ordinance? Will they be walking the beat or on bicycles?
There were no answers. All we know is that one week into the “increased patrols” announced by the city, there have been no increased patrols.
So why the big announcement?
Actually, there’s one reason we’re pleased the premature announcement was made — because now more people know about the Police Department’s staffing problems. Chief Kirk Trostle said the department had 56 officers assigned to patrol duties a year ago. Now there are 40.
Trostle says the department is trying to fill some of the positions, but that takes time. Holiday shopping doesn’t wait until the department is better staffed, however.
Last year, downtown business owners and landlords paid for private security guards to patrol downtown on foot during the holiday shopping season. It made a difference. But the R-Town patrols ended after the holidays when the group ran out of money.
We don’t think it’s the responsibility of downtown property owners to hire their own police force. It’s a city responsibility.
If the city is willing to pay officers double overtime to patrol downtown, the city should at the very least use some of that overtime money that won’t be spent to bring back the R-Town patrols.
Wishful thinking will not make downtown safer and more inviting. Increased patrols will. One way or another, the city should ensure that the Police Department gets help, even if it’s from a temporary source.
___
Oct. 14
Woodland Daily Democrat: Woodland may not need an MRAP, but it needs something
The possibility of Woodland acquiring a Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle came up during a recent City Council meeting and there was the immediate — and predictable — reaction from the public: What the heck does Woodland need a MRAP for anyway?
From my perspective I was tempted to think the council were merely acting like children who want new toys. Offer any kid a new toy and there’s the immediate response of wanting it — and using it.
Look, by now nearly everyone has feelings about the use of cast-off military vehicles being used in situations involving civilians. Woodland isn’t Iraq. Nor is Davis, where popular outcry may result in having an MRAP — ordered years earlier and only delivered within the last month or so — returned.
The Davis City Council has now told its police department it has 60 days to get rid of the vehicle. We’ll see if that happens.
For Woodland, according to Police Chief Dan Bellini, the city has gotten free military “hardware” under the National Defense Authorization Act that might have cost $27,000. Some of the items received since 1998 — the year it started participating in the program — include rifles for its SWAT team, sights for the rifles and military-style knives, flashlights, ammunition and pouches used to hold ammunition.
But an MRAP is an all-together different thing. It’s a $600,000 fully armored “toy” that has the potential of being able to move police into a hazardous situation.
There’s no sign that Woodland will get the hardware yet. And we trust that our police would use it only in the most extreme cases. But who knows?
And here’s the basic problem: Woodland already has an “assault” vehicle, which is an old armored car dressed up with Kevlar that is used to transport police into those relatively few dangerous situations to protect both the officers and civilians. It’s probably been used fewer than two or three times in the past five years. But it’s old. It was bought in 2006 (for about $10) from the Colusa County SWAT team, where it was already used. Its age is 30 years. Few of us drive cars that old.
Bellini also told the council that inspectors from the California Highway Patrol have said the vehicle’s air brakes need to be replaced. It was also made to transport money not people. It needs to be replaced.
If typical protocols are followed, it could cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy a new armored vehicle.
So, the choice is whether to get an MRAP for free or use precious city dollars to buy something else.
I spoke with a Davis police officer recently about why that department decided to request an MRAP in the first place and the answer was clear and logical. The officer explained the department’s mission was public safety. If there is a potential for people to be put in harm’s way, then they need to be protected.
Bellini told the City Council pretty much the same thing. “You ask why we need one in Woodland? It’s one of those vehicles that when you need it; you need it. You can’t wait to get it. You need it now. When officers are going into a situation where rounds are being fired, our body armor will not protect us from any type of rifle fire.”
As well, if innocent lives are put at risk, then something is needed to get them out of harm’s way. An MRAP will do just that. It holds as many as 10 people. So will some other form of armored vehicle.
The thought of an MRAP rolling along Woodland’s Main Street isn’t very pretty for me — unless it were in the Christmas Parade. I also have this vision of seeing it advance along Fourth or Fifth streets should there be a gang shooting in that area. It’s an ugly vision.
Nonetheless, if the mission of police is to protect the innocent and themselves, the city needs something. Which means we have to decide if we want to spend money for an armored vehicle, or get an MRAP for free (assuming the military will provide the city with one). It’s a difficult choice to which I don’t have an answer.
___
Oct. 13
The Fresno Bee: BIA, National Indian Gaming Commission allowed Chukchansi crisis to get out of control
The leadership factions in the Chukchansi casino dispute want the closed Madera County gambling operation opened as quickly as possible so the 900 tribal members can receive their slices of a monthly payout totaling $1 million.
But federal and state authorities who finally intervened years late in this long-standing battle over control of the casino and its profits should proceed with diligence and caution — not with their eyes on the clock.
This mess likely will require many months, if not a year, to properly investigate and untangle so future patrons don’t have to worry about their safety or being ordered out of the casino with their winnings left behind on the gaming tables.
Moreover, it’s important that those responsible for regulating Indian gaming send a clear message to other tribal casinos in California and across the nation that they will not tolerate the rioting and attempted armed takeovers among rivals that have occurred at Chukchansi at least twice since 2012, most recently Oct. 9.
Clearly, some tribal members don’t care about people who gamble and dine there. Otherwise, they would have engaged in peaceful attempts to settle their differences instead of behaving like thugs.
The fact that the Chukchansi Gold Resort & Casino website, as of Monday, didn’t mention the place is closed indefinitely suggests the tribe and casino management care little about their customers.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the National Indian Gaming Commission bear responsibility for allowing matters at Chukchansi to spiral out of control. The bureau’s reluctance to intervene in the tribe’s longstanding leadership disputes was inexcusable.
The NIGC, meanwhile, allowed the casino to miss a financial audit deadline for 18 months before finally getting tough and threatening to shutter operations.
Now that the Golden Goose has been yanked from their hands, the parties to this dispute will say the right things, promise to get along and lobby hard to open the casino quickly.
Regulators would be wise to ignore their pleas and do what is necessary to ensure that there are no more riots, beatings and armed confrontations in the casino or on its grounds. That much, at least, is owed to the casino’s customers.
___
Oct. 14
Long Beach Press-Telegram: Long Beach’s College Promise needs more community support
When Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia gave a high-five to a Newcomb Academy kindergartner Tuesday, it marked the start of a historic relationship between the city and top educators.
Instead of being just a cheerleader, the city took a big step in becoming a full partner with Cal State Long Beach, Long Beach City College and Long Beach Unified School District in supporting the Long Beach College Promise.
That Promise, which was started in 2008 by CSULB, LBCC and LBUSD, creates a path to college for local students. LBUSD graduates are offered a tuition-free semester at LBCC and guaranteed admission to CSULB if they meet minimum requirements at the university.
There were high-fives all around as Garcia, CSULB President Jane Close Conoley, LBCC President Eloy Oakley and LBUSD Superintendent Chris Steinhauser signed the agreement.
The mood, indeed, was festive as students from Ernest McBride High School, where the signing occurred, and nearby Newcomb Academy joined in with applause. Administrators noted proudly that these Newcomb kindergartners would be in the Class of 2027 when they entered college.
There is nothing more important in strengthening the local and national economy than investing in education. Young people in Long Beach are struggling to make the leap from poverty to the middle class.
The statistics are staggering. Thirty-two percent of children under 5 years of age and 33 percent of children ages 5-17 are living in poverty in Long Beach.
Seventy-nine percent of Long Beach adults have graduated from high school, but only 28.6 percent have received a bachelor’s degree.
Garcia and the education leaders pledged to increase access to college and close the achievement gap among under-represented ethnic and socio-economic groups.
Among initiatives to reach that goal, officials committed to offering assistance to students, starting in the fourth grade, where students will visit college campuses and begin learning about the admissions process and financial aid.
Despite record applications at CSULB, President Conoley told students the campus would “hold a seat” for them because the university’s commitment to Long Beach is “completely solid.”
Garcia repeated one of his top priorities, pushing for universal preschool in the city. He also challenged officials to double the number of student internships. He compared Long Beach — which has 80,000 public school students but just 1,500 internships — to Boston which has 50,000 public school students and 15,000 internships.
Garcia said the city will double its internships from 400 to 800, and he is encouraging businesses to do likewise.
The College Promise is an ambitious plan to upend the effects of poverty, race and limited educational opportunities.
The nationally recognized effort does a lot of things right, like bringing together all levels of education for a common goal. Now, it’s getting stronger and expanding. That’s a hopeful sign but only the realization of a real education and jobs will make it work.
Now it’s time for the broader community, including businesses, clergy, nonprofits and residents, to step up.
___
Oct. 14
Los Angeles Times: How to reduce coerced confessions and wrongful convictions
Two North Carolina half-brothers were released from prison last month after serving three decades for a rape and murder they did not commit but for which they had been convicted based on coerced confessions. The exoneration finally came after new testing of DNA evidence matched neither Henry McCollum, 50, nor Leon Brown, 46, but instead implicated a third man convicted of a similar crime committed around the same time in the same neighborhood.
The Innocence Project says that over 15 years, 64 of 102 erroneous murder convictions nationwide were based on false confessions.
It’s impossible to say for certain, but had the state of North Carolina required its investigators back then, as it does now, to record interrogations of serious felony suspects in custody, it’s likely that this atrocious miscarriage of justice would not have happened. The men, who have diminished intellectual capabilities, signed confessions after hours of intense questioning and a promise that they could go home. Perhaps the police would not have behaved that way if a camera had been running, or if they did, it would have been brought to light during the trial.
There’s a simple step that can help address this: Require police to videotape interrogations of suspects in serious felony cases. More than 40 California cities or agencies already do this, including San Diego and San Francisco. (Los Angeles does not.) Federal agents in the Department of Justice began doing so in July. The benefits are clear and laudable: a chance to reduce wrongful convictions, protect police from contrived allegations of abuse or malfeasance and save the expense of defending bad cases.
California has considered this before. The Legislature passed such laws in 2005 and 2007, but Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed them because of his fear of constraining police. But the concerns of law enforcement groups were unpersuasive. In 2008, the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice recommended taping interrogations, and last year, the state adopted a law requiring recorded interrogations — but just for minors suspected of homicide.
Aren’t suspects read their Miranda rights? Seems like the judges and prosecutors should look hard at confessions given by low I.Q. suspects, especially where evidence is otherwise lacking.
Outfitting all those interrogation rooms wouldn’t be cheap, and storing the interviews would take some logistical configuring. But those are minor hurdles. Since 2010, Congress has considered several bills that would have provided matching federal funds to install recording systems, but it has failed to pass them. It should do so.
But even if it doesn’t, the Legislature should work with Gov. Jerry Brown to re-craft legislation requiring the recordings. It would protect both the integrity of the criminal justice system and the innocent.
___
Oct. 14
The Orange County Register: Penny-ante pension fixes
While state and local politicians may want to believe that they have addressed the pension issue once and for all, it is far from resolved.
California faces nearly $140 billion in unfunded retirement liabilities for teachers and other government employees, under the most optimistic scenarios. The state also faces unfunded liabilities of roughly $26 billion for University of California employees.
While Sacramento has enacted a funding plan to eliminate the roughly $74 billion unfunded liability for teacher pensions over 30 years, the state still has no long-term, strategy beyond hoping for the best, to fully fund the pension for UC and the California Public Employees Retirement System.
The teachers funding plan will put significant burdens on the state budget and that of local school districts, which will see sizable increases in their pension obligations phased in over seven years. Necessarily, this means tighter budgets or pressure to raise taxes or push for more bonds.
The Legislature passed the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2012, which mainly tinkered with benefit formulas for newly enrolled CalPERS members and requires more contributions by employees.
The effort is estimated to reduce unfunded liabilities by many billions of dollars, which is certainly a good thing. However, CalPERS still has a $64.6 billion unfunded liability, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.
There is reason to believe that that figure could get larger over time. If investment returns fall short of what CalPERS assumes — 7.5 percent over the next 20 or more years — the unfunded liability will only get bigger. The same is true of the teachers and UC systems.
Even accepting all the current assumptions, Californians must wonder if the current system is worth it. Sustaining pension funding has contributed to the bankruptcies of Vallejo, Stockton and the city of San Bernardino while threatening to drive other cities toward a similar cliff.
Local governments have prided themselves on enacting pension reforms for their employees. Those reforms have consistently taken the form of convincing employees to share the cost of pension contributions.
Most, if not all of these reforms have included pay raises to offset the pension contributions. These kinds of shell games only move around costs passed on to taxpayers in the form of less money for services and programs. Of course, even these kinds of reforms only make pension contributions less painful for local governments, while doing little to address enduring unfunded liabilities.
No one wants to lose benefits promised to them, which is why public-sector unions have fought hard against substantive pension reforms while giving way to piecemeal reforms.
Californians need to consider whether the status quo is worth the costs. When that question is answered, state and local governments must consider real, long-term solutions that will help avoid further bankruptcies and shortfalls.
___
