SANTA ANA – A coalition of community groups is demanding a grand-jury investigation into what its members describe as a pattern of abuse inside Santa Ana City Hall.
Those alleged abuses include a six-figure severance package given to the former city attorney and a half-million-dollar fee that the mayor expected for his work on a state land deal. The coalition plans to file a formal complaint with the Orange County grand jury by Thursday, listing those and other concerns.
That complaint will bear signatures from half a dozen mostly Latino organizations, headed by the longtime advocacy group Los Amigos. That group counts among its members Alfredo Amezcua, one of the chief political rivals of Mayor Miguel Pulido.
Amezcua, who lost a bid to unseat Pulido last fall, referred questions to other members of the coalition. They said politics played no role in their decision to take their concerns to the grand jury.
"This is not about politics," said Francisco Barragán, commander of the United Mexican-American Veterans Association, one of the coalition's groups. "It's about getting the facts, and moving forward from the facts."
Pulido was not in City Hall on Wednesday and could not immediately be reached for comment. In a prepared statement, City Manager David Ream said: “The city is sensitive to the public’s need for a transparent government. As such, the City Council has always strived to be inclusive and to meet the highest standards of disclosure as required in both local and state laws.”
The community groups' complaint lists four areas of concern, many drawn from news coverage of the past several months:
•The City Council recently approved a severance deal with former City Attorney Joseph Fletcher for more than $330,000, including cashed-out vacation and sick days. Neither Fletcher nor council members have spoken in any detail about the circumstances of his resignation last month, but his contract guarantees him a severance only if the council fires him.
•Pulido has said he expected to receive a "success fee" worth as much as $500,000 for helping bring together investors for a state land deal. The companies involved in that deal, however, have refuted that, saying Pulido was never in line for any money.
•Police Chief Paul Walters recorded an automated "robocall" in the days before the November election challenging Amezcua's campaign claim that he had the support of a member of Congress. Walters said he recorded the call on his off-hours, at home, and only after checking with the city attorney, the city manager and his own personal attorney.
•Five council members received campaign money from developers and real-estate brokers involved in a major redevelopment project. Two of the council members subsequently cast votes on that project; both have said they were not aware that they may have had a conflict of interest, and have returned the money.
"It becomes a pattern of repeated abuses," said Barragán, who helped organize the coalition and led a press conference on Wednesday morning announcing the grand-jury complaint. "What do they say? Where there's smoke, there's fire."
Mary Booker, an administrative assistant with the Orange County grand jury, said she could not speak in any detail about complaints it receives, all of which are considered confidential. The grand jury receives about 50 complaints a year, she said, and intends to "check into each and every one."
The coalition filing the complaint also includes the state League of United Latin American Citizens and its Santa Ana chapter, the Rudy Escalante chapter of the American GI Forum of the United States, MANA de Orange County and the Santa Ana Coalition for Better Government.
The coalition's lead group, Los Amigos, also demanded a grand-jury investigation of Pulido's business dealings last year, a request that Pulido described at the time as politically motivated.
Contact the writer: 714-704-3777 or dirving@ocregister.com
http://www.ocregister.com/news/coalition-282858-grand-jury.html
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Judge may toss lawsuit over Mendocino supe's travel expenses
Mendocino Supervisor Kendall Smith spent $3,067 on hotel rooms in 2005
By GLENDA ANDERSON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Wednesday, January 5, 2011 at 1:16 p.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, January 5, 2011 at 7:54 p.m.
A lawsuit aimed at forcing a Mendocino County supervisor to repay $3,087 in travel expenses appeared unlikely to be upheld following a hearing in small claims court Wednesday night.
Mendocino County Superior Court Judge John Behnke took the issue under submission but said he was inclined to dismiss the case brought against Supervisor Kendall Smith by Anderson Valley Advertiser publisher Bruce Anderson.
Anderson, as have three grand juries, said Smith wrongfully claimed mileage between her Fort Bragg home and Ukiah when she actually spent nights in Ukiah. He was asking that the money be reimbursed to the county.
Smith said using mileage funds for lodging was a standard practice at the time and that she had been advised by her predecessor and the clerk of the board that it was acceptable. Coast supervisors must drive more than an hour each way on a winding road to reach the county offices, and Smith said she would stay overnight when she conducted county business in Ukiah two days in a row.
But it appears the underlying allegations that have dogged Smith for almost four years won't be resolved in court.
“I sincerely doubt I have jurisdiction,” Behnke said. The judge said either the district attorney or county counsel have jurisdiction when allegations of false claims are made against government officials.
Former District Attorney Meredith Lintott already has declined to prosecute Smith, saying there was no evidence she intended to defraud the county.
Behnke also noted that the incidents that gave rise to the lawsuit occurred in 2005 and 2006, likely placing them outside the statute of limitations.
Behnke dismissed outright the allegations against Smith's co-plaintiff, Auditor-Controller Meredith Ford, saying she could not be sued for decisions made in good faith in her official capacity.
The issue of mileage reimbursement was first raised in the 2006-07 Mendocino County Grand Jury report.
Two subsequent grand juries also raised the issue and urged Lintott to demand a reimbursement. She initially declined but last year ordered Ford to garnish Smith's wages.
Ford sought legal advice from the County Counsel's Office, which referred the issue to the Sonoma County Counsel's Office.
The Sonoma County Counsel's Office said that Lintott did not have the authority to order the garnishing without a court judgment.
There's been a “scrupulous passing of the buck,” Anderson told Behnke, while explaining why he had not filed a claim until late last year.
Smith called the allegations against her “untimely and unproven.”
Grand jury findings “should not be taken as fact,” she told the judge. She said the $3,087 figures was an estimate made by the grand jury and had not been substantiated.
More than a dozen spectators, many of them members and former members of county grand juries, packed into the small courtroom where the lawsuit was heard. The grand jury members declined to comment.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20110105/ARTICLES/110109797?Title=Mendocino-supe-s-travel-expense-case-goes-to-court
By GLENDA ANDERSON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Wednesday, January 5, 2011 at 1:16 p.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, January 5, 2011 at 7:54 p.m.
A lawsuit aimed at forcing a Mendocino County supervisor to repay $3,087 in travel expenses appeared unlikely to be upheld following a hearing in small claims court Wednesday night.
Mendocino County Superior Court Judge John Behnke took the issue under submission but said he was inclined to dismiss the case brought against Supervisor Kendall Smith by Anderson Valley Advertiser publisher Bruce Anderson.
Anderson, as have three grand juries, said Smith wrongfully claimed mileage between her Fort Bragg home and Ukiah when she actually spent nights in Ukiah. He was asking that the money be reimbursed to the county.
Smith said using mileage funds for lodging was a standard practice at the time and that she had been advised by her predecessor and the clerk of the board that it was acceptable. Coast supervisors must drive more than an hour each way on a winding road to reach the county offices, and Smith said she would stay overnight when she conducted county business in Ukiah two days in a row.
But it appears the underlying allegations that have dogged Smith for almost four years won't be resolved in court.
“I sincerely doubt I have jurisdiction,” Behnke said. The judge said either the district attorney or county counsel have jurisdiction when allegations of false claims are made against government officials.
Former District Attorney Meredith Lintott already has declined to prosecute Smith, saying there was no evidence she intended to defraud the county.
Behnke also noted that the incidents that gave rise to the lawsuit occurred in 2005 and 2006, likely placing them outside the statute of limitations.
Behnke dismissed outright the allegations against Smith's co-plaintiff, Auditor-Controller Meredith Ford, saying she could not be sued for decisions made in good faith in her official capacity.
The issue of mileage reimbursement was first raised in the 2006-07 Mendocino County Grand Jury report.
Two subsequent grand juries also raised the issue and urged Lintott to demand a reimbursement. She initially declined but last year ordered Ford to garnish Smith's wages.
Ford sought legal advice from the County Counsel's Office, which referred the issue to the Sonoma County Counsel's Office.
The Sonoma County Counsel's Office said that Lintott did not have the authority to order the garnishing without a court judgment.
There's been a “scrupulous passing of the buck,” Anderson told Behnke, while explaining why he had not filed a claim until late last year.
Smith called the allegations against her “untimely and unproven.”
Grand jury findings “should not be taken as fact,” she told the judge. She said the $3,087 figures was an estimate made by the grand jury and had not been substantiated.
More than a dozen spectators, many of them members and former members of county grand juries, packed into the small courtroom where the lawsuit was heard. The grand jury members declined to comment.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20110105/ARTICLES/110109797?Title=Mendocino-supe-s-travel-expense-case-goes-to-court
Mendocino Small claims court hears Smith travel expense case
By TIFFANY REVELLE The Daily Journal
Updated: 01/05/2011 11:59:05 PM PST
A small claims case against 4th District Supervisor Kendall Smith regarding $3,087 she was overpaid for travel costs wasn't resolved Wednesday night in Room A of the Mendocino County Superior Court, but it doesn't look good for plaintiff Bruce Anderson.
Judge John Behnke said he would either deem that he didn't have jurisdiction to order Smith to repay the amount, saying the criteria for a "whistle-blower" lawsuit weren't met, or he would deny Anderson's claim.
"If there is some misuse of public funds, the DA ... is supposed to investigate and exercise their discretion. If there's a whistle-blower type circumstance, that is when there are facts that aren't known -- they're not in the public domain -- and a whistle-blower comes forward with that information; then a private person can put itself in place of the county or the governmental entity and proceed," Behnke said. "I really don't see that as having happened here, so I sincerely doubt that I have jurisdiction."
He called the case a "false claims case" several times, and said under state law governing false claims, the court doesn't have jurisdiction over an elected official.
Anderson, who is the publisher of the Anderson Valley Advertiser, brought the taxpayer lawsuit against Smith in hopes that the court would order her to pay $3,087 back to the county that she was overpaid in travel reimbursement claims.
"In 2006, the grand jury found that Supervisor Smith billed the county for travel untraveled.
Three successive grand juries found the same thing," Anderson said during his opening comments.
He referred to travel reimbursement Smith claimed for what the county's civil grand jury called "fictitious commute miles" between her Fort Bragg home and Ukiah between January 2005 and November 2006, when she was staying with friends or renting a room in Ukiah and not actually traveling.
He told the court Smith said in 2008 that "she would be open to negotiation to repay the money."
Anderson recounted the grand jury's findings and events in 2010, including former Mendocino County District Attorney Meredith Lintott ordering county Auditor-Controller Meredith Ford to dock Smith's pay for the amount.
Ford, who calculated the amount Smith was overpaid at the grand jury's behest, was included in Anderson's claim.
"She should have recovered the money when she was first requested to in 2010," Anderson argued.
Behnke said Ford wasn't a "proper defendant" for a false claim, which he said would allege a government official took money under false pretenses.
Behnke said Ford acted within the scope of her employment with the county when she asked for a legal opinion instead of complying with Lintott's order. County Counsel Jeanine Nadel claimed a conflict of interest and forwarded Ford's request to the Sonoma County Counsel's Office. That office issued a Sept. 19 opinion that Lintott and Ford didn't have the authority to dock Smith's pay without a court order.
Smith's response to grand juries previously was that the county's travel reimbursement policy at the time was confusing, and that she claimed the travel expenses based on a "per-diem" calculation she thought was acceptable because two other supervisors used it.
Smith submitted a written response and read it aloud to the court Wednesday night. In the response, Smith said she based her claims on a travel reimbursement established in 2002 that allowed her to claim a mileage rate instead of being compensated for any overnight lodging.
"The policy states, Supervisors with meetings back-to-back may elect to stay overnight rather than drive back and forth and will be reimbursed not to exceed the mileage rate that would have been charged for travel,'" Smith read.
She said when a new policy was established in 2007, "the reimbursement filing was identical, as the amount claimed was to be the mileage rate in both scenarios."
Smith also said the grand jury's findings "do not have the force of law and should not be taken as fact," and noted Anderson's claim came six years after the reimbursements in question.
Behnke asked Anderson if the $3,087 in question was claimed before 2007, and Anderson said the grand jury calculated that amount in 2006.
"Four grand juries have gone over the same fuzzy claims, in which Supervisor Smith blames policy, grand jury system -- everybody but herself -- for basically billing the taxpayers for travel that the grand jury ... established she did not travel," he said.
Behnke said the district attorney can prosecute the matter criminally or civilly, and said he didn't know why Lintott hadn't done so. In prior responses, Lintott held there was no evidence that Smith meant to defraud the county.
After Behnke took the matter under advisement, Anderson said outside the courtroom that he plans to wait for the judge's written ruling, and may bring the matter to newly elected District Attorney C. David Eyster.
Tiffany Revelle can be reached at udjtr@pacific.net, or at 468-3523.
http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/ci_17022950?source=most_viewed
Updated: 01/05/2011 11:59:05 PM PST
A small claims case against 4th District Supervisor Kendall Smith regarding $3,087 she was overpaid for travel costs wasn't resolved Wednesday night in Room A of the Mendocino County Superior Court, but it doesn't look good for plaintiff Bruce Anderson.
Judge John Behnke said he would either deem that he didn't have jurisdiction to order Smith to repay the amount, saying the criteria for a "whistle-blower" lawsuit weren't met, or he would deny Anderson's claim.
"If there is some misuse of public funds, the DA ... is supposed to investigate and exercise their discretion. If there's a whistle-blower type circumstance, that is when there are facts that aren't known -- they're not in the public domain -- and a whistle-blower comes forward with that information; then a private person can put itself in place of the county or the governmental entity and proceed," Behnke said. "I really don't see that as having happened here, so I sincerely doubt that I have jurisdiction."
He called the case a "false claims case" several times, and said under state law governing false claims, the court doesn't have jurisdiction over an elected official.
Anderson, who is the publisher of the Anderson Valley Advertiser, brought the taxpayer lawsuit against Smith in hopes that the court would order her to pay $3,087 back to the county that she was overpaid in travel reimbursement claims.
"In 2006, the grand jury found that Supervisor Smith billed the county for travel untraveled.
Three successive grand juries found the same thing," Anderson said during his opening comments.
He referred to travel reimbursement Smith claimed for what the county's civil grand jury called "fictitious commute miles" between her Fort Bragg home and Ukiah between January 2005 and November 2006, when she was staying with friends or renting a room in Ukiah and not actually traveling.
He told the court Smith said in 2008 that "she would be open to negotiation to repay the money."
Anderson recounted the grand jury's findings and events in 2010, including former Mendocino County District Attorney Meredith Lintott ordering county Auditor-Controller Meredith Ford to dock Smith's pay for the amount.
Ford, who calculated the amount Smith was overpaid at the grand jury's behest, was included in Anderson's claim.
"She should have recovered the money when she was first requested to in 2010," Anderson argued.
Behnke said Ford wasn't a "proper defendant" for a false claim, which he said would allege a government official took money under false pretenses.
Behnke said Ford acted within the scope of her employment with the county when she asked for a legal opinion instead of complying with Lintott's order. County Counsel Jeanine Nadel claimed a conflict of interest and forwarded Ford's request to the Sonoma County Counsel's Office. That office issued a Sept. 19 opinion that Lintott and Ford didn't have the authority to dock Smith's pay without a court order.
Smith's response to grand juries previously was that the county's travel reimbursement policy at the time was confusing, and that she claimed the travel expenses based on a "per-diem" calculation she thought was acceptable because two other supervisors used it.
Smith submitted a written response and read it aloud to the court Wednesday night. In the response, Smith said she based her claims on a travel reimbursement established in 2002 that allowed her to claim a mileage rate instead of being compensated for any overnight lodging.
"The policy states, Supervisors with meetings back-to-back may elect to stay overnight rather than drive back and forth and will be reimbursed not to exceed the mileage rate that would have been charged for travel,'" Smith read.
She said when a new policy was established in 2007, "the reimbursement filing was identical, as the amount claimed was to be the mileage rate in both scenarios."
Smith also said the grand jury's findings "do not have the force of law and should not be taken as fact," and noted Anderson's claim came six years after the reimbursements in question.
Behnke asked Anderson if the $3,087 in question was claimed before 2007, and Anderson said the grand jury calculated that amount in 2006.
"Four grand juries have gone over the same fuzzy claims, in which Supervisor Smith blames policy, grand jury system -- everybody but herself -- for basically billing the taxpayers for travel that the grand jury ... established she did not travel," he said.
Behnke said the district attorney can prosecute the matter criminally or civilly, and said he didn't know why Lintott hadn't done so. In prior responses, Lintott held there was no evidence that Smith meant to defraud the county.
After Behnke took the matter under advisement, Anderson said outside the courtroom that he plans to wait for the judge's written ruling, and may bring the matter to newly elected District Attorney C. David Eyster.
Tiffany Revelle can be reached at udjtr@pacific.net, or at 468-3523.
http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/ci_17022950?source=most_viewed
Monday, January 3, 2011
Want to make a Difference? Volunteer for the Sacramento County Grand Jury
By Robert Lewis
rlewis@sacbee.com
Published: Monday, Jan. 3, 2011 - 9:49 am
Tired of reading about government waste and malfeasance?
Then do something about it.
That's the message from the Sacramento County Grand Jury. The grand jury -- a body of citizens empaneled to investigate complaints of government waste or abuse -- is accepting applications for the 2011-12 term. With ongoing budget problems, that oversight is more important than ever, said Don Prange, the current grand jury's foreman.
"You've sat back home and said 'If I could only do something to affect a change,'" Prange said. Well you can, and you should, he added.
Prange is currently serving for the fourth time on the grand jury. He keeps coming back because it's a great way to benefit the community, Prange said.
The grand jury is a body of 19 county residents who have in the past spent their year-long sting looking at issues, such as the deaths of children under the oversight of the Child Protective Services Department and wasteful spending at the library. The grand jury can also hear criminal complaints and issue indictments.
The deadline to apply for the 2011-12 term is Feb. 4. For more information, including application, instructions visit the grand jury's website at www.sacgrandjury.org. You can also call the grand jury's coordinator Rebecca Castaneda at (916) 874-7578.
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/03/3296071/want-to-make-a-difference-volunteer.html#ixzz1A0T6Od7i
rlewis@sacbee.com
Published: Monday, Jan. 3, 2011 - 9:49 am
Tired of reading about government waste and malfeasance?
Then do something about it.
That's the message from the Sacramento County Grand Jury. The grand jury -- a body of citizens empaneled to investigate complaints of government waste or abuse -- is accepting applications for the 2011-12 term. With ongoing budget problems, that oversight is more important than ever, said Don Prange, the current grand jury's foreman.
"You've sat back home and said 'If I could only do something to affect a change,'" Prange said. Well you can, and you should, he added.
Prange is currently serving for the fourth time on the grand jury. He keeps coming back because it's a great way to benefit the community, Prange said.
The grand jury is a body of 19 county residents who have in the past spent their year-long sting looking at issues, such as the deaths of children under the oversight of the Child Protective Services Department and wasteful spending at the library. The grand jury can also hear criminal complaints and issue indictments.
The deadline to apply for the 2011-12 term is Feb. 4. For more information, including application, instructions visit the grand jury's website at www.sacgrandjury.org. You can also call the grand jury's coordinator Rebecca Castaneda at (916) 874-7578.
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/03/3296071/want-to-make-a-difference-volunteer.html#ixzz1A0T6Od7i
Sunday, January 2, 2011
New attitudes would help bicycling's golden age
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Pull up at any busy intersection where bikes and cars meet, and it's often a free-for-all. Pedalers shoot through red lights and blow stop signs. Drivers honk, shout and swerve into bike lanes. It's clear that the city's official encouragement of bicycling has not be accompanied by sufficient respect for the law, by cyclists or motorists.
A civil grand jury report found that police avoid bike-versus-car disputes because of San Francisco's mixed-up feelings: We want more people to ride but don't want to crack down on bike-messenger riding habits. Barely 1 percent of the 204,673 traffic citations written last year went to cyclists for violations such as running lights, riding on sidewalks and "salmoning" or pedaling the wrong direction on a one-way street. Neither drivers nor riders are protected by this no-rules environment.
Along with enforcement, there needs to be education. Riders are allowed the full use of driving lanes, the same as any vehicle, though few drivers can stem their impatience at a dawdling rider taking up the full road. The city's network of lanes and suggested riding streets is little known, one side-effect of an obstructionist lawsuit that delayed bike lane work for four years until this year. The learning curve has barely begun.
Unless more is done in these areas, the grand jury warned, "serious mistrust, conflict, and misunderstandings" will continue to be the rule and undermine a promising program. The word has to get out about both personal rights, restrictions and travel options.
Such attitude and behaviorial changes are essential to establishing what should be a golden age of bike riding in San Francisco. Ridership is up over 50 percent in four years. White paint is going down on 31 more miles of bike lanes on top of 48 miles already striped. A regional system will soon roll out 500 rental bikes across the city.
The surge is fueled by a generational change in a city where young people flock to live in the South of Market, Hayes Valley and Mission neighborhoods, all flat areas where bike riding makes sense. But the city's also a car-clogged place dotted with steep hills, narrow streets and distant neighborhoods where riding is less of an option.
In encouraging more riding - as a 190-page official bike plan does - the city needs to be better prepared. It has begun a five-year, $25 million program bringing more lanes, parking spots and other traffic changes. But there are missing ingredients: law enforcement and public awareness.
But there's no question that bike riding has taken hold and bloomed. Riding to work, while about 3 percent of the total commute, is rising year by the year. The city has a bike-riding goal of 20 percent of the transportation-to-work pool in 10 years.
This target may sound high, but it's easy to see understand why riders and city officials are in agreement. Bikes are cheap, enviro-friendly and healthy. They don't need a vast infrastructure such as fleets of Muni buses, costly freeways or armies of workers to run things. In a city facing a $400 million deficit, bike riding is a nearly free transit option, one that will grow if Muni service is depleted further.
One example of a bike-influenced thoroughfare is Valencia Street, redone recently to add bike lanes amid little protest in a neighborhood filled with cycling shops, young people and flat pavement. The bike traffic feeds into Market Street, which has become a test lab for bike riding, ranging from pot-holed plain-Jane sections to green-painted bike-only lanes alongside Muni tracks. The city is due to remake Market in the next few years with a plan that will be a major test of bike riding's appeal and promise.
Market is already one of the busiest bike-riding pathways in the country, according to Andy Thornley, program director for the Bicycle Coalition. His group has grown from 5,000 members to 12,000 in five years, making the organization a political force via election endorsements and courting of City Hall decision-makers.
On its website, the bike group offers its own futuristic image of San Francisco that includes crosstown bike lanes, a waterfront bridge and even a conveyor-belt-style lift that hauls bikers up steep hills.
Cycling's rising popularity doesn't make it immune to opposition. Other cities, notably New York, have faced revolt and taken out bike lanes where neighbors, drivers and merchants objected. No such rebellion has happened here, perhaps because an expansion of bike programs was held up by legal delays and is only now rolling out.
Bond Yee, the director of sustainable streets for the Municipal Transportation Agency, suggested another reason. The city's famously drawn-out policymaking, built around hearings and lengthy comment periods, has accommodated most objections. "We're getting very little negative pushback," Yee said.
San Francisco clearly wants to accommodate bike riding in a major way. But it must be accompanied by a recognition that bicyclists must follow the rules - and San Francisco police should be willing to enforce them.
This article appeared on page E - 10 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/18/EDCL1F4T9E.DTL#ixzz19wLnQdgE
Pull up at any busy intersection where bikes and cars meet, and it's often a free-for-all. Pedalers shoot through red lights and blow stop signs. Drivers honk, shout and swerve into bike lanes. It's clear that the city's official encouragement of bicycling has not be accompanied by sufficient respect for the law, by cyclists or motorists.
A civil grand jury report found that police avoid bike-versus-car disputes because of San Francisco's mixed-up feelings: We want more people to ride but don't want to crack down on bike-messenger riding habits. Barely 1 percent of the 204,673 traffic citations written last year went to cyclists for violations such as running lights, riding on sidewalks and "salmoning" or pedaling the wrong direction on a one-way street. Neither drivers nor riders are protected by this no-rules environment.
Along with enforcement, there needs to be education. Riders are allowed the full use of driving lanes, the same as any vehicle, though few drivers can stem their impatience at a dawdling rider taking up the full road. The city's network of lanes and suggested riding streets is little known, one side-effect of an obstructionist lawsuit that delayed bike lane work for four years until this year. The learning curve has barely begun.
Unless more is done in these areas, the grand jury warned, "serious mistrust, conflict, and misunderstandings" will continue to be the rule and undermine a promising program. The word has to get out about both personal rights, restrictions and travel options.
Such attitude and behaviorial changes are essential to establishing what should be a golden age of bike riding in San Francisco. Ridership is up over 50 percent in four years. White paint is going down on 31 more miles of bike lanes on top of 48 miles already striped. A regional system will soon roll out 500 rental bikes across the city.
The surge is fueled by a generational change in a city where young people flock to live in the South of Market, Hayes Valley and Mission neighborhoods, all flat areas where bike riding makes sense. But the city's also a car-clogged place dotted with steep hills, narrow streets and distant neighborhoods where riding is less of an option.
In encouraging more riding - as a 190-page official bike plan does - the city needs to be better prepared. It has begun a five-year, $25 million program bringing more lanes, parking spots and other traffic changes. But there are missing ingredients: law enforcement and public awareness.
But there's no question that bike riding has taken hold and bloomed. Riding to work, while about 3 percent of the total commute, is rising year by the year. The city has a bike-riding goal of 20 percent of the transportation-to-work pool in 10 years.
This target may sound high, but it's easy to see understand why riders and city officials are in agreement. Bikes are cheap, enviro-friendly and healthy. They don't need a vast infrastructure such as fleets of Muni buses, costly freeways or armies of workers to run things. In a city facing a $400 million deficit, bike riding is a nearly free transit option, one that will grow if Muni service is depleted further.
One example of a bike-influenced thoroughfare is Valencia Street, redone recently to add bike lanes amid little protest in a neighborhood filled with cycling shops, young people and flat pavement. The bike traffic feeds into Market Street, which has become a test lab for bike riding, ranging from pot-holed plain-Jane sections to green-painted bike-only lanes alongside Muni tracks. The city is due to remake Market in the next few years with a plan that will be a major test of bike riding's appeal and promise.
Market is already one of the busiest bike-riding pathways in the country, according to Andy Thornley, program director for the Bicycle Coalition. His group has grown from 5,000 members to 12,000 in five years, making the organization a political force via election endorsements and courting of City Hall decision-makers.
On its website, the bike group offers its own futuristic image of San Francisco that includes crosstown bike lanes, a waterfront bridge and even a conveyor-belt-style lift that hauls bikers up steep hills.
Cycling's rising popularity doesn't make it immune to opposition. Other cities, notably New York, have faced revolt and taken out bike lanes where neighbors, drivers and merchants objected. No such rebellion has happened here, perhaps because an expansion of bike programs was held up by legal delays and is only now rolling out.
Bond Yee, the director of sustainable streets for the Municipal Transportation Agency, suggested another reason. The city's famously drawn-out policymaking, built around hearings and lengthy comment periods, has accommodated most objections. "We're getting very little negative pushback," Yee said.
San Francisco clearly wants to accommodate bike riding in a major way. But it must be accompanied by a recognition that bicyclists must follow the rules - and San Francisco police should be willing to enforce them.
This article appeared on page E - 10 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/18/EDCL1F4T9E.DTL#ixzz19wLnQdgE
Editorial: DA, FBI and grand jury must probe Hercules dealings
MediaNews editorial
Posted: 12/25/2010 09:00:00 PM PST
Updated: 12/27/2010 08:57:23 AM PST
THE LONG overdue cleanup of the fiscally and ethically challenged Hercules city government has begun. But the announcement last week of the imminent departure of the nepotistic city manager who pushed $3 million in no-bid contracts for a business headed by his young daughters will not be nearly enough to remove the stench from City Hall.
The Contra Costa district attorney, the county grand jury and the FBI need to carefully review the city's insider dealing under the tenure of outgoing City Manager Nelson Oliva, whom we hope will finally be out for good on Jan. 9. And the city must bring in financial experts to determine the full extent of Hercules fiscal woes.
As for leadership, City Attorney Mick Cabral, who publicly excused Oliva's behavior, must go next. And Mayor Ed Balico should submit his resignation immediately. If he doesn't, he should be recalled along with council members Joanne Ward and Don Kuehne, as we said about two weeks ago when we took the very unusual step of calling for removal of elected officials from office.
We wish we sensed that the City Council's termination of Oliva marked an ethical awakening by Balico, Ward and Kuehne; instead, we only see politically opportune bowing to public pressure in hopes that it will subside. Worse, when it comes to Balico, we continue to learn more about his attempts to leverage his political position for personal gain.
The entire episode has been an embarrassment for one of the fastest-growing cities in the East Bay, a community that holds great promise but has been hampered by leaders out for their own financial or political benefit.
For example, over the past three years, Oliva has recommended, and the council has approved, the no-bid service contracts for the firm he once owned, the firm for which two of his daughters until recently served as CEO and chief financial officer. The firm, in turn, instigated the awarding of questionable redevelopment agency loans to one of its own employees and to city workers, including Oliva's administrative assistant, who, a month later, was appointed to the board of directors of the Oliva family firm.
City Council members knew about the nepotism for more than a year, yet did nothing. As Election Day neared this year and public pressure mounted, Oliva went out on medical leave, and the council brought in an interim replacement, Charlie Long, a no-nonsense financial expert and former city manager. Long was to stay eight months and to start cleaning up the mess.
He moved quickly, slashing the city contract with the Oliva family firm and exposing the city's severe financial condition. Meanwhile, voters booted out two council members who were up for re-election this year. (The terms of Balico, Ward and Kuehne last until 2012.) Then, after Election Day but before new members were installed, the City Council abruptly fired Long and, amazingly, brought back Oliva.
The reasoning was ridiculous, but basically came down to claims that Long was moving too fast, acting on his own and making too much information public. In other words, he was embarrassing the council by candidly discussing the city's finances and trying to fix the problem.
Worse, Long later revealed in a letter to the council, Balico was complaining that publicity about the city's finances was hurting his ability to market his personal waste-to-energy business to other cities. It turns out that Balico had joined in that business with Oliva's mentor, former City Manager Mike Sakamoto.
Sakamoto was also under contract to the city of Hercules both directly and indirectly through the Oliva family firm. In other words, Balico, on the one hand, solicited Sakamoto to join the efforts of his personal waste-to-energy firm and, on the other hand, had approved contracts from which Sakamoto benefitted. The conflict was morally and ethically wrong; authorities must determine if it crossed a legal line.
As for Ward and Kuehne, there's no indication they have financially benefitted. But their support of the retention of Oliva for so long, their participation in the firing of Long and their public silence on the ethical breaches in City Hall indicate they were most concerned about their political futures, that they lack the moral leadership essential for public office. We keep looking for signs to the contrary and have yet to see them. The two either need to speak up now and convince the community that they have ethical backbones, or they need to go as well.
Hercules deserves leaders who will look out for the residents, not for themselves.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_16937730?nclick_check=1
Posted: 12/25/2010 09:00:00 PM PST
Updated: 12/27/2010 08:57:23 AM PST
THE LONG overdue cleanup of the fiscally and ethically challenged Hercules city government has begun. But the announcement last week of the imminent departure of the nepotistic city manager who pushed $3 million in no-bid contracts for a business headed by his young daughters will not be nearly enough to remove the stench from City Hall.
The Contra Costa district attorney, the county grand jury and the FBI need to carefully review the city's insider dealing under the tenure of outgoing City Manager Nelson Oliva, whom we hope will finally be out for good on Jan. 9. And the city must bring in financial experts to determine the full extent of Hercules fiscal woes.
As for leadership, City Attorney Mick Cabral, who publicly excused Oliva's behavior, must go next. And Mayor Ed Balico should submit his resignation immediately. If he doesn't, he should be recalled along with council members Joanne Ward and Don Kuehne, as we said about two weeks ago when we took the very unusual step of calling for removal of elected officials from office.
We wish we sensed that the City Council's termination of Oliva marked an ethical awakening by Balico, Ward and Kuehne; instead, we only see politically opportune bowing to public pressure in hopes that it will subside. Worse, when it comes to Balico, we continue to learn more about his attempts to leverage his political position for personal gain.
The entire episode has been an embarrassment for one of the fastest-growing cities in the East Bay, a community that holds great promise but has been hampered by leaders out for their own financial or political benefit.
For example, over the past three years, Oliva has recommended, and the council has approved, the no-bid service contracts for the firm he once owned, the firm for which two of his daughters until recently served as CEO and chief financial officer. The firm, in turn, instigated the awarding of questionable redevelopment agency loans to one of its own employees and to city workers, including Oliva's administrative assistant, who, a month later, was appointed to the board of directors of the Oliva family firm.
City Council members knew about the nepotism for more than a year, yet did nothing. As Election Day neared this year and public pressure mounted, Oliva went out on medical leave, and the council brought in an interim replacement, Charlie Long, a no-nonsense financial expert and former city manager. Long was to stay eight months and to start cleaning up the mess.
He moved quickly, slashing the city contract with the Oliva family firm and exposing the city's severe financial condition. Meanwhile, voters booted out two council members who were up for re-election this year. (The terms of Balico, Ward and Kuehne last until 2012.) Then, after Election Day but before new members were installed, the City Council abruptly fired Long and, amazingly, brought back Oliva.
The reasoning was ridiculous, but basically came down to claims that Long was moving too fast, acting on his own and making too much information public. In other words, he was embarrassing the council by candidly discussing the city's finances and trying to fix the problem.
Worse, Long later revealed in a letter to the council, Balico was complaining that publicity about the city's finances was hurting his ability to market his personal waste-to-energy business to other cities. It turns out that Balico had joined in that business with Oliva's mentor, former City Manager Mike Sakamoto.
Sakamoto was also under contract to the city of Hercules both directly and indirectly through the Oliva family firm. In other words, Balico, on the one hand, solicited Sakamoto to join the efforts of his personal waste-to-energy firm and, on the other hand, had approved contracts from which Sakamoto benefitted. The conflict was morally and ethically wrong; authorities must determine if it crossed a legal line.
As for Ward and Kuehne, there's no indication they have financially benefitted. But their support of the retention of Oliva for so long, their participation in the firing of Long and their public silence on the ethical breaches in City Hall indicate they were most concerned about their political futures, that they lack the moral leadership essential for public office. We keep looking for signs to the contrary and have yet to see them. The two either need to speak up now and convince the community that they have ethical backbones, or they need to go as well.
Hercules deserves leaders who will look out for the residents, not for themselves.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_16937730?nclick_check=1
Victorville Mayor calls for closure in grand jury, SEC, USCIS probes
Federal, county investigations cost Victorville $300,000
December 25, 2010 1:43 PM
VICTORVILLE • The cost and strain of responding to lengthy investigations by two federal and one county agency has newly seated Mayor Ryan McEachron calling for an end to the inquiries — though he first requested the forensic audit by the San Bernardino County Grand Jury.
The cost of responding has topped $300,000 in staff time and attorney fees, city officials estimated.
“I think that the forensic auditor has requested as much documentation as he possibly can,” McEachron said, with New York-based firm Kessler International at work since May investigating the city’s books through a special $195,000 appropriation by the county Board of Supervisors. “If he has found some wrongdoing, then it needs to be put out there. If people have done something criminally wrong they need to be brought to justice. And if he hasn’t, then we need to know that, too. Either way I think the investigation needs to come to an end and a report needs to be issued.”
McEachron said his request for a forensic audit called for the investigator to look at very specific things he’d heard concerns about since taking office in 2008.
“I asked them to look at contracts that the city had in place and was there anything wrong with those,” McEachron said, “as well as to look at payroll, which was put under IT, and was there anything done wrong there, such people getting paychecks that shouldn’t have been getting paychecks.”
Now McEachron said it appears the auditor has expanded the inquiry to include “everything under the sun” — though he believes the saying “no news is good news” likely applies here.
“The fact that no indictments have been issued, nothing has come out that there has been any criminal wrongdoing, makes me cautiously optimistic,” the mayor said. “...Stealing of taxpayer money is a big deal, so you just don’t let someone that’s done that sit around.”
McEachron is also anxious for the Security and Exchange Commission to wrap up its months-long investigation into the city’s bond issuances.
Victorville is also waiting to hear back from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on an appeal filed last month against the federal agency’s decision to terminate its EB-5 Regional Center program.
Brooke Edwards may be reached at (760) 955-5358 or at bedwards@VVDailyPress.com.
http://www.vvdailypress.com/news/victorville-25015-jury-mayor.html
December 25, 2010 1:43 PM
VICTORVILLE • The cost and strain of responding to lengthy investigations by two federal and one county agency has newly seated Mayor Ryan McEachron calling for an end to the inquiries — though he first requested the forensic audit by the San Bernardino County Grand Jury.
The cost of responding has topped $300,000 in staff time and attorney fees, city officials estimated.
“I think that the forensic auditor has requested as much documentation as he possibly can,” McEachron said, with New York-based firm Kessler International at work since May investigating the city’s books through a special $195,000 appropriation by the county Board of Supervisors. “If he has found some wrongdoing, then it needs to be put out there. If people have done something criminally wrong they need to be brought to justice. And if he hasn’t, then we need to know that, too. Either way I think the investigation needs to come to an end and a report needs to be issued.”
McEachron said his request for a forensic audit called for the investigator to look at very specific things he’d heard concerns about since taking office in 2008.
“I asked them to look at contracts that the city had in place and was there anything wrong with those,” McEachron said, “as well as to look at payroll, which was put under IT, and was there anything done wrong there, such people getting paychecks that shouldn’t have been getting paychecks.”
Now McEachron said it appears the auditor has expanded the inquiry to include “everything under the sun” — though he believes the saying “no news is good news” likely applies here.
“The fact that no indictments have been issued, nothing has come out that there has been any criminal wrongdoing, makes me cautiously optimistic,” the mayor said. “...Stealing of taxpayer money is a big deal, so you just don’t let someone that’s done that sit around.”
McEachron is also anxious for the Security and Exchange Commission to wrap up its months-long investigation into the city’s bond issuances.
Victorville is also waiting to hear back from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on an appeal filed last month against the federal agency’s decision to terminate its EB-5 Regional Center program.
Brooke Edwards may be reached at (760) 955-5358 or at bedwards@VVDailyPress.com.
http://www.vvdailypress.com/news/victorville-25015-jury-mayor.html
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
State AG offers legal opinion on Daly City city clerk's post
By Neil Gonzales
ngonzales@bayareanewsgroup.com
Posted: 12/21/2010 07:00:49 PM PST
Updated: 12/21/2010 07:00:50 PM PST
Annette Hipona, city clerk of Daly City, didn't have to leave her seat on the local school board after she was elected to the city post two years ago, state Attorney General and governor-elect Jerry Brown said in a recent legal opinion.
State law does not prohibit an elected city clerk from also serving on the school board in the same city, according to the opinion obtained by the Metropolitan News-Enterprise, a Los Angeles newspaper focused on law, the courts and other issues.
The opinion pleased Hipona, who was elected as city clerk in November 2008 while still serving on the board of the Daly City-based Jefferson Elementary District.
"I have always believed that (the positions of) school board member and city clerk were not incompatible since they (have) no connection with each other," Hipona said Tuesday in a statement to the Times. "Before I even considered running for city clerk, I did extensive research regarding this situation and found no conflict. It is nice to be vindicated."
Hipona recalled that some city and school leaders believed at the time there was a conflict of interest, creating the appearance of impropriety.
"I could not put the school district in a negative position with concerns of conflict of interest, even though there was none," said Hipona, who resigned from the Jefferson board in March 2009.
"I loved my time on the school board," she added. "Children and education have always been important to me. ... (This opinion) will provide an opportunity for city clerks to serve on the school board."
San Mateo County Counsel Michael Murphy asked for the opinion following Hipona's election as city clerk, the Metropolitan News-Enterprise reported. Murphy could not immediately be reached for comment Tuesday.
As part of his opinion, the Metropolitan News-Enterprise reported, the attorney general determined that the offices of city clerk and school trustee are compatible because neither has authority over the other.
Hipona also earned a measure of vindication in 2009 when a county civil grand jury report concluded that Daly City was unjustified in slashing her pay from $101,374 to $52,988 a year and recommended that the decision be reversed.
However, the city argued that the reduction was justified based on financial and personnel factors, and Hipona's pay was not restored.
Contact Neil Gonzales at 650-348-4338.
http://www.mercurynews.com/san-mateo-county/ci_16915277?nclick_check=1
ngonzales@bayareanewsgroup.com
Posted: 12/21/2010 07:00:49 PM PST
Updated: 12/21/2010 07:00:50 PM PST
Annette Hipona, city clerk of Daly City, didn't have to leave her seat on the local school board after she was elected to the city post two years ago, state Attorney General and governor-elect Jerry Brown said in a recent legal opinion.
State law does not prohibit an elected city clerk from also serving on the school board in the same city, according to the opinion obtained by the Metropolitan News-Enterprise, a Los Angeles newspaper focused on law, the courts and other issues.
The opinion pleased Hipona, who was elected as city clerk in November 2008 while still serving on the board of the Daly City-based Jefferson Elementary District.
"I have always believed that (the positions of) school board member and city clerk were not incompatible since they (have) no connection with each other," Hipona said Tuesday in a statement to the Times. "Before I even considered running for city clerk, I did extensive research regarding this situation and found no conflict. It is nice to be vindicated."
Hipona recalled that some city and school leaders believed at the time there was a conflict of interest, creating the appearance of impropriety.
"I could not put the school district in a negative position with concerns of conflict of interest, even though there was none," said Hipona, who resigned from the Jefferson board in March 2009.
"I loved my time on the school board," she added. "Children and education have always been important to me. ... (This opinion) will provide an opportunity for city clerks to serve on the school board."
San Mateo County Counsel Michael Murphy asked for the opinion following Hipona's election as city clerk, the Metropolitan News-Enterprise reported. Murphy could not immediately be reached for comment Tuesday.
As part of his opinion, the Metropolitan News-Enterprise reported, the attorney general determined that the offices of city clerk and school trustee are compatible because neither has authority over the other.
Hipona also earned a measure of vindication in 2009 when a county civil grand jury report concluded that Daly City was unjustified in slashing her pay from $101,374 to $52,988 a year and recommended that the decision be reversed.
However, the city argued that the reduction was justified based on financial and personnel factors, and Hipona's pay was not restored.
Contact Neil Gonzales at 650-348-4338.
http://www.mercurynews.com/san-mateo-county/ci_16915277?nclick_check=1
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Kern Grand Jury: RPD well-run organization
Posted Dec 07, 2010 @ 06:00 AM
Print Comment
Ridgecrest, Calif. —
The Kern County Grand Jury said the Ridgecrest Police Department is a well-run organization.
In its report released Monday, the jury found that since the chief of police took control of the animal shelter, the department has been able to reduce the number of animals euthanized through an “adopt-out” program of the animals to Canada. The department also sends dogs to specific breed-rescue programs.
The report noted there is no major drug or gang activity within its jurisdiction, the animal shelter is also under the control of the chief of police, and the department has two K-9 units which were purchased through public donations and assist the sheriff’s deputies upon request.
The Grand Jury report also noted the department has a teen court program through a local church. “This is for first-time juvenile offenders and is managed by the Kern County Probation Department,” said the report. “The local Deputy District Attorney acts as the Judge and teen members who have successfully completed the program act as jurors.”
The jurors of the teen court sentence the juvenile offenders to community service, a fine, letters of apology or accountability. The parents or guardians of the teen have to be involved and must be present during the Court hearing.
“This is done in a formal setting,” the report stated. “The chief reported they have a low recidivism rate due to the program.”
The jury expressed concerns about the RPD patrol fleet.
“Due to budget restraints, the patrol cars are an aging fleet,” said the report. “Many of the cars have 150,000 to 160,000 miles of service. Two new cars are expected.”
Three motorcycles are used for traffic control enforcement.
According to the report, the chief reported that they have a good relationship with the local schools through contact with the principals and/or resource officer at the local high school.
There are 30 active Community Emergency Response Team members and more than 300 have been trained for this program.
The report also stated Police and Community Together program that works through four organizations with a total of 60 volunteers. The volunteers work at such activities as animal control, records, graffiti and traffic control, etc. The volunteers perform more than 10,000 hours of service to aid the department each year.
The department must respond within 90 days.
The report can be seen at www.co.kern.ca.us. Click on Grand Jury for access to the report.
http://www.ridgecrestca.com/newsnow/x1646546359/Grand-Jury-RPD-well-run-organization
Print Comment
Ridgecrest, Calif. —
The Kern County Grand Jury said the Ridgecrest Police Department is a well-run organization.
In its report released Monday, the jury found that since the chief of police took control of the animal shelter, the department has been able to reduce the number of animals euthanized through an “adopt-out” program of the animals to Canada. The department also sends dogs to specific breed-rescue programs.
The report noted there is no major drug or gang activity within its jurisdiction, the animal shelter is also under the control of the chief of police, and the department has two K-9 units which were purchased through public donations and assist the sheriff’s deputies upon request.
The Grand Jury report also noted the department has a teen court program through a local church. “This is for first-time juvenile offenders and is managed by the Kern County Probation Department,” said the report. “The local Deputy District Attorney acts as the Judge and teen members who have successfully completed the program act as jurors.”
The jurors of the teen court sentence the juvenile offenders to community service, a fine, letters of apology or accountability. The parents or guardians of the teen have to be involved and must be present during the Court hearing.
“This is done in a formal setting,” the report stated. “The chief reported they have a low recidivism rate due to the program.”
The jury expressed concerns about the RPD patrol fleet.
“Due to budget restraints, the patrol cars are an aging fleet,” said the report. “Many of the cars have 150,000 to 160,000 miles of service. Two new cars are expected.”
Three motorcycles are used for traffic control enforcement.
According to the report, the chief reported that they have a good relationship with the local schools through contact with the principals and/or resource officer at the local high school.
There are 30 active Community Emergency Response Team members and more than 300 have been trained for this program.
The report also stated Police and Community Together program that works through four organizations with a total of 60 volunteers. The volunteers work at such activities as animal control, records, graffiti and traffic control, etc. The volunteers perform more than 10,000 hours of service to aid the department each year.
The department must respond within 90 days.
The report can be seen at www.co.kern.ca.us. Click on Grand Jury for access to the report.
http://www.ridgecrestca.com/newsnow/x1646546359/Grand-Jury-RPD-well-run-organization
Monday, December 6, 2010
Internal Affairs: More trouble for Genghis Dan
Posted: 12/06/2010 07:51:20 AM PST
Updated: 12/06/2010 07:52:00 AM PST
Controversies surrounding
Dan Fenton, the CEO of Team San Jose, just won't go away.
As if two civil grand jury investigations, a default notice filed by San Jose for overspending his budget, an unfavorable report from the city auditor and growing impatience by the City Council with Team San Jose's problems weren't enough, now comes word that Fenton and his group -- which runs the city's convention center and downtown theaters -- may be sued.
Don Lessem, the organizer behind "Genghis Khan: The Exhibition,'' which ran from late May through Nov. 1 at the Tech Museum, said that after weeks of stonewalling by Fenton, he's suing Team San Jose for not paying $170,000 of a $300,000 guarantee the group gave his company verbally and in writing.
Together with a group of Bay Area Mongolian-Americans (Khan, of course, was Mongolian), Lessem plans to hold a news conference Monday morning in front of Team San Jose's downtown headquarters to announce the lawsuit.
"I have offered Dan Fenton, Team San Jose CEO, installment plans, and even to forego additional gift shop sales income due us, simply to make sure they honored their legal commitments. They refuse,'' he wrote Mayor Chuck Reed in a November e-mail.
"I have no option but to sue, to alert other international exhibition organizers, and to take my grievance to the ... media.''
Lessem, who has been in the exhibit business 16 years, called Team San
Advertisement
Jose's behavior "unprecedented.''
In an e-mail to the Mercury News, Fenton characterized the issue as "a disagreement,'' saying "full payment has already been tendered and ... no additional amounts are due."
If all of this seems like a scene from the movie "Groundhog Day,'' you're right.
Last year, Team San Jose attracted widespread industry condemnation after Fenton announced an exclusive agreement with San Jose Teamsters to do work at the convention center that previously had been split with the San Francisco local. His own board was blindsided by the move and subsequent negative headlines.
In fact, San Jose's reputation with convention and trade show groups became so problematic that Fenton and two board members were forced to fly to Dallas to mollify customers and leaders of the Exhibition Services & Contractors Association.
Fenton's national reputation, as one industry leader involved in that brouhaha told IA, is well-known: "Dan Fenton rarely ever says anything officially that you can hold him to."
Internal Affairs is an offbeat look at local politics. This week's items were written by Tracy Seipel, John Woolfolk, Tracey Kaplan and Scott Herhold. Send tips to internalaffairs@mercurynews.com, or call 408-271-3638.
http://www.mercurynews.com/internal-affairs/ci_16765961?nclick_check=1
Updated: 12/06/2010 07:52:00 AM PST
Controversies surrounding
Dan Fenton, the CEO of Team San Jose, just won't go away.
As if two civil grand jury investigations, a default notice filed by San Jose for overspending his budget, an unfavorable report from the city auditor and growing impatience by the City Council with Team San Jose's problems weren't enough, now comes word that Fenton and his group -- which runs the city's convention center and downtown theaters -- may be sued.
Don Lessem, the organizer behind "Genghis Khan: The Exhibition,'' which ran from late May through Nov. 1 at the Tech Museum, said that after weeks of stonewalling by Fenton, he's suing Team San Jose for not paying $170,000 of a $300,000 guarantee the group gave his company verbally and in writing.
Together with a group of Bay Area Mongolian-Americans (Khan, of course, was Mongolian), Lessem plans to hold a news conference Monday morning in front of Team San Jose's downtown headquarters to announce the lawsuit.
"I have offered Dan Fenton, Team San Jose CEO, installment plans, and even to forego additional gift shop sales income due us, simply to make sure they honored their legal commitments. They refuse,'' he wrote Mayor Chuck Reed in a November e-mail.
"I have no option but to sue, to alert other international exhibition organizers, and to take my grievance to the ... media.''
Lessem, who has been in the exhibit business 16 years, called Team San
Advertisement
Jose's behavior "unprecedented.''
In an e-mail to the Mercury News, Fenton characterized the issue as "a disagreement,'' saying "full payment has already been tendered and ... no additional amounts are due."
If all of this seems like a scene from the movie "Groundhog Day,'' you're right.
Last year, Team San Jose attracted widespread industry condemnation after Fenton announced an exclusive agreement with San Jose Teamsters to do work at the convention center that previously had been split with the San Francisco local. His own board was blindsided by the move and subsequent negative headlines.
In fact, San Jose's reputation with convention and trade show groups became so problematic that Fenton and two board members were forced to fly to Dallas to mollify customers and leaders of the Exhibition Services & Contractors Association.
Fenton's national reputation, as one industry leader involved in that brouhaha told IA, is well-known: "Dan Fenton rarely ever says anything officially that you can hold him to."
Internal Affairs is an offbeat look at local politics. This week's items were written by Tracy Seipel, John Woolfolk, Tracey Kaplan and Scott Herhold. Send tips to internalaffairs@mercurynews.com, or call 408-271-3638.
http://www.mercurynews.com/internal-affairs/ci_16765961?nclick_check=1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)