Cotati police concessions could impact other cities

By JEREMY HAY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 3:26 p.m.

In a development likely to frame other law enforcement labor talks, Cotati police have agreed to a two-tier pension system and to begin contributing toward their pension plans and medical benefits.

The agreement, which reduces benefits for future officers, affects only five police officers, five dispatchers and a community service officer in Sonoma County’s smallest city.

But it is certain to be watched closely across the region, both by cities struggling to cut costs and by police and fire unions that fought long and hard to get the most generous pensions in the public sector.

The contract changes pension formulas so that newly hired officers will have to wait to retire until they are 55, when they would qualify for up to 87.5 percent of their salary. Officers can now retire at 50 with up to 90 percent. Similar changes were made for non-sworn police department employees.

The savings won’t be much in the next few years, but “further down the road they are considerable,” said Nick Franceschine, an actuary who owns North Bay Pensions, a retirement plan manager.

The 3-year agreement, signed Wednesday, was welcomed by city officials who, despite the recent passage of a half-cent sales tax measure, are facing a drum-tight budget.

“One of Cotati’s biggest financial challenges has been the increasing cost of employee-compensation packages,” said city manager Dianne Thompson. “Each of these changes is an important step towards the city’s goal of financial sustainability.”

And officials in other cities said the agreement was notable for what the city achieved.

“It’s a significant accomplishment,” said Fran Elm, director of human resources in Santa Rosa, where contract talks with officers start in about a year.

The new contract comes in the context of a furious national debate over public sector benefits.

“This is something they’re really pushing in all parts of the country, with very different degrees of success,” said Andy Merrifield, a political science professor at Sonoma State University.

The concern over benefits has been exacerbated by a severe recession that’s put government budgets under extraordinary pressure. Increasingly, the retirement plans are seen as a key factor undermining the long-term finances of local and state governments.

Defenders argue the benefits are just compensation for public service jobs that traditionally paid less well than private industry and, in the case of public safety workers, are more arduous and risky.

But critics of the benefit plans say they are too generous and a crippling future liability to cities and states trying to maintain services and staffing in the face of shrinking budgets that are unlikely to grow robustly for years.

Oakland police officers this week agreed to pay the full employees share of their pension premiums, equivalent to about 9 percent of pay. The pact also reduces benefits for new hires.

Cotati police representatives noted that last year they took a 14 percent pay cut; under the new contract they will gain it back over three years. And they said the new contract signaled their continued commitment to helping the city regain a sturdy financial footing.

“I think we stepped up to the plate again,” said Officer Chris Kaupe, president of the city’s 11-member police officers association, which also includes dispatchers.

But Kaupe acknowledged that the contract was negotiated against the backdrop of growing public scrutiny of public sector retirement benefits, in particular those for public safety personnel.

“There’s the political and financial environment and the way the public feels about the current retirement system — they want to see change and we are making those changes,” Kaupe said.

The benefits issue was central to the two-month negotiations, he said, and on Wednesday Mayor Robert Coleman-Senghor, in acknowledging the union’s concessions, also implicitly recognized a victory for the city at the bargaining table.

“These concessions were considerably more than many others in the state or the region,” he said.

In Sonoma County the debate over the benefits has been particularly vigorous in Santa Rosa and Rohnert Park, which among the county’s nine cities face perhaps the most pressing budget crises, and where altering public pension plans has been a focus of official’s efforts.

In those cities and others, Cotati’s new contract is more than likely to play a role in labor negotiations down the road.

“It certainly will be used by city managers or their negotiators to say, ‘Look, this can be done, this has been done, be responsible like the Cotati police officers,’” SSU’s Merrifield said. “It will be a tool in the tool box.”

In Santa Rosa, Councilman Gary Wysocky wouldn’t comment on whether the Cotati development would impact future labor negotiations with police officers, but said, “Our executive staff has to lead the way with shared sacrifice.”

Rohnert Park councilman Jake Mackenzie was more direct: “What the Cotati police did has to be on the table.”

Santa Rosa officer injured by bullet fragment in training accident

Published: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 at 3:00 a.m.

A Santa Rosa police officer was accidentally struck Tuesday by a bullet fragment during a training exercise, Marin County sheriff’s officials reported.

The officer was treated for minor injuries at Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital, Sgt. Debra Barry said.

“The officer received the appropriate medical treatment and is doing well,” said Santa Rosa Police Chief Tom Schwedhelm.

Another officer was clearing a round from a .40-caliber firearm at about 4 p.m. when the weapon accidentally fired, Barry said.

The officers were at a training program at the Circle S Ranch and Shooting Range, a 196-acre ranch in western Marin County used by many law enforcement agencies for practice, Barry said.

The bullet shot into a concrete table and broke into fragments, which struck a nearby officer in her leg, hand and face, Barry said. She was airlifted to Memorial Hospital.

The shooting appeared to be an accident and Marin officials had no plans to investigate it further, Barry said.

Marin authorities withheld both officers’ names.

Schwedhelm wouldn’t give further information on how the accident occurred, stating that the incident was an internal personnel matter.

“When an accident occurs, we evaluate that and look at ways of improving the training,” he said.

— Julie Johnson

Youth plan protest of Arizona law
Local activists draw connections to the civil rights movement of the ’60s

By DAN JOHNSON,
ARGUS-COURIER STAFF

Published: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 at 12:37 p.m.

The recent rise in student activism in the Petaluma area, which has been likened to similar activity in the 1960s, is drawing a direct connection to the period as it prepares to protest the immigration bill passed in Arizona and focus on other issues affecting local immigrants, such as driver’s license violations.

Youth from Impact!, a Petaluma-based group, are collaborating with those from Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (Chicano student movement of Aztlan, a group of indigenous peoples of Mexico), a nationwide student organization with several branches in Sonoma County, to organize the “Human Rights Summer.” The name was inspired by the historic Freedom Summer of 1964, which was part of a movement involving some 70,000 students to help end the political disenfranchisement of African-Americans in the Deep South.

Several Petaluma students are affiliated with one or both organizations, which plan to jointly hold a march at 6 p.m. on Thursday, July 29 protesting the enactment of Arizona’s immigration bill; have house meetings in Petaluma and other county locations to discuss immigration; help to introduce resolutions in local cities that express opposition to the bill and support for human rights; and reach out to businesses to encourage a boycott of Arizona products.

“The civil rights marches of the 1960s were on television, and the whole world knew about them. But now, with immigration, there is all this rhetoric, and the people who are directly affected by the issues are being dehumanized,” said Sabina Ahmed, an active member of Impact! and 2008 graduate of Casa Grande High School who is now attending Santa Rosa Junior College.

“So much is missing from the picture. Immigrants are being viewed as criminals. Many people don’t understand their needs, and that they’re human beings, too,” added Ahmed, a native of Mexico and daughter of a Pakistani father and Guatemalan mother.

The Arizona law, SB 1070, is described by both proponents and opponents as the broadest and strictest immigration measure in several generations. It makes failure to carry immigration documents a crime and gives police the broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the United States illegally.

Some critics regard the bill as an open invitation for discrimination and harassment against Latinos, regardless of their immigration status.

David Valdez, a student at Santa Rosa Junior College’s Petaluma and Santa Rosa campuses who is a member of MEChA, is concerned that the law could be a foreshadowing of additional problematic things to come for Latinos.

“During the 1960s, many positive things started happening. Schools added ethnic studies classes, such as Chicano and Latino studies, and more bilingual teachers,” Valdez said. “The movement going on in Arizona is a major threat to what was won in the 1960s. Everything that past generations fought for is in danger of being flushed down the drain.

“We need to fight to maintain these things.”

Impact! traces its lineage back to the People’s Revolutionary Organization, formed in 2005, and United Resistance, created in 2006. Impact! is an independent, all-volunteer organization that works for social justice, primarily on the issues of police accountability, and immigrants’ and employees’ rights. Through youth leadership development, as well as community building, grassroots organizing, solidarity and direct action, Impact! seeks to build a radical movement for social change.

About 30 youth are affiliated with Impact!, and 10 to 15 of them are more substantially involved, Ahmed said.

MEChA was created in 1969 by a coalition of groups advocating civil rights for people of Mexican descent. It has several branches in its Redwood Coast de Aztlan MEChA Central region, including branches at Casa Grande and Petaluma high schools, and Santa Rosa Junior College.

Recent immigration issues have rejuvenated interest in the student organization, which emphasizes the importance of political involvement and education as avenues for social change.

(Contact Dan Johnson at dan.johnson@arguscourier.com)

Surprise farewell for retiring SRJC chief

Published: Thursday, July 29, 2010 at 6:14 p.m.

A man who’s worked as a police chief for 34 years figures life doesn’t hold many more surprises.

And yet, Terry Stewart was pleasantly stunned Thursday afternoon when he walked out of the Santa Rosa Junior College District Police office for his last time as chief.

Several officers switched on the Code 3 lights on their patrol cars and about a dozen SRJC Police cadets stood shoulder-to-shoulder and applauded their primary mentor.

“That’s the whole reason I came to the JC, to teach those kids,” said Stewart. “I’ve taught about 1,000 of them.”

His former students include several current chiefs of police, among them Sebastopol’s Jeff Weaver and Petaluma’s Dan Fish.

Though he’s retiring from SRJC’s police department, Stewart isn’t ready to stop instructing potential peace officers. When the fall semester begins he’ll teach a beginning criminal-justice class.

But first, Sonoma County’s longest-serving police chief will take a bit of vacation.

– Chris Smith

Ex-Santa Rosa police captain must pay legal costs
Second-in-command fired in ’08 amid discrimination claims vows to appeal judge’s ruling

By LORI A. CARTER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Friday, July 30, 2010 at 4:03 a.m.

A judge has ordered a former Santa Rosa police captain to pay $32,000 in sanctions to the city for its costs to defend his wrongful termination lawsuit, but the amount is only a third of what the city sought.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, in a July 12 ruling, ordered Jamie Mitchel or his attorney to pay $31,600 to Santa Rosa. The city wanted $108,700.

In April, Illston dismissed Mitchel’s complaint, which argued that he was fired illegally because the city wanted to appease several police department employees who had complained about discriminatory treatment under former Chief Ed Flint and Mitchel, his second-in-command.

Mitchel was fired in 2008, and Flint was forced out by the former city manager. The city has spent about $1 million to get rid of the police managers, buy out the complainants and pay for additional training within the department to correct internal problems. Exact figures were unavailable this week.

Mitchel said this week he will appeal the sanctions payment, which is due by mid-September and payable by him or his lawyer, Scott Lewis of Santa Rosa. “You bet I’m going to appeal,” he said. “I’ll go to the Supreme Court. This issue is bigger than Jamie Mitchel. It’s now an erosion of the Peace Officer Bill Of Rights.”

City Attorney Caroline Fowler was on vacation and unavailable for comment.

Mitchel, 55, has argued that his rights were violated, he was discriminated against because he is a white man and that his arbitration hearing was improperly handled.

The city paid the six complainants a total of more than $120,000 to resolve their grievances, which included complaints alleging gender discrimination, harassment and retaliation by Flint. All four complaints named Flint, and two named Mitchel.

No lawsuits were filed by the employees, some of whom no longer work for the city.

After parts of Mitchel’s suit were dismissed last year, Illston tossed out the remainder this spring. The city sought sanctions against Mitchel and his attorney for what it argued were frivolous claims.

City-paid lawyers submitted paperwork seeking more than $108,700 in legal fees, including rates ranging from $421 an hour for the lead attorney to $136 an hour for a paralegal.

The judge ruled only costs incurred to fight the most recent amended complaint, filed in February, were recoverable, about a third of the total.

Mitchel’s attorney filed an appeal, which will move the case to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal for further briefing and a hearing. It was unclear whether the order to pay the city’s costs would be stayed pending the appeal.

Staff Writer Lori A. Carter can be reached at 762-7297 or lori.carter@pressdemocrat.com.

Clash over checkpoints
Activists decry impound policy at DUI checkpoints, say illegal immigrants face undue hardship

By MARTIN ESPINOZA
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Saturday, July 31, 2010 at 3:00 a.m.

Standing on the side of Old Redwood Highway, just south of Jay Palm’s saddle shop in Penngrove, a Latina held up a colorful sign with the word “Reten” written twice. About 500 yards down the road, local attorney Alicia Roman held up a similar sign.

For Spanish-speaking illegal immigrants, the meaning — “checkpoint” — was clear that Friday evening.

Some took heed and quickly turned off at Goodwin Avenue. Those who ignored the warning, or did not understand it, suddenly found themselves amid a sea of orange cones as Petaluma police officers slowed traffic and guided drivers through a stop aimed at nabbing drunken drivers, unlicensed drivers and those with suspended licenses.

One Petaluma woman, an illegal immigrant without a license, was pulled over and lost her husband’s ’98 Mustang convertible to a 30-day impound. Late for her job as a cleaner at the nearby shopping center, she walked toward North McDowell Boulevard, talking to her husband on her cell phone.

“I feel horrible,” she said, speaking in Spanish as she walked, hauling her son’s car safety seat.

“I’ve heard about these things, but I never imagined it would happen,” said the woman, who asked that her name not be used. “I need to work and I can’t get a driver’s license.”

She was one of four drivers that night whose cars were impounded for license infractions. They were snared in a state-funded program that has developed into a high-profile crackdown with two aims: Take drunken drivers off the road and enforce state law requiring drivers to have a license.

For every one DUI arrest made at a Petaluma checkpoint in the past five years, four people were cited or arrested for driving without a license.

Even as a tow truck hitched up the Mustang, an untold number of illegal immigrants successfully avoided the checkpoint in what has become a sort of cat-and-mouse game that pits traffic safety efforts with local immigrant-rights activists.

State officials say that what’s driving the $14 million that goes toward funding traffic safety checkpoints in California is a dramatic, 20 percent decline in “alcohol-impaired” deaths, from 1,298 in 2005 to 1,029 in 2008.

Immigrant-rights advocates like Roman, a Santa Rosa lawyer, focus on the economic and emotional hardship immigrant families suddenly face when their car is confiscated. The cost of recovering a car after 30 days can reach up to $2,000, a figure that includes a $50-a-day storage fee at a local tow yard, a towing fee and a police administrative fee.

“It’s just not right for police to impound cars of non-drunken drivers for 30 days,” Roman said. “Especially when they are allowing drunken drivers to pick up their cars the very next day.”

Preventing accidents

But Petaluma Police Sgt. Ken Savano, coordinator of the “Avoid the 13” Sonoma County DUI Task Force, which represents 13 law enforcement agencies in the county, says the checkpoints are first and foremost about traffic safety. He points to traffic safety studies that show that unlicensed drivers and those who drive with suspended or revoked licenses cause a disproportionate number of accidents.

“Traffic safety is saving lives and preventing injuries, and one of the tools that we have is to enforce the laws that the people have enacted that are designed to improve safety,” said Savano.

Late last year, the California Office of Traffic Safety dubbed 2010 “The Year of the Checkpoint,” alerting California drivers of record funding for checkpoint campaigns throughout the state, from $5 million in 2009 to $8 million this year.

The Petaluma Police Department, which last year became the county’s coordinator of state-funded “Avoid” checkpoints, has been involved in 15 checkpoints so far this year. Two more are planned in Sonoma and Cloverdale before Labor Day, and another two are scheduled for the Christmas and New Year’s holidays.

Since May 2005, Petaluma has staged 70 checkpoints, screening about 64,500 vehicles, conducting 2,027 field sobriety tests and arresting a total of 742 people. Of these arrests and citations, 111 have been for drunken driving, 134 for driving on a suspended license and 418 for driving without a license. There also have been 21 arrests for drug offenses and 30 arrests for other violations.

Checkpoints as deterrent

Chris Cochran, a state traffic safety office spokesman, said sobriety checkpoints nab fewer drunken drivers than so-called “saturation patrols,” where police units target specific roads to identify and arrest impaired drivers.

However, the checkpoints send a much stronger and visible message, one that is highly publicized, beginning with a press release from the local police department.

“You want there to be a large deterrent,” said Cochran.

New technologies have helped get out the word. When a checkpoint is encountered, he said, word of the operation spreads fast, via cell phone calls, Twitter messages and text messages.

“This is all fine with us,” Cochran said. “We want more and more people to know about them.”

“Those people who may have contemplated going out and drinking, they will be more likely to arrange for a designated driver or a cab or some way of getting around,” he said.

Two checkpoints on July 23 in Petaluma netted three suspected drunken drivers, one with an blood-alcohol level three times the legal limit.

The early checkpoint on Old Redwood Highway near North McDowell Boulevard was held between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. and coincided with the happy-hour bar crowd.

The second was staged on Petaluma Boulevard North, near Gossage Avenue, between 11 p.m. and 2 a.m., and was aimed at late-night downtown bar-goers.

At the Old Redwood Highway checkpoint, motorcycle patrol officers kept a lookout for drivers who turned off the street. Savano said avoiding a checkpoint is illegal if the driver commits a traffic violation in the process, such as an illegal U-turn.

Fear of deportation

One driver, another illegal immigrant who asked that his name not be used for fear of deportation, drove through the checkpoint early in the evening and lost a 2000 Mercury Cougar to a 30-day impound.

The man, who works as a ranch hand, never strayed far from the checkpoint after losing his car. Something was troubling him, he later admitted. Several family members joined him on the sidewalk, waiting to talk to Savano.

The man asked why his citation called for an appearance in Sonoma County Superior Court, rather than traffic court. He wanted to know if immigration enforcement officials would be there waiting for him.

“Immigration is not going to deport you for driving without a license,” Savano said, adding later than he recognized the man’s fear.

“I feel bad about the financial impact,” Savano said in a follow-up interview last week. “But our fundamental duty is public safety.”

Immigration advocates call for the use of greater discretion in the 30-day impound rule.

Roman, who represents local tenants in eviction cases, is one of the main organizers of the checkpoint protests. Since last year, the loose-knit group of activists have mobilized up to 10 people for a checkpoint operation, she said.

She acknowledged that a possible fallout from warning Spanish-speaking drivers about the checkpoints is that a drunken driver could be tipped off, avoid the checkpoint and later cause an accident.

She said the signs used to be in both English and Spanish, but the group narrowed them down to Spanish to minimize the possibility of aiding drunken drivers avoid the checkpoints.

“That would be terrible,” Roman said. “I can’t say that there’s not going to be a Latino that’s not going to see our signs and drive drunk. ... I’m out here trying to help the families of the poor. The majority of the people at this time, it’s people coming home from work.”

Impound discretion

She said the police have a choice: “You don’t have to impound cars.”

Cochran said state law does give local law enforcement officials the discretion to avoid the 30-day impound rule for driver’s license violations.

“Some jurisdictions say, ‘I’ll give you 20 minutes to get a licensed driver to come here.’ That’s a local policy call which may or may not be actionable in court.”

But he added that such a call is “much more the exception than the rule” for the more than 470 law enforcement agencies in the state.

Savano said jurisdictions that enforce the 30-day impound law are “clearly concerned with improving traffic safety.” He said the intent of the legislature when it enacted the rule was to remove the vehicle from the drivers who statistically had been shown to cause anywhere from four to five times as many crashes as licensed drivers.

Savano said the primary concern of enforcement officers is applying traffic laws equally.

“If we were to suddenly change our policy to allow certain unlicensed drivers some different opportunity or policy, how then do we stay fair and impartial to other people who are caught or stopped for driving without a license?” he asked.

Last Tuesday, four days after the ranch hand lost his car, the man, his wife, a daughter and a friend visited the Petaluma police station to try to get his car out of the impound lot. The car, which was being held in the Petaluma Towing yard at 1800 Petaluma Boulevard, had already racked up hundreds of dollars in storage and tow fees.

Tow hearings are held at the police station between noon and 2 p.m. on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Aside from a $140 administrative tow fee, Petaluma Towing charges a $186 tow fee and a $50-a-day storage fee. The administrative tow fee is authorized by the state and allows the city to recover costs associated with the storage and impound of the vehicle.

The man said he desperately wanted to get the Mercury Cougar out of impound so that he could sell it and keep his financial loss to a minimum. He said he figured he could get $4,000 for the car, though he would have to pay about $2,000 in impound costs after 30 days.

Amalia Greenberg Delgado, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, said the practice of impounding vehicles for 30 days where a traffic safety issue does not exist may violate some drivers’ Fourth Amendment rights, which limit the forfeiture of property without due process.

“The 30-day impound is discretionary,” she said.

Local law enforcement officials said the checkpoints will continue because they have been effective at raising public awareness about important traffic safety issues.

As a line of cars drove through the recent Old Redwood Highway checkpoint, Savano pointed out that there were a total of 608 DUI arrests in Petaluma last year.

Since 2005, DUI arrests are up 80percent, from 334 to 608, he said, and alcohol-related collisions have declined by 20 percent.

“Arrests are up, crashes are down,” Savano said. “But the most significant statistic is that nobody died from an alcohol-related collision in Petaluma in 2009, and so far the same is true in 2010.”

Petaluma checkpoints net 3 DUI suspects

By MARTIN ESPINOZA
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Saturday, July 24, 2010 at 9:59 a.m.

Petaluma police arrested and cited 10 drivers during two DUI and driver’s license checkpoints Friday night. Three of the arrests were for drunk driving.

The first checkpoint was staged on Old Redwood Highway near the North McDowell Extension between 6 and 9 p.m., and the second was held from 11 p.m. until 2 a.m. on Petaluma Boulevard North near Gossage Avenue.

The stops are part of a series of at least 10 checkpoints, held mostly on weekends in Santa Rosa, Petaluma and Cotati, since March.

Of the 1,534 vehicles that passed through the two checkpoints, 1,494 were screened by officers for signs of DUI and driver’s license violations. Sixty-nine drivers were directed to nearby parking areas for further evaluation.

In addition to the three arrested for DUI, one driver was arrested for driving on a suspended license and three others were arrested for driving without having been issued a license. One person was cited for having an expired driver’s license and another person was arrested for an outstanding stolen vehicle warrant. One person was arrested for possession of marijuana in his car.

In the most serious DUI arrest, police reported that Shawn Kristoffer Cahoon, 34, of Rohnert Park entered the first checkpoint at about 6:28 p.m. with a blood alcohol level almost three times the legal limit.

Officers screening drivers detected the odor of alcohol and Cahoon displayed signs of intoxication, police said.

He was on probation for a previous DUI in February 2008. The terms of his probation require that he not drive a vehicle with alcohol in his blood and that he not refuse to take a blood alcohol test. Cahoon refused to take a chemical test and was booked into Sonoma County Jail for violating probation, officials said. His bail was set at $10,000.

A total of seven vehicles were towed and four were impounded for 30 days because the drivers either did not have a driver’s license or were driving on a suspended license.

The 30-day impound rule often affects illegal immigrants because California law does not allow them to obtain a state driver’s license.

As in previous checkpoints, about a half-dozen activists stationed themselves ahead of the police stop point. They warned drivers by holding signs that read, “Reten, Reten,” which is the Spanish word for checkpoint.

The program, funded through a state grant, involves 13 law enforcement agencies in Sonoma County and is coordinated by the Petaluma Police Department.

Rohnert Park fire commander says agency is in disarray

By JEREMY HAY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Monday, July 26, 2010 at 6:01 p.m.

The Rohnert Park Public Safety Department is in disarray, its fire division commander said Monday.

The division lacks support from managers and the City Council, it is hampered by senior officers resistant to change, and it is beset by low morale, Fire Commander Jack Rosevear said.

“The department’s in crisis,” said Rosevear, who took over the fire division in June 2008 and plans to run for City Council this year. “I’m not exaggerating. It’s not a matter of perspective, it’s the truth.”

Rosevear, who has said he will retire in August partly to save the jobs of younger firefighters facing potential layoffs, made his concerns known in an unusually public manner, delivering a statement to The Press Democrat and the weekly Community Voice newspaper.

He said his motive is to shed light on problems within the department — which provides both police and fire services — and lay the groundwork for necessary improvements.

“I’m not after payback, retribution, vengeance, anything like that. I’m after success,” he said.

City officials unanimously rejected the substance of Rosevear’s concerns, but were varied in their reactions, expressing responses ranging from irritation to bewilderment to praise of his performance.

“This is all a personnel issue that he’s putting in public,” said Mayor Pam Stafford. “This council doesn’t deal with disgruntled employees, that’s not our purview.”

Public Safety Director Brian Masterson, Rosevear’s boss, said, “Jack did a good job for us…he made some positive changes and I would say he was supported by all the members of public safety.”

He added: “I’m a big believer that people have the right to express their opinions however they want to do it and certainly Jack has voiced his.”

Vice-Mayor Gina Belforte said, “I can honestly say I don’t know what he’s talking about…I haven’t had any reason to believe there’s been a problem with fire.”

In his statement, Rosevear said the city’s firefighters and police officers are “the finest and most courageous” he’s ever worked with, then laid out a blistering catalogue of charges. They include:

– “A small group of senior police officers” have tried to undermine him through a steady whispering campaign because they resent changes he made that reduced their overtime;

– City leaders and Masterson prioritize police services over fire services;

– Budget-related decisions or proposals — particularly related to layoffs — made by city leaders and supported by Masterson have contributed to low morale within the division.

Rosevear said younger firefighters have left or are planning to leave the department because they fear being laid off. And he said he was told twice since June 2009 that he would be laid off, which firefighters opposed because they thought it would hurt the division.

He said Masterson supported that proposal by then-City Manager Dan Schwarz, illustrating how police services are favored over fire services.

“At Rohnert Park, law enforcement is the dominant arm. Everything comes secondary to that, including fire,” Rosevear said. “So if there are decisions to be made, law enforcement staffing would be weighed first before fire.”

Masterson disputed that on several counts.

“I didn’t support laying off anybody,” he stated, while also saying that layoffs were an understandable recourse for a city teetering on bankruptcy.

Masterson said he transferred police officers to the fire division in early 2009, a plan implemented with Rosevear’s support. Since then, more police officers have been laid off than firefighters, he said.

“We’re not in a crisis,” Masterson said. “We were in a state of flux last year because we weren’t sure what was going to happen. It was stressful for everyone.”

Asked whether Rosevear’s statements surprised her, Stafford suggested the fire commander was playing politics.

“You know, he’s running for City Council, of course,” said Stafford, who is running for re-election.

“If there was not a council seat open I would be speaking out in this same manner,” Rosevear said. “I’m only running because I see a pending disaster, and I have been personally caught up in the disaster as an employee and as a resident.”

Stafford said Rosevear is alone in his concerns.

“Personally, I don’t think his position reflects the department, I think it reflects him,” she said.

Please read the following statement from our board member Elbert “Big Man” Howard on the Arizona law.

New Immigration Law: Capitalism & Immigration = Fascism
By Elbert “Big Man” Howard

Arizona’s newly-passed law, SB 1070, firstly, allows police officers to subjectively determine what race they think a person is along with how poorly a command of the English language they believe the person has.

Secondly, this law allows these law enforcement officers at will, based on these racist methods, to stop, detain, harass, question, demand identification, and then decide whether or not the person is in the USA illegally.

The state “bosses” and institutions who control the police have decided it is now perfectly legal to completely ignore a person’s constitutional and human rights by taking into account such racist nonsense as a person’s skin color, type of clothing worn, and even the number of people in a car.
According to this law, the police can now legally harass day laborers and the people who seek to hire them.

This is legalized racial profiling of Latinos as well as African Americans and these violations of human rights have been included in Arizona’s state police training materials and these enforcement guidelines will be distributed to 15,000 Arizona state officers when SB 1070 is set to become absolute law effective July 29th, 2010.

The weak-kneed Obama administration, which spit out lip service concerning immigration reform so as to get the Latino vote, now has abandoned and turned its back on these people and abandoned them. This is no different than the practice of previous administrations which did the exact same thing to African Americans seeking voting, civil and human rights.

Once again, we are faced with a Federal and State government political football game – a dangerous, expensive game costing not only money (“our tax dollars at work!”) but one which threatens massive civil unrest and invites violence.

What these appointed governmental “bosses” most worry about is losing their jobs (licenses to steal from the people) and they understand that by implementing these vicious and racist practices, thereby satiating the fearful elite in Arizona, they may be able to stay in office a little longer.

This reign of terror that is being imposed on the Hispanic and African American communities can be turned in the other direction, against these fearful, racist law-makers (AKA law-breakers).
HOW?
ORGANIZE!
DOOR TO DOOR, STREET TO STREET, BLOCK TO BLOCK!
Everyone able to vote must register and then vote to remove those who create these laws, who practice racism, and who are trying to deprive people of their constitutional and human rights.
We must remove those who refuse to serve the needs and desires of all in our communities.

To achieve this, we must join in solidarity with all our brothers and sisters of all ages, across all ethnic, racial, and gender lines. We must all speak out, loudly and clearly, and let our so-called leaders know that we will not stand idly by, and they will not be re-elected, as long as racist laws like these are allowed to be put into practice.

Solidarity is the key to unity, and in unity there is power.

Power to the People.

Elbert “Big Man” Howard
Forestville, California
July 12th, 2010