Showing posts with label LA County Sheriff's Department (LASD). Show all posts
Showing posts with label LA County Sheriff's Department (LASD). Show all posts

January 28, 2009

Suspect impersonating Sherriffs?

This is a bad start to the new year, just yesterday there was a horrible home invasion robbery. And today was the state of the city address. (No doubt there were a number of Sheriff's over there for a free lunch as opposed to patrolling) Hopefully this offender is not a repeat offender. This story as written below also does not make sense as they noted that he presented himself as a police officer (Sheriff maybe?) but then below they note "He was wearing a gray sweat shirt with red writing and black sweat pants with white stripes down the sides." How do you pull off being an officer dressed like that. Something is not right here. Also lets hope that this is not a real cop. Finally there is not much hope of catching this guy if we leave it up to "CSI" Lakewood Sheriffs.

Fake Cop Rapes, Kidnaps Girl, 14, In Lakewood

Sheriff's deputies Tuesday asked for the public's help in finding a man dressed up as a police officer before raping and kidnapping a 14-year-old girl in Lakewood.

The man shined a flashlight at two girls and presented himself as a police officer as he got out of a sport utility vehicle Friday at about 8:45 p.m. in the 12000 block of Gradwell Street, near Hawaiian Gardens, according to Los Angeles County sheriff's Lt. Al Garcia.

The suspect then punched one girl, who fell to the ground, as the man grabbed the other girl, forcing her into his vehicle, Garcia said.

He drove north on Claretta Avenue, then raped the girl before dropping her off near where he first grabbed her, Garcia said.

The man was described as white, 20 to 30 years old, bald, about 5 feet 10 inches tall and weighing 200 pounds. He was wearing a gray sweat shirt with red writing and black sweat pants with white stripes down the sides.

He was driving a white, four-door older sport utility vehicle with tinted rear windows.

Investigators asked anyone with information on the case to call the Special Victims Bureau at (866) 247-5877.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

January 27, 2009

Another home invasion robbery

If more than a few of these occur we are going to be concerned. We also suspect many of these are not reported in the media. This is a story we did last year on another one. We will see if this shows up on the new crime reports page This home invasion is near Norwalk Blvd and Del Amo.

From wire services
Posted: 01/27/2009 06:44:16 AM PST

LAKEWOOD - Four armed bandits staged a home invasion robbery in Lakewood today, reportedly taking some $5,000 in cash and several other items.

The robbery occurred in the 20800 block of Belshire Avenue near 207th Street about 1:30 a.m., said Lt. Minh Dinh of the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department's Lakewood Station.

Armed with handguns, the four bandits tied up the home's occupants before fleeing with four I-phones, $5,000 in cash, some wallets and keys, and other miscellaneous items, deputies told an On Scene Video camera crew at the robbery scene.

Dinh said the holdup was under investigation and that detectives were interviewing the victims.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

January 11, 2009

CrimeReports.com..first impressions

Leave it to the City of Lakewood to make sure its citizens are the last to know about new developments that really affect them. We noticed over on www.LBReport.com that LBPD unveiled a third party crime stats website that looks pretty good so far. It is called CrimeReports.com. Users can log in to receive customized crime reports and set up an auto emailed report telling them crimes that have been reported with a certain distance from their selected address. Clearly it took some real private sector brains and capital to put this together using raw data supplied by a number of local agencies, including LASD and LBPD. LAAG has been requesting this type of site from the city for some time. It looks like this was a joint effort by multiple cities and agencies but for some unknown reason Lakewood did not want to tell its residents about the service. Nothing on Lakewood's website as of today nor any emails from the city on this new site. Of course we saw no mention of the site on the LASD.org site either which is not really surprising as the LASD.org site wins the prize for the poorest design, poorest user friendly navigation and poorest up to date information of any law enforcement agency of that size (8,000 officers and counting). Given that this CrimeReports.com site was given information by most if not all LASD contract cities, you would have thought that they would have wanted to get the word out. The CrimeReports.com site appears to have data all the way back to July 1, 2008, however we are still trying to determine when the site went live for Lakewood residents to use.

Here are things we like from what we can see so far:

* alerts can be set up and emailed to you;
* it is multi jurisdictional so that you can see crime occurring just over the city border and how your city fares compared to other cities and neighborhoods;
* it seems to be fairly up to date showing crime occurring in the current day; this will likely vary depending on when the LASD releases crime data and when the site owner updates the map; this is likely an automated schedule;
* it is Google maps based so its user friendly;
* it includes registered sex offender information and a fairly good selection of crimes;
* users can drill down by crime, location and time;

Limitations or areas requiring further study or refinement:

* Not clear on how many total days the crime info is kept in the system in a viewable way;
* Not clear how to get printable reports (as opposed to mapped reports);
* Not clear how information gets into this site or its accuracy;
* Clearly this is reported or officer observed crimes but does not report all call data where a report was not generated;
* Not clear what crimes are not on the report, such as quality of life issues i.e. noise complaints, fireworks, parking issues;
* Not clear how far back the data goes or how long it will be available on the site;
* Not clear what this is costing Lakewood taxpayers or if it is included in the LASD $9 million a year contract cost to Lakewood. From the CrimeReports.com website they report the following monthly fees:

For Universities $49/month
Up to 50K citizens $99/month
Over 50K citizens $199/month (likely Lakewood so $2400 per year)

"Custom pricing applies to agencies serving contract jurisdictions. Please contact us for additional information"

If all this costs is 2400 a year its a good deal as that is about what one day of vacation time costs the city for one LASD deputy!!

Once we work with the site in more detail we will report further. Once you have used the site please give LAAG your feed back on this crime site at updates@LAAG.us

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

December 17, 2008

LAAG's reply to the City's comments in the Press Telegram 12-15-08

Most of our loyal readers (and many new ones) saw the 12/15/08 Press Telegram feature written about our site. Of course the city of Lakewood was queried about the site. LAAG wanted an opportunity to address some of the comments made by Councilman Rogers in the article. And of course as we have many times before, we offer the city space on our pages to offer rebuttals to what they feel is inaccurate on our site. To date the city has not taken us up on that offer.

With respect to the March 2009 city council election candidate filing dates not being not well publicized, on that issue, Councilman (excuse me, vice mayor) Todd Rogers says there was an announcement about incumbents seeking re-election on the front page of the Lakewood Community, a Chamber of Commerce Publication that goes to every home in the city. "It clearly told everybody in town that there was an election," Rogers said.

We found the November 2008 issue of the Lakewood Chamber of Commerce newspaper. (we are not sure of the date when it was actually distributed) Again this is the paper that most people throw directly into the trash after it sits on their lawn for a few days. Each month it has a puff piece written by the "mayor" (or likely some ghost writer) or some other councilperson talking about some "issue" (a real or fake one). In November one small article was about how the three incumbents were "kicking off" their March 2009 re-election "campaigns" with a 100 person dinner (wonder who paid for that?) at city hall (attended by you guessed it all the politicos and fireworks sellers that would have been voting for them in March 2009, along with our special friend Sheriff Baca!) NO WHERE in the article did it mention any deadlines for nominations or anything about that rather complicated process whatsoever. The Press Telegram ran no story at all (as they had no reporter for Lakewood at the time) nor was there any hint of a deadline on the city website. Why? Well if you are running for re-election the last thing you want to do is call a deadline to the attention of your potential opponents (like LAAG did) So yes there was hint of an "election" in the air, but as we said the city did everything it could to "hide" the nomination deadline to insure the three candidates would be a shoe in. And it worked.

Rogers, stated in the article that "city government is 'open', despite some of the assertions he has read [on LAAG]" and that "The city of Lakewood doesn't do anything in secret...". Well if hidden in the clerks office is your definition of open then I guess it is "open" (but only from 9-5 pm) But most folks dont walk into city hall every day for their news. They read news papers and now the web. So if you dont want people to know something just post it on a bulletin board in the clerks office. How many of you have read the bulletin board in the clerks office in the last year? LAAG believes in transparency in government as its our money they are wasting. "...Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants..." [Justice Louis D. Brandeis] We have a whole section devoted to government transparency. The reason governments dont want to post too much on the web is that people might actually see it, copy it (like LAAG) and start asking questions which politicians find "hard to answer". I think Long Beach Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske agrees.

Rogers also stated in the article that what the city does is "...based on the surveys and feedback we get from the community..." Well I saw two surveys on the Lakewood website and only very brief summaries at that with no specific questions asked. The last survey date we saw was 2006. LAAG plans to do some surveys as well and you can be sure when we do we will post them. The point being that only about 2,700 people vote in city council elections out of 80,000 residents. So how many of those polled do you really think are clued in about specific problems in the city?

As Campbell Brown recently said on CNN.com: "It goes without saying, the media is annoying. It is the media's job to be annoying. Especially those members of the media assigned to cover the president. Or in this case the president-elect. Their role is not to support [the City council] President-elect Barack Obama, but to challenge him, to do their best to hold him accountable."

If you want to read cheerleader "puff pieces" about the City and the City Council then read the city's website or those from the Lakewood Chamber of Commerce "throw away" "news"paper that comes out once a month. There are plenty of places to find that kind of news. Not here.

We don't think Lakewood is a bad city nor the city council the worst. There are much worse. But there are much better too. We need to strive for improvement. We think this site is one way of encouraging change by trying to make the city more "transparent" or calling foul when everyone else is too afraid to or have given up on dealing with city hall as it is. And who could blame them.

Mr Rogers concluding dismissive comments about LAAG in the Press Telegram article: "...[LAAG's] views are out of sync with the majority of residents. As an example, he cited [LAAG's] suggestion at a City Council meeting to look into the possibility of creating a city police department.." Well again you have to realize that Rogers is a sheriff captain (top person in the substation) in Carson and it sends shivers down his spine when you dare to criticise the sacred cow that signs his paychecks. The point LAAG was making (the context of which is when LASD totally dropped the ball on the Dunrobin explosion in March 2006 by its own admission) was that the city just accepted what the LASD fed them. It was the city council that had to hold the LASD accountable. It clearly had not and LAAG felt that the reason was that the LASD offered Lakewood its services on a "take it or leave it basis" and to get some competition on LASD's 9 million a year contract the city should get bids from other police agencies that offer contract law enforcement. Of course carving out a piece of LASD "territory" would be about as likely as Rogers "Lakewood school district" fantasy becoming a reality. Talk about out of sync.

We agree that LAAG is out of sync with the status quo and we aren't going to change one bit!

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

December 10, 2008

Sheriff Baca road trip to the Inauguration

I really hope Sheriff Baca is kidding. Really the best thing we could have happen is Obama appointing a new Sheriff for LA County that actually has some intelligence. When you read this story below think to yourself..how is it that you (not me) voted for this guy. Does he not think anything through? I suppose next he will offer to have then all drive new hybrid LASD cars (at taxpayer expense) and five days salary (with rolling road closures for them of course) just like the recent PR stunt by the auto execs driving to Washington DC. Lets call this for what it is Baca. The 347 deputies won the lottery in the Dept. for going back to get front row seats at the hottest event this year. And where will they sleep? All the hotels are booked. I suppose we can rent 5 floors at the Ritz Carlton DC at taxpayer expense. And I am sure Baca himself will not miss it! Cant wait to see that expense report. Then I read things like this and realize this whole scheme probably seems rational to Baca.

L.A. County sheriff's plan to send deputies to inauguration is questioned
Baca wants to fly 347 deputies back east. But some officials wonder if the cost will be too high and if the deputies aren't needed in the county.

By Molly Hennessy-Fiske and Richard Winton

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sheriff10-2008dec10,0,100128,full.story
From the Los Angeles Times

December 10, 2008

The request was straightforward, even flattering. Send a few hundred Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies across the country next month to assist Washington, D.C., police at the presidential inauguration.

It's the price tag of $1.6 million -- with as much as $1 million coming from the county -- that has given some top officials indigestion.

"We're not in a position to police other cities, as worthy as this is," Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said Tuesday. "This is not an emergency. This is not Katrina, this is not a hurricane or a natural disaster."

Sheriff Lee Baca, in a letter dated Tuesday, asked county supervisors to approve plans to charter a plane and fly 347 deputies to Washington, where they would work for four days. A decision was postponed until next week's meeting.

At issue is who will ultimately pay for what.

Everyone agrees that Washington police would pick up the tab for $533,000 in airfare and $97,000 in per diem expenses, but that amount accounts for only a portion of the costs.

County officials estimate that they would be on the hook for another $905,000 in salary and benefits. In addition, there is $81,000 in needed "cold weather gear" including jackets, gloves, hats and "turtleneck dickies," at a cost of $232 per deputy. (LAAG: I guess we have to buy them little mittens too as they dont have any. give me a break)

Baca said Tuesday that concern about repayment is "much ado about nothing." (LAAG: yes as anything taxpayers say is trivial)

"The reality is the county will pay nothing for this," he said, adding that the questions raised about costs are coming as he is still in negotiations with Washington police and the inaugural committee.

Baca said that providing mutual aid was good policy, adding that earthquake-prone Los Angeles may one day need the favor returned.

Baca's spokesman, Steve Whitmore, said Tuesday that although D.C. police requested several hundred deputies, so far they have offered to reimburse the salaries of only 40.

The Sheriff's Department agreed to foot the cost of winter weather gear because it will be used again by deputies working in colder parts of the county, Whitmore said. (LAAG: so they dont have their own jackets...never had cold weather in CA efore this)

"What the sheriff has said is the department is willing to provide the deputies requested, but they will have to pay all of their salaries," Whitmore said. Some 64 deputies worked the 2004 Bush inaugural, with the costs reimbursed by the Washington, D.C., Metro Police Department.

Even if the entire cost of the trip is covered, Yaroslavsky and Supervisor Michael Antonovich said they would have trouble approving it.

"The sheriff's first responsibility is to the citizens of Los Angeles County, to ensure that we have adequate protection at any time of day," Antonovich said. "If they need additional personnel on the East Coast, then they need to utilize personnel on the East Coast." (LAAG: Uh yeah..brilliant..lets not fly 3500 miles to help when people 50 miles away can help..)

Another concern -- despite assurances from the sheriff that those sent would come from "non-emergency" positions -- is whether the county would incur additional overtime costs for deputies needed to backfill for those in Washington. (LAAG: Since when does the Sheriff Dept. worry about overtime...how do you expect Deputies to buy those new boats they need)

"We have a fiscal crisis on our hands and an even worse one looming on the horizon. Our job is to husband our resources," Yaroslavsky said.

It was unclear Tuesday whether there were enough votes on the five-member board to permit the plan to go forward when it comes up again next week.

Supervisor Gloria Molina declined to comment on the matter through a spokeswoman. A spokesman for Supervisor Don Knabe said his boss was undecided, as was Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas.

"There are clearly pros and cons to doing so," Ridley-Thomas said. "The question in the final analysis is whether the sheriff and other proponents can persuade the board that this is a defensible thing to do."

The call for help went out weeks ago, said Traci Hughes of the Washington, D.C., police.

"We are expecting historical crowd numbers and there are numerous [inaugural] ball sites" that have to be secured, Hughes said. "Keep in mind too that we have to ensure that people can get in and out of the city. So there will be officers manning traffic posts and just a variety of things."

As of Tuesday, 96 law enforcement agencies had promised to supply 4,000 additional staff for the inauguration, effectively doubling the ranks of the Washington, D.C., department, Hughes said. Several West Coast law enforcement agencies were approached, she said. Hughes declined to say which ones, citing security concerns. (LAAG: I think the cat is out of the bag as we know how many LASD officers want to go; the crooks in LA will take notice and have one hell of an inauguartion party back in LA)

Los Angeles Police Department officials said Tuesday that they had not received any requests to provide officers for the inauguration. (LAAG: perhaps Baca asked DC to ask him for 347 officers!)

The department, however, does plan to send a small team of tactical commanders to the inauguration to observe crowd control.

Steve Remige, president of the Assn. of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, which represents rank-and-file deputies, said Tuesday that his members "are flattered that the inaugural committee believes Los Angeles deputy sheriffs are needed to provide security for the inauguration." (LAAG: of course the union wants to go. How silly)

But, he said, given the state's growing budget deficit, what could amount to a $1-million gift from the county seemed impractical at best.

"It might be the season for giving," Remige said, "but this is over the top."

Hennessy-Fiske and Winton are Times staff writers.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

November 30, 2008

What's new...more LASD proposed spending with little accomplished

LAAG does not approve of LA County Executive Officer Fujioka's $400,000 a year salary but I guess he is earning part of it by using some common sense. It looks like he has nixed a so called "gang operations center" which Sheriff Baca was promoting as part of this anti gang "proposal" (polite word for it). Baca has proven before that he is not a manager and not a cost containment or "under budget" guy nor is his department known for that.

Our problem with new "operations centers" for LASD is that they seen to turn into more "relaxation" centers than they do work centers. The $20 million dollar new substation built in Lakewood (with a huge LASD motorhome to go with it!) has not been responsible for one more arrest in Lakewood (nor would taxpayers know as no current detailed crime stats are posted for Lakewood). We need less "palace building" and more "police patrolling". The more you build these "centers" the more likely deputies will want to congregate in them as opposed to being on the street.

Sheriff Baca is also seeking "Patriot Act" types of leeway. Next I suppose we will hear the line that they want to use "enhanced interrogation" techniques. The problem with all this waiving of Constitutional protections is that it does not ever appear to yield to much in the way of real crime reduction and is often abused when placed in the hands of law enforcement with no checks whatsoever (by judges) on its abuse.

Also every time Sheriff Baca proposes something to the county its all take and no give. The taxpayers give him millions and what do they get in return from the Sheriff's?...nothing, well at least no tangible commitments in writing. Just empty promises. Not more work per deputy but more deputies hired with less work now done by each. The old union technique (also used effectively by the teachers unions in their mantra to reduce class size). Here is an example of what we get when we dole out more money to the LASD.

Another thing we dont see is more realtime crime statistics from LASD to back up this need. The devil is in the details as they say.


From the Los Angeles Times
Delays plague L.A. County's anti-gang program
The county's chief executive is expected to announce two pilot programs next month, more than a year after deadline.
By Molly Hennessy-Fiske

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/politics/cal/la-me-gang30-2008nov30,0,7862190,full.story

November 30, 2008

Los Angeles County leaders, who more than a year and a half ago promised to revamp their $105-million-a-year gang intervention effort, are still months away from a new strategy, hobbled by repeated delays and haggling over details.

William T Fujioka, the county's chief executive, is scheduled to unveil his plan for county supervisors Dec. 16, more than a year after the deadline first set by the supervisors. In contrast, Los Angeles city leaders moved forward months ago and have a dozen programs in place.

After much infighting, the county plan includes pilot sites in the Florence-Firestone neighborhood north of Watts and in the Pacoima area, where Los Angeles County sheriff's officials are working with Los Angeles and San Fernando police to combat gangs.

It remains unclear, however, how they will be structured, funded or monitored. Critics fault Fujioka and his staff for dragging their feet and downsizing the so-called Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy while residents of unincorporated areas of the county targeted by gangs repeatedly asked for more help.

"It shouldn't have taken this long," said civil rights lawyer Connie Rice, whose public policy group, the Advancement Project, issued a report in January 2007 that called for a massive, coordinated regional effort to fight gangs and spurred a rethinking of both city and county efforts. The $593,000 report was commissioned and paid for by the city of Los Angeles.

Fujioka and his staff have been tight-lipped about details. The presentation has been pushed back twice this month as they met with Sheriff Lee Baca and his staff and supervisors' staffers to hash out details.

At next month's meeting, Fujioka plans to ask for four more months to develop the strategy and cost estimates, according to copies of his proposal released this month to supervisors' staffers.

Central to that draft is a controversial gang emergency operations center proposed by Baca that would allow county staff to waive confidentiality laws and share information about individuals involved with or at risk of becoming involved with gangs.

Late last month, Baca made a rare appearance at a supervisors' staff briefing and spent two hours pushing the center, which he proposed a year ago. He has asked for $3 million in his proposed budget for technology and staff to run the program.

"For every week or two that goes by, we don't know if we could have prevented a gang murder or a crime with the absence of this program," he said.

Supervisors' staffers have been insisting for months that the sheriff cannot waive confidentiality to fight crime. Earlier this month, a shouting match broke out between supervisors' and sheriff's staffers at a meeting to consider the latest draft of the strategy.

Fujioka said last week that the sheriff's proposed center no longer is part of his gang proposal, calling it too costly and unnecessary to the pilot programs. He declined to release a copy of his amended proposal until he presents it to the board.

"I'm not going to support" an emergency operations center, Fujioka said. "I don't see success as contingent on having a center."

Rice said the county's anti-gang strategy is being whittled down.

"Every letter I see, the program gets smaller and smaller," Rice said. The city of Los Angeles, she noted, "is already off to the races."

Supervisor Yvonne B. Burke first called for a reevaluation of the county's anti-gang strategy in May 2007, a month after Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced the city's new gang reduction plan based on the Advancement Project's report. The day after Burke's call for action, supervisors voted to have county staff review the report, as well as the city plans, and report back in four months with a new county strategy.

The review was hobbled by numerous stops and starts.

Fujioka took over the project after he became county chief executive in July 2007. Two months later, he appointed a committee of city, county and community officials, including Rice. Committee members gave him their recommendations in February, then stopped meeting.

Meanwhile, Gary Hearnsberger, head deputy district attorney, stepped down as the chairman of the county's Interagency Gang Task Force, a committee that is supposed to monitor anti-gang programs. The task force also stopped meeting in February and reconvened briefly earlier this month only to be briefed by Fujioka's staff on the new strategy and select a new chairman, Peter Shutan, deputy city attorney. It plans to meet monthly.

The last countywide spending report on anti-gang programs was released in July 2007. Supervisors requested an update in June but Fujioka postponed it, even after he received supervisors' approval to hire a county analyst to work on the strategy; the analyst is to be paid between $97,000 and $127,000.

Fujioka also postponed a cost analysis of the new strategy, due in June, until later this month.

His staff said they have not started it.

Asked about the delays, Fujioka said that perfecting a new strategy -- one he hopes to expand to other areas of the county at some point -- was not a short-term effort.

"This is not a six-month, two-year program. This is a paradigm shift, changing the culture in the county," Fujioka said.

Most recently, Fujioka said, he postponed unveiling the gang proposal from this month until December "out of courtesy" to new Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, who takes office Monday.

He noted that the county continued to develop and fund anti-gang programs while the new proposal was being developed.

"It's not as if the county is completely frozen," Fujioka said.

"It's important that what we roll out works and that we get buy-in from all the different departments," he added.

He said that to blame his office alone for delaying the proposal would be "unfair" and "inaccurate."

Supervisors have been hesitant to criticize Fujioka's effort.

A spokeswoman for Supervisor Gloria Molina said her boss likes what she has heard about the strategy but has questions about how the county plans to hold anti-gang programs accountable for spending.

So far this much is clear: The county's initial plan will be much smaller in scope than what Los Angeles has in place.

Under the city's plan, proposed seven months ago, gang prevention programs are centralized in the neediest 12 gang-reduction zones, neighborhoods where gang violence is four times the citywide average.

Program managers in each zone, the last of whom started work last month, will receive $1 million a year in prevention funds, enough for each to target at least 200 children.

The county efforts are slated to start in Florence-Firestone, base of operations for the rival Florencia 13 and East Coast Crips gangs, and Pacoima, where an injunction is in place against the Pacoima Project Boys.

Fujioka said he chose the two neighborhoods because they are next to city gang reduction zones and will allow for city-county partnerships, and because they will show the new strategy can work in gang-dominated areas and those where gangs are at a tipping point.

"One could always say we'll do it in five areas, the five supervisory areas, but then you run the risk of spreading yourself too thin," Fujioka said. "We want the first effort to be successful."

Supervisors' staff said they "haggled" over which neighborhoods to target first.

Last year, Supervisor Don Knabe asked that the pilots include the Harbor Gateway area of his district, where some high-profile racially motivated crimes have occurred in recent years.

Knabe's staff argued that the area was as much of a "tipping point" community as Pacoima.

Fujioka said he ultimately decided against including Harbor Gateway because the area had not seen as much violent, gang-related crime as Pacoima, based on statistics provided by the Sheriff's Department. Harbor Gateway was also not adjacent to a city gang reduction zone.

The city's newly appointed "gang czar," the Rev. Jim Carr, served on the committee that developed the county strategy and said it would not move forward unless supervisors accepted a formula for placing anti-gang programs in neighborhoods where they are most needed, across district lines. He noted that City Council members compromised and placed gang reduction programs in eight of 15 council districts.

"We'll see if the county is able to also make that jump," Carr said. "I think it's the only way. It needs to be done based on need, not politics."

In Florence-Firestone, Maria Ortiz, a mother and elementary school aide, said she and her neighbors need help now.

"They're scared," she said. "They don't want their kids to join" gangs.

Ortiz began asking the county to intervene a few years ago after her family was intimidated by Florencia 13 gang members living on their block. Now, she said, other parents regularly ask her what steps they should take to keep their children out of gangs.

She directs them to the sheriff's substation. Deputies there coordinate after-school programs and have donated movies for children to watch during summer vacations. They count on discretionary money from the supervisors to run athletic programs.

Capt. James Hellmold, the substation commander, said deputies want to help at-risk youth but are short-staffed. He said they are looking forward to more resources and a plan from the county.

"We're sort of piecemealing these concepts," he said. "It's hard to engage in mentoring a kid in soccer games when you have somebody getting mugged on a street corner."

Hennessy-Fiske is a Times staff writer.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

November 13, 2008

LASD Crime lab busts no one but taxpayers

Every time we hear a story like the one below we hear the same line of BS from Baca...oh its not the lazy incompetent LASD employees its lack of "resources" (aka "money") Well lets see. The Sheriff's just opened a new $102 million dollar (11 million over budget) crime lab in LA county in May 2007 that was hailed as a "CSI like" facility and is touted as the largest municipal crime lab in the nation. Well just more proof that TV cop shows are nothing like reality. You see the CSI crime lab is similar to the one we the taxpayers built for LASD...the difference is that in CSI the TV show the crime lab employees really care about their work and are diligent about solving cases. But again thats the fantasy part. With respect to all the backlogged DNA I like how the headline is "may" be untested. They dont even know? Scary. Funny they did not just dump all the samples.

Also in 2004 voters passed Proposition 69 which requires convicted felons, some misdemeanor offenders and those arrested on rape or murder charges to provide a sample of their DNA, usually taken via cheek swab. This work is also backlogged.
Under Proposition 69, the funding to pay for processing all these new samples was supposed to come from the criminals themselves, through an increase of $1 on every $10 misdemeanor fine. This was expected to produce $25 million a year for the state “penalty pot,” but it has only yielded $7.5 million.

So once again voters are duped into voting for "solutions" (or needed "resources") that sound good on paper or in speeches but never quite turn out to be as good as promised by law enforcement as they are the ones who fail to make them work. Dont blame the taxpayers for trying.

Update 4-24-09: PBS "Now" show did a really good expose on this issue called "Justice Delayed". Mostly dealt with LAPD but they also mentioned the problem with LASD. It really makes you realize the scope of the problem on a human scale. Basically billions has been spent on the problem with very little to show for it. I guess we need more criminalists than cops on the street as the cops on the street are not the ones that solve crimes. Just ask the CSI TV folks.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dna13-2008nov13,0,279193.story
From the Los Angeles Times

L.A. County sheriff's officials acknowledge that genetic evidence in 5,635 rape cases may be untested

The department plans a case-by-case review to see which sexual assault kits remain unexamined. The revelation follows reports of a similar DNA backlog at the LAPD.
By Joel Rubin

November 13, 2008

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, under pressure from county supervisors and watchdog groups to account for its handling of DNA evidence from sexual assault cases, acknowledged Wednesday it did not know whether genetic evidence from more than 5,600 rape cases had been examined.

In response to an inquiry by the Board of Supervisors last month, Sheriff's Department officials tallied 5,635 sexual assault evidence kits -- semen and other DNA samples collected by authorities from victims -- sitting in freezer storage facilities, Cmdr. Earl Shields said. The department must now manually compare that inventory with records from its crime laboratory to determine which kits remain unexamined, Shields told the board Wednesday.

"The bad news is we have 5,635 kits in a warehouse," Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said. "The good news is we now know what has to be done."

The true size of the county's DNA backlog is probably significantly larger, said Sarah Tofte, a researcher with Human Rights Watch who has been pressing local law enforcement agencies around the country to address backlogs. The total announced Wednesday does not take into account the unknown number of sex crime kits that are in the hands of the more than 40 small police agencies in the Los Angeles area that rely on the sheriff's crime lab for analysis, she said.

Under a new policy ordered by Sheriff Lee Baca, all sexual assault kits gathered in the future will be tested -- a departure from a long-running practice in which the sheriff's crime lab analyzed evidence only after detectives handling a case requested it. Shields also said the department would analyze evidence from all kits currently in storage that are found to be untested, although he warned that such an effort would require additional funds to hire more analysts as well as outsourcing testing to private labs.

Unexamined kits hold potentially crucial information. Through a complex scientific process, DNA analysts can extract a person's genetic code from the collected samples and compare it to those of known felons that are kept in federal and state databases. When the DNA sample collected at a crime scene or from a victim's body matches a DNA profile of someone in the database, it offers prosecutors nearly irrefutable proof of their guilt. The evidence can also be used to confirm that someone has not falsely confessed to a crime or link someone to other unsolved cases.

The scrutiny of the Sheriff's Department comes on the heels of a similar look into the DNA backlog at the Los Angeles Police Department, where DNA evidence from roughly 7,000 rapes and other violent crimes remained untested.

A recent audit of the backlog by City Controller Laura Chick found that 200 potential sexual assault cases had not been prosecuted because LAPD officials failed to meet legal deadlines to test DNA evidence.

In response to the mounting criticism, city politicians and LAPD Chief William J. Bratton last month approved a plan to pay private labs for more testing and to hire additional staff for the LAPD's crime lab. Several million dollars more would be needed in coming years to meet the LAPD's goal of eliminating its backlog by 2013, officials said.

Sheriff's officials in recent months have tried to downplay the size and seriousness of their backlog and resisted comparisons to the LAPD, where the crime lab has fallen behind on requests from detectives to test DNA evidence from about 500 rapes, homicides and other violent crimes.

The Sheriff's Department has only "10 to 20" such cases, Shields said.

Department officials have said they suspect that nearly all the untested evidence kits are from cases in which the detectives have not felt the need to ask for DNA analysis.

"We still believe we will find that untested rape kits are untested because they are of no probative value," said sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore. "But we want to make sure what we believe to be right is right."

Shields conceded to supervisors, however, that the Sheriff's Department would not know for certain the status of each rape investigation until it completed its case-by-case review. In cases where there is untested evidence, department officials plan to contact the investigators to find out which have been solved already without the help of DNA and which remain open. As the department attempts to clear the backlog, genetic evidence from cases at risk of expiring because of state laws or from cases still under investigation would be among those tested first, officials said.

Tofte and other advocates for rape victims praised Baca for the changes to his department's DNA policy, but urged the sheriff to hire more investigators to avoid being inundated with new leads in cases as the DNA backlog is cleared.

"Every day we see new victims come in, and we wonder whether that person had to be raped because evidence of their attacker is sitting there in storage," said Gail Abarbanel, founder of the Rape Treatment Center at the Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center.

Rubin is a staff writer.


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

October 25, 2008

Got Towing Fees?

Fortunately in Lakewood no ones car is ever towed as their is no parking enforcement and even when there is, LASD is not involved in it in any way, especially enforcement. It is the city civilian "parking enforcement staff" who have to call the city council to get an ok to write a parking ticket (for fear of pissing of one of the 2500 people that elects the council). This is a good idea given what we have to pay cops per hour to do this. (only problem is the parking enforcement people dont even pay for themselves with the fines collected; but I digress). Oh one other point... the parking staff leaves at 5pm when all the parking violations occur (once people come home form work). At that point you have to call LASD to complain about a parking problem. Perhaps if the violation is parking in front of a cops driveway you might get someone to respond.

The stories below are really a sad commentary on the greediness of law enforcement. Here are people who we pay very well to enforce the law yet they take advantage of their position to rip off the taxpayers even more. According to a high ranking cop I know the argument for paying police extremely high salaries in CA was to prevent corruption. Well I guess it has not worked at LASD. Even sadder is the fact that the LASD sheriff retired before being accused (caught). So he was making the top pay scale when he "allegedly" ripped off the city. What do you think the chances are this will ever get to court or that this cop will refund the money off his 100k a year pension benefits we are paying? Not likely.

LAAG hopes to revisit this story but we are pretty sure we will not hear of this story again. What is even sadder is this has likely happened before and never made it into the press. Also the LASD is also "reviewing several other internal policies" where I suppose graft and corruption could exist but that have not even been looked at yet. Very sad. I wonder if there are any investigations going on in Lakewood? Surely not (an no one in this city questions anything LASD does) and if there were you can be sure we will never know about it. Wonder if the city ever finished this "investigation"? Where are the results?

Probe of alleged theft prompts L.A. County sheriff to review impound policies
Lee Baca says he plans to have tow-truck operators collect the fees instead of department officials. Investigators are looking into the alleged theft of $400,000 by a sergeant.
By Richard Winton
October 23, 2008

Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca said an investigation into allegations that a sergeant stole more than $400,000 in car impound fees has prompted a review of the way his department handles such transactions for the dozens of cities it patrols.

Baca said he plans to have the towing operators collect the administrative fees directly from motorists, rather than involving sheriff's officials in the process.

"I don't see the need for the department to be a cashier," he said. "The system has to be tightened."

Sheriff's officials initiated the review after La Puente officials reported a significant shortfall in the fees that were supposed to have been collected by the Sheriff's Department, authorities said.

The sergeant retired from the department in May shortly after he was placed on leave as a result of the ongoing investigation, authorities confirmed this week. He could not be reached for comment. No charges have been filed in the case.

"Our residents have been stolen from," said La Puente Mayor Louie Lujan. "This is a large amount of money. It will have a direct impact on our city budget."

According to authorities, the sergeant supervised La Puente's car impound program and also ran the drunk driving task force and other programs that led to impounds.

John Stites, president of the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Assn., said a union attorney was ready to rebut any allegations made against the sergeant.

"They have been playing around with this for about a year and they have yet to present anything," Stites said.

As part of the investigation into the missing funds, Baca said, detectives have seized money but "not enough to cover the shortfall." He did not say from whom the money was seized.

Michael Gennaco, head of the Office of Independent Review, which serves as the Sheriff's Department watchdog, said the way the cash was handed to deputies by vehicle owners at the Industry Sheriff's Station was problematic.

"That is not a good practice. There is a need for systemic change to avoid this kind of problem," he said.

Gennaco said other stations have had issues. Compton, for example, had accounting discrepancies, but authorities did not establish that money had been stolen, Gennaco said.

Winton is a Times staff writer

richard.winton@latimes.com


Sheriff's department re-thinking towing fees
By Tania Chatila, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/24/2008 10:55:17 PM PDT

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is reexamining how it collects towing fees after allegations emerged a former traffic sergeant took nearly $500,000 from the city of La Puente.

Sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore said while several potential policy changes are on the table, Sheriff Lee Baca wants to take the department out of the collection process completely.

"The sheriff has a strong feeling that the sheriff's department should not be a cashier," Whitmore said.

The department has been reviewing their policies for the past few months, Whitmore said. It stems mostly from an ongoing investigation into allegations former Industry station Sgt. Joe Dyer was stealing tow money from La Puente.

The department's Internal Criminal Investigations Bureau has been investigating Dyer since the beginning of the year.

Officials believe he was collecting towing fees intended for La Puente, but not turning over all of those fees to the city.

La Puente is supposed to receive $168 each time a car is impounded.

That fee is paid to the sheriff's Industry Station, which issues a receipt that the driver must provide to reclaim his or her vehicle at La Puente-based Haddick's towing company. The driver then pays a separate fee to Haddick's and the car is released.

La Puente Councilwoman Lola Storing said officials believe Dyer was only dropping off a portion of those fees and receipts at City Hall - which were never reconciled with the Haddick's records.

Dyer retired in May. He did not return calls seeking comment.

"Let's just say that this has been a wake-up call for the department," said Michael Gennaco, chief attorney for the Office of Internal Review.

The OIR is an independent agency that reviews alleged policy violations within the Sheriff's Department. They are aware of the allegations against Dyer and expect to receive a copy of the case once it is submitted to the District Attorney.

"It's still an ongoing investigation," Whitmore said. "But once it's done we will seek prosecution."

There has been one other case within the department involving mishandled tow fees, Whitmore said.

The incident took place in 2007. It involved a deputy in Compton who was suspended for 10 days after failing to follow the department's money handling procedures, Whitmore said.

Gennaco said that while there was initial concern this deputy might have stolen money, the evidence didn't bear that out.

"There was no evidence of any funds missing," Whitmore said. "Apparently he was not doing the paperwork properly. There was no money involved."

The incident is chronicled in an OIR quarterly report released earlier this year.

Gennaco said strides have already been made at the sheriff's Industry Station to reduce the potential for theft.

"The way things are done now in Industry are totally different," he said.

The department is also reviewing several other internal policies and will consult with the Board of Supervisors, Whitmore said.

Other options include taking the department to a cashless system, he said.

"One of the difficulties is we've got 40 cities and each city kind of has its own way of doing things," Whitmore said. "The whole key here is to encourage people to be honest."

La Puente officials are also reviewing their own cash handling procedures.

Staff Writer Frank C. Girardot contributed to this story.

tania.chatila@sgvn.com

(626) 962-8811, Ext. 2109

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

October 6, 2008

LAPD innovation needed at LA Sheriff's Dept.

Once again LASD (Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept.) is way behind the times and LAPD (Los Angeles Police Dept.), an organization just as large as LASD and just as bureaucratic. Yet with forward thinking leadership via "Broadway Bill" Bratton (appointed not elected no less) we get some pretty innovative ideas. His crime mapping idea borrowed from his ideas while in NYC seems to be making progress. The latest idea is the tip site. We like the idea and will monitor its progress. Another idea is LAPDTV which this week is airing live crime scene work from the excavation of a possible burial site of a murder victim from the 1960's. Pretty innovative stuff. LAAG likes government transparency. That is very hard to come by with LASD. We all know what happens without oversight (i.e. the subprime mortgage financial mess).

Don't expect anything like this from LASD which is still policing in the 1970's. Time for some fresh leadership at LASD. Too bad we have to leave LASD leadership election up to the voters.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-text18-2008sep18,0,2533933.story
From the Los Angeles Times

LAPD unveils new tipster tool: anonymous text messages
Chief William J. Bratton says he hopes the new technology will generate more crime tips from the public.
By Richard Winton, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 18, 2008

Los Angeles Police Chief William J. Bratton on Wednesday unveiled a new system allowing people to provide anonymous crime tips to police through text messages and the department's website.

Bratton said he hoped the new technology, which protects the sender's identity, would generate more crime tips to the LAPD from the public.

"Far too often, victims and witnesses are too afraid to come forward out of fear of retaliation. Today, we're changing that," said L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who appeared at a news conference with Bratton.

Villaraigosa demonstrated the new text message system, sending an anonymous message from a cellphone saying he had witnessed a robbery and that the suspect had entered a grocery store at 8th Street and Broadway. After sending the message, the mayor received a reply assigning him an alias, which he could use to contact police and provide additional information.

Messages from tipsters are delivered to the Los Angeles Police Department's Regional Crime Center, the agency's information hub for daily operations through which tips are relayed to detectives and patrol officers in the field. The system also allows officers to communicate with the anonymous sender via text messages, according to LAPD Capt. Joel Justice.

Justice said the text message system was already used by police in New York, Boston and San Diego.

Tipsters send text messages to 274637 -- which spells the word CRIMES -- then type LAPD. The message is routed through a national system to Los Angeles police. Tipsters will also be able to convey information on www.lapdonline.org by clicking on the WebTips icon.

At the news conference, law enforcement officials said they hoped the public would use the system to assist police in cracking high-profile crimes, such as the Aug. 2 slaying of L.A. County sheriff's Deputy Juan Escalante, who was attacked outside his Cypress Park home, and the string of 11 slayings in South Los Angeles dating back to 1985, which police say were committed by a serial killer.

"We need more clues than we have now," said LAPD Deputy Chief Charlie Beck, who is overseeing the serial killer investigation. "We will solve this crime, but we would rather solve it sooner rather than later." richard.winton@latimes.com


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

August 11, 2008

Likely Homicide near South St. and Woodruff St.

You can bet we will not hear anymore on this from LASD (Lakewood Sheriffs). They tend to sweep things like this under the rug. No details on if the body was in a house or just on the street. But if being investigated by homicide detectives I think it is likely that it is an obvious homicide. The 5900 block of Edgefield Street is right next to the intersection of Woodruff St. and South St. This is the LASD press release


Aug 11, 2008 4:45 am US/Pacific
Woman's Body Found In Lakewood
LAKEWOOD, Calif. (CBS) ― The death of a woman whose body was found in Lakewood was being investigated today by homicide detectives, a sheriff's deputy said.

The woman's body was discovered in the 5900 block of Edgefield Street,
near Woodruff Avenue, about 6:15 p.m. Sunday, said Deputy Byron Ward of the Sheriff's Headquarters Bureau.

No further details were immediately available, he said.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

July 12, 2008

One factor explaining increased cost of the Lakewood Sheriff's 2008-9 contract

The report below makes the increased cost of LASD (sheriff) service make sense. Look at this brilliant taser incident right here in Lakewood. What will that cost? Of course dont forget the cost of wrongful shootings like this one and the settlement costs of crashing into hapless motorists while drunk on the job.

The report notes that the in-custody claims are increasing and are more costly to resolve. We think it is likely due to the fact that juries see these in custody injuries or deaths as less justifiable than other injuries or deaths.

I think part of the reason for these incidents is poor on the job training, a "don't care attitude", (as deputies are not personally at risk for bad behavior) and just plain lack of smarts and common sense. Lets face it you are giving a gun (and tremendous power and unquestioned authority) to some guys that barely have a high school diploma. (yes some do go to college on our nickel once on the force to boost their salary)

The only good thing to be said about sheriff's "contract" service is that the pain of the cost of these settlements is spread over the whole county and all contract cities and not just Lakewood (which it would be if Lakewood had its own police force). The sore point however is that we are getting close to the tipping point of LASD costing more than they are "worth" in terms of achievements. We need more individual deputy legal responsibility. But that will happen when hell freezes over thanks to public unions and their mafia like grip over elected officials.

From the July 2008 report of Special Counsel Merrick Bobb (click on image to enlarge):





Read the full report here from the semiannual reports of Special Counsel Merrick Bobb and staff discussing the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD). These reports are prepared at the direction of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors pursuant to its appointment of special counsel to conduct ongoing monitoring and critical review of the LASD's performance.

Report: LA Inmate Deaths, Injuries Costing Millions In Settlements

POSTED: 12:35 pm PDT July 11, 2008
http://www.knbc.com/news/16856328/detail.html

LOS ANGELES -- Deaths and injuries to people in custody in Los Angeles County jails continue to cost the county millions of dollars in lawsuit settlements, according to a report released Friday.

While the number of lawsuits filed against the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has dropped in recent years, the total amount of money paid out due to litigation has increased, according to an internal investigations report released by Merrick Bobb, special counsel to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

When looking at three-year averages over the past six years -- from 2001 through 2004 as compared to 2004 through 2007 -- the number of lawsuits closed dropped from an average of 300 a year to 233 a year, but the total amount paid rose from an average of $9.9 million a year to $10.5 million.

The average amount paid for lawsuits during the earlier period was $33,000, and jumped to $44,800 over the second three-year period.

Of the 69 lawsuits against the department in which the county was required to make a payout over the last fiscal year, 17 resulted in awards greater than $100,000.

Of those, six cases involving in-custody death or injury accounted for $5.6 million in payouts -- more than half of the department's total civil liability for the past year.

"Lawsuits relating to in-custody injury and death that have resulted in significant payments to plaintiffs are not a relic of the past but rather point to an ongoing and continuing source of liability," according to the report. [snip]

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

July 10, 2008

LASD drunk ON duty!

Yet another update to the 2008 story below. June 29, 2008 accident and it takes 15 months to get a guilty plea? This is an open and shut case. The OC Register (http://www.ocregister.com/articles/driving-county-moran-2587604-angeles-influence) reports: "Vicki Podberersky, Moran's attorney, said this morning that her client has already served most of his time on home confinement. She said he was placed on unpaid leave from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department when charges were filed against him (LAAG editor: approx. Feb 2009), but he will seek reinstatement." Oh and note how they don't like to talk about the fact he was on paid administrative leave for 6 months. Now they want LASD to hire him back. Sorry. No deal. Of course even if they have the guts to buck the union and fire him he will just go to another agency. Wonderful how we let the bad apples rot the whole barrel. Dont forget this accident was on duty and in a marked police vehicle. Also no word on the civil suit and eventual settlement the taxpayers will be picking up the tab on. It should be the officer and his private insurance who picks up the entire tab, including the county's cost of defense in the civil case and all these costly reinstatement hearings.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/sheriff-sentencing.html
Former L.A. County deputy sentenced in DUI crash that injured 2
September 30, 2009 | 2:50 pm

A former veteran deputy with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department was sentenced today to six months in jail and three years of informal probation for injuring two people when he crashed his department-issued sport utility vehicle into their car a year ago while under the influence of alcohol, said officials with the Orange County district attorney's office.

Moran, 43, of Buena Park was ordered to complete a three-month first-offender program and face a Mothers Against Drunk Driving panel, according to a statement from the district attorney's office. In such panels, offenders pay MADD a fee to hear victims or relatives of victims of drunk driving crashes relate their stories.

Moran pleaded no contest Feb. 27 to one misdemeanor count of driving under the influence, causing injury and one misdemeanor count of driving with a blood-alcohol level of 0.08% or more causing injury, according to the statement.

Moran was driving his Chevrolet Blazer south on Beach Boulevard in Stanton about 5:30 a.m. on June 29, 2008, when he crashed into a sedan near Garden Grove Boulevard, district attorney officials said. The sedan's 33-year-old driver and his 20-year-old female passenger were knocked unconscious and taken to a hospital. At the time of the crash, the sedan's driver was in possession of and tested positive for methamphetamine. He also tested positive for sedatives and opiates, the statement said.

His case is under review, said Keith Bogardus, an Orange County deputy district attorney. His name and the name of his passenger were not released because the investigation is ongoing.

--Ruben Vives


July 12, 2008 follow up info to story below (from various published news sources):

Witnesses reported that Deputy Robert Moran of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department ran a red light at Garden Grove Boulevard while driving southbound on Beach Boulevard at about 5:25 a.m., Amormino said.

Investigators say Moran was immediately relieved of duty and remains on paid leave, pending the outcome of a criminal investigation.

An internal investigation is expected to be launched when the criminal investigation is concluded.

So he is drunk at 5:25 am? Looks like a real long standing drinking problem. What was he parting all night at a Rave while on duty? Oh and if you read between the lines above they are going to wait until AFTER both the criminal case and the ADMINISTRATIVE cases (which wont even start until after the criminal case) are completed before deciding what to do with him. What a gig. There is about a 99% chance he violated the law but he gets to go surf at the beach while making full salary. Where can I sign up for this? If this guy worked for some private company he would have been fired the day after the accident. This type of behavior takes place as the Sheriff's dept. does not swiftly discipline its own via a citizen review board. Looks like our prior post was right on the money.

Prior posting below:

This is totally unacceptable. I can at least understand being drunk off duty...but on duty?...and then driving? We can only hope that the officer is held personally financially responsible for this action as opposed to the taxpayers. Public employees are the only class of citizens that we know of where they suffer no personal financial threat/harm due to activity like this. He will also not likely loose his job thanks to the union. Also he gets to sit home and collect a check until the 6 month investigation is over, which will likely find no wrong doing. I am sure this will get buried as quickly as possible by the LASD. The sad thing is if he was off duty there could likely be more personal responsibility as opposed to the taxpayers funding this jackpot.


L.A. County sheriff's deputy arrested on suspicion of drunk driving after on-duty crash
Authorities say the officer, on duty in Orange County, was en route to an investigation in Huntington Beach when his car collided with another, causing life-threatening injuries to one person.

By David Haldane, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 10, 2008

A Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy has been relieved of duty after being arrested on suspicion of drunk driving following a traffic accident while on duty in Orange County, authorities said Wednesday.

Robert Andrew Moran, an 18-year veteran of the department, was en route to an investigation in Huntington Beach when his sheriff's Chevy Trailblazer collided with a 1999 Mazda Protege at Beach and Garden Grove boulevards in Garden Grove on June 29.

Two occupants of the Protege were taken to hospitals, one with life-threatening injuries, said Jim Amormino, a spokesman for the Orange County Sheriff's Dept.

Moran, who witnesses said had run a red light, was arrested on suspicion of felony driving under the influence, Amormino said.

He was released after posting bail, but has been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of a criminal investigation. "We will monitor the investigation, then determine our next step," Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept. spokesman Steve Whitmore said.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

July 6, 2008

Getting to the bottom of the fireworks enforcement problem

As LASD refuses to post up to date daily crime and call logs LAAG is forced to make Public Records Act (PRA) requests, which are usually only partly honored, if at all. The problem with the PRA in California is that there really is no teeth in the law. Government entities flout it and LASD I am sure is one of the best at doing so. Again as we have reported before, they don't want taxpayers to have detailed up to date crime info as it would show things are worse than they are telling you in the PR spin the council gives us via the council controlled publications we get. Secondly, they don't want you to know how little they really are doing to fight crime and "quality of life" problems (such as fireworks scofflaws). All the city council does is throw more money at it in terms of LASD overtime. It is almost like a kick back. Paying LASD more money is like pouring money down a rat hole: you will never see it again and it sure won't do you any good.

In any event our PRA sent to LASD today is reprinted in part below. We'll see what happens.

July 6, 2008
Total of 3 page(s) via e mail
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST

Custodian of Records for Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept.
Risk Management Bureau

Dear Custodian of Records:

Pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6250 et seq.), we seek to inspect and or obtain a copy of the following, which we understand to be in the possession, custody or control of your agency or department:

All the following records should be organized into these time periods and related only to the city of Lakewood:

July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2005
July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2006
July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2007
July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2008

Any and all DOCUMENTS (see fn 1) depicting, evidencing, referencing, referring, relating or pertaining to:

1. Any or all calls related to fireworks (calls for service) (along with address information on the calls)

2. Any or all dispatches of units for the calls above or related to fireworks complaints (along with address information on the dispatches)

3. Any or all citations issued related to fireworks calls or as a result of the dispatches in 2 above (along with address information on the cites)

4. Total overtime hours for LASD personnel including but not limited to total cost to city of Lakewood for such overtime;

5. Any or all injuries reported/discovered on 1 or 2 above or calls where LASD assisted with LA County Fire Dept. on the calls (along with address information on the calls);

6. Notwithstanding the foregoing dates, all reports related to any fireworks calls or injuries within 1000 feet of any side of Jose San Martin Park or Del Valle Park from July 3, 7:00am to July 6 700am 2008


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

As memories of the 3/06 Dunrobin explosion fade...

Well it looks like things are back to "normal" in Lakewood. Fireworks problems (legal and illegal) are "better" than they were in July 2004-2005 but not as good as 2006-2007 (post Dunrobin explosion March 2006). One thing is for sure: Lakewood fireworks users don't give a damn about fires in CA! "Just give us our damn fireworks!" For all this overtime we taxpayers are paying for I never saw one sheriff car this July 4 (compared to numerous sightings on July 4, 2006). Hmmm makes you wonder if they spent all that 2008 overtime sitting behind some store.....or watching those new flat screens in the new 20 million dollar sheriff "palace"...We also wonder what portion of Lakewood's sheriff overtime money was spent in Lakewood vs some other nearby cities. From some of the reports (see #5) it sounds as if we may need to call out the national guard. I do know no one at the Lakewood Station takes vacation on July 4, but it sounds to me like they might as well.

LAAG readers report they are not too happy either..here are some reports:

Report 1:

You may wish to be attentive to a news story, or other area resident's stories, regarding a drunk 18 year old igniting illegal fireworks and possibly a stick of dynamite near San Martin Park late last night. It is my understanding that a dozen homes in the area, and cars, were damaged by the blast, including the 18 yr old having a chunk of his leg blown off. Lakewood city hired 50 deputies on overtime (time and a half) to patrol the streets for firework scofflaws. They began at 2 pm and virtually had no activity until 8 pm. So for six hours, 50 deputies fed at the city trough. The new fines and citations won't begin to offset the costs of a police presence. The amount of illegal fireworks I witnessed didn't seem any less then any other year. When you consider the city costs for all of this, you'd think we would come out ahead if the city just went ahead and gifted public funds to the football/soccer/baseball/cheerleader or whatever who claim they can't make it without firework stands. It has to be less then what we are paying deputies to drive around. As for the news story, I haven't seen anything about it yet. But possibly you have some readers that live in the area that are more informed.

Report 2:

We saw a bunch of police cars near the park, but we didn't know exactly what was going on because we had our own issue going on over here. One of our neighbors was shooting off huge illegal fireworks and we called LASD but the only thing they did was come by an HOUR later, then they took one look around the street, found nothing and then left. The neighbors then continued shooting off illegal fireworks until 1 a.m. .... Seriously. This city is a JOKE.

Report 3:

Lakewood sheriffs are the laziest pieces of trash I have ever seen in my life. On the 4th of july our very inconsiderate neighbors fired numerous illegal fire works off and when I called the sheriff's department I got a volunteer that took my complaint and knew nothing about the laws on fireworks in Lakewood. I had to tell him the law on it!

Then I told him that these people here are shooting of the illegal fireworks and hiding them in a vehicle nearby. The stupid, lazy sheriff came one hour later, rolled up in their squad car with police lights on one block away and, of course, all the illegal activity stops. They did the same tactic last year.

If reports come out this year that there were less people cited or arrested, it's not because things are better, it's because the LASD have figured out how to do less work. The sheriff who finally came by, didn't even shine his lights into the vehicle that contained all the illegal fireworks.

Now, if you wanted to catch these people, WHY would you run the police lights up and down the block you might ask? Because they don't want to fill out all the paperwork that would be involved. And why don't they make more arrests? Paperwork, paperwork, paperwork, and crap they would get from the jailers for making their 4th of july a lot more work-intensive.

What's the final outcome? Sheriffs are pissed off because they have to work on this holiday and they're going to do as little as possible; the jailers are pissed off if they have to do any extra work; and the law-abiding homeowners are pissed off because nothing is being done on their behalf; The only ones who benefit are the criminals who destroy property and maim others with not only illegal fireworks, but with "Safe and Sane" fireworks as well.

The other problem is that the so-called "Safe and Sane" people shoot off their fireworks right alongside the illegal people. So, next year I wonder what would happen if people put up signs in the neighboring cities that say something like: "THE CITY OF LAKEWOOD WELCOMES ALL FIREWORKS" because by not showing up and cleaning up this mess, that is essentially what they are doing--condoning it. And then call and call to report all the illegal activity going on. Videotape the illegal acts and send a copy to the Mayor and the rest of his Lakewood cronies who probably had a very good night's sleep last night.

Report 4:

I heard a similar story about this [stick of dynamite near San Martin Park], but it was my understanding that it was near Del Valle Park on Woodruff, not San Martin Park. What I heard was similar to what you said: a large explosive device, damaged cars and some drunk injured and arrested.

Report 5:

...With the shortage of trained Lakewood deputies, most of the two man cars assigned to firework abatement were filled on overtime by jail deputies with no patrol experience. And virtually in all of the contacts that deputies made during the night for fireworks, the were confronted with large groups of drunk individuals. Opting to get involved in a major disturbance or confrontation with odds not in their favor, most deputies avoided contact. They were outnumbered and back up wasn't always available. And in many areas of East Lakewood and Hawaiian Gardens, deputies were confronted with drunks firing handguns, rifles and shotguns in the air. Confrontations could have been tragic and the judgement of the deputies to become involved would have certainly been questioned. There wasn't anyway for them to come out with a win situation.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

June 13, 2008

"Someone has to start justifying this to us."

Anyone that reads this article below and feels that the Sheriff's aren't a greedy petty bunch of spoiled children just does not understand the problem, how to remedy it or what the long term consequences are of ignoring this. And as the article points out this practice is just as out of control at LASD. I think the biggest problem is that the overtime is not justified and is handed out like candy by supervisors. Reading below it seems like OT is mostly spent watching TV. Again apparently those in control politically cannot be trusted to mind the candy store which in this case is stocked with your tax dollars. And with the lucrative retirement benefits looming on the horizon don't think this pain is going to end any time soon. When it comes to public safety you DON'T get what you pay for. The reason most taxpayers look the other way is due to some fanciful vision of public safety workers and very little understanding of what the job really entails or the safety factor (which we reported on earlier here)

Search through this database of 2006 and 2007 salary data for Orange County Sheriff's deputies

Friday, June 13, 2008
Overtime policies push 100 sheriff's officers over $150,000
By NORBERTO SANTANA JR. and NATALYA SHULYAKOVSKAYA
The Orange County Register

Over the past decade, Orange County officials transformed the post of sheriff's deputy into a six-figure job based on the belief that overtime was cheaper than hiring new officers.

The department's reliance on overtime enabled mostof its sworn officers to earn more than $100,000 in 2007. More than 100 earned over $150,000.

That cost $41.7 million in overtime, on top of the $318 million the county spent on deputy salaries, health insurance and retirement benefits. The overall budget and salaries have doubled since 1997, but overtime expenditures have tripled.

Acting Sheriff Jack Anderson defended the spending, saying overtime is 9 percent cheaper than hiring additional deputies and paying their salary and retirement. The department says overtime saved it $9.7 million last year.

"What you can't negate is the fact that you are actually saving money," Anderson said. "Overtime is cheaper than paying full salary and benefits."

But a Register analysis of payroll records, public documents and extensive interviews has found that:

•The department calculated its "savings" using the salary and overtime rates of the most expensive deputies. If the department had assigned new deputies to work even half of the overtime accrued by deputy sheriff II's in the jails, it could have saved more than $500,000 per year. If officials had replaced half of jail deputies with more basic law enforcement officers – such as special officers or correctional officers – they could have saved as much as $10million.

•Policies allowing deputies to work a three-day workweek and to retire early have dramatically boosted overtime costs. After enhanced pensions led to large numbers of retirements, deputies with four days a week off were happy to fill up the empty shifts with overtime.

•The huge amount of extra hours and the large payouts have contributed to culture and discipline problems in the department, especially at county jails. Despite the six-figure earnings, some deputies slacked off on the job. Now, efforts by sheriff's officials to transfer deputies out of jail assignments and into patrol jobs have fueled union grievances and lawsuits.

Last year, the Orange County Sheriff's Department spent about 12 percent of its salary budget on overtime. That's similar to the overtime percentage paid by Los Angeles County, which is the largest sheriff's department in the nation.

But Orange County's overtime spending is higher than similar-sized departments. San Diego and Ventura, for instance, spent about 9 percent of their salary budget on overtime.

Because of conflicting responses from sheriff's officials about whether the cost of overtime vs. new hires had ever been studied, the Register filed a request under the California Public Records Act asking for copies of any internal studies. That triggered a different response.

"There have been no overtime studies conducted as described," Capt. Mike James replied in a May 15 letter.

"Overtime has become a part of the culture of the public safety folks," county CEO Tom Mauk said in an interview.

"(But) the notion that overtime is cheaper than hiring more deputies is just a best guess. It needs to be carefully analyzed."

County officials across Southern California balance their budgets by keeping unfilled positions on their books.

That's how sheriff's officials can say that excessive overtime spending doesn't matter because they stay within their budget. If those officials removed the vacant positions from the budget, the sheriff's departments would go over budget virtually every year.

A new Orange County sheriff, former Los Angeles County Sheriff's division chief Sandra Hutchens, was appointed by the board Tuesday and will take office in the next few weeks. Hutchens has promised to conduct an immediate review of departmental operations.

Whether the overtime payouts are good policy or bad, deputies are worth every dollar, said Wayne J. Quint Jr., a sheriff's sergeant who is president of the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs.

"It is a dangerous job. It is a tough job," Quint said. "It is public safety. It is hard to put a price tag on that."

The human cost

When the 2006-2007 Orange County Grand Jury noticed the large overtime payouts at the Theo Lacy jail, it sounded alarm bells. Grand jurors noted that there are advantages to using overtime – no additional pension or health care benefits must be paid.

But they added, "This savings is offset by the additional costs of overtime pay, and the stress that overtime work could, in the long run, result in an increase in sick leave and poorer job performance."

That same year, an Orange County Register investigation revealed that deputies had been watching TV and text-messaging while a Theo Lacy inmate was slain in the cellblock below.

When the district attorney empanelled a special grand jury to get to the bottom of the problems, prosecutors uncovered an undisciplined atmosphere at the facility. They found that deputies watched television, surfed the Internet and dragged mattresses into guard stations to sleep while on duty.

Acting Sheriff Anderson fired one deputy, placed five others on leave and forced out two assistant sheriffs.

Within weeks, two more deputies were fired during an investigation into whether a Taser stun gun was used to kill a cat.

And last month, prosecutors charged Deputy Jason C. Brant with falsifying reports on property crimes. Officials said he reported that citizens had refused to cooperate with investigations when in fact he had never even called them.

Records show Brant had earned more than $19,300 in overtime in 2007.

Anderson said the department has policies limiting overtime, but acknowledged they seldom have been enforced.

"We know when people are fatigued their decision-making can become fuzzy… . Somehow, their work ethic changes," he said.

$100,000-plus in extra pay

The sheriff's pay is set by statute; assistant sheriffs who have accrued seniority often earn more than the sheriff, even though they don't collect overtime.

But huge overtime payouts to deputies, investigators and sergeants have allowed some rank-and-file officers to come close to or exceed the earnings of top brass.

The top earners in the department last year were assistant sheriffs Charles Walters and Jo Ann Galisky – both earning just under $225,000.

But close on their heels was Theodore R. Harris, an investigator assigned to Dana Point, who made $220,869, or $5,000 more than former Sheriff Mike Carona. The largest portion of Harris' paycheck, $119,855, came from working overtime.

Three of the top-five rank and file earners were stationed at Theo Lacy, with each earning close to $200,000.

Richard D. Ostrow, a deputy sheriff II at Theo Lacy, made $208,745. His overtime earnings, $116,226, considerably outweighed his salary.

William S. Motodera, a deputy sheriff I stationed at Lacy, was paid $196,534. Well over half of it, $106,740, was for working overtime.

Jesse M. Oller, another deputy sheriff II from Theo Lacy, was paid $191,840. The overtime portion of his earnings was $98,842.

The Register sought comment from these deputies, delivering letters to their workplace. None responded to the Register's inquiries.

Quint said the deputies wouldn't comment because the department has a policy prohibiting most deputies from speaking to the media. He also said Harris has been warned by sheriff's officials that he was exceeding departmental limits and has promised to curtail his overtime.

The Register analysis shows that in 2006 and 2007, at least 80 deputies were paid for more overtime than the 24 hours per week the policy allows.

There are no state limits on how much police officers can work. A 2002 national survey showed that only one quarter of large departments limited their officers' overtime. On average, the limit was a little over 21 hours a week.

Around the country, police departments started reining in overtime after noticing that senior officers used extra hours to boost their retirement benefits, which are usually based on the final years of an officer's earnings.

In Orange County, retirement calculations do not include overtime, except for two small instances – time allocated for briefings and for care of service dogs.

The absolute limit that an officer could work without affecting his health is 80 hours a week, said police fatigue expert Bryan Vila, a criminology professor at Washington State University, Spokane.

The Register analysis showed that five officers exceeded that limit.

According to sleep research, the effect of long hours on reaction and decision-making becomes similar to the influence of illegal levels of alcohol in blood.

"Cops don't come to work drunk and nobody would put up with it if they did," said Vila. "But they do come to work just as impaired by fatigue."

On average, the department's top-ranking deputies – deputy sheriff II's – worked 415 extra hours and made $23,757 in overtime in 2007. Sergeants averaged 304 hours and $20,864. Deputy sheriff I's, the entry-level deputies who mainly staff the jails, made $17,221 per deputy in overtime. They averaged 339 hours of overtime. Investigators made $14,131 from overtime, or about 254 hours per person.

Even Quint, who is on formal leave from the department to concentrate on his union duties, boosted his paycheck with $35,908 in overtime in 2006 and $38,548 in 2007. The Register analysis shows that Quint is always paid for the identical number of overtime hours – 20 per paycheck.

Under the union contract, the Sheriff's Department continues to pay Quint's salary. The union reimburses the county for the salary, overtime and benefits.

Quint, who became association president in 1999, said his overtime payouts are approved by the union's board of directors. His predecessor received 6.5 hours per week. As a union president, Quint asked the board to increase overtime payments to 10 hours per week about 8 years ago.

Before he was the union representative, Quint said, he was a sergeant who tried to work at least 16 hours of overtime a week, mostly in patrol.

"I work clearly more than 10 extra hours a week. … If I were to bill the association for the actual hours I work, our bills would go through the roof," he said.

The 'Killer' threes

County supervisors contributed to the spike in overtime costs by enacting two policies that simultaneously shortened workweek for deputies and encouraged a wave of retirements among senior deputies.

In January 2000, former Sheriff Carona approved a 3/12 workweek for deputies. That was a perk long sought by the deputies union but one former Sheriff Brad Gates had resisted because of the difficulty in managing it.

Every two-week pay period deputies work six 12-hour shifts and one eight-hour shift. That leaves them seven days off every two weeks.

"It's difficult to manage," said Former Assistant Sheriff Dan Martini. "It's a killer."

Then, in December 2001, county supervisors enhanced deputies' retirement benefits by allowing them to retire at age 50 with 3 percent of pay for each year served at the department. A deputy with 30 years' service could get 90 percent of his pay at retirement. Under federal law, no one can receive more than 100 percent of pay.

According to figures from the Orange County Employees Retirement System, retirements in the Sheriff's Department jumped from 29 in 2001 to 93 in 2002. Retirements since 2002 have remained at more than 50 a year since, twice the pre-2001 levels.

Anderson said the large number of retirements is creating vacancies that are difficult to keep up with because of the time it takes to find recruits and get them through the academy. "We have an issue with people retiring. We're constantly hiring behind those."

After increasing from $20.8 million to $29.6 million in 2001, overtime costs stayed stable at about $25 million until 2005.

That year, county supervisors contributed again to the overtime payouts when they opted to staff the expansion of Theo Lacy jail in Orange with overtime hours. The overtime budget rose to $33 million.

"Everyone knew we were building a jail," Anderson said of the 2005 expansion of Theo Lacy. "The board (of supervisors) decided not to fund it….So the sheriff decided to open up the jail on overtime."

'Keeping it green'

With all the free time triggered by the 3/12 work schedule, the vacant shifts and little management tracking, deputies began to see overtime as a normal part of their check.

Deputies and managers alike have a nickname for the biggest earners: "overtime whores."

Retired Deputy Simon Kim – who described himself with that nickname – said the sergeants know which deputies like overtime and contact them to fill shifts.

"When you have seven days off, what do you do? I worked overtime."

In recent years the department also became adept at "keeping it green."

That slogan reflects the practice of actively seeking out contract services to keep the hours flowing. One favorite post under the Carona regime was the Orange County Fair, which switched its patrol contract to deputies soon after the sheriff's wife was appointed to the board of directors.

"Every July, it's Christmas for everybody," Kim said. "Even the lieutenants get into the action."

While Kim was eventually sanctioned for excessive overtime, sheriff's officials confirmed they did not have a way to regularlytrack the overtime payouts and hours worked by individual deputies.

That changed in May after the Register's inquiry.

Anderson said a new program had been instituted that sends electronic reports to managers each pay period to allow for individual tracking of overtime.

Resistance to change assignments

The overtime payouts have changed deputies' preference in assignments.

Most deputies have become so accustomed to the schedules and paychecks of jail duty that they are resisting efforts to move them into patrol assignments.

Anderson sought to encourage transfers and promotions out of the jails and into patrol assignments. The deputies sued in court, albeit unsuccessfully, to stop him.

Court filings show approximately 180 deputy sheriff II's in the jail who are eligible to request transfer to patrol. Only ten have done so.

"That leaves 170 eligible personnel who have chosen not to seek a transfer to patrol," county lawyers said in a court filing. "This creates operational problems for the sheriff."

Anderson's plan was to offer promotions to deputy I's who agreed to transfer into patrol. Five deputies took the deal.

Anderson is also fighting the deputies union over a change to the 3/12 work schedule that he says could save taxpayers $500,000 annually.

He wants jail deputies to start their eight-hour shift early in the morning and work through the day instead of starting in the afternoon and working at night, when all inmates are asleep.

Meanwhile, the union is arguing that officials are actually underpaying overtime amounts, saying that the four hours above 40 in the second week of the 3/12 schedule should be paid as overtime.

And another deputy action, known as a "donning and doffing" lawsuit, seeks to recover overtime for the time that deputies spend dressing and undressing from their uniforms.

"Government entities should be paying their workers the legal wage they are entitled to," Quint said.

Anderson has also suggested hiring correctional officers instead of deputies, arguing it could save as much as $10 million each year.

A departmental spokesman argued Thursday that switching assignments to lower-paid officers may not be possible because of different training requirements and the union contract.

But County Board of Supervisors Chairman John Moorlach and county CEO Mauk both said they want the county's new performance auditor to take a look at overtime spending patterns.

"Someone," Moorlach said, "has to start justifying this to us."

Contact the writer: Contact Santana at 714-796-2221 or nsantana@ocregister.com; Shulyakovskaya at 714-796-7024 or natalya@ocregister.com.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

click here to receive LAAG posts by email