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

Dunrobin explosion: Northern Calif. version

Ahh fireworks. Don't you just love them especially when in the hands of people who dont know of Darwin's Law. This story reminds us very much of the Dunrobin street explosion in March 2006. The differences are that the explosion was smaller in Sunnyvale and caused less damage to surrounding structures (due to less explosive material) and the suspect in Sunnyville was injured more severely than in the Lakewood explosion.

Police say fireworks caused fire in Sunnyvale's downtown

By Cody Kraatz
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_10907024?nclick_check=1
Sunnyvale Sun
Article Launched: 11/05/2008

Sunnyvale's Department of Public Safety is investigating alleged criminal possession of explosives and/or fireworks after an explosion burned two men in a downtown Sunnvyale apartment, said DPS Capt. Doug Moretto.

Fire crews responded to the explosion in a lower-level apartment at 415 S. Sunnyvale Ave. on Oct. 26 at 7:25 a.m. The fire was quickly contained and extinguished.

Two men who were in the apartment were burned. Both were treated at the scene and taken to Valley Medical Center in San Jose.

David Weist, 48, is suspected of possessing and tampering with an illegal explosive, probably a large firework. Moretto said last week that he had not been arrested.

Weist's roommate, Dan Downen, had just finished wiping and hosing burns, blood and bits of finger off the walls last Thursday.

He said that Weist, whom he had not seen since the incident, had been in an induced coma and the previous day had emerged from a surgery that left him with only a pinky finger on one hand. The other man, who did not live there, had been treated for burns on his back, said Downen, who was home at the time of the explosion.

"I swear to God, it looked like my wall swelled like 2 feet. I went over there an opened the door, and there was nothing but smoke. [Weist's clothing] was on fire. I grabbed him, threw him down, ripped off the flames and patted him out," he said, adding that Weist had a history of "playing with fireworks." Moretto said.
DPS investigators, along with Santa Clara County bomb and fire investigators and the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, were trying to determine what kind of explosive device Weist had.


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

Lakewood City Council nomination period closes December 5, 2008

The nomination period for candidates for City Council opens on November 10th and closes on December 5th 2008. We have not seen this information posted anywhere else on the internet other than our site. Nothing at the city website or in emails from the city "news fodder" email machine. Nothing in the Press Telegram. This is no doubt intentional as all the incumbents want challengers to have no time advantage. They are hoping that challengers miss the very small time window for the nomination period above.

There is no filing fee to run for City Council. The only cost paid to the City would be from candidates wishing to include a Candidate’s Statement in the sample ballot. Potential candidates must go into see the city clerk to obtain a “candidate’s packet” which is a compilation of material from various sources.

The process of issuing nomination papers is not one that can be completed remotely, the potential candidate (or designee) must appear in person at the clerk's office or they may designate (in writing) someone to collect the information for them.

We will be providing more information on this process as we move forward but we felt it was important to get this information out to potential candidates as soon as possible in order to start vetting the candidates and to insure that they have as good as chance at winning as the three incumbents up for re-election (Steve Croft, Todd Rogers and Diane DuBois)


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

Lakewood Measure "L" (utility users tax) results

It looks like this tax and a host of others will be increasing during the recession. No idea what Lakewood will tax next under Measure L as it is written to broaden the scope of what "utilities" and services are taxable. And don't expect any accountability from this city, who's motto should be city of obfuscation, the opposite of transparency. You never get a straight answer and to get it you have to pry it out of them. So dont go looking for where this money is really going. Its theirs now and they will do with it what they want. You had the chance to make the city accountable and once again the voters failed.

As of Date: 11/05/2008 Time: 03:24

LAKEWOOD MEASURE L - COMMUNICATION USERS' TAX -
(MAJORITY OF VOTES CAST) -

Yes	21,848	78.74%
No	5,898	21.46%

TOTAL PRECINCTS 52 PRECINCTS REPORTING 52

REGISTRATION 42,237

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

Change is here...in many ways

Well we had to laugh at this news tidbit which was over looked by most in all the excitement tonight. We were wondering if this was a silent nod to LAAG's anti fireworks position, a snub to China's fireworks exporters or an acknowledgement of Al Gore's position on global climate change. (humor intended here) In any event we find it refreshing that Obama felt that he did not need to cover a million people in the waiting crowd with smoke and ash to make a point. Words were patriotic/historic enough. We have said it before and we will say it again. Patriotism has nothing to do with fireworks. Its standing for principles.

Obama Canceled Fireworks for This Evening

November 05, 2008 1:05 AM

Given all the pomp and pageantry of past events for President-elect Obama, why was tonight's celebration speech so subdued?

That was intentional.

In fact. fireworks were originally planned for this evening, but President-elect Obama canceled them.

"Given the sobriety of the times, he didn't feel they were appropriate," senior adviser David Axelrod tells ABC News.


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

Circuit City hanging on in Lakewood

Circuit City Stores Inc. said Monday it is closing about 20 percent of its U.S. stores -- cutting thousands of jobs -- in an effort to return to profitability as it finds consumers reluctant to spend and its vendors less eager to give it credit.

The nation's No. 2 consumer electronics retailer said it will shut 155 of its more than 700 stores and leave at least a dozen markets entirely. It will lay off about 17 percent of its domestic work force, which could affect up to 7,300 people.

Stores in Southern California that will be closed include those in City of Industry, Compton, Escondido, Fontana, Foothill Ranch, Mira Loma, Moreno Valley, Murrietta, Pomona, Riverside, Thousand Oaks, Santa Barbara, Santa Maria and Vista. The list of store closures can be found here. The Lakewood Center Circuit City store will remain open as will one store in Long Beach, as well as stores in Signal Hill, Norwalk and Seal Beach (in this area). That is good news for Lakewood Center which has already been decimated by the recession. Mervyn's filed for bankruptcy in September and the Macy's / May Co. / Robinsons consolidation racked the retailing world a few years back, drastically effecting Lakewood Center's major anchor tenants. The Costco store required the demolition of a brand new Macy's store which was only open for a few years before closing.

I suspect the recession will put Circuit City into bankruptcy after the dismal Christmas season this year which will likely be a bloodbath. The only bright spot might be flat screen digital TV sales in advance of the looming February 2009 analog TV signal transmission cut off (for those using over the air antennas). But I doubt there are a lot of sales left as most people have cable or satellite and most in Lakewood likely already have digital TV's.

The Costco store opening in Lakewood Center has been delayed by a number of "utility" issues. (It was supposed to open in November 2008) Apparently there is a groundwater problem of some sort. This has not been reported on from what we have seen. It is not slated to open until spring (when the recession is in full swing) and after missing the key holiday purchasing season which will be a big hit on Lakewood.

Lakewood behind cities such as Downey, Carson and Cerritos in sales tax, as only 6 percent of the city is zoned for commercial or industrial uses. The rest of Lakewood comprises homes, schools, parks and other entities.

Given that the city has a lot of work to do as they are wasting the 6% they do have. Look at the South and Bellflower location which lost Vons in the late 1990's and recently lost Bakers Square restaurant. We reported on this intersection over a year ago. Both anchor tenants likely never to be replaced without serious action by the city. That is a prime location being squandered. The city is not stepping up doing what it can to attract businesses. It focuses all its attention on the mall while the rest of the city goes downhill. Soon the loss of these businesses ans well as the home values plummeting will mean more blight and more crime as less desirable residents are attracted, such as renters and those who fail to keep their houses and surrounding property neat and tidy. And this is how the death spiral begins in a city. It takes years for the decay to spread but it does spread.

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

Vote NO on Measure "L" the Utility Users Tax: Tell the City Back to the Drawing Board

Measure "L" Utility Users Tax: The Tax Grab Broadens its Reach

This November 4 election will not only involve a new President but many state and local measures which are making a grab for your wallet. Clearly the Utility Users Tax (UUT) "increase" (or rather broadening in reach and scope) could not come at a worse time given the current economic "meltdown".

As it typical with Lakewood city government, the city is not telling voters the whole story on the UUT tax increase in Measure "L". (Lakewood kept LAAG's "No on L" argument off the November ballot while accepting the "Yes on L" argument) They claim Measure L is simply “updating” the existing tax ordinance but in reality it is a broadening of the ordinance in order to make the tax apply to more services and utilities likes calls made over the internet. That was the whole reason why this UUT in Measure L required another vote. The City does not want to do this again so they are broadening the ordinance to not only bring in more revenue (by taxing more types of services and utilities like VOIP phone service, and other future technology like femtocells etc.) but to make it easier in the future to tax "yet unknown" or unforseen sources of revenue ...without a further vote by the taxpayers. All while duping the taxpayer into not thinking they are getting a tax increase just because the tax "rate" is not increasing.

So for right now they are claiming that internet access, email and related content and services are not being taxed under Measure L but this is only due to the fact that Federal law prevents it at this time. But if that changes in the future then Lakewood could use Measure L to tax those new services, without asking for your permission or taxpayer approval via an election.

The city claims the 3% rate will not increase without a vote but nothing in Measure L prevents them from further broadening the application of the tax to other "services" or "utilities" without taxpayer approval.

Another very sneaky tactic is telling voters that the funds will be used for a certain service, project or activity when the proposed ordinance does not mandate such use. The reason the city has done this is it knows that voters are less likely to approve a “general slush fund” tax especially when the money can be funnelled to special interests (like those entities or their representatives who signed the ballot argument in favor of Measure "L"). Voters are more likely to approve a tax that is earmarked for “specific services”. However it takes a 2/3 majority vote in order to pass a “special tax”, whereas a “general tax” (such as this proposed UUT) only needs a simple majority to pass. Deceptively, the voter booklet voters are provided with tells voters:

"Shall an ordinance be adopted to ...fund law enforcement, gang and drug prevention programs, after-school activities, senior transportation, parks, street and traffic signal maintenance and other essential services, ... regardless of technology used, annual audits, public review of expenditures, no rate increases without voter approval, and local control of revenues?"

If you want to read the entire 15 page ordinance of Measure L please click here (PDF)

Again they city has attempted to enumerate those uses that they know will garner votes for the measure but fail to explain to voters that the tax revenues can be used for what ever the city council decides to use them for. That is there the sneaky phrase "and other essential services" above comes into play. What does that mean? Only the city council will decide. For example if the city council decided to use the revenues to redecorate their offices, there is NOTHING in Measure L that prevents that.

There is nothing in Measure L that governs the use of the taxes. That includes even restricting where this tax money cold be used. For example it could be used outside the city of Lakewood. This ordinance does not change anything with respect to existing law on such matters.

Another feature the city likes to tout in Measure L is the "public review of expenditures". Nowhere in Measure L is there any change to existing law with respect to the "transparency" that they city will allow or promoting the use of the internet to increase public awareness of the use of tax dollars like this. There is nothing in Measure L that increases public review or accountability or even visibility. Ask yourself this: if the city council is so transparent why have they never posted the full city budget on line or the audits and budget expenditures of all the prior $35 million (the city's figure) collected since 1992 under the existing UUT? Because they dont want to to know where the money goes and they dont want you to know what is going on with your tax dollars. The devil is in the details! Other city’s UUT ordinances specifically allow for citizen oversight on the utilization of the new funds. Not Measure L.

There are other problems with Measure L. Lets say you use a cell phone, a land phone and VOIP all together. You will be taxed on all three devices, so there is overlap in the tax. The tax is regressive in that it is a greater burden on low or fixed income residents and the more you use the phones and other services the more you will be taxed. However as we all know utilties are now mostly taxes and have very high minimum monthly fixed charges. This tax feeds off those minimum charges. Also if your neighbor only uses a land line and not other technologies he will only be taxed once. So the fairness of Measure L is not as big a selling point as the city makes it out to be.

Also do not assume that 3% is a "low" tax rate. Take a look at your utitlty bills with 10 or so different taxes on it and see which one is higher than 3%. Likely none. So why is 3% deemed reasonable? Especially when Measure L will now be covering more of your services and utlities. The problem of course is the cumulative effect of all these "low" taxes on your overall bill. That is why utility bills are always advertised without all the taxes, which can add as much as 15% to the total. And we have all seen how these taxes are wasted.

Lets not forget the other tax increases on the horizon either; the 0.5% county and 1% state sales tax increases that combined will increase LA County’s sales tax to 9.75%, the highest in the country. This is another tax grab when voters can least afford it.

Also voting NO on Measure L leaves the old tax in place. It does not eliminate the old tax or the revenue. If this were not a chance to get more revenue why would the city and the Sheriff's department be in favor of it?

Dont buy the City's deceptive tax grab. Tell the city to get this right by increasing oversight and accountability provisions to prevent abuse of your hard earned dollars. (Just like the Federal bailouts) VOTE NO on Measure "L"

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

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

Bailouts for CA pensions next up

I knew this was coming. You could see the writing on the wall 3 years ago or more. So we the taxpayers bail out the banks and Wall St. Then we bail out AIG. Now we are going to have to bail out the pension funds of those hard working cops who bring lawsuits upon us taxpayers (when the shoot and taser people "accidentally") as well as all their "hard working" civil servant cousins. Yes that's right Joe Taxpayer. You go to end of the line. Too bad your 401k just ate it in the last two weeks. No one to bail you out. But who will pay the cops $100,000 a year retirement and gold plated healthcare for life with cost of living when Wall St. dented their pension funds? YOU WILL of course. Wake up private sector zombies! You better get in line for your bailout before its all gone! You know what rolls down hill...and guess who is at the bottom. You cant really have a bigger train wreck can you? Idiots in government running a pension fund the size of a small country and when they screw up they get bailed out.

Like I say all the time. The solution to the problem is that we all go work for the government and leave the private sector jobs to third world (soon to be first world) countries. Next we will nationalize the banks. Ahh socialism is great ain't it? Well it is if you are a public employee. The rest of us have to pay for it.

Retirement system bailout feared
By Troy Anderson, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/08/2008
http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_10674612

The Wall Street meltdown has siphoned tens of billions of dollars from local and state public pension systems over the past year, and elected officials and taxpayer groups expressed worry Wednesday that taxpayers might ultimately have to bail out the plans.

The state retirement system has lost about $50 billion in investment value since June 30, 2007, a drop of about 20 percent in just over a year.

Los Angeles County's system has dropped 8 percent, from $40.9 billion down to $37.8 billion, during the same period.

The city of Los Angeles Fire and Police Pension System dropped 13 percent, to $12.1 billion.

And the state teachers retirement system has also dropped 8 percent, down to $158.6 billion.

Former Assemblyman Keith Richman, who heads a foundation seeking pension reform in California, said the drop in assets "is going to put a severe financial strain on the taxpayers."

He noted that state taxpayers already are on the hook for several hundred billion dollars in unfunded liabilities for public employee pensions and retiree health care plans.

"The public employee pensions were going to place a heavy cost on the taxpayers before the drop in the stock market and it's going to be even more costly now," said Richman, president of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, said the drops in the funds, especially the $49.2 billion drop in CalPERS, are "Exhibit A" in why state lawmakers should have adopted Richman's plan a few years ago to shift new state employees into 401(k)-type retirement plans.

"So not only do private employees see their own 401(k) retirement accounts shrinking, they are now also on the hook to pay additional costs for public sector pensions that are unfunded," Coupal said. "This is highly unjust."

But California Public Employees Retirement System spokeswoman Patricia Macht said the system has experienced heavy losses before, only to recover fairly quickly. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the fund lost about $50 billion but ultimately rebounded with a $120 billion gain, she said.

CalPERS holds about 56 percent of its investment portfolio in the stock market, she said, but no more than 0.5 percent of that in any single public company, with additional diverse investment in bonds, real estate and commodities.

"One lesson we learned in the early 2000s was the need to hold back some of our gains - to spread our gains over a longer period of a time," she said.

Macht said the taxpayer contribution to CalPERS won't need to be increased in the fiscal year starting July 1. But she said CalPERS will have to wait to see how the market does before determining if the taxpayer contribution will need to be increased in future years.

Les Robbins, chairman of the Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association, said the board has plenty of money to pay for county employees' pensions.

"We haven't seen anything like this since 1929," said Robbins, a retired sheriff's sergeant. [is this not inconsistent with his prior statement...never mind he is a cop already on the dole...LAAG Editor] "But we're in this for the long haul. We work in 30-year cycles. We are a conservative fund." [Yes and so were my 401k stocks..again public employees in denial of reality]

Michael Perez, general manager of the city's Fire and Police Pension, said the fund has dropped significantly and he's gotten lots of calls from worried members.

"It's affected us as it has every other public pension system," Perez said. "We're a well-funded and well-diversified plan and we smooth asset values over a five-year period. We've been in existence since 1899 and have been through a lot of market cycles."

At Tuesday's Board of Supervisors meeting, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky expressed concerns about a recent LACERA report noting the fund has exposure to several large investment banks that filed for bankruptcy, received a federal bailout or were purchased by another bank, including Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., American International Group Inc. and Merrill Lynch Co. Inc.

LACERA Chief Investment Officer Lisa Mazzocco wrote that the fund has more than $150 million invested in companies that could be at risk.

"The magnitude of this week's events is incomprehensible," Mazzocco wrote. "In a matter of 10 short days, the country's financial system has been dramatically altered."

Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke said LACERA had initially estimated it may lose $84 million.

"We had a lot of warning," Burke said. "And so I was really surprised that there was such a difference in terms of the approach of the county and the approach of LACERA as it related to some of those investments."

But Yaroslavsky said the $84million is "pocket change" compared to what the losses may eventually total. Yaroslavsky said the county may ultimately have to bolster the LACERA fund with hundreds of millions of dollars.

The annual taxpayer contribution to the fund has risen from $194million in 2001 to $752 million last year.

"The real impact is going to be when we have to make up what could be in the nine figures on the retirement contribution - to make up the difference between what they lost in earnings and what has to be put in to meet the requirements of funding the pension plan," Yaroslavsky said.

troy.anderson@dailynews.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

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