Tazer Spotlight!

The Tazer, unflinching in the face of controversy, is always open for your commentary, and so, without further adieu, we feature this exchange in response to Mike Ali's allegations of Brown Act misconduct...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

anonymous said...
Mr. Ali: Why not be fair with your commentary to this Tazer audience and broadcast the Brown Act Violations made this week by other candidates for mayor on National Night Out:

Gayle McLaughlin & Gary Bell

Shouldn't THEY also know better?

Now, let's review your campaigning efforts for Mr. Bell - you too gave out campaign material during the cities National Night Out also.

Do you feel justified because you were not on city property? Isn't it the same violation to be using a city event for political purposes?

dread captain shiroiwashi said...
Hey, "anonymous"! Glad to know you're all about being even-handed. I like that.

Me, I happen to think there's a big difference between a city-sponsored event that should (supposedly) have no specific political agenda and a press conference called by a mayor on government property on government time where an employee of a county supervisor may have been campaigning for that mayor on government time. But what do I know, right?

Not that the Brown Act has ever been enforced with any sort of passion or zeal, I say take it up with whichever legal authority is convened for this purpose and let the chips fall where they may.

Mike Ali said...
Okay, this is like one of most weakest and lame agruements I have ever heard. But as anybody in this community knows I am always transparent and very upfront about what I do, so in fairness to YOU I will respond!

First of all I am not an incumbet or elected offical seeking re-election, nor have I called a press conference for campaigning purposes.

You know as well I do that I respectively called and asked the National Night Out organizers if I could set-up a small cardboard table to pass-out campaign literature for the candidate I support. I was cleared to do as such. If I would been told no, I would have respected them and would have brought no literature what so ever.!

Plus I paid to rent a space to have the little table to the event organizers and all incumbents and candidates were entitled to do as such, if they wished to rent a space!

Sis, you know I have always read your postings and will give you your respect at what you post.

But however the day of press conference I saw you hob-nobbing with Mayor Anderson and many people there at that event were kind of surprised how buddy-buddy you were with her. It looked sort of strange that you were all up in face when she got out of her car.

But I do not really care one bit, about your political cronies or who you roll with. Thats your business!But I am saying is I played be the rules that night and I always will!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Tazer thanks everyone for their participation. That's why we're here.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT, August 4th, 11:41 AM: A correction from Michael Ali via e-mail:

Dear Tazer readers, I had mentioned the illegal campaigning by Irma Anderson's supporter passing her re-election campaign literature illegally on City Property and while the Mayor was on duty at a City 'function'. I stated it was in violation of the Brown Act. I should have stated it was A VIOLATION OF THE CALIFORNIA FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION that camapign literature was being illegally passed on City Property and with incumbent being on duty as an elected official! I do apologise for my error! However the point remains...ILLEGAL CAMPAIGNING IS JUST THAT!

Admitting a mistake is never weak and never wrong. Too bad some politicians can't be brave and right.

The Tazer finds itself siding with the assessment of Dread Captain. If someone believes illegal campaigning took place, they can report any incident(s) to the CA Fair Political Practices Commission. Let the chips fall where they may!

Road Rage Insanity

TWO ARRESTED AFTER SHOOTOUT ON I-80
Chase ends in a crash, closing two eastbound lanes of the freeway and sending two to hospital

By Cassandra Braun and Karl Fischer
CONTRA COSTA TIMES

RICHMOND - Police are investigating a roving shootout Thursday between two cars that triggered a chase and ended in a crash on Interstate 80, briefly shutting down two eastbound lanes.

An officer was patrolling the 4200 block of Hilltop Drive around 5:40 p.m. when he saw the occupants of a Honda sedan and a four-door Lexus exchanging gunfire, Sgt. Enos Johnson said.

The officer pursued the Honda onto eastbound I-80, where the driver lost control in the fast lane and smashed into two passing cars under the Richmond Parkway overpass. The accident shut down the two left lanes for about a half-hour.

The Honda's driver, David Khettavong, 22, was trapped in the car as a result of the accident and arrested at the scene. The car had been reported stolen.

Two people from the other cars involved in the accident were flown with non-life-threatening injuries to John Muir Medical Center in Walnut Creek, police said.

Meanwhile, officers were using K-9s to track one of the shooting suspects, who witnesses said jumped out of the car after the impact and ran across four lanes of westbound I-80 traffic and down an embankment toward Hilltop Mall, Johnson said.

About 8:30 p.m., a resident on Flannery Road in the Tara Hills subdivision in unincorporated San Pablo just west of I-80 reported that a suspicious man was in the back yard.

California Highway Patrol officers and Contra Costa sheriff's deputies arrived at the scene and arrested 24-year-old Johnson Phommaphat, the passenger in the stolen Honda.

Both suspects were booked at County Jail in Martinez on charges of assault with a deadly weapon.

Police are still looking for the other vehicle, a four-door white or tan Lexus, that was involved in the shooting.

Tension mounts...

The Tazer wasn't the only entity experiencing consternation over this "Safe Streets Now" proposal being shopped by Irma Anderson. Regular Tazer reader and contributor Michael Ali had this to say on the matter:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the very timely piece that the current edition of the 'RICHMOND TRUTH TASER' put out regarding Mayor Anderson's press conference yesterday (Wednesday-August 9, 2006), let the following facts of truth and public record be known to the readers of the 'TASER'.

Mayor Anderson's current administration over the past 4 1/2 years has had over 182 deaths from violence and killings in the killing fields of Richmond. Her so-called 'War On Violence' has failed and lost years ago. She is using her theme of 'Safe Streets Now!' as nothing more then a campaign tool for her re-election. She is EXPLOITING my family and all other families who are survivors, that have lost family to the violence and killing. She is now asking us to PROSTITUTE ourselves by endorsing a worthless ballot measure, that neither is supported by the Richmond City Council, City Manager, the City Fianance Director or the current Chief of Police, who has remained silent on the matter.

Here are the true facts that the REAL RICHMOND VIOLENCE PREVENTION MOVEMENT knows:

1. That the current Chief of Police Magnus can petition the Richmond City Council for any funding that his Department needs in terms of money, technology, manpower and firepower; his requests will be granted by the Council, that would include the War On Violence. So there would be no need for a special election as Mayor Anderson touts.

2. The so-called 'Safe Streets Now!' monies could not even be used or allocated until July 2007 [time of passage of next budget -- ed.].

3. The Richmond Police Department currently has somewhere between 25 to 30 positions open to recruit and hire new street-level officers. Translated that means there is enough money available NOW to recruit and hire 25 to 30 new street-level officers. Again with that funding available, it negates the need for another rip-off special election.

4. And the most damning thought is that Mayor Anderson was illegally campaigning on City property and on duty as the Mayor at the press conference. She had staff from Supervisor John Gioia's office passing out 'Anderson For Mayor' campaign literature which is a VIOLATION OF THE BROWN ACT AND THEREFORE ILLEGAL!

This information was held back at the so-called press conference! Exploiting our families, lying and deceiving the citizens of Richmond, illegally campaiging! What a sham of democracy!

DAMN DIRTY POLITICS!

Yours in the Struggle for Human and Civil Rights in the City of Richmond,

Micheal Ali

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Tazer stands ready for all discussion on this matter, no matter how pointed, but reasoned.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT, August 3rd, 6:31 PM: Mike Ali reports this addendum:

"I got a phone from Contra Costa County Board of SupervisorJohn Gioia, who was concerned when I had mentioned at the Mayor's press conference that one of his staff was illegallly passing out 'reelect Irma Anderson for Mayor campaign literature' on City property and while Mayor Anderson was on duty for the press conference. I stated that it was a violation of the Brown Act to do as such.

Gioia stated that his staffer was a part-time employee and was passing it out on her on time. Nor was she representing his office while she was there. Okay, I promised the Supervisor that I would set the record straight about his pat-time staffer. Now I told him that it was still a violation of the Brown Act to campaign on City Property or doing City business. He contends that this individual was perfectly well within their rights to do as such and did not violate the Brown Act, and was not illegally campaigning. Hhhummm! Yeah right, whatever!"

Duly noted, Mr. Ali, and thank you for that. Supervisor Gioia and Mayor Anderson are welcome to give their own accountings of this incident. The Tazer is more than just fair and balanced, it is equal time to any who wish to participate.

Editorial Decisions?

Thursday greetings to all inhabitants of Tazerville!

Something interesting apparently happened on the way to the presses for the Contra Costa Times. When we got hold of today's edition, we found a front page article by John Geluardi and Karl Fischer about Irma Anderson's quest to get her "Safe Streets Now" measure on the November ballot. The title: "Mayor's initiative confronts violence".

The Tazer thought it was good enough to find online and post here, but imagine our confusion when there are TWO articles by Geluardi and Fischer with identical content but different titles. The one that was published bears today's date, but the other bears yesterday's. Its title: "Richmond mayor launches signature-gathering campaign to fund more cops".

Needless to say, this caused a minor stir among Team Tazer. Sure, it wasn't published in the paper (our edition of the paper, that is), but an enthusiastic and false title in Anderson's favor was mulled and posted online. According to the "SSN" proposal -- as cited in the article -- it funds recruitment and hiring, both of which are processes that do not necessarily result in an officer for the Richmond Police Department.

The Tazer even has a quibble with the published version title. We've never seen an "initiative" confront anything, let alone violence, but Madam Mayor might hope it does, so that she won't have to do it herself.

And here it is, complete with the published title.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MAYOR'S INITIATIVE CONFRONTS VIOLENCE
If approved, money would be directed from budget toward hiring additional police officers

By John Geluardi and Karl Fischer
CONTRA COSTA TIMES

Mayor Irma Anderson stood on the steps of the Richmond Police Department on Wednesday to announce a petition drive for her $6.5 million anti-violence special election initiative.

At the news conference, Anderson said she has 180 days to collect 6,000 signatures for the initiative to qualify for a special election. If approved, the initiative would earmark money in next year's budget to hire police officers and fund anti-violence programs.

Anderson vowed to take the initiative to the voters after her council colleagues voted it down last week.

"I am here to take a stand against violence in our city," Anderson said. "From now on, I will not engage in anymore political rhetoric. I simply cannot stand by while more lives are lost."

About 25 community members, including a representative of state Sen. Don Perata's office, stood with the mayor Wednesday. The news conference was coordinated by the Lew Edwards Group, the same political consulting firm that is handling Anderson's re-election campaign.

Council members are criticizing the initiative as a financially reckless plan calculated to enhance her campaign by exploiting the heartbreak caused by years of chronic violence.

It is telling that the timing of Anderson's news conference coincides with the beginning of her campaign, Councilman Nat Bates said.

"The mayor is trying to get her re-election campaign going, and unfortunately she's using the homicides," Bates said. "It's a very sad commentary that a person would go to that extent. It has nothing to do with solving the problem, and I hope the citizens will see through it."

Anderson denied her motivations are political and said council members do not want voters to have a say on the violence in their community.

"I expected more from the council," she said. "They fear our community cannot make a good decision about how their money is spent."

Anderson's initiative would mandate 5 percent of next year's budget -- about $6.5 million -- be used to recruit and hire new police and fund anti-violence programs. The goal is to cut violent crime by 50 percent in the next five years, Anderson said.

About $4.2 million would go to recruit and hire new police officers. Violence-prevention programs such as after-school tutoring, job training and parolee re-entry support would received $2.3 million.

The initiative would not raise new taxes, Anderson said; the funding would come from recently increased city fees and projected increases in revenue.

But it is likely that the projected increases would not cover the $6.5 million and that other departments would suffer cuts in order to fund the new officers and programs, said Councilman John Marquez, who is also chairman of the Public Safety Committee.

The diversion of funds could seriously threaten the city's financial recovery from a crippling $35 million budget shortfall in 2004.

Marquez also said the need for more police funding is highly questionable. Richmond currently has a complement of about 155 sworn officers, and in the current budget funding has been approved to reach 179. Prior to the budget crisis, the department's authorized complement was 205 sworn officers.

But like other Bay Area cities, Richmond has had trouble finding qualified recruits. Until recently, the city was financially unsound, there was no permanent police chief, and police officers agreed to salary cuts in the wake of the budget crisis. In addition, the police station is in sub-standard condition and may be a health hazard because of a mold problem, according to a recent report.

While cautious not to seem ungrateful, leaders inside the Richmond Police Department said they had no role in crafting the mayor's proposal and were not entirely clear how all of the new money would be used.

"I appreciate the commitment from all of the elected officials, including the mayor," police Chief Chris Magnus said. "While we were not involved in this particular proposal, I think the discussion is helpful."

Supporters of the mayor's initiative said that ending the chronic violence is the most important issue facing Richmond.

"It's simple arithmetic, you would have more available bodies to stop crime," said Brian Arnold, manager of the Monterey Pines Apartments in South Richmond. There have been two homicides near the apartments in recent years.

In 2005, there were 40 homicides in Richmond and 213 nonfatal shootings. Since the 1980s, there has not been fewer than 18 homicides in the city, and one year there were more than 60.

Contact John Geluardi at 510-262-2787 or at jgeluardi@cctimes.com

Unleavening

Some sad news to temper the community policing report...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MAN SHOT DEAD IN RICHMOND

A Richmond man was shot to death early Saturday morning in a Cutting Boulevard parking lot near Martin Luther King Memorial Park.

Norman Bass, 41, of Richmond, died at the scene from multiple gunshot wounds to the head and torso, according to the Contra Costa County Coroner's Office.

Police found the wounded man when responding to calls about gun shots heard about 12:22 a.m. Efforts to resuscitate the man were unsuccessful, police said.

--Denis Cuff

A New Hope

A blessed Sunday to all in Tazerville. Some rather promising news from RPD to report.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

POLICE, RESIDENTS ADDRESS CRIME

RICHMOND: About 60 meet with officers to discuss ways to combat illegal activity in Iron Triangle neighborhood

By John Geluardi
CONTRA COSTA TIMES

About 60 residents from Richmond's troubled Iron Triangle filed into the St. Mark's gym Thursday to meet police officers recently assigned to their community.

Capt. Alec Griffin and Lt. Mark Gagan gave residents the phone numbers and e-mail addresses of the nine patrol officers who will be permanently assigned to beat six, a crime-ridden area bounded by Ohio and Barrett avenues and Garrard and Carlson boulevards.

"Right now, there are ruthless people out there who do not care about the consequences for their actions, and people are afraid," Gagan told community members. "But together we will get to the point where they are the ones who are afraid."

The Iron Triangle neighborhood consists of mostly low-income residents, many who are immigrants and speak little English. Several of the residents at the event told police through a translator they are tired of blight, prostitution, drug dealing and chronic violence.

In June, Chief Chris Magnus redeployed the police department into the North, Central and Southern sectors and assigned a captain to each. The three sectors are subdivided into nine beats.

The redeployment is central to Magnus' community policing plan. The goal is that officers will develop familiarity and trust with community members through regular contact, and captains will be held accountable for the quality of policing in their sectors.

St. Mark's Father Ramiro Flores said the new community policing plan has given Iron Triangle residents new hope.

"I really believe this is the way to do it," he said. "The police need to develop trust with the people here so they feel safe to tell them who is responsible for crime in their neighborhoods."

St. Mark's Church, Casa di Esperanza and the Contra Costa Interfaith Supporting Community Organization planned the event and made Spanish translators available.

Contact John Geluardi at 510-262-2787 or at jgeluardi@cctimes.com.

FOR MORE INFO:
In Spanish and English, call Casa De Esperanza, 510-234-9015, or Richmond Police Department, 510-621-1212.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Tazer very much likes the idea of community policing + clergy + community/neighborhood groups. It strikes the Tazer as not only effective but cost effective as well.

See how that didn't even take $186,000 and 6 months to figure out?