Dec. 12
Los Angeles Times on California police unions” power:
It”s troubling enough that the members of the public in California have no access to the discipline and misconduct files of their police and therefore can”t know the caliber of officers serving them, or whether a particular handful are unreliable or dangerous on the street or are costing too much in liability settlements.
What”s worse shockingly so is that in some jurisdictions (including Los Angeles County) even prosecutors have no such access, even though that information is absolutely essential if defendants are to have fair trials.
It”s not getting better. Despite nationwide clamoring for increased police transparency and accountability, court interpretations of California law have put police records more thoroughly out of reach here than in any other state. When Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell tried to send Dist. Atty. Jackie Lacey a list of 300 of his deputies who have problematic conduct records, he was sued by the Assn. of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs the labor union for rank-and-file deputies. In July, the 2nd District Court of Appeal sided with the union.
The ruling now calls into question the practices of agencies in other California counties, including San Francisco, San Luis Obispo and Sacramento, that routinely share the names of problem officers with prosecutors.
The state Supreme Court will hear the case next year and can and should overturn the lower court. Prosecutors must be able to know who they are putting on the witness stand, and whether they have histories of dishonesty or other misconduct that call their credibility into question.
More to the point, prosecutors have a constitutional duty under the landmark 1963 case Brady vs. Maryland to inform defendants of information that calls the reliability of prosecution witnesses into question. If they don”t have that information themselves, it is exceedingly difficult to fulfill that duty.
Who are L.A. County”s problem deputies, and how did they earn their place on the sheriff”s secret “Brady” list? There was no way of knowing until now. Times reporters Maya Lau, Ben Poston and Corina Knoll learned the names and went to work uncovering the misdeeds. Thanks to the reporters” efforts, we now know that several deputies still serving have been convicted of crimes. Others were reprimanded but escaped prosecution. One faked a search warrant rather than seek one from a judge. One wrote a false report after pepper-spraying an elderly man in the face. One agreed to leave a sergeant out of an arrest report. Others have records of family violence or sexual misconduct with members of the public.
The Times story necessarily raises the question of how it is that deputies with records of lying, falsifying reports and other misconduct could still be serving. The answer lies in part in a civil service process that can overturn the sheriff”s decision to fire or discipline a deputy, and thus undermine his authority. The Board of Supervisors ordered changes to the process to ensure that the sheriff”s side of the case is adequately presented to the Civil Service Commission, but county employee unions are pushing back.
The power of law enforcement unions lies at the core of California laws and procedures that protect officers, keeping information about their conduct secret from the public and even from prosecutors, no matter how egregious their actions.
Law enforcement is a difficult and dangerous job, and should not be made more difficult and dangerous by unwarranted release of personnel records. But unlike teachers, firefighters or most other public employees, peace officers are empowered by the public to deny people their liberty and, in some cases, their lives, in the name of public safety. They must sacrifice some measure of privacy to ensure that their misconduct is sufficiently discoverable to enable the accused to defend themselves in court, and the public to monitor their actions and curb their conduct when necessary.
Courts that have protected officers from disclosure of their misdeeds have done so to uphold laws adopted by a Legislature that has been too willing to accept law enforcement union contributions and carry water for those unions. Regardless of how the state Supreme Court rules when McDonnell”s Brady case comes before it next year, it is well past time for lawmakers to show a little independence from law enforcement unions. It is time to let members of the public know a little more about the officers who serve them.
___
Dec. 12
San Francisco Chronicle on Mayor Ed Lee”s unfinished business housing:
The tech boom that Mayor Ed Lee embraced ensured that the man who began his career fighting for poor tenants ended up presiding over a city known for some of the nation”s most unaffordable housing and pervasive homelessness.
The city remained in the throes of the crisis at the untimely end of Lee”s tenure, but the mayor had grappled with it since his early years in office. State Sen. Scott Wiener, a former member of the Board of Supervisors, said that while jobs were the priority when he and Lee took office in the wake of a recession six years ago, “Very quickly, things flipped, and we had plenty of jobs and a housing shortage.” Even so, he said, the mayor”s focus on housing ultimately helped the city produce more homes than it has in decades.
Lee supported the creation of a trust fund to replace lost state spending on affordable housing and set a goal of building or rehabilitating 30,000 homes by 2020, of which more than 17,000 have been realized. He also supported major residential developments in Parkmerced and Treasure Island, though they have been slow to take shape.
In September, Lee signed a promising order setting deadlines to speed the city”s glacial planning and permitting process and set a goal of 5,000 new housing units a year, more than double the city”s average over the past three decades. “Obviously no mayor is going to solve housing in one or two terms,” Wiener said. “He put us on a good track.”
Lee”s record on homelessness is decidedly mixed. It remains one of San Francisco”s most intractable issues despite Lee”s efforts. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development”s latest point-in-time population count, more than 1 percent of the nation”s homeless live in San Francisco – about 6,257 people.
Lee created the city”s first Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing. His favored solution – the Navigation Center shelters that allowed entire homeless camps to move in and receive services – were considered successful by the few who could access them. But Lee simply couldn”t create enough shelter, from Navigation Centers to permanent supportive housing units, to dramatically reduce the number of desperate people on the streets.
Lee”s record on public housing, on the other hand, is one of unqualified success. The mayor, who grew up in a public housing complex in Seattle, made a pledge to remake San Francisco”s “poverty housing.”
This was a tall order. When he came into office, the vast majority of San Francisco”s public housing was replete with mold, pests, and decrepit facilities. The Housing Authority was short on cash and better known for a string of scandals, including employee discrimination and favoritism in awarding contracts, than it was for improving the lives of San Francisco”s poorest residents.
Lee appointed competent new authority leaders who got the budget in shape. They partnered with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and a long list of nonprofit and for-profit developers to upgrade all of San Francisco”s public housing.
The cost of this ambitious project, which is still in progress at sites around the city, was hundreds of millions of dollars. It couldn”t have been done without Lee”s leadership, creative thinking, and willingness to try new partnerships.
Lee was grappling with housing even in his last hours: His final Twitter post noted new legislation to rein in unscrupulous landlords. The next mayor should see through his permitting and planning reforms as well as public-housing improvements, said Gabriel Metcalf, chief executive of the urban planning think tank SPUR. He or she should also take on the difficult issue of changing the city”s zoning to create more opportunities for housing.
“The interlinked problems of homelessness and overall housing affordability stand as the greatest problems facing the next mayor,” Metcalf said. “Mayor Lee made a lot of progress … but the next mayor needs to take it a lot further.”
No mayor can accomplish these goals without public resolve. The burden is on us all to help fulfill Mayor Ed Lee”s unfinished mission on housing and homelessness.
___
Dec. 12
Orange County Register on a long-term solution for marijuana laws:
On Dec. 7 Congress extended critical protections for states that allow lawful access to medical marijuana.
Since 2014, the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment, originally known as the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment, has prevented the Justice Department from spending money to interfere with state medical marijuana laws.
Today, 29 states and the District of Columbia have laws on the books allowing some degree of access to medical marijuana, serving roughly 2 million patients, according to the Marijuana Policy Project and New Frontier Data.
As marijuana remains illegal under federal law, Rohrabacher-Blumenauer offers protections by simply blocking DOJ spending on enforcement, which is why it is tied to federal spending bills and must be constantly reauthorized.
While the amendment has been consistently reauthorized since 2014, reauthorization hasn”t been so certain this year, with attempts by prohibitionist House Rules Committee Chair Pete Sessions, R-Texas, to block it.
Fortunately, the amendment has been extended, for the time being. But as Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., said after the vote, two weeks isn”t enough security for the millions of people who benefit from medical marijuana.
“As Congress works out a long-term funding bill, it must also include these protections,” he said. “And ultimately, Congress must act to put an end to the cycle of uncertainty and permanently protect state medical marijuana programs and adult use from federal interference.”
We agree. The amendment must be reauthorized to protect patients and distributors willing to operate in a lawful manner. But in the long run, a better solution to the tension between state and federal laws is to remove marijuana from federal restrictions.
Practically, that entails passing legislation such as the Marijuana Justice Act introduced by Sen. Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, or the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act introduced by Reps. Tom Garrett, R-Virginia, and Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii. If Congress is unwilling to go that far, the least that should be done in the meantime is the passage of legislation like the CARERS Act to permanently protect state medical laws and allow Veterans Affairs physicians to prescribe medical marijuana.
___
Dec. 12
Santa Maria Times on raging wildfires being the new normal:
Gov. Jerry Brown recently had an interesting perspective on California”s future, saying raging wildfires are the “new normal,” and we”d best get used to it.
Or better yet, be prepared, because it is anything but normal that officials closed down North County schools earlier this week due to unhealthy smoke conditions from the Thomas fire.
That blaze has grown into one of California”s worst wildfires, ever. And it happens in a season when we used to get some rain, not fires.
Still, this is a joyous time of year, or at least it is for some of us. Before we get too gleeful about the holiday fun we”re having, perhaps we should pause for a moment and consider what kind of holiday season our neighbors down south are having.
We are referring to the thousands of people forced out of their homes by that series of wildfires stretching along the coast of Southern California.
The worst of the bunch so far has been the Thomas fire in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, whipped into a frenzy by Santa Ana winds and moving through residential areas so quickly that people barely have time to grab the car keys and escape. Photographs and video of the devastation make one think of a war zone, or the wake of a category-5 hurricane.
The terrible truth we must consider is that these fires affect all Californians in one way or another, because we live in a potential powder keg. And we”ve had our share of these fire monsters here on the Central Coast.
Long-time residents of the South Coast will remember, in vivid detail, the Painted Cave Fire that swept down from San Marcos Pass, destroying hundreds of homes and killing a woman trapped by the wall of flames consuming brush and structures at the rate of an acre a minute.
Mid-county residents will recall the more-recent Zaca Fire, started on Independence Day by workmen using a metal grinder spewing sparks into dry weeds. That one burned until almost October, scorching more than a quarter-million acres, mostly in the back-country wilderness.
This likely will turn out to be one of the worst fire years in California history, with the current blazes and the October conflagration that killed 42 people in Northern California”s wine country. And it”s obviously not over yet.
What the Thomas fire and those monsters from the past tell us is that we”re only one arcing power line, lightning strike or carelessly-discarded cigarette butt from a full-on catastrophe.
Another clue is that such fires are raging in December, a month in which wildfires have traditionally not happened.
Maybe this is what Californians will have to come to expect. A changing climate brought us the hottest summer on record, and despite last winter”s rainfall, we still are on the cusp of severe drought conditions.
The weather has a habit of changing people”s plans, and that”s what we all need to prepare for. We are engaged in a new climate paradigm, and while skeptics may question the existence of global warming, you cannot question what”s happening in California and much of the rest of the west recently.
Just as we warn motorists about the increased risk factors of holiday driving, we now feel compelled by current events to advise readers to be extra-careful doing anything that could send out the spark that ignites the next major wildfire. We also encourage everyone to have an emergency plan, fully discussed with friends and family, with emphasis on acting quickly.
___
Dec. 11
Sacramento Bee on California dam repairs:
California”s dam inspectors appear to be doing their jobs well. Unfortunately, too many dam operators are falling down on the job, and could be placing the public at risk.
That”s the message of a report by The Sacramento Bee”s Ryan Sabalow and Dale Kasler. It”s also a part of life in California. As vast swaths of Southern California smolder from the unusual late-season fires this dry December, people naturally are focusing less on rain, potential flooding or dam safety.
But as climate changes and the Santa Ana winds to the south and the Diablo winds in our region become more pronounced, Californians will have no choice but to invest in flood control and other water-related public works.
Kasler and Sabalow reviewed reports by dam safety inspectors who identified problems at 93 dams, 91 of which are “high hazard,” meaning people live and work downstream. They”re owned by a miss-mash of operators that include local water districts, utilities and the mighty Metropolitan Water District, which provides water to 19 million Southern Californians.
Problems generally are minor, initially, and no dam seems likely to fail any time soon. But small problems can become big problems if left unaddressed. Or as Jeffrey Mount, a water expert at the Public Policy Institute of California, says: “You”re lucky until you”re not.”
That became evident when the Oroville Dam spillway crumbled in February under pressure from the deluge in what would become California”s wettest rainy season on record. The final analysis of what went wrong at Oroville is not complete. But experts believe tree roots clogged the drainage system, undermining the spillway and leading to a $600 million rebuilding project.
A telling example cited by Kasler and Sabalow involves North Fork Dam, which was built in 1939, holds water from the small Pacheco Creek, and, loosely speaking, is operated by the Pacheco Pass Water District in Santa Clara County. Year after year, inspectors cited damage caused by roots and cracks in the spillway. It all went uncorrected until 2016, when the reason for the seemingly lackadaisical approach to safety became evident. The Pacheco Pass district was being dissolved, the inspector noted.
Now, the potential bill is coming into focus. In August, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, which hopes to take over the Pacheco district, submitted an application to the California Water Commission seeking $484.5 million to expand the 6,000-acre-foot reservoir to one that would hold 141,000 acre-feet.
The Water Commission is scheduled to meet on Wednesday to consider that request and 10 others like it. Competition will be stiff. The commission has $2.7 billion to allocate for water storage as part of the $7.5 billion Proposition 1 bond approved by voters in 2014. Requests total four times that $2.7 billion.
The Department of Water Resources estimates the cost of repairing dams statewide could be $5 billion. And there are many obstacles to raising money, not the least of which is that a 1996 initiative requires that dam owners obtain a two-thirds vote from affected people to raise taxes to pay for repairs.
Uncle Sam evidently will be little help, despite President Donald Trump”s promise that he would invest heavily in infrastructure. Congress seems incapable of funding public works. Congress last year approved legislation supposedly to help reinforce dams, but authorized a mere $10 million nationwide for the current year, and $445 million over 10 years. None of the money has been appropriated.
In 2011, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that a mega-storm of the sort that has struck California before could cause $725 billion in damage. The Central Valley Flood Protection Board estimates that we must spend as much as $21 billion during the next three decades to prepare for Central Valley floods. Statewide, the number exceeds $50 billion.
As we have written before and since the Oroville spillway crumbled, Californians must face the hard costs of living in this re-engineered state. Though the cost is high, the price of not acting could be huge.