Watching the City Council Meeting on Tuesday Night in addition to reading the Davis Enterprise coverage and the Ombudsman’s Report on his observations one is very tempted to hearken back to May 2, 2003 where President Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln beneath the sign Mission Accomplished and pronounced the end of major combat operations. And while this is probably a wholly unfair analogy, it is not without some truth to it. Because in reality while there was almost a jubilant atmosphere at the council chambers on Tuesday, the real and tough work lies not behind us but ahead of us.
And yet the very message of the other night is that there are structures in place that will lead us in the right direction.
Don Saylor perhaps summed up this feeling very well, “It is heartening to see the work of so many in the community on this issue. I think there’s a genius to what the community has done in response to the complaints we’ve heard.” Leaving aside the very obvious and blatant irony of his statement, one needs to remember that this system is largely untested by a strong and substantial case. What we have seen at best is that this system in good times, may be adequate—and even then I have my doubts.
At best I would suggest that this new system is indeed untested, but in many ways I believe even stronger that many of the problems that we dealt with over the last year and indeed over the last twenty years are still occurring now and that they have simply not come to our attention just yet in any sort of public way.
I think some of this false sense of security comes from this statement from the report of Bob Aaronson, the Ombudsman: “Of what I observed first-hand, there is little that is troubling about how the Davis Police Department responds to the public. To the extent that any incidents have prompted my concern, it has typically been misjudgments and not misconduct.”
In many ways this gives those such as the City Council Majority and their defenders strong political cover and these words set the tone for the meeting on Tuesday Night. And yet we must note that those words themselves are at best heavily nuanced. He said “little” not “nothing” and he couched in terms of what he observed “first-hand” which leaves much of what he has read second and third hand in play.
It is at this point at which I believe this veneer of mission accomplished begins to fray as quickly as that banner on the USS Lincoln. For one needs only travel out into the community—the minority community—to realize that all is not as rosy as it seemed in council chambers. If you talk to many people instead of optimism and euphoria you have at times heated anger and frustration. For these people, Saylor is indeed correct that there is much more “heat” than “light.”
Perhaps the most frank discussion of Tuesday evening’s meeting was on the Community Advisory Board. While many members of this board—all of whom are staunch defenders of the police—come forward on Tuesday to praise its work, it was enlightening first to hear the city staff admit that the CAB is not an oversight body like the Police Advisory Board or the Ombudsman. What it most resembles is a sounding board for the police chief.
Steven Worker, himself an ardent defender of the police and the council majority, admitted that the selection process might indeed appear problematic to the outsider and lend itself to the perception that the body was not representative. And although he did not offer a solution, his admission of the problem was enlightening. Moreover the concern was raised both by Worker and Sharla Harrington who spoke in public that the private nature of the meetings and the lack of specificity of the minutes also seemed to undermine it.
In truth this body was described by one of the few members of the CAB who is a critic of the police, as filled with people who are strong supporters and rarely ask tough questions. Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald (my wife and former chair of the HRC) pointed out that this body had actually existed prior to its reformation in 2005 and that prior to its disbanding by Chief Jim Hyde it had been a very effective and diverse body and that the new body was the one that lacked the diversity. It is a diversity in a different sense than sheer demographics, but rather a diversity of thought on police operations. There are simply too many defenders and not enough critics and the purpose of the meetings is wholly sanitized.
Perhaps the most outrageous comments of the evening were made by Councilmember Stephen Souza. First Councilmember Souza asked Mr. Aaronson if there was a required certification for an ombudsman. Actually he less asked it than asserted it. Mr. Souza clearly should have researched this prior to his question, for he would have clearly found that there is no certification required. Secondly he suggested that perhaps Mr. Aaronson could review the operations of all city departments. This was an astonishing statement that Mr. Souza once again should have taken up in private. It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.
When this position was created I strongly questioned how someone could be a part-time Ombudsman and only come to the city of Davis just a few days out of the month and be able to perform the vast tasks expected of him. This was not discussed on Tuesday night, but it seems clear that there is simply not enough time or resources available to provide the kinds of oversight and scrutiny that this system clearly needs. Mr. Aaronson in his position as Ombudsman, needs to be given far more resources than have thus far been allotted. And while Mr. Aaronson will not complain about this, I certainly both can and will.
This gets back to my primary complaint of that evening and let me say I respect the concerns that Bob Aaronson did express both in his report and in his statements on the lack of a strong supervisory structure, problematic in-car computers and in-car recording systems, and frankly his statement about the lack of communication was in fact a home run.
However at the end of the day, Mr. Aaronson, in my opinion simply has not seen the dark underbelly of the city of
The implication of Tuesday night was mission accomplished, but in fact, the reality is more like mission incomplete. The suggestion was made that we have made tremendous progress in the last year and in reality I would suggest that we have made tremendous progress in one area and one area alone—we hired an ombudsman. Unfortunately I think the city council believed that this position would be a catch-all and one of the reasons they believed that was in fact that they never really believed there was a problem to begin with.
The reality is that the position cannot possibly catch-all the problems in this community with the police. And I myself believe I have fallen into a false sense of security that somehow with the hiring of Bob Aaronson, that all of these problems that have been twenty years in the making would go away. I feel that I have backed off this fight to a considerable measure out of deference for Mr. Aaronson. Now after reading the press coverage I feel that I myself have made a mistake. It is not that Mr. Aaronson is poor intentioned—in fact, just the opposite in my opinion. He is a very good, decent, and sincere man. It is simply that he has too big a job ahead of him to leave it all to him.
Where we have fallen backwards is that there is no one that is a public body that can help him out. The Human Relations Commission has been disbanded and it has been replaced by a body that is at best a shadow of its former self. The Community Advisory Board has been somewhat exposed as a non-oversight body, and it was advertised as one of the pieces of the oversight puzzle. The PAC is a body that appears to audit IA’s (internal affairs investigations) and that is indeed an important purpose but it is also a limited one. And the Ombudsman himself has a
The problems in our community did not happen overnight and they will not be cured in a five month period. While I remain disappointed in the tone of the report, I also realize that this presents an opportunity for this community, if people are willing to actually go out into the field and discover for themselves what a lot of people have to deal with on a daily basis. The mission is in fact not accomplished and in many ways it has only just begun.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
What the discerning viewer witnessed from the dais Tues eve were two quite uncomfortable councilpersons trying to appear supportive of civilian police oversight which they were firmly opposed to..hence, comments that were either obtuse or the usual “nothingness”. You are right, Doug. This very definitely has a feel of the Bush administration’s plight as Davis once again demonstrates that it rejects the council majority’s agenda.
What the discerning viewer witnessed from the dais Tues eve were two quite uncomfortable councilpersons trying to appear supportive of civilian police oversight which they were firmly opposed to..hence, comments that were either obtuse or the usual “nothingness”. You are right, Doug. This very definitely has a feel of the Bush administration’s plight as Davis once again demonstrates that it rejects the council majority’s agenda.
What the discerning viewer witnessed from the dais Tues eve were two quite uncomfortable councilpersons trying to appear supportive of civilian police oversight which they were firmly opposed to..hence, comments that were either obtuse or the usual “nothingness”. You are right, Doug. This very definitely has a feel of the Bush administration’s plight as Davis once again demonstrates that it rejects the council majority’s agenda.
What the discerning viewer witnessed from the dais Tues eve were two quite uncomfortable councilpersons trying to appear supportive of civilian police oversight which they were firmly opposed to..hence, comments that were either obtuse or the usual “nothingness”. You are right, Doug. This very definitely has a feel of the Bush administration’s plight as Davis once again demonstrates that it rejects the council majority’s agenda.
“Perhaps the most outrageous comments of the evening were made by Councilmember Stephen Souza. First Councilmember Souza asked Mr. Aaronson if there was a required certification for an ombudsman. Actually he less asked it than asserted it. Mr. Souza clearly should have researched this prior to his question, for he would have clearly found that there is no certification required. Secondly he suggested that perhaps Mr. Aaronson could review the operations of all city departments. This was an astonishing statement that Mr. Souza once again should have taken up in private. It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.”
David, here are the links to three associations or institutes of training for Ombudsman’s
http://www.ombudsassociation.org/
http://www.usombudsman.org/
http://www.law.ualberta.ca/centres/ioi/
and the question of expansion of review of other departments was first said by the City Manager Bill Emlen. I followed it up with my questions. This idea of expansion has nothing to do with the role or compensation for the work Mr. Aaronson is doing so far, it has to do with the possible expansion of role and new compensation for this role. When this item first came to the Council over a year ago I asked about oversight by the Ombudsman of all or some city departments. Stephen
“Perhaps the most outrageous comments of the evening were made by Councilmember Stephen Souza. First Councilmember Souza asked Mr. Aaronson if there was a required certification for an ombudsman. Actually he less asked it than asserted it. Mr. Souza clearly should have researched this prior to his question, for he would have clearly found that there is no certification required. Secondly he suggested that perhaps Mr. Aaronson could review the operations of all city departments. This was an astonishing statement that Mr. Souza once again should have taken up in private. It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.”
David, here are the links to three associations or institutes of training for Ombudsman’s
http://www.ombudsassociation.org/
http://www.usombudsman.org/
http://www.law.ualberta.ca/centres/ioi/
and the question of expansion of review of other departments was first said by the City Manager Bill Emlen. I followed it up with my questions. This idea of expansion has nothing to do with the role or compensation for the work Mr. Aaronson is doing so far, it has to do with the possible expansion of role and new compensation for this role. When this item first came to the Council over a year ago I asked about oversight by the Ombudsman of all or some city departments. Stephen
“Perhaps the most outrageous comments of the evening were made by Councilmember Stephen Souza. First Councilmember Souza asked Mr. Aaronson if there was a required certification for an ombudsman. Actually he less asked it than asserted it. Mr. Souza clearly should have researched this prior to his question, for he would have clearly found that there is no certification required. Secondly he suggested that perhaps Mr. Aaronson could review the operations of all city departments. This was an astonishing statement that Mr. Souza once again should have taken up in private. It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.”
David, here are the links to three associations or institutes of training for Ombudsman’s
http://www.ombudsassociation.org/
http://www.usombudsman.org/
http://www.law.ualberta.ca/centres/ioi/
and the question of expansion of review of other departments was first said by the City Manager Bill Emlen. I followed it up with my questions. This idea of expansion has nothing to do with the role or compensation for the work Mr. Aaronson is doing so far, it has to do with the possible expansion of role and new compensation for this role. When this item first came to the Council over a year ago I asked about oversight by the Ombudsman of all or some city departments. Stephen
“Perhaps the most outrageous comments of the evening were made by Councilmember Stephen Souza. First Councilmember Souza asked Mr. Aaronson if there was a required certification for an ombudsman. Actually he less asked it than asserted it. Mr. Souza clearly should have researched this prior to his question, for he would have clearly found that there is no certification required. Secondly he suggested that perhaps Mr. Aaronson could review the operations of all city departments. This was an astonishing statement that Mr. Souza once again should have taken up in private. It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.”
David, here are the links to three associations or institutes of training for Ombudsman’s
http://www.ombudsassociation.org/
http://www.usombudsman.org/
http://www.law.ualberta.ca/centres/ioi/
and the question of expansion of review of other departments was first said by the City Manager Bill Emlen. I followed it up with my questions. This idea of expansion has nothing to do with the role or compensation for the work Mr. Aaronson is doing so far, it has to do with the possible expansion of role and new compensation for this role. When this item first came to the Council over a year ago I asked about oversight by the Ombudsman of all or some city departments. Stephen
Davisite or is it Gene Borack?, I have never been uncomfortable with oversight over the Police Department or any department for that matter. I have been from the beginning of my 19 consecutive plus years of service to our community as a member of a City Commission or City Council supportive of appropriate oversight. It is not should the City have oversight is what type we should have. Stephen
Davisite or is it Gene Borack?, I have never been uncomfortable with oversight over the Police Department or any department for that matter. I have been from the beginning of my 19 consecutive plus years of service to our community as a member of a City Commission or City Council supportive of appropriate oversight. It is not should the City have oversight is what type we should have. Stephen
Davisite or is it Gene Borack?, I have never been uncomfortable with oversight over the Police Department or any department for that matter. I have been from the beginning of my 19 consecutive plus years of service to our community as a member of a City Commission or City Council supportive of appropriate oversight. It is not should the City have oversight is what type we should have. Stephen
Davisite or is it Gene Borack?, I have never been uncomfortable with oversight over the Police Department or any department for that matter. I have been from the beginning of my 19 consecutive plus years of service to our community as a member of a City Commission or City Council supportive of appropriate oversight. It is not should the City have oversight is what type we should have. Stephen
Dear Stephen:
Thank you for posting those links and I appreciate your comments.
My read of these links suggests that there is training available which I see as a different issue from required certification. My interpretation of what you said on Tuesday was more along the lines of a certification you would have in order to be able to be an Ombudsman. My read of this material does not suggest that.
That said, this was somewhat a minor issue and perhaps it would have been better had I not brought it up. In retrospect it seems almost petty to have brought it up.
I say that to perhaps increase your awareness of my concerns about the second issue.
I was much more concerned with your second statement, and I do indeed remember you bringing this up last year as well.
I don’t see any possibility of expanding the position. My understanding of what Mr. Aaronson does, suggests a full time position just for his current duties would be substantially more reasonable than the current arrangement. And even then, I suspect he would only be scratching the surface of what needs to actually be done.
The sense I get is that there is much that needs to be done but is not getting done due to limitations on time. And that is not a knock on Mr. Aaronson by any means, it is simply a reality of the complexity of the situation.
Dear Stephen:
Thank you for posting those links and I appreciate your comments.
My read of these links suggests that there is training available which I see as a different issue from required certification. My interpretation of what you said on Tuesday was more along the lines of a certification you would have in order to be able to be an Ombudsman. My read of this material does not suggest that.
That said, this was somewhat a minor issue and perhaps it would have been better had I not brought it up. In retrospect it seems almost petty to have brought it up.
I say that to perhaps increase your awareness of my concerns about the second issue.
I was much more concerned with your second statement, and I do indeed remember you bringing this up last year as well.
I don’t see any possibility of expanding the position. My understanding of what Mr. Aaronson does, suggests a full time position just for his current duties would be substantially more reasonable than the current arrangement. And even then, I suspect he would only be scratching the surface of what needs to actually be done.
The sense I get is that there is much that needs to be done but is not getting done due to limitations on time. And that is not a knock on Mr. Aaronson by any means, it is simply a reality of the complexity of the situation.
Dear Stephen:
Thank you for posting those links and I appreciate your comments.
My read of these links suggests that there is training available which I see as a different issue from required certification. My interpretation of what you said on Tuesday was more along the lines of a certification you would have in order to be able to be an Ombudsman. My read of this material does not suggest that.
That said, this was somewhat a minor issue and perhaps it would have been better had I not brought it up. In retrospect it seems almost petty to have brought it up.
I say that to perhaps increase your awareness of my concerns about the second issue.
I was much more concerned with your second statement, and I do indeed remember you bringing this up last year as well.
I don’t see any possibility of expanding the position. My understanding of what Mr. Aaronson does, suggests a full time position just for his current duties would be substantially more reasonable than the current arrangement. And even then, I suspect he would only be scratching the surface of what needs to actually be done.
The sense I get is that there is much that needs to be done but is not getting done due to limitations on time. And that is not a knock on Mr. Aaronson by any means, it is simply a reality of the complexity of the situation.
Dear Stephen:
Thank you for posting those links and I appreciate your comments.
My read of these links suggests that there is training available which I see as a different issue from required certification. My interpretation of what you said on Tuesday was more along the lines of a certification you would have in order to be able to be an Ombudsman. My read of this material does not suggest that.
That said, this was somewhat a minor issue and perhaps it would have been better had I not brought it up. In retrospect it seems almost petty to have brought it up.
I say that to perhaps increase your awareness of my concerns about the second issue.
I was much more concerned with your second statement, and I do indeed remember you bringing this up last year as well.
I don’t see any possibility of expanding the position. My understanding of what Mr. Aaronson does, suggests a full time position just for his current duties would be substantially more reasonable than the current arrangement. And even then, I suspect he would only be scratching the surface of what needs to actually be done.
The sense I get is that there is much that needs to be done but is not getting done due to limitations on time. And that is not a knock on Mr. Aaronson by any means, it is simply a reality of the complexity of the situation.
In past meetings, I do remember Councilman Souza articulate an interest in having the ombudsman’s work extend beyond police oversight review. This certainly would have “diluted” the ombudsman’s focus on police oversight. Perhaps a misperception on my part, but Souza’s public questioning of Aaronson’s “credentials”(which if, he was concerned, should have been done before the hiring), could be read as an attempt to undercut the clear enthusiasm and respect at the city manager’s choice.
In past meetings, I do remember Councilman Souza articulate an interest in having the ombudsman’s work extend beyond police oversight review. This certainly would have “diluted” the ombudsman’s focus on police oversight. Perhaps a misperception on my part, but Souza’s public questioning of Aaronson’s “credentials”(which if, he was concerned, should have been done before the hiring), could be read as an attempt to undercut the clear enthusiasm and respect at the city manager’s choice.
In past meetings, I do remember Councilman Souza articulate an interest in having the ombudsman’s work extend beyond police oversight review. This certainly would have “diluted” the ombudsman’s focus on police oversight. Perhaps a misperception on my part, but Souza’s public questioning of Aaronson’s “credentials”(which if, he was concerned, should have been done before the hiring), could be read as an attempt to undercut the clear enthusiasm and respect at the city manager’s choice.
In past meetings, I do remember Councilman Souza articulate an interest in having the ombudsman’s work extend beyond police oversight review. This certainly would have “diluted” the ombudsman’s focus on police oversight. Perhaps a misperception on my part, but Souza’s public questioning of Aaronson’s “credentials”(which if, he was concerned, should have been done before the hiring), could be read as an attempt to undercut the clear enthusiasm and respect at the city manager’s choice.
David and Gene?, be it that I am a working Councilmember I can not at this time continue to interact on this Blog about this subject, I must go make a living. As to the subject of what I do, I think both of you are also making interpretations and assumptions. I would love talk to you both at some time in the future further on both of these subjects so you can know rather than assume. Thanks, Stephen
David and Gene?, be it that I am a working Councilmember I can not at this time continue to interact on this Blog about this subject, I must go make a living. As to the subject of what I do, I think both of you are also making interpretations and assumptions. I would love talk to you both at some time in the future further on both of these subjects so you can know rather than assume. Thanks, Stephen
David and Gene?, be it that I am a working Councilmember I can not at this time continue to interact on this Blog about this subject, I must go make a living. As to the subject of what I do, I think both of you are also making interpretations and assumptions. I would love talk to you both at some time in the future further on both of these subjects so you can know rather than assume. Thanks, Stephen
David and Gene?, be it that I am a working Councilmember I can not at this time continue to interact on this Blog about this subject, I must go make a living. As to the subject of what I do, I think both of you are also making interpretations and assumptions. I would love talk to you both at some time in the future further on both of these subjects so you can know rather than assume. Thanks, Stephen
For the record this is the exact statement that Councilmember Souza made on Tuesday:
“I would imagine that you are an accredited ombudsman…”
He was asking this within the context of expanding Mr. Aaronson’s role to looking over all city departments. I do not see that as feasible.
I do not see anything in the links that Mr. Souza has provided that indicates that there is any sort of an accreditation process. It does appear that there is some sort of training available to an Ombudsman but that would seem to be a different issue.
For the record this is the exact statement that Councilmember Souza made on Tuesday:
“I would imagine that you are an accredited ombudsman…”
He was asking this within the context of expanding Mr. Aaronson’s role to looking over all city departments. I do not see that as feasible.
I do not see anything in the links that Mr. Souza has provided that indicates that there is any sort of an accreditation process. It does appear that there is some sort of training available to an Ombudsman but that would seem to be a different issue.
For the record this is the exact statement that Councilmember Souza made on Tuesday:
“I would imagine that you are an accredited ombudsman…”
He was asking this within the context of expanding Mr. Aaronson’s role to looking over all city departments. I do not see that as feasible.
I do not see anything in the links that Mr. Souza has provided that indicates that there is any sort of an accreditation process. It does appear that there is some sort of training available to an Ombudsman but that would seem to be a different issue.
For the record this is the exact statement that Councilmember Souza made on Tuesday:
“I would imagine that you are an accredited ombudsman…”
He was asking this within the context of expanding Mr. Aaronson’s role to looking over all city departments. I do not see that as feasible.
I do not see anything in the links that Mr. Souza has provided that indicates that there is any sort of an accreditation process. It does appear that there is some sort of training available to an Ombudsman but that would seem to be a different issue.
This is the point that some on the the HRC made last year when Mr. Souza stated. and other council members supported, the idea that the Ombudsman would not only look into police complaints, but into city complaints.
I recall a meeting where it was stated that if there were pot holes or other issues that citizens had complaints about they could speak with the Ombudsman.
It was a revelation that either:
a) They clearly did not realize just how much of a problem this issue is in our community even though they had heard many stories for quite some time; or
b) They wanted to downplay the severity of it.
This is the point that some on the the HRC made last year when Mr. Souza stated. and other council members supported, the idea that the Ombudsman would not only look into police complaints, but into city complaints.
I recall a meeting where it was stated that if there were pot holes or other issues that citizens had complaints about they could speak with the Ombudsman.
It was a revelation that either:
a) They clearly did not realize just how much of a problem this issue is in our community even though they had heard many stories for quite some time; or
b) They wanted to downplay the severity of it.
This is the point that some on the the HRC made last year when Mr. Souza stated. and other council members supported, the idea that the Ombudsman would not only look into police complaints, but into city complaints.
I recall a meeting where it was stated that if there were pot holes or other issues that citizens had complaints about they could speak with the Ombudsman.
It was a revelation that either:
a) They clearly did not realize just how much of a problem this issue is in our community even though they had heard many stories for quite some time; or
b) They wanted to downplay the severity of it.
This is the point that some on the the HRC made last year when Mr. Souza stated. and other council members supported, the idea that the Ombudsman would not only look into police complaints, but into city complaints.
I recall a meeting where it was stated that if there were pot holes or other issues that citizens had complaints about they could speak with the Ombudsman.
It was a revelation that either:
a) They clearly did not realize just how much of a problem this issue is in our community even though they had heard many stories for quite some time; or
b) They wanted to downplay the severity of it.
I think the community has mistakenly attributed the relative silence in the last few months to mean that all is well and the current programs are working.
The absense of complaints is not proof that there is no problem. It is evidence that people still do not trust the current system.
Anyone who watched the Halema Buzayan situation unfold who is a parent had to get a sick feeling in their stomach because no one would ever want to be in that position.
If that what filing a complaint and suing the police means, that I’ll take my lumps and protect my family.
I agree with David Greenwald that some of us have been silent too long and it time now once again for action.
I don’t think Steve Souza gets it. I don’t think he realizes the depths of the problems. But he should because a serious racial profiling incident happened on his watch a few years ago when he was head of the Democratic party in Davis.
When he gets done cleaning our pool, maybe he can tell us all about it………….
I think the community has mistakenly attributed the relative silence in the last few months to mean that all is well and the current programs are working.
The absense of complaints is not proof that there is no problem. It is evidence that people still do not trust the current system.
Anyone who watched the Halema Buzayan situation unfold who is a parent had to get a sick feeling in their stomach because no one would ever want to be in that position.
If that what filing a complaint and suing the police means, that I’ll take my lumps and protect my family.
I agree with David Greenwald that some of us have been silent too long and it time now once again for action.
I don’t think Steve Souza gets it. I don’t think he realizes the depths of the problems. But he should because a serious racial profiling incident happened on his watch a few years ago when he was head of the Democratic party in Davis.
When he gets done cleaning our pool, maybe he can tell us all about it………….
I think the community has mistakenly attributed the relative silence in the last few months to mean that all is well and the current programs are working.
The absense of complaints is not proof that there is no problem. It is evidence that people still do not trust the current system.
Anyone who watched the Halema Buzayan situation unfold who is a parent had to get a sick feeling in their stomach because no one would ever want to be in that position.
If that what filing a complaint and suing the police means, that I’ll take my lumps and protect my family.
I agree with David Greenwald that some of us have been silent too long and it time now once again for action.
I don’t think Steve Souza gets it. I don’t think he realizes the depths of the problems. But he should because a serious racial profiling incident happened on his watch a few years ago when he was head of the Democratic party in Davis.
When he gets done cleaning our pool, maybe he can tell us all about it………….
I think the community has mistakenly attributed the relative silence in the last few months to mean that all is well and the current programs are working.
The absense of complaints is not proof that there is no problem. It is evidence that people still do not trust the current system.
Anyone who watched the Halema Buzayan situation unfold who is a parent had to get a sick feeling in their stomach because no one would ever want to be in that position.
If that what filing a complaint and suing the police means, that I’ll take my lumps and protect my family.
I agree with David Greenwald that some of us have been silent too long and it time now once again for action.
I don’t think Steve Souza gets it. I don’t think he realizes the depths of the problems. But he should because a serious racial profiling incident happened on his watch a few years ago when he was head of the Democratic party in Davis.
When he gets done cleaning our pool, maybe he can tell us all about it………….
I remember the incident you’re talking about. Precinct walking while Black in Davis. Also known as PWWB in political circles. The staffer didn’t file a complaint of course because he didn’t want to make the state senator look bad, which it would not have, but there you have it…Northern CA Disneyland …where all is perceived as perfect.
I remember the incident you’re talking about. Precinct walking while Black in Davis. Also known as PWWB in political circles. The staffer didn’t file a complaint of course because he didn’t want to make the state senator look bad, which it would not have, but there you have it…Northern CA Disneyland …where all is perceived as perfect.
I remember the incident you’re talking about. Precinct walking while Black in Davis. Also known as PWWB in political circles. The staffer didn’t file a complaint of course because he didn’t want to make the state senator look bad, which it would not have, but there you have it…Northern CA Disneyland …where all is perceived as perfect.
I remember the incident you’re talking about. Precinct walking while Black in Davis. Also known as PWWB in political circles. The staffer didn’t file a complaint of course because he didn’t want to make the state senator look bad, which it would not have, but there you have it…Northern CA Disneyland …where all is perceived as perfect.
I must have missed the controversial statements by Steve Sousa because I was focused on letting the council know that the CAB did not seem to be fulfilling its role as part of the police oversight system or its role of dispersing vital information to the community. Staff clarified in its report at the beginning of the item, that it was not serving this role, but rather serving as a focus group or sounding board for the Police Chief.
I do find it a concern that with all that came to light last year, that the two parts of police oversight have found not much amiss. I do not believe, and this has been confirmed, that the community and all within the department are comfortable with how the Buzayan case was handled, for example. It defies common sense.
I’m sure the City Attorney, and maybe some on the Council, are concerned with liability should a negative report be released. A simple example of this is the $85,000 the city paid to the now legendary woman who was cited for snoring too loud. However, the key to change is admitting responsibility…first. It is a dilemma.
There seems to be a need for advocacy that the current organization is not meeting. The ombudsman can’t do it alone and within the hours that he is contracted for. The school district is also finding this out with their part-time School Climate Coordinator. The Human Relations Commission used to try to do this, but has had this role taken away by the Council.
Sharla Cheney Harrington
I must have missed the controversial statements by Steve Sousa because I was focused on letting the council know that the CAB did not seem to be fulfilling its role as part of the police oversight system or its role of dispersing vital information to the community. Staff clarified in its report at the beginning of the item, that it was not serving this role, but rather serving as a focus group or sounding board for the Police Chief.
I do find it a concern that with all that came to light last year, that the two parts of police oversight have found not much amiss. I do not believe, and this has been confirmed, that the community and all within the department are comfortable with how the Buzayan case was handled, for example. It defies common sense.
I’m sure the City Attorney, and maybe some on the Council, are concerned with liability should a negative report be released. A simple example of this is the $85,000 the city paid to the now legendary woman who was cited for snoring too loud. However, the key to change is admitting responsibility…first. It is a dilemma.
There seems to be a need for advocacy that the current organization is not meeting. The ombudsman can’t do it alone and within the hours that he is contracted for. The school district is also finding this out with their part-time School Climate Coordinator. The Human Relations Commission used to try to do this, but has had this role taken away by the Council.
Sharla Cheney Harrington
I must have missed the controversial statements by Steve Sousa because I was focused on letting the council know that the CAB did not seem to be fulfilling its role as part of the police oversight system or its role of dispersing vital information to the community. Staff clarified in its report at the beginning of the item, that it was not serving this role, but rather serving as a focus group or sounding board for the Police Chief.
I do find it a concern that with all that came to light last year, that the two parts of police oversight have found not much amiss. I do not believe, and this has been confirmed, that the community and all within the department are comfortable with how the Buzayan case was handled, for example. It defies common sense.
I’m sure the City Attorney, and maybe some on the Council, are concerned with liability should a negative report be released. A simple example of this is the $85,000 the city paid to the now legendary woman who was cited for snoring too loud. However, the key to change is admitting responsibility…first. It is a dilemma.
There seems to be a need for advocacy that the current organization is not meeting. The ombudsman can’t do it alone and within the hours that he is contracted for. The school district is also finding this out with their part-time School Climate Coordinator. The Human Relations Commission used to try to do this, but has had this role taken away by the Council.
Sharla Cheney Harrington
I must have missed the controversial statements by Steve Sousa because I was focused on letting the council know that the CAB did not seem to be fulfilling its role as part of the police oversight system or its role of dispersing vital information to the community. Staff clarified in its report at the beginning of the item, that it was not serving this role, but rather serving as a focus group or sounding board for the Police Chief.
I do find it a concern that with all that came to light last year, that the two parts of police oversight have found not much amiss. I do not believe, and this has been confirmed, that the community and all within the department are comfortable with how the Buzayan case was handled, for example. It defies common sense.
I’m sure the City Attorney, and maybe some on the Council, are concerned with liability should a negative report be released. A simple example of this is the $85,000 the city paid to the now legendary woman who was cited for snoring too loud. However, the key to change is admitting responsibility…first. It is a dilemma.
There seems to be a need for advocacy that the current organization is not meeting. The ombudsman can’t do it alone and within the hours that he is contracted for. The school district is also finding this out with their part-time School Climate Coordinator. The Human Relations Commission used to try to do this, but has had this role taken away by the Council.
Sharla Cheney Harrington
Taking up again the analogy to our Iraq debacle,I thought that our ombudsman’s statement was a powerful, if diplomatically presented, statement about the lack of “seasoning” of our police personnel. The “troops” in both cases take the blame when the real accountability lies with those who have the responsibility to teach and direct. Leadership and the diligent taking of these responsibilities are key. Personally, I am optimistic that this is appreciated by both our new Police Chief and our new city manager.
Taking up again the analogy to our Iraq debacle,I thought that our ombudsman’s statement was a powerful, if diplomatically presented, statement about the lack of “seasoning” of our police personnel. The “troops” in both cases take the blame when the real accountability lies with those who have the responsibility to teach and direct. Leadership and the diligent taking of these responsibilities are key. Personally, I am optimistic that this is appreciated by both our new Police Chief and our new city manager.
Taking up again the analogy to our Iraq debacle,I thought that our ombudsman’s statement was a powerful, if diplomatically presented, statement about the lack of “seasoning” of our police personnel. The “troops” in both cases take the blame when the real accountability lies with those who have the responsibility to teach and direct. Leadership and the diligent taking of these responsibilities are key. Personally, I am optimistic that this is appreciated by both our new Police Chief and our new city manager.
Taking up again the analogy to our Iraq debacle,I thought that our ombudsman’s statement was a powerful, if diplomatically presented, statement about the lack of “seasoning” of our police personnel. The “troops” in both cases take the blame when the real accountability lies with those who have the responsibility to teach and direct. Leadership and the diligent taking of these responsibilities are key. Personally, I am optimistic that this is appreciated by both our new Police Chief and our new city manager.
“It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.”
Has Aaronson said he is working ‘far more hours’ than he is being paid to work? And if so, might that not just be due to his need, as an outsider new to this job, to get up to speed?
“When this position was created I strongly questioned how someone could be a part-time Ombudsman and only come to the city of Davis just a few days out of the month and be able to perform the vast tasks expected of him.”
If you have as much confidence in Aaronson as you say you do, and he says that he can do the job as it has been laid out, then why doubt Mr. Aaronson’s word on this?
“This was not discussed on Tuesday night, but it seems clear that there is simply not enough time or resources available to provide the kinds of oversight and scrutiny that this system clearly needs.”
That may be true. But we live in a world of finite resources. Most of us don’t view the law enforcement system in Davis as being so malignant as you view it. As such, I think most would conclude that the level of oversight and scrutiny that you call for would be excessive and perhaps counterproductive.
“Mr. Aaronson in his position as Ombudsman, needs to be given far more resources than have thus far been allotted.”
If the ombudsman were calling for ‘far more resources,’ then it should be considered. However, as far as I know, he is not. As such, there’s no reason to take resources away from other areas in order to give them to him. And if we did reduce the resources of another agency or department in order to give more to the ombudsman, which one ought that be?
“And while Mr. Aaronson will not complain about this, I certainly both can and will.”
I suspect that Mr. Aaronson has a better idea of the resources he needs than you have of that.
P.S. I laud you for — the very first time — identifying your wife in the context of this piece. I think it’s necessary to do that whenever you or she are or have been active players in the stories you are writing about.
“It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.”
Has Aaronson said he is working ‘far more hours’ than he is being paid to work? And if so, might that not just be due to his need, as an outsider new to this job, to get up to speed?
“When this position was created I strongly questioned how someone could be a part-time Ombudsman and only come to the city of Davis just a few days out of the month and be able to perform the vast tasks expected of him.”
If you have as much confidence in Aaronson as you say you do, and he says that he can do the job as it has been laid out, then why doubt Mr. Aaronson’s word on this?
“This was not discussed on Tuesday night, but it seems clear that there is simply not enough time or resources available to provide the kinds of oversight and scrutiny that this system clearly needs.”
That may be true. But we live in a world of finite resources. Most of us don’t view the law enforcement system in Davis as being so malignant as you view it. As such, I think most would conclude that the level of oversight and scrutiny that you call for would be excessive and perhaps counterproductive.
“Mr. Aaronson in his position as Ombudsman, needs to be given far more resources than have thus far been allotted.”
If the ombudsman were calling for ‘far more resources,’ then it should be considered. However, as far as I know, he is not. As such, there’s no reason to take resources away from other areas in order to give them to him. And if we did reduce the resources of another agency or department in order to give more to the ombudsman, which one ought that be?
“And while Mr. Aaronson will not complain about this, I certainly both can and will.”
I suspect that Mr. Aaronson has a better idea of the resources he needs than you have of that.
P.S. I laud you for — the very first time — identifying your wife in the context of this piece. I think it’s necessary to do that whenever you or she are or have been active players in the stories you are writing about.
“It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.”
Has Aaronson said he is working ‘far more hours’ than he is being paid to work? And if so, might that not just be due to his need, as an outsider new to this job, to get up to speed?
“When this position was created I strongly questioned how someone could be a part-time Ombudsman and only come to the city of Davis just a few days out of the month and be able to perform the vast tasks expected of him.”
If you have as much confidence in Aaronson as you say you do, and he says that he can do the job as it has been laid out, then why doubt Mr. Aaronson’s word on this?
“This was not discussed on Tuesday night, but it seems clear that there is simply not enough time or resources available to provide the kinds of oversight and scrutiny that this system clearly needs.”
That may be true. But we live in a world of finite resources. Most of us don’t view the law enforcement system in Davis as being so malignant as you view it. As such, I think most would conclude that the level of oversight and scrutiny that you call for would be excessive and perhaps counterproductive.
“Mr. Aaronson in his position as Ombudsman, needs to be given far more resources than have thus far been allotted.”
If the ombudsman were calling for ‘far more resources,’ then it should be considered. However, as far as I know, he is not. As such, there’s no reason to take resources away from other areas in order to give them to him. And if we did reduce the resources of another agency or department in order to give more to the ombudsman, which one ought that be?
“And while Mr. Aaronson will not complain about this, I certainly both can and will.”
I suspect that Mr. Aaronson has a better idea of the resources he needs than you have of that.
P.S. I laud you for — the very first time — identifying your wife in the context of this piece. I think it’s necessary to do that whenever you or she are or have been active players in the stories you are writing about.
“It seems to me as an observer, that Mr. Aaronson would have politely explained that he was already working far more hours than the city was paying him and he is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.”
Has Aaronson said he is working ‘far more hours’ than he is being paid to work? And if so, might that not just be due to his need, as an outsider new to this job, to get up to speed?
“When this position was created I strongly questioned how someone could be a part-time Ombudsman and only come to the city of Davis just a few days out of the month and be able to perform the vast tasks expected of him.”
If you have as much confidence in Aaronson as you say you do, and he says that he can do the job as it has been laid out, then why doubt Mr. Aaronson’s word on this?
“This was not discussed on Tuesday night, but it seems clear that there is simply not enough time or resources available to provide the kinds of oversight and scrutiny that this system clearly needs.”
That may be true. But we live in a world of finite resources. Most of us don’t view the law enforcement system in Davis as being so malignant as you view it. As such, I think most would conclude that the level of oversight and scrutiny that you call for would be excessive and perhaps counterproductive.
“Mr. Aaronson in his position as Ombudsman, needs to be given far more resources than have thus far been allotted.”
If the ombudsman were calling for ‘far more resources,’ then it should be considered. However, as far as I know, he is not. As such, there’s no reason to take resources away from other areas in order to give them to him. And if we did reduce the resources of another agency or department in order to give more to the ombudsman, which one ought that be?
“And while Mr. Aaronson will not complain about this, I certainly both can and will.”
I suspect that Mr. Aaronson has a better idea of the resources he needs than you have of that.
P.S. I laud you for — the very first time — identifying your wife in the context of this piece. I think it’s necessary to do that whenever you or she are or have been active players in the stories you are writing about.
After kind of thinking about this topic for awhile I want to highlight a point that Councilmember Souza made.
“It is not should the City have oversight is what type we should have. “
A lot of people I think took the debate last year as to whether there should be a civilian review board or an ombudsman. But at least from my perspective, I didn’t see the debate that way.
I am currently concerned about the process because there is no public scrutiny or even access at all available to it. Even the Community Advisory Board meets in closed door sessions.
Second and probably most concerning is the fact that I never got the impression that any of the members of the city council outside of Sue Greenwald really accepted that there was any kind of problem with the police. Yes, the council created several bodies, I think fairly weak bodies in terms of oversight, but we can discuss that further, but there was never an acknowledgment of the problem.
If Councilmember Souza comes back, I actually think of the four from last year which includes Mr. Puntillo, he was the closest to acknowledging that there even was a problem, what do you, Mr. Souza, see the problem with the police being?
Do you think that a bunch of yahoos including my wife made this stuff up to wreak havoc on you?
Do you think there is a minor problem with public perception?
Do you think there is a major problem with the operations of the police department?
Do you think that Mr. Aaronson is correct when he speaks of lack of leadership?
Do you simply dismiss people who have come forward to the city council with complaints as crazy?
I’d like to hear it from you on this forum where we can all discuss equally or somewhat equally what you really believe about this.
After kind of thinking about this topic for awhile I want to highlight a point that Councilmember Souza made.
“It is not should the City have oversight is what type we should have. “
A lot of people I think took the debate last year as to whether there should be a civilian review board or an ombudsman. But at least from my perspective, I didn’t see the debate that way.
I am currently concerned about the process because there is no public scrutiny or even access at all available to it. Even the Community Advisory Board meets in closed door sessions.
Second and probably most concerning is the fact that I never got the impression that any of the members of the city council outside of Sue Greenwald really accepted that there was any kind of problem with the police. Yes, the council created several bodies, I think fairly weak bodies in terms of oversight, but we can discuss that further, but there was never an acknowledgment of the problem.
If Councilmember Souza comes back, I actually think of the four from last year which includes Mr. Puntillo, he was the closest to acknowledging that there even was a problem, what do you, Mr. Souza, see the problem with the police being?
Do you think that a bunch of yahoos including my wife made this stuff up to wreak havoc on you?
Do you think there is a minor problem with public perception?
Do you think there is a major problem with the operations of the police department?
Do you think that Mr. Aaronson is correct when he speaks of lack of leadership?
Do you simply dismiss people who have come forward to the city council with complaints as crazy?
I’d like to hear it from you on this forum where we can all discuss equally or somewhat equally what you really believe about this.
After kind of thinking about this topic for awhile I want to highlight a point that Councilmember Souza made.
“It is not should the City have oversight is what type we should have. “
A lot of people I think took the debate last year as to whether there should be a civilian review board or an ombudsman. But at least from my perspective, I didn’t see the debate that way.
I am currently concerned about the process because there is no public scrutiny or even access at all available to it. Even the Community Advisory Board meets in closed door sessions.
Second and probably most concerning is the fact that I never got the impression that any of the members of the city council outside of Sue Greenwald really accepted that there was any kind of problem with the police. Yes, the council created several bodies, I think fairly weak bodies in terms of oversight, but we can discuss that further, but there was never an acknowledgment of the problem.
If Councilmember Souza comes back, I actually think of the four from last year which includes Mr. Puntillo, he was the closest to acknowledging that there even was a problem, what do you, Mr. Souza, see the problem with the police being?
Do you think that a bunch of yahoos including my wife made this stuff up to wreak havoc on you?
Do you think there is a minor problem with public perception?
Do you think there is a major problem with the operations of the police department?
Do you think that Mr. Aaronson is correct when he speaks of lack of leadership?
Do you simply dismiss people who have come forward to the city council with complaints as crazy?
I’d like to hear it from you on this forum where we can all discuss equally or somewhat equally what you really believe about this.
After kind of thinking about this topic for awhile I want to highlight a point that Councilmember Souza made.
“It is not should the City have oversight is what type we should have. “
A lot of people I think took the debate last year as to whether there should be a civilian review board or an ombudsman. But at least from my perspective, I didn’t see the debate that way.
I am currently concerned about the process because there is no public scrutiny or even access at all available to it. Even the Community Advisory Board meets in closed door sessions.
Second and probably most concerning is the fact that I never got the impression that any of the members of the city council outside of Sue Greenwald really accepted that there was any kind of problem with the police. Yes, the council created several bodies, I think fairly weak bodies in terms of oversight, but we can discuss that further, but there was never an acknowledgment of the problem.
If Councilmember Souza comes back, I actually think of the four from last year which includes Mr. Puntillo, he was the closest to acknowledging that there even was a problem, what do you, Mr. Souza, see the problem with the police being?
Do you think that a bunch of yahoos including my wife made this stuff up to wreak havoc on you?
Do you think there is a minor problem with public perception?
Do you think there is a major problem with the operations of the police department?
Do you think that Mr. Aaronson is correct when he speaks of lack of leadership?
Do you simply dismiss people who have come forward to the city council with complaints as crazy?
I’d like to hear it from you on this forum where we can all discuss equally or somewhat equally what you really believe about this.
Doug.. my recollection was that Councilman Souza was responding to this as a political problem rather than an issue with the Davis Police Department that needed to be addressed.
Doug.. my recollection was that Councilman Souza was responding to this as a political problem rather than an issue with the Davis Police Department that needed to be addressed.
Doug.. my recollection was that Councilman Souza was responding to this as a political problem rather than an issue with the Davis Police Department that needed to be addressed.
Doug.. my recollection was that Councilman Souza was responding to this as a political problem rather than an issue with the Davis Police Department that needed to be addressed.
“Second and probably most concerning is the fact that I never got the impression that any of the members of the city council outside of Sue Greenwald really accepted that there was any kind of problem with the police.”
I don’t recall a single statement by Sue Greenwald where she said or implied that the Davis cops were targeting minorities because they were not white. That was the principal allegation of the HRC mob. And no one on the council, not even Sue, bought it.
“… but there was never an acknowledgment of the problem.”
There never was acknowledgment principally because the people making the charge never proved it.
The burden was not, and ought not be, on the cops to prove the negative. The burden is on the people who believe and expound that the DPD is institutionally racist.
“Second and probably most concerning is the fact that I never got the impression that any of the members of the city council outside of Sue Greenwald really accepted that there was any kind of problem with the police.”
I don’t recall a single statement by Sue Greenwald where she said or implied that the Davis cops were targeting minorities because they were not white. That was the principal allegation of the HRC mob. And no one on the council, not even Sue, bought it.
“… but there was never an acknowledgment of the problem.”
There never was acknowledgment principally because the people making the charge never proved it.
The burden was not, and ought not be, on the cops to prove the negative. The burden is on the people who believe and expound that the DPD is institutionally racist.
“Second and probably most concerning is the fact that I never got the impression that any of the members of the city council outside of Sue Greenwald really accepted that there was any kind of problem with the police.”
I don’t recall a single statement by Sue Greenwald where she said or implied that the Davis cops were targeting minorities because they were not white. That was the principal allegation of the HRC mob. And no one on the council, not even Sue, bought it.
“… but there was never an acknowledgment of the problem.”
There never was acknowledgment principally because the people making the charge never proved it.
The burden was not, and ought not be, on the cops to prove the negative. The burden is on the people who believe and expound that the DPD is institutionally racist.
“Second and probably most concerning is the fact that I never got the impression that any of the members of the city council outside of Sue Greenwald really accepted that there was any kind of problem with the police.”
I don’t recall a single statement by Sue Greenwald where she said or implied that the Davis cops were targeting minorities because they were not white. That was the principal allegation of the HRC mob. And no one on the council, not even Sue, bought it.
“… but there was never an acknowledgment of the problem.”
There never was acknowledgment principally because the people making the charge never proved it.
The burden was not, and ought not be, on the cops to prove the negative. The burden is on the people who believe and expound that the DPD is institutionally racist.
Rich:
All you have to do is watch the tape of Sue Greenwald again from this week.
Rich:
All you have to do is watch the tape of Sue Greenwald again from this week.
Rich:
All you have to do is watch the tape of Sue Greenwald again from this week.
Rich:
All you have to do is watch the tape of Sue Greenwald again from this week.
The SOP(standard operating procedure) here is to delay and frustrate until the “upstarts” are emotionally exhausted and give up. If this doesn’t do the trick, a healthy dose of bullying, intimidation laced with the smell of rage and underlying violence is added to the mix. Courage and persistence are the best antidote.
The SOP(standard operating procedure) here is to delay and frustrate until the “upstarts” are emotionally exhausted and give up. If this doesn’t do the trick, a healthy dose of bullying, intimidation laced with the smell of rage and underlying violence is added to the mix. Courage and persistence are the best antidote.
The SOP(standard operating procedure) here is to delay and frustrate until the “upstarts” are emotionally exhausted and give up. If this doesn’t do the trick, a healthy dose of bullying, intimidation laced with the smell of rage and underlying violence is added to the mix. Courage and persistence are the best antidote.
The SOP(standard operating procedure) here is to delay and frustrate until the “upstarts” are emotionally exhausted and give up. If this doesn’t do the trick, a healthy dose of bullying, intimidation laced with the smell of rage and underlying violence is added to the mix. Courage and persistence are the best antidote.
I should add that all have not really given up but some are simply focussing on how to raise money and find ethical attorneys for legal advice on filing lawsuits.
I should add that all have not really given up but some are simply focussing on how to raise money and find ethical attorneys for legal advice on filing lawsuits.
I should add that all have not really given up but some are simply focussing on how to raise money and find ethical attorneys for legal advice on filing lawsuits.
I should add that all have not really given up but some are simply focussing on how to raise money and find ethical attorneys for legal advice on filing lawsuits.