Two candidates jump into the Burbank City Council race

As of  last Friday morning, two eager candidates, both with experience in city government, are off and running for two seats on the Burbank City Council. The first to sign up on the candidate’s list on Monday, November first, the first official day of the nomination period , Planning Board Vice-Chair,  Emily Gabel-Luddy.

 Burbank Police Commission Chair, Bob Frutos, signed up on the same day right behind Gabel-Luddy. Both Frutos and Gabel-Luddy took home nomination papers, which require the signatures of 50 registered voters supporting their candidacy.

I’ve heard about other contenders preparing for the city council race, too. So expect to see more names mentioned here, on this blog,  as the deadline for pulling and returning nomination papers to the City Clerk’s office nears. The deadline is Monday, November 29, 2010 at 5 p.m.

The Primary Nomination Election is February 22, 2011, followed by the General Municipal Election on April 12, 2011.

For a countdown to the February election check the far right column of this blog.

Controversial bike lane in Burbank gets a reprieve

Photo: FLLewis/Media City G -- A cyclist rolls along in the bike lane on Verdugo Avenue in May of 2010

A hot issue that gets folks in the Media City riled up almost as much as the Burbank Police mess — is the bike lane along a stretch of Verdugo Avenue. This bike lane has a passionate group of haters as well as a peddle-power group that loves it. 

At last Tuesday’s city council meeting, a number of cycling enthusiasts turned out to encourage council members to make the bike lane permanent. The six month project was up for review. Despite the vocal support, council members decided they did not have enough data to fairly access the project, so they voted unanimously for a six-month extension for it.

The vote came as a surprise to the bike lane supporters as well as opponents like Ken Fesperman. A long time Burbank resident, Fesperman lives on a side street near Verdugo Avenue. Fesperman says the outrage over the bike lane from his neighbors and others he knows, prompted him to circulate a petition to have it removed. That’s when he ran into trouble.

Last month, Fesperman was collecting signatures for his petition at the Buena Vista Library when a cyclist confronted him. Fesperman says he was assaulted during the altercation and it left a scar on his face. Fesperman filed a police report, but the incident dampened his spirit for community involvement. However, Fesperman did turn in his petition to city hall, which he says had 330 signatures of folks wanting Verdugo Avenue re-striped back the way it was — two traffic lanes in each direction.  There is now one lane in each direction with a yellow turn section in the middle, from Hollywood Way to Olive Avenue.

Fesperman complains the change never should have been made without informing residents on the side streets. He says that since the bike lane went in, more motorists are zipping down his street –sometimes at “..55 to 60.. ” miles per hour in a zone where children frequently play in the area. “You’re creating more traffic,” Fesperman insists. He believes a powerful few are pushing the bike lane project. “I heard it’s a special interest group. Handful of the city insiders…”

 Maybe that’s why the city survey found little traffic change on Verdugo Avenue  –the overflow is pouring into the side streets. Another survey, with a wider scope, should be done.

Another problem is the alarming number of  bicyclists who ignore traffic rules. The violators got a scolding from outspoken activist, Eden Rosen, at last Tuesday’s council meeting. I’ve seen it myself. Bicyclists blowing through red lights and stop signs,  or riding two or three abreast with a line of traffic behind them.  Even cops I know complain about these arrogant cyclists who don’t follow the rules of the road. Oh, and we’re not talking about school children — most often — the culprits are adults.

In the coming months, city officials have opportunities to work on easing the traffic problems around Verdugo Avenue and to address other concerns of nearby residents. Oh, it wouldn’t hurt to pass out some of those bike safety pamphlets to the cyclists. I hear they have a good supply of the pamphlets over at the Burbank PD.

First flu case confirmed in Los Angeles County

It’s that time of year again. Los Angeles County has its first confirmed case of the seasonal flu. It’s the influenza strain A H3N2, which is rolling across the country, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This year’s flu vaccine will protect against that strain and two others, including H1N1.

In a press release, Los Angeles County Health Official, Jonathan E. Fielding, declared now is an excellent time to get that flu shot: “We cannot predict how severe or how mild a flu season will be. Flu is a serious illness and should be treated as such. Ample vaccine is already available in LA County in a variety of locations, including pharmacies, supermarkets, community clinics and doctor’s offices.”

Last Friday, I stopped in at the CVS Pharmacy on Hollywood Way and got my flu shot. It was a breeze. Only a few people were waiting, including a mother and her two young children, so the process did not take long. The cost around $30 and they accept most insurance plans. For information on free flu shots at single day vaccination clinics and or at Public Health Centers go here. Flu shots are now recommended for everyone six months and older.

Photo: FLLewis/A Writer’s Groove — Burbank City Hall at East Olive Avenue and North Third Street.

Last Tuesday night’s Burbank City Council meeting was like a marathon, it went on and on, but for a good reason. The city council had a busy agenda filled with issues and concerns on December 8 and that packed the chamber at city hall.  The controversy over declawing domestic cats brought out the largest crowd and got the city council bombarded with over 100 e-mails.

During a public hearing on a proposed city ban on the practice, speaker after speaker argued against declawing calling it cruel, even ”inhumane,” and claimed it is primarily being done for the convenience of pet owners. They suggested such simple alternatives as clipping a cat’s nails and providing a scratching post for the feline in order to protect furniture.

A small group of opponents of the ban spoke out as well. Some of them cited pet owners with health issues like “compromised immune systems” as a good reason for declawing. Still others defended declawing as  medically safe, if done properly, and a choice that should be left up to the pet owner and a veterinarian.

Burbank Police Captain Janice Lowers, who supervises the Burbank Animal Shelter, came out in support of the ban. Captain Lowers said the shelter has seen a number of declawed cats with health and behavior problems. After some debate, the city council voted 4-to-1 in favor of banning the declawing of cats only. The lone “no vote” came from Mayor Gary Bric.

Two female Cal State Northridge students sitting next to me were taking diligent notes. One of the journalism students was baffled by Bric’s vote against the ban and asked me about it. Earlier, Bric had stated he couldn’t vote for the ban if it included all animals. Well, Council Member Anja Reinke changed her motion to only cover cats and Bric still voted “no.” I thought that was odd and I couldn’t explain it to the confused student. The way I see it, if you’re going to have a declawing ban it should cover all animals, not just cats. The emergency ordinance takes effect immediately, beating a December 31 deadline for enacting declawing bans. Burbank is now the eighth city in the state to outlaw declawing of cats.

Public comments and the rest of the agenda items followed, so the city council meeting did not wrap until well after midnight. While the rest of us headed for home, the council members went into closed session to deal with more city business.

In retrospect, this was a good council meeting because the council members stayed focused on the issues, this time around, and did not get into petty squabbles. This is something the Burbank Police Commission should try to emulate. At the December 2 meeting, the police commission proceedings were hampered by constant bickering on the panel. There is a huge divide growing between the renegade commissioner, James Etter, and the rest of the panel. How can the police commissioners step up and help solve some of the serious problems in the Burbank Police Department when they can’t seem to stop fighting among themselves? I was very disappointed. I had high hopes for this police commission.

Photo: FLLewis/A Writer’s Groove — Burbank Police and Fire Headquarters at Third Street & Orange Grove Avenue.

Burbank Police Commission meetings at police headquarters are getting more and more interesting. Last night’s meeting brimmed with drama including verbal fireworks and one commissioner abruptly walking out in a huff. The way I see it, these are the growing pains of commissioners who are struggling to break out of an old sedentary model and leave a “do nothing” reputation behind, or as new Commissioner Ray Adams put it,”… beef up our strength…be more valuable to the community.” To this I say, right on!

This kind of change isn’t going to come without heated debate and ah, plenty of drama. The first one to get pumped up last night was James Etter, who quickly lost patience with his fellow commissioners and the meeting procedures. Etter pleaded for a period of discussion before an item could be voted on for a future agenda. The Boy Scout leader/entertainment industry pro, was upset that it appeared commissioners were voting down certain agenda items he suggested without a clear understanding of the issues involved.   

Assistant City Attorney/Police Department Counsel Juli Scott kept interrupting to remind the commissioners they could not discuss new issues unless they had been “agendized.” This Catch 22 frustrated Etter to the point he scooped up his laptop computer and other belongings and headed for the door, threatening to make his exit permanent. Etter charged the commission was stuck in the past and “… going nowhere.”

Scott, who tries to control the commission meetings with long rambling and often confusing legal explanations or opinions, probably thought things would settle down after the renegade Etter left. No way. Gutsy Commissioner Elise Stearns-Nisesen stepped up next to ask a series of probing questions about a new controversy over single officer patrol units, as well as those lawsuits and investigations swirling around the city.

Oddly, sometimes when Police Chief Tim Stehr would attempt to answer a question posed to him by Commissioner Stearns-Niesen or one of the other commissioners, Scott would explode with some long-winded response. A couple of times, I saw the chief’s mouth open to speak, but the words we heard were from Scott. It was a strange sort of ventriloquist act that was annoying rather than amusing. Why is Scott talking so much at these commission meetings? It’s like Scott views the commissioners as jurors in a trial she is trying to win.

No matter, these commissioners appear to be determined to move away from business as usual. Commissioner Ray Adams commented that he “…could relate to the frustration of Mr. Etter.” Adams said the commission needs to become more involved and relevant so it can “…help the police department … help the community.” The other commissioners, Stearns-Niesen, Robert Frutos, Nathan Rubinfeld, Claudia Bonis, and Hagop Hergelian agreed.

Those commissioners voted unanmously to meet on Wednesday, October 28, 2009, for the specific purpose of drafting a letter to the city council requesting new powers and responsibilities. This is a welcome surprise and I applaud their efforts.

Photo: Burbank City Councilman Dave Golonski from Burbank city website

Burbank City Councilman Dave Golonski is not happy with the way the Burbank Leader newspaper reported on that statement read by Mayor Gary Bric at last Tuesday’s city council meeting. The much-talked-about and reported-on statement is the first official public reaction from the entire city council to a slew of police lawsuits and a number of investigations going on in Burbank. The complete statement is posted on this blog.

Today I was over on the Leader website and read an opinion piece by Councilman Golonski. He claims the newspaper’s story, “FBI probes Police Dept., “ about that statement last Wednesday, “… omitted some important facts, so I’d like to clarify the important points that I believe were inaccurately portrayed in the article.”

One of the points Golonski makes is that the story  ”…  reported that the mayor “blew the lid off the investigations” after the council had remained silent on the legal action building against the city. While our statement contained more detailed information on the investigations, the fact that there are both internal and external investigations looking into issues at the police department was disclosed publicly in response to oral communications at a council meeting as far back as May.”

In fact, it was Golonski who made the revelation about those “… internal and external investigations…” at a city council meeting on May 19, 2009. Golonski’s disclosure was mentioned in a story on this blog back in May as well.

The councilman has a few other issues with that newspaper article. Here’s the link to Golonski’s response,  which also appears in today’s print edition of the Leader.  

Photo: FLLewis/A Writer’s Groove —Burbank Police and Fire Headquarters.

In a recent Los Angeles Times story about the FBI probe and those lawsuits filed by former and current members of the Burbank Police Force, Burbank City Attorney Dennis Barlow had very little to say. City Attorney Barlow is quoted as saying he “… was unable to comment on the FBI investigation or the lawsuits against the city and Police Department, citing pending litigation.” Barlow may be mum, but another major player in the Burbank City Attorney’s Office has had plenty to say about those lawsuits which allege a pattern of harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and misconduct in the BPD.

On this blog last Wednesday, we first heard about Assistant City Attorney Juli Scott’s harangue from one of our regular commenters. “Stretch” said, “… Juli Scott was recently giving “sexual harrasment” training at the police department. In front of 75 or so officers she starts to talk about the lawsuits and how they are all BS. It is reported that Scott continues her rant and says the city will fight these suits and if they lose they will appeal them at all cost. Then they will seek damages against the complaining officers. Cost to who…not you Juli..just the taxpayers.” Burbank blogger Jim Carlile picked up the story as well.

I have confirmed from a Burbank police employee who was at that training session, on Monday, September 28, that Attorney Scott put on quite a performance. The employee might become a target of retaliation, so I’m not going to include a name or gender. The employee described the tirade by Scott as being filled with “cheap shots.”  According to the employee, Scott said, “… they don’t settle frivolous lawsuits that they will fight cases and have them overturned on appeal and then make the plaintiffs pay for their legal fees, etc.”  Also, my source confirmed an officer who has filed one of those lawsuits was in the audience and was possibly the main target of Scott’s verbal assault.

In the statement read by Mayor Gary Bric at the City Council meeting last Tuesday, with the approval of his fellow council members, Bric referred to the lawsuits and claims as “… very serious allegations and I think it is clear to everyone that the police department is facing some major challenges.”  A very different tone from that of a lawyer in the City Attorney’s Office who called the lawsuits frivolous and threatened the officers who filed them with reprisals. Interestingly, the official city statement from the Burbank Public Information Office described the lawsuit filed by Former Deputy Police Chief Bill Taylor as “frivolous,” too.

All of this makes you wonder who really speaks for the city of Burbank and who is in charge of the direction it is taking with these lawsuits and investigations. The mixed signals from city officials suggest a crisis in leadership along with the other problems now facing Burbank and its citizens.

Photo:  FLLewis/A Writer’s Groove — Burbank Police Vehicle

The legal problems for the city of Burbank and its embattled police department got a whole lot worse this past week. On Tuesday, well-respected Ex-Deputy Police Chief Bill Taylor filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging that he was demoted to captain for drawing attention to several serious incidents in the department, including discrimination against a group of minority officers. Taylor joins four Burbank police officers, a lieutenant, and a former detective, in suing the city for alleged misconduct and unfair treatment in the BPD.

The filing of the Taylor lawsuit comes as no surprise. Rumors about it have been making the rounds in the city for weeks now. Nevertheless, the filing of the suit in Los Angeles Superior Court amounts to a legal bomb blowing up in Burbank. I have a copy of the lawsuit, so here are the major incidents cited by Taylor, which he says cost him his position as Deputy Police Chief.

FIRST INCIDENT

“During March 2009, a sworn employee of the Burbank Police Department was accused of sexually harassing numerous females at the Burbank Animal Shelter. The employee was accused of inappropriate sexual comments and gestures. When Claimant (Taylor) was notified of the allegations of sexual harassment, he recommended to Chief of Police Tim Stehr that the employee be placed on administrative leave pending an investigation. Chief of Police Stehr became agitated and demanded that the employee not be placed on administrative leave for a long period of time and ultimately directed Claimant (Taylor) to bring the employee back to work prematurely before sufficient investigation had been undertaken. Claimant (Taylor) informed the City Manager (Mike Flad) about this incident and that it was handled inappropriately on or about April or May 2009.”

The suit alleges, “… Chief Stehr’s motivation to retaliate against Plaintiff (Taylor) arises from his own personal experiences being subjected to discipline for having sexual intercourse in a police vehicle while on duty. Consequently, Stehr minimized complaints of sexual misconduct and frowned upon Plaintiff (Taylor) for reporting it and taking the issue seriously.”

SECOND INCIDENT

“Claimant (Taylor) repeatedly complained from April 2008 through April 2009, to Stehr that minority (African-American and Hispanic) probationary police officers were being singled out by the Patrol Captain (Pat Lynch) at the time, and some of his staff, for termination on account of their race. Claimant  (Taylor) was able to stop the terminations by refusing to support the record that had been unjustly prepared to support the potential terminations.”

“On or about April or May 2009, Claimant (Taylor) informed the City Manager (Flad) that some department personnel were attempting to unfairly terminate probationary minority officers.”

THIRD INCIDENT

“In or about January 2007, an IA investigation had been initiated based upon an allegation that a lieutenant, while he held the rank of sergeant, had used excessive force against a suspect. The investigation was conducted, interviews were taken, and evidence was gathered. In or around 2007 all of the documents, flash drive and interview tapes pertaining to the case that were stored in a locked office in the Burbank Police Department were stolen. The theft could have only been committed by an employee of the Burbank Police Department. In a memo to Stehr dated November 19, 2007, Claimant (Taylor) requested that an outside agency be contacted and brought into the Burbank Police Department to investigate what appeared to be a burglary within the Department by Department employees. In the memo, Claimant (Taylor) specifically requested that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and the Burbank City Attorney’s office become involved. Claimant’s (Taylor’s) request to bring in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department was angrily denied. On or about April or May 2009, Claimant (Taylor) informed the City Manager (Flad) about the 2007 burglary and the Chief’s failure to take appropriate action.”

These allegations are explosive because they show a direct link to one of the most powerful officials in Burbank city government, City Manager Mike Flad. If indeed Flad had knowledge of these incidents and his actions were as described in the lawsuit, well, the city manager should find himself on the hot seat answering some pretty tough questions. Also, if Flad knew about these incidents in the Burbank Police Department, were other city hall officials aware of them as well? 

Also in my opinion, if Taylor’s allegations are true, his reactions to these incidents should have earned him a promotion and not demotion.    

Frequently, Taylor has been described as the moral compass of the Burbank P.D.  Stripping Taylor of his Deputy Police Chief position and knocking him down to captain sends a disturbing message. It says the Burbank Police Department is adrift in troubled waters without sufficient direction and guidance. A situation that could prove to be very costly for the city and its citizens.

Meanwhile late yesterday, a statement slamming the lawsuit and Captain Taylor was posted on the Burbank city website:  ”…The City intends to vigorously defend this case and seek all available and appropriate sanctions, including court costs and attorney’s fees, against Mr. Taylor for filing this false and frivolous lawsuit and defaming the reputations of the City and Police Department.” 

Photo:FLLewis/A Writer’s Groove

At Burbank City Council meetings most of the face time goes to the council members and the staff. They’re the ones who are supposed to be handling city business, therefore, they get to do a lot of the talking. Still, I get a kick out of the public comment segments where we get a chance to hear what’s bugging some of the citizens of Burbank.

At last Tuesday’s city council meeting, Mayor Gary Bric called up more than 15 people to the podium to speak for five minutes or less on city business during the first public comment period.  A young group of male BMX bike riders asked the council to allow them to take their favorite set of wheels to the city’s skate park. One skater spoke out against the arrangement saying BMX bikes would damage the park and might cause accidents with skaters. Later the city council (minus Vice- Mayor Anja Reinke who is on vacation) would vote four-zip in support of Option One, which would expand the the skate park by 1,400 square feet and allow for BMX bikes. The council members requested staff come back with some ways to fund the project.

Also, some business owners spoke out about how their street curb parking on South Victory Boulevard near West Alameda Avenue vanished with very little notification recently. The shop owners of GH Shower Doors, Burbank House of Hobbies, and Dav-Tech were among those complaining about being blindsided. The reason behind the red-lining of that section of Victory Boulevard was due to traffic lane changes at the intersection, which included a new left turn lane onto West Alameda.

Burbank City Traffic Engineer Ken Johnson admitted his department had “dropped the ball” by not giving the business owners adequate notice about the street parking change: “I do apologize to the property owners.” Also, the shop owners got quite a bit of sympathy and promises to try to help ease some of their parking headaches from councilmen Dave Golonski, David Gordon, and Mayor Gary Bric.  

A number of the regulars took to the mic as well Tuesday night, most notably Esther Espinoza and Mike Nolan. Mrs. Espinoza made a heartbreaking emotional plea for help from the city and surprisingly, got no response from the city council. Oh, a staff member did offer Mrs. Espinoza some tissues to wipe her tears. Sure, her family issues may not be city related, but someone on staff should be able to help this Burbank resident get the aid she needs through the right agency. The city should really forget past grudges, step up and show some compassion in the case of Espinoza family.

As for Mike Nolan, the Burbank City Attorney’s office provided him with a list of 10 law firms, which have billed the city for police-related matters since 2004. Nolan had been asking for this type of information for weeks. The bottom line cost, $524, 005.35. Yes, a cool half-million bucks. Copies of the list were available to the public at the city council meeting.

Nolan pressed the city to reveal to the public what the reasons are behind those legal costs.  Nolan said it’s  ”…time to tell us what’s wrong…” in the police department. Many others agree with him, still we’ll have to wait and see if the City Attorney’s Office provides any background data on the list.

 Also, Nolan held up a document he said was from former Burbank Police Detective Chris Dunn’s personnel file and that it had been leaked to a local newspaper. Nolan asked, “How did that happen?” Nolan pushed even harder for answers during the second public comment section at the end of the city council meeting, but he didn’t get very far in his quest.

Now, Chris Dunn and his attorney, Solomon E. Gresen, have taken up the issue of those suspected leaked documents. Yesterday, Dunn filed a claim for damages against the city of Burbank. The claim alleges: “On or about July 16, 2009, Claimant Christopher Lee Dunn’s private personnel file and documents contained in that file were disclosed to Christopher Canelago of the Burbank Leader and other members of the press and general public.”

The claim goes on to say that “… the public employee or employees causing his injury, damage or loss include, without limitation, Dennis A. Barlow and Carol A. Humiston of the Burbank City Attorney’s Office, among others.”

You might remember that on July 16, Dunn became the sixth former or current Burbank Police Office to file a discrimination lawsuit against the city. On Jim Carlile’s blog there’s a press release from Dunn’s law firm with more on both legal actions.