The first question: Should attorney be elected or appointed
Penman says unequivocally the position should be elected by popular vote.
"I am your voice, your mouthpiece, your watchdog in city hall," he said.
Penman talks about the Gang of 4, a mid-1990s case in which his office unearthed corruption on the council, as an example of why attorney should be independent from politicians.
Elected city attorneys are "policy makers" he says, a stark difference from Milligan's position and a stance at odds with Mayor Pat Morris.
Milligan responds. She says she'd emphasize the fact that the question acknowledges the position is "advisory" in nature, a clear refute to Penman's policy-making argument.
"I agree with Mr. Penman that my opinoin on this issue is totally irrelevant."
THe voters have spoken on the matter, Milligan says. It should not matter whether elected or appointed, she says.
"Clear nonpolitical, unbiased legal advice in writing to the policy makers," is what she would bring to the office, Milligan says.
"It is for the voters to decide, not for the city attorney to influence," she says.
Next question is on parolee housing. What would you do? the moderator asks.
Milligan says public safety is of utmost concern "for me and most of you."
"It will be on the forefront," Milligan says.
She says Penman has done well with the moratorium on parolee housing, but has done so four years too late.
"My opponent seems to bring this up only at election time," she says.
"My pledge has been and will remain to be nonpolitical," she adds.
She says Penman exploits citizen fears to get reelected.
She says the state should require state licensing for all group homes to avoid concentration in neighborhoods.
Penman: "we know what to do about parolee housing."
He says that in 2000, after his election, he cracked down on parolee housing.
"None of them were thrown out on the streets as some would have you believe," Penman says, emphasizing that displaced parolees were relocated in an orderly manner.
He said by Feb .2001, parolees were down by 200 and crime dropped accordingly. He says the mayor at the time, Judith Valles, stifled his efforts. He doesn't mention Valles by name.
"Other cities stand up to state parole" and are in better shape on the issue, he says.
Comments
Morris is working on developing his own gang of 4
Posted by: Larry Heasley | October 10, 2007 7:23 PM
One would think, after DECADES of UNINTERRUPTED opportunities to DO SOMETHING RIGHT, Jim Penman would have found a way to at least SLOW the "broken window" crisis in San Bernardino - parolees... blight... criminal elements (that did enjoy a dip from Paula's innovative approach, via injunctions, until she left for employment in another locale, where she continues to serve the residents there VERY WELL - prompting writers in other areas of SBNow Blog to encourage HER to run for SBCA ).
But noooooooooooo...
Instead of RESULTS, San Bernardino has The Penman Decades, or should that be, The Penman Debacles ~ branding San Bernardino forever in infamy for the time of his tenure.
The same tired old issues NEVER ONCE RESOLVED, are dragged before the same tired voters, who applaud like trained seals (as they write letters and do other acts at his bidding like trained mindless beings) -
and the cycle continues...
Well, as the time keeper said, "TIME'S UP!"
It's time for CHANGE in San Bernardino!
Since when is the time for change to occur measured in DECADES - without results?
The same old characters will only continue the same old lack of results...
UNLESS...
SAN BERNARDINO VOTES FOR MARIANNE MILLIGAN, CITY ATTORNEY!
Posted by: Susana Atanasova | October 10, 2007 8:04 PM
Jim Penman’s opponent continually says that she will only act in an advisory capacity in policy making matters. Well, it’s nice for the Mayor and his four amigos if he can get her elected. Her integrity has unraveled so much that any informed person can see her true colors, and those are not very pretty. If elected, he will have her(not her, but her five new assistants) pushing to change the charter so fast in order to have an appointed City Attorney for our City. He can then pass on this legacy to his son, the boy wonder in charge of putting up and transporting signs . Is that on the City’s dime or gas credit card? Does anyone know for sure?
Jim Penman’s opponent states that she will be non-political, duhhhh, do we know that she will be beholden to the Morris machine or not? How else other than being non political will she repay hizoner for all the perks given to her on the city taxpayer’s dime, or dollars.
She states that Mr. Penman attempts to scare the people at election times. Where in the world does this woman live? How long has she been in San Bernardino? Does she have a clue about what goes on in the City? She needs to get out from under the Mayor’s desk, out of the Green Zone, out of the Police escorted tours of Op Phoney, and into the real world. We don’t need her bull statements that those in OP Phoney feel safer. Of course they do, they are surrounded by the cops who are supposed to be in other parts of the City protecting the real voter/ taxpayers. Instead they are being used to escort her and conduct what she calls a survey taken by her, a DEPUTY DIRECTOR. Is that what she does in her capacity?
This opponent states that we are four years behind in parolee monitoring. Could it be that it is hard to win a wrestling match with 1000 lbs of dead weight holding you back(let’s see 5 X 200Lbs=1000) and attacking you and stalling and placing road blocks in every direction you want to go. Let’s look at the present moratorium on parolees; how many times has that been stalled? We need to keep JIM PENMAN as our CITY ATTORNEY to keep the sharks away.
Posted by: Joe Ortiz | October 11, 2007 1:42 AM
The position of City Attorney needs to be an elected position.
Posted by: Mrs. ebirdie | October 11, 2007 9:30 AM
Susana, if you only could wake up long enough to know the real truth when you see it. Injunctions had been accomplished in this town long before Paula ever got here. She learned them here and took her training elsewhere, where they paid more! Maybe it is people like you who have continued to hold this community back. People who are willing to take an honest stand, on their own two feet are the only people worth holding up. Do you consider yourself mindless, since you are obviously doing the same mindless bidding for Marianne, and obviously at Dennis's request, since you are obviously beholden to him. If you think for one minute anyone lends you ANY credibility, since you tend to insult everyone that blogs with thoughts of their OWN mind, then you really are out of YOUR mind. And if your theory of people who "are dragged before the same tired voters, who applaud like trained seals (as they write letters and do other acts at his bidding like trained mindless beings) who have continually by huge amounts voted in people like Anderson and McCammack and Penman...and for that matter Morris...they all must be those same trained seals. Well, Susana, I guess that leaves you in the minority...again!
Posted by: proud wife and mother | October 11, 2007 11:21 PM
Joe,
You ask if anyone knows the things you write "for sure". Obviously, you do not.
There have long been MANY attorneys working in the city attorney's office. How do you think the work gets done? Henry Empeno, Esquire, for example, is one of the hardest working people in Office of City Attorney. There are former-SB-municipal-attorney posts in other areas of SBNow Blog citing the timelines of successful efforts then attempted to be claimed as accomplishments for Penman's own aggrandizement and credit.
Reading as Jim Penman desperately clawed at the coattails of a former SB municipal attorney's achievements in another area of SBNow Blog was pathetic.
SB needs a proven winner ~ as is Marianne Milligan in bringing _10_ code inspector positions to our streets, after we've waited years in a 6-week backlog while Penman's office did NOTHING to help us.
BTW: The TEN new positions are staffed at no cost to SB.
"Get 'er Done"?
MARIANNE MILLIGAN DOES!
Your Friend & Neighbor,
Susana Atanasova
Posted by: Susana Atanasova | October 12, 2007 2:57 AM
Susana, again, get your facts straight. Marianne had absolutely NOTHING to do with 10 new code positions. Robert Houts invented the program. Not Marianne. And, okay, let's say she did. Wouldn't that be making new POLICY? I can't stand the double standard you live by. Your facts are ALL wrong. And lieing is immoral. We still have a six week backlog. The difference now does Marianne have the backbone to prosecute these people, including herself for illegal sign placement? She does NOT know the law regarding how to enforce our codes, just look around for the past year. The illegal signage is horrific. Her response to those who deliver this garbage to her is: we can't do anything about it if we don't see them putting them up. HOGWASH! She does NOT know the law and she wants the job? Give me a break! Please stop wasting everyone's time by typing lies.
Posted by: proud wife and mother | October 12, 2007 11:12 AM
I hope G. Baude does background checks on these "10" volunteers......who knows we might end up with 11 loose cannons in Code Enforcement if you count Milligin.
Posted by: Mrs. ebirdie | October 12, 2007 11:33 AM