Full story: Billdt to retire, Scialdone in mix, search to start soon

YES

Robert,

A bit of additional and clarifying information to coincide with your comments relating to Chief Scialdone.

The reference to him by the POA in utilizing his services were necessary in light of pending questions that would most certainly arise as to "what next?"
One would then ask, "Why Frank Scialdone?" Chief Scialdone has established himself in the policing industry through a consistent history involving a well rounded and fair leadership mindset amongst both rank and file, management and executive personnel. His efforts and accomplishments in the City of Rialto are illustrative proof. His analysis of the state of the department and corrective measures undertaken were instrumental in salvaging what on the surface was a very unsightly picture. He was recruited by Rialto based on his previous accomplishments in the City of Fontana during his tenure as Chief of Police as a proven innovator and problem solver.

The perception provided in your article is such that it would lead some to beieve the POA is steadfast in its recommendation. Granted we are, as it relates to the need for change and a look from the outside. We could think of no better candidate, and in light of our position had the responsbility of suggesting his services. The suggestion was made openly during discussion with the Mayor and other elected and appointed officials. The POA is not fearful of any level of scrutiny and looks forward to an independent analysis and full disclosure of its findings. The City should be of the same posture!

Mayor,

We get it. The Chief is a great guy. Now let the great guy retire now and help the Police Department start its healing process with a new leader. Then we can all get back to working for the citizens and end this debate.

Does the Mayor really think we are that dumb? Give me a break....."He's been a remarkably good chief of police" and "the proof is in the pudding" The Mayor contradicts himself in the same article by saying that the issues with the POA were not handled by BOTH sides very well. That would indicate a not so perfect chief..and...What happened to Billdt's earlier comment about how he is committed to the City? Is that over now?

Why are Lawhead and Filson contacting Scialdone? One would think they would not want to start emulating the behavior they have so publicly accused Billdt of..... Oh wait they already give that impression. I will go out on a limb here and say that the rest of the POA members didn't have any idea what those two were up to.
If Scialdone does't have caller ID he might want to get it, so when Lawhead and Filson calls again he can say "HELL NO".

"The chief needs to leave, and we need someone from the outside to step in now, get this thing fixed so guys can get back to work," Police union president Rich Lawhead said during a meeting with The Sun's editorial board on Thursday.

The reality is that most of us working on the front lines ( Patrol Division ) have never stopped working, morale is decent. The department is young, most of the Patrol force loves what they are doing and are not affected by what is going on. Lawhead must be talking about the 2 Sergeants on Admin leave when he made the comment about guys getting back to work.

THE ARTICLE READS : "The chief needs to leave, and we need someone from the outside to step in now, get this thing fixed so guys can get back to work," Police union president Rich Lawhead said during a meeting with The Sun's editorial board on Thursday.

The reality is that the people on the front lines ( Patrol division ) haven't stopped working or even slowed their pace, the motivation is still there. When Lawhead commented about guys getting back to work, he must be referring to just 2 Sergeants. Most of the Patrol force is not affected by what is going on between the POA and the Chief.

... Lawhead and former union president Steven Filson already have an interim replacement in mind -- DON SODERBLOOM.

The question is how long will they string Scialdone along? Make sure and remind him of the resistance Zimmon faced as an educated outsider. I'll go out on a limb and say anybody who takes this job better understand that as soon as they pursue a path to right the ship or demand accountability or follow the chain of command as it is written will find his or herself the object of POA ire.

Hmmmm....

Billdt is going to retire in March, until then he draws his salary. The City has a budgetary crisis but will need to hire a interim chief.

The Director over at Animal Control is only working part time to save money to pay for staffing. The ACO's insult citizens who want dead animals picked up.

The City cannot afford any lame ducks. Move Billdt to Animal Control for the remainder of his contract. Maybe Sheriff Joe of Maricopa County, Arizona can mentor him. America's toughest cop also runs a very successful sheltering program.

Wow... Boom and Kimball obviously discovered the blog this week.

Billdt-"It's been my intention to transition from being the police chief to some opportunities in my private life"
What, be a consultant on how to be an ineffective, dishonest, unethical, self-serving Chief? No accredited college degree needed for that...

Robert- Some questions perhaps you can find answers to:
Why does billdt want to wait till the end of his contract to leave? Why not now? The relationship between he and the rank & file is not going to improve. Problems will only multiply between now & March. & whoever the successor will be will only have a deeper hole to dig the PD out from in March.

Yes, the only thing Billdt is committed to is BILLDT. The lame duck chief starts work as of today, and his cronies like the intimidator Kimball, cry baby-because-I-didn't-get-promoted-to-capt Boom (no Brian,only one bar not two), spineless stab(no-shoot)you in the back alcoholic Lemos, Osama bin Goggin, will start scrambling to find out what the interests, sports, hobbies of Scaldone or Soderbloom are & get fesh knee pads.

The City needs to step in now befor the chief dismantles the entire department before he goes. So far several employees have lost thier job. The Chief has closed down all of the community service offices and spent a ton of money doing that when its supposed to be saving the city money. Now he's splitting the city in half and splitting up the 21 beat plan system that works just fine. I think his intentions are to run the officers and morale into the ground before he leaves. The chief claims this is going to help save money...The bad part is when the chief goes we still have to deal with the 43 supporters, which are seargents and above who think just like him.

Anonymouse,

we have been through the beat plan changes before, big deal. It won't kill the morale of the Officers. It will be the whinning from some of you that causes the morale to drop. Negativity is contagious, so lets start acting like professionals and just do what we are paid to do. The Chief is not on a mission to destroy the Police Dept., he doesn't want to go down in flames and would like to leave on a better note and that is why he wants to stay until his contract is up.

About the Rialto guy.....Didn't Rialto try to dismantle it's department and go to the Sheriffs dept? Didn't the Rialto city council say the dept was corrupt? Or was that under a different chief?

To Kimball and Boom:

Your illustrious leader (Billdt) is almost 'out the door.' He arrogantly thinks he will stay until March 2009. He won't last another month! Any chief in his right mind would step down from that position in the midst of such controversy.

Now Mr. Kimball, as you know, a general rule of leadership is that "it is better to be respected than liked." You have neither! You lead by fear and positional authority only. Those who smile when they see you (Patterson included) actually hate you! How does that make you feel? Be a real man and put in you retirement papers (we know, you probably have an 'injury' you will attempt to go out on). You are simply a discrace to our department and the legacy you leave is a wide path of destruction.

As for you Mrs. Boom, (yes, that is your nick name due to your unpredictable behavior) when Billdt and Kimball are gone you will stand with no legs! No sponsors, no backing, nothing! Not only are you not liked or respected, you are actually despised by the men and women of our agency (and at city hall of course). All of the rotten things you have done to people to further your career have caught up with you. You will never be promoted to captain. Your dreams of a better tomorrow (as you crush subordinates beneath you) are gone. Since you can't retire for another 3 years, take a stress retirement and move to Washington in order for us to serve the citizens with some dignity.

An ancient of old once that, "your sins will find you out." Well, thanks to a couple of courageous reporters, this blog, and the courage of our employees, you have been 'found out.' Your 15 minutes are over! Leave now!

Hey- Kimball, you talk bout honor. whose? Where was your honor when as a patrol sgt. you called an African American on the west side the N-word to his face. You remember? You got days-off for that. Ask Pierre Weakly, he had the courage to report you.
Honor--all you do is talk about it. Don't even compare yourself to those who earned it whether at SBPD or in the military.

And Never-to-be-capt Boom, aren't you the one, many years ago, who after taking a nutcase female to Ward B, later invited her to your place to "recover" from the trauma? Also aren't you also the one who had a sexual harassment complaint made against you some years ago by the Distrcit Attorney's office. Word has it you skated on that too. And wasn't your first wife a speed addict? You, Kimball, & Lawrence must get your teflon from the same supplier--Billdt

To add to anonymous
Mr. Boom (you don't deserve the title Lt, you didn't earn it) wasn't it you who considered Phil Genaway a fatherly figure & mentor? the same genaway who was convicted of embezzling the city of Adelanto's money & went to prison for it? You guys were tight, as it were. seems you like to associate with bullys (kimball) & crooks (genaway & allegedly lawrence)
Yeah, you'd make a top of the line capt...I understand you're a dallas cowboy fan...what a shame, now I have to change teams.

The patrol division has not stopped working hard, although morale is low, the men and women of the patrol division keep on working hard to serve the community. We are still motivated to go out there and make a difference no matter who is chief or what is going on in the department. Bottom line is we still want to go out there and work hard.

We are a young department and I think the younger front line officers did not fully understand the vote of no confidence and just voted with the majority. I know some of the officers are beginning to change their minds and feel like they are being left in the dark by what is going on both sides. If we are not careful we are going to have a new problem. It seems we have to read about everything either in the newspaper or on line.

This is the first we heard about Scialdone and we have to find out about it on line. Simply not acceptable. I support the POA we just need to communicate better with each other.

As far as the reorginization, all we know is that as of October 1st they are getting rid of the Central District( Downtown) and sending the downtown officers to other beats. I know the Northwest division will pick up some the westside, Delman Heights, Little Zion and the Dorjils and will have less time to spend in the old Baker Team, Pine Irvington area, University/Kendall area and the Business districts. The new Southeast division will now cover Baseline Sierra Way area (lugo, sepulveda and wall st. areas) were the calls for service are very high. This will take officers away from the Hospitality Lane area where many people come from out of town to enjoy dinner and shop. The new plan calls for 28 beats we could not even cover 21 beats in the old system.
Plus all of the community offices will now close, not sure many of you knew that. I know the patrol division is grumbling about that but we will still go out there and work as hard as ever.

WHOA!

Aren't these comments becoming a little too personal?

Are we going to put prosecutions at risk by undermining the credibility of our entire police force?

I understand that the animosities run deep. But talking about accusations that people were cleared of and commenting on the condition of somebody's former spouse seems to me to be more than a bit excessive.

I'm sure the criminal defense bar is enjoying a toast to this blog right now.

Perhaps we can slow this rush to turn a debate on issues into an "I can malign you worse than you can me marathon."

This type of stuff isn't productive, it doesn't resolve the department's internal problems but it does give a heck of a lift to the bad guys sitting in jail or (hopefully) soon to be sleeping there.

It also gives pause to the reading public, many of whom are undoubtedly starting to wonder about both the command staff and the rank and file when obvious police insiders (some from command and some from the line) make such comments about one another.

You don't sound very professional guys. I think I know all of you, command and rank and file, and you are showing a side of your personalities that many of us haven't seen before and your comments aren't very reassuring to a concerned public.

I can see average citizens quickly adopting an attitude of "a curse on both of your houses" if command staff and rank and file don't lighten up on the gossipy trash.

Jim Penman

Well Jim, the mayor can cure the problem by removing the problem and not letting it continue to fester. The sworn and non-sworn staff spoke, overwhelmingly, but that hasn't seemed to sway the mayor into believing that the problem is Billdt and his Command Staff.

The skeletons that are coming out of the closet on this blog is only the tip of the iceberg! The quicker the mayor deals with the problem, and stops burying his head in the sand, the quicker we can get back to the tasks at hand.

You should probably help the mayor make the decision that should have been made Monday night, or the real mud will start to fly!

The behavior of the managers of this organization is appalling!!! Since their egos wont get out of the way, then maybe the public should know who really have been entrusted with running the Police Department

Billdt has a saying, as he is dropping the discipline hammer on people, "it's not personal, it's business." That's all it is--personal, very personal. So hopefully billdt & company won't take any of this personally, it's only business--the rank & file's businss, the SB citizens' business, city hall's business.

Mr. Pemman,

You are probably right. We are getting a bit personal. However, it's very difficult to be led by these men that we have blogged about. We have been in absoulute fear of them and our jobs if we spoke out against them (ask Steve Lowes and others). This is the only forum I know of where we can express such deep frustrations and not experience any retaliation.

Our hope is that people like you, the council, mayor and public will take notice of our complaints and do something about them. Nearly everyone works for a boss who they do not like. However, Billdt, Kimball and Boom have done unspeakable things to their employees and you're seeing these men and women speaking from deep seated unresolved issues created by these leaders. These are not just pety complaints and grumbling. We are at our wits end and refuse to take it any longer.

Mr. Penmen
Transparency has to start somewhere, & since the PD or City Hall is not the place, this forum is as good a place as any & a safe haven for those who fear retaliation.

Frank Serpico,

In my humble opinion if the advice from the City Attorney's office had been listened to earlier we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today.

The problem certainly would have been fixed before we reached the point of a no-confidence vote, calling for the Chief's resignation, bringing in an intervener, and before our command and line staff started making personal attacks on one another and even on their families.

Unfortunately, any advice we might offer now would probably fall on the same deaf ears to which our earlier recommendations were directed.

I don't think it serves the purposes of either command or line staff to demonstrate characteristics that are lower and less inspiring than those I know most of you possess, characteristics that are higher and that bring more honor to each of you and the SBPD.

Both sides claim to be working for the preservation of the integrity of the SBPD. The level to which some of the discourse has sunk on these blogs over the past 24 hours does little to reach that goal and may well result in decisions which neither side will feel it can live with.

NO MATTER HOW BAD YOU THINK IT IS NOW, POLITICIANS CAN ALMOST ALWAYS MAKE IT WORSE.

The discussion needs to return to one of issues, grievances regarding actual incidents, and philosophies, while resisting emotional urges to talk about whose former spouse did or did not suffer from an addiction. Such comments bring credit to no one and could result in a "decision" that is far more onerous than what either side feels it is being subjected to at the present time.

An attitude of "if it isn't what I want, the heck with it, let the whole thing go down," is neither admirable nor productive and brings discredit primarily to the advocates of that attitude.

Rise above the muck, and above your base emotions, and remember who you are. Be the kind of man or woman you see yourself as being, the kind of person of which you, your children and your community can be proud.

Jim Penman

The behavior Mr Penman speaks of, is the same behavior that can get me promoted to the rank of Captain, as demonstrated by our leaders. I guess we have had a form of leadership development, it's called how to lead like a tyrant!

And, I think Billdt and crew dragged wives into the fray first.

Anonymous,

Respectfully speaking, I don't know who started it; I just think it is beneath all of us. We should not look to those who engage in this kind of behavior to be the teachers for the rest of us, even if they are our temporary supervisors or those we supervise.

Jim Penman

"In my humble opinion if the advice from the City Attorney's office had been listened to earlier we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today."

Get out your big red markers and circle this date on the calendar! I agree with Jim Penman! Who would have thought this day would ever come?

Jim,

You are absolutely right. This should stop. These criticisms of our managers are all completely true. I am a very harsh critic of them and even I have been embarrassed by what's been posted in the last day or so. This is unbecoming of our guys. The worst part is that what's being said at work makes this look like nothing. The department is in absolute chaos and we have a council who doesn't care. I say council because the mayor is not even worth mentioning, but we all expected the council would help. I know it's not all the council, but obviously a majority since Billdt returned to work Thursday. I am watching my beloved department spriral down the toilet and Billdt and his buddies are pulling the handle. Don't be surprised if you hear about fist fights breaking out at the station. The level of tension is very high.

This all goes to show it's politics as usual in San Bernardino. Great city, great City Hall, Great Fire Dept and Great PD. Why do I live here? I can't find a reason to anymore.

There are a few guys who are making this situation very personal and fanning the flames for pure sport it seems. Mr. Penman is absolutely right in his assessment.
I for one, Mr. Penman, have always thought you have done a fine job and have appreciated the support you have given the police department over the past several years, even when they they did'nt support you.
You guys need to realize, that people are watching this exchange become very personal and it is going to look ridiculous to the general public.
Let the process work. Better days are coming so chill. This won't last forvever and things will improve.

To Captain Mitch Kimball,

Your entry dated September 19 at 10:05AM needs to be addressed.

Mitch, we all know that you authored that blog (even though you didn't leave your name). You said regarding morale, "it will be the whinning from some of you that causes the morale to drop." Have you considered just how hypocritical that sounds coming from you? You have destroyed morale since you came aboard. You intentionally hurt and mistreat others for your own gain (Boom has such a wonderful mentor in you).

You also said, "so let's start acting like professionals." Those of us who have known you for a number of years have been waiting for a long time for you to take your own advice. Your style of professionalism is to 'beat people into submission until they say uncle.'

You said that, "the chief is not on a mission to destroy the Police Dept...he doesn't want to go down in flames." Of course not, he wants to make sure that the Steve Lowes investigation is completed so he can terminate him. He also wants to make sure that the Brad Lawrence investigations gets completed as well (with a "not sustained" disposition of course). If only he could have placed such priorities on the Dorjil investigation. But of course that would involve making an important decision that could have been viewed as negative from the public.

Isn't it interesting that Steve Lowes faces termination for a number of internal investigations generated by Boom. And Brad Lawrence has allegedly committed criminal offenses and there is no criminal investigation? Oh don't worry, Billdt will fix it all before he goes.

Mitch, you have become a toothless lion and even the sound of your growl is diminishing. What a great day it will be when you leave! However, I would think twice about having a retirement party. The only ones who will attend are the very managers that despise you but will smile and wave goodbye knowing that their lives will become much richer with you gone.

To Mr. Penmen and others who say things are getting too personal: You obviously haven't been the subject of years of intimidation and bullying tactics used by these men. Shortly you will see vibrant job actions that won't stop until our wonderful leader is gone (Mitch, get your helmet on, your on deck!).

If you are all so proud of your department, why are you dragging it through the dirt. You are playing junior high school games and your beloved department is getting the worst of all this pettiness.

There is not a professional standing among any of you. Professional people remain in control during any and all occasions. They don't call people names, they don't bring up past incidents which have absolutely nothing to do with the present situation, they act like ladies and gentlemen at all times and their actions are constructive rather then destructive.

Shame on each and every one of you. You make me ashamed of the fact that I work with you.

Something about this POA sounds real immature. All the personal attacks and degrading of people we have known for years. I don't like the way things are going. And why is Joe turner still commenting like he is a member of the POA. He was fired by an overwhelming vote of NO CONFIDENCE!

To Anonymous,

Give me an opening, I’ll give you a sermon.

No, I haven't been "the subject of years of intimidation and bullying tactics by these men" as you correctly write.

However, I have been the subject of years and years of what was, in my opinion, attempted intimidation and bullying tactics by Bob Holcomb, Shauna Clark, Ralph Hernandez, Valerie Pope-Ludlam, Freddie Curlin, Eddie Negrete, Judith Valles, Pat Morris and others.

Example: the filing of four complaints against me with the State Bar. I was told that Bob Holcomb and Ralph Hernandez were jointly responsible for three, Judith Valles for another.

I was cleared on each one after lengthy and sometimes expensive investigations.

Example: I was falsely accused of sexual harassment by Ralph Hernandez, acting on "information" allegedly supplied by then City Administrator Shauna Clark and a private investigator she supposedly hired to interview all of the former employees in my office. (No lady/woman has ever filed an harassment complaint against me, Ralph Hernandez is the only person to have done so.)

After being cleared of Mr. Hernandez’ sexual harassment charge once, the exact same charge, same people, same circumstances, same time period, was refiled during the 2006-2007 Mayor's race, and, when the State Bar cleared me a second time, their exoneration of me was appealed. Lots of negative newspaper and T.V. coverage about me on this stuff. That is the real reason they do it, to teach people who don't like what they are doing to keep their mouths shut.

Example: Pat Morris supporters, including then-mayor Judith Valles and certain council members, staged an agenda item to refer my conduct during the mayoral election to the District Attorney. Morris supporters, including Shauna Clark, came to the televised Council meeting and publicly voiced tales of alleged terrible deeds on my part, including rehashing, you guessed it, the SAME sexual harassment charge made by Ralph Hernandez, the same incident of which the State Bar keeps clearing me. This time, the District Attorney cleared me of any wrongdoing too.

Example: The gang of four hired a San Francisco Bay Area law firm to "investigate" the allegations of sexual harassment made by then-Councilman Ralph Hernandez and paid them almost $100,000 for their report.

After the election I was running in ended, and I had lost that election, the City Council rejected the report on a 5-2 vote. (I went into personal debt in that campaign to the tune of around $94,000.)

Later, that $100,000 report was used as a basis for the complaint to the State Bar, which cleared me after seeing the report was primarily hear-say statements, allegedly made (if they were made at all) by "anonymous" (sound familiar?)individuals.

Example: A newspaper filed a law suit in Superior Court against the City, but naming me as the "real party in interest," to get a copy of the $100,000 report.

I hired a lawyer to defend me and argued, successfully, that the report SHOULD be released. For all of the uproar, it ended up saying very little that made me look bad. The cost to the taxpayers, on this attempted intimidation and bulling tactic? Over $150,000.

Example: an "audit" of my office, intended to show misuse of funds and incompetence was engineered, in my opinion (with considerable evidence to back that opinion up) by then-Mayor Bob Holcomb and then City Administrator Shauna Clark.

The result: the audit showed none of what it was supposed to show; instead, it showed efficiency, cost-saving practices and the need for more staff and a new computer system in the San Bernardino City Attorney’s office.

After the audit was presented, Shauna Clark stated during open session at a city council meeting, "the audit was flawed." (Even though it was Shauna Clark who had recommended the particular audit firm to Holcomb - the firm was actually hired by Mayor Tom Minor and his city council after Holcomb left office. But they went with the firm Shauna Clark and Holcomb had previously selected.)

After my office reported the former city librarian to the District Attorney for misuse of public funds I was lambasted in the press, almost daily, for picking on the unfortunate man.

He was later convicted at a jury trial of felony misuse of public funds, removed from office and forbidden to ever hold public employment in this state again.

This is one of the "examples" my political opponents point to when they say I "persecute" people.

When my office reported a Planning Commissioner to the Fair Political Practices Commission for voting to block a new gas station that was to go in about one block from the Planning Commissioner's gas station I was again blasted for picking on yet another unfortunate man.

He was subsequently convicted after a jury trial on conflict of interest charges, removed from office and left the state.

After the trial was over, a complaint was filed against me and our Planning Commission Deputy City Attorney(who testified for the prosecution at the trial) for allegedly reporting a “client” to the FPPC. In a traditional attorney/client situation, that could be a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

The State Bar cleared both of us. (It seems our adversaries don’t understand the line of case law that says lawyers who are employed to represent a city or county are hired pursuant to provision(s) in a city or county charter, and do not have the same attorney/client relationship with the public officials they advise that they would have if they were “retained,” or “directly hired” by a client.

This is another "example" used by my opponents as "evidence" of me “persecuting" my "political opponents," even though in this case, the man had supported me for re-election and contributed to my campaign. Hardly a “political opponent.”

Example: When our office built a bribery case against four councilmembers: Valerie Pope-Ludlam, Ralph Hernandez, Eddie Negrete and Freddie Curlin, the newspaper lambasted me for not prosecuting the suspects right away, even though the misdemeanor political crime we were originally investigating developed evidence of felony bribery which my office didn't have the legal authority to prosecute.

We turned the case over to the FBI; they tried a "sting" operation that failed and dropped the case. Our office continued to pursue it for EIGHT years until the State Attorney General finally agreed to file felony bribery charges against Pope-Ludlam and Negrete. Hernandez had already passed away and Curlin had fled the country.

Both Pope-Ludlam and Negrete eventually pled guilty, had to repay the amount of the bribes they took to the city, and Pope-Ludlam served jail time.

Throughout the investigation I was periodically chided by the newspaper, criticized at public comments during televised council meetings, attacked in letters to the editor and in hundreds of conversations by political opponents who used the "gang of four" investigation as “another example of the City Attorney persecuting innocent people who disagree with him."

Timothy Prince, local attorney and current candidate for the U.S. Congress, even came to two council meetings, defended the gang of four at the public dias, and said they were “victims” of the City Attorney's zealous persecution of innocent people, "just because they disagreed with him."

By the way, the Sun actually ran political cartoons of me abusing the council majority, while the investigation of the rampant corruption going on inside City Hall was still being reviewed by the FBI and the State Attorney General (the D.A. had previously “opted out” of that prosecution.)

The difference between the County and the City? An elected city attorney's office was on top of the situation after the first two months. The County had to wait until the Feds came in to do their house cleaning.

As a result of our investigation, and Mayor Tom Minor's decision to air the results of that investigation in public at a televised council meeting (after the D.A., the Attorney General and the FBI bowed out,) three of the corrupt councilmembers were thrown out of office at their next election; the fourth one wisely decided not to run for re-election. He was the one who surrendered his drivers license and left the country "voluntarily."

Unlike the corruption in County government, the San Bernardino City electorate only had to wait until the next election to take care of business.

YET, my opponents still mention this very difficult effort and successful anti-corruption investigation as an example of my office "hounding" people who “fight him.”

Man, did they fight. They cut the city attorney office budget and eliminated both of the city attorney investigator positions; the very investigators who were delving into their corrupt deals. We had to go to court and sue the city council to get those investigators re-instated so they could finish building their case. We won in court and the investigation wasn't halted as the corrupt council members hoped it would be.

Today, my opponents still regale unknowing newer arrivals to our city with the story of how the City Attorney sued his own city council.

By the way, they filed a complaint against me with the State Bar on that one too. They said the law prohibited me from suing my own client. The Bar, and cases involving elected municipal attorneys, saw it much differently. We were cleared again.

But, while all this was going on, and before they were voted out of office, at every televised City Council meeting the gang of four took turns accusing me of so much wrong doing, and so much horrible personal conduct, that my mother quit watching those meetings.

Ralph Hernandez said during one of those televised attacks, "Mr. Penman is an immoral man. He's married to one woman and living with another."

It was true, I was separated and going through a divorce. The "other woman" I was living with? My sister Margie. That one really upset my mom, who was bedridden by then with an amputated leg and heart disease.

Mom passed away before the gang of four was prosecuted, never witnessing the ultimate vindication of the tenacity and very low tolerance for corruption, especially corruption by public officials, that she and my father had instilled in their five children.

Example: The City Council “censored” me, when I wrote a letter to a man for whom the city was paying for two motel rooms and two meals a day. He was quoted in the newspaper saying, “in Mexico they treat us better than they do here.”

Many of my constituents took umbrage with that remark, especially since we had evacuated the man and his family from a fire-susceptible trailer park, put he and his family up at tax payers’ expense in a motel until he found a house that the City financially helped him to purchase.

My conduct that brought on the “censor?”

I wrote the man a letter on office stationary, since my office was the one coordinating the evacuation and relief efforts, offering to continue to give him the same assistance we were then giving him, or providing he and his family transportation, one way, to a location under the control of the government that he thought would “treat him better.”

Yes, I would do it again. I would also willingly accept being censored again for the same reason. My children and grand children are Hispanic; my letter wasn't about ethnicity. If the man felt he would get better treatment by the City of Riverside, I would have offered him transportation, one way, to Riverside.

The list of examples goes on and on, like the time a political opponent accused me of falsifying a campaign endorsement of myself - the State Attorney General clear me of that charge, and then cleared me again when his decision was appealed - that one cost my personal bank account a bundle in attorney fees; through the false smears of the Mayor's race (another expensive election where I believed I was doing the right thing for my city and its residents) and on into the more recent city attorney election where I was accused of, and called almost everything, except being the honest and dedicated civil servant I try to be. (Well, I guess I'll plead guilty to a little lack of humility here. I've never denied being guilty of one charge leveled against me, arrogance. I do my best not to be the arrogant son of a gun they say I am, but I admit I don't always succeed in avoiding that kind of behavior.)

No, anonymous, I've never been subjected to the "years of intimidation and bullying tactics of these men," that you feel you've had to suffer through.

But I think I've paid my dues despite missing that experience. I also think I know a little about being on the receiving end of actions of "tough guys" who believe lies, intimidation and bullying will always prevail over integrity, patience, fortitude and tenacity.

They're wrong, sometimes. It is up to us not to quit. If we do, they win. I might have left this job voluntarily years ago, but I wasn’t about to let them win, especially not that way.

“Never, ever, ever, never give up,” Winston Churchill said. He also knew something about fighting corrupt governments.

I think if you believe you are right you should keep on fighting. If they beat you, but you go down fighting, hopefully you’ve bloodied them up enough, weakened them enough, for the next honest guy or gal to win.

But if you give up, they win, no doubt, no hesitation, THEY WIN!

Davy Crockett’s Motto: “First be sure you’re right, then go ahead.”

Maybe today it is an anachronism, but if it is, I still think it’s a good one.

Jim Penman

I thought Joe Turner was the POA spokesman?

Joe Turner ran his mouth once too often and a bunch of ol timers had enough. There was a big meeting at the POA office and the overwhelming vote was to get rid of that idiot. Now he can go back to the 7-11 graveyard shift.

Old Goat,

"A bunch of ol' timers" had absolutely nothing to do with Mr. Turner's release from the POA!!! As I recall it was a business decision made by the Board to terminate Turner's contract.

As for the "big meeting" that you spoke of, it was the standard monthly meeting. The only BIG meetings that I recall having were the contract vote, and the No-Confidence vote.

You are not helping matters by blogging this information, please stop stirring the pot. You have become just as embarassing as those you chide on this blog.

If you have such wise advice to spread, how about being part of the solution and not fan the flames of the problem.

The final word on Mr. Turner is, perception has been said to be viewed as reality. The Board of Directors fixed the perception by making the business decision that was voted on.

Judging from your comment regarding Mr. Turner, "There was a big meeting at the POA office and the overwhelming vote was to get rid of that idiot", well it is obvious that you believe in the democratic system.

You must also believe that a "vote" means something.

You must belive that "overwhelming" votes should mean some action should be taken, and recognized.

Then you MUST also support the OVERWHELMING vote of no-confidence that those who voted in a ballot box style vote gave to Chief Billdt. You notice that I did not call him an idiot. He is still a man and deserves that bit of dignity/respect, just as you and Mr. Turner should also have.

TW,
In regards to your above I'm just wondering what "business decision" really means? Does it have anything to do with Turners altercation at the city attorneys office. I believe a police report was taken. I think a phone call was made to the board of directors because of this. Could it be that Turner at this point and time was just to confrontational and could negatively impact the POA's plans? Why did they terminate Turners contract? Seems he wasn't there that long.

Mr Penman, do you really think this is the place to post all history???????? You have a reputation for bullying people below you as well. So no one really is going to simpithize with you! This city is SO DISFUNCTIONAL. Now we have to add you to that list after that rant.

It's funny how Joe Turner is not employed by the POA any longer, yet so believes in their plight, he still blogs in support of their issues. That is loyalty and will be rewarded in the end. And by the way, I don't know of any cops who shoot their mouths off, do you?

Joe turner keeps speaking for the POA because it gives him credibility and a platform. Before the POA, he was just a loudmouth standing on a corner so don't be fooled into thinking he is doing anything out of loyalty. By the way, how will he be rewarded in the end? Dont forget he is not a police officer and he was already fired from the POA. It sounds to me like "Open minded " thinks he will be a big time shot caller someday and he will personally take care of Turner.

To Anonymous (immediately above):

Before I begin...can some of you "anonymouses" change your handle to something a little bit different?

Let me give you a helpful hint. Anything that you choose (other than your real name) is pretty much synonymous with anonymous.

But, I digress...

Anyway...back to the regularly scheduled program. For someone who is just a "loudmouth standing on a corner", I sure do get a lot of attention.

I mean, from members of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate having hearings on my Illegal Immigration Relief Act, to cities and counties all across the nation discussing and/or implementing my initiative, to the California State Legislature passing a bill to directly nullify my work at the local level (AB 976) to being on the front page of the Wall Street Journal (twice), the New York Times...yada yada yada...to Chief Billdt promising to give the POA the PAL money if they got rid of me...I sure do get a lot of attention.

Let me close with the following tidbit for my friend above. It ain't your friends who give you credibility. It is your opposition.

Old Goat:

I am commenting because I live in this city and am invested in this community. Do you live in this city?

And to be frank...the simple fact of the matter is that I was instrumental in crafting the public narrative that has got us to this point.

Believe it or don't, I really couldn't care less.

But rest assured...Chief Billdt knows that I left the porch.

To Anonymous at 8:50:

Why don't you get the incident reports and post them here? I am sure they would provide an illuminating look at the machinations of city government.

I have nothing to hide.