Beef is never rare in San Bernardino
A note: Calls for an investigation are not new in San Bernardino politics.
The article posted below deals with City Attorney James F. Penman's insistence that Mayor Pat Morris be investigated for an alleged conflict of interest.
Penman himself was the subject of an election year investigation more than three years ago. He was ultimately cleared of wrongdoing in the matter.
In 2006, The Sun just happened to receive an anonymous complaint to the California Bar against Penman just days before the runoff election in the mayoral contest between Penman and then Judge Pat Morris, who won.
This newspaper did not rush to report on the complaint on the basis that it was by all appearances an episode of election-time gamesmanship. After the election, The Sun reported that the complaint was filed in December by then-Mayor Judith Valles, who supported Morris in that campaign.
San Bernardino is about to enter another mayoral campaign and Morris is seeking reelection. Penman has said repeatedly that he will not seek the mayor's post this time around, but the two officials often tangle at the dais, especially when legal matters are up for discussion. Morris is a former Superior Court judge.
This reporter asked Penman why he shouldn't assume that San Bernardino politics being what it is, he shouldn't assume that this episode isn't another round of gamesmanship.
His response:
"Unlike the allegation from Mayor Valles, the (new) allegation came from HPC," he said.
"That's why we need an investigation," he added.
HPC stands for Human Potential Consultants, an organization that has proposed a homeless shelter. Penman claims in two memos that HPC has alleged Morris has improperly intervened in their efforts.
The news article follows below. One almost wonders if future developments on the Sixth Floor will include a contest to determine who can punch harder.
By Andrew Edwards
Staff Writer
SAN BERNARDINO -- In a pair of memos, City Attorney James F. Penman calls for an investigation to see if his political rival, Mayor Pat Morris,has a conflict of interest relating to a proposed homeless shelter.
The Mayor's Office replies that the messages are nothing more than political spectacle designed to distract attention from the process by which the proposed homeless shelter is being considered.
In his memos, Penman writes that Human Potential Consultants, the Carson-based organization that has proposed the shelter, has alleged that Morris interfered in their attempt to establish a shelter in San Bernardino.
Penman reports that Human Potential Consultants has alleged that Morris improperly involved himself into the process because the Mayor's daughter has looked into doing business at a business park near the intersection of West Orange Show Lane and Arrowhead Avenue. The business park is one location under consideration for the proposed homeless shelter.
The City Attorney writes in his first memo, dated Tuesday, that if a conflict of interest exists, such a violation could result in civil and criminal penalties, the mayor's removal from office.
"The mayor should recuse himself and his office from all further involvement in this project until the allegations of HPC can be investigated," Penman wrote in Tuesday's memo.
It's rare for city attorneys to use such strong assertions when warning other public officials about potential conflicts of interest. Penman said Wednesday it's also rare for an organization with business before City Hall to accuse a San Bernardino official of interfering on behalf of a family member.
HPC could not be reached for comment Wednesday to discuss their reported allegations.
Morris responded with his own memo Wednesday. In his missive, Morris writes that he asked his daughter, Kathleen Willis, 43, to forego plans to locate her gymnastics school at an Orange Show Lane business park where the proposed shelter could also be established.
Willis was out of town Wednesday and unable to comment, a woman who answered the phone at her business, Inland Empire Gymnastics Academy, said.
Morris further writes California's conflict of interest laws do not apply to the situation because his daughter is not a dependent child. The mayor contended that the real issue is not the alleged conflict of interest but the public process.
During the July 20 City Council meeting, the agenda included a request to approve an urgency ordinance that would have allowed HPC to create a shelter in the 200 block of West Orange Show Lane. The request was signed by both Development Services Director Valerie Ross and Penman.
The council chose to put off a decision on proposed ordinance until its Aug. 3 meeting.
Morris and Third Ward Councilman Tobin Brinker said they were concerned that the urgency process did not provide notice for neighboring business owners to register their concerns regarding the proposal. Both Penman's and Morris' memos report that the shelter would serve parolees.
"We need to basically put this out with a process, a legal process that gives appropriate notice," Morris said in an interview.
Brinker said a shelter at the business park could discourage commerce there.
The City Council has previously rejected HPC's attempt to establish a shelter at a church site on North Sierra Way because that location is near a facility that serves domestic violence victims.
HPC has appealed that decision and according to the July 20 request for council action on the urgency ordinance, would withdraw its appeal if given a permit to develop a shelter on Orange Show Lane.
6 Comments
Leave a comment
About SB Now Blog
Andrew Edwards. E-mail Andrew here.
First HPC was not forthcoming when detailing what type of shelter would be located at the Sierra Way address. They danced around the fact that they were being paid to house parolees - and this was next to a proposed school.
However, this isn't the first time that Willis' name has come up in conjunction with Morris and the word nepotisim. What about the city contract with Parks and Rec?
Then there is the blatant act of nepotisim with Jimmy Boy being Chief of Staff. It is a well known fact (whispered in the halls of City Hall) that Pat's salary goes to support Jim's family.
Also, look at county records for the house that Jim lives in. Pat owned it first - been in the family for years.
Then again, Pat has to do something since his son can't hold a job that supports the growing family. You can't live on baseball tickets.
Oh, ALL DAY LONG, Morris is a non-profit scam artist. When he was a CPS court judge, he involved himself with CPS contracted agencies (Children's Fund diagnosis the abuse & gets grants for it, & the Community Foundation writes the grants for adoption agencies- for a fee). When he was a drug court judge, he invoved himself with drug court contract agencies (places the druggies had to use/go to for "treatment" and whatnot). All Pat had to do was render faulty verdicts in his weird, un-normal, special little courts without juries to witness when he'd refuse people the opportunity to present evidence or call witnesses to clear their good name.
You people think he kept people out of jail because it made him feel good? Oh, NO! He couldn't send certain ones to jail because they were innocent...You see, if you force someone to participate in your "charity" to fix them up or take their kids, you really don't need a jury; however, if you're going to put someone behind bars, you need a jury and that would mean people must be permitted the opportunity to defend themselves with witnesses and evidence...
You see, now that he's mayor, he's been calling for raids on the poorer parts of town (usually minorities), opening countless drug and CPS court cases on innocent people. Consider Operation Sunrise (02-27-08): more than 50 children had to be investigated by CPS for truancy...Now, here's the kicker: THE KIDS WERE ALL OFF TRACK!!!! See? It's that easy for him to get business. Morris has door to door raids done in this town to support the growth of his "non-profits." He's dirty.
I hope he rots in H-E-doublehockysticks for what he's doing in this town. I hope he goes to prison. I wonder how it makes him feel to know that a good portion of San Bernardino pray for him to go to prison every night.
Perhaps someday…the people of SB will have a Mayor who has their best interest at heart 100% of the time. Perhaps someday these residents will have a voice the Mayor will listen to and hear. Perhaps someday the Mayor of SB will not be influenced by special interests, personal agenda or vendettas towards other elected. Perhaps someday the Mayor of SB will have the right ethical make-up to not skirt the City’s nepotism mandates by hiring family members and showing favoritism to other family members. Perhaps someday SB will have a Mayor who understands his role in the political arena and know it is not to run and influence Phoenix Centers that abound with corruption and crime due to his selection of leadership. Perhaps someday SB will have a Mayor who is not concerned with photo ops more than providing direction and support to those whose job it is to run the city. Perhaps someday, maybe November 2009 SB will start to change and recover from this dark cloud of embarrassing representation that has earmarked SB for so long. Perhaps someday there will be a sequel to the TV show the Soprano’s that will depict the politics of SB and those who have been involved for years. Perhaps…
Whats real funny and pathetic is that Penman knew this months ago and waited till election time. We have some of the biggest little kids within our city government. He did this he did that waaaaaan waaaan take my ball and go home. They are worried about that crap and forget hello we need a budget freaking idiots. To think us as residents in this city elected these nuts.....What does that make us?
Penman knew this info on July 21st and jumped on it ASAP according to the paper. You guys right crap for reality and believe it yourselves. How ridiculous. Is Morris too good for the truth to be told to the public cause he won't tell you. If not him, then who?
And the beat goes on. There MUST be an unwritten agreement between the SB Mayor’s official job description and the SB City Attorney’s official job description saying they will publicly fight and slander one another regardless who fills the position. This holds true especially during election periods for both positions. We seem to get to see them regurgitate like issues every two years depending on whose turn it is to face the voters.
However, I for one am a little tired of reading or hearing the “he/he (or she) said” that commands the media’s attention. It is NOT news worthy reporting. It is NOT professionalism at its best from either position and I feel it is counter productive to running our City. Both individuals in these (current) positions can, should and are expected to do better. These types of actions are not in the job descriptions for which you were elected and the voters of SB deserve more from each elected position.
SB will never improve itself with this type of action that serves no useful purpose. These two (individuals) work harder opposing or undermining one another than they do anything else. If laws have been broken, ask the District Attorney to investigate for validity and/or necessary legal action against the law breaker. Stop doing “your laundry” in public fashion and focus more on serving the voters of SB for which you were elected. The gaming must stop as SB can no longer afford the unproductive time each is investing. We have a City like so many other City’s that is/are in financial upheaval now and balanced budget concerns should capitalize all available time until our economy turns the corner and we can restore the jobs and positions and services that were sacrificed. Nothing should be more important, nothing!
Lastly, before any consideration is given to accepting more parolees into the City limits of SB, the residents (VOTERS) should be consulted. Regardless of what you feel towards this subject, the citizens of SB MUST be heard on accepting more convicted felons into this already crime ridden City. They must know there is an unbelievably high rate of these convicted are or become repeat offenders. They must decide if we need to place the City’s welcome mat out for these individuals. Not the Mayor, nor the City Attorney but the VOTERS. It will be these same voters that will more than likely fall victim to these repeat offenders. Can the voters afford this preventable upsurge in forecasted crime?
Special interests or personal agendas must not cloud the will of the public or voters. SB can not nor should be the promise land for felons. Our Mayor has a very difficult time understanding this now and while on the Bench and hearing the opposition ongoing about it. It needs to be settled once and for all, let the citizens/voters decide. That is how I see it, how about YOU?