Beilke calls DA complaints "preposterous"

On December 19, 2006 the Los Angeles District Attorney Public Integrity Unit was requested to investigate a complaint regarding a conflict of interest regarding the Glickman Development at the former K-Mart property in Pico Rivera. That property abuts Ron Beilke’s Der Wienerschnitzel. Ron Beilke, in a series of emails (copies available on request), used his political influence to fast track an additional business venture on that property. Since Glickman & Associates were forced to deal with the City Manager (Chuck Fuentes), Beilke had an advantage to negotiate that deal which was not available to the general public. (PID Case No.: 07-0003)

On February 6, 2007, the Los Angeles District Attorney Public Integrity Unit December was provided with demonstrative evidence that Ron Beilke violated the law on March 7, 2006 and November 13, 2007 by voting on improvements to the intersection of Washington and Rosemead Blvd. Beilke admits he made a “mistake”. But can it be labeled a “mistake”? Ron Beilke attended and completed the ethics training required of all newly elected officials which included conflict of interest. Beilke’s arrogance lead him to vote because nobody is going to tell him what to do on his corner.
On March 5, 2007 the Los Angeles District Attorney Public Integrity Unit was requested to investigate a complaint regarding Chuck Fuentes “fixing” parking tickets for Ron Beilke. Additional evidence, in the form of archived emails from Scott Wasserman to Deborah Lopez on November 8, 2005 and November 17, 2005, were provided regarding a “conversation” with Chuck (Fuentes) regarding “fixing” two parking tickets for Ron Beilke. Scott Wasserman wrote “FYI-I had a lengthy conversation with Chuck about my discomfort with being asked to void out parking citations for council members”. One of those parking tickets was for an unregistered vehicle parked along the curb at Ron Beilke’s house. Sandi Roth, D.D.A. in a telephone conversation, related that this was not against the law, according to the DA’s attorneys. I explained how Ron Beilke benefited by not have the vehicle towed (and paying the towing cost), the expense of bringing the registration current by paying fees to the DMV, and by paying the “release fee” to the Sheriff’s Department. Certainly a financial gain by Ron Beilke, provided by Chuck Fuentes, by not having to pay substantial fees any other Pico Rivera resident would have had to pay, should be illegal.

Is the DA’s office writing the law or enforcing it?

Additionally in the March 5, 2007 letter, the Los Angeles District Attorney Public Integrity Unit was requested to investigate a complaint regarding an incident in July 2005 wherein council member Ron Beilke went to a conference in Monterey, California (from July 26 thru July 30) and on Friday July 29, 2005 the Pico Rivera city credit was used (Debbie Lopez’s acting City Manager’s issued card) was used to pay Ron’s family dinner at Benihana’s which included Ron’s father, daughter, daughter’s boyfriend, Ron’s son, and additional guests of council member Ron Beilke. This amount of over $477 was never paid back to the city for his family’s (and his friend Chuck Fuentes’) meal. Deborah Lopez was not even present when the bill was paid. Forgery, misuse of public funds? How is that not illegal? Nonetheless, District Attorney Investigator Avila assured me that the statue of limitations is 4 years from the date the complaint was filed. There was time to investigate this matter although nothing was mention of this in the article.

With regards to the complaint of election code violations, clearly Beilke alludes to his misconduct by making the statement – “If you have a quantity of ballots what do you do with them?” So did he have them and in his mind had he no option but to turn them in? He further implicates himself by the statement – “Aren't there checks and balances for turning them in where someone says, `you can't do that?” Beilke clearly attempts to focus the blame away from him and onto Vida Tolman, the then city clerk. And finally the most implicating statement of all – “That would entail a conspiracy and I would not be the only one being investigated."

The conspiracy theory is correct. Beilke and Fuentes conspired to pad the casted votes for the purpose of creating a council majority so Fuentes could keep his job and Beilke could remain in controlling power. Remember, Beilke and Fuentes were in eminent danger and fighting for their lives. Should one legitimate council person be elected, Fuentes would have lost his job and Beilke would have been sidelined on the council minority. A Shakespearian plot at its finest!

When Congresswoman Grace Napolitano and Ron Beilke filed a complaint on Councilman Carlos Garcia the matter came before a Grand Jury in a few short months. So why did the Los Angeles District Attorney Public Integrity Unit take three years on this case with all of the evidence available?

Maybe, and hopefully, the auspices of a Congresswoman Gracie Napolitano will no longer protect Ron Beilke, a convicted felonious thief.

Judge: How do you plead to count 04, Grand Theft Property
Beilke: Nolo Contendere (Guilty)
Déjà vous.

Raul Murga
raul@prctip.org
All letters and emails available on request