Eye On Modesto

Thoughts and observations about Modesto and Stanislaus County

Archive for the tag “Modesto”

MID is Back to its Old Tricks Obfuscating the TRUTH

By Emerson Drake

MID attorney Tim O’Laughlin manages to drum up business for himself while building walls between MID at its ratepaying owners also known as the public. The following is a copy of, what has become a typical response from O’laughlin to a Public Information Request made by Reed Smith.

Linda Fischer, Paralegal

Modesto Irrigation District
Legal Department
(209) 526-7388

 

I am in receipt of your e-mail dated May 11, 2012 relative the attached response from MID General Counsel Tim O’Laughlin.

 

Mr. O’Laughlin’s letter dated May 11, 2012, does not comply with the District’s obligations under the Public Records Act.  Specifically, the requested records must be produced within ten days.  The District “head” has not provided notice that “unusual circumstances” exist which would result in an extension of the deadline by fourteen days.  Govt. Code 6253(c).

 

I am writing to confirm my understanding of your statements to me when I came into MID yesterday afternoon, May 14, 2012, at 2:30 PM regarding availability of the documents I requested to INSPECT.  General Counsel, Tim O’Laughlin, has by the attached letter, refused to produce any of the documents to date.

 

To restate what I heard you say yesterday afternoon:

 

1)         There are 13 file volumes involved within my request.  [ You did not mention digital files and maps  that have been requested ]

 

2)         When I met with you on April 30, 2012 regarding a very similar PRR, you informed me that AGM Walt Ward was responsible for accumulating the files, and that I conclude from your narrative that the records have been aggregated in a single location at 1231 11th Street, Modesto, CA 95354.

 

3)         GC Tim O’Laughlin says the documents must be reviewed to identify CONFIDENTIAL material within the 13 volumes, prior to release for IMMEDIATE INSPECTION.  To date, the District has not informed me that any of the requested documents are subject to “exemption” from disclosure.  Such a determination was required within ten days from the date of my request.  Govt. Code 6253(c).

 

4)         GC Tim O’Laughlin, has created a scenario where he claims he is the only person that can review the documents to remove CONFIDENTIAL material within the 13 volumes, prior to release for INSPECTION. 

 

5)         There is no definition of CONFIDENTIAL within the PRA.  The PRA requires the District to respond to my request within ten days, May 20, 2012, with either the records or a determination that an “exemption” in the PRA applies to specific records.  

 

6)         You stated that GC O’Laughlin is only in Modesto three (3) days PER MONTH.  This is not an “unusual circumstance” as defined in Govt. Code 6253. 

 

7)         You offered no time estimate for MID’s production of the documents. 

 

I responded to you yesterday that, based upon my understanding of the California Public Records Act intent, this lack of a time-line for production is unacceptable and fails to comply with the PRA.

 

Please let me know if I have misunderstood your communication of yesterday.

 

Self-appointed MID Board President, Tom Van Groningen, promised on January 10, 2012, to conduct business in an open and transparent manner.

 

I now request that the documents be made available by Monday, May 21, at 9 AM, or I intend to seek legal relief to insure that MID complies with the Act.  As a public entity, MID has a fiduciary duty to comply with California law.


Sincerely,

 

Reed Smith

 

From: Linda Fischer <lindaf@mid.org>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 16:06:38 -0700
To: Reed Smith <reedsmith@charter.net>
Cc: Tim O’Laughlin towater@olaughlinparis.com>, Allen Short <ALLENS@MID.ORG>, Linda Fischer <lindaf@mid.org>, Angela Cartisano AngelaC@mid.org>, Pat Caldwell-Mills <PATC@MID.ORG>, Colleen Rangel <COLLEENR@MID.ORG>, Walt Ward <WalterW@MID.ORG>
Subject: FW: Message from legal – Written Response to Reed Smith re: inspection on May 14, 2012
 
 Dear Mr. Smith,
 
Attached please find Modesto Irrigation District’s written response to your Public Records Act Request of May 10, 2012 regarding the inspection of the annexation files/documents.  Thank you.
 
Linda Fischer, Paralegal
Modesto Irrigation District
Legal Department
(209) 526-7388
 

From: legal-copier1@mid.local [mailto:legal-copier1@mid.local]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 4:07 PM
To: Linda Fischer
Subject: Message from legal – Written Response to Reed Smith re: inspection on May 14, 2012
 
 
Now you find the pdf sent from MID’s overpaid attorney Tim O’Laughlin.
 

It’s Time to Take Special Interest’s Big Money out of Local Politics

By Emerson Drake

Last night during the public comment period at the Modesto City Council meeting a man stood up and asked for the Council to take another look at Modesto’s “Time Is Now, Clean Up Politics” or TIN CUP ordinance.  This is an opportunity for EVERYONE, regardless of political bent, to help level the playing field of local politics. 

Do you believe unions hold too much sway or think developers can buy our elected officials by the handful?  Since we are in between local election cycles,  now is the time to change the rules our local politicians are required to play by.

At this point in time we have a $3,000  limit before our elected representatives are required to step back or recuse themselves from voting for a contributors project.  That, in the opinion of many Modesto Citizens, is too high.

What was proposed last night is a $1,000 limit on Council races and a $2,000  limit for Mayoral races with a 48 month floating window.

People are still allowed and encouraged to contribute to their favorite candidates as much as they choose so this doesn’t violate anyones civil liberties. The only caveat is if they go over the limit, the individuals receiving the contribution would not be allowed to speak to or vote on any measure put forth by, or that financially benefits, their contributor.

This seems very straight forward and you would think anyone  for better government would be standing in line to endorse this measure.

Very soon we’ll have  a link  to a petition for everyone who wants clean government can sign.  We hope the Modesto Chamber of Commerce will support and endorse this proposal.

Citizens of Modesto, the ball is in your court. Please help us hit a grand slam  for the home team by knocking it out of the park.

Another Black Mark on Modesto, The Blue Ribbon Commission on the Homeless

By Emerson Drake

It was supposed to help the chronic homeless and homeless veterans when Councilman Joe Muratore asked the Safety and Communities Committee  for permission to create what evolved into this cruel and heartless attack on Modesto’s homeless. 

Out of 32 applicants, 9 were chosen. One dropped out but the rest pushed forward with their personal agendas.  J. David Wright, the Chairman of the Blue Ribbon Commission on the Homeless or (BRCH), stated it correctly when, at the April 03, 2012 City Council meeting ,said the 9 chosen were all “effected” by our homeless citizens . He failed to mention the members were either negatively effected by the homeless or stood to gain potential financial profit for themselves or the respective self identified groups they represent.  

But even that doesn’t tell the whole story of the BRCH’s members.

Mike Moradian was one of Joe Muratore’s confidants in Muratore’s council election campaign.  Moradian was the leader of a non-profit LaLoma Neighborhood Association (LLNA). The LLNA “strongly supported” Muratore’s council bid and the LLNA soon lost its non-profit status.  Muratore and Moradian were advocates of leveling the airport district (which is in Muratore’s council District) in order to help rid Modesto of its homeless population and those who Moradian perceived as “trouble makers.”  Moradian also supported Muratore’s hope the city would financially support their private security force in LaLoma’s local public parks.

Two of the chosen were former members of the Stanislaus Community Assistance Program (SCAP).  Darryl Fair who was Chairman for SCAP’s board of directors during the height of the SCAP debacle and has been hoping someone would come along and fund a daycare center said he could “manage.” And Frank Ploof who, for a period of time, was a member of SCAP’s board of directors and despite having SCAP’s irregularities exposed with Darryl Fair at the helm, continued to “hook up”  Fwith air at the  Renaissance Center. The center was originally set up as a non-profit in Fair’s sons’ name but lost its non-profit status from the IRS for non-compliance of financial regulations.

Vanessa Czopek, Stanislaus County’s head librarian was chosen because of, or in spite of, her misgivings regarding the homeless presence in and around the downtown branch in  Modesto.  She had taken active steps to disenfranchise these citizens from their right to use the library.  Since she couldn’t legally refuse them access to the inside, she attempted to “disinclined” them of using the outside.   Ms. Czopek had most of the tables and benches removed from the library portico.  Unfortunately many other citizens, yes even those with homes, used these benches as a place to rest while exploring the nearby farmers market or just enjoying the beautiful tree-lined streets adjoining the library.

Brad Wilson had been a long time employee of the Modesto’s Y0semite Gospel Mission.  During his time on the committee he was placed in charge of the Mission. He did have some difficulties with getting permission to renovate an existing structure to expand their rehabilitation abilities.  Of course an opportunity to reinforce his “way” of rehabilitating people and a chance to funnel a larger percentage of public donations to his organization couldn’t possibly hurt.

Steve Madison the former head of Modesto’s Building Industry Association and now on the Board of Directors there managed to get himself appointed to the Salvation Army Board.  A feat usually performed by aspiring political wannabees through donating a significant amount of money but requiring no expertise or experience with those in need.  Unless of course of you count a developer looking for a piece of prime farm land to plant driveways in or a politician looking for a campaign donation.

J.David Wright the Commission Chairman is a local insurance branch owner and salesman and doesn’t like anyone to eek out an existence by living behind a dumpster near his place of business.  Mr. Wright has been especially busy donating to successful Council and failed Mayoral hopefuls to the tune of $5,700 in the last year alone.  Did I mention many of these same candidates are now on the council and recently reappointed him and the other Commissioners (I guess they think it sounds better than committee members) to another yet unnamed commission task?

J. David Wright made it very clear he/they believe the homeless are molly coddled and overfed. He made the claim they homeless could get fed 10 to 15 times a day, which is something the report doesn’t document. Muratore later made the claim that the homeless could get fed up to 20 times daily.  This claim was refuted later by people and groups who fed the homeless daily on their own.

Wright also made the claim there are 10 or 12 agencies in Modesto that pass out food daily. Again their report does not substantiate this.  Point in fact, one of the agencies they reference will give 3 days of food once every 3 months!

We need to understand the BRCH had several goals. One is to create a mindset of “out of sight out of mind.”  Day centers would be helpful but not as a magic wand. Many of the homeless wouldn’t use a daycare facility except occasionally or during inclimate weather.

Another goal is to funnel donations, monetary and food, to just a few groups like the Yosemite Gospel Mission, Interfaith ministries) which didn’t participate here) and the Salvation Army.  unfortunately this limits the people who will be allowed access to the support services provided since these agencies have alienated aprox.15-20% of the homeless due to their restrictive rules and religious affiliations.

An informative pamphlet Merced uses would be of great use to homeless advocates and those wishing to truly assist the homeless in finding available resources.  It is also necessary to monitor the major groups presently assisting the homeless in order to ensure the greatest dispersion to ALL of the homeless not just those who fit the cookie cutter ideals of the few powerful organizations who presently dominate the field. Plus the homeless most often are transportation challenged.  The “fairytale style anecdotal stories”  told by the BRCH members are a prime example of how their agendas have tainted their perspectives.  Grants being written for or money handed over to “professional non-profiteers” should be avoided.

 The reading of the BRCH’s final report is recommended. BRCReport.   But continued community involvement and supervision is very important.  The Joe Muratore’s of the world can’t be trusted with those who are most vulnerable to society’s baser instincts. 

What we allow done to the least of us we allow done to all of us.

Author: Carl Skaggs This image was taken by me...

Author: Carl Skaggs This image was taken by me on January 14, 2010 in Modesto, California I hereby relinquish all rights to this photo. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Will Candidate and now Councilman Dave Lopez Make Good on His Word?

By Emerson Drake

On October 24, 2011, Dave Lopez was being interviewed on Athens Abell’s “On Watch” television show when he made some promises to his constituents. One of them was in response to Ms. Abell’s question regarding the misuse of SCAP and NSP2 funds.  “If the audit comes back and it says there has been a misappropriation of funds and it’s this persons department will you personally call for their resignation?”

Dave Lopez’s response was “Absolutely, absolutely, that is what you should count on your local officials for. You find the bad piece and you cut it away.”  Yet the findings are in and Joe Muratore has been potentially threatened with debarment because of his misdeeds. Which means he could be prevented from ever having anything to do with government funded financing and the question we’ve asked Susana Wood, City Attorney, is will Modesto be barred from future participation in federal funds if Mr. Muratore remains on the City Council.  To this point we haven’t received an answer.

Quite honestly we don’t expect to receive one since she’s the council’s attorney and not the attorney for the citizens ofModesto.

.

Muratore’s fellow City Council members have remained completely silent including Dave  Lopez. This is an extremely sad state of affairs forModesto.  We have enough black eyes in the nation’s perception without having a councilman spreading his particular form of greed throughout the city’s business.

We can’t forget the $48,000 dollars still in question between Mr. Muratore and his business partner Ryan Swehla and Swehla’s business partner Scott Monday.

It appears these men have conspired to keep as much of the NSP2 money for themselves as possible by controlling the disbursement of funds from the city (remember the contractor couldn’t apply for more money because of the $1.2Million saved for Muratore’s Benchmark Realty’s use on the apartment on which Benchmark made the $62,500 commission).

Will Dave Lopez follow through on the ideal his campaign promise was based on, or is it business as usual in the family owned and operated Modesto?

It’s time for Modesto’s citizens to clean house and get respect back for their City Council. If any one on the city council remains either quiet or in support of Mr. Muratore they are part of the problem and not the solution.

To listen to Dave Lopez’s words go to

http://www.youtube.com/user/mrsathensabell#p/u/2/Ga6xNbp6XOM

Kari Abbey Prelim Summations the Long Version

By Emerson Drake

District Attorney Dave Harris

The afternoon started out quietly with D.A. Harris sitting at the table softly reciting the events of last week’s hearings.  He started by describing the various ways Rita Elias had made the world aware of where she lived over the summer.  How her ex-common law husband had brought her children over to visit about ten times and always to the 1708A Donaldson address.

And how, when arrested in August, Rita had given the 1708A address to the Probation Department including providing them with a diagram of the apartment and where her bedroom was in relationship to those of others.  She even had a cable bill in her name at that address since cable service was part of the overhead she paid.  Just three weeks prior to the shooting she had told Deputy Hooper that she lived there as he documented in a report.

James Abbey had told the officers the night of the shooting he and Kari were there to collect the rent or evict them that night.  He also had admitted to Officers Kari and Rita had gotten in a fight with Kari ending up on top of Rita, pummeling her until James Abbey told her to stop. Harris reminded the court another witness had related how Elias said if she hadn’t been wearing heals Abbey wouldn’t have won.  James Abbey’s response to her was “bring it on.”  He then he told Elias “if you don’t leave I’ll sick Kari on you again.”

We were reminded of the times where Abbey had used her relationship withModestopolice and her badge to remain in control of situations when police were called. Kari and James Abbey and Bennie Taylor sometimes used ‘self help’ up to and including violent acts against tenants as Harris called it to perform illegal evictions of tenants behind in their rent payments.

DA Harris sited Daluiso vs. Boone, a Supreme Court decision that when performing unlawful evictions anything that came afterward was illegal.

Harris then pointed out the 106 plants were many times more than the Compassionate Act allowed and while acknowledging James Abbey had a recommendation, it didn’t cover this many plants and that James Abbey had admitted to investigators he had sold some of his harvested buds.  The second recommendation from someone in the foothills didn’t count since there was no evidence that James was the other persons’ caregiver. The third card was expired and wasn’t valid.

Harris went on to the embezzlement charge, reminding the Judge of the statements of two co-workers who had complained to her supervisor that Kari was spending 50% of her time on non-work related business.  The supervisor works in another location, so direct supervision was impossible.  The co-workers complained that she spent 50% of her time on her property management, and that there was a “for sale” and a “for rent” sign in her county issued car.

Harris also points out that ‘flex time’ excuse given by the defense doesn’t hold water.  And that Abbey had used her professional relationships to get fellow Officers to perform evictions for her with out Abbey having to pay the fee the Sheriff’s Office charges landlords.

Harris’ delivery through out his summation is calm and deliberate and he remained seated the entire time.

Defense Attorney Michael Rains

Now it was Defense attorney Michael Rains’ turn.  He said he felt the need to educate the people in the courtroom about prelims and what they were for but to be honest it seemed like he was addressing the judge through, or should I say instead, of  the observers in the courtroom. He reminded everyone of how his specialty is defending accused police officers and he had tried cases in many different counties but his experience here was limited and he hoped this county was like the others. He was concerned that this case might be a public relations ploy for the District Attorney’s office. 

Defense Attorney Rains’ style is to pace and apply histrionics (exaggerated expression or emotion) to his delivery.

He tells the court most times at prelims the prosecutor is smug and confident and while he doesn’t accuse Harris of this it reminds one of the act in Julius Caesar when Anthony says Brutus is an honorable man but means the exact opposite.  Defense attorney Harris says that most if not all of these charges should be thrown out and claims it was self-defense.  He also says that “cops will be charged with murder all the time if this is allowed to continue”. 

Rains uses the phrase “crafty claims” by the prosecution and denies that the facts the DA is using are real.  He actually suggests that just because she had a cable bill in her name at this address, doesn’t mean that she lives there.  Rains quotes Sally Pantoja saying that she didn’t see a fight between Abbey and Elias and he claims that the autopsy shows hair was pulled out of the scalp, but no hair was found at the scene, suggesting that the fight took place somewhere else.  

According to testimony the autopsy stated there was bruising on the scalp, suggesting that hair was pulled.  It was never suggested that hair was pulled from the scalp.  He suggested that the autopsy evidence of Rita having blunt force trauma to her hands and face could have been Elias hitting Abbey, not the other way around. 

Rains then tries to work in some hearsay that the judge had not allowed in hearings last week.  Harris objects and is sustained.  Rains says that Sally Pantoja was a credible witness despite the fact that she wouldn’t answer her door twice when police were trying to find witnesses to what happened.  Presumably she didn’t answer because she was on probation and under the influence of an illegal substance. 

 He actually claims that Kari Abbey was obligated to shoot Rita Elias as a police officer, despite her not being there in an official capacity.  He says the DA is waging a smear campaign against his client.  He also says the conspiracy case is a “wobbler”, meaning it could be a felony or misdemeanor.  He tries to make the claim that Bennie Taylor wasn’t there at all three instances of illegal evictions, so how can it be a conspiracy? 

He calls Quantana, who was assaulted by Bennie Taylor during an attempt to collect past due rent, a professional squatter. In the attempt to evict Quantana, the Abbey’s refused to supply a rental agreement despite his having paid about $1200 as a deposit.  As a result, Mr. Quantana was forced to generate a false rental agreement in an attempt to obtain electricity.  This would be the third time the Abbeys have been shown to either turn off the electricity as they did at the 1708 Donald home, the night of the shooting, and during the attempted eviction onWiley Drive.  

Rains reminds the court that he introduced eighteen rental agreements where the renter was required to pay for the electricity and had Investigator Hermosa read where the renter was required to provide the electricity in all those instances.

As far as the embezzlement charge is concerned, he suggests they have nothing but hearsay, with disgruntled co-workers alleging that she was only working a50% of the time.  He actually says the law language in the embezzlement charge is ambiguous at best and one is required to use the “rule of reasonableness”.

Once again, Rains accuses the DA of a smear job and tries to blame Abbey for the marijuana grow and tries to play it off as a medical grow, despite the fact log books and scales were found and James Abbey told police officers that he sold it.

Rains says that Kirk Bunch perjured himself by saying the MID bill found in Abbey’s bedroom was for the house and shed.  Rains pointed out that TID services that area. 

When he talks about the child endangerment charge, he reminds the court of the two pictures of the shotgun found in the couch with the child’s toy found near the trigger in one, but it was moved in the second one. 

I smell a rat.

Defense attorney Rains suggests the evidence was planted and said quite dramatically, “I smell a rat”.  Defense Attorney Rains’ presentation seemed more like a stage actors dramatic portrayal that’s been over-dramatized and filled with hyperbole. 

District Attorney Harris’ rebuttal.

DA Harris discussed the two pictures of the shotgun, pointing out to the court, the first one with the toy next top the trigger was taken to show how the weapon appeared when they found it.  The second one shows that the four shotgun shells had been removed from the gun, so obviously the movement of the toy was inconsequential.  Harris points out “to have guns where a six year old can reach them is inherently dangerous”. 

Concerning the marijuana grow, three cards were found.  One was expired and the second gave no indication that James Abbey was a caregiver to the card holder, the third was James Abbey’s, but the Compassionate Care Act doesn’t allow that quantity of plants and never allows sales.   The court is reminded that James Abbey admitted to investigators that he sometimes sold marijuana. The path that leads to the horse trailer in back that held sheriff’s posse tack and saddles, is where the three potted marijuana plants were found by investigators and where they noticed the strong smell of marijuana.

Mortgage paperwork for the house and shed, although in Kari, James and Denise Abbeys name, was found in Kari Abbey and Bennie Taylor’s bedroom, showing that Kari Abbey had been paying the mortgage for the house and shed and the electricity bill for both the house and the shed.

If you count the properties owned by Kari Abbey, James Abbey and Bennie Taylor, along with the company PLM, and now the recently introduced 18 more properties, it’s possible that Kari Abbey was managing 31 properties.  Deputies found a rental and a for sale sign in her county issued car.  Kari Abbey had been using her professional relationships with fellow deputies to deliver eviction notices and wasn’t paying the county mandated fee to the sheriff’s department. 

On the night of the shooting, James Abbey told investigators “we were going to get the rent or we were going to evict them”.  

Conspiracy is defined as an unlawful agreement to perform an unlawful purpose or act, so by James and Kari going to “get the rent or evict them”, it shows there was a conspiracy.  Defense attorney Rains had made claims that a landlord can go into a home at anytime, so therefore, there was no “trespass” that night.  DA Harris pointed out the law Rains quoted was from 1946 and there have been many changes regarding rental rights since then.  When a renter is in the home, they have the same legal rights as if they were the owner.  Kari, James or Bennie entering any rental property where somebody was already in the home is trespassing.  He says the law has to protect “lesser individuals” and that Abbey never identified herself as a police officer in the performance of her duty and as such, never gave Rita Elias the chance to surrender. 

He reminds the court that Jose Flores, Kari’s apartment manager, stated to investigators that Kari said to Rita, “come on, if you want to fight me, come back up here”, when Rita was in the street preparing to leave.  Kari goaded her into returning.  Its Rita returning back to the duplex that Judge Ricardo Cordova says justifies the self-defense.

After the hearing Rains spoke to observers, and mentioned he was concerned the DA would re-file the murder or manslaughter charges.  He plans to continue preparing a defense in case that happens.

Kari Abbey prelim Exam – Day Four

By Emerson Drake

To open the day, the defense presents Sally Ann Pantoja.  She lived at 2012 Donald back in September of 2010. 

Defense attorney Rains first has her explain how she rents from Kari Abbey, as does her best friend Julie Perez who was renting from Ms. Abbey at the time. She explains another of her friends was looking for a place and that she’s talked with Abbey about this friend renting a house from her and had left her number with Abbey.  Responding to questions she states, she didn’t really know Rita Elias but had been introduced to her by her friend Julie.  She said Rita comes and goes from the 1780A address frequently.  Also that she knows the two men living there better than she knew Rita. 

The night of the shooting she said she heard shouting outside and went into her front yard and saw Rita Elias (the Mexican woman is how Pantoja describes Rita) picking up her personal belongings out of the street and placing them in her backpack.

A tall, older white male was engaged in an argument with Rita.  Julie told Sally that the male was Mr. Abbey.  He was yelling at Rita “If you don’t get off of my property I’ll let her get you.”  Rita responds that she doesn’t have to leave. Then James Abbey yells at her again to get off of his property.  Pantoja says Rita was cursing at James.

Ms. Pantojo states during this time she didn’t hear Kari saying anything. That just the man and Rita were arguing.

Just as she believes Rita, having gathered all of her belongings in the backpack, is going to leave, she says Rita then said. “Fuck this, I’m going to get my gun.”  Rita sets the backpack down by Pantoja’s fence and then walks quickly across the street, past the cars, into the apartment and comes back out with a stick/branch in her left hand and what we now know as a bb gun in her right.

At this point Sally Pantoja runs up to her own porch and when she reaches it she hears what she describes as five gunshots.  Sally says she didn’t see any of the shooting. When asked who was there, at the beginning she said only she and Ester Elipo, the occupant of 1708B.  Only after being prompted by Rains did she mention Jose Flores for the first time. She now mentions she watched Jose Flores get in his truck and drive off.  She then hears Kari say someone call 911.  Sally explains this was the first thing she heard Kari say.

On cross examination by D.A. Harris, her story changes slightly and she gets mixed up repeatedly.   

Sally tells the court she didn’t know who Kari Abbeys manager Jose Flores was, and that she had never seen him around before.  She also says James Abbey, in response to Rita’s cursing and saying she wouldn’t leave, said “Rita, get off my property or I’ll let Kari loose on you.”   Responding to further questioning by D.A. Harris, Sally explains that the reason the Sheriff’s Deputies hadn’t talked with her before is that when they knocked on her door that night she hid and wouldn’t answer, When Sally was asked why she explained she was on parole and she didn’t want them to take her to jail.

The deputies went around a second time attempting to find witnesses and knocked on her door but she still refused to answer.  Sally admitted her front door had been open during the first attempt to contact her but she still didn’t answer.  Sally also said the only two vehicles she saw that night were the pick-up and the jeep.  She didn’t see Kari Abbey’s sheriff’s car with the children in it.  But she claims to have seen the children afterward.

LeAnn Rae Wesner-Donaldson took the stand.  She’s been with Children and Family Services for nine and a half years.  She was called to the home by George Papadopoulos.  When she arrived the children had already been taken to the other grandparents home onMuncy Drive.   

She testified she had been shown the three weapons found in the home.  She said Papadopoulos told her the weapons all needed racked (a cartridge inserted) but that their magazines were loaded but had been separated by the time she arrived.

Later she interviewed the children, ages one and six.

Robert McFarlane, a private investigator for the defense attorneys firm then took the stand. He introduced and walked us through portions of a DVD taken at the home of James and Denise Abbey.  Included were scenes from the living room, a second bedroom used by a child, the second bathroom, and Kari Abbey and Bennie Taylor’s walk in bedroom closet.

He also discusses the samurai swords on the wall and the one on a lower shelf in the Abbey/Taylor side of the house.  He made a point the lower sword on the stand within reach of the children was “duller than a butter knife.”

He is asked about the diagram of the apartments at 1708 Donald.  He points out in pictures taken at the scene the window appears to be in a different location than in the diagram.  But under questioning he acknowledges that after the shooting a deputy had used a laser range finder to measure the distances from a variety of set points on the apartment to set points on the vehicles in the driveway.

Mr. McFarlane created a diagram of the houses (three) located at 712S. Santa Cruz.  These are rentals owned by the Abbeys.  His representation of the area is supposed to create some doubt as to the story about Kari Abbey throwing tenant Victor Quintana’s stored items in the side yard.  But D.A. Harris shows McFarlane a google overhead photo that proximately displays the shortcomings of the diagram and its lack of scale accuracy and suggests the original story regarding the belongings could have been accurate.

D.A. Harris took pains to get introduced to the record that having a small amount of meth might not mean one is under the influence of the drug.  And that one of the ways used to measure if someone has ingested the drug is to measure the residue of the kidney’s cleaning the system.

The next hearing for Kari Abbey will be next Monday where the attorneys for both sides will present final arguments.

Greg Nyhoff and the SCAP Letters, is He Stonewalling the Citizens or trying to “Control” the Story?

By Emerson Drake

When we heard Modesto was refusing to give either the letter it wrote to SCAP or SCAP’s response, to the Bee or the rest of us for that matter, we sent a Public records Request to the City in an attempt to get a copy of the letters.

The following was the City’s response:

From the Office of the City Clerk

Hello, Mr. Drake…
 
You indicated that you wanted an acknowledgement of receipt for your request, so I wanted to make sure it was being worked on. The City Manager’s office reports that the response letter received from SCAP will be released within the specified timeframe under the Public Records Act.  Given the closure of the City for the Thanksgiving Holiday and furloughs, they will release the document on Monday, November 28th. 

 

We wondered why the obvious delaying tactics by the City Manager Greg Nyhoff?  Was he trying to dribble the story out in small bits and pieces?  Maybe, maybe not.

We’ve all learned about the life cycle of a news story and delaying disclosure would be a way to deal with one leaked part at a time.  Or at the very least seek a more “friendly venue” to disclose the entire story.

On November 16th, the very day this email was received, we were fortunate enough to obtain from a reader the letter SCAP sent in response to the City’s.

Apparently Mr. Nyhoff felt the need to advance his time-table since the “cat was out of the bag” so to speak. We only hope Mr.Nyhoff will come clean and stop trying to protect some of the people who sat in on his hiring interview and deal with the people who pay his salary.  That is to say, the PUBLIC.

So what do you have to say for yourself Mr. Nyhoff?

 
 

Banks, $100 Bills, and You

By Emerson Drake

If you’ve gone to the bank recently to transact business, you probably heard the tellers ask “will hundreds do?”, or something to that effect.

 It sounds a lot like; “do you want fries with that?”  Doesn’t it? 

 Like all businesses, banks have done time studies which showed them if you pass out hundreds instead of twenties, the line moves a little faster.

Seems innocent enough, but it also means they can employ fewer tellers.  But what are the other ramifications?

Small businesses try to hold down the amount of cash in their registers so as not to be an inviting target for thieves.  Much theft is a crime of opportunity.  Seeing lots of cash in a register invites theft.  The closer we get to Christmas time the more noticeable it will be, but it holds true year round.

Regular customers can tell you if a cashier hides $20 under the cash drawer or under the counter, and if they know, so does the thief. 

So help bank tellers keep their jobs and assist business owners from appearing as easy targets.  When they ask if hundreds will do, just say “no thanks.”

Attention Joe Muratore, No Conflict of Interest? That’s NOT Entirely True Is It

We understand how Bee reporter Ken Carlson has a difficult job getting reality past his editors and we truly sympathize. So we contacted the City Attorney Susan Acala Wood through City Clerk Stephanie Lopez to find out what really took place.

Here is the Ms. Wood’s response:

Dear Mr. Drake:
The City Clerk’s Office forwarded your request to me for response.
It’s unfortunate that the newspaper mis-reported the facts, because their botched article has obviously caused your concern.
The actual facts are that once the OIG auditors flagged the Tully Road transaction to City staff, a number of steps which included analyzing the transaction under three separate and applicable conflict of interest statutes: 1) HUD and NSP regulations; 2) The Political Reform Act; and 3) Government Code Section 1090.
In the first one, the City of Modesto found that Councilmember Muratore violated conflict of interest laws under the NSP program and HUD regulations when, as a principal of Benchmark, he participated in the sale and acquisition of the Tully Road property which was purchased by Trinity Ventures through the NSP program. Enforcement action was taken, which included the issuance of a violation notice and a demand for a return of the $62,000.00 commission that Benchmark received. As a result, Councilmember Muratore and Benchmark forfeited the commission (A number of enforcement actions were also taken against Trinity Ventures however Councilmember Muratore is not a principal of Trinity). This enforcement action was pursued in consultation with HUD officials in the regional office in San Francisco. Both HUD and the City await the final audit from OIG to determine if they will require us to take additional action.
In the second one, the FPPC found that Councilmember Muratore violated conflict of interest laws under the California Political Reform Act regarding his vote on two NSP related action items. They issued him a written warning, and set forth reasons why they were declining to assess a fine or penalty against him and considered their enforcement action closed.
Regarding the third, out of an abundance of caution, the Council asked my office to review the Tully Road transaction and determine whether the Councilmember’s involvement implicated Government Code Section 1090. We engaged the law firm of Meyers Nave, and Mr. Richard Rudnansky to assist in this analysis and review. The City paid approximately $2200.00 for this work. The analysis concluded there was no 1090 violation because the transaction was not one that was presented to the Council for action, nor did it require ratification by the Council, and also because the delegation to the CH&CDC, which was the body authorized to give final approve to the loans, occurred prior to Councilmember Muratore being elected to office (so he was not in a position to influence the delegation to the CH&CDC). Accordingly, no additional enforcement action was required under this statute.
That is the statement that the Mayor provided yesterday. If you would like a copy of the statement that was given, just let me or Ms. Lopez know.
I know this is more information than you actually requested. But since you always take care to research into the actual facts, I thought you might appreciate the information.
If I can answer additional questions, please feel free to contact me.
Susana Wood
City Attorney
Here is the official city news release:

Mayor Provides Update Regarding Councilmember Conflict of Interest Issue

Below is the formal statement from Modesto Mayor Jim Ridenour regarding the Councilmember Conflict of Interest issue related to the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP):
I want to take this opportunity to provide an update to the public about the conclusion of the City’s review of the receipt of a real estate sales commission earned by Benchmark Realty, the company co-owned by Councilmember Muratore for the sale of a property that was purchased using NSP funds.
As soon as the City became aware of the Councilmember’s involvement, a number of actions were simultaneously initiated to address the matter:
• To begin with, staff conducted an immediate investigation to verify the facts and to determine the appropriate manner in which to proceed under NSP regulations. This included coordinating with HUD staff. As a result, the City took immediate corrective action to recover the commission
• I requested that the OIG conduct a full audit of the City’s NSP program. The OIG also determined that the involvement by the Councilmember would trigger a more comprehensive audit of the City’s NSP transactions. That review has been ongoing and is expected to conclude in the next 6-7 weeks.
• Benchmark principals were notified of the violation of NSP regulations and were ordered to return the commission to the city. Benchmark immediately responded and returned the funds.
• Councilmember Muratore self-initiated a report to FPPC for determination of whether he had violated conflict of interest laws under the California Political Reform Act. The FPPC responded that he had violated the Political Reform Act and he was given a written warning. They also determined that because Mr. Muratore promptly brought the matter to their attention they would close the case without fine or penalty.
• Finally, the City Council requested from its attorneys a formal review, analysis and opinion as to whether the transaction constituted an impermissible Conflict of interest violation under California Government Code section 1090. The analysis concluded there was no 1090 violation because the transaction was not one that was presented to the Council for action, and the delegation to the CH&CDC, which was the body delegated to approve the loans, occurred prior to Councilmember Muratore being elected to office.
I have personally overseen this process on behalf of the Council, and feel that the City has been diligent in its response to this incident. The City Manager has kept the OIG auditors fully informed of all responses to this matter, and has continued to request HUD’s assistance and review of every step of the enforcement action taken.
We will also continue to wait for the results of the OIG audit and respond to any additional actions they may require of the City.

We want to thank Ms. Woods and Ms. Lopez for their timely response to our queries.

Post Navigation