For over a year now, we here at the Patterson IrriTator have documented numerous Brown Act violations by the Patterson City Council. Unfortunately, for the majority of this past year, these violations have gone unchecked by all us in this community. However, when a few residents stood up and questioned the Mayor’s decision to disregard public comment before a closed session, people took note. The Patterson Irrigator chided the council, calling them out on their rather pretentious decision to opt out of public comment because it “would take all night” and failing to disclose who voted for the John Ramos early Christmas gift.
New Patterson IrriGator Article: "Council pledges to better comply with Brown Act"
But the Brown Act violations are only the tip of the iceberg. The Mayor and City Councilwoman Annette Smith have collaborated on far too many tactics that can only be described as a total disregard for the public’s trust.
They’ve abused their elected office to settle personal scores.
They’ve appointed residents who stand to benefit economically to draft our city’s future blueprint…the General Plan.
They’ve used our tax dollars to keep their political benefactors from paying their legal fees.
You see, in the long run, the Brown Act violations are small potatoes, complying with the Act doesn’t stop the Slate from abusing their elected official powers. Until we demand more from our elected official, the circus will remain at city hall.
We commend those residents who chose to stand and make their voices heard, without you, this science project we call our elected officials, would have continued to embarrass our city and bring shame to our democratic form of government.
OldTimer said,
November 12, 2009 @ 12:42 PM
What is really scary is that at the end of the article in the Irrigator, they make it sound like Logan and the rest of the council have done very little wrong and that:
. “It is gratifying to find a city attorney so willing to share his
. perspectives on open-government issues,” McKee said. “It is
. even more pleasing to find one willing to make changes to better
. protect the public’s right to be informed and involved in its city
. government.”
It seems that Logan and the council actually came out of it smelling like roses. They have known all along what they were doing. They have known all along that they could do whatever they wanted. If not for the Irrigator FINALLY deciding to print an article about it, they would still be doing as they wished. Again, the citizens don’t really matter until the Irrigator prints an article and someone from the outside gets involved.
I had to laugh at Becky’s comments:
. “We are going to have issues like this in the future — maybe
. during my last year in service or for future councils,” Campo said.
. “Let this be a learning experience. We should learn from it.”
What she is saying is that it will most likely be business as usual and that she doesn’t have to worry about it. She is just going to let it go to the next mayor. If they really meant to fix the problem, she would have said so. She would have said that they would ensure that they followed all the rules. Instead, she left the door wide open so that they could continue to do as they want, as their backers want, and completely ignore the desires of the citizens they are supposed to take in to consideration.
I didn’t see the vote tally, but one of the items that they are supposed to report is how they voted. If they were really sincere in their desires to follow the rules, then they would tell us who voted for and against giving Ramos his early Christmas gift. (I am sure the vote went exactly as reported in other articles here on the IrriTator – it sure would be nice for them to admit it.) They would report how they voted on that issue, since it has the appearance of taking care of their backer, instead of saying that they might consider following the rules in the future. (But then, does Ramos really want the public to know whose pockets he takes care of??????)
The council, or at least some of them, may not be doing anything wrong. There just may be the appearance that they are corrupt. But, if they weren’t corrupt, you would think that they would do everything in their power to eliminate the distrust and appearance of corruption that is evident. Deciding on giving Ramos $27K of our money, the taxpayers money, behind closed doors, without any public comment, is not how one would attempt to show that they aren’t corrupt. If anything, it actually makes a stronger case that there is corruption there. A loud case of it.
To show us, the citizens, that there was nothing out of the ordinary for this. Let us then see who presented the item to the board, who made the motions, and who voted yeah or nay. Quit hiding and let us know the process that went on to put us, the taxpayers, on the hook for the money.
Imagine, if you will, that you work for a private company. Let’s say that you are paid to do a job. For the sake of this discussion, let’s say that you decide NOT to do your job in a meeting. Your decision to NOT do your job ends up costing your company quite a bit of money. Can you honestly tell me that your company would not only do nothing about it, but it would begin the process of firing, or at least impacting, the job of another employee? There aren’t very many companies out there that would not do anything to this type of employee. Unless, of course, you work for the city of Patterson. In most cases, I imagine that if the employee made such a mistake that cost the investors as much time and money as our attorney has, they would have been terminated.
Remember, it isn’t just the $27K we are out. We are out the money paid to the attorney for NOT doing his job, we, the taxpayers, are also out all the extra money that has been spent fighting and looking in to the move. If the planning commission had received the counsel that they should have received, I am sure that various processes from all parties would have been different. The center wouldn’t have begun preparing for a move, the landlord wouldn’t have had to fight it, the city wouldn’t have had to do what they dad. All because ONE person decided that he didn’t want to do his job. As I said, if this were a private company, that ONE person would either be reprimanded or would be looking for new employment.
Dang, I guess I get a little excited with my posts. Maybe I need to listen to relaxing music or do something to relax me when I post here.
red state said,
November 12, 2009 @ 8:56 PM
You liberals are never happy, first you complain about the brown act but when the mayor does the right thing you still find something wrong. She can’t be perfect, how about the rest the council, shouldn’t they also take some of the blame, the mayor can’t be the fall guy for everything wrong at city hall. I just hope the mayor decides to run for another term, so we’re not stuck with you hippies.
The Patterson Irritator said,
November 12, 2009 @ 9:24 PM
At the top of the “city chart” are the citizens of the city of Patterson. We are the people who the Mayor and Council MUST answer to. During the “Morris Meeting” residents voiced concerns about brown act violations, they were simply brushed off by the Mayor and Co.
Fast forward a week, CalAware DEMANDS compliance with the Brown Act, the mayor and city attorney PLEDGE to comply more fully with the law in near future.
Does anyone else have a problem with this?
MrB said,
November 13, 2009 @ 12:25 AM
I have an issue with the mayor’s and the city attorney’s response, as does the OldTimer above seems to have.
As the OldTimer said, the mayor and city attorney have indicated that they intend to not abide by the Brown Act in the future. Why else would they beat around the bush about it.
You would think that they already learned and would begin to abide by the Brown Act. Instead, she comes out and tells us, via the Irrigator, that in the future they will go against the Brown Act. A learning experience my butt. They got caught, they almost admitted their guilt, and they said they will do it again. Heck, since they wield the power in this community, they can do whatever they want. They have the city lawyer, they have the city manager, they now have the planning commission, and they have the developer who basically owns the city. Who can stop them? The Brown Act? HA! They laughed in the face of CalAware AND the citizens of this community who tried to stop them with the Brown Act.
P'd off said,
November 13, 2009 @ 2:46 PM
What a complete joke. Campo and Smith have thumbed their noses as this town for far too long. They BOTH knew they weren’t complying with the Brown act, as well as many others, and haven’t for some time. Especially since they both have personally visited this site, or had one of their cough family members do it for them. There is ZERO ACCOUNTABILITY in this town. Their boss, John Ramos, is pulling the strings. Numerous conflicts of interest, lining their bosses pockets, personal vendettas against a running mate and someone whom they believed aligned with him, getting employees from the mayors business ushered into local politics, Smith using a fake alias and pumping up Wal-Mart and showing her praise for it before a vote from the council on the matter, the M Street fiasco and how they both still view it, a stench along Sperry and American Eagle that has been there for years, etc etc etc. I could go on, but hey, the mayor got us a Taco Bell! She also got us another drug store! and another! Hell, when Wal-Mart rolls in we’ll have over 6 different pharmacies in town! WOO HOO!
It is criminal as well with how the mayor and city council have not worked in unison with the Sherriff’s department. They’ve sat back and put the load on them. Once the housing market crashed, most of the good people in this town left and the TRASH moved in. Patterson is now Oakland and the children roam the streets and think they own it! Don’t say anything to them though, or you’ll have their TRASH parents calling PO PO on you. Some of the people moved here to get away from that crap but its true what they say, you can take people out of the ghetto, but you can’t take the ghetto out of them. That gated community should be locked to keep them all in. We haven’t even touched on all the gang activity here.
When I moved here, this town had promise, now its a place I don’t want my children being raised.
MrB said,
November 14, 2009 @ 12:09 AM
I couldn’t agree more, P’d off. Not only has Patterson become a safe haven for the gangs, but it is also a safe haven for the drug dealers. Where else can you try to sell drugs to school kids every morning and every afternoon and not have much worries about the police?
What was it, a couple of months ago a kid gets popped for having, in his possession, 17 bags of marijuana. And all he gets nailed for is possession. I may be crazy, but 17 bags of marijuana in my mind would be more along the lines of dealing. Is there anyone out there that really thinks that someone caught with 17 bags isn’t selling? I mean, besides out city government, since it was them that decided we really didn’t need a local police force.
I would be willing to bet that the kids caught for possession was back on the street within hours, with another 17 bags.
I think that what has become of our city is two fold. First off, as many people say, we have become a mini-East-Oakland, as far as the streets go. As far as the city government goes, we have become a mini-Chicago. But that might be putting Chicago down too much. The Chicago government is actually attempting to clean up the corruption, while our city government is just getting more corrupt as each day passes.
If it isn’t corruption, what else would you call everything that has happened over the past year or so? What else would you call everything they have done? I honestly can’t think of a word that would describe our current elected officials better than corrupt.
I can’t wait to see what they have in store for us next. I just can’t wait to see how we can use more city money and facilities to help out poor John Ramos.
The Patterson Irritator said,
November 16, 2009 @ 4:16 PM
We really can’t agree with path in which this discussion has turned. It’s easy to blame children…but are we really providing any alternatives for them to turn to? We welcome the “diversity” the sudden housing market crash has brought to town, more importantly, folks that grew up here now have chance to stay here. Two years ago, this wasn’t the case.
Lastly, we just don’t like labeling working folks….trash.
OldTimer said,
November 18, 2009 @ 9:41 AM
Here’s a beauty. It doesn’t directly apply to the Brown Act, but it does apply to the council and how they handle the Brown Act and other rules and laws that they have decided to ignore. Dejeune is quoted:
. “I think that’s a bad perception,” Councilwoman Dejeune Shelton
. said after the meeting. “But we can’t deal with perception. We
. have to deal with the law.”
I ask you all, since when does this council abide by the law? Only when it impacts them personally, Logan, or their good buddy Ramos. Then and only then do they hide behind the law.
And, now we have to pay for more of Logan’s inept counsel and write yet another check to Ramos, because you just know he is going to ask for more money. You just know it. And, as we all know, it will go to a 3-2 vote to give him more money.
I wonder what those three stand to get when they are out of office.
OldTimer said,
November 18, 2009 @ 2:49 PM
Not sure where else to put my comments regarding your recent twitter post, the one that reads:
. Thought: Let initiative proceed, if it passes, then spend city money
. to challenge constitutionality,if it fails,no money spent on legal fees
The problem is that they fully know it will pass. Therefore they will do everything in their power to keep it from the people. Their plan is to drag it out as long as possible so that when the lease is up, and the health center doesn’t have any options except to renew the lease, Ramos will raise the rates beyond comprehension. They will be a captive audience and forced to pay what he asks.
Just watch, after they lose this next battle in court the Ramos Council will have another trick up their sleeves to delay it again and NOT do what the residents want.
MrB said,
November 18, 2009 @ 8:09 PM
I have also wondered what they will do next to block the move.
I was unable to attend the meeting last night. I need to know, did they really give people a chance to speak BEFORE they went to their backroom, or was it business as usual. If they did, did it take all day?
Also, I have been wondering, is there a back door to their closed session meeting room? Maybe one where their advisor, Mr. J. Ramos, can get in without the general public seeing? How else do they come up with all the help they give him? He has got to be in those closed sessions, making sure his needs are met.
One more thing I wonder about. Do you think that the council will ever do anything that the people want? For the most part, the people didn’t want to NOT have their own police force. For the most part, the people want the health center to move. For the most part, the people DO NOT want the Wal-Mart.
Yet this council continues to do as they and their friends wish and not that what the main body of the voters want.
As has been said, the voters will speak when the time comes. Will it be too late to fix some of their private agendas? Most likely. By then, Wal-Mart will have broken ground, as will other pet projects that don’t really benefit the city, but just a few.
OldTimer said,
November 19, 2009 @ 1:39 PM
You know what I was thinking this morning? I read about the residents downtown being forced to pay for their water hookups to be moved. I read in the article that Dominic recused himself from the vote since he lives in the vicinity. That was probably a sound, legal, decision on his part.
My thought was this: Shouldn’t Annette recuse herself from any votes that have anything to do with someone she had a business relationship with in the past? Wasn’t he her landlord when she had her business in town? At least I think he owns the building that housed her business. If this is the case, wouldn’t it be wise for her to have been recusing herself from any vote related to Ramos?
Just some thoughts from a concerned citizen.
The Patterson Irritator said,
November 19, 2009 @ 4:53 PM
One would think that you were spot on, but remember, in the city of circles those with powerful political benefactors act without any regard for ethics…..we beat this tree to death.