Councilmen Still Need to Come Clean about Dan Watson

At the South Pasadena CIty Council candidates forum on October 3, 2013, the candidates were asked whether the nonrenewal of former Police Chief Dan Watson’s contract was handled properly.  (I did not ask the question and was surprised it was asked.)  Philip Putnam responded that the nonrenewal of Watson’s contract was entirely the work of former City Manager John Davidson and went on to state that Davidson was “disengaged” because he was having “personal issues,” which Putnam then described. Putnam’s statement revealing personal matters about Davidson was insensitive and seems unethical.  In addition it is incorrect and reveals a willingness to blame others to avoid personal responsibility.

From the beginning, Putnam has been the Council’s biggest defender in the Watson matter. Early on, he lectured the City Council audience about how the hiring and firing of a police chief is entirely up to the City Manager.  He wrote a long letter to the Review saying the saying the same thing.  Unfortunately, Putnam was describing how city government is supposed to work.  He was not describing how it was actually working, and he’s smart enough to know it. 

Watson’s departure was not the work of Davidson. The day after Putnam and Cacciotti were reelected in November 2009, the Council met in closed session.  At the meeting, Mayor Sifuentes presented a list of complaints against Watson and suggested that his contract not be renewed.  The only councilmember who openly opposed what Sifuentes wanted to do was Dr. Schneider.   The day after the meeting, Davidson met with Watson.  He told Watson that the Council wanted to make a change, that they had someone else in mind, and wanted to do a “soft recruitment,” (which means to simply hire someone without an open interview process.) Watson quickly realized that the replacement the Council had in mind was Joe Payne.  Shortly before all this occurred, Davidson had praised Watson for being his best department head.  It was clear to Watson that Davidson did not want him to leave, but during the ensuing weeks Davidson could not find three members of the Council willing to prevent what Sifuentes wanted to do.  Davidson had to do what Sifuentes, supported by at least three and probably four councilmembers, wanted him to do or he would have been fired.  Like a good soldier, Davidson, who had only been with the city for six months, did the Council’s bidding by not offering Watson an acceptable contract and by eventually hiring Joe Payne, whose questionable qualifications were born out by his short-lived term as Chief.  None of this is what Davidson wanted.

Why does Putnam keep blaming the City Manager instead of telling us the truth of his own involvement?  If Putnam and Cacciotti had joined Schneider in opposing Watson’s departure, it would not have happened.   At the forum, Cacciotti said that this was “the most difficult decision” in his twelve years on the Council and seemed to regret his actions.  He also said he could not discuss the matter because it was a closed-session personnel matter.  That’s not correct.  The DA’s Public Integrity Division found that any closed session where Watson’s performance was discussed violated the Brown Act and is not subject to the confidentiality rules.   I have emails from the DA clearly stating that.  The question now is not why Watson’s contract was not renewed, but why Cacciotti and Putnam did not join Schneider in putting a stop to Sifuentes’ shenanigans.  The answer to that question is not a personnel matter.   So come on, Mr. Putnam, let’s stop falsely blaming Davidson and tell us what really went on. 

Christmas Breakfast Story - An Annual Tradition

Christmas morning can be a challenging time for a single Jewish guy who wants to go someplace for breakfast. Every year I get in my car and drive toward Pasadena.  Very few places are open, but I always seem to find one.

One year, the bakery next to Mi Piaci on Colorado was open. Another year, it was Robin's in Hastings Ranch. It seems to vary from year to year, and I can't count on any place to be open from one year to the next. 

Several years ago, as I made my way into Old Town on Christmas morning, I noticed that Ruby's Diner at the corner of Green and Fair Oaks was open. Ruby's was a '50s-style diner that had great food and waiters and waitresses dressed in 50s-style outfits. It also had an electric train that went around on an elevated track above the dining area. (Ruby’s has long since left Pasadena, but can still be found in some other Southern California locations.)  

Sometimes my swing-dancing friends, and I would go there in the evening after a dance at Pasadena Ballroom Dance Association and dance in the aisles between the tables to the 50s music they played on the speaker system. I was really happy that Ruby's was open that Christmas morning.

Upon arriving, I realized that I needed to buy an LA Times to read as I ate, but decided I'd wait until after I ordered my meal. As I entered, a young woman greeted me and asked me if I was there for breakfast. I thought this was a rather odd question. It was around 8:00 a.m., so what else would I be doing walking into a restaurant?

I noticed that the waiters and waitresses were not wearing their usual red and white Ruby's outfits. Instead they were wearing blue jeans and flannel shirts. I thought, "That's funny, but it is Christmas. Maybe they just thought they'd let them wear regular clothes." 

I was taken to a booth, and I sat down waiting for someone to bring me coffee and a menu and take my order. As I waited, I noticed that instead of the usual salt and pepper shakers on the table, there were those little paper envelopes. I also noticed that the utensils were plastic. I thought, "Well, it's Christmas. I guess they didn't want to bring in a full crew of dishwashers and table bussers."

I sat for quite a while without getting a menu or being offered a cup of coffee. I was becoming a little impatient, when suddenly two young waitresses appeared at my table. One had a pot of coffee and the other had a rectangular styrofoam plate containing scrambled eggs, bacon, hash browns, and toast, which she began to place in front of me.

"What's this?" I asked.

"It's breakfast," one of them said in a tone that suggested the answer should have been obvious.

"But I didn't order this," I said.

Just then a lightbulb went on in my head.

"Is this a free breakfast for the homeless?" I asked.  

"Yes," she said.

"Oh," I said as I thought about sliding down under the table from embarrassment,

"I can't eat this. I didn't realize...  There’s no sign or anything out front…"  

"Don't worry about it," she said, "We have enough food to feed 500 people and only 50 have shown up. We're just going to have to throw it out." 

So reluctantly, I began to eat my free Christmas breakfast. I looked around sheepishly at the other diners. There were a few homeless-looking people, and a few large tables of what appeared to be special-needs patients.

I had to eat my breakfast without the company of a newspaper because, you see, I felt so guilty for being there, I didn't have the nerve to show I had disposable income by getting up and spending a quarter on the LA Times.

After I was done, I went over and offered to pay for my food or to make a donation.

The waitress said, "There's no way you can. We don't have registers working, and all the food's been donated and paid for. We're just going to have to send all the leftovers to the park where they're serving lunch, and there will be way too much food." 

I just shook my head and rolled my eyes, still very embarrassed. At least, as they say, I got a story out of it!

Trees and Cars

Yesterday I went to an event around the corner from this street, and I saw these two cars that had been damaged by a falling tree in the recent windstorm.  This morning I went over to take some photos and ran into the owner who was meeting with someone from a car-salvaging company.  These cars were in the driveway when a huge deodar cedar tree, which I would have mistaken for a pine, fell on them.  The tan car has a 6-inch thick branch piercing the roof that goes all the way to the floor board.  The lower photo shows another deodar cedar on another part of the property that is similar to the one that fell.

Christmas Breakfast

Christmas morning can be a challenging time for a single Jewish guy who wants to go someplace for breakfast. Every year I get in my car and drive toward Pasadena.  Very few places are open, but I always seem to find one.

One year, the bakery next to Mi Piaci on Colorado was open. Another year, it was Robin's in Hastings Ranch. It seems to vary from year to year, and I can't count on any place to be open from one year to the next. 

Several years ago, as I made my way into Old Town on Christmas morning, I noticed that Ruby's Diner at the corner of Green and Fair Oaks was open. Ruby's was a '50s-style diner that had great food and waiters and waitresses dressed in 50s-style outfits. It also had an electric train that went around on an elevated track above the dining area. (Ruby’s has long since left Pasadena, but can still be found in some other Southern California locations.)  

Sometimes my swing-dancing friends, and I would go there in the evening after a dance at Pasadena Ballroom Dance Association and dance in the aisles between the tables to the 50s music they played on the speaker system. I was really happy that Ruby's was open that Christmas morning.

Upon arriving, I realized that I needed to buy an LA Times to read as I ate, but decided I'd wait until after I ordered my meal. As I entered, a young woman greeted me and asked me if I was there for breakfast. I thought this was a rather odd question. It was around 8:00 a.m., so what else would I be doing walking into a restaurant?

I noticed that the waiters and waitresses were not wearing their usual red and white Ruby's outfits. Instead they were wearing blue jeans and flannel shirts. I thought, "That's funny, but it is Christmas. Maybe they just thought they'd let them wear regular clothes." 

I was taken to a booth, and I sat down waiting for someone to bring me coffee and a menu and take my order. As I waited, I noticed that instead of the usual salt and pepper shakers on the table, there were those little paper envelopes. I also noticed that the utensils were plastic. I thought, "Well, it's Christmas. I guess they didn't want to bring in a full crew of dishwashers and table bussers."

I sat for quite a while without getting a menu or being offered a cup of coffee. I was becoming a little impatient, when suddenly two young waitresses appeared at my table. One had a pot of coffee and the other had a rectangular styrofoam plate containing scrambled eggs, bacon, hash browns, and toast, which she began to place in front of me.

"What's this?" I asked.

"It's breakfast," one of them said in a tone that suggested the answer should have been obvious.

"But I didn't order this," I said.

Just then a lightbulb went on in my head.

"Is this a free breakfast for the homeless?" I asked.  

"Yes," she said.

"Oh," I said as I thought about sliding down under the table from embarrassment,

"I can't eat this. I didn't realize...  There’s no sign or anything out front…"  

"Don't worry about it," she said, "We have enough food to feed 500 people and only 50 have shown up. We're just going to have to throw it out." 

So reluctantly, I began to eat my free Christmas breakfast. I looked around sheepishly at the other diners. There were a few homeless-looking people, and a few large tables of what appeared to be special-needs patients.

I had to eat my breakfast without the company of a newspaper because, you see, I felt so guilty for being there, I didn't have the nerve to show I had disposable income by getting up and spending a quarter on the LA Times.

After I was done, I went over and offered to pay for my food or to make a donation.

The waitress said, "There's no way you can. We don't have registers working, and all the food's been donated and paid for. We're just going to have to send all the leftovers to the park where they're serving lunch, and there will be way too much food." 

I just shook my head and rolled my eyes, still very embarrassed. At least, as they say, I got a story out of it!

Small Town

Members of the South Pasadena High School Band make their holiday rounds by playing in front of Shakers diner and Bristol Farms Market. 

The Cover for Trout Fishing in America

"The cover for Trout Fishing in America is a photograph taken late in the afternoon, a photograph of the Benjamin Franklin statue in San Francisco's Washington Square.

Born 1706--Died 1790, Benjamin Franklin stands on a pedestal that looks like a house containing stone furniture. He holds some papers in one hand and his hat in the other.

Then the statue speaks, saying in marble:

PRESENTED BY

H. D. COGSWELL

TO OUR

BOYS AND GIRLS

TAKE OUR PLACES

AND PASS ON.

Around the base of the statue are four words facing the directions of this world, to the east WELCOME, to the west WELCOME, to the north WELCOME, to the south WELCOME. Just behind the statue are three poplar trees, almost leafless except for the top branches. The statue stands in front of the middle tree. All around the grass is wet from the rains of early February.

In the background is a tall cypress tree, almost dark like a room. Adlai Stevenson spoke under the tree in 1956, before a crowd of 40,000 people.

There is a tall church across the street from the statue with crosses, steeples, bells and a vast door that looks like a huge mousehole, perhaps from a Tom and Jerry cartoon, and written above the door is "Per L'Universo."

Around five o'clock in the afternoon of my cover for Trout Fishing in America, people gather in the park across the street from the church and they are hungry.

It's sandwich time for the poor.

But they cannot cross the street until the signal is given. Then they all run across the street to the church and get their sandwiches that are wrapped in newspaper. They go back to the park and unwrap the newspaper and see what their sandwiches are all about.

A friend of mine unwrapped his sandwich one afternoon and looked inside to find just a leaf of spinach. That was all.

Was it Kafka who learned about America by reading the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin....

Kafka who said, 'I like the Americans because they are healthy and optimistic.'"


                                           -  Richard Brautigan

                                           

Police Unions, South Pasadena, and Art Salinas

I appreciate and respect the work of those who serve as our public safety officials. On the other hand, I have serious concerns about some of the tactics their unions employ. 

In a column in the Pasadena Star News on February 2, 2010, Larry Wilson wrote of a law firm in Upland, CA called Lackie, Dammeier & McGill. They are former police officers who advise police unions on the tactics they should use to obtain higher wages and benefits. Wilson revealed what was on the firm’s website back then.  The more controversial stuff has since been moved to a private area of the website.

Wilson wrote, “We know what the lawyers have advised officers' associations to do—guilt-trip the electeds, give money to their campaigns, use crime as a wedge issue in order to scare the public, use work slowdowns and the blue flu to get what you want.” 

Wilson went on to describe what else was on the website, “From "Negotiations After Impasse": "Now is the time those political endorsements, favors, and friendships come into play." From "Political Option": "The association should be like a quiet giant in the position of, `do as I ask and don't (tick) me off."'

From "Let the Games Begin": "Storm City Council"; "Billboards - Nothing seems to get more attention than a billboard entering the city limits which reads that crime is up and the City could (sic) care less about your safety," even when that is not true.

"Public Ridicule - Blunders by the City Manager, Mayor, or City Council members or wasteful spending should be highlighted and pointed out to the public at every opportunity."

"Focus on an Individual: Avoid spreading your energy. Focus on a city manager, councilperson, mayor or police chief and keep the pressure up until that person assures you his loyalty and then move on to the next victim.”

Ironically, just one day after Wilson's column appeared and only a short time after it was clear that Police Chief Watson would be sent packing, Councilman Mike Ten thought it would be a great idea to show a video, Police Officers Under Attack, at the Council meeting. Well, we know that Mr. Ten's on board with the program.

So how do these tactics play out in South Pasadena? Four years ago, David Sifuentes, a Fire Captain and union official with LAFD, who’d only recently moved to town, was elected to City Council. Sifuentes received about 95% of his campaign contributions from the police and fire unions. His campaign manager was Jeffrey Monical, a public-safety union consultant who runs a firm called Lavell Communications.

Next thing we know, Sifuentes and Monical decide that it would be a great idea not to renew Police Chief Dan Watson’s contract although they never pointed to anything specific that made this necessary. In fact, in the entire time Sifuentes has been on the Council, he never once discussed the police department with Watson. 

When Watson tried to get answers about why the Council didn’t want to renew his contract, he was told by the City Manager that some Councilmen were “uncomfortable” with him calling them, and he was ordered not to contact them. 

So it’s clear, it wasn’t anything Watson had done that made Sifuentes and Monical move Watson out: Watson points out that Sifuentes never had a substantive conversation with him about the police department. Maybe he wasn’t as favorable to the POA as they wanted him to be, but it appears that the primary reason was they wanted to pay off retired sergeant Joe Payne for deciding not to run for City Council. There is no doubt that Sifuentes knew that Payne would be the next police chief before Watson even knew that his contract would not be renewed.   In an article in the South Pasadena Review on October 26, 2011, Watson says he was aware from two sources in early 2010 that Sifuentes had told people that Payne would be the next Police Chief.  This was before the job was even announced.  Even in December 2009, people around City Hall were saying that Payne would be the next Chief. 

Payne admitted to the South Pasadena Review that he’d discussed the job with SIfuentes “months earlier.”  This is what South Pasadena got when it elected a POA-backed candidate. 

After the spontaneous community uproar at the removal of Watson, it appears that Sifuentes feared he would lose if he ran for reelection—something that would not be good for the higher political aspirations he’s rumored to have.

So what did he and Monical do instead? They found a surrogate candidate, Art Salinas. Salinas is one of the few candidates who is taking union money—his largest contributor to date is the POA—and at his campaign kickoff, he introduced Jeffrey Monical, the union consultant, as his “campaign advisor.” 

Salinas is saying all the right things. He even says he objects to the back-room way that Watson was removed, says he won’t tolerate back-room deals. Wanna bet?  Do you really think Salinas will be “his own man” when Sifuentes, Monical, and the POA come knocking with the next step in their game plan, whatever it may be? 

I recently emailed Salinas and asked him how he could expect us to believe that he’s against back-room deals when he’s supported by the champions of the back-room deal. Salinas’ answer was as you might expect.

First he points to the fact that 4 of 5 councilmen supported the decision, “I must believe their decision was based on what they believed to be in the best interest of the City. If it was a bad decision, and done in an underhanded, non-transparent, manner, how do 4 of 5 support it?” 

Well, let’s see, maybe it’s because they all felt beholden to the POA and its political pressure. Maybe it’s because we have a Council of horse-trading less-than-honorable players. It appears that Cacciotti and Putnam were under heavy POA pressure to go along with the plan. Sifuentes and Ten were already on board. 

Salinas goes on, “Furthermore, if as you say Mr. Sifuentes was responsible, that he got three other Councilmen to agree with him says a great deal about his leadership ability.“

Really? Even bullies have leadership ability. That’s exactly what they do have. What they don’t have is character and good intentions. Leadership ability is only part of the story. It’s what you do with it that matters. 

Then comes the bizarre part, “If Dr. Schneider was against the move as he says, if it was done improperly, and if it was so wrong for the community, why didn’t he stop it? Isn’t that what we want from our leaders?” 

Salinas’ thinking is so twisted that he’s willing to blame the one councilman who refused to go along with the plan, and who, by the way, was the only one not beholden to the POA. This in spite of the fact that his own backers, Sifuentes and Monical, were the perpetrators of the plan.

Sounds to me like Salinas has drunk the Kool-Aid.  Do we want a guy who thinks like this on the City Council? Can we trust that when it’s crunch time Salinas will not be right there, ready to do whatever Sifuentes, Monical, and the POA want?  I don’t think so. 

There’s a reason the POA is putting its money behind Salinas.  They will want a return on their investment.