Board of Stupes

By LORETTA REDD — June 16, 2009

An article appeared in the New York Times citing California’s budget crisis. The author, Jane Gross, noted, “…this year seems different, the fiscal problems in the nation’s most populous state are beyond reach of bookkeeping tricks and painless service cuts. Experts point to the cumulative effect of a long recession and the staggering health and welfare costs tied to legal and illegal immigration.”  

She cited a Supervisor from Alameda County named Don Perata, whose fatalism was noted: “Our problems have gone from epidemic to pandemic. This year is the terrible future we’ve been talking about.”

This article appeared in June of 1993.

Pete Wilson was Governor of California.

Even more redundant than the broad issues of a bad economy and a State in debt, is that one of the steps taken by the Supervisors in Alameda County in 1993, was just replicated by our own Board of Stupe-id-visors in this week’s budget hearings.

Sixteen years ago, Alameda County, home to the city of Oakland, voted on a budget which forced the layoff of half of its 140 lawyers, “…thus ending the prosecution of all misdemeanors, 47,000 cases last year.”

That meant no arrests for shoplifters, drunks, vandals, prostitutes, and a litany of other ‘minor’ criminal offenses including indecent exposure, domestic violence and most first offense drug possessions.For anyone familiar with the crime-soaked city of Oakland, I would have to say the effect of putting the District Attorney’s office staff under the ax, placed the ‘ax’ in the hands of the wrong folk.

Here in Santa Barbara County, our Board members all but genuflected when expressing support for public safety. But when budget restoration dollars were handed out, a jaw-droppingly stupid preference of tax money, led by the nacent Doreen Farr, went to the Department of Planning and Development over that of the District Attorney.

Not only was Planning and Development allocated a restoration to its $17.36 million operating budget; it was given $443,000 when assistant department chief John Baker had only requested $275,000!

Maybe code enforcement of fluorescent lightbulbs or improperly installed sprinkler systems is more important than having adequate legal protection for the entire County.

Supervisor Carbajal, who initially sought only a fourth that amount for the Development department, changed his mind, in part, so the victims of the recent fires would have adequate planning staff to help them rebuild.

Very thoughtful, Supe, but with the cuts to the Office of the District Attorney you’ve just voted on, those required to prosecute the morons who caused hundreds of homes, a permanently disfigured couple, and thousands of acres to burn, may not have had sufficient staff to even bring charges.

Maybe the weather here is so nice that residents and tourists throughout Santa Barbara county just aren’t bothered by punks loitering and fighting, drunks urinating in public, from State Street to Isla Vista, or folks driving under the influence, writing bad checks in Lompoc, or shoplifting in Santa Maria, or domestic violence in Vandenberg Village.

Only, that’s exactly what we see filling the police blotter every single day…and if the perps have no chance of being punished, the police are not going to waste their time making arrests.

Oh but wait, it gets better…

While Assistant District Attorney Eric Hanson described the cuts to his office staff as “an absolute killer,” our five wisemen on the Board voted to give more funds to the Public Defender’s office than to the DA’s.

Why?

Because the public defenders can declare themselves ‘unavailable’ when their caseload is (self)determined to be too great, necessitating the expensive hiring of private attorneys to represent those being charged with a crime. Anyone who has ever seen Law and Order, knows the Miranda rights by heart, “…you have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford representation, an attorney will be appointed for you….”

However, the DA’s office is expected to hold up their side of Lady Justice’s scales without any outside ‘hired’ assistance. And, given that Chief DA Christie Stanley was, for the umpteenth time, absent from this important grab-fest of dollars, there doesn’t seem to be much assistance from the internal management side either.

In the ‘broken window’ theory of policing, if crime is addressed at its earliest stages—like a home with a broken window indicating its abandonment—then the expense and reality of more serious crimes is alleviated.

When it comes to windows, apparently our Supervisors would rather have sufficient Planning and Development staff making sure the glass meets ‘green’ standards, than to have sufficient prosecution staff to deal with the consequences of a smash and grab burglary coming to a neighborhood near you.

With these kinds of short-sighted priorities and lop-sided budget restorations, 2009 may actually be “the terrible future we’ve been talking about” since 1993.

Comment on this article

Subject:

Body:

Poster:

Enter text seen above:

financial sense : 6/16/2009

It may not make shrieking op-ed sense, but it makes financial sense to not pay private attorney fees at hundreds of dollars/hour but instead have public defenders. Until the law is changed that every person charged with a crime has a right to an attorney (and lacking funds to have one appointed to defend him) the public defenders' office is cost effective. The PDs' office has been heavily cut over the years, in greater proportion, I think but don't have the figures in front of me, than the DA's office. At least the Supes refused to give missing from action (because of extended illness, undoubtedly cared for by County health insurance) a $30K raise a couple of months ago.

crb

---

GASP : 6/16/2009

"the staggering health and welfare costs tied to legal and illegal immigration.” What? Somebody dared to notice out loud? Isn't it "racist' to point out the obvious truth? Oh, that was in 1993 before the Political Correctness State Police took over the police state of California state (Democrats kissing up to an assumed voting bloc). Just think, if it was noticeable in 1993 it must be a monster by now.

---

Here's a possible solution : 6/16/2009

BILL MEXICO. Can we just finally admit that Mexico is a very wealthy country with an abundance of natural resources - including a citizen (Carlos Slim) who briefly eclipsed Bill Gates as world's wealthiest - so why have we never sent Mexico a bill for all its citizens coming to use our country's services? When you consider the Mexican President who ENCOURAGED Mexicans to violate our borders & come here to earn dollars to send back home, I think it's totally appropriate. Especially when it's revealed that Mexico's #1 source of revenue is THOSE US DOLLARS sent by the illegals who come here to bear children for free, make use of our roads, sewers, water & other infrastructure for free. We can no longer afford to take in uneducated, unskilled labor who use 4 times the amount of services in relation to the taxes they pay - and that's IF they pay taxes. Most are paid under the table & pay none. SEND MEXICO A BILL!!!

Brendalinn

---

Hook Line and Stinker : 6/18/2009

Loretta----look beyond Eric Hansons powerpoint and examine the details of the D.A. budget...........you might figure out that our humble D.A. will have ample ability to prosecute misdemeanors. Do your homework. Funny how you buy the spin of the right-wing rantings

too bad

---