Newest articles on The Sacramento Press tagged as "city attorney"

City attorney drops Occupy arrest charges

2011-11-17T00:59:28Z

The City Attorney’s office released a statement Wednesday saying charges against some of the people arrested for violating park curfew hours at Cesar Chavez Plaza will be dropped and the cases dismissed “in the interest of justice.”

City Attorney Eileen Teichet said in a press release that a limited number of cases against people charged with only one violation of the city code would be dismissed.

“After evaluating the facts of each case and criminal history of each defendant,” Teichert said in the press release, “the City Attorney’s office has determined that the arrest and jail time that each dismissed defendant served achieved the People of the State of California’s demand for substantial justice.”

Eighty-four people have been arrested since Oct. 6, when Occupy Sacramento began protesting in Cesar Chavez Plaza, and some of them have been arrested multiple times.

According to the statement, the City Attorney’s office will continue to prosecute defendants charged with multiple violations of the City Code related to violations of park curfew at Cesar Chavez Plaza.

Local civil rights attorney Mark Merin filed a lawsuit Nov. 1 in federal court on behalf of Occupy Sacramento, claiming the city has violated protesters’ First Amendment rights by interfering with the group’s freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.

A Jan. 5 hearing is scheduled on the lawsuit in federal court.

In a similar court case, the New York Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that protesters' First Amendment rights did not extend to allowing "tents, structures, generators and other installations" in Zuccotti Park while protesting.

Attorneys for Occupy Sacramento were not immediately available for comment.

Melissa Corker is a Staff Reporter for The Sacramento Press. Follow her on Twitter @MelissaCorker.

Occupy Sacramento protesters want exception to city camping law

2011-10-12T05:42:42Z

After 35 arrests in six days for violating a city camping ordinance, a group of Occupy Sacramento protesters marched to City Hall Tuesday to ask City Council members for an exception to the law so they can have 24-hour access to Cesar Chavez Plaza for peaceable demonstration.

“This is a fundamental constitutional issue,” said Sacramento resident David Whitfield, speaking on behalf of Occupy Sacramento. “Individuals are exercising their First Amendment rights, and no legislative body can abridge those rights.”

Demonstrators representing a wide range of ages and walks of life have gathered for more than six days in Cesar Chavez Plaza at Ninth and L streets to participate in the Occupy Sacramento movement.

The movement, which includes public protests, marches and organized demonstrations, began as a “show of solidarity” with similar protest movements that have cropped up across the nation in recent weeks, said Sara Beth Brooks, one of Occupy Sacramento’s coordinators

The effort calls for demonstrators to “occupy” a public space continuously during the protests – but, by doing that, Sacramento demonstrators have run afoul of a city ordinance prohibiting overnight camping in public parks.

The ordinance was enacted to keep public streets and parks “clean, sanitary and accessible” to residents and the public at large, according to the city code.

Brooks said that participants in Occupy Sacramento are not camping, however – they are exercising their First Amendment right to “peaceably assemble.”

And they will continue to exercise their right, Brooks said, “indefinitely.”

“There is no set end to the statement we are making,” Brooks said. “We are committed to seeing this through and having our voices heard.”

More than 300 people attended the council meeting Tuesday. Fifteen people spoke during public comment at the meeting to describe the nature of the occupation demonstration and to ask for an exception to the law.

According to the city code, the city manager may issue a temporary permit to allow camping on public property in connection with a special event. The code does not specify a maximum length of time for the exception to be valid.

According to police spokesman Andrew Pettit, interactions between police officers and the demonstrators over the past week have been “peaceful,” and the demonstrators have been “very cooperative.”

“The purpose of this (occupation) has been educational awareness,” said Ari Rashid, one of the coordinators of the Occupy Sacramento movement. “We want to discuss the issues that plague our society and our nation.”

Rashid and other speakers told council members that the extended demonstration has been carried out peacefully and largely without incident.

“We are not a public nuisance,” Rashid said, “and we are nothing less than peaceable. We want to keep the occupation going in Cesar Chavez park.”

Brooks said in an email Tuesday that 20 protesters were arrested Thursday, one on Friday and 14 Saturday.

All were arrested for unlawful assembly, Brooks said.

“This is the first time in my 24 years of life that I’ve experienced direct democracy,” Rashid told council members. “These (protests) are happening because people feel like they aren’t being heard. I’m here tonight to be heard.”

Councilman Steve Cohn told audience members that he had visited with demonstrators at Cesar Chavez Plaza on Monday evening, and he noted that the group was “definitely peaceful.”

The City Council could not take action on the request for an ordinance exemption at Tuesday’s meeting because it was not an item on the agenda. If the council took any action without proper public notice, it would be a violation of the Brown Act.

Eileen Teichert, Sacramento’s city attorney, confirmed that the city manager has authority to grant an exception to the camping ordinance, however, it would still be an action requiring public notice.

The Brown Act requires that the public is notified at least 72 hours in advance of council meetings which matters will be on the agenda for that meeting.

Cohn asked city staff to add an item to the next council meeting agenda to discuss changing the current policy on camping as an exception for this demonstration.

“Demonstrations are happening in Seattle, Portland, San Diego and Washington, D.C.,” Cohn said. “I feel like this city ought to be able to figure out how to make this work, too.”

Melissa Corker is a Staff Reporter for The Sacramento Press. Follow her on Twitter @MelissaCorker.

City appeals decision in homeless class action suit

2011-09-23T02:50:07Z

On the same day that activists and supporters rallied together for homeless rights at the Safe Ground Jubilee, attorneys for the city of Sacramento were busy filing a motion to appeal a Federal Court decision in a contentious homeless class action lawsuit.

“Our rationale for appeal is based primarily on procedural and evidentiary rulings that came up in the trial,” Brett Witter, supervising deputy city attorney for Sacramento said Thursday.

The motion for appeal was filed Sept. 14 in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals by attorney Chance Trimm, on behalf of the city.

According to court documents, the city is appealing a May 24 Federal Court decision that found the city liable on two of six claims by plaintiffs that the city “had a custom and practice of violating (plaintiffs’) constitutional rights concerning their personal property.”

(Read court documents on Lehr v. City of Sacramento HERE.)

“We’re not appealing the jury’s decision,” Witter said, “instead, we’re challenging the way the evidence was presented to the jury.”

Witter said that, among the issues brought up in the city’s appeal is an amendment made to the plaintiffs’ complaint late in the game.

“(The amendment) came literally a couple of weeks before the trial,” Witter said. “We felt the late amendment was inappropriate. That’s just one of the problems (with the trial) we want to discuss.”

Mark Merin, the attorney representing the homeless class action group, said Wednesday that the city has no basis for the motion to appeal.

“An appeal can only happen after a final judgement,” Merin said. “In this case, there hasn’t yet been one.”

Because the jury decided the city is liable but hasn’t set damages yet, Merin explained, the case is not considered “final” or completed.

Merin filed a motion with the court on Sept. 20 to dismiss the appeal for “lack of jurisdiction.”

The homeless class action against the city began in 2007 when Merin, representing homeless individuals, filed suit in Sacramento Federal Court alleging that homeless plaintiffs’ belongings were illegally taken and thrown away by Sacramento police officers between August 2005 and May 2009.

Once the court made its decision in May 2011, Merin said, the next step should be negotiating a claims procedure to compensate individuals for damages and property loss.

“It’s not just compensation for the actual property,” Merin said. “It’s also loss of use of property. The (class action petitioners) are also entitled to damages for the violation of their rights.”

Merin said there isn’t any way to accurately estimate the final amount of damages, but he estimates the amount may be as much as $1 million or more.

“As long as the case is unresolved, it has a real impact on the many homeless people in Sacramento,” Joan Burke, director of advocacy for Loaves & Fishes, said Thursday.

Burke said that more than 1,000 homeless people in the city are forced to sleep outside every night because there is a lack of shelter space available.

“Anyone forced to sleep outside is subject to arrest,” Burke said. “When people are arrested, they have to worry about their stuff.”

Typically what people have with them when they are living outside, Burke said, are “survival items” – such as clothing, eyeglasses or medical prescriptions – or more sentimental items like photographs and family mementos.

“When you have to minimize what you carry around,” Burke said, “you get it down to what is really most important to you.”

In June, the city filed additional motions for summary judgment – to essentially “cancel” the jury decision – as well as a motion for a new trial.

Both actions were denied by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., the presiding judge of the case, on Aug. 15.

“(The City) has done all they can to delay the reckoning,” Merin said, “and it just won’t work.”

Witter said that, if the appeal is denied, city attorneys will go back to the City Council to get direction on what to do next.

Merin said he expects the court will make a decision on the motion to dismiss by the end of October.

Melissa Corker is a Staff Reporter for The Sacramento Press. Follow her on Twitter @MelissaCorker.

City program targets problem buildings, slumlords

2011-04-27T00:45:45Z

When buildings become slums and havens for gangs, prostitution and drug use, a little-known city program can force landowners to clean them up or – in extreme cases – be evicted.

The Justice for Neighbors program began in 2006 and allows multiple departments – including police, code enforcement, the city attorney’s office and park rangers – to focus their efforts on some of the worst slumlords and dangerous properties in the city, resolving an average of 17 cases per year.

“Essentially, it’s a public and social nuisance (enforcement) team,” said Gustavo Martinez, supervising deputy city attorney. “We meet every month and evaluate the worst security issues.”

Property owners are required to bring their buildings into compliance and stop criminal activity on the sites, or else they can face prosecution and jail time.

Safety issues are also tackled by the program when property owners refuse to comply with city codes and ordinances.

The program went into effect in 2006 to streamline city services and cut down on the time it was taking to solve the problems, Martinez said. Many times, police and code enforcement officers were working on the same property for different reasons, and the Justice for Neighbors program ensures there are no duplicate efforts – and similarly, no duplicate expenses.

Police Sgt. Matt Young, who is a leader of the south area’s Problem Oriented Policing (POP) unit, said that involving the city attorney’s office when a situation requires it now takes less time than it did previously.

“It used to take six to eight months, and now it only takes two or three,” he said, adding that officers no longer have to repeatedly go to some of the worst places in the city before the problems are addressed.

“It’s been a very effective program,” he said.

One of the program’s success stories is the property at 3132 Third Ave. – a 16-unit apartment complex.

The Justice For Neighbors program started work on it in 2007 due to numerous problems including prostitution, drug sales, sexual assaults and a large number of neighborhood complaints, according to a presentation given to the City Council April 12.

Police were called to the property 90 times in two years, and the property continued to deteriorate, with many of the units lacking running water and electricity.

The property owner was jailed for 30 days, but when problems persisted, the court ordered a receiver to take over the property, and it was sold last June. With its sale, the city was able to recoup $66,000 in attorney’s fees and enforcement costs, according to the presentation.

By February, it was refurbished.

“Now, developers are renting out beautiful units,” Martinez said.

Approximately $500,000 has been awarded to the city through the courts, of which about $120,000 has been collected, Martinez said, adding that some properties, like the on at 3132 Third Ave., have fees attached to them that the city will recoup if they are sold.

A more recent aspect of the program is the ability to order evictions based on certain felony crimes involving guns or drugs.

According to Martinez, Sacramento joins four other cities – Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland and San Diego – in being able to evict tenants for felony gun violations, and five other cities – the same as gun crimes, but with the addition of Palmdale – in being able to evict for felony drug activity.

That authority was granted by the California Legislature as a pilot program in 2009 for guns and 2010 for drugs, and it will expire in 2014 unless extended, Martinez said.

Only a small number of gun evictions have been served, and it is designed to combat gang activity, Young said.

“We recently had one where a gang member had a sawed-off shotgun and was living across from a school,” he said.

Last year, 33 evictions were served for drug violations, and four for gun violations, he added.

Martinez pointed out that the evictions are used sparingly and typically only when landlords or property owners have “had their heads in the sand” and not responded to previous requests to stop illegal activity.

The evictions are in line with a city ordinance that says property owners are responsible for controlling criminal activity on their property, be it a residence they live in or one they rent out, Martinez added.

No special funding is set aside for the program, as it is included in the daily activities of each of the departments involved in it.

Money collected through court orders is slated exclusively for enforcement and is used for things such as purchasing new equipment for police, Martinez said.

“I think it’s a great program,” Young said. “It really streamlines the process.”

Residents aren’t able to call in complaints to the program itself, Young and Martinez said. If there are complaints, they should still call the applicable department – including police and code enforcement – and the monthly meetings held by the program participants determine which properties are the worst based on number of complaints and calls for service.

Brandon Darnell is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press. Follow him on Twitter @brandon_darnell.

Third-party attorneys write new strong mayor draft

2010-07-02T03:52:56Z

Mayor Kevin Johnson’s strong mayor campaign has released a draft of Johnson's proposal and plans to pitch it to the City Council in July.

The release of the new report marks a change in tactics for Johnson’s campaign because third-party attorneys — not the city attorney — wrote the draft.

For weeks, Johnson’s strong mayor campaign has said that City Attorney Eileen Teichert should write the formal language for the proposal. But the City Council prevented Teichert from writing the draft in a 7-2 vote last month.

The first strong mayor initiative was written by Thomas Hiltachk, a third-party attorney. That initiative was struck down by a Sacramento County Superior Court judge in January.

Shawn Callahan, who works on Johnson’s campaign, explained in a June 30 mass e-mail that the draft is part of the campaign’s strategy to persuade council members to vote for a strong mayor form of government. “With clear and detailed proposal language available for public review, council members have one less reason to oppose letting voters weigh in on this issue,” Callahan wrote.

The two attorneys who wrote the draft are Liane Randolph of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP in Sacramento, and J. Clark Kelso, a law professor at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento. As a "federal receiver," Kelso monitors the quality of health care at state jails.

Read the draft of Johnson’s proposal here.

Kathleen Haley is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.

Arbitration close for Railyards land

2009-10-29T02:27:04Z

The city of Sacramento and Railyards developer Thomas Enterprises expect to move forward Monday on attempts to put a price tag on key land needed for a future regional transportation center.

The city exercised its right to request an independent arbitrator after both sides failed to agree on the price of 33 acres needed to build the transportation center, an expansion of the historic Sacramento Valley Station into the 244-acre Railyards development.

A public hearing has been set for 9 a.m. Monday at Sacramento County Superior Court to help narrow down the list of potential arbitrators qualified to set a value and price for the land, which will also contain relocated railroad tracks and other infrastructure needed for the transit center and the Railyards development, said Sheryl Patterson, senior deputy city attorney.

Each side will submit five names to a judge. The judge will winnow that to a list of the five most qualified.

Both sides will then strike names from the list, after the judge tosses a coin to decide who goes first. Arbitrators will be crossed off if not available. The arbitrator is expected to be selected and the dates of arbitration hearings set by the end of next week, Patterson said.

Photo by Eric Whalen. Suzanne Hurt is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.