CPOA California Peace Officer Winter 2011 by Association Outsource Services, Inc.

PeaceOfficer California

Winter 2011

General Election Wrap Up

PAID

PRST.STD. U.S. POSTAGE

PERMIT NO. 2840 SACRAMENTO, CA

COPSWEST: Once Again a Success! Meeting the Challenges through Leadership & Advocacy

table of contents

2010-2011 Executive Committee President

Jim McDonnell Chief Long Beach Police Department jim.mcdonnell@longbeach.gov

FEATURES

Legislative Update

1st Vice President

General Election Wrap Up

Proposition 19: A Prelude

COPSWEST: Once Again a Success

A Look Back at CPOA’s Past Presidents

Meeting the Challenges through Leadership and Advocacy

Women Leaders in Law Enforcement Conference

19th Annual Law Enforcement Legislative Day

DEPARTMENTS

Sandra Spagnoli Chief San Leandro Police Department sspagnoli@sanleandro.org

2nd Vice President

Rick Braziel Chief Sacramento Police Department rbraziel@pd.cityofsacramento.org

3rd Vice President

Rich Lucero Captain Fremont Police Department rlucero@ci.fremont.ca.us

4th Vice President

Mark Yokoyama Chief Cypress Police Department myokoyama@ci.cypress.ca.us

President’s Message

David McGill Lieutenant Los Angeles Police Department mcgilld@lapd.lacity.org

Executive Director’s Message

Promotions and Retirements

Immediate Past President

General Counsel

Legal Services Program News

Advertiser Index

Treasurer

John Standish Retired Chief California Department of Insurance ipp@cpoa.org

Chairs, Regional Advisory Council JP Badel Captain Lodi Police Department jpbadel@pd.lodi.gov

Steve Porter Captain Murrieta Police Department sporter@murrieta.org

Parliamentarian

Edward Pape Lieutenant Los Angeles Police Department 31313@lapd.lacity.org

Executive Director Carol Leveroni, CAE cleveroni@cpoa.org

Publisher

California Peace Officers’ Association 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 1495 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 263-0541 Fax: (916) 520-2277 E-mail: cpoa@cpoa.org www.cpoa.org

Managing Editor

Tricia Schomus (916) 263-0541 tschomus@cpoa.org

Opinions expressed are those of the authors or persons quoted and are not necessarily those of the CPOA state board, appointees, staff and its membership. The publication of any advertisement by CPO or the California Peace Officers’ Association is neither an endorsement of the advertiser nor of the products or services advertised. Neither CPO nor CPOA are responsible for any claims made in an advertisement published in California Peace Officer. © California Peace Officers’ Association. All right reserved. The contents of this publication may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written consent of the publisher. The California Peace Officers’ Association is committed to developing progressive leadership for the California law enforcement community. This is accomplished by organizational networking, professional development, technology advancement and public policy advocacy. The purpose of California Peace Officer is to inform and educate CPOA members; to promote professional development; to generate interest in association activities and to foster a cohesive and involved membership.

Editor

Lisa Kopochinski (916) 481-0265 lisakop@sbcglobal.net

Advertising Manager

Cici Trino Association Outsource Services (916) 990-9999 Fax: (916) 990-9991 cicit@aosinc.biz

Layout and Design Lori Mattas

Printing and Mailing Copeland Printing

California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 3

president’s message

Collaboration

H By Jim McDonnell, Chief of Police Long Beach Police Department

appy New Year! As 2010 officially comes to a close, I hope you were able to enjoy a safe and happy holiday season. In spite of the difficult challenges our society is facing, as I reflect back on 2010, I realize just how thankful we should be. Crime continues to decrease in all sectors of our communities. These decreases have not occurred by chance, but rather through the hard work of the men and women who proudly wear that badge of honor and serve the more than 37 million people of this great state on a daily basis. As we look toward 2011 and beyond, it is unquestionable that we are facing unprecedented challenges. The budgetary news continues to grow worse while unemployment and other causes of desperation increase in virtually every jurisdiction of the state. What makes this so ironic is that it’s occurring while we are celebrating eight years of significant accomplishments in changing behavior through effective and efficient policing strategies. However, as we are all very much aware, these accomplishments grow extremely fragile as the challenges continue to grow and worsen. The November 2010 mid-term elections brought with it new leadership to Sacramento. As we look to the future, the role of professional organizations, such as CPOA, will take on an even greater significance. Together, we must collaborate with all sectors of governance to identify new and better ways to serve the public’s most critical need—optimum public safety. As Dr. Rich Callahan stated during this past year’s Annual Training Symposium, “Collaboration will be the key to success in the 21st century.” As law enforcement leaders, it’s incumbent upon all of us to continue, “fighting the good fight” in order to ensure that public safety remains the highest priority in the eyes of our new government leadership. At the same time, we must continue to share our good ideas, while looking for best practices that include collaborative efforts, which increase our overall effectiveness during these difficult times without compromising officer or public safety. As I stated numerous times during 2010, leadership is about leading for the benefit of others and not the enrichment of ourselves. The desire to help others must always be our motivation for seeking higher levels of responsibility within our organizations and society. As we stand on the shoulders of those who have come before us, it’s incumbent upon us to leave this generation of policing in better condition than we found it. As former CPOA President John McGinness so eloquently stated, “CPOA is an organization comprised of smart, enthusiastic people who have the best chance of identifying solutions to complex problems.” By leading from our core values, together, we will pass the torch to a new generation of law enforcement that is not only brighter for them, but for generations to come. On behalf of your executive board and myself, we wish you the very best for a safe and prosperous New Year. r

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

executive director’s message

Hands Up!

By Carol Leveroni, CAE

re you like me? You start the beginning of a new year and try to look ahead to see what will be coming up. What you need to plan for. What direction you’d like to move toward or new projects you’d like to take on. Do your own little 12-month forecast. Well, if ever there was a year that would make that difficult to do, this would probably be it. We have a new administration that is facing the continuing budget debacle that only seems to get worse month by month. The profession is facing the unthinkable sunset of the vehicle licensing fee (VLF) that contributes a half-billion dollars into law enforcement funding. By the time this is printed we will know if the Supreme Court has ordered the release of thousands of prisoners back onto our streets or has just delayed the resolution to the prison overcrowding issue. And probably we will be fighting yet another run at the legalization of marijuana. Bottom line, you are all continuing to do more with less and wondering how much worse it can get. However, as a fan of roller coasters, I’ll quote the typical direction of “put your arms and hands inside the ride until it comes to a full and complete stop,” The reality is that the ride will end. The question is, are you the kind of rider that ends it with hands in the air and a big smile, or looking terrified and perhaps a little ill? You already know that part of the equation is how well prepared you are to deal with these issues. As a member of CPOA, you’ve already taken one step in the right direction. Within our mission, it states that CPOA will strive to provide progressive, ethical leadership development through training, technology, advocacy and mentoring of our future leaders. This issue of California Peace Officer concentrates on the advocacy portion of our mission and is of the utmost importance to you as a law enforcement professional in California. As I mentioned above, CPOA’s leadership, volunteers and legislative advocate consistently have their ear to the ground when it comes to legislation that may affect how you work. CPOA’s lobbyist, Jennifer Wada, is at the Capitol daily advocating on behalf of CPOA and public safety. This past election, CPOA was a contributor (in both dollars and volunteer time) in the defeat of the marijuana legalization proposition and is hard at work (along with the other public safety associations) attempting to get an extension to the VLF funding stream. That being said, we cannot do this without you. Legislators want to hear from you, their constituents. Working as a team, we can do much to influence public safety legislation. I strongly encourage you to attend the April 6 Law Enforcement Legislative Day in Sacramento. Not only will speakers be on hand to provide you with information on issues that may affect you, but you’ll have the opportunity to walk across the street and speak with your legislator and communicate public safety concerns directly to them. It is a small, oneday investment into the long-term health of the profession. And finally, while no one can predict the future, I encourage you to take the CPOA ride. Just pull down your safety bar, put your hands up in the air, a smile on your face and enjoy the ride. r

California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 5

legislative update

Legislative Update By Jennifer Wada

But as the festivities wind down and camera lights stop flashing, a very grim reality sets in: California is facing a $25.4 billion deficit.

Jennifer Wada is an attorney, legislative advocate, and chief executive officer of The W Group, LLC. She offers her clients a blend of strong advocacy, relationships at all levels of government, and a wealth of legislative and regulatory knowledge. She can be reached at jennifer@thewgroupspa.com.

he Legislative session commenced on December 6 with the typical swearing-in fanfare. Inaugural receptions were held throughout Sacramento, champagne flowed and the families of newly elected legislators flew in from all parts of the state. But as the festivities wind down and camera lights stop flashing, a very grim reality sets in: California is facing a $25.4 billion deficit. The Legislative Analyst’s Office reports that the forecast of the state’s General Fund revenues and expenditures requires finding a solution to the $25.4 billion budget problem between now and the time the Legislature enacts a 2011-12 budget plan. The deficit consists of a $6 billion projected deficit for 2010-11 due to inaccurate revenue projections, and a $19 billion gap between projected revenues and spending in 2011-12. The news does not improve in future years, as the LAO projects budget problems of about $20 billion each year through 2015-16. What this means for the public safety community is that it is highly vulnerable to major funding cuts and various reform efforts that attempt to alleviate the state’s financial burdens. We anticipate that variations of the realignment proposals we fought back last year will reemerge. We also anticipate prison and pension reform will be major focuses. And we cannot forget the flurry of legislation that will greatly impact us. In light of these great challenges that we face, the upcoming year will require solid mobilization of the public safety community. Our voices will need to be louder and our messages will need to be powerful. In order to enable these objectives, CPOA is implementing a new legislative strategic enhancement plan. CPOA is unique, as

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

it is an organization with unparalleled diversity in membership. This plan will build upon on that diversity and will solicit participation from a wider pool of stakeholders, establish a database of experts for specific input on a variety of issues, and would enhance the decision-making process on policy matters. The enhancement plan first seeks to reach out to department heads, or his/her designees, to participate as members of our Law and Legislation committee. We will seek participation from police departments and sheriffs’ offices both large and small, and in both northern and southern California. This will enhance the committee’s representation of all law enforcement both in terms of policy and geography. We will also solicit participation from other law enforcement associations as well as encourage more participation from existing CPOA members. The enhancement plan next seeks to create a database of policy experts on a wide variety of topics. CPOA will utilize the expertise of its members to provide more substantive input on legislation or other matters. The knowledge of each member together is the backbone of our advocacy and we intend to integrate it into the fabric of our advocacy in a more methodical and detailed fashion. Lastly, the Board of Directors will take a more active role in reviewing legislation and policy. We believe that all of these components will improve our advocacy infrastructure to ensure that all members have a role in the process and that CPOA continues to speak for all law enforcement. CPOA’s breadth of membership is valuable—there is no better time to stand together to show it. r

SFPCU GLOBAL ATM CHECKING Goodbye Fee. Hello Free.

Now you can enjoy the freedom to use any ATM anywhere you areâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;if another institution charges you, we refund the fees.* Start taking advantage of this convenient service by applying for an SFPCU Global ATM Checking Account online! Then say goodbye to fees, and hello to free!

800.222.1391 www.sfpcu.org All CPOA Members are Eligible for Membership!

* SFPCU will credit the ATM surcharge up to $3.00 per out-of-network ATM transaction up to a maximum of six (6) transactions per calendar month. Member must have a Checking Account in good standing and a Direct Deposit posted to their Checking account within the last 31 days to qualify. ATM Rebates are for ATM surcharges only, and do not include Point-of-sale transactions. This Credit Union is federally insured by the National Credit Union Administration. California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 7

General Election Wrap Up By Jennifer Wada

fter months of commercials, robocalls, flyers and lawn signs, California voters finally cast their ballots in the November General Election. The Secretary of State reports that 54.9 percent of registered voters turned out for this year’s election, which is on par with past gubernatorial elections. Voters had the opportunity to vote on everything from governor to marijuana. And despite the wave of states turning red across the country, California continued to elect a majority of democrats. Let’s recap the results of the major races. Governor Despite GOP Meg Whitman spending $160 million on her campaign, $142 million being her own money, veteran politician Jerry Brown won by a wide margin on Election Day. Brown won 53.6 percent of the vote, compared to Whitman’s 41.3 percent. It was the most expensive nonpresidential campaign in history, with Whitman spending five times the amount as Brown. It is interesting that, in a year where generally Democrats and incumbent politicians are out of favor, Brown was able to declare victory. Many critics believe Whitman’s exorbitant spending made it difficult for the average person to identify with her and the Brown campaign did a good job of characterizing her as a cold poster child for the elite. There was a growing feeling that she was overly scripted, would say anything to win and was generally unlikeable. These impressions were only bolstered when it was reported that she had hired an illegal immigrant and then abruptly fired her before running for gov-

ernor. The unions were also a large part of Brown’s success, contributing significant amounts of money and knocking on doors and phone banking to voters across the state. In the end, Jerry Brown was the clear winner. It will be interesting to see how the quirky “Governor Moonbeam” will govern this time around. Although it has been said that he will be beholden to labor unions, he is refreshingly liberated from typical political pressures that often confront a governor. He no longer has aspirations for president or any other political office. At the same time, his maverick style could be wildly unpredictable. It will be an interesting term. It’s been a long time since 1975. Attorney General Four weeks after the November 2 election, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris declared victory in the Attorney General race against L.A. District Attorney Steve Cooley. This was the closest battle of all statewide races with the lead shifting between candidates four times as counties processed absentee and provisional ballots. At one time, Cooley held a ten-point lead over Harris but, ultimately, Harris was able to maintain her lead. She won by 14 points in Los Angeles county, Cooley’s own backyard. Cooley conceded upon a 50,000 vote deficit, with just over 100,000 votes let to be counted. The Secretary of State’s office shows Harris receiving 46.1 percent of the votes, with Cooley at 45.3 percent. The AG race rounds out a democratic sweep in California, an anomaly in a year where democrats faced defeat throughout the nation.

Harris is the first woman, first African-American and first Indian-American to be elected as the state’s “top cop.” She has announced a list of priorities, which include reducing the state’s recidivism rate; protecting the state’s environment; helping those homeowners who face foreclosure and are the targets of predatory lending; ensuring the civil rights of Californians regardless or race, religion or sexual orientation; and using innovation and technology to attack problems, such as identity theft. Harris has announced that her transition team will include former LAPD Chief William Bratton, former secretaries of state Warren Christopher and George Shultz, and civil rights attorney Constance Rice. Proposition 19 This measure was defeated by a large margin in the recent election. Prop 19 would have allowed people 21 years and up to possess, cultivate or transport marijuana for personal use, as well as authorized commercial activities such as the sale of marijuana. While the proposition had polled well early on in the campaign, as Election Day approached, popularity for the measure dwindled. Only 46.1 percent of voters approved the measure, while 53.9 percent rejected it. This was largely due to increasing awareness that the measure had practical issues, such as inconsistency with federal law and ambiguity in definitions, for example, what “driving under the influence” meant. Despite the measure being defeated, it is guaranteed that the issue will make its way back into policymaking circles. Legislation and another ballot measure are already in the pipeline. Proposition 22 Proposition 22 was approved by voters and now prohibits the state from borrowing or taking funds used for transportation, redevelopment, or local government projects and services. Specifically, the measure reduces or eliminates the state’s authority to borrow or change the distribution of state fuel tax revenues, use vehicle license fee revenues to reimburse local governments for state mandated costs, shift property taxes from cities, counties and special districts to schools and redirect redevelopment agency property taxes to any other local government. By prohibiting state raids of local funds, the measure is expected to help maintain law enforcement, 911 emergency response, and other public safety services. Proposition 25 Proposition 25 was approved by voters 55 percent to 45 percent. This is monumental for the state budget, as it reduces the vote threshold for approval of a state budget from two-thirds to a

simple majority. Every year, budget gridlock occurs since Republican votes are necessary for passage of a largely Democrat-controlled budget. This will now change that dynamic. The lower vote requirement would also apply to trailer bills that appropriate funds and are identified by the Legislature as related to the budget. There had been question as to what impact this measure has on the threshold to approve taxes. However, the 3rd District Court of Appeal has issued an opinion that Prop 25 cannot be interpreted to operate as an end-run around the two-thirds vote requirement for raising taxes. The Supreme Court has ordered publication of this opinion. Proposition 26 While Proposition 25 lowers the vote threshold for budget approval, Proposition 26 increases the vote threshold on fees that will now be considered taxes. These newly designated “taxes” are generally those that address “health, environmental, or other societal or economic concerns” because they pay for services that benefit the public broadly, rather than providing services directly to the fee payer. However, there is no clear line and litigation will surely be the result in many cases. The measure also retroactively applies to fees imposed as far back as January. This could impact booking and other fees. The delineation between a tax and a fee will now be fought out in the Legislature, on future ballots and throughout local governments. Proposition 27 Proposition 27 would have eliminated the redistricting commission approved by voters in 2008 and given the power back to elected representatives to draw district lines. The rejection of Proposition 27 represents that voters continue to believe that legislators should not have the power to gerrymander districts. Other Notable Races • Lieutenant Governor – San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom prevailed over Republican State Senator Abel Maldonado. • Secretary of State – Incumbent Debra Bowen prevailed over Republican Damon Dunn. • Controller – Incumbent John Chiang prevailed over Republican State Senator Tony Strickland. • Treasurer – Incumbent Bill Lockyer prevailed over Republican State Senator Mimi Walters. • Insurance Commissioner – Democrat Assemblyman Dave Jones prevailed over Republican Assemblyman Mike Villines. • Superintendent of Public Instruction – Assemblyman Tom Torlakson prevailed over a former teacher and superintendant Larry Aceves. r

California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 9

Proposition 19: A Prelude By Jennifer Wada

Proposition 19 was merely an introduction, a prelude, to heightened efforts to legalize marijuana.

n November 2, 2010, California voters rejected Proposition 19 by eight percentage points. Despite early polling results favoring the measure, it was ultimately defeated on Election Day. Proposition 19 would have legalized marijuana under California law. The measure had two main features: 1) legalizing marijuana possession and cultivation for personal use; and 2) authorization of commercial marijuana activities. The main provisions of the measure would have: • Allowed people 21 years old and up to possess, cultivate or transport marijuana for personal use; • Permitted local governments to regulate and tax commercial production, distribution, and sale of marijuana to people 21 years and older; • Prohibited people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using in public, or smoking it while minors are present; • Maintained prohibitions against driving while impaired; and • Limited employers’ ability to address marijuana use to situations where job performance is actually impaired. It is important to note that while prop 19 limited possession and cultivation up to one ounce, state and local governments could have authorized larger amounts. Additionally, they could have licensed establishments that could sell marijuana to persons 21 years and older. State and local law enforcement agencies could not have seized or destroyed marijuana from persons in compliance with the measure, and the language of the proposition stated that no individual

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

could be punished, fined or discriminated against for engaging in such conduct. While early polls showed the Proposition passing, the opposition gained momentum in the final weeks leading up to the election and the measure was defeated. So, why are we still talking about it? The answer is simple: because Proposition 19 was merely an introduction, a prelude, to heightened efforts to legalize marijuana. The national media attention to this proposition has now injected the question of legalization into the mainstream. This has energized many pro-marijuana organizations that are already banding together to mount future campaigns. It has bolstered a movement. It is rumored that Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D – San Francisco) intends to introduce legislation in 2011 that would legalize marijuana. Additionally, almost immediately after the measure was rejected by voters, the main funder and proponent of Prop 19 announced his intentions to place a similar measure on the ballot in 2012. The subject is now a constant in mainstream political discourse and we can be certain about future runs at legalization. In order to respond to future efforts, it is important to analyze the evolution of the Prop 19 campaign. As mentioned earlier, it was only in the last weeks leading up to the election that support for Prop 19 fizzled. Early on, when the question of legalization was tested on voters, the majority supported the concept. We must take note of the reality that, whether it is support or acquiescence, the idea of legalization is seemingly more acceptable in California. The opposition gained momentum when voters finally became educated on the actual details of the proposition. Specifically, that it was inconsistent with federal

law. This would be the case with any attempt, whether it is via the ballot or legislation. Federal laws still classify marijuana as an illegal substance and provide criminal penalties for various activities related to its use. Therefore, potential voters had to fear that Californians taking advantage of the new law might still face enforcement by the feds. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder came out vigorously against Prop 19 stating that the federal government would continue to enforce its laws against Californians who grow or sell marijuana even if the proposition passed. Not only did this flag a practical problem for the measure but it also made voters pause, especially those voters who typically side with the Obama administration. The consistency between state and federal laws is an obvious sticking point and anti-legalization advocates should continue to exploit the inconsistency. Voter turnout was also an important dynamic in the defeat of Prop 19. Older voters were overwhelmingly against it, and voters under the age of 30 favored it. This fared well for the No on Prop 19 campaign, since younger voters vote less in off-year elections. However, the means to legalization could happen outside of a ballot measure. We already know legislation is likely. It would behoove anti-legalization advocates to focus on energizing the base of older voters, as well as educating the public at large of the consequences of legalization. With the state and local budgets being in serious debt, proposals that generate revenue are typically encouraged. Proponents of pro-legalization efforts argue that legalization

would result in savings to state and local governments by giving them tax and fee authority and reducing the number of marijuana offenders incarcerated in state prisons and county jails, as well as the number placed under county probation or state parole supervision. These annual savings have been estimated in the several tens of millions of dollars. It is also contended that court and law enforcement costs are reduced since less enforcement would be needed and the criminal cases in the courts will decrease. What needs to be considered, however, are the costs associated with publicly funded substance abuse treatment or other related medical care. And, although the proposition prohibited driving while impaired, there was no standard or measure of what being “under the influence” meant. As a result, many users could have easily gotten behind the wheel while still under the effects of marijuana. This could result in more accidents and increased need for emergency, medical and law enforcement services. It is imperative that the full extent of inadvertent consequences continue to remain at the top of the debate. Proposition 19 was just the beginning. Many more legalization efforts will occur. It is critical that the public safety community continues to convey— to their legislators, neighbors, friends and family—that it will make their jobs more difficult, not less. There are no better messengers. The one view all Californians share is that law enforcement personnel should not only be applauded, but also empowered to protect the public. r

California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 11

Photos courtesy of John Standish and Carmen Porto

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

Once Again a Success! By David Goldberg and Marc Shaw

he 2010 COPSWEST show has come and gone. If you were not able to attend, you missed out on a fantastic opportunity to learn about the most cutting-edge products and services available to the public safety community. The show, which has historically been held in October, was moved to November and the weather in the Inland Empire could not have been better. With the local mountains in the background, the view from the Ontario Convention Center was picture perfect. As final preparations for this year’s show were underway, southern California law enforcement agencies were rattled by the murder of Riverside Police Officer Ryan Bonaminio. When the CPOA staff and COPSWEST committee learned that Officer Bonaminio’s funeral would coincide with the opening of the show, many discussions took place on how to proceed. In the end, everyone agreed that “the show must go on,” but felt it was very important to inform the vendors that this tragic event could have an impact on attendance. During the ribbon-cutting ceremony, Benicia Police Chief Sandra Spagnoli honored Officer Bonaminio with a moment of silence. The vendor community showed solidarity with their law enforcement partners and remained committed to presenting at the 2010 COPSWEST show. In the end, it was evident that proceeding as planned was the right decision, as not one vendor withdrew from the event. The “Best of COPSWEST” awards were presented by CPOA President Jim McDonnell in conjunction with Monday’s Leadership Training Day. This year’s winners were: • Best Badge Design – Lebanon, Oregon, Police Department • Best Go Green Effort – California Highway Patrol – Guns to Rebar • Best Cold Case Solved – San Diego County Sheriff’s Department • Best Specialty Vehicle – Riverside County Sheriff’s Department • Best Cruiser Design – Grants Pass, Oregon, Department of Public Safety On Wednesday, the 3rd Annual Charity BBQ was held and nearly 800 people enjoyed a sampling of items prepared by eight local law enforcement teams. Competing police departments included Banning, Montclair, Ontario, Redlands and San Bernardino, as well as the California Highway Patrol (Rancho Cucamonga Area), DMV Investigations and San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department (Rancho Cucamonga Station). They all tested their expertise on the grill and tried to wow the panel of judges. Ultimately, the first place trophy was awarded to the San Bernardino Co. Sheriff’s Department, second place went to the Ontario Police Department, and third place was awarded to DMV Investigations. VONS Supermarket donated hundreds of pounds of ribs and

California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 13

chicken and many other local establishments supplied side dishes, drinks, paper products and soft serve ice cream. After the proceeds were calculated, each BBQ team earned almost $1,000 for their selected charity! This year, 288 vendors occupying over 500 booths and more than 2,000 people attended COPSWEST. Whether they were there to participate in the various training opportunities, attend emerging technology presentations, walk the tradeshow floor or network with other public safety professionals, it was obvious that the show provided something for everyone. As the tradeshow drew to a close, the excitement moved to the Auto Club Speedway in Fontana, where the 2010 Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Annual Law Enforcement Vehicle Test was held for the second year. Sam Davis (Federal Signal) coordinated the track portion of this year’s event and did a remarkable job! COPSWEST is the only place west of the Mississippi where you can spend a few days at an exceptional tradeshow and then watch our nation’s automobile manufacturers put their newest law enforcement vehicles to test. The LASD Vehicle Test is held to be the most strenuous in the nation. The testing methods and environments are unparalleled. With the famous Goodyear Blimp circling above, Ford Motor Company’s newly announced replacement for their workhorse Crown Victoria along with General Motor’s return of the Caprice and Dodge’s newly remodeled Charger all took to the track where their individual performance statistics were

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

tabulated and reported for all in attendance to see. Kawasaki’s reintroduction into the police market with their new 1400GTR demonstrated some strong results as well. Couple that with the numerous vendor displays, a free lunch and high-definition television coverage provided by Panasonic, and the 2010 LASD Vehicle Test was a resounding success for all in attendance. As co-chairs for this event, we must thank our dedicated volunteer committee that made the show a success. Two veterans of the committee will be retiring soon, and their contributions will be greatly missed. We wish Commander Lindley Zink (Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Department) and Captain Mark Getchel (El Dorado County Sheriff’s Department) the very best in their retirement. The other committee members included Craig Bassett (Bassett Sales Corporation), Joe Chavez (California Department of Insurance Fraud Division), Rick Crossman (Crossco/Code – 3), Sam Davis (Federal Signal Corporation), Ben Dawson (Sun Badge Company), Deputy Sheriff Mike Eckert (Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department), Chris Eldridge (Ford Motor Company), Sergeant Tom Graham (California Highway Patrol), Lieutenant Phil Holder (Banning Police Department), Larry Houston (Versatile Information Products, Inc.), Ken Kennedy (General Motors), Lynne Jones (California Highway Patrol, retired), James Nunn (San Bernardino Co. Sheriff’s Department, retired), Katie Roberts (Ontario Police Department, retired), Andrew Sayko (Crossco/Code 3), Mike Sterling (Panasonic Computer Solutions Co.), and Lieutenant Dexter Thomas (Ontario Police Department), as well as Dianne Peregrina and Vickie Kirk of CPOA. For those who participated in this year’s show, we certainly hope you found the experience worthwhile and enjoyable. If you were not able to make it to this year’s show, you missed out! In either case, mark your calendar for November 8-9, 2011, and plan to attend the 2011 COPSWEST show at the Ontario Convention Center. r

California Highway Patrol Captain Marc Shaw, Commander of the Baldwin Park area, served as the 2010 co-chair of the COPSWEST tradeshow committee. Captain Shaw holds a bachelor’s degree in management from Saint Mary’s College of California and is currently attending POST Command College Class 50.

Captain David Goldberg is in charge of the Inland Empire Regional Office for the State of California Department of Insurance Fraud Division. He has been in law enforcement for 20 years and a member of CPOA for 11 years. Captain Goldberg is currently the Region VI Chair and a member of the Ethics Committee and a cochair of the COPSWEST planning committee. He can be reached at david.goldberg@insurance.ca.gov.

MASTAGNI, HOLSTEDT, AMICK, MILLER & JOHNSEN A Professional Corporation

PROVIDING COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL REPRESENTATION TO PEACE OFFICERS AND THEIR FAMILIES FOR OVER 30 YEARS: CPOA’S LSP PROVIDER LABOR/EMPLOYMENT LAW WAGE AND HOUR CLAIMS INTERNAL AFFAIRS/DISCIPLINE FEDERAL AND STATE TRIAL LITIGATION THIRD PARTY, PERSONAL INJURY AND UNINSURED MOTORIST CLAIMS PEACE OFFICER CRIMINAL DEFENSE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS/LABOR RELATIONS DISABILITY RETIREMENT WORKERS’ COMPENSATION SOCIAL SECURITY APPEALS

www.mastagni.com 1912 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95811 (916) 446-4692 Toll Free (800) 854-7581 Chico: (530) 895-3836; Stockton: (209) 948-6158 San Jose: (408) 292-4802; Fresno: (559) 486-5580 Making a false or fraudulent Workers’ Compensation claim is a felony subject to up to five years in prison or a fine up to $50,000 or double the value of the fraud, whichever is greater, or by both imprisonment and fine.

California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 15

past presidents

A Look Back At CPOA’s Past Presidents

Glen Craig 1988-89 CPOA President By Sal Rosano

len Craig began preparing for a career in law enforcement when he enrolled in the police science program at College of Sequoias in Visalia, California in 1950. He graduated in 1952 and was drafted into the army later that year. He served in the military police at Fort Lewis, Washington, until February, 1955. Upon his discharge, he immediately went to work with the Visalia Police Department. In April, 1956, he entered the California Highway Patrol training academy and was initially assigned to Barstow and then on to Victorville. He transferred to Visalia in 1957. He was promoted to Sergeant in 1961 and worked in Eureka and Visalia. In 1965, he was promoted to Lieutenant and assigned to Gold Run. In 1966, he was transferred to Sacramento Headquarters in the Office of Special Representative (Legislative Liaison) and stayed there for six-and-a-half years through the ranks of Captain and Assistant Chief. As Special Representative, he was instrumental in the passage of the Implied Consent Law and the Presumptive Limit Law. In 1972, he was promoted to Deputy Chief and assigned as the CHP’s Southern Division Commander in Los Angeles. At age 39, he was the youngest Deputy Chief in CHP history achieving his climb through the ranks in just 16 years. In 1975, at age 42, he became the CHP’s youngest Commissioner. He served as Commissioner for eight years. He created the MAIT concept, the physical fitness program, the regional helicopter program and the 11-99 Foundation. Glen’s command staff at the CHP recognized him as a natural leader with a talent for grasping and dealing with a myriad of challenging and difficult situations. In 1983, he was appointed Director of the Department of Justice Division of Law Enforcement. While at the Department of Justice, he was instrumental in implementing the first statewide-automated fingerprint system in the United Sates (CAL-ID). He lobbied for and obtained 70 percent funding for local agencies to set up and implement the Remote Access Network (RAN).

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

Four years later, he was elected Sheriff of Sacramento County and served three terms until his retirement in 1999. He created the Service Center Concept, implemented Community Oriented Policing and developed the plan for decentralizing the Department. He negotiated the contracts for the newly incorporated cities of Citrus Heights and Elk Grove and laid the groundwork for the contract with the soon-to-be incorporated city of Rancho Cordova. Throughout his career, Glen continued to pursue his education, attending Sacramento State and Cal Lutheran College before completing his undergraduate work at Cal State University at Los Angeles.

Service to the CPOA Glen served on the Board of Directors of CPOA for 15 years and as President in 1988-89. He was instrumental in CPOA focusing on middle and upper-management people and proposed the regional concept to make CPOA programs more accessible to mid-management people. He was the first Chairman of the Legal Services Program and guided it through the organization and implementation process. In 1998 Glen was the recipient of the Mickey Rainey Award for outstanding service to CPOA.

Accomplishment Outside his Tenure as CPOA President After retirement, Glen became a partner in the software company In-Synch Systems. He still serves as Chairman of the Board for In-Synch. He has served as a consultant for Motorola Corp., Public Strategies Inc., and the State Attorney General. r

Sal Rosano, retired Chief of Police of Santa Rosa Police Department, was the CPOA president from 1984-1985. He is actively gathering CPOA historical information. If you would like to contribute, contact Sal at salrosano@aol.com.

Meeting the Challenges through Leadership and Advocacy By Susan E. Manheimer

he contemporary challenges facing our profession and the communities we serve are dramatic. We have and will continue to confront electoral, economic and legislative threats to our most fundamental means of effective policing. How we respond and adapt to these challenges will profoundly impact our profession and public safety within our communities for years to come. This has been the challenging backdrop, over this past year, that I have been privileged to serve as the president of the California Police Chiefs Association. I have come to fully appreciate the value of alignment among the leadership of law enforcement professional associations. We have worked to sustain public safety objectives through various persistent and serious challenges. There is no doubt in my mind that the strong coalition that our statewide law enforcement associations have developed has afforded us greater impact and influence on matters critical to public safety. I can safely say, on behalf of the membership and leadership of the California Police Chiefs Association, that we have greatly valued our partnership with the California Peace Officers’ Association, the State Sheriffs Association, the California Probation Chiefs, and the District Attorney’s Association. These professional associations, known collectively as the “Other Big 5,” have been meeting regularly with the Governor and the Legislature on matters of budget, prison and pension reform, as well as countless other critical funding and legislative issues. I have been “at the table” at many of these meetings over the past few

years and have seen time and again how the advocacy and influence of our coalition has helped change course on countless occasions. There is no doubt in my mind that our collective “voice” advocating for public safety in our communities, and sound public policy within the criminal justice system has had great success and great impact. Clearly there are many more challenging and troubling issues on the horizon. The stunning acceleration of the economic crisis and the difficulty in finding meaningful solutions has led to complex problems. It has been especially helpful that our associations have become a stronger and more effective influence in Sacramento as we have enhanced this cohesive coalition. In the past several months, we have also forged a broader coalition with rank and file groups as well as the League of Cities and other allied partners as we struggle to mitigate the deep cuts in public safety and prison and parole budgets. Our influence and impact have been heard and have impacted policy and legislation throughout California this past year. So far this year, we have been on the front lines on the fight against marijuana legalization, successfully fought back wholesale prisoner releases, and so far have kept our COPS and Byrne/JAG funding intact. Clearly this year will be no better with the ballooning deficits and we will need to redouble our efforts and draw on our considerable and influential law enforcement coalition. When we consider the manner in which we exert our influence professionally, it is clear that each of us has a role as individuals and also as members in our organizations and associations. It is tempting to concontinued on page 18 California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 17

Meeting the Challenges continued from page 17 fine our effort to an organization most closely tied to our primary duty responsibilities. This likely holds true whether as a police chief, sheriff, second in command, investigative or operational specialist in a particular discipline, or labor and employment leader. In part, this emanates from commonalities of associations functioning in areas such as legislative advo-

cacy, participation in amicus public policy litigation, or hosting training symposiums. It is also a simple reality of the time constraints facing modern law enforcement leaders. CPOA, however, is at the intersection of all of our professional associations. Through its broad base of membership, the California Peace Officers’ Association coalesces

CalVet Home Loans Salutes Those Who Continue to Serve

Thank You for Your Service to Our Country

Thank You for Your Service to Our Community The best home loan value for veterans and active military Sacramento 866-6532510 Bakersﬁeld 866-653-2507

Fresno 866-653-2511 Redding 866-653-2508

San Diego 866-653-2504 Riverside 800-700-2127

www.cdva.ca.gov/calvetloans

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

the perspectives common to all of us as law enforcement officers whether from municipalities, counties, or state agencies. For this reason, despite our respective constituencies, investing effort with the work of CPOA, and supporting their mission is a worthwhile means of furthering many of our central law enforcement leadership objectives. Our areas of shared viewpoint and priorities are many and benefit from a strong coalition base. While I have been honored to have held several leadership roles in the California Police Chiefs Association throughout my last ten years as a Chief, I have continued my membership and commitment to CPOA and have encouraged our Cal Chiefs members to join CPOA to take advantage of the many member benefits and support CPOA’s efforts on behalf of our profession. The diversity of the membership of CPOA incorporates the views of leaders at all levels of law enforcement service and through a broad base of law enforcement. As an example, the CPOA/CPCA traffic safety committee incorporates the membership of the CHP, municipal agencies, and state and county agencies. No other association spans this breadth and depth of involvement within their committees and advocacy as CPOA. Public policy level advocacy provides another very useful leadership development opportunity. In particular, for the executive manager, it offers a venue for interacting with and advancing successive generations of leaders presently at ranks not always accessible. At the same time, executive leadership can readily gain diversified insights about pending areas of contention or concern validating or amending prevailing perceptions and thoughts. In this same context, for developing leaders seeking greater influence or formal promotion, involvement offers an opportunity to gain experience and depth while making a useful contribution. The result ideally is an improved collective understanding among all of us as colleagues of the influences and forces shaping the demands we face. Now, more than ever, we will need strong and skilled leadership to face the challenges and keep our organizations and communities strong and safe. We will need resilient and adaptive leaders at all levels of our organizations and associations to fully leverage our resources, smartly advocate for our needs, and provide strategic direction with reduced budgets to effectively deliver safety and security for our communities. CPOA’s mission of leadership development, training, and advocacy for its diverse law enforcement membership contributes greatly to meeting those goals and developing our future leaders and enhancing our profession. r Susan E. Manheimer, Chief of Police for the City of San Mateo, serves as the President of the California Police Chiefs Association. She can be reached at police@cityofsanmateo.org or (650) 522-7600.

5th Annual Women Leaders in Law Enforcement Conference By Sandra Spagnoli

he 5th Annual Women Leaders in Law Enforcement (WLLE) Conference was held on November 8-10, 2010, in Pasadena. The theme for the event was “Sharing Strategies for Success: Managing Transition.” Since its inception, this conference has achieved the goal of bringing members of the law enforcement community together—both sworn and professional staff, from line level to police chief—to provide training, networking and a fresh perspective of readiness, preparedness and collaboration. More than 750 law enforcement professionals were in attendance for the networking, training and activities. Hosted by the Pasadena Police Department, the conference featured speakers from across the state during the two days of training which was presented through 11 different workshops and plenary sessions. The goal of this year’s training conference was to provide dynamic workshops that embrace both sworn and professional staff (non-sworn). Workshops included a presentation from author Allan Duffin on the history of women in law enforcement, and training to enhance leadership development, promotional

preparation, presentation skills; life management; critical incident: a survivors perspective; economic times; street survival and tactics; critical incident: response and recovery; and a debriefing from the Oakland Police Department on the tragic events which lead to the murder of four Oakland police officers in 2009. For those that wanted to kick of their morning at 0630 hours, San Jose Police Officer LeeAnn Alfonzo started off two mornings with a CrossFit training session for conference attendees. CrossFit is a functional fitness program being utilized by law enforcement, firefighters and the military as their primary fitness training across the world. CrossFit is a combination of functional movements performed at a high intensity that are constantly varied. The 6th annual WLLE Conference will be hosted by the San Jose Police Department, November 13-15, 2011, at the Fairmont Hotel in San Jose. Visit www. wlle.net for information on the upcoming 2011 conference and view highlights and photos of the 2010 conference. r

Sandra Spagnoli is the Chief of Police for the city of San Leandro and First Vice President of CPOA. She can be reached at sspagnoli@sanleandro.org.

Eliminate Computer Downtime Automatic Shutdown Before Losing Critical Data Prevents Laptops from Draining Batteries Low Vehicle Voltage Detection Monitors Vehicle Voltage USB 2.0 Connectivity Connectivi Selectively Discharge Laptop Battery Comes with Customizable Software Two Year Warranty

California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 19

legislative day

Mark your calendars for the

19th Annual Law Enforcement Legislative Day

he event is happening Tuesday and Wednesday, April 5-6 in Sacramento. A legislative reception will kick off the program on Tuesday, April 5 from 5:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. The day-long program begins at 8:00 a.m. on April 6 at the Sheraton Grand Hotel in downtown Sacramento. The collection of political expertise presenting at this established event in years prior has included the Attorney General, CDCR Secretary, California Legislative Analyst, Director of Finance, as well as very informative legislative panel presentations. The day includes a luncheon and the presentation of the Bud Hawkins Memorial Law Enforcement Professional of the Year Award. Time is built into the program from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on both days for attendees to go to the Capitol and meet with their legislators. These visits are strongly encouraged. Legislative Day draws more than 250 law enforcement leaders and legislative coordinators. This event is organized by the following: • California Peace Officers’ Association • California Police Chiefs Association • California District Attorneys Association • California State Sheriffs’ Association • California Narcotic Officers’ Association • California Highway Patrol

Supporters include: • California Reserve Peace Officers’ Association • California Law Enforcement Association of Records Supervisors • Chief Probation Officers of California

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

• Peace Officers Research Association of California • California Campus and University Police Chiefs Association • California Probation, Parole and Correctional Association • Southern California Public Safety Dispatchers • California District Attorney Investigators’ Association • California Correctional Supervisors Organization • California Sexual Assault Investigators Association • California Association of Code Enforcement Officers • Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training Learn how the legislative process works, what critical legislative issues are facing public safety this year and how you can personally influence the outcome of key bills that will affect your agency and the profession.

For More Information Visit the CPOA website at www.cpoa.org for further details, hotel information and a registration form. If you have any questions, please contact the CPOA office at (916) 263-0541.

2011 Legislative Update Manual Your source for immediate information on close to 100 bills signed into law last year that affect law enforcement. We’ve taken the guesswork out of changes in statutory law. A special section on important court decisions is included. Cost: $20 plus tax and shipping. Order online at www.cpoa.org under publications in the bookstore. r



california peace officers’ association’s

annual leadership summit

may 25 - 27, 2011  san diego, california  the omni hotel

cpoa bulletins

Promotions

2010/2011 Training Courses

Battle Ground Police Department, WA

Officer Involved Shootings: Supervisory and Management Responsibilities

Commander Robert Richardson Appointed Chief of Police (retired from Irvine Police Department)

Bell Gardens Police Department Lieutenant Jeffery Travis Promoted to Captain

Cypress Police Department Sergeant Jim Olson Promoted to Lieutenant

Port Hueneme Police Department

Chief Kathleen Sheehan Appointed to Chief of Police (previously at Bishop Police Department)

Sacramento Co. Sheriffâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Department Captain Scott Jones Elected Sheriff

San Leandro Police Department

Chief Sandra Spagnoli Appointed to Chief of Police (previously at Benicia Police Department)

State of California

Retired Chief David Singer Appointed as U.S. Marshal for the Central District (previously at Whittier Police Department)

January 20-21, Santa Clara January 27-28, Seal Beach February 24-25, Fairfield March 3-4, Riverside March 10-11, Simi Valley March 31- April 1, Sacramento April 7-8, Paso Robles

Pitchess Motion Update February 16, Corona March 10, Benicia

POBR March 15, Fairfield May 11, CSU Northridge Visit cpoa.org under the training tab for additional course listings and to register.

2011 Legislative Update January 27, Imperial February 2, Ukiah February 9, Vacaville February 16, Vacaville

Public Records Act January 27-28, Commerce February 3-4, Napa February 10-11, Ontario March 3-4, Paso Robles April 7-8, Irvine

Legal Update Regarding Discovery and Personnel February 3-4, Sacramento

Canine Program Management March 23-25, Simi Valley

Retirements Chief Sam Spiegel Folsom Police Department CPOA member for 27 years

Chief Stan Henry Cathedral City Police Department CPOA member for 20 years

Chief Michael Fraser Pleasanton Police Department CPOA member for 27 years

Commander Robert Richardson Irvine Police Department CPOA Member for 19 years Sheriff John McGinness Sacramento Co. Sheriffâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Department CPOA member for 14 years Chief David Singer Whittier Police Department CPOA member for 7 years

Self-contained unit that Mounts Anywhere Green and Red Status LEDs Low 3-Milliamp standby current Programmable delay from 15 min to 16 hours Optional direct-ignition sensing (recommended for emergency vehicles apps) Low Voltage Protection (Turns off when system voltage falls below 10.5-Volts for 15-Seconds) 16.5-Volt Over Voltage Protection 5 second test mode (all switches off) Two year warranty

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

Chief Rod Uyeda Manhattan Beach Police Department CPOA member for 6 years Chief Tom Simonetti Martinez Police Department CPOA member for 6 years

general counsel’s message

Changes to HR 218 Allowing Law Enforcement Officers to Carry Concealed Weapons By Martin J. Mayer

n 2004, Congress passed HR 218, known as the “Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 (LEOSA).” That law allowed, among other things, “qualified” active law enforcement officers and “qualified” retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons in any state or local subdivision, notwithstanding the laws of those states or cities. The definitions of those two categories of officers are established in LEOSA, not by individual jurisdictions. On October 1, 2010, Congress passed S.1132, known as the “Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Improvements Act of 2010.” This Act implemented several significant changes to the 2004 Act with, perhaps, the greatest impact on those previously defined as “qualified” retired officers.

Retired Officers Defined The original legislation defined such officers, in part, as follows: “(1) retired in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer, other than for reasons of mental instability; (2) before such retirement, was authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration

of any person for, any violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest; (3)(A) before such retirement, was regularly employed as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more; or (B) retired from service with such agency, after completing any applicable probationary period of such service, due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such agency; (4) has a non-forfeitable right to benefits under the retirement plan of the agency; (5) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the State’s standards for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry firearms. . .” The new legislation has, among other things, deleted the words “retired in good standing” and replaced them with the term “separated from service in good standing;” changed the requirement that one needed “an aggregate of 15 years or more” of service, to “10 years or more;” and, deleted the requirement that to be considered a “qualified retired law enforcement officer” one must have “a non-forfeitable right to benefits under the retirement plan of (his or her) agency.” In fact, the use of the term “retired” is misleadcontinued on page 24 California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 23

General Counsel Message continued from page 23

ing, at best. An individual could resign from law enforcement, after 10 years and one day, and still meet this new definition of a “retired law enforcement officer.”

Firearms Qualifications

Martin J. Mayer is a name partner with the public sector law firm of Jones & Mayer, located in Fullerton, CA. He has served as General Counsel to CPOA for the past 30 years.

Perhaps one of the most significant modifications to HR 218 involves firearms qualification by the officer who is now referred to as having been “separated from service.” The 2004 law required that to be a “qualified retired” officer, one had to show proof that he or she had, during the past 12 months, met the standards of their former agency required of active law enforcement officers, or met the state standards established by the state in which they resided. Under the new law those provisions remain unchanged, however, new procedures have been added. If the state in which the officer who was “separated from service” resides does not have a state standard, the officer may meet the standards of “either a law enforcement agency within the state in which the individual resides or the standards used by a certified firearms instructor that (sic) is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that state. . .” From a practical perspective that means, for example, if an officer resigns after 10 years of service (in one or more agencies), and lives in a state without an established state standard, he or she can go to any law enforcement agency in that state, or to any “certified firearms instructor,” to be tested. If they meet those standards, it would then allow them to carry a concealed weapon anywhere in the United States. Obligation of Agency to Test Former Officers There is, still, nothing in LEOSA which mandates that a local agency test a former officer who was “separated from service in good standing” in order to enable that individual to carry a concealed weapon under the provisions of LEOSA. A concern expressed by law enforcement executives involves potential litigation and/or liability if they do test and “certify” a former officer as having met their agency’s standards. If an incident occurs involving that former officer using his/her weapon, resulting in a lawsuit against that former officer, will that “certifying agency” be named in the suit? It is certainly likely that a plaintiff’s attorney would do so, if for no other reason than to try and find the “deep pocket.” It is important to remember that one may have no liability in a matter, but that doesn’t insure there will be no litigation. And litigation is costly, especially if it occurs in another state.

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

Impact of Law One important fact which should be considered by officers, who want to rely on LEOSA, and carry concealed weapons out of their home state, is that LEOSA is a defense to criminal prosecution; it is not a “free pass.” If jurisdictions have laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons, they can choose to arrest and prosecute a person who is acting in accordance with LEOSA. It is then a matter for a court to decide. Just such a situation arose in the state of New York in 2008, as reflected in the case of People v. Booth, 826 N.Y.S.2d 767. A Newburg, N.Y. police officer stopped a vehicle for speeding. It was determined that the driver (Booth) had a suspended license and an outstanding arrest warrant. During an inventory of the vehicle, a weapon and ammunition was discovered. It was subsequently determined that Booth was a member of the Coast Guard, was authorized to carry the weapon when conducting operations for the Coast Guard, and had law enforcement duties as well. The court found that, under LEOSA, Booth “was a qualified law enforcement officer” and was “exempt from prosecution under New York State Law as a result of LEOSA.” The fact that he violated Coast Guard rules by having his weapon with him, which might subject him to discipline by the Guard, did “not act to lessen the scope of LEOSA,” as it was applied in the criminal case. The point to remember, however, is that Booth was arrested and indicted and had to defend himself in court. The mere fact that he met the LEOSA requirements did not enable him to avoid going through the criminal justice process. In addition, he was subject to adverse employment action for violating Coast Guard policies.

Conclusion This law has the potential of creating problems for individuals and agencies as well. Nonetheless, it is the law and should be discussed amongst law enforcement executives, their legal counsel, and the entities in which they function (cities, counties, states, etc.). The law is sweeping in scope and, in light of these recent amendments, may generate new issues to be addressed. Not the least of which, for California law enforcement, is the question of who is coming into this state with concealed weapons and what training and experience do they have? In any event, these changes are in place and it is important for all law enforcement agencies to become familiar with them and understand how they should be implemented. r

legal service program news

Recent Case Upholds Immunity from Civil Liability for Fire Department Managers By Christina B. Johnson

ivil liability is a common concern in law enforcement agencies throughout California. Law enforcement managers, in particular, often find themselves on the hook for decisions they make regarding internal affairs, officer-involved shootings, and other department-related incidents. Qualified immunity is an area of the law that protects officers from civil liability in certain situations. A recent 9th Circuit court case, Delia v. City of Rialto (2010 WL 3504502) was one of those situations. Delia was a firefighter with the Rialto City Fire Department who began to feel ill after working to control a toxic spill. Delia took doctor-recommended medical leave for several weeks and eventually returned to work. The City was suspicious during the time Delia was on medical leave because of previous disciplinary actions that had been taken against him. The City decided to conduct surveillance of Delia and ended up with footage of him carrying building supplies such as fiberglass and rolls of insulation. The City began an internal affairs investigation to determine if Delia was off work on false pretenses. Fire Chief Orders Search During a formal investigative interview, Delia admitted to having purchased the insulation but denied that it was ever installed. The fire chief then requested two battalion chiefs to follow Delia to his house to make sure the insulation was, in fact, uninstalled. Delia later filed a lawsuit claiming his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unlawful government searches and seizures had been violated. The Ninth Circuit found that while Delia’s Fourth Amendment right had been violated because he had been ordered to remove the insulation from his house in full view of the battalion chiefs, the chief and two battalion chiefs were not subject to civil liability. The court

reached its decision by applying the doctrine of qualified immunity. This doctrine serves to protect the need to hold public officials accountable while also shielding them from harassment and liability when they perform their duties correctly. The qualified immunity doctrine protects government employees from civil liability as long as the employee’s actions do not violate a clearly established constitutional or statutory right about which the employee should have known. Court Finds Qualified Immunity from Lawsuit The Ninth Circuit found the chief and battalion chiefs were covered by the qualified immunity doctrine because there was no clearly established right that would cause a reasonable official to believe that his conduct violated the Fourth Amendment. The court found the case did not fit neatly into any previous category of Fourth Amendment case law because no previous decision involved the legality of a “compelled search” similar to that conducted in Delia’s case. The previous case law, the court said, was not sufficient to make the chief and battalion chiefs aware their actions violated Delia’s Fourth Amendment rights. Therefore, they could not be held civilly liable. The CPOA Legal Services Program is one of the many resources that law enforcement managers can turn to in order to avoid civil liability. The LSP provides representation on a variety of employmentrelated matters including consultation on pending actions, representation in civil actions, retirement appeals, actions for discipline, demotions, involuntary transfers and any other punitive or adverse action taken against a member. r The reader should not act on the information contained in this article without seeking specific legal advice on the application and interpretation of this information in any particular matter.

Apply online at

www.cpoa.org for CPOA’s Legal Service Program.

Christina Johnson is a law clerk at Mastagni, Holstedt, Amick, Miller & Johnsen. She graduated from the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law this past December with a concentration in business law. Currently, she is studying to take the California State Bar in February of 2011.

California Peace Officer | Winter 2011 | 25

resource guide

CALVET HOME LOANS CalVet Home Loans

POLICE FLEET AND ACCESSORIES Folsom Lake Dodge

(800) 952-5626 www.cdva.ca.gov/calvetloans Please see our ad on page................................................................. 18

(916) 355-9999 www.folsomdodge.com Please see our ad on page................................................................... 2

CBU ONLINE AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES California Baptist University

UNIVERSITY American Military University

(866) 7676.CBU www.calbaptist.edu/CJLA Please see our ad on page................................................................. 27

(703) 334-3970 www.Apus.edu Please see our ad on page.................................................... Back Cover

CREDIT UNION San Francisco Police Credit Union (415) 242-6488 www.sfpcu.org Please see our ad on page................................................................... 7

DEPENDABLE VEHICLE POWER MANAGEMENT Copeland Enginerring, Inc. (619) 575-4600 www.cope.eng.com Please see our ad on page........................................................... 19, 22

AD INDEX American Military University................................................. Back Cover California Baptist University............................................................... 27 CalVet Home Loans........................................................................... 18 Copeland Enginerring, Inc.........................................................19 & 22 E-Seek, Inc.......................................................................................... 7 Folsom Lake Dodge............................................................................. 2

DRIVER LICENSE READERS E-Seek, Inc. (714) 545-3316 www.e-seek.com Please see our ad on page................................................................... 7

LEGAL SERVICES Mastagni, Holstedt, Amick, Miller, Johnsen (916) 446-4692 www.mastagni.com Please see our ad on page................................................................. 15

| Winter 2011 | California Peace Officer

Mastagni, Holstedt, Amick, Miller, Johnsen....................................... 15 San Francisco Police Credit Union....................................................... 7

Bachelor of Science in

The education you need to prepare to lead.

Criminal Justice Leadership & Administration Accelerated Active-Duty Program at California Baptist University Convenient online and onsite class schedules  Expert faculty, small class sizes, individual attention  Active-duty requirement ensures quality networking  Curriculum focuses on developing management expertise 

Developed in cooperation with law enforcement agencies, CBU’s program is your best choice if you are serious about preparing for leadership excellence.

866.7676.CBU Accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.