Even though I was on vacation last week, I was still tuned in enough to be thoroughly disappointed when the Ventura County Star decided to run another story on the SVPD where the City Council requests a third party investigation on their handling of the Takasugi case. The story shed no light on any new facts or information and seemed to only keep the topic fresh on the minds of Simi Valley readers. I wasn’t the only one who saw it this way.

Chief Mike Lewis has drafted a response to be published in the Ventura County Star. He lays out the facts regarding the timeline of events as well as the resources allocated to the investigation. Understandably, his frustration is evident regarding the story’s constant revival in our local paper.

When we’re not in the midst of an election cycle, I’m proud to say that I’m a supporter of our City Council. But I don’t always agree with every stand they take, either as a unified Council or individually. I hope that our City Council can let this issue rest for now and I think they really have since mentioning this issue several weeks back. Even better, I’d hope the Ventura County Star can ease up until there’s something new and relevant to report. There’s an awful lot we don’t know about how these cases are investigated, not to mention an even bigger issue regarding available resources and concerns about mandatory job rotations. Rather than open Pandora’s box, I propose we all rest easy and let this play itself out.

Here are Chief Mike Lewis’s thoughts on the matter:

Every Cloud has a Silver Lining

For many weeks now, the 195 fine men and women of the Simi Valley Police Department have been maligned regarding the alleged delay of a complex fraud investigation.  Normally, our internal review and a subsequent request for an investigation (which was declined) by the District Attorney’s Office would be sufficient to quell any questions regarding the allegation of an inappropriate action, in this case the intentional delay in completing an investigation.  However, this particular issue seems to have taken on a life of its own, and I will not silently stand by while the integrity of my officers and support staff is continually impugned for questionable purposes.

A review of the facts are as follows:

Beate Kirmse, administrator for the estate of Oscar Muro, filed a criminal complaint on October 19, 2010, alleging attorney Russell Takasugi, embezzled funds from the estate of Mr. Muro.  This was 14 days before the recent City elections.  An article reporting this criminal complaint appeared in the Ventura County Star on October 25.  This was one week before the election.

When this complaint was filed, our lead expert economic crimes investigator was out of the office for an extensive training class to prepare him for a new position as the Department’s lead homicide investigator.  A law enforcement agency must constantly review its workload and allocate resources based upon priority of the type of investigation and our detectives’ current caseload.  Based upon this review, our Investigative Unit made the decision to wait until our lead investigator returned from training to assist a newer detective with the investigation of this particular case.  There were no exigent circumstances requiring immediate action such as the destruction of evidence.

Fraud and embezzlement cases are very complex and require hundreds of records, including bank statements and other types of documentation, which must be subpoenaed from banks, trusts, estate attorneys, etc., before a case may be presented to the District Attorney’s Office for review. Investigations of this nature typically take many months, even years, to complete based upon the complexity.  Only after an investigation is complete would there be any information released to the public.

We are now a full six weeks into this investigation, and it will probably take several more months to complete.  If I had put my entire Investigative Unit on this case when it was first received, there would have been nothing to report before the election and this investigation would still be ongoing.  As the head of this agency, it is my professional opinion, based upon knowing all of the facts, that the Department took the proper steps in an appropriate timeframe.  For some to suggest otherwise is nothing more than an attempt to keep this “story” in the news with unfounded claims of biased policing.

The constant rehashing of this story smacks of Police Department bashing.  In fact, much of this story is attributed to second hand comments reportedly made by a civil attorney during a probate hearing in Superior Court.  The repeated assertion that there is a “black cloud” over our Department comes from not knowing all of the facts and not allowing the City Manager to complete his review and report back to the City Council with his findings.  I have already stated my desire to have full transparency on this issue and once again pledge to the community of Simi Valley that a review is welcomed.

As the Chief of Police, I am proud to state that I stand with the investigators who are diligently working this investigation; unequivocally support their decisions made, and the Department’s handling of this case.  As with all of the calls for service we receive, this case will be handled with the highest degree of integrity and professionalism because this purported dark cloud truly has a silver lining composed of the 195 dedicated staff who make up the Simi Valley Police Department.

Mike Lewis, Chief of Police
Simi Valley Police Department

*** UPDATE: Barbra Williamson has resigned as Chair of the Task Force, but still remains a member of the group. ***

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Resignation of Barbra Williamson, Chair of the Simi Valley Landfill Expansion Task Force

Simi Valley, CA (December 8, 2010) – Barbra Williamson announced today the resignation as Chair of the Simi Valley Landfill Expansion Task force effective immediately.

Citing the perception of a possible conflict of interest due to her recent appointment to the negotiating committee with Mayor Huber and City Manager Mike Sedell on discussions with Waste Management and the proposed landfill expansion, Williamson thought it best to step down.

SVLET member Louis Pandolfi will take over as acting chair.  “The Task Force has exceeded my greatest expectations and I know it will continue in its professional investigation of the impacts of the landfill expansion on the residents and businesses in our Community”, Williamson said.

“Task Force members will surely miss the leadership that Barbra has provided for over three years, during which she has worked tirelessly to protect Simi Valley from the negative environmental impacts that will result from the proposed landfill expansion”  said Charles Blaugrund Task Force Member. “We wish her success in her new assignment with Mayor Huber.”

Various members of the community showed up to speak. Ben Gilbert, owner of Welcome to the Neighborhood Magazine, spoke about the positive benefits of Waste Management as a contributing community member. Others spoke favorably about Waste Management’s processing of waste, turning the methane gases into electricity. Former Council Candidate Ken Sandberg chose to speak about what he refers to as lies and deception on the part of the Landfill Taskforce.

Mark McDonald, owner of SiteServer in Simi Valley, spoke of the green nature of Waste Management’s business. He talked about Waste Management’s business being under strict state and federal regulations regarding the every day operations, suggesting that WM’s business will not be harmful to the community. Other speakers discussed air quality not being a significant issue, also detailing proactive measures to counteract the emission of greenhouse gases.

Harry VanDyck represented the Simi Valley Chamber of Commerce, indicating the Chamber Boards favorable position for the expansion of the landfill.

But it wasn’t all sunshine and roses…

The President of the Big Sky association put it simply enough. He likes Waste Management as a business, he believes they do a good job and that they should be allowed to continue to do a good job. However, he just doesn’t want the landfill to get any bigger than it already is. He commended Barbra Williamson for her work on the Landfill Expansion Taskforce, but also expressed concern that Big Sky home values will not recover from the expansion on the landfill.

Alice Sterling of the Landfill Taskforce indicated that the expansion benefits are rare, if not non-existent. She clearly made the point that she and the Taskforce are against the landfill expansion as proposed. She asked the Mayor to take the high road and to work with the County to ensure that the landfill expansion does not proceed as proposed. Also from the Taskforce, Louis Pandolfi spoke about other situations where Waste Management was made to make-up the difference in home sale prices where it was deemed that their landfills impacted property values. His point: Waste Management can be made to make things right when community leaders require it.

I’ll reach out to Councilwoman Barbra Williamson for a transcript of her statement on the expansion agenda item. Her statement details the points of compliance requested by the Taskforce of WM. More to come over the next several weeks…

UPDATE: The Committee assembled to resume negotiations with Waste Management will consist of Mayor Huber, Councilwoman Barbra Williamson and City Manager Mike Sedell.

For information regarding the Landfill Expansion Taskforce, dates and schedules, as well as related documents, check out www.savesimi.com.

Simi Valley Landfill Expansion Task Force Announces Website Availability

Simi Valley –Barbra Williamson, Chair of the Simi Valley Landfill Expansion Task Force announced today that the Task Force has created a website available for viewing at savesimi.com  Responding to numerous requests by interested community members concerned about the negative impacts of the proposed Simi Valley Landfill expansion by Waste Management, Inc., Ms. Williamson states, “This website makes it easy for members of the public to contact the Task Force directly and share their points of view with us. I receive inquiries daily on how people can get involved in the Task Force and learn more about the landfill expansion. This gives them an opportunity.”

Found on the website is an overview of the landfill expansion, highlights of critical impacts effecting Simi Valley and neighboring communities, links to forward thinking waste-to-energy techniques and documents associated with the Task Force. Enlisting the aid of local college students, the creation of the website is one example of the commitment of volunteers to inform the community of the impacts resulting from a three-fold expansion of the landfill.

———————————————————————————————————
The Simi Valley Landfill Expansion Task Force is an independent community group formed in 2007 by Simi Valley City Councilwoman Barbra Williamson and members of the community. The Taskforce is not affiliated with the City of Simi Valley or any other government body. Its mission is to keep the public informed and engaged on issues involving the Simi Valley Landfill and Recycling Center’s proposed expansion currently under consideration by the County of Ventura.

####

Mayor-elect Bob Huber spoke as well, identifying WM as a large Texas billion dollar corporation that produced a press release that he found offensive, standing up for Councilwoman Williamson’s right to free speech. Additional speakers suggested alternatives to the large landfill regarding waste disposal, like new state of the art facilities for disposal as well as rail transport to ship waste to landfills outside of Simi Valley.

The number of folks there to speak out in favor of Waste Management: ZERO!

During Council Comments, Barbra Williamson took a few minutes to recite a prepared presentation on her thoughts regarding Waste Management’s recent position. It was a strong, moving statement that I would like to share with you hear. I’m hoping to have a transcript of the presentation later this afternoon.

It’s a terrible position that we’re in as the approval deadline approaches for this landfill. From my observations, the landfill expansion has been surrounded by a mix-up of fear inducing statements and confusing, sometimes conflicting figures. Most people have taken either a firm pro or anti position against the landfill, but for those who want to study the facts and make an educated decision, it’s difficult. Every seemingly credible source is easily followed up by another just as credible source with conflicting data. With one side suing the other, and the other side now refusing to participate, clarity does not seem likely any time soon.

As an added note, Councilwoman Foster’s remarks regarding annexation seemed dead-on to me. Annexation cannot occur without willing participation from the land owner — Waste Management. With that said, as a City we should be laying the pressure on the County Board of Supervisors to ensure that we are represented.

I think its a fair assumption that considering the obvious support Bob Huber’s campaign had from the Simi Valley Police Officers Association, his signs were considered a bit more sacred to those on the POA. That’s something that has been hotly disputed, but the videos I found recently I believe are further evidence of that. I’d bet comfortably that the POA doesn’t have any video evidence of sign thefts of any other candidate. Admittedly, I have no details on how these videos were obtained.

A YouTube user named svpdpoa401 uploaded the following three videos. The quality is somewhat poor because it appears to be video shot of a video monitor playing the actual videos. The producer of the videos included amusing title cards and upbeat rock music. The origin and background of the video is unknown because the metadata on the uploads contains no detailed descriptions. However, you’ll clearly see hooligans swiping Huber signs and running away.

We continue to believe what we’ve always believed since the beginning of this project: that all Ventura County groups, residents and business people, and especially all Simi Valley residents, should expect us to be open and transparent about the project. And we have lived up to that.

Those comments, attributed to Mike Smith, Director of Operations for WM in Ventura County, were followed by these regarding the Task Force’s position on the legality of the expansion project:

The actions of Councilmember Williamson and her Task Force are confusing. We have been meeting with Councilmember Williamson and her Task Force since 2007 under the assumption that they were interested in making this a good project that would work for Simi Valley. Then, they file a lawsuit against the County and WM.
Then, they ask us to debate them while the lawsuit is awaiting a decision by the courts. Now, Councilmember Williamson tells the media that the Task Force isn’t suing us, even though they obviously are.

John Newell, Waste Management Corporate Counsel, concluded the statement with this to say about their plans for this case and the legality of the expansion:

WM, in our filing, is asking that the Court dismiss the lawsuit completely. This request is based on the undisputed facts that the proposed project is subject to a reimbursment agreement between the County and WM (i.e., the County is not spending taxpayer dollars) and that an independent body, CalRecycle has already determined that the project is properly described within the County Siting Element.

Simply put, the Task Force’s lawsuit fails on the facts and the law.

No word yet on how the Landfill Task Force intends to respond.

The statement can be read in its entirety by clicking here.

According to the article on the Sojka for Mayor website:

The Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District has received an $802,000 Proposition 84 grant for upgrades to the Arroyo Simi Greenway, officials announced Wednesday.

The district will use the grant to pay for the first phase of improvements — a cooperative effort that involves the district, city of Simi Valley and Ventura County Watershed Protection District.

The upgrades will include 2 miles of new paved trails, 17 new trail entries and installation of signs, benches, bicycle racks and educational exhibits.

The grant from the California Natural Resources Agency was announced at a news conference on the Arroyo Simi attended by park district, city, county and state officials.

I have spoken to Steve Sojka about the importance of Quality of Life issues in Simi Valley, discussing things like the Arroyo and freeway landscaping. With critical issues facing Simi Valley, he believes it’s important to share news about significant milestones like these in addition to other efforts, such as meeting with the surrounding business owners regarding the Farmers Insurance departure. As the Chair of the Arroyo Simi Greenway Improvement committee, Sojka is delighted with this accomplishment.

“The arroyo can truly become a valuable quality-of-life amenity for our current residents and well into the future for our kids and the next generation.”

The nice thing about this project is that it doesn’t burden the city’s finances. The funds for this project come from a grant specifically designed for public agencies to revamp their river waterways.

The grant from the California Natural Resources Agency was announced at a news conference on the Arroyo Simi attended by park district, city, county and state officials.

“We’re ecstatic about it,” said park district General Manager Larry Peterson. “This is a very big thing for us. I think it’s probably the largest competitive grant our agency has ever received in its 49 years.”

Peterson said that in addition to the grant, the park district and Simi Valley have each committed $100,000 toward the first phase of upgrades.

“It’s going to be a beautiful trail that will serve a lot of needs,” he said. “Phase 1 will be the next great step in this process.”

Keith Mashburn and the Landfill Expansion

The Simi Valley Landfill is an issue that is not only very important, it is also very complicated.  The fact of the matter is, yes I do have an opinion about the expansion, however, I feel that opinion is not based on enough information to attempt to convince others that my opinion is is the best option for the residents of Simi Valley.

I truly believe in transparency and integrity in ones public life.  Based on my desire to be elected to the Simi Valley City Council, I feel it is appropriate to publicly disclose my relationship with Mike Smith, the manager of the Simi Valley landfill.  Mike and I are friends on a social level. We meet at sporting events, and our families get together for dinner and birthday celebrations etc.  Mike and I have agreed to limit our political discussions and have also agreed that regardless of the election outcome, we are committed to remaining friends.  It must be noted, that prior to my decision to run for council, we never discussed local politics at all.

When asked, Mike said I could post my sign on Waste Management property at two locations.  Mike was very clear that all candidates for City Council can post their signs at these two locations.  I would never stoop so low, as to ask or suggest, that only my sign be allowed in a particular location.  Mike has not offered to endorse me or help my campaign in any way.  I have not, and will not ask him, or his company, to support me in my council run.  I have been to the landfill twice to take tours and would recommend the tour to anyone, as I had no idea what really took place at a landfill.

With the above said, I feel it is the opinion of the residents of Simi Valley that is most important when making a decision on the expansion of the landfill.  As a candidate I believe it is my obligation to learn as much as I can about the expansion and to share that information in an unbiased manner with the general population of the City of Simi Valley.  As a political candidate, I will be contacting Waste Management, most likely Mike Smith, and asking for detailed information regarding the proposed expansion.

Currently the residents of Simi Valley are at a distinct disadvantage as to control or input into the expansion discussions.  We are at the mercy of the County of Ventura and can only hope they will do the right thing for Simi Valley.  I agree with those that have called for annexation.  Yes this should have been done long ago, but, rather than look back, we need to move forward and work to give the citizens of Simi Valley a voice in this important issue.  I could care less who gets credit for being the first to call for annexation.  I doubt the citizen/taxpayer plans on presenting a trophy to the one who called for it first.

I call on the current council to move forward with the annexation process.  I will support them in this action and make myself available to help the process move forward in an expedient manner.  This is about placing the taxpayer residents of our city above any political ambitions.  Our citizens deserve as much control over this expansion as possible.  It is the obligation of the current council to obtain that control and then discuss with the citizens the pros and cons of the expansion.

I don’t know that we as a city will ever be able to take control.  I do know if we don’t try to gain some control through annexation or another yet to be determined means, we will have none.  In my opinion to sit back and do nothing is not an option.

I would very much like to meet with any Simi Valley citizens that would like to share their opinions and ideas regarding the expansion.  In particular, I would like to hear from anyone who lives in the Big Sky area of Simi Valley.  I believe if any group of homes is being impacted by the landfill now, or in the future if the expansion takes place, it will be the residents of Big Sky.

I know and understand that elected officials are delegated the authority to vote on behalf of the constituency that elected them.  I feel that this practice works on most issues and it is expected of the elected to make many decisions for their constituents.  There are however issues that come up that may have a profound effect on a community and I feel it is the duty of the elected official to reach out and measure the desire of the community.

I am available to meet with anyone interested in meeting with me on this subject, or for that matter, on any subject related to the City of Simi Valley and my candidacy for City Council.  I go to IT’S A GRIND coffee house on Cochran near Madera on most mornings  at 8:00 am.  You may contact me at keithmashburn@gmail.com to confirm I will be at the coffee house on the morning you plan on coming.  E mail me if a different time and location works better for you and we can work out the details.  To represent you I feel it is very important to discuss your views.

To be clear, the City of Simi Valley will NOT be the ones to determine if the expansion can proceed as plans regardless of annexation. That duty will remain with the County Board of Supervisors.

There are benefits to proceeding with annexation, however. For example, if the land that surrounds the landfill is going to be developed in any way (e.g. a shopping center), annexation would put the City in control of approving or denying those plans. Having said that, has annexation ever been a considering since the landfill expansion was first proposed. The answer is… yes!

Here’s a quote from Mike Smith of Waste Management that appeared in the Ventura County Star this morning:

Mike Smith, director of operations for Waste Management Ventura County, said he believes the company and Williamson “want the same thing — to keep Simi Valley clean and green.”

“We at WM are committed to working with the city of Simi to ensure that the landfill can continue to benefit the city and its residents, regardless of whether the city considers annexation or not,” Smith said. “In fact, we have been discussing annexation with officials from the city of Simi Valley for more than three years.”

Mike Smith, director of operations for Waste Management Ventura County, said he believes the company and Williamson “want the same thing — to keep Simi Valley clean and green.”

“We at WM are committed to working with the city of Simi to ensure that the landfill can continue to benefit the city and its residents, regardless of whether the city considers annexation or not,” Smith said. “In fact, we have been discussing annexation with officials from the city of Simi Valley for more than three years.”

Read the details by clicking here…

If the discussion has been going on that long, I’m definitely curious to know how long this process takes and how quickly it can be resolved. I know Councilwoman Barbra Williamson has been THE outspoken Council Member on this topic. I suspect her battle has been an uphill one the whole time for it to take this long for annexation to make it to the agenda, especially with WM being open to the discussions for that length of time.

When the topic of annexation is behind us, I’d be very interested to hear all the candidates weigh in on whether or not they are for or against the expansion itself. For me, that is the ultimate topic regarding the expansion.

UPDATED: I’m getting a lot of email and messages from folks who believe my facts are incorrect regarding whether or not annexation will provide the city with the power to approve or deny the expansion.

The conversation most frequently referenced is between me and Barbra Williamson in my comments section on the landfill related post on September 7th:

Mike Chandler: Barbra, could you answer this just to make sure I’m clear:

1 – Would annexation give the city the power to approve or deny the expansion?

2 – Is it true that regardless of whether or not the landfill is annexed that the city would never have control over operating specifics, such as “tipping fees”, rates, daily capacity, etc., including the landfill’s service region (LA and beyond)?

3 – Would annexation have a positive impact on the city’s bottom line?

Barbra Williamson: 1) yes
2) yes
3) maybe but I am more thinking yes.

Fair enough.  However, in the Ventura County Star article I referenced earlier in this post, I read the following quote:

Williamson, chairwoman of the Simi Valley Landfill Expansion Task Force, wants the City Council to consider annexing the landfill so the city can have more oversight of the site’s surrounding areas.

“Because technically, by state law, the city can have nothing to do with the running of the landfill itself,” she said in an interview. “That has to be under the jurisdiction of the county. But if in fact there is going to be development in the surrounding area, the city needs to be in the controlling seat.”

Barbra is very approachable and always willing to respond to my requests for clarification (thank you, Barbra!). Via email, she clarified that in fact the County is the single entity that will determine whether or not the landfill can be expanded per the proposal, regardless of whether the property is annexed.

I think the confusion on this fact was based on the comments I mentioned above, but this is the latest confirmation I received on the matter.