http://video.foxnews.com/v/1423816220001/hundreds-arrested-in-chaotic-occupy-oakland-protests

Long-Term Care

You can include in medical expenses amounts paid for qualified long-term care services and premiums paid for qualified long-term care insurance contracts.
Qualified Long-Term Care Insurance Contracts

A qualified long-term care insurance contract is an insurance contract that provides only coverage of qualified long-term care services. The contract must:

1. Be guaranteed renewable,

2. Not provide for a cash surrender value or other money that can be paid, assigned, pledged, or borrowed,

3. Provide that refunds, other than refunds on the death of the insured or complete surrender or cancellation of the contract, and dividends under the contract must be used only to reduce future premiums or increase future benefits, and

4. Generally not pay or reimburse expenses incurred for services or items that would be reimbursed under Medicare, except where Medicare is a secondary payer, or the contract makes per diem or other periodic payments without regard to expenses.

The amount of qualified long-term care premiums you can include is limited. You can include the following as medical expenses on Schedule A (Form 1040).

1. Qualified long-term care premiums up to the amounts shown below.

a. Age 40 or under – $340.

b. Age 41 to 50 – $640.

c. Age 51 to 60 – $1,270.

d. Age 61 to 70 – $3,390.

e. Age 71 or over – $4,240.

2. Unreimbursed expenses for qualified long-term care services.

Note. The limit on premiums is for each person.

Also, if you are an eligible retired public safety officer, you cannot include premiums for long-term care insurance if you elected to pay these premiums with tax-free distributions from a qualified retirement plan made directly to the insurance provider and these distributions would otherwise have been included in your income.

Here is some information related to Legal Defense premiums…..
Deductions Subject to the 2% Limit

You can deduct certain expenses as miscellaneous itemized deductions on Schedule A
(Form 1040). You can claim the amount of expenses that is more than 2% of your adjusted gross income. You figure your deduction on Schedule A by subtracting 2% of your adjusted gross income from the total amount of these expenses. Your adjusted gross income is the amount on Form 1040, line 38.

Generally, you apply the 2% limit after you apply any other deduction limit. For example, you apply the 50% (or 80%) limit on business-related meals and entertainment (discussed in chapter 26) before you apply the 2% limit.

Deductions subject to the 2% limit are discussed in the three categories in which you report them on Schedule A (Form 1040).

· Unreimbursed employee expenses (line 21).

· Tax preparation fees (line 22).

· Other expenses (line 23).
Unreimbursed Employee Expenses (Line 21)

Generally, the following expenses are deductible on Schedule A (Form 1040), line 21.

You can deduct only unreimbursed employee expenses that are:

· Paid or incurred during your tax year,

· For carrying on your trade or business of being an employee, and

· Ordinary and necessary.

An expense is ordinary if it is common and accepted in your trade, business, or profession. An expense is necessary if it is appropriate and helpful to your business. An expense does not have to be required to be considered necessary.

Examples of unreimbursed employee expenses are listed next. The list is followed by discussions of additional unreimbursed employee expenses.

· Business bad debt of an employee.

· Education that is work related. (See chapter 27.)

· Legal fees related to your job.

· Licenses and regulatory fees.

· Malpractice insurance premiums.

· Medical examinations required by an employer.

· Occupational taxes.

· Passport for a business trip.

· Subscriptions to professional journals and trade magazines related to your work.

· Travel, transportation, entertainment, and gifts related to your work. (See chapter 26.)
Business Liability Insurance

You can deduct insurance premiums you paid for protection against personal liability for wrongful acts on the job.
Damages for Breach of Employment Contract

If you break an employment contract, you can deduct damages you pay your former employer that are attributable to the pay you received from that employer.

SB1399 was aimed at saving California millions of dollars in prison health care expenses by allowing the parole of medically incapacitated inmates. It’s unfortunate and outrageous that this law is being used by cop killers like Gerald Youngberg to seek parole.

In 1973, Youngberg took the lives of San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department Lt. Al Stewart, CHP Officer Larry Wetterling, and gas station attendant Robert Jenkins in execution-style murders. He was sentenced to death, but his sentence (along with hundreds of others’) was overturned in the mid-1970s when the California Supreme Court declared the state’s version of the death penalty unconstitutional.

Since then, Youngberg has applied for parole on 11 occasions and been denied each time. His last denial came in 2010 when he was told he would have to wait five years to reapply. But the enactment of SB1399 has made possible another hearing on Feb. 8, 2012, when Youngberg’s application for a medical parole will be heard by the Board of Parole Hearings at High Desert State Prison in Susanville.

“Although Youngberg is precisely the type of person who was not intended for medical parole, drafting provisions of that law make him eligible for an application,” said Sacramento Lobbyist John Lovell. “Since he has received a certification from the head physician at High Desert State Prison, defeating this effort will be a daunting one. This is true even though the stroke which afflicts Youngberg took place eight years ago, and he is not totally disabled. The only restrictions on his prison activities are that he is confined to a wheel chair and must have a lower bunk in a cell.”

Law enforcement agencies and organizations throughout California strenuously oppose parole of any kind for Youngberg. The League is joining the effort and encourages others to do the same.

Letters opposing Youngberg’s parole should reference “Penal Code 3550 Parole Hearing for Gerald Youngberg, Inmate Number B50097” and be sent to:

High Desert State Prison
Attn: C&PR/Records Office –Board Desk
475-750 Rice Canyon Road
P.O. Box 750
Susanville, CA 96127

Board of Parole Hearings
Attn: Lifer Scheduling Analysts
PO Box 4036
Sacramento, CA 95812-4036

We also wish to take this opportunity to call on SB1399 author Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, to consider amending his legislation to preclude the use of “medical parole” for anyone convicted of murdering a law enforcement officer.

Lee Saunders

Monday, January 2, 2012

Despite those who are all-too-willing to play Chicken Little, the sky is not falling on the California pension system.

Here are the facts. Over the past 20 years, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System has earned an average annual investment return of 8.4 percent, which is more than the fund needs to ensure it can pay long-term benefits. Since the market crash of 2008, CalPERS has recovered from its losses and is now funded at 75 percent, a healthy level by the mark of rating agencies.

A recent report on public pensions released by the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research flies in the face of these facts, favoring instead trumped-up assumptions that CalPERS earnings are much lower. For reasons unknown, or at least unsaid, the report asserts that CalPERS earnings stand at just 6.2 percent per year, a rate they suggest is breeding a growing shortfall in the fund.

That is not a fact, and SIEPR knows it. SIEPR knows that 6.2 percent isn’t the actual earnings rate. Instead, that number reflects “the long-term historical average for investors allocating capital in the same manner as pension funds.” In other words, they found investors who put money into the market in a way similar to how pension funds invest and used those results instead of CalPERS’ actual historical record.

California Treasurer Bill Lockyer resigned as an SIEPR advisory board member after the report was issued, noting tersely: “When it comes to public pensions, maybe SIEPR should stand for ‘Stanford Institute to Eviscerate People’s Retirement.’ ”

This isn’t the first time SIEPR has gotten it wrong. Last winter, they claimed that CalPERS’ actual earnings were 4.14 percent, the so-called risk-free earnings rate. That inaccuracy spurred a Little Hoover Commission report, causing public panic over a pension crisis that doesn’t exist. After catching much flak from economists, SIEPR issued the new report with its slightly higher earnings projections.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, pension costs are among the smallest and slowest-growing in state government, making up less than 3 percent of the total budget. All the while, public-sector unions are helping to ensure that pension funds remain stable and their benefits affordable.

That is not to say that there isn’t work to be done. While pensions account for less than 3 percent of the budget, corporate tax loopholes amount to tens of billions lost from the budget. Even after budget cuts, new loopholes rob public education and other programs of $1 billion per year, that money instead going to fill the coffers of Wall Street corporations.

Facts are facts. While we know CalPERS and the California Teachers’ Retirement System are irreplaceable sources of retirement security for hundreds of thousands of workers, the defined-contribution system favored by its critics is badly broken. According to the Wall Street Journal, the median household headed by a person aged 60 to 62 with a 401(k) has less than one-quarter of the savings needed for retirement. That’s a fact we ignore at our own peril.

Lee Saunders is the secretary-treasurer of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

By JAMES DAO

OAKLAND, Calif. — Days after Jean Quan was elected mayor in the fall of 2010, the Oakland police put a wheel clamp on her silver Prius while it was parked outside City Hall. She cursed her husband for not paying the family’s parking tickets and braced for the embarrassing news articles.

So it began: the rookie year from hell. In May, the city attorney quit, lambasting City Hall as being corrupt. In October, the police chief followed suit, complaining about micromanagement. In November, voters rejected a tax that Ms. Quan had advocated to help fix a budget shortfall. December brought new talk that all three of Oakland’s professional sports teams might leave for fancier digs.

But the problem that has really besieged Ms. Quan, the first woman and first Asian-American to be the city’s mayor, has been the Occupy Oakland movement, which in October turned a grassy plaza in front of City Hall into a muddy staging ground for anticorporate protests.

In a dizzying series of reversals, Ms. Quan initially embraced the protest, then ordered the camp cleared, then allowed the demonstrators to return after the police seriously injured one of them, a Marine veteran. Two weeks later, she ordered the plaza cleared again, citing reports that “anarchists” were fomenting violence.

Now, Frank H. Ogawa Plaza remains empty most days, but Ms. Quan’s mayoralty is teetering. In a city known for its flamboyant and colorful mayors, she has emerged as one of its most controversial. Conservatives accuse her of coddling the protesters, while former allies on the left are incensed that she ordered the plaza cleared at all.

And now two rival groups, one started by a black community activist, the other by a white former mayoral candidate, are vying to have her recalled.

“She should have declared a position and stuck with it,” said Dan Siegel, a longtime friend and adviser who broke with the mayor after the police cleared the plaza the second time but who opposes a recall. “The problem was going back and forth, which wound up making everyone angry with her.”

For Ms. Quan, 62, a longtime civil rights activist and former union organizer whose husband and 29-year-old daughter participated in Occupy protests, the possibility of being undone by youthful demonstrators poses a painful paradox.

To this day, she fondly recalls being “a mouthy little Chinese kid” who chided a dean at the University of California, Berkeley, in the 1960s for threatening to revoke her scholarship because she had posted leaflets calling for a grape boycott on campus. Early in the Occupy campaign, she issued statements saying she endorsed the “pro-99 percent activists.” (Yet when she appeared at a recent panel event with protest organizers, she was loudly heckled.)

In an interview over matzo ball soup, Ms. Quan, who speaks so swiftly that her sentences sometimes tumble into each other, acknowledged sympathies for the protesters. “My background has made it emotionally harder” to order police actions against them, she said. “But I’m the mayor of the city. I have to make decisions based on being the mayor.”

To her critics, Ms. Quan’s ambivalence underscores what they consider her fundamental weakness: she remains, they say, more activist than executive, uncomfortable using police power to maintain order. And in Oakland — which had 90 homicides last year, three times as many as San Diego, despite being one-third the size — public safety is issue No. 1 for many voters.

“Her handling of Occupy was a classic example of her inability to lead,” said Charles Pine, a retiree who is helping to organize one of the recall drives. Or as a former city official put it: “She views herself as part of the group who are giving hell to the man. The problem is she is the man.”

Ms. Quan has had a particularly tense relationship with the police union, which endorsed her main rival for mayor and last month issued a letter calling her handling of the protests “confusing.”

The friction stems partly from her complaint that pay and pensions for the police consume half the city’s general fund budget, leaving little for social programs, parks and public works. Last year, as a city councilwoman, she supported the layoffs of about 100 officers and recruits, though she has hired back more than 50 since becoming mayor.

“I think a lot of police officers feel she doesn’t like them,” said Dominique Arotzarena, president of the Oakland Police Officers Association, which represents about 650 officers.

Critics have also attacked Ms. Quan’s crime-fighting strategy, which emphasizes focusing services as well as police patrols on 100 blocks that account for 90 percent of the city’s most violent crimes. “They think I’m too soft on crime because I want to do the intervention and prevention,” she said. “I just think I’m being smart.”

As for talk that she is indecisive, she bristles. “I do stuff based on data, not on rhetoric,” she said.

Ms. Quan grew up in Livermore, where her father, who died when she was 5, ran a restaurant. Though her family had been in California since the 19th century, she was the first member born in America, because anti-Chinese immigration laws had prevented her grandfathers from bringing their wives to the country.

At Berkeley, she and her future husband, Floyd Huen, helped organize a famous 1969 student strike demanding ethnic studies, then wrote the curriculum for an Asian-American course. The couple spent several years in Manhattan while Mr. Huen attended Yeshiva University’s medical school, then moved to Oakland, where Ms. Quan organized immigrant workers for the Service Employees International Union.

Her political career began almost accidentally in 1989 when, after mobilizing parents to fight the elimination of a school music program, she decided to run for the school board, winning in a Republican stronghold. “It was just sort of a continuation of my activism,” she said.

A 12-year stint on the board was followed by eight years on the City Council. Then came her stunning victory in last year’s 10-candidate mayoral race.

Under the city’s new voting system, which requires voters to rank their preferences, she was the first choice on less than a quarter of the ballots. But when second and third preferences were tallied, she emerged the winner of the four-year term, defeating the favorite, former State Senator Don Perata, by less than two percentage points.

Leonard Raphael, the treasurer of one of the recall committees, said Ms. Quan’s lack of a clear mandate might make her vulnerable. “I’m hoping that wrapping yourself in the mantle of progressivism isn’t good enough anymore if you are incompetent,” he said.

But it is far from clear that the recall groups have the resources to gather the nearly 20,000 signatures needed to put a recall on the ballot next year. They have also failed to coalesce around an alternative candidate — and if the recall question makes the ballot, a mayoral election will be held simultaneously. Mr. Perata has said he will not run.

At the same time, organized labor seems to be lining up behind the mayor, and her friends are beginning to mobilize.

“She is a fierce fighter and very well organized,” said Dick Spees, a former Republican city councilman who is friends with Ms. Quan. “And she will fight it to the end.”

OAKLAND—Strained by the Occupy Oakland movement, the city’s police department is struggling to provide adequate services, and morale has sunk to its lowest level in years, says a police-union representative.

Enlarge Image

 

MCT/Zuma PressOakland police and Occupy Oakland protesters clash on Washington Street in October. Officers faced criticism for some of tactics they used.

“It’s rough being an Oakland cop,” says Barry Donelan, vice president of the Oakland police union and a 10-year police officer. “We’re committed to servicing the community but morale is very low now.”

Mr. Donelan says things went downhill for the police when the Occupy Oakland movement began in late October. The Oakland Police Department devoted a third of its 645 officers to policing the demonstrators, leaving only two-thirds of the force to respond to emergency calls beyond the protest area, he says.

Mr. Donelan says this meant weeks of 12-to-14-hour shifts for many officers and numerous emergency calls going unanswered for lack of available police officers. Police officers have received overtime pay for this extra work.

The Oakland Police Department confirms the stretched force hasn’t been able to respond to all emergency calls.

Asked about understaffing and declining morale, Johanna Watson, a spokeswoman for the Oakland Police Department, said, “With such limited resources, it’s certainly had an effect on how we do our jobs.” She said managing the Occupy encampment and addressing high crime in the city has taxed the department and placed a heavy burden on officers.

Other police officers, who declined to be identified for publication, say morale has been damaged by lackluster public support from Oakland Mayor Jean Quan, and criticism from local and national media figures of some of the tactics used in a raid of the Occupy encampment in October. The mayor’s office declined to answer questions on this matter.

Mayor Quan has had a tempestuous relationship with the department, publicly trading barbs with the police union during contract negotiations earlier this year and over strategy concerning Occupy Oakland.

The fallout from the Occupy movement is the latest blow to this city’s police force. For the past two years, the pay and benefits of Oakland police officers have been reduced and there have been layoffs. The department says it now has 645 sworn officers, down from about 800 in late 2008.

Oakland city manager Deanna Santana says she realizes the police department is under a heavy strain. Ms. Santana says she is working to improve conditions for the OPD but budget constraints limit what she can do. She adds that she regrets the missed emergency calls.

“I value my police officers and what they have been through is very difficult,” Ms. Santana says. “I have apologized to some of my officers for some of the missteps and I’m committed to improving conditions for them. We have to find a way to get through what all consider unsustainable.”

Adding to the recent turmoil, police chief Anthony Batts resigned in October, citing too many layers of oversight and little support from city leaders for policing tactics such as youth curfews and not allowing suspected gang members to congregate.

The Oakland Police Department is preparing for a hearing in January before U.S. District Court Judge Thelton Henderson, which could determine if Oakland’s police force is to be placed under federal control.

The hearing comes after the city agreed to have federal monitors observe the department, a move stemming from the settlement of a police-brutality and corruption case in 2002. The settlement requires the OPD to adhere to a checklist of conduct codes. In October, Judge Henderson issued an order threatening a federal takeover of the OPD if reforms weren’t hastened—an unprecedented move for a police department, according to the Department of Justice.

Ms. Watson, the police spokeswoman, and Mr. Donelan, the union vice president, declined to comment on the hearing with Judge Henderson.

“I don’t see anything positive at all happening in Oakland,” says William Bratton, former police chief of New York City and Los Angeles and now chairman of Kroll Inc, a global risk assessment firm. He isn’t advising either the police union or the city of Oakland. “It’s a perfect storm of bad: too much oversight, not enough support from city leaders, too few officers,” Mr. Bratton says.

In some neighborhoods, community leaders say they have seen the ripple effects of an understaffed police force and declining police morale. In the Prescott neighborhood in West Oakland, where recently six people were injured and a toddler killed in a shootout, locals say officers were barely present during Occupy and still don’t always respond to emergency calls.

“The police department is in a very tough position because over the last few years there has not been much stability,” says Marcus Johnson, a community leader in the Prescott neighborhood. The former mechanical engineer also serves on the city’s Neighborhood Crime Prevention Council, a group that operates as a liaison between neighborhoods and the OPD.

“As a citizen, how can you feel safe when you have such turnover and uncertainty in the police department,” Mr. Johnson said.

Ms. Watson says she understands residents’ concerns and the department is working to address them but with limited resources and staffing “we can only do so much.”

Judge Henderson, meanwhile, who has been keeping tabs on the Oakland department since the 2002 settlement of the police corruption case, said in October that a federal takeover of the OPD “remains a potential remedy that may be needed to finally achieve the reforms in a reasonable period.” He declined to comment for this article.

Rocky Lucia, an attorney representing the OPD union, says it is unclear how Judge Henderson will view the handling of the Occupy movement by the police department. But Mr. Lucia adds that he hopes the judge takes into consideration the many issues OPD has had to deal with.

Write to Bobby White at bobby.white@wsj.com

State Treasurer Bill Lockyer resigned from a pension advisory panel to protest a study it was affiliated with that called for reducing retirement benefits for current public employees and overhauling the boards that oversee the public pension systems.

The study was issued by the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and authored by Stanford public policy professor and former Democratic Assemblyman Joe Nation. It warned that the worsening finances of public pension systems in California would continue to squeeze state budgets unless there were significant changes.

In quitting the institute’s pension advisory panel, Lockyer said he questioned the conclusions and methodology of the study.

“When it comes to public pensions, maybe SIEPR should stand for ‘Stanford Institute to Eviscerate People’s Retirement,’ ” said Joe DeAnda, the treasurer’s press secretary. Lockyer said the study did not adequately consider the legal impediments to reducing benefits for current employees and ignored  research indicating that retirement systems perform better when their boards include members of the retirement plan.

Nation said public pension systems need more dramatic changes than those proposed recently by Gov. Jerry Brown. “Although it offers many positive elements, Governor Brown’s proposal provides only modest additional cost savings,” the study said.

Link:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2011/12/state-treasurer-resigns-in-protest-from-pension-advisory-panel.html

This year we will be doing the raffle a little different so we can get done earlier for all to enjoy dancing and socializing. Tickets are again $40 per person and you can reserve a table for 10.

Anyone who buys their tickets during the month of December 2011, will be given,
are you ready…..

10 Free Raffle Tickets!!!!!

Tickets will go on sale, Monday, December 5th, so get your tickets early as his offer is only good through December! Any questions you can email Renee or call the OPOA at 510-834-9670.

On behalf of the 645 Oakland police officers we represent, this letter comes to you out of duty to protect the Oakland community and its citizens.

Oakland police officers are the 99% and we understand and sympathize with your message. We respect your right to peaceful protest.

We are also sworn to protect the citizens of Oakland. Right now, Oakland is in a state of emergency.

Our police officers are the 99% struggling in Oakland neighborhoods every day to contain the 1% who rob, steal, rape and murder our law-abiding citizens. The Occupy Oakland protest, now 30 days old, is taking our police officers out of Oakland neighborhoods and away from protecting the citizens of Oakland.

In an average city in California, this might not be of emergency proportions for its citizens. Oakland is not an “average” city – we have the highest violent crime rate in California. We are the 5th most violent city in the United States – with more shootings and homicides than any city west of the Mississippi.

Last night’s murder, right in the epicenter of Occupy Oakland, is unacceptable. So is the violence being promoted by “renegade” protesters who are lighting firebombs, destroying property and attacking police.

What is even more tragic is that homicides are a frequent occurrence in Oakland. This is the real emergency: Yesterday’s murder was Oakland’s 101st homicide of 2011. It is time for us to stop directing all of our efforts at policing the small enclave of “Occupy Oakland” and get back to our job of protecting the citizens of Oakland in the neighborhoods where our residents live.

The events of recent weeks have shown that many occupiers at Frank Ogawa Plaza are citizens of other communities with limited interest in preserving the greater good and safety of our City.

Please, we ask you: Leave Frank Ogawa Plaza peacefully and immediately so Oakland Police can get back to work fighting the devastating crime that’s occurring in our neighborhoods.

You have sent the world a strong message; now it is time to go home. Your leaving today, peacefully, of your own free will, on the 30th day, will send a message to Oakland that you care about our citizens and respect our city.

With last night’s homicide, in broad daylight, in the middle of rush hour, Frank Ogawa Plaza is no longer safe. Please leave peacefully, with your heads held high, so we can get police officers back to work fighting crime in Oakland neighborhoods.

Thank you.

We represent the 645 police officers who work hard every day to protect the citizens of Oakland. We, too, are the 99% fighting for better working conditions, fair treatment and the ability to provide a living for our children and families. We are severely understaffed with many City beats remaining unprotected by police during the day and evening hours.

As your police officers, we are confused.

On Tuesday, October 25th, we were ordered by Mayor Quan to clear out the encampments at Frank Ogawa Plaza and to keep protesters out of the Plaza. We performed the job that the Mayor’s Administration asked us to do, being fully aware that past protests in Oakland have resulted in rioting, violence and destruction of property.

Then, on Wednesday, October 26th, the Mayor allowed protesters back in – to camp out at the very place they were evacuated from the day before.

To add to the confusion, the Administration issued a memo on Friday, October 28th to all City workers in support of the “Stop Work” strike scheduled for Wednesday, giving all employees, except for police officers, permission to take the day off.

That’s hundreds of City workers encouraged to take off work to participate in the protest against “the establishment.” But aren’t the Mayor and her Administration part of the establishment they are paying City employees to protest? Is it the City’s intention to have City employees on both sides of a skirmish line?

It is all very confusing to us.

Meanwhile, a message has been sent to all police officers: Everyone, including those who have the day off, must show up for work on Wednesday. This is also being paid for by Oakland taxpayers. Last week’s events alone cost Oakland taxpayers over $1 million.

The Mayor and her Administration are beefing up police presence for Wednesday’s work strike they are encouraging and even “staffing,” spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for additional police presence – at a time when the Mayor is also asking Oakland residents to vote on an $80 parcel tax to bail out the City’s failing finances.

All of these mixed messages are confusing.

We love Oakland and just want to do our jobs to protect Oakland residents. We respectfully ask the citizens of Oakland to join us in demanding that our City officials, including Mayor Quan, make sound decisions and take responsibility for these decisions. Oakland is struggling – we need real leaders NOW who will step up and lead – not send mixed messages. Thank you for listening.

“We appreciate that the Board of Parole Hearings, having repeatedly found Powell not suitable for parole on his ‘life with the possibility of parole’ sentence, is once again recommending against his release and helping to ensure that he serves the full sentence for his heinous crime. We also salute all the members of Ian Campbell’s family, the public, and law enforcement officers and officials whose opposition provided the Board of Parole with ample reason to deny this murderer’s request.”

A summary of Gregory Powell’s horrific crime can be read here.

Powell was originally sentenced to death, but that sentence was reduced to life in prison with the possibility of parole when the courts struck down California’s death penalty in 1972. LAPD officers have not forgotten this horrific crime and we are thankful that the parole board did not overlook the details and cold-blooded nature of this killing of an LAPD officer.

In this new era of reduced prison sentences and the state’s realignment plan that will result in as many as 52,000 felons being sent to county jails instead of state prisons, it is important that individuals sentenced to life with the possibility of parole stay in prison for the remainder of their lives, irrespective of infirmities or old age, unless they are granted parole. Gregory Powell’s life sentence is not a sentence of ‘imprisonment until a terminal illness develops.’ The purpose of a life sentence is defeated if, near the end of their lives, cold-blooded murderers like Powell are released so they can spend their last days in comfort.

“While Officer Ian Campbell can never be brought back, nor the damage and heartache caused by Gregory Powell be undone, justice was upheld through the recommendation against granting his request for compassionate release and ensuring he draws his last breath while confined behind prison bars.”

Convicted of the murder of on-duty Los Angeles police officer Ian Campbell, whom he kidnapped and later executed, “Onion Field” killer Gregory Powell was sentenced to death. That sentence was then reduced to life in prison with possibility of parole when the Courts struck down California’s death penalty in 1972.

For those who may have forgotten the horrific crime, on March 9, 1963, Ian and his partner, Karl Hettinger, were assigned to Hollywood Division. Ian and Karl stopped a car with two suspicious people, Gregory Powell and Jimmy Smith. Ian and Karl did not know that Powell and Smith were both armed and looking for a liquor store to rob. As Ian approached the car, Powell took Ian as a hostage. Karl surrendered his gun under the threat that if he did not, Ian would be killed. Both officers were kidnapped. Ian was forced to drive at gunpoint with Karl in the back seat. They were taken to a deserted onion field near Bakersfield where Powell executed Ian. As Ian lay on the ground, Smith shot him four times. Karl managed to escape. Both Powell and Smith were arrested within twenty-four hours of the murder. Joseph Wambaugh wrote the book, “The Onion Field” about Ian’s murder.

Now, however, Powell wants another chance at getting out of prison. He has cancer, and believes that fact should justify a “compassionate release” from prison. Never mind that he showed Ian Campbell absolutely no mercy and tried to murder Campbell’s partner Karl Hettinger that same night in that same onion field.

Apparently, Powell and his attorney fail to comprehend the meaning of the phrase “life in prison.” Put simply, it means that unless granted parole, you will stay in prison for the remainder of your natural life, and die in that prison, whether by cancer, a heart attack, or old age. Powell is not a suitable candidate for parole, as demonstrated by the 11 separate denials for parole since 1972.

Given that, Powell’s life sentence is not a sentence of “imprisonment until a terminal illness develops.” It should be expected that the inmate will stay and die in prison. It defeats the purpose of a life sentence if, at the end of life, cold-blooded murderers like Powell are let out so their last days can be spent in comfort. Part of the deserved punishment for his brutal crime is that he spend his last waking moments deprived of freedom.

As you may have noticed there have not been blogs posted on the website for a while.  The reason for those who are receiving the member emails is obvious.  The OPOA member email list now includes the lion share of members, but there are still a few holdouts.  If you would like to take part and receive periodic emails, including the monthly messages from your association please email your Name (Last, First), Serial Number (8000), & email address to the OPOA at opoamembers@gmail.com.  Do not send us your city email address, it will not be included.

Thank you.

Barry Donelan
President, OPOA

May 17, 2011

Contact: Sergeant Dom Arotzarena or Mary Jo Rossi (510) 834-9670
Oakland Police Officers Initiate “Supporter of the Oakland

Police Officers’ Association” Community Outreach Program in

Commemoration of National Police Week May 15 – 21

Oakland – In commemoration of National Police Week (May 15-21), the Oakland Police Officers’ Association announced today the start-up of a new community outreach program to Oakland citizens and community leaders to help fight crime in Oakland.

Last year, the Congressional Quarterly Press ranked Oakland as the most dangerous city in California and the fifth most dangerous city in the United States. Oakland has been home to an average of 120 murders a year for each of the past five years. Last Friday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a report naming Oakland as the third highest city in the United States (New Orleans and St. Louis rated highest) for youth homicides of children 10 to 19 years of age.

“Violent crime is up and the number of police officers on the streets is down,” said Sergeant Dom Arotzarena, President of the 645 member Oakland Police Officers’ Association. “More than ever we need to work together as a community to fight violent crime in our neighborhoods.”

OPOA is sending emails and letters to nearly 30,000 Oakland residents and community leaders inviting them to become a part of the OPOA’s crime prevention network. Signing up is free and is strictly voluntary. Residents who sign-up to become a part of the Association’s crime prevention network will receive a FREE “Supporter of the Oakland Police Officers Association” decal which can be placed on a vehicle, home or business window.

Each month, OPOA Supporters will receive, via email, updates on crime incidents in the Oakland community, as well as informative tips on how to prevent crime in our neighborhoods.

OPOA will also provide emergency preparedness tips for citizens who sign up for monthly emails, including how to prepare your family or business for a big earthquake or other catastrophic event.

“Our police and the community need to work together to prevent youth homicides, which are devastating the Oakland community,” said Arotzarena. “We are all working with limited resources, making it even more important that we work together as a community to stop the violence.”

National Police Week, May 15 – 21, was established by proclamation in 1962 by President John F. Kennedy, in which tens of thousands law enforcement officers from around the world converge on Washington D.C. to honor fallen peace officers who have died in the line of duty.

The Oakland Officers’ Association values the opportunity to be in better communication with citizens on important public safety issues and community concerns and we hope residents will take the time to sign up by visiting www.OPOA.org and clicking on the Sign Up decal on the website home page.

###

News coverage links:

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/east_bay&id=8115170

http://www.ktvu.com/news/27792131/detail.html

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/05/05/fallen-oakland-police-officers-honored-heckler-mars-ceremony/

http://www.insidebayarea.com/top-stories/ci_18002123

http://www.myfitv.com/videos/830899/kntv-bay-area-nbc-oakland-salutes-fallen-officers

http://www.ktvu.com/news/27792131/detail.html

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/video?id=8115181&rss=rss-kgo-video-8115181

I know you come to work every day knowing the risks; I also know how committed and dedicated you are to serving the Oakland community.  Just a reminder:  As violence escalates in our community, there is help available for all Oakland police officers as we struggle to deal with the ongoing work load.  We have a great peer support team that includes our police chaplain and psychologist.  Please use these resources if there is a need to decompress.

I am working daily with our OPOA Board Members to manage the many complex political issues, as well as looking out for the well-being of all our officers and your families.  I would not be out-of-line to say that we have our work cut out for us.  Our challenges are many.

In addition to our 663 officers doing the work of 1,200, we are grappling with many other important issues to OPOA members, including:  Meeting with Mayor Quan and her administration, as well as Chief Batts.  We have discussed:  City budget issues, staffing, radio communication, police vehicle, computer, equipment and facility challenges, officer safety and contract issues.  To date, Mayor Quan has not presented a plan.

With regards to the OPOA Board, Todd Bergeron, William Pappas and Tony Banks did not run for the Board this year.  They will be sorely missed.  Congratulations to new Board Members Jim “Joey” Gordon, Dan Tirapelli and Freddie Mestas.  Together they bring 75 years of law enforcement experience and we look forward to their contributions on the Board.

In addition, two Executive Board positions have changed.  Brian Hubbard and Wendy Rae voluntarily stepped down from the Secretary and Treasurer Positions.  Devin Underwood and Jake Bassett have taken over their positions.  Both Brian and Wendy put in long hours and gave astounding efforts to this membership.  They leave big shoes to fill.  Devon and Jake are both mid level career guys within OPD and bring multiple skills, years of experience, and a great enthusiasm to serve.

In the community, OPOA is sponsoring a North Oakland Little League baseball team.  We are hoping for a championship this year!  The OPD family raised $3,500 dollars for the Perez family.  Lieutenant D. Lozares started the fund raising effort.  The money will not bring back their daughter, but OPD showed this family that they remain in our hearts and prayers.  The family harbored tears of gratitude when receiving the check and it was with heartfelt affection that we contributed to help the Perez family on behalf of all our officers.

I will be writing more as we have more news.  Until then, if there are questions feel free to email me at arotzarena@opoa.org.  Please stay safe.

This past Friday at the OPOA Christmas Party, I was surprised to see Mayor Elect Jean Quan attend.  I greeted Mrs. Quan and asked her why she made the statement that 85% of Oakland Police Officers do not like Oakland.  She denied ever making that statement.

Today, Monday 20 December 2010, I was contacted by Sue Piper, a staffer member for Quan, who clarified Mayor – Elect Quan’s comments in the paper last week.

She told me the following

Mayor-Elect Quan asked both Bay City News Service, the author of the article, and the Oakland Tribune to correct their article that ran on Friday, December 17 about the meeting of the NAACP with OPD Chief Batts and herself.  She reminded Jeff Shuttleworth, the reporter that what she actually said was that Chief Batts’ did a survey of residents as part of his strategic plan and found that 40% of Oakland residents distrust the police, and that 85% of the police force does not live in Oakland.

I explained to the Mayor-elect Quan that officers even if they do not live in the city they choose to work in this city and enjoy the opportunity to serve.  Our officers have sacrificed more than most for this city, regardless of where they live.

I believe Mayor-elect Quan knows little about our profession as police officers.  I will try my best to explain what cops face here on a nightly basis and some of the critical issues facing Oakland Police Officers.

I am hoping that Mayor Elect Quan and the OPOA can work together to make this city better.

Dom Arotzarena

President, OPOA

Among the measures on the ballot in Oakland is Measure X, the $360 dollar parcel tax that includes our pension concession. In polling it came back with a 40% no among likely voters. Given that it needs 66.66% to pass, the poll results indicate that it will fail. Measure BB, the measure Y fix, and Measure W the telephone tax are polling well but still have an uphill battle. This election season the OPOA set up a Political Issues Committee (PIC) to raise money for the measures. Besides the OPOA contribution, this committee raised more than $40k with contributions from our friends. Let’s hope BB passes, if not we will face a huge wave of layoffs in January 2011.

As we have all seen the assault on the Oakland Police Department continues.

I have been here for 20 years and not one time since I’ve been here have I seen it this bad. Morale within the police department is the lowest I have ever seen. People are in a state of shock around this department and no one really knows what to do to make it better. What I cannot figure out is how people, not in our profession, continue to try and dictate how we should do our jobs. These days we are treated like second class citizens with no rights and one little mistake is a cause for termination. We cannot and are not allowed to make a single mistake. If we do, we will be held accountable, yet day in and day out Oakland Police Officer get the job done, with the resources we are given.

Not sure why I need to remind people of the facts but here they are. Four Oakland Police Officers killed in in the line of duty in 2009. A total of eight OPD officers died in 2009. Also in 2009, a concession contract to save jobs. 2010 brought us, 80 police officers laid off, and the prospect of even more layoffs in 2011. City of Oakland your police officers are walking around worried about keeping their jobs. Officers are worried about their own safety on the streets. On a daily basis we are running short of officers in every area of the city. That means open beats. Most recently I heard Mayoral Candidate Quan say that we need to get more desk officers out onto the street. Wake up Mrs. Quan there are no desk officer positions!!! Maybe she wants to pull from some of the few detectives that OPD has left. They are only investigating Homicides, Robberies, Rapes and Domestic Violence, not really important things!!!!

Unless you have been under a rock, compliance to the Negotiated Settlement Agreement is in full gear. The rank and file is and has been committed to complying with this consent decree and at the same time trying to make things safer for the citizens of Oakland. When it comes to the NSA it is important that we do things right, if that means taking our TIME, then that’s what we will do. One mistake will cost you your job. So take your TIME and make sure all compliance issues are met.

Every two years the OPOA must go to Caltrans and bid on our OPOA parking lot. In the past, we paid $6400 dollars a month. This year a group bid against OPOA for the lot. Their plan was to outbid OPOA and then rent parking spaces back to our members in the same lot for $150 a month. We were able to once again secure the lease for the lot, but at the cost of $11,000 per month. However, because of this higher cost the $10 rate we now pay cannot cover the new lease. To address this problem, the OPOA board voted unanimously to raise our monthly rates to $20 dollars a month. You will see this increase in late November.

I apologize for not writing a BLOG sooner. I have been very busy with this election and raising money. I will be writing a BLOG update next week after the election.

Until then stay safe and contact me any time Arotzarena@opoa.org

Dom Arotzarena
President, OPOA

We then released the following statement to the media, and met with reporters in our offices.

The Oakland Police Officers Association (OPOA) understands more than most the consequences of the budget problems that confront our city.

We have seen the number of our officers on the street go from 803 two years ago to less than seven hundred. Just in the past month, eighty of our community’s police officers were laid off and the streets in which we work became increasingly dangerous and the crimes to which we respond have now been limited. It is a dangerous situation for all of us.

We have done our best to be part of the solution in Oakland. Last year we made $34 million worth of concessions. Over the past couple of weeks we have continued to work with our City Council to put together long-term solutions. In that effort our members voted and we have agreed to the following:

1. We have agreed to pay an additional 7 percent contribution to now pay the full 9 percent cost of our pensions.

2. We have agreed to a two-tier pension system for new employees. New hires will now retire at 3 percent at 55.

We have also agreed to work with the City Council to help educate the voters on the benefits of the new parcel tax initiative being proposed by the City Council.

Oakland police officers remain committed to our community. We want enough police officers to keep our streets safe and the officers patrolling them not to be in constant danger.

We believe Oakland can still be a great City. It is important for all of us to stand together and say we want to make Oakland a place we are proud to call home and not a war zone that families and businesses want to avoid.

We will continue to work to keep you, our community, informed. Thank you.

However, city government did not plan. In fact they did very little between last summer and today. The proof is very clear; they cut 200 plus open positions and only had 68 layoffs during this entire fiscal crisis. Yes, I said only 68 layoffs so far!! At the police department we saw the cuts; we gave more than any other bargaining unit. The city continued to spend without planning. The City appeared to have no sense of urgency. Now they want to pull out their political gun and place it at our heads and the head of every law abiding Oakland citizen!!!

Today at the Rules committee meeting (3 Jun 2010), Ignacio De La Fuenta made a motion for city council to vote to layoff Police Officers!!!! This is two days after we had our first “official” meeting with Council members De La Fuenta, Quan, Kernighan and Brunner. You tell me, is that bargaining in good faith bargaining? Unbelievable!! We first learned of the city’s woes, where else but in the media, on 18 May. Then we met on June 1, for the official talk, and then BAM…. June 3, a motion is made for LAYOFF notices to be sent out. Yes, this is before any talks with the OPOA. These are the facts. This is NOT how you run a city.

Today, Council Member Brunner did a really good job shutting down the talk of Police layoffs, for now. There will not be a vote to send layoff notices at the 15 June, council meeting; instead they will discuss layoffs at the 24 June meeting.

It doesn’t appear that the city is serious about negotiating in good faith with the OPOA. They want the OPOA to give up, give up, give up, and receive NOTHING in return. They cannot even give me a guarantee that there will be no further layoffs should further concessions be made.
As far as getting out OUR message, we are trying each and every way to get out the OPOA position out to the public. We are updating the website OPOA.org, we have a Facebook Oakland Police Officers’ Association page that is getting updated daily, and we are getting our posts on the city Yahoo groups. I have given countless TV interviews. Both Barry and I talk to print journalists almost daily. However, with a few exceptions, the media has only printed and broadcasted what they want and edit out the rest. The media has NEVER been favorable to the OPOA.

940A!! This is a serious situation! I need your help getting the facts out. The OPOA cannot be the only ones trying to get out the point across, it will take ALL of us. This magnitude of this situation has never been faced by this organization. Every member of this police department will be affected if we layoff. I need every member to push people to our website and Facebook page. We will be entering into talks with the city. The executive board of the OPOA will be in discussions with the city. It is very important for all members not to negotiate this contract with media, friends, and city politicians. This will only give them ammo to attack us and may even sabotage our talks.
Here are some great points to tell the community we serve:

1. The OPOA members took a concession last year saving hundreds of jobs and saving the city $34.2 million. If we negotiate what guarantees are there? What if they come to us again next year?
2. Cutting 200 officers will severely impact out response violent crimes and dangerous situations.
3. The city approached the OPOA for the first time with layoffs in May, just a month before the budget is due.
4. The city has done little or nothing to solve its budget shortfalls after our concession agreement last year.
5. Our pension is paid by the city because it was negotiated that way, which means the City Council voted for it! The city felt it was cheaper. (See Barry’s blog for more on this subject)
6. We are in line with most other agencies in the Bay Area with regard to pay and benefits. However, we have far higher workloads, more calls for service and work in the 4th most dangerous city in the nation.
7. Why is the city not cutting anyone else??
8. Push everyone to the Facebook Page and OPOA.org websites

At this point, we will be talking with the city. We are yet to hear their plan, because they don’t have one yet. The OPOA in good faith, like last year, will listen to the city and see if we can pull them out of their mess. However, believe me when I tell you this, the OPOA will NOT be bullied by the city. We know firsthand how much the OPOA has given. We will help our laid off members, but who is going to help law the law abiding citizens of Oakland when 200 plus Police Officers are laid off?