Written by: Noah Abrams

Published: 29 September 2022

Disappointment and confusion continue to surround the struggle for oversight of the Sonoma County sheriff’s department.

 

Local resident Kimi Barbosa recently made her thoughts on the matter known to the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors.

 

"You proved us right," Barbosa said. "In 2020 we said we did not want you to adopt this ordinance because we did not trust that you would keep this ordinance intact."

 

 She's not alone in her concern.

 

In an August letter to the Board the Community Advisory Council - CAC - expressed their concern about the future of the county’s independent sheriff oversight body, IOLERO.

 

“Indeed it appears that the county has done exactly what community members most feared would happen.”

 

Supervisor Chris Coursey weighed in with his thoughts.

 

"You've got a couple of different narratives going on, and one is that the MOU’s allow Measure P to be implemented, and the other is the MOU’s have gutted Measure P," Coursey said.

 

Recent months have seen a flurry of legal activity over the implementation of Measure P, passed by 65% of Sonoma County voters in 2020.

 

Measure P provides for greater civilian oversight of the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Department.

 

Much of the contention centers on the decision by the state Public Employee Relation Board, PERB, vacating provisions of Measure P after deputy sheriffs labor groups filed a complaint after the measure’s passage.

 

In June the California Court of Appeals overturned PERB’s decision.

 

Meanwhile, the Sonoma County board of supervisors, the appellant against PERB’s decision, signed memoranda of understanding, MOUs, with the deputy sheriffs labor organizations.

 

Then, earlier this month, the California Supreme Court denied hearing an appeal aiming to reinstate PERB’s initial ruling to overturn Measure P.

 

Coursey expressed some optimism for oversight though.

 

"The provisions of Measure P have not been applied," Coursey said. "And it's not because anybody thinks that they can't be. My understanding is that they, they have not been. Nobody has asked, nobody has refused. So it's hard to make predictions. But my expectations are that we're gonna have more robust sheriff's department oversight in Sonoma County because of Measure P."

 

Lauren Bonds, legal director for the National Police Accountability Project, said the complicated legal morass around the implementation of police oversight, not just in Sonoma County, but across the country, comes as no surprise.

 

"One of the really big barriers to municipal or county level civilian oversight, unfortunately, has been that even if there's very vocal support from the public, it's so easy for law enforcement unions to kind of tie things up in the court," Bonds said. "Some of the most exciting models that we've seen haven't really moved forward because they've been tied up in litigation."

 

Bonds said the auditor model, which IOLERO operates on, can have serious shortcomings.

 

"The auditor model, like after internal affairs has done its thing, and it's kind of referred to independent oversight where they can make their own determination, that usually doesn't have much binding effect or force, unfortunately," Bonds said. "And oftentimes even those bodies don't really get all of the information that they need to do a real investigation or assessment."

 

Some of the major concerns about the recent MOUs are over whistleblowing and investigative powers. Measure P originally allowed IOLERO to get whistleblower complaints without having to notify the sheriff’s internal affairs department. Per the MOUs though, complaints to IOLERO must now be referred to quote “the appropriate enforcement agency.”

 

Regarding investigations, the MOUs stipulate the sheriff doesn't have to comply with a request by the IOLERO director to access internal investigative files. And that IOLERO can only begin investigating incidents which result in a death following the conclusion of the sheriff’s own investigation.

 

In the eyes of the CAC, both investigative provisions run afoul of Measure P, and they said the precedence of the MOUs over established law, leaves the county open to further legal troubles around Measure P going forward.

 

Bonds said the provisions within the MOUs should come as no surprise.

 

"So I think that's been kind of one of the biggest forms of opposition we've really seen is officers pushing back and saying that we can't be held accountable, cause otherwise we won't be able to do our job," Bonds said.

 

John Alden, the new IOLERO director, addressed the CAC’s concerns at their September meeting. He said for now the relationship between the sheriff's office and IOLERO appears set in place.

 

"I'm not aware, from what I've been advised so far, that there's a way for IOLERO to expand its powers beyond those letters of agreement through this operational agreement," Alden said. "This is the document that helps us understand how to implement the letters for better or for worse. In that regard, this operational agreement is not going to allow us to get to the issues that people have expressed concern about."

 

While IOLERO retains its ability to recommend disciplinary action and interview individuals as part of its investigations, anger over the MOUs continues.

 

"This agreement does impinge on the proper operation by IOLERO," local resident Thomas said at a recent board meeting. "To write these letters of agreements with the sheriff to essentially gut the major aspects of this ordinance continues to breed distrust," Barbosa said. "Now it's the Board of Supervisors literally standing in the way of independent oversight," said Lee Vandeveer speaking to the board of supervisors during public comment.

 

As Bonds said, the court still serves as a forum of last resort.

 

"At the end of the day, sometimes courts are the best way to hold police accountable, ultimately our theory of change is that you should always be able to sue police to make them better and also to be made whole for injuries that you experience," Bonds said.

 

Josette Brose-Eichar is a Sonoma County resident who was involved in the Measure P campaign and continues to advocate for accountability. She said proper oversight is itself a matter of public safety.

 

"If they cared about us as human beings out here that they are supposed to represent, they should care about our safety and whether we live or die, that we should never have to worry that during a traffic stop or in jaywalking that we could die or be harmed in some way," Brose-Eichar said.

Read more: Frustration mounts in the struggle for sheriff oversight

Written by: Noah Abrams

Published: 29 September 2022

Fall has officially begun with perhaps another “Strike-tober” ahead as healthcare workers at Sutter Heath in Santa Rosa started early in their fight for a new contract.

 

Chants of "We’re on strike!" came from the lab scientists, pharmacists, social workers, and other ESC’s, engineers and scientists, at Sutter Health in Santa Rosa.

 

While mental health workers at Kaiser in Santa Rosa enter their seventh week on strike, Sutter’s ESC’s picketed for the first time Monday. That’s despite, according to Sutter, the intervention of a federal mediator, and a willingness to bargain in good faith by the healthcare company.

 

Josh Schoeneman, a lab scientist and member of the bargaining team, who has worked at Sutter for eight years, said after 14 months of contract negotiations, the strike is over two core issues.

 

"We're focused on respect and and patient care," Schoeneman said. "So we want to see conversation around staffing levels to make sure that we're doing the best for patient care and the community."

 

In a written statement, a Sutter spokesperson said the priority remains “providing safe, high-quality care to…patients."

 

LaCrystal Barrett, a social worker with 19 years experience at Sutter, said the strike is not just for those on the picket line.

 

"My biggest concern right now is retention, keeping the people that we have and recruiting people who come behind us, and what we want to see is fair wages that those that come behind us are going to be able to get the right pay that they rightfully deserve," Barrett said. "And so if one fall, we all fall."

 

Max Bell-Alper with North Bay Jobs with Justice said the striking workers are not alone.

 

"In the first six months of 2022, there has been over 180 strikes in this country involving nearly 80,000 workers," Bell-Alper said. "That is a record that is happening right now, that you are a part of. You are a part of that history."

Read more: Sutter healthcare scientists join ranks of striking workers in Santa Rosa

Written by: Mark Prell

Published: 28 September 2022

With the pandemic waning, more of us are taking to the skies from Sonoma County.

The passenger count at the Sonoma County Charles M. Schulz Airport is nearing 400,000 so far this year. That's more than double 2020's record low.

Airport Manager Jon Stout said, "We're projecting we'll finish the year around six hundred to six hundred and twenty-five thousand passengers, which is up from four hundred eighty-eight thousand in 2019 - our peak year.”

Stout said this new record comes amidst airlines canceling flights, many due to staffing and equipment shortages and increased fuel costs.

In July, United Airlines announced it was suspending service to Santa Rosa on November 1st.

Then, in August, the airports' newest airline partner, Aha!, filed for bankruptcy, ceasing all operations.

American Airlines also announced cuts to its schedules.

According to Stout, "Between American and United, they have left approximately 64 markets since COVID started, and other airlines have that same problem of not enough pilots to do everything they'd like to," he said.

And it's not just pilots. Stout said it's mechanics and cabin crew as well.

Alaska Airlines is also trimming service, but the company says it will begin serving Seattle from Sonoma County with a larger Boeing 737 to serve more passengers starting October 6th.

In contrast, Avelo Airlines has said it will launch two new weekly flights from Santa Rosa to Palm Springs starting mid-November.

Stout said Avelo will also use a Boeing 737 in a “single-class" configuration, which will serve up to 189 passengers per flight.

Stout said he's very happy with how Avelo has worked out.

"They've been here a year and a half and are now our second largest carrier," he said.

Construction of a new passenger terminal has been underway since November 2020 and phase two is nearing completion.

According to Stout, the work will be completed and opened to passengers on November 16^th. He said the new facilities will offer, “four new gate counters, two baggage claim belts, and about 30,000 more square feet of space for customers.”

Stout added airport officials are also currently working with the Federal Aviation Administration on plans for a new control tower.

(Photo: Artist rendering of new terminal interior, courtesy of Charles M. Schulz-Sonoma County Airport).

Written by: Marc Albert

Published: 28 September 2022

For nearly a decade, propelled by activists concerned about long-term exposure to certain frequencies of radio waves, the City of Sebastopol has delayed the roll-out of new, high-tech utility meters. This week, years after state regulators ruled municipalities had no jurisdiction and couldn't block them, Pacific Gas and Electric began installing them. That's left some locals with a mix of fear and outrage.      

 

Barely two dozen people turned out Tuesday afternoon, but enthusiastic honking from passing drivers suggests more widespread concern about exposure to radio frequency radiation.

 

Standing on Healdsburg Avenue, activist Angela Ford said the city's apparent capitulation after a long struggle has left her with deep sadness.

 

"This represents the loss of community's abilities to control their environment and their future."

 

City Manager Lawrence McLaughlin, in an email, said "presently, the city of Sebastopol does not have an official policy with regard to this on-going deployment." He said the city is not currently considering any legal action. An earlier prohibition against installing them, with a $500 fine, is no longer in play.

 

PG&E spokeswoman Deanna Contreras confirms the utility began replacing meters Monday---but only for residential and business customers who have not opted out. She said twenty-two hundred and fifty homes, and four hundred businesses, still had analog meters.

 

Considered crucial for demand pricing and reducing PG&E labor costs, the meters transmit usage information to central computers, obviating the need for meter readers.

 

But activists in Sebastopol and elsewhere remain concerned about health impacts. A decade ago, the California Public Utilities Commission began allowing people to opt-out---for a seventy-five dollar one-time fee, plus a ten dollar monthly surcharge for three years. Pamela Gentry, one of the organizers of this week’s picketing says, that's unreasonable.

 

"Any charge to opt-out is unreasonable because EMFs are bad for our health and there's many people who are extra-sensitive to them and they're extremely serious for their health. It's like an extortion racket."

 

McLaughlin, the city manager, said company officials requested and held a meeting with him Monday. He told KRCB in an email that he relayed community health concerns, but the meeting was in no sense, a negotiation or similar.

 

Those living in apartment buildings and trailer parks, which made up most of those waving to traffic Tuesday, are most concerned with clusters of meters grouped together tracking usage in nearby units.

 

Patty Hiller said counted sixty-five of them within forty paces of her home.

 

"What will become of me? That is just too much radiation for a senior person to deal with."

 

That's a fear shared by Dorothy Schwartzberg. Like many she noted that personally opting out won't alleviate dangers unless one's neighbors opt-out too.

 

"On my wall, there are twenty-four, twelve gas meters and twelve electric meters. When they pulse, they are going to go through walls, through my apartment, into other apartments, and I am going to suffer some very strong health effects. When people out-out, people who don't opt out will have their meters going everywhere, we're going to get fried, so to speak."

 

PG&E's Contreras says quote "SmartMeters are not harmful, transmitting relatively weak radio signals," likening them to baby monitors.

 

 

Read more: After a decade of resistance, Sebastopol relenting on SmartMeters