Sunday, March 28, 2010
The Best and Worst at the Same Time
Once again I am at odds with myself in regards to sharing what concerns that rise up from a simple review of the daily media be it the press or video. Have you every had some thing in your life be the worst and best experience at the same time. I find myself there almost on a daily basis. Right now today I am so lost as to what is right, or what is wrong, to have faith or have I lost my faith? I wonder how many apologizes I owe for my selfishness which is why all these postings began in the first place. Now when I say my selfishness you might also view it as my self preservation through our Santa Barbara criminal court corruption. I often worry what if my postings have over stepped there place with the families that live the nightmare I describe and to them I am truly sorry and do at this time again offer my Heart felt apologies. As I reflect back to my first experiences with the courts here in Santa Barbara. It was more than just my personal violations but the violations of our Country that started my writing. I never claim to be smarter than or some sort of know it all, in fact my claims are just the opposite. I feel that for the most part I am just simply sharing situations or data that make no sense to me and I wonder if it is the same for you? Now my need to make sense of my life is why I write (best) yet my fear I may never get my life back (worst) is why I can hate writing. Does that make sense to anyone? I love my Country and yet hate what I see and I feel a responsibility greater than my own needs to keep writing. Than the question comes can words really inspire others into concern or action? Will people raise there head from the grazing on manure that we do on a daily basis without thought and respect for the needs of complete strangers as we would our own? Time will tell but I have faith that when the ugly of what has really transpired right here in Santa Barbara to our youth the best of people will show up.
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish the Constitution for the United States of America. “
These words not only inspire me but our veterans live and die to ensure they are never abused. Most people have respect for these values far greater than what has been shown here in Santa Barbara. Well here I go getting long winded again so I better stop. What I am going to try and accomplish right now is some simple short thoughts, concerns, questions and data. Than I will leave it up to you if my work can really make a difference? If you find this posting has intrigued you all I ask is that you share it with others so the good work can begin. There can be no greater core value than family and the destruction of this unit and is a crime against our selves. Our fore fathers took into account that we would be a bi cultural Country at birth thus the reason why our freedoms were regardless of our orgin to always be protected. We must be able to embrace where we came from and where we are with out prejudice to either.
Real quickly did any one catch the episode of “On Patrol” the REALITY show of the Santa Barbara police? Well if that’s REALITY it is no wonder that Cam Sanchez is in the mess that he is. In the episode I saw a week or so ago Saturday the police were following up on a call to 7-11 on Castillo Street. Once there they found a white man who was under the influence of alcohol and they thought he had been driving and with a child and yet he was only given a warning and allowed to take a taxi home! Please remember his vehicle is in the parking lot, did the security cameras not have the man driving onto the property? Now the officer involved I have concerns with but please, he let him go scott free? At the very least a field report should have been taken and a referral to social services at the very least. Oh that’s right it was not an “ALlEGED GANG CRIME’ my bad. Now the very next scene is the Santa Barbra police stopping some one who is walking under the influence of alcohol. After a very polite interview they end up taking the person to a sober center. I agree with how the second situation was handled the officers were great, very polite and showed genuine concern for the well fair of the person and the law….BRAVO . Just tell me who is the idiot that edits this show and thinks that the first situation gave a good view of our police. Now get this straight I have nothing but love and respect for all law enforcement but corruption will never sit well with me. You see when you use a car to run over and kill two Mexicans and all they get is 5 years in prison with special circumstances, it makes me wonder? Now the woman leaves behind 4 children. So where is the justice for them I ask? Now did anyone else besides me notice the ‘ON PATROL” being advertised on the Super Bowl channel prior to the game? That must have cost? I wonder Cam Sanchez do you have an image problem? If you would like I could preview the show so that you stop disrespecting the men and woman who serve under you.
I have a question for Mr. Sanchez, Did the Sheriff Officer you and the D.A. Dozer put on the stand for the Juarez whisper tape. Was that officer made a ware before he took the stand that the F.B.I. had enhanced the audio, because his testimony sure did not reflect any such knowledge. Now during the Juarez trial why was this F.B.I. version never used? Mr. Sanchez you don’t USE fellow law enforcement officers as it appears you did in the Juarez trial. I have the court motion requesting the release of such a tape.
Regards
Larry Mendoza
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Pension Fund warnings that Mr. Geis Santa Barbara County auditor choose to Ignore!
http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/publications/SantaBarbaraReportFinal.pdf
Summary and Recommendations That our whole County Government choose to Ignore.
In summary, we have a number of concerns about how the retirement system is managed. Our report focuses on the areas of concern, but is not meant to imply that the system is currently in a crisis. The issues raised are intended to help the County better understand and manage the retirement system in the future. SBCERS is currently reasonably well funded and the primary underlying methodologies used are sound and lead to a fully funded system. However, there are complex interactions embedded in the retirement program that may affect the future soundness of the system if they are not well understood by all parties. The current structure is not transparent in how the system operates which may lead to poor decisions in the future. There are also some technical issues that should be addressed immediately in order to limit their potential impact.
In particular, we have the following concerns:
The mechanism for paying retiree healthcare benefits does not appear to be consistent with our understanding of federal law potentially jeopardizing the tax qualification of SBCERS and tax returns for all retirees receiving healthcare benefits.
The proposal to establish a 401(h) account appears to vest benefits that are not currently vested and may contravene Section 401(a).
There may be an implicit retiree healthcare subsidy that should be valued under GASB 45.
The SBCERS policy for using Excess Earnings appears to be independent of fiduciary responsibilities for protecting pension benefits and creates an asymmetrical risk distribution for the County.
SBCERS appears to view benefits that are fully funded through Excess Earnings as creating no additional cost to the County. Any benefit improvement has a cost.
The number of different reserve accounts established by SBCERS and the discretionary transactions between those reserve accounts make the system less transparent than it should be.
Mercer Human Resource Consulting 26
Retirement System Evaluation County of Santa Barbara
The practice of crediting reserves with the assumed rate of earnings each year instead of the actual rate of earnings distorts funding levels, is not transparent and may prevent the recognition of those assets for purposes of GASB 43 and 45.
The practice of establishing reserves as both assets and liabilities under GASB 25 distorts the reported funded status and makes benefit improvements appear less costly than they really are.
The analysis used to grant benefit improvements failed to test the sensitivity of assumptions and may have underestimated the cost of those benefit improvements.
When actuarial assumptions are next reviewed, particular attention should be paid to the following:
• – retiree mortality,
• – rates of retirement for public safety,
• – salary increases in year of retirement, and
• – inflation and wage growth.
With each of these concerns, we recommend that the County work with the Retirement Board to take appropriate corrective action or to investigate alternatives and develop appropriate policies. The overriding objectives of any changes should be:
to confirm compliance with applicable laws and regulations,
to improve the stability of the retirement system, and
to improve the transparency of the retirement system.
Mercer
Summary and Recommendations That our whole County Government choose to Ignore.
In summary, we have a number of concerns about how the retirement system is managed. Our report focuses on the areas of concern, but is not meant to imply that the system is currently in a crisis. The issues raised are intended to help the County better understand and manage the retirement system in the future. SBCERS is currently reasonably well funded and the primary underlying methodologies used are sound and lead to a fully funded system. However, there are complex interactions embedded in the retirement program that may affect the future soundness of the system if they are not well understood by all parties. The current structure is not transparent in how the system operates which may lead to poor decisions in the future. There are also some technical issues that should be addressed immediately in order to limit their potential impact.
In particular, we have the following concerns:
The mechanism for paying retiree healthcare benefits does not appear to be consistent with our understanding of federal law potentially jeopardizing the tax qualification of SBCERS and tax returns for all retirees receiving healthcare benefits.
The proposal to establish a 401(h) account appears to vest benefits that are not currently vested and may contravene Section 401(a).
There may be an implicit retiree healthcare subsidy that should be valued under GASB 45.
The SBCERS policy for using Excess Earnings appears to be independent of fiduciary responsibilities for protecting pension benefits and creates an asymmetrical risk distribution for the County.
SBCERS appears to view benefits that are fully funded through Excess Earnings as creating no additional cost to the County. Any benefit improvement has a cost.
The number of different reserve accounts established by SBCERS and the discretionary transactions between those reserve accounts make the system less transparent than it should be.
Mercer Human Resource Consulting 26
Retirement System Evaluation County of Santa Barbara
The practice of crediting reserves with the assumed rate of earnings each year instead of the actual rate of earnings distorts funding levels, is not transparent and may prevent the recognition of those assets for purposes of GASB 43 and 45.
The practice of establishing reserves as both assets and liabilities under GASB 25 distorts the reported funded status and makes benefit improvements appear less costly than they really are.
The analysis used to grant benefit improvements failed to test the sensitivity of assumptions and may have underestimated the cost of those benefit improvements.
When actuarial assumptions are next reviewed, particular attention should be paid to the following:
• – retiree mortality,
• – rates of retirement for public safety,
• – salary increases in year of retirement, and
• – inflation and wage growth.
With each of these concerns, we recommend that the County work with the Retirement Board to take appropriate corrective action or to investigate alternatives and develop appropriate policies. The overriding objectives of any changes should be:
to confirm compliance with applicable laws and regulations,
to improve the stability of the retirement system, and
to improve the transparency of the retirement system.
Mercer
Santa Barbara Pension fund criminal act's and cover up my County Auditor Robert Geis!
The letter reflecting a cover up involving the Santa Barbara County Pension fund, look no further than the charts on page 2.
http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/Publications/CountyRetirementCosts.pdf
County of Santa Barbara
Office of the Auditor-Controller
County Retirement Costs: White Paper by Robert W. Geis, CPA
(Through June, 30, 2006)Page 1 of 7
County of Santa Barbara
Office of the Auditor-Controller
County Retirement Costs: White Paper by Robert W. Geis, CPA
(Through June, 30, 2006)
The County Retirement plan and underlying systems can be difficult to understand due to the
complexities of the benefit, investment and funding policies. The benefit system is a multi-employer
plan that includes the County, Courts, Air Pollution Control, Santa Barbara Association of
Governments and six Special Districts. There are nine different benefit plans. The funding policy is
driven by a complex array of actuarial science, federal tax laws, state legislative code and
governmental accounting policies. Losses on investment returns of $464 million between December 31, 1999 and December 31, 2002 had a dominant impact on the fund. This white paper explains some actuarial and accounting concepts to help the reader better understand the financial condition
and dynamics of the pension fund as they relate to the current funded status of the system.
For an in-depth analysis, the County hired an independent third party (Kroll/Mercer) who issued an
evaluation of the system dated November 7, 2006 (http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/home.asp).
They identified a number of concerns that should be addressed regarding retiree health benefits, the
policy of using “excess earnings,” improving the methods to measure the cost of proposed new
benefits, making the system more transparent (it is difficult to understand), confirm compliance with
applicable laws and improve the stability of the system. To address these concerns, the County hired
tax attorneys Ice Miller to guide us towards assuring the Retirement Plan is in compliance with IRS
federal tax laws. The County and Retirement system are currently compiling a legal plan document to
aid in this effort.
The County has also established a working team to address issues. We are trying to inform and train
the BOS and BOR of the fiscal implications of the fund and its practices. We believe the BOS and BOR
should establish a funding agreement that addresses the basic pension plan, retiree health and
benefit improvements to improve long-term stability. Finally, the County and BOR are addressing and
incorporating GASB 43 and GASB 45 implementation requirements for reporting Other Post
Employment Benefits (OPEB).
Submitted by:
Robert W. Geis, CPA
Auditor-Controller
(805) 568-2101
Page 2 of 7
Financial Status of Retirement Fund
The County’s retirement fund is in good overall financial condition, but maintaining this level is a
stress on the County budget. At 6/30/2006 the fund was 86% funded using the actuarial value
method of measuring the plan assets available to pay for current and future retirement liabilities, and
90% funded using the market value method. In addition, the County has no outstanding pension
obligation bonds. We believe that to be considered in excellent financial condition, the fund should
ideally maintain a funded ratio of 125% or more for a consistent period of time. Superior earnings
above the system-expected investment earnings rate of 8% would contribute to this excellent overall
funding status.
The following two tables demonstrate the financial status of the plan over the last seven years. They
will also be used to show the volatility of investment returns within the system that can occur within
an economic cycle. It is important that retirement systems and decision makers look at longer
planning cycles. Benefits can accumulate over 30 years or longer while an employee works and be
paid out for periods over 30 years after they retire.
Asset Smoothing: Under current retirement board policy the Actuarial Value of assets is a smoothed
market value in which unexpected investment returns (gains or losses) are recognized over a 5-year
period. The purpose is to smooth out the impact of volatile investment returns with respect to County
contribution rates. The downside of using the actuarial method is a distortion of when the investment
losses were actually incurred.
Actuarial Value (Market Gains/Losses Smoothed over 5-Years to Delay or Soften Impact to Contribution Rates)
In Chart below what happen to the accounting for the year 2001?
(in millions) 12/31/99 12/31/00 12/31/02 06/30/03 06/30/04 06/30/05 06/30/06
Plan Assets 1,068 1,171 1,296 1,347 1,379 1,444 1,553
Accrued Liability (Cost) 1,067 1,145 1,364 1,455 1,579 1,688 1,810
Percent Funded 100% 102% 95% 93% 87% 86% 86%
Over(Under) Funded Amount 1 26 (68) (108) (200) (244) (257)
No Asset Smoothing: The Market Value of assets is the true picture.
Market Value (No Smoothing)
In Chart below what happen to the accounting for the year 2001?
(in millions) 12/31/99 12/31/00 12/31/02 06/30/03 06/30/04 06/30/05 06/30/06
Plan Assets 1,247 1,183 1,080 1,169 1,347 1,476 1,629
Accrued Liability (Cost) 1,067 1,145 1,364 1,455 1,579 1,688 1,810
Percent Funded 117% 103% 79% 80% 85% 87% 90%
Over(Under) Funded Amount 180 38 (284) (286) (232) (212) (181)
Case in point: In 1999 the County was 100% funded per the actuarial value method and 117% funded ($180 million surplus) per the market value method. In our opinion, this was just short of excellent.
At that point decision makers decided to improve both active member and retired member benefits
using surplus earnings to pay the benefits (a part of the $180 million surplus). The cost of these
benefits created new liabilities for past service estimated by the actuaries to cost $87 million. During
the implementation of the new benefits the market lost $142 million by 12/31/00. Therefore, the
surplus to pay the benefits was wiped out and new liabilities were created that had not been paid for
Page 3 of 7
over time. The next year the fund lost an additional $322 million.( How is a reference to this huge loss in 2oo1 made here but missing from Mr. Geis's Charts above on page 2?) The market value unfunded liability went from a surplus of $180 million to a deficit of $284 million. As discussed later, the plan sponsors
(County) are required to payoff the deficit through increases in contribution rates (see UAAL in table
below). The point is that even with 117% funding, because of market volatility any change in benefits
has to be carefully planned, especially in the area of using surplus earnings to fund benefit increases.
A better fiscal policy would be to build a reserve to the 125% or greater funding level with the surplus
maintained to guard against market downturns.
Page 4 of 7
County Retirement Contribution Rates, Pensionable Salaries & Basic Cost
The County’s cost for the basic pension benefit is represented by contribution rates, which have been
growing significantly over the last several years. The table below shows blended rates for all plans.
Each separate plan (i.e., General and Safety) has its own rate. For example, in FY 2005/06, the
General Plan rates averaged 17%, while the Safety Plan rates averaged 32%. In addition to the
Retirement System rate, the County also must pay Social Security of 6.2% for General members.
County rates are developed to pay for the annual normal cost of basic pension benefits and to pay for
the unfunded liability over 15 years. Over time, the County has also bargained to pick-up a portion of
the required employee contribution.
History of Blended Rates
12/31/99 12/31/00 12/31/02 06/30/03 06/30/04 06/30/05 06/30/06
Normal Cost 12.09% 11.87% 11.63% 11.56% 11.48% 11.38% 11.61%
UAAL -0.09% 0.08% 2.29% 3.65% 6.63% 8.40% 9.29%
Total Blended Rate 12.00% 11.95% 13.92% 15.21% 18.11% 19.78% 20.90%
History of Pensionable Salaries and Basic Pension Cost
Estimated
(in thousands) FY 00/01 FY 01/02 FY 02/03 FY 03/04 FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07
Pensionable Salaries 197,458 215,715 227,431 238,879 243,379 250,133 264,732
x County Blended Rate 12.00% 11.95% 11.95% 13.92% 15.21% 18.11% 19.78%
= County Basic Pension Cost 23,695 25,778 27,178 33,252 37,018 45,299 52,364
Without actuarial smoothing County contributions rates would have doubled to about 22% in one year
starting FY 02-03 and doubling the employer contributions from $31 million to $60 million. With the
smoothing method, five years later in FY 06-07 contribution rates have now hit 21% with
contributions approaching $57 million.
History of Basic Pension, Employee Pick-up & FICA (Social Security) Cost
Estimated
(in thousands) FY 00/01 FY 01/02 FY 02/03 FY 03/04 FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07
County Pension Cost 23,695 25,778 27,178 33,252 37,018 45,299 52,364
Employee Contribution Pick-up 3,418 3,591 4,013 4,208 4,176 4,230 4,300
FICA (Social Security) 8,553 9,349 9,639 9,835 10,001 10,234 11,025
Total Basic Pension 35,666 38,718 40,830 47,295 51,195 59,763 67,689
With FICA (Social Security), the County paid almost $68 million for basic retirement in FY 2005/06.
Almost 10% of the County total budget and 23% of basic salary costs.
To be used
in
FY 07/08
Page 5 of 7
Funding Retirement Benefits
• The accrued liability represents the liability attributable to
prior service by the cost method.
• The normal cost represents the increase in liability
attributable to an additional year of service.
• The unfunded actuarial accrued liability is amortized over
15 years as a level percentage of payrolls.
• Actuarial assets must earn at least 8.16% in order to keep
unfunded actuarial accrued liability from growing.
This is a pictorial representation of the theoretical overview of retirement funding. Assets must earn
8.16% over the long-term to keep the unfunded actuarial accrued liability (see amortization above)
from growing. A lower return due to underperforming investments will cause the unfunded liability to
grow. The investment return is the single most important component of the long-term stability of a
pension fund.
$1.810 B $1.553 B
$31.5 M $30.1 M (11.38% of Pensionable Salaries)
$25.2 M (8.40% of Pensionable Salaries)
$52.4 M
(19.78% of Pensionable Salaries)
Page 6 of 7
Funding Retiree Health and Other Benefit Costs
Currently, retirees receive health and other benefits outside of the basic pension benefit. These other
benefits are not officially or explicitly paid for through the normal method described above. The
method used to pay for these other benefits is a complicated process that takes a portion (50%) of the
investment earnings above the expected rate of return (“excess earnings”) and sets it aside for these
other benefits. This is not an actuarially sound practice because “excess earnings” are not equivalent
to surplus earnings. Effectively, this practice diverts assets from the basic pension and increases the
unfunded liability. The table below shows the fiscal impact of this practice on the unfunded liability.
With the current practice, the unfunded liability is $257 million. If the practice was not followed, all
assets would be available for the basic pension benefit and there is no additional liability outside of
the basic pension benefit, the unfunded liability would be reduced by $138 million to $119 million.
Each time there is a distribution of “excess earnings,” the unfunded liability will increase. For
example, at 6/30/06, “excess earnings” totaled $86 million. If these are distributed, 50% or $43
million will go towards increasing the retiree health or other benefits and the unfunded liability will
increase by $43 million to $300 million. The associated County UAAL rate will then increase from
9.29% to 11.31% to pay for the increase in the unfunded liability increasing County costs by an
additional $5 million annually. In addition, the plan sponsor does not contribute the additional cost of
the retiree health benefit on an annual basis creating additional unfunded liabilities.
Without Impact of
Current Current "Excess"
(in millions - based on FYE 6/30/06) Practice Practice Distribution
Assets Available - Basic Pension Benefits 1,415 1,553 1,372
Assets Available - Other Retiree Benefits 138 - 181
Total Assets Available 1,553 1,553 1,553
Liability (future cost) - Basic Pension Benefits 1,672 1,672 1672
Liability (future cost) - Other Retiree Benefits 138 - 181
Total Liability 1,810 1,672 1,853
Difference (Assets less Costs = "Unfunded Liability") (257) (119) (300)
History of Costs for Retiree Health & Other Benefits
Estimated
(in thousands) FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 01/02 FY 02/03 FY 03/04 FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07
Retiree Health Costs 3,272 3,676 3,876 4,834 5,202 5,740 6,005 6,250
Cash In-Lieu of Health 273 284 350 520 549 435 449 450
Ad Hoc COLA Costs 2,333 2,321 3,397 2,382 2,334 2,304 2,256 2,300
Total Other Benefits 5,878 6,281 7,623 7,736 8,085 8,479 8,710 9,000
The costs of these external benefits have grown 48% from FY 1999/00 to FY 2005/06. The
Mercer/Kroll report states that “a long-term return of 9.6% would result in the distribution of over $3
billion in additional retiree benefits over the next 50 years,” which is two times our current assets of
$1.553 billion available for basic pension benefits. The nature of these benefit increases is
unsustainable by the plan sponsor.
Page 7 of 7
Conclusion
Decision makers should be concerned with the complexities of the benefit, investment and funding
policies. What follows are a few concerns:
The system has a 50% chance that it will earn more than 8.16% over the long-term and a 50% chance
that it will not earn 8.16%. The volatility of investment returns should always be the first thing
considered in any system decision.
The County budget is under stress from the requirement to increase contributions. Actuarial
smoothing helps with contribution rates but increases long-term costs. Each decision maker on the
Board of Supervisors and Retirement Board should strive to eliminate the UAAL. The goal should be to
pay only the next year’s normal cost and all normal costs should be paid annually.
The retirement trustees are contemplating continuing the practice of distributing “excess earnings”
for new retiree health benefits. It may be argued that it is not prudent to do so if the pension benefits
are not fully funded and perhaps more than fully funded.
The County is not funding the additional annual cost of retiree health benefits on an annual basis.
To be competitive with other public safety agencies the County granted the 3% at 50 benefit for
public safety members (Sheriff). This cost is not yet reflected in the normal rate or the UAAL rate
currently being paid by the County.
The need to provide competitive benefits for general members both for benefit formula and employee
contributions continues to be an issue. The County needs to carefully consider and understand the
costs associated with any change in benefits.
CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate
of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement System
for its comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005. This was the fifth
consecutive year that SBCERS submitted the report for consideration and received this prestigious award.
End of
http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/Publications/CountyRetirementCosts.pdf
Pension Fund Data Web Site
http://www.countyofsb.org/sbcers/default.aspx?id=19040&ekmensel=e2f22c9a_608_622_btnlink
http://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/sbcers/ActuarialValuation20090630.pdf
http://www.countyofsb.org/sbcers/fnp/2007FinalValuation.pdf
http://www.allianceresourceconsulting.com/Profiles/460.pdf
http://www.hfmweek.com/news/526392/santa-barbara-pension-looks-to-replace-arden.thtml
Santa Barbara pension looks to replace Arden
The $1.7bn Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement System (SBCERS) has terminated its only hedge fund manager, Arden Asset Management, but will look to replace the investment this summer.
Money Management Letter
http://www.moneymanagementletter.com/Search.aspx?SearchStr=Santa%20Barbara%20County%20Employees%20Retirement%20System
http://www.ipe.com/realestate/santa-barbara-county-opens-separate-account-search_34572.php
Santa Barbara County opens separate account search
1 April 2010 17:04:
UNITED STATES - Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement System has approved a Request for Information to hire a discretionary separate account real estate manager.
http://www.independent.com/news/2009/mar/12/county-budget-bloodbath/
Sounds like bankruptcy is in the county’s future. Seriously. Under Chapter 9 of the Federal Bankruptcy Act a local government can declare bankruptcy, void all of its contracts including pension obligations, and start fresh. No government has been so lavish with pension and benefits than our local pols. Easy for them: buy off the unions, get votes, get termed out, and leave the taxpayers to deal with the problems. So my vote is for bankruptcy, the recall of all Supes, and a new election to replace them with leaders and problems solvers.
Read this letter is she really serious?
http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s70306/s70306-574.pdf
http://www.sbcgj.org/2009/responses/SBCERS_Response.pdf
Below is a partial response to the Grand Jury report from 2009.
In there response the B.O.S. claims a17.2% return and yet the Pension fund reflects 143 million dollar loss
Pension association
http://www.sacrs.org/mc/page.do?sitePageId=20260&orgId=slgs
Pension Watch
http://pensiontsunami.com/blog/?p=85
Read the numbers in this story
http://www.kcoy.com/Global/story.asp?S=12192053
Is it 2 Billion as listed below or 1.2 Billion on the next page?
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-137823402/deadline-participant-sues-avon.html
Santa Barbara Hires for Int’l Equity.
Magazine article from: Investment Management Weekly Sorondo, Marc October 24, 2005 700+ words ...2 billion Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement System (SBCERS) has hired New Star Asset Management to manage an active international...Street Global Advisors, but Peters said that New Star was selected because of its investment style
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2008/lr20471.htm
“SEC Distributes Nearly $50 Million to Defrauded Xerox Investors
The Xerox Fair Fund resulted from SEC actions brought in 2002 and 2003 against Xerox Corporation, five of its officers, Xerox’s independent audit firm (KPMG, LLP) and five KPMG accountants who held senior positions on the Xerox engagement. Among them, the defendants paid more than $46 million to settle SEC charges that they caused Xerox to make materially false and misleading statements in SEC filings. (Ten million dollars of the total amount was paid by Xerox to the U.S. Treasury before the Fair Fund provisions were enacted.)” Please go to the above web page for full version of the S.E.C. report
http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/Publications/CountyRetirementCosts.pdf
County of Santa Barbara
Office of the Auditor-Controller
County Retirement Costs: White Paper by Robert W. Geis, CPA
(Through June, 30, 2006)Page 1 of 7
County of Santa Barbara
Office of the Auditor-Controller
County Retirement Costs: White Paper by Robert W. Geis, CPA
(Through June, 30, 2006)
The County Retirement plan and underlying systems can be difficult to understand due to the
complexities of the benefit, investment and funding policies. The benefit system is a multi-employer
plan that includes the County, Courts, Air Pollution Control, Santa Barbara Association of
Governments and six Special Districts. There are nine different benefit plans. The funding policy is
driven by a complex array of actuarial science, federal tax laws, state legislative code and
governmental accounting policies. Losses on investment returns of $464 million between December 31, 1999 and December 31, 2002 had a dominant impact on the fund. This white paper explains some actuarial and accounting concepts to help the reader better understand the financial condition
and dynamics of the pension fund as they relate to the current funded status of the system.
For an in-depth analysis, the County hired an independent third party (Kroll/Mercer) who issued an
evaluation of the system dated November 7, 2006 (http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/home.asp).
They identified a number of concerns that should be addressed regarding retiree health benefits, the
policy of using “excess earnings,” improving the methods to measure the cost of proposed new
benefits, making the system more transparent (it is difficult to understand), confirm compliance with
applicable laws and improve the stability of the system. To address these concerns, the County hired
tax attorneys Ice Miller to guide us towards assuring the Retirement Plan is in compliance with IRS
federal tax laws. The County and Retirement system are currently compiling a legal plan document to
aid in this effort.
The County has also established a working team to address issues. We are trying to inform and train
the BOS and BOR of the fiscal implications of the fund and its practices. We believe the BOS and BOR
should establish a funding agreement that addresses the basic pension plan, retiree health and
benefit improvements to improve long-term stability. Finally, the County and BOR are addressing and
incorporating GASB 43 and GASB 45 implementation requirements for reporting Other Post
Employment Benefits (OPEB).
Submitted by:
Robert W. Geis, CPA
Auditor-Controller
(805) 568-2101
Page 2 of 7
Financial Status of Retirement Fund
The County’s retirement fund is in good overall financial condition, but maintaining this level is a
stress on the County budget. At 6/30/2006 the fund was 86% funded using the actuarial value
method of measuring the plan assets available to pay for current and future retirement liabilities, and
90% funded using the market value method. In addition, the County has no outstanding pension
obligation bonds. We believe that to be considered in excellent financial condition, the fund should
ideally maintain a funded ratio of 125% or more for a consistent period of time. Superior earnings
above the system-expected investment earnings rate of 8% would contribute to this excellent overall
funding status.
The following two tables demonstrate the financial status of the plan over the last seven years. They
will also be used to show the volatility of investment returns within the system that can occur within
an economic cycle. It is important that retirement systems and decision makers look at longer
planning cycles. Benefits can accumulate over 30 years or longer while an employee works and be
paid out for periods over 30 years after they retire.
Asset Smoothing: Under current retirement board policy the Actuarial Value of assets is a smoothed
market value in which unexpected investment returns (gains or losses) are recognized over a 5-year
period. The purpose is to smooth out the impact of volatile investment returns with respect to County
contribution rates. The downside of using the actuarial method is a distortion of when the investment
losses were actually incurred.
Actuarial Value (Market Gains/Losses Smoothed over 5-Years to Delay or Soften Impact to Contribution Rates)
In Chart below what happen to the accounting for the year 2001?
(in millions) 12/31/99 12/31/00 12/31/02 06/30/03 06/30/04 06/30/05 06/30/06
Plan Assets 1,068 1,171 1,296 1,347 1,379 1,444 1,553
Accrued Liability (Cost) 1,067 1,145 1,364 1,455 1,579 1,688 1,810
Percent Funded 100% 102% 95% 93% 87% 86% 86%
Over(Under) Funded Amount 1 26 (68) (108) (200) (244) (257)
No Asset Smoothing: The Market Value of assets is the true picture.
Market Value (No Smoothing)
In Chart below what happen to the accounting for the year 2001?
(in millions) 12/31/99 12/31/00 12/31/02 06/30/03 06/30/04 06/30/05 06/30/06
Plan Assets 1,247 1,183 1,080 1,169 1,347 1,476 1,629
Accrued Liability (Cost) 1,067 1,145 1,364 1,455 1,579 1,688 1,810
Percent Funded 117% 103% 79% 80% 85% 87% 90%
Over(Under) Funded Amount 180 38 (284) (286) (232) (212) (181)
Case in point: In 1999 the County was 100% funded per the actuarial value method and 117% funded ($180 million surplus) per the market value method. In our opinion, this was just short of excellent.
At that point decision makers decided to improve both active member and retired member benefits
using surplus earnings to pay the benefits (a part of the $180 million surplus). The cost of these
benefits created new liabilities for past service estimated by the actuaries to cost $87 million. During
the implementation of the new benefits the market lost $142 million by 12/31/00. Therefore, the
surplus to pay the benefits was wiped out and new liabilities were created that had not been paid for
Page 3 of 7
over time. The next year the fund lost an additional $322 million.( How is a reference to this huge loss in 2oo1 made here but missing from Mr. Geis's Charts above on page 2?) The market value unfunded liability went from a surplus of $180 million to a deficit of $284 million. As discussed later, the plan sponsors
(County) are required to payoff the deficit through increases in contribution rates (see UAAL in table
below). The point is that even with 117% funding, because of market volatility any change in benefits
has to be carefully planned, especially in the area of using surplus earnings to fund benefit increases.
A better fiscal policy would be to build a reserve to the 125% or greater funding level with the surplus
maintained to guard against market downturns.
Page 4 of 7
County Retirement Contribution Rates, Pensionable Salaries & Basic Cost
The County’s cost for the basic pension benefit is represented by contribution rates, which have been
growing significantly over the last several years. The table below shows blended rates for all plans.
Each separate plan (i.e., General and Safety) has its own rate. For example, in FY 2005/06, the
General Plan rates averaged 17%, while the Safety Plan rates averaged 32%. In addition to the
Retirement System rate, the County also must pay Social Security of 6.2% for General members.
County rates are developed to pay for the annual normal cost of basic pension benefits and to pay for
the unfunded liability over 15 years. Over time, the County has also bargained to pick-up a portion of
the required employee contribution.
History of Blended Rates
12/31/99 12/31/00 12/31/02 06/30/03 06/30/04 06/30/05 06/30/06
Normal Cost 12.09% 11.87% 11.63% 11.56% 11.48% 11.38% 11.61%
UAAL -0.09% 0.08% 2.29% 3.65% 6.63% 8.40% 9.29%
Total Blended Rate 12.00% 11.95% 13.92% 15.21% 18.11% 19.78% 20.90%
History of Pensionable Salaries and Basic Pension Cost
Estimated
(in thousands) FY 00/01 FY 01/02 FY 02/03 FY 03/04 FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07
Pensionable Salaries 197,458 215,715 227,431 238,879 243,379 250,133 264,732
x County Blended Rate 12.00% 11.95% 11.95% 13.92% 15.21% 18.11% 19.78%
= County Basic Pension Cost 23,695 25,778 27,178 33,252 37,018 45,299 52,364
Without actuarial smoothing County contributions rates would have doubled to about 22% in one year
starting FY 02-03 and doubling the employer contributions from $31 million to $60 million. With the
smoothing method, five years later in FY 06-07 contribution rates have now hit 21% with
contributions approaching $57 million.
History of Basic Pension, Employee Pick-up & FICA (Social Security) Cost
Estimated
(in thousands) FY 00/01 FY 01/02 FY 02/03 FY 03/04 FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07
County Pension Cost 23,695 25,778 27,178 33,252 37,018 45,299 52,364
Employee Contribution Pick-up 3,418 3,591 4,013 4,208 4,176 4,230 4,300
FICA (Social Security) 8,553 9,349 9,639 9,835 10,001 10,234 11,025
Total Basic Pension 35,666 38,718 40,830 47,295 51,195 59,763 67,689
With FICA (Social Security), the County paid almost $68 million for basic retirement in FY 2005/06.
Almost 10% of the County total budget and 23% of basic salary costs.
To be used
in
FY 07/08
Page 5 of 7
Funding Retirement Benefits
• The accrued liability represents the liability attributable to
prior service by the cost method.
• The normal cost represents the increase in liability
attributable to an additional year of service.
• The unfunded actuarial accrued liability is amortized over
15 years as a level percentage of payrolls.
• Actuarial assets must earn at least 8.16% in order to keep
unfunded actuarial accrued liability from growing.
This is a pictorial representation of the theoretical overview of retirement funding. Assets must earn
8.16% over the long-term to keep the unfunded actuarial accrued liability (see amortization above)
from growing. A lower return due to underperforming investments will cause the unfunded liability to
grow. The investment return is the single most important component of the long-term stability of a
pension fund.
$1.810 B $1.553 B
$31.5 M $30.1 M (11.38% of Pensionable Salaries)
$25.2 M (8.40% of Pensionable Salaries)
$52.4 M
(19.78% of Pensionable Salaries)
Page 6 of 7
Funding Retiree Health and Other Benefit Costs
Currently, retirees receive health and other benefits outside of the basic pension benefit. These other
benefits are not officially or explicitly paid for through the normal method described above. The
method used to pay for these other benefits is a complicated process that takes a portion (50%) of the
investment earnings above the expected rate of return (“excess earnings”) and sets it aside for these
other benefits. This is not an actuarially sound practice because “excess earnings” are not equivalent
to surplus earnings. Effectively, this practice diverts assets from the basic pension and increases the
unfunded liability. The table below shows the fiscal impact of this practice on the unfunded liability.
With the current practice, the unfunded liability is $257 million. If the practice was not followed, all
assets would be available for the basic pension benefit and there is no additional liability outside of
the basic pension benefit, the unfunded liability would be reduced by $138 million to $119 million.
Each time there is a distribution of “excess earnings,” the unfunded liability will increase. For
example, at 6/30/06, “excess earnings” totaled $86 million. If these are distributed, 50% or $43
million will go towards increasing the retiree health or other benefits and the unfunded liability will
increase by $43 million to $300 million. The associated County UAAL rate will then increase from
9.29% to 11.31% to pay for the increase in the unfunded liability increasing County costs by an
additional $5 million annually. In addition, the plan sponsor does not contribute the additional cost of
the retiree health benefit on an annual basis creating additional unfunded liabilities.
Without Impact of
Current Current "Excess"
(in millions - based on FYE 6/30/06) Practice Practice Distribution
Assets Available - Basic Pension Benefits 1,415 1,553 1,372
Assets Available - Other Retiree Benefits 138 - 181
Total Assets Available 1,553 1,553 1,553
Liability (future cost) - Basic Pension Benefits 1,672 1,672 1672
Liability (future cost) - Other Retiree Benefits 138 - 181
Total Liability 1,810 1,672 1,853
Difference (Assets less Costs = "Unfunded Liability") (257) (119) (300)
History of Costs for Retiree Health & Other Benefits
Estimated
(in thousands) FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 01/02 FY 02/03 FY 03/04 FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07
Retiree Health Costs 3,272 3,676 3,876 4,834 5,202 5,740 6,005 6,250
Cash In-Lieu of Health 273 284 350 520 549 435 449 450
Ad Hoc COLA Costs 2,333 2,321 3,397 2,382 2,334 2,304 2,256 2,300
Total Other Benefits 5,878 6,281 7,623 7,736 8,085 8,479 8,710 9,000
The costs of these external benefits have grown 48% from FY 1999/00 to FY 2005/06. The
Mercer/Kroll report states that “a long-term return of 9.6% would result in the distribution of over $3
billion in additional retiree benefits over the next 50 years,” which is two times our current assets of
$1.553 billion available for basic pension benefits. The nature of these benefit increases is
unsustainable by the plan sponsor.
Page 7 of 7
Conclusion
Decision makers should be concerned with the complexities of the benefit, investment and funding
policies. What follows are a few concerns:
The system has a 50% chance that it will earn more than 8.16% over the long-term and a 50% chance
that it will not earn 8.16%. The volatility of investment returns should always be the first thing
considered in any system decision.
The County budget is under stress from the requirement to increase contributions. Actuarial
smoothing helps with contribution rates but increases long-term costs. Each decision maker on the
Board of Supervisors and Retirement Board should strive to eliminate the UAAL. The goal should be to
pay only the next year’s normal cost and all normal costs should be paid annually.
The retirement trustees are contemplating continuing the practice of distributing “excess earnings”
for new retiree health benefits. It may be argued that it is not prudent to do so if the pension benefits
are not fully funded and perhaps more than fully funded.
The County is not funding the additional annual cost of retiree health benefits on an annual basis.
To be competitive with other public safety agencies the County granted the 3% at 50 benefit for
public safety members (Sheriff). This cost is not yet reflected in the normal rate or the UAAL rate
currently being paid by the County.
The need to provide competitive benefits for general members both for benefit formula and employee
contributions continues to be an issue. The County needs to carefully consider and understand the
costs associated with any change in benefits.
CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate
of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement System
for its comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005. This was the fifth
consecutive year that SBCERS submitted the report for consideration and received this prestigious award.
End of
http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/Publications/CountyRetirementCosts.pdf
Pension Fund Data Web Site
http://www.countyofsb.org/sbcers/default.aspx?id=19040&ekmensel=e2f22c9a_608_622_btnlink
http://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/sbcers/ActuarialValuation20090630.pdf
http://www.countyofsb.org/sbcers/fnp/2007FinalValuation.pdf
http://www.allianceresourceconsulting.com/Profiles/460.pdf
http://www.hfmweek.com/news/526392/santa-barbara-pension-looks-to-replace-arden.thtml
Santa Barbara pension looks to replace Arden
The $1.7bn Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement System (SBCERS) has terminated its only hedge fund manager, Arden Asset Management, but will look to replace the investment this summer.
Money Management Letter
http://www.moneymanagementletter.com/Search.aspx?SearchStr=Santa%20Barbara%20County%20Employees%20Retirement%20System
http://www.ipe.com/realestate/santa-barbara-county-opens-separate-account-search_34572.php
Santa Barbara County opens separate account search
1 April 2010 17:04:
UNITED STATES - Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement System has approved a Request for Information to hire a discretionary separate account real estate manager.
http://www.independent.com/news/2009/mar/12/county-budget-bloodbath/
Sounds like bankruptcy is in the county’s future. Seriously. Under Chapter 9 of the Federal Bankruptcy Act a local government can declare bankruptcy, void all of its contracts including pension obligations, and start fresh. No government has been so lavish with pension and benefits than our local pols. Easy for them: buy off the unions, get votes, get termed out, and leave the taxpayers to deal with the problems. So my vote is for bankruptcy, the recall of all Supes, and a new election to replace them with leaders and problems solvers.
Read this letter is she really serious?
http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s70306/s70306-574.pdf
http://www.sbcgj.org/2009/responses/SBCERS_Response.pdf
Below is a partial response to the Grand Jury report from 2009.
In there response the B.O.S. claims a17.2% return and yet the Pension fund reflects 143 million dollar loss
Pension association
http://www.sacrs.org/mc/page.do?sitePageId=20260&orgId=slgs
Pension Watch
http://pensiontsunami.com/blog/?p=85
Read the numbers in this story
http://www.kcoy.com/Global/story.asp?S=12192053
Is it 2 Billion as listed below or 1.2 Billion on the next page?
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-137823402/deadline-participant-sues-avon.html
Santa Barbara Hires for Int’l Equity.
Magazine article from: Investment Management Weekly Sorondo, Marc October 24, 2005 700+ words ...2 billion Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement System (SBCERS) has hired New Star Asset Management to manage an active international...Street Global Advisors, but Peters said that New Star was selected because of its investment style
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2008/lr20471.htm
“SEC Distributes Nearly $50 Million to Defrauded Xerox Investors
The Xerox Fair Fund resulted from SEC actions brought in 2002 and 2003 against Xerox Corporation, five of its officers, Xerox’s independent audit firm (KPMG, LLP) and five KPMG accountants who held senior positions on the Xerox engagement. Among them, the defendants paid more than $46 million to settle SEC charges that they caused Xerox to make materially false and misleading statements in SEC filings. (Ten million dollars of the total amount was paid by Xerox to the U.S. Treasury before the Fair Fund provisions were enacted.)” Please go to the above web page for full version of the S.E.C. report
The Cause of Corruption in Pension Funds and Corporate America. Failure to provide Accurate Financial information is Criminal
Read JohnTorell's comments,Mr Torell was formerly the auditor for Santa Barbara County for 12 years before coming here.
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-government/10581680-1.html
Accounting For A Crisis: City Auditor Leads Overhaul Of Outdated Financial System
By Allen, Mike
Publication: San Diego Business Journal
Date: Monday, January 16 2006
You are viewing page 1
While the spotlight on San Diego's ongoing financial crisis remains on the city's pension deficit of some $1.4 billion, the underlying cause for the city's problems stems from a systemic failure to fully disclose its financial information, said City Auditor and Comptroller John Torell.
Appointed in March to replace former Auditor Ed Ryan, who resigned in February 2004, Torell is spearheading an overhaul of a financial reporting system he called chaotic and antiquated.
"What got us into trouble was not because of a large pension deficit. A lot of organizations have large pension deficits. It was because we didn't tell the truth in our financial statements," Torell said.
"We didn't give full, adequate disclosure about the financial bind that we're in. We glossed over it."
At the center of the non-disclosure is the city's 2003 consolidated annual financial report. The annual report must be filed as a requirement of the city's issuing municipal bonds that investors advance in return for annual interest payments.
Errors And Omissions
In January 2004, the city disclosed to a number of national securities information repositories a series of errors and omissions in its 2003 fiscal year report for the year ended June 30, 2003.
The documents essentially admitted that earlier disclosed liabilities of its employee pension fund and its wastewater system were not accurate. Because of changes in the city's contributions (as a result of two under-funding decisions by the City Council and the retirement board) to its employee pension fund, the city's unfunded liability could fall to 65 percent and total as much as $2.4 billion in the coming years, according to disclosure documents dated Jan. 27, 2004.
Shortly after the disclosures were filed, investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the U.S. attorney's office, and the district attorney's office were launched. Two bond rating agencies downgraded ratings on outstanding city bonds, and a third agency, Standard & Poor's, halted any review of its debt until the city delivered audited annual financial reports.
The investigations led to criminal indictments by the district attorney's office of five former members of the city's retirement board in May. On Jan. 6, the U.S. attorney's office announced grand jury felony indictments of three former pension board members, its former attorney and its chief administrator. Three of the recently charged were also indicted in the state case.
Federal officials said the investigation into the pension debacle is continuing, which some interpret as meaning additional indictments will follow.
The arcane language contained in the city's disclosure documents make it difficult to ascertain the scope of the past errors, but Torell estimated the net total in the 2003 report to be $600 million
Help Wanted
Faced with an inability to issue new debt, mainly because of the lack of current annual financial reports, the city has attempted to rectify the situation by hiring a host of accounting and legal consultants. Through last month, the cost for these consultants had risen to $26 million, according to the city auditor's office.
As part of its remediation effort, the city
adopted an ordinance in October 2004 to go beyond merely providing financial reports, but to achieve a higher standard in its financial disclosures, including requiring an annual evaluation of the city's internal control system.
The City Council adopted a law that was like a "mini-SarbanesOxley," the accounting reform law passed in 2002 in response to some high-profile corporate accounting scandals, to
show regulators its intention to create a more transparent accounting of its financials, said Torell, who was the auditor for Santa Barbara County for 12 years before coming here.
"What they want to do is assure that the processes and controls that we have in place will ensure that we have accurate and timely financial statements," he said.
Based on Torell's report released Jan. 1,
the city has a lot of work to do.
The report states that the current controls over its financial reporting are inadequate; that its outdated business processes are manually intensive and prone to error, its staff is not sufficiently trained; and the financial reporting system needs automating.
The most important aspect of resolving the problem rests with the city's elected officials and top managers to foster a more open environment for staffers to do their jobs, Torell said.
The city should eliminate an "authoritarian control environment" in managing its staffers so they won't hesitate in speaking out when they feel something isn't being done correctly, the report states.
"The people around here have been told to 'sit down and shut up.' That's been the general rule," he said.
Among the steps Torell has already implemented is setting up a computerized financial reporting system at a cost of about $75,000.
Other remediation steps proposed in the report are establishing a new position of chief accountant; providing ongoing professional training for managers and clerical staff, in addition to biannual ethics training for all staffers; and establishing an employee hot line for staffers to provide anonymous input on perceived problems.
Fred Sainz, a spokesman for Mayor Jerry Sanders, said Sanders read Torell's report and is aware of his proposed solutions.
Once newly hired CFO Jay Goldstone begins his job, he will conduct an assessment of all the departments that report to him, including the auditor's office, and implement steps to improve operations, Sainz said.
Torell, who oversees a staff of 97 and an annual budget of $9.8 million this year, wasn't sure of the total cost for all the planned steps, but said he's already cut I I positions from his department's payroll resulting in an annual saving of about $1.6 million.
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-government/10581680-1.html
Accounting For A Crisis: City Auditor Leads Overhaul Of Outdated Financial System
By Allen, Mike
Publication: San Diego Business Journal
Date: Monday, January 16 2006
You are viewing page 1
While the spotlight on San Diego's ongoing financial crisis remains on the city's pension deficit of some $1.4 billion, the underlying cause for the city's problems stems from a systemic failure to fully disclose its financial information, said City Auditor and Comptroller John Torell.
Appointed in March to replace former Auditor Ed Ryan, who resigned in February 2004, Torell is spearheading an overhaul of a financial reporting system he called chaotic and antiquated.
"What got us into trouble was not because of a large pension deficit. A lot of organizations have large pension deficits. It was because we didn't tell the truth in our financial statements," Torell said.
"We didn't give full, adequate disclosure about the financial bind that we're in. We glossed over it."
At the center of the non-disclosure is the city's 2003 consolidated annual financial report. The annual report must be filed as a requirement of the city's issuing municipal bonds that investors advance in return for annual interest payments.
Errors And Omissions
In January 2004, the city disclosed to a number of national securities information repositories a series of errors and omissions in its 2003 fiscal year report for the year ended June 30, 2003.
The documents essentially admitted that earlier disclosed liabilities of its employee pension fund and its wastewater system were not accurate. Because of changes in the city's contributions (as a result of two under-funding decisions by the City Council and the retirement board) to its employee pension fund, the city's unfunded liability could fall to 65 percent and total as much as $2.4 billion in the coming years, according to disclosure documents dated Jan. 27, 2004.
Shortly after the disclosures were filed, investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the U.S. attorney's office, and the district attorney's office were launched. Two bond rating agencies downgraded ratings on outstanding city bonds, and a third agency, Standard & Poor's, halted any review of its debt until the city delivered audited annual financial reports.
The investigations led to criminal indictments by the district attorney's office of five former members of the city's retirement board in May. On Jan. 6, the U.S. attorney's office announced grand jury felony indictments of three former pension board members, its former attorney and its chief administrator. Three of the recently charged were also indicted in the state case.
Federal officials said the investigation into the pension debacle is continuing, which some interpret as meaning additional indictments will follow.
The arcane language contained in the city's disclosure documents make it difficult to ascertain the scope of the past errors, but Torell estimated the net total in the 2003 report to be $600 million
Help Wanted
Faced with an inability to issue new debt, mainly because of the lack of current annual financial reports, the city has attempted to rectify the situation by hiring a host of accounting and legal consultants. Through last month, the cost for these consultants had risen to $26 million, according to the city auditor's office.
As part of its remediation effort, the city
adopted an ordinance in October 2004 to go beyond merely providing financial reports, but to achieve a higher standard in its financial disclosures, including requiring an annual evaluation of the city's internal control system.
The City Council adopted a law that was like a "mini-SarbanesOxley," the accounting reform law passed in 2002 in response to some high-profile corporate accounting scandals, to
show regulators its intention to create a more transparent accounting of its financials, said Torell, who was the auditor for Santa Barbara County for 12 years before coming here.
"What they want to do is assure that the processes and controls that we have in place will ensure that we have accurate and timely financial statements," he said.
Based on Torell's report released Jan. 1,
the city has a lot of work to do.
The report states that the current controls over its financial reporting are inadequate; that its outdated business processes are manually intensive and prone to error, its staff is not sufficiently trained; and the financial reporting system needs automating.
The most important aspect of resolving the problem rests with the city's elected officials and top managers to foster a more open environment for staffers to do their jobs, Torell said.
The city should eliminate an "authoritarian control environment" in managing its staffers so they won't hesitate in speaking out when they feel something isn't being done correctly, the report states.
"The people around here have been told to 'sit down and shut up.' That's been the general rule," he said.
Among the steps Torell has already implemented is setting up a computerized financial reporting system at a cost of about $75,000.
Other remediation steps proposed in the report are establishing a new position of chief accountant; providing ongoing professional training for managers and clerical staff, in addition to biannual ethics training for all staffers; and establishing an employee hot line for staffers to provide anonymous input on perceived problems.
Fred Sainz, a spokesman for Mayor Jerry Sanders, said Sanders read Torell's report and is aware of his proposed solutions.
Once newly hired CFO Jay Goldstone begins his job, he will conduct an assessment of all the departments that report to him, including the auditor's office, and implement steps to improve operations, Sainz said.
Torell, who oversees a staff of 97 and an annual budget of $9.8 million this year, wasn't sure of the total cost for all the planned steps, but said he's already cut I I positions from his department's payroll resulting in an annual saving of about $1.6 million.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Concern over Santa Barbara District Attorney candidate Josh Lynn's firing, who cares?
My Response to “Law and disorder in D.A.’s Office ( A story in Thursdays news press).
Ever since last Monday I am stunned by the double standard a select few wish to exercise in regards to recently fired Deputy District Attorney Josh Lynn. To show concern for only is civil rights with all the outrage in this community over corruption and abuse in our local courts. My feeling is that Josh Lynn should be ashamed of himself complaining his rights were violated. Try being a 12 or 14 year old boy and only getting referred to as either an alleged or a Gang member every time Mr. Lynn spoke. What about there civil rights? In the needless death of Angel Linares reports of over 100 kids were at the scene, yet over half were not involved in the fighting. They showed the intelligence an respect to the law and got the hell out of there. Yet we never reach out to that portion of our youth, why is that? Just yesterday 06/24/10 in the Santa Barbara News press under the classification of Guest Opinion Terry Tyler a retired Certified Public Accountant made several bold statements in support of the “alleged” victim Josh Lynn. I agree with his opening statement;” Something has gone terribly wrong at the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office and no amount of spin can hide it.” Mr. Tyler may I make one small suggestion; something HAS been terribly wrong in the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office. I stand corrected though because after a second viewing of your opinions I agree with more than I thought.
1- Mr. Lynn ran an attack campaign making accusations of corruption.. Thus possibly upsetting and possibly exposing many of his colleagues in the D.A.’s office to the same unwanted scrutiny.
2- As information comes out Mr. Lynn went to the press and a story was run without verifying the facts first as to why the 1 day leave. The story appeared in the Sunday press almost as if a favor to Mr. Lynn since everything he was claiming was to have happen Friday after hours. Any responsible journalist would have held the story giving some professional courtesy by contacting Ms. Bramsen when she became available. Than and only after factoring in her comments an reasoning would a story be released instead of shooting from the hip for cheap theatrics.
3- Mr. Tyler feels this was a punishment handed down to Mr. Lynn after the election. I feel that maybe some people not in the know should let a sleeping dog lie. I have come across several people who claim Josh Lynn was there marijuana dealer in years gone by. In a reply I received to one of my postings the person raised several questions regarding contributors to the Josh Lynn campaign. The contributors claimed to be D.B.A. xxxx and donated 5000.00. However upon reviewing the D.B.A. the names of the donors and the business did not match. I must admit I have not verified that fact but there is more. The person than went on to say that in fact the donors had just purchased 100 acres in Santa Maria for illegal marijuana crops. I am not sure how to digest this except to say did that act represent some type of election fraud? If indeed the donors are not as they claimed and should the District Attorneys office investigate that?
4- Are you kidding me Mr. Tyler, “what a horrible message this action sends to others, who will now dare to run for office”. Can you Say TOM SNEDDON one of the most vindictive S.O.B.’s every to falsely claim he was a public servant.
5- Mr. Tyler also adds” What about freedom of speech, what about Josh Lynn’s civil rights.”? Mr. Lynn has the right to free speech he just does not have the right to lie about what was actually happen in order to seek public sympathy. As for his civil rights, I will get back to that subject in just a moment.
6- Mr. Tyler than goes onto say ‘With all the problems the District Attorneys Office has had throughout these last few years, this is exactly what the office doesn’t need.”. I again find myself agreeing with Mr. Tyler. What if the firing of Mr. Lynn is in fact addressing your brilliant observation?
7- Thank god a C.P.A. brings up our County Budget problems. Mr. Tyler did you know that over 1 billion dollars goes of the radar for a whole year? That’s right Mr. Geis our County Auditor-Controller goes so far as to draft a letter clearing up concerns some appeared to be having mid 2000’s. With our county pension fund. The odd thing is in the attempt to clear things up Mr. Geis shows accounting in that letter for 2000,2002,2003,2004,but not 2001. So I than check all the yearly reports and almost 99.9% of 2001 data on any yearly report is absent including 2001 altogether. I than look into who was the auditing company used by the County. Santa Barbara was using KPMG, so take a peek at there lack of credibility below. An one more note I think they are still in service to our county Pension fund.
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2008/lr20471.htm
“SEC Distributes Nearly $50 Million to Defrauded Xerox Investors
The Xerox Fair Fund resulted from SEC actions brought in 2002 and 2003 against Xerox Corporation, five of its officers, Xerox's independent audit firm (KPMG, LLP) and five KPMG accountants who held senior positions on the Xerox engagement. Among them, the defendants paid more than $46 million to settle SEC charges that they caused Xerox to make materially false and misleading statements in SEC filings. (Ten million dollars of the total amount was paid by Xerox to the U.S. Treasury before the Fair Fund provisions were enacted.)”
My point is this Mr. Tyler, while Josh Lynn was in control of the office, did he investigate any of my findings I forwarded him?
8- Mr. Tyler you question the level of service we can expect from our elected law enforcement officials and the actions of Ms. Bramsen and newly elected District Attorney Joyce Dudley.
I question the motive behind concerns being put out Josh Lynn’s way. I feel the good old boys are upset there hand picked successor failed to meet the objective assigned to him. When Joyce Dudley was publicly pulled off her case load in inner office politics and was replaced by corrupt Mary Barron were you worried about her Civil Rights, or disrespect she was forced to face in public? When Judge Ochoa sentenced Peter Jeschke for 2 counts of having sex with a minor in the lightest possible fashion did her acting supervisor Josh Lynn publicly support her? An by the way why was there no suspended sentence for Mr. jeschke since he had a second trial coming up. To be honest we have not heard anything about that outcome either. Hell Josh Lynn could not even concede the election in a professional manner allowing Joyce Dudley a victory speech.
More than that Mr. Tyler what about my civil rights with 7 false strike-able felonies? How about the civil rights of those falsely accused with a felony from the old Santa Barbara district attorney’s office. The only thing you can call it is malicious prosecution when 30% of those originally charged with a felony are dismissed? However not until they are forced to pay the higher felony bail and attorney fees. I feel if Josh Lynn has had his rights violated he is entitled to his day in court. If that day in court is in Santa Barbara he will need more than good luck just ask the 14 year old boy framed for murder, Ricardo Juarez.
If we do not care about those we are sworn to protect what right do we have to complain when our own rights receive the same unjust treatment?
Mr. Tyler I keep a blog @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com
Please review some of the many other concerns I have in this County.
Sincerely
Larry Mendoza
Ever since last Monday I am stunned by the double standard a select few wish to exercise in regards to recently fired Deputy District Attorney Josh Lynn. To show concern for only is civil rights with all the outrage in this community over corruption and abuse in our local courts. My feeling is that Josh Lynn should be ashamed of himself complaining his rights were violated. Try being a 12 or 14 year old boy and only getting referred to as either an alleged or a Gang member every time Mr. Lynn spoke. What about there civil rights? In the needless death of Angel Linares reports of over 100 kids were at the scene, yet over half were not involved in the fighting. They showed the intelligence an respect to the law and got the hell out of there. Yet we never reach out to that portion of our youth, why is that? Just yesterday 06/24/10 in the Santa Barbara News press under the classification of Guest Opinion Terry Tyler a retired Certified Public Accountant made several bold statements in support of the “alleged” victim Josh Lynn. I agree with his opening statement;” Something has gone terribly wrong at the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office and no amount of spin can hide it.” Mr. Tyler may I make one small suggestion; something HAS been terribly wrong in the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office. I stand corrected though because after a second viewing of your opinions I agree with more than I thought.
1- Mr. Lynn ran an attack campaign making accusations of corruption.. Thus possibly upsetting and possibly exposing many of his colleagues in the D.A.’s office to the same unwanted scrutiny.
2- As information comes out Mr. Lynn went to the press and a story was run without verifying the facts first as to why the 1 day leave. The story appeared in the Sunday press almost as if a favor to Mr. Lynn since everything he was claiming was to have happen Friday after hours. Any responsible journalist would have held the story giving some professional courtesy by contacting Ms. Bramsen when she became available. Than and only after factoring in her comments an reasoning would a story be released instead of shooting from the hip for cheap theatrics.
3- Mr. Tyler feels this was a punishment handed down to Mr. Lynn after the election. I feel that maybe some people not in the know should let a sleeping dog lie. I have come across several people who claim Josh Lynn was there marijuana dealer in years gone by. In a reply I received to one of my postings the person raised several questions regarding contributors to the Josh Lynn campaign. The contributors claimed to be D.B.A. xxxx and donated 5000.00. However upon reviewing the D.B.A. the names of the donors and the business did not match. I must admit I have not verified that fact but there is more. The person than went on to say that in fact the donors had just purchased 100 acres in Santa Maria for illegal marijuana crops. I am not sure how to digest this except to say did that act represent some type of election fraud? If indeed the donors are not as they claimed and should the District Attorneys office investigate that?
4- Are you kidding me Mr. Tyler, “what a horrible message this action sends to others, who will now dare to run for office”. Can you Say TOM SNEDDON one of the most vindictive S.O.B.’s every to falsely claim he was a public servant.
5- Mr. Tyler also adds” What about freedom of speech, what about Josh Lynn’s civil rights.”? Mr. Lynn has the right to free speech he just does not have the right to lie about what was actually happen in order to seek public sympathy. As for his civil rights, I will get back to that subject in just a moment.
6- Mr. Tyler than goes onto say ‘With all the problems the District Attorneys Office has had throughout these last few years, this is exactly what the office doesn’t need.”. I again find myself agreeing with Mr. Tyler. What if the firing of Mr. Lynn is in fact addressing your brilliant observation?
7- Thank god a C.P.A. brings up our County Budget problems. Mr. Tyler did you know that over 1 billion dollars goes of the radar for a whole year? That’s right Mr. Geis our County Auditor-Controller goes so far as to draft a letter clearing up concerns some appeared to be having mid 2000’s. With our county pension fund. The odd thing is in the attempt to clear things up Mr. Geis shows accounting in that letter for 2000,2002,2003,2004,but not 2001. So I than check all the yearly reports and almost 99.9% of 2001 data on any yearly report is absent including 2001 altogether. I than look into who was the auditing company used by the County. Santa Barbara was using KPMG, so take a peek at there lack of credibility below. An one more note I think they are still in service to our county Pension fund.
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2008/lr20471.htm
“SEC Distributes Nearly $50 Million to Defrauded Xerox Investors
The Xerox Fair Fund resulted from SEC actions brought in 2002 and 2003 against Xerox Corporation, five of its officers, Xerox's independent audit firm (KPMG, LLP) and five KPMG accountants who held senior positions on the Xerox engagement. Among them, the defendants paid more than $46 million to settle SEC charges that they caused Xerox to make materially false and misleading statements in SEC filings. (Ten million dollars of the total amount was paid by Xerox to the U.S. Treasury before the Fair Fund provisions were enacted.)”
My point is this Mr. Tyler, while Josh Lynn was in control of the office, did he investigate any of my findings I forwarded him?
8- Mr. Tyler you question the level of service we can expect from our elected law enforcement officials and the actions of Ms. Bramsen and newly elected District Attorney Joyce Dudley.
I question the motive behind concerns being put out Josh Lynn’s way. I feel the good old boys are upset there hand picked successor failed to meet the objective assigned to him. When Joyce Dudley was publicly pulled off her case load in inner office politics and was replaced by corrupt Mary Barron were you worried about her Civil Rights, or disrespect she was forced to face in public? When Judge Ochoa sentenced Peter Jeschke for 2 counts of having sex with a minor in the lightest possible fashion did her acting supervisor Josh Lynn publicly support her? An by the way why was there no suspended sentence for Mr. jeschke since he had a second trial coming up. To be honest we have not heard anything about that outcome either. Hell Josh Lynn could not even concede the election in a professional manner allowing Joyce Dudley a victory speech.
More than that Mr. Tyler what about my civil rights with 7 false strike-able felonies? How about the civil rights of those falsely accused with a felony from the old Santa Barbara district attorney’s office. The only thing you can call it is malicious prosecution when 30% of those originally charged with a felony are dismissed? However not until they are forced to pay the higher felony bail and attorney fees. I feel if Josh Lynn has had his rights violated he is entitled to his day in court. If that day in court is in Santa Barbara he will need more than good luck just ask the 14 year old boy framed for murder, Ricardo Juarez.
If we do not care about those we are sworn to protect what right do we have to complain when our own rights receive the same unjust treatment?
Mr. Tyler I keep a blog @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com
Please review some of the many other concerns I have in this County.
Sincerely
Larry Mendoza
Monday, June 21, 2010
Santa Barbara news storys that seam to get pushed under. The Death at our Mental Health Facility.
METH Bust or Death at the M.H.F
You can always tell when things are being hidden in Santa Barbara and corruption is involved, do you now how? Because the media stops reporting on the issue, story, arrest what ever the subject in question is and you are forced to keep track yourself. What has happen with the following?
1- Still no mention of arraignments or acts to seize real estate located 2078 Las Canoas 93105 as allowed by federal law in the big METH bust? The bust in question is the one that our local Santa Barbara news press has yet to report on. The information below was taken from Sheriff’s web page in regards to the drug bust and is in the middle of posting.
“William Paxson – 11550(a) H&S – Under the influence of a controlled substance, 11364 H&S – Possession of drug paraphernalia, 11366 H&S – Maintaining a dwelling for drug use/sales. Bail was set at $2,500.”
View the home at the link below
http://www.phototoursidx.com/sb/details.php?mlsid=20090818193919423244000000&index=19&propClass=Res&cid=25
Now when I put my house up for sale back in June of 06 because I was being told prison was in my future a certain Santa Barbara Police officer took it upon himself to advise the Realtor to pull my home off the market. After he arrested me of course and get this Mary Barron from the D.a’s office than charged me with 3 strike-able felonies. The big one being for vandalism that resulted in a flat tire with all leads exhausted according to the investigation documents. Actually there was a disagreement between my roommate and I but with no one else present what type of case could she have had? I than later that summer sat in jail for no legal reason and that lasted almost 3 months. I lost the house in an illegal foreclosure 12 of 06.
2- Again still no report in the Santa Barbara new press about the sudden death at our mental health facility, why is that? Are Hector and Efren mental health employees up to there old tricks again?
3- The Lyons double murder case and the “Whisper tape” I thought this trial was ready to start over a month ago?
It closing I find it hard to believe that our Superior Court can have any kind of back log since there is no news from the Court House being reported in print other than the youth murder trial. Now here is a scary thought. The Santa Barbara news press has already commented in there paper that they felt the District Attorneys office has not made there case, humm.
You can always tell when things are being hidden in Santa Barbara and corruption is involved, do you now how? Because the media stops reporting on the issue, story, arrest what ever the subject in question is and you are forced to keep track yourself. What has happen with the following?
1- Still no mention of arraignments or acts to seize real estate located 2078 Las Canoas 93105 as allowed by federal law in the big METH bust? The bust in question is the one that our local Santa Barbara news press has yet to report on. The information below was taken from Sheriff’s web page in regards to the drug bust and is in the middle of posting.
“William Paxson – 11550(a) H&S – Under the influence of a controlled substance, 11364 H&S – Possession of drug paraphernalia, 11366 H&S – Maintaining a dwelling for drug use/sales. Bail was set at $2,500.”
View the home at the link below
http://www.phototoursidx.com/sb/details.php?mlsid=20090818193919423244000000&index=19&propClass=Res&cid=25
Now when I put my house up for sale back in June of 06 because I was being told prison was in my future a certain Santa Barbara Police officer took it upon himself to advise the Realtor to pull my home off the market. After he arrested me of course and get this Mary Barron from the D.a’s office than charged me with 3 strike-able felonies. The big one being for vandalism that resulted in a flat tire with all leads exhausted according to the investigation documents. Actually there was a disagreement between my roommate and I but with no one else present what type of case could she have had? I than later that summer sat in jail for no legal reason and that lasted almost 3 months. I lost the house in an illegal foreclosure 12 of 06.
2- Again still no report in the Santa Barbara new press about the sudden death at our mental health facility, why is that? Are Hector and Efren mental health employees up to there old tricks again?
3- The Lyons double murder case and the “Whisper tape” I thought this trial was ready to start over a month ago?
It closing I find it hard to believe that our Superior Court can have any kind of back log since there is no news from the Court House being reported in print other than the youth murder trial. Now here is a scary thought. The Santa Barbara news press has already commented in there paper that they felt the District Attorneys office has not made there case, humm.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Morgan Hill, Drug Dealers and the Santa Barbara Police what is the Illegal tie in. This stuff is calling Hollywood!
Just random info on case's that were handled illegally, the tip of the ice berg. F.Y.I.
I do have a a question is local law enforcement for sale in a divorce or to drug dealers. SBPD followed me back from an extend stay in Morgan Hill just before my sister the probation officers wedding back in 10/05. I have to go to work right now but my next posting will start at the beginning, I am sure many of you are wondering how this all started. There is only one question to ask that I still cannot answer WHY, why did all this happen. Probably starts and ends with the Golden Rule Money! Larry R. Vega will have a role, sorry to hear his father just past way in Morgan Hill in April.
I am asking you all to keep an open mind with me please. This recording was made the week before I left Morgan Hill, and I felt like I was being chased out by Larry R. Vega and possable friend Oscar Flores locals to Morgan Hill(more on them later) and I could hear this very faint sound in my hotel room. Now I switched rooms 3 times in two months and Larry R. Vega always ended up in the room next to me, why is that? I am in an extended stay monthly rental because my than wife has agreed(she was lying)to try and work on our marriage and move up north. So in my last room I would wake up in the middle of the night and as soon as I opened my eyes this faint noise would start to play as if thy could see inmy room. So i did what any sane person would do I recorded the sound with my cell phone and emailed it to myself. At about 20 seconds into the tape you can hear the word nothing, this will be made important later on today. This recording can be extended by changing pitch thus my interest and knowledge why the "Whisper tape" is pure manure.
So here is my question. Does it not seam possible my illegal detention by SBPD maybe be tied into what they do not want exposed about them being in Morgan Hill? At the time it may have seamed odd but look back now, listen to what they say on the recording, you might want head phones. I have about 10 different lengths and contents from this recording, you will be amazed what I can do with a recording that our Police dept claims they cannot with the "whisper tape". Within 4 weeks I am locked up and the key is thrown away in an effort to ruin my creditability. I hope that has not happen.
So much more to share. Now keep in mind at that time I was 45 years old and never arrested or had as much as a parking ticket. My alleged crime wave lasted 6 months and since being placed on illegal felony probation has never happen again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have re-contacted the family of the patient that died in the Santa Barbara Mental Health facility to keep myself I the loop. I have also contacted the detective in the case to see what I can do about my beating. Any how the stuff below is taking me longer than I thought sorry. Please let me know what you want or don’t want ok.
Larry
I started on my Mental health superior court case complaint , but is this to long winded?
My complaints of criminal civil rights violations by the Santa Barbara District attorneys office will cover several Santa Barbara Superior court cases. Although there will violations from other local law enforcement agencies over lapping with these complaints, we will only deal with the Santa Barbara District attorneys office and the illegal actions by there personnel in this document.
Superior Court Case # 1187044 Mental Health 5150 evaluation and treatment. Since when does mental health care include beatings while being extremely over medicated so as to fog my reporting and or recording the illegal acts?
On Thursday Morning November 18th 2005 the Santa Barbara Police department took custody of me and placed me in the County Mental Health facility as a Danger to Self and Danger to others after a visit to Cottage Hospital and clean drug test. The Santa Barbara police department did this with no documentation or investigation into there claims of any kind in regards to why these actions were being taken in the first place and against my will. The first responding officer informed me that I had threatened to harm my wife and her brother at some recent point in time. I immediately disputed these facts. Upon my eventual release I spoke to my wife and she confirmed no such action had ever taken place by me and neither her nor her brother had ever made such false claims. Further more in a later dated investigation by a district attorney staff no such allegations were every investigated or confirmed by the investigator. I will later in my complaint show why the District Attorneys actions will be challenged on many levels for corruption and the repeated violations of my Constitutional rights. However for now I would like to stay on point with the Mental Health beating I was forced to endure. My Confidential Superior Court Case #1187044 file is virtually empty of any documentation. The file contains only 2 documents with the first one dated 11/21/2005. Neither document in the file can be traced to the date I was first placed under the County care on 11/18/05 The first fax to the local courts is 4 days later 11/21/05 at 12:15pm and is the “ Notice of Certification”. The second document is dated 5 days later on 11/22 and faxed on 11/23 at 8:16 am and is the “Certification review” form from 11/22. Immediately from day one of my being placed under care I requested a Writ of Habeas Corpus be completed on my behalf acting on my Constitutional right to demand an audience with the local magistrate. I did not completely understand the process and wanted counsel to protect me. At no time were public defender services offered to assist me with these matters. On the certification review I was found not D.T.O. or D.T.S. and this time it is noted on the document that I again request a judicial review and Writ be filed on my behalf. Please keep in mind I was not released until 12/01/05 a full 14 days of illegal detention. I was never brought before the Court nor was a writ ever completed or filed on my behalf so that I could petition for my release as allowed by law. Thus I was being held against my will and my Constitutional rights to Due Process were being violated. While being held against my will I was transported 11/23/05 under an emergency situation to the local hospital. While I was in the care of Santa Barbara County at there mental health facility I was being physically abused by being hit in my kidney area while I was also subject to extreme medication. I was returned to the Mental Health facility later that evening of 11/23/05 by ambulance the same way I had left. I must have been cleared of something only after having some type of test by the Cottage hospital emergency staff run and completed. At no time beyond that evening did facility personal at the County Mental health make reference to or act as if emergency medical treatment had been needed by me. It took me 3.5 years to track down the emergency medical transportation and treatment billing for the night of 11/23/05. Upon review of all treatment files the Mental Health Facility kept on me from 11/18 through 12/01/05 they show no such medical treatment. I have requested an investigation of the emergency treatment I received by the following agencies, Public defender, probation, district attorneys, and to date no one will comment or start an investigation in a any kind.
In a letter sent to Mr. Allan Kaplan of the local District attorneys office 06/08/08 I address all the above concerns and he refuses to investigate that matter as well others shared in that correspondence.
Superior Court case # 1188728 filed 01/25/06
The People of California vs. Lawrence Andrew Mendoza
I am charged with a complaint of felony 422 criminal threats by Senior Deputy District attorney Vicki Johnson.
I am falsely charged by the District attorneys office as further abuse continues from case #1187044. The dispatch log report clearly shows the call was considered minor and went out as a disturbing the peace call. Further more at no time in the transcripts is there any claim of any kind of threat being issued and no mention of fear of safety. There was no merit for not only the false charge against me but there actions that followed. For 5 months that followed I was told how grave the felony strike-able charge and situation against me was. The fact that a newly filed divorce was behind these false charges the district attorneys office should have been well aware it was merely a common and illegal divorce tactic and my right should have been protected.
Superior Court case # 1189598 fled 02/07/06 3MORE CASES TO REVIEW
The People of California vs. Lawrence Andrew Mendoza
February 4th 2008
The People vs. Ricardo Juarez Case# 1218867
D.A. argues the issue regarding whisper tape. States that no substantial right of he defendant has been impacted.
The exact same scenario came up in the Lyons double murder and tape was not allowed
On this date Judge Ochoa finds that due to late filing of informational by D.A. Dozer
Case # 1218867 OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT MOTION TO SET ASIDE THE INFORMATION. DATED 01/22/08 Filed by the Santa Barbara District Attorneys and signed by Deputy Franklin. I am only providing you with 4 sheets of the 30 that make up this motion. On page 19 Mr. Franklin makes reference the earlier granting of use immunity for the prosecutions witness Ricardo R. in order to testify against the against the defendant for murder Ricardo Juarez. In line 9 of page 19 of this motion and I quote” Ricardo R. was granted immunity from prosecution for the murder and than testified”. Since the murder charge was singular to Mr. Juarez it seams the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office had proven the defense’s case that reasonable doubt did in fact exist as to the defendants charges and this was done prior to a trial. Now when you go back and examine the circumstances as to how Mr. Juarez was charged in the first place. One can see the Prosecutorial Misconduct
I have a second serious concern of prosecutorial misconduct by the Santa Barbara District attorneys office in this same motion and that starts on page 27. On page 27 starting with line four and I quote “which simply re-alleges the charge alleged in the felony complaint, upon which defendant was held to answer after a six day preliminary examination.’. While yes it is true that after these matters had been concluded and Mr. Juarez’s charges were dropped a second preliminary hearing would be later held and that proceeding did last 6 days. What I would like investigated is how the District attorney could make a reference to that proceeding which had not taken place for at least 2 months into the future. They only way there could be any reference to that hearing would be if this motion had been prepared and post dated after the event in question Thus filling a need for the courts to continue there criminal ways and cover up against the defendant.
It is a bit complicated but the charges were thrown out on 02/05/08 for Mr Juarez’s first case but he was recharged with a new case number # 1257189 in Santa Barbara Superior Court. On 07/18/08 a MOTION RENEWING REQUEST FOR MISTRIAL AND A CITATION FOR PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT is Filed against both prosecutors Hilary Dozer and M. Franklin
I do have a a question is local law enforcement for sale in a divorce or to drug dealers. SBPD followed me back from an extend stay in Morgan Hill just before my sister the probation officers wedding back in 10/05. I have to go to work right now but my next posting will start at the beginning, I am sure many of you are wondering how this all started. There is only one question to ask that I still cannot answer WHY, why did all this happen. Probably starts and ends with the Golden Rule Money! Larry R. Vega will have a role, sorry to hear his father just past way in Morgan Hill in April.
I am asking you all to keep an open mind with me please. This recording was made the week before I left Morgan Hill, and I felt like I was being chased out by Larry R. Vega and possable friend Oscar Flores locals to Morgan Hill(more on them later) and I could hear this very faint sound in my hotel room. Now I switched rooms 3 times in two months and Larry R. Vega always ended up in the room next to me, why is that? I am in an extended stay monthly rental because my than wife has agreed(she was lying)to try and work on our marriage and move up north. So in my last room I would wake up in the middle of the night and as soon as I opened my eyes this faint noise would start to play as if thy could see inmy room. So i did what any sane person would do I recorded the sound with my cell phone and emailed it to myself. At about 20 seconds into the tape you can hear the word nothing, this will be made important later on today. This recording can be extended by changing pitch thus my interest and knowledge why the "Whisper tape" is pure manure.
So here is my question. Does it not seam possible my illegal detention by SBPD maybe be tied into what they do not want exposed about them being in Morgan Hill? At the time it may have seamed odd but look back now, listen to what they say on the recording, you might want head phones. I have about 10 different lengths and contents from this recording, you will be amazed what I can do with a recording that our Police dept claims they cannot with the "whisper tape". Within 4 weeks I am locked up and the key is thrown away in an effort to ruin my creditability. I hope that has not happen.
So much more to share. Now keep in mind at that time I was 45 years old and never arrested or had as much as a parking ticket. My alleged crime wave lasted 6 months and since being placed on illegal felony probation has never happen again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have re-contacted the family of the patient that died in the Santa Barbara Mental Health facility to keep myself I the loop. I have also contacted the detective in the case to see what I can do about my beating. Any how the stuff below is taking me longer than I thought sorry. Please let me know what you want or don’t want ok.
Larry
I started on my Mental health superior court case complaint , but is this to long winded?
My complaints of criminal civil rights violations by the Santa Barbara District attorneys office will cover several Santa Barbara Superior court cases. Although there will violations from other local law enforcement agencies over lapping with these complaints, we will only deal with the Santa Barbara District attorneys office and the illegal actions by there personnel in this document.
Superior Court Case # 1187044 Mental Health 5150 evaluation and treatment. Since when does mental health care include beatings while being extremely over medicated so as to fog my reporting and or recording the illegal acts?
On Thursday Morning November 18th 2005 the Santa Barbara Police department took custody of me and placed me in the County Mental Health facility as a Danger to Self and Danger to others after a visit to Cottage Hospital and clean drug test. The Santa Barbara police department did this with no documentation or investigation into there claims of any kind in regards to why these actions were being taken in the first place and against my will. The first responding officer informed me that I had threatened to harm my wife and her brother at some recent point in time. I immediately disputed these facts. Upon my eventual release I spoke to my wife and she confirmed no such action had ever taken place by me and neither her nor her brother had ever made such false claims. Further more in a later dated investigation by a district attorney staff no such allegations were every investigated or confirmed by the investigator. I will later in my complaint show why the District Attorneys actions will be challenged on many levels for corruption and the repeated violations of my Constitutional rights. However for now I would like to stay on point with the Mental Health beating I was forced to endure. My Confidential Superior Court Case #1187044 file is virtually empty of any documentation. The file contains only 2 documents with the first one dated 11/21/2005. Neither document in the file can be traced to the date I was first placed under the County care on 11/18/05 The first fax to the local courts is 4 days later 11/21/05 at 12:15pm and is the “ Notice of Certification”. The second document is dated 5 days later on 11/22 and faxed on 11/23 at 8:16 am and is the “Certification review” form from 11/22. Immediately from day one of my being placed under care I requested a Writ of Habeas Corpus be completed on my behalf acting on my Constitutional right to demand an audience with the local magistrate. I did not completely understand the process and wanted counsel to protect me. At no time were public defender services offered to assist me with these matters. On the certification review I was found not D.T.O. or D.T.S. and this time it is noted on the document that I again request a judicial review and Writ be filed on my behalf. Please keep in mind I was not released until 12/01/05 a full 14 days of illegal detention. I was never brought before the Court nor was a writ ever completed or filed on my behalf so that I could petition for my release as allowed by law. Thus I was being held against my will and my Constitutional rights to Due Process were being violated. While being held against my will I was transported 11/23/05 under an emergency situation to the local hospital. While I was in the care of Santa Barbara County at there mental health facility I was being physically abused by being hit in my kidney area while I was also subject to extreme medication. I was returned to the Mental Health facility later that evening of 11/23/05 by ambulance the same way I had left. I must have been cleared of something only after having some type of test by the Cottage hospital emergency staff run and completed. At no time beyond that evening did facility personal at the County Mental health make reference to or act as if emergency medical treatment had been needed by me. It took me 3.5 years to track down the emergency medical transportation and treatment billing for the night of 11/23/05. Upon review of all treatment files the Mental Health Facility kept on me from 11/18 through 12/01/05 they show no such medical treatment. I have requested an investigation of the emergency treatment I received by the following agencies, Public defender, probation, district attorneys, and to date no one will comment or start an investigation in a any kind.
In a letter sent to Mr. Allan Kaplan of the local District attorneys office 06/08/08 I address all the above concerns and he refuses to investigate that matter as well others shared in that correspondence.
Superior Court case # 1188728 filed 01/25/06
The People of California vs. Lawrence Andrew Mendoza
I am charged with a complaint of felony 422 criminal threats by Senior Deputy District attorney Vicki Johnson.
I am falsely charged by the District attorneys office as further abuse continues from case #1187044. The dispatch log report clearly shows the call was considered minor and went out as a disturbing the peace call. Further more at no time in the transcripts is there any claim of any kind of threat being issued and no mention of fear of safety. There was no merit for not only the false charge against me but there actions that followed. For 5 months that followed I was told how grave the felony strike-able charge and situation against me was. The fact that a newly filed divorce was behind these false charges the district attorneys office should have been well aware it was merely a common and illegal divorce tactic and my right should have been protected.
Superior Court case # 1189598 fled 02/07/06 3MORE CASES TO REVIEW
The People of California vs. Lawrence Andrew Mendoza
February 4th 2008
The People vs. Ricardo Juarez Case# 1218867
D.A. argues the issue regarding whisper tape. States that no substantial right of he defendant has been impacted.
The exact same scenario came up in the Lyons double murder and tape was not allowed
On this date Judge Ochoa finds that due to late filing of informational by D.A. Dozer
Case # 1218867 OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT MOTION TO SET ASIDE THE INFORMATION. DATED 01/22/08 Filed by the Santa Barbara District Attorneys and signed by Deputy Franklin. I am only providing you with 4 sheets of the 30 that make up this motion. On page 19 Mr. Franklin makes reference the earlier granting of use immunity for the prosecutions witness Ricardo R. in order to testify against the against the defendant for murder Ricardo Juarez. In line 9 of page 19 of this motion and I quote” Ricardo R. was granted immunity from prosecution for the murder and than testified”. Since the murder charge was singular to Mr. Juarez it seams the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office had proven the defense’s case that reasonable doubt did in fact exist as to the defendants charges and this was done prior to a trial. Now when you go back and examine the circumstances as to how Mr. Juarez was charged in the first place. One can see the Prosecutorial Misconduct
I have a second serious concern of prosecutorial misconduct by the Santa Barbara District attorneys office in this same motion and that starts on page 27. On page 27 starting with line four and I quote “which simply re-alleges the charge alleged in the felony complaint, upon which defendant was held to answer after a six day preliminary examination.’. While yes it is true that after these matters had been concluded and Mr. Juarez’s charges were dropped a second preliminary hearing would be later held and that proceeding did last 6 days. What I would like investigated is how the District attorney could make a reference to that proceeding which had not taken place for at least 2 months into the future. They only way there could be any reference to that hearing would be if this motion had been prepared and post dated after the event in question Thus filling a need for the courts to continue there criminal ways and cover up against the defendant.
It is a bit complicated but the charges were thrown out on 02/05/08 for Mr Juarez’s first case but he was recharged with a new case number # 1257189 in Santa Barbara Superior Court. On 07/18/08 a MOTION RENEWING REQUEST FOR MISTRIAL AND A CITATION FOR PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT is Filed against both prosecutors Hilary Dozer and M. Franklin
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Josh Lynn dismissed from Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office, did he try to lie and blow things out of whack?
Lynn Dismissed from DA’s Office, Bramsen Says
http://www.noozhawk.com/noozhawk/article/061510_lynn_dismissed_from_da_office/
By Lara Cooper, Noozhawk Staff Writer
Josh Lynn lost to fellow prosecutor Joyce Dudley in last week’s election for Santa Barbara County district attorney. The two were vying to succeed the late District Attorney Christie Stanley, who died in April of lung cancer. (Lara Cooper / Noozhawk file photo)
The acting DA denounces Josh Lynn's reaction to being put on administrative leave, saying he 'twisted it in an inappropriate way'
Santa Barbara County Acting District Attorney Ann Bramsen announced shortly after 5 p.m. Tuesday that she has terminated Deputy District Attorney Josh Lynn from his position with the office.
Bramsen sent out a statement “to help the public better understand some important general background information,” but added that she was limited by law to disclosing specific details about personnel matters.
After months of campaigning, which often grew rancorous, between District Attorney-elect Joyce Dudley and Lynn, Dudley emerged the winner in last week’s election.
Bramsen said Dudley and Lynn had taken vacation time during the last couple of weeks of the election, and were scheduled to return to work Monday.
Over the weekend, Lynn told local media he had been ordered to remain home from work on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of this week. Bramsen said she had placed him on a one-day administrative leave, a decision she said was made to ensure a smooth transition upon return to the office.
“The one paid day off was not a suspension, nor was it imposed for disciplinary purposes,” Bramsen said. Rather, it was to review administrative organization of the office and to avoid disruption.
But Bramsen said Lynn had taken the one paid day off and “twisted it in an inappropriate way that is negatively affecting the office.”
“After I notified Mr. Lynn of his one paid day off, additional concerns arose that changed my view,” she said in the statement.
Lynn was promoted to chief trial deputy under former District Attorney Christie Stanley. He served as acting district attorney during Stanley’s lengthy battle with lung cancer. She died in April.
Since Lynn was appointed to his position as trial deputy under Stanley, he became an at-will employee, instead of civil service status.
Dudley, who has been unavailable for comment, has said she doesn’t currently have power over personnel matters, which still fall under Bramsen’s domain.
Review the Santa Barbara District Attorney press release at the link below
http://www.noozhawk.com/images/uploads/Lynn_Termination.pdf
Sounds like Josh was playing games Humm?
http://www.noozhawk.com/noozhawk/article/061510_lynn_dismissed_from_da_office/
By Lara Cooper, Noozhawk Staff Writer
Josh Lynn lost to fellow prosecutor Joyce Dudley in last week’s election for Santa Barbara County district attorney. The two were vying to succeed the late District Attorney Christie Stanley, who died in April of lung cancer. (Lara Cooper / Noozhawk file photo)
The acting DA denounces Josh Lynn's reaction to being put on administrative leave, saying he 'twisted it in an inappropriate way'
Santa Barbara County Acting District Attorney Ann Bramsen announced shortly after 5 p.m. Tuesday that she has terminated Deputy District Attorney Josh Lynn from his position with the office.
Bramsen sent out a statement “to help the public better understand some important general background information,” but added that she was limited by law to disclosing specific details about personnel matters.
After months of campaigning, which often grew rancorous, between District Attorney-elect Joyce Dudley and Lynn, Dudley emerged the winner in last week’s election.
Bramsen said Dudley and Lynn had taken vacation time during the last couple of weeks of the election, and were scheduled to return to work Monday.
Over the weekend, Lynn told local media he had been ordered to remain home from work on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of this week. Bramsen said she had placed him on a one-day administrative leave, a decision she said was made to ensure a smooth transition upon return to the office.
“The one paid day off was not a suspension, nor was it imposed for disciplinary purposes,” Bramsen said. Rather, it was to review administrative organization of the office and to avoid disruption.
But Bramsen said Lynn had taken the one paid day off and “twisted it in an inappropriate way that is negatively affecting the office.”
“After I notified Mr. Lynn of his one paid day off, additional concerns arose that changed my view,” she said in the statement.
Lynn was promoted to chief trial deputy under former District Attorney Christie Stanley. He served as acting district attorney during Stanley’s lengthy battle with lung cancer. She died in April.
Since Lynn was appointed to his position as trial deputy under Stanley, he became an at-will employee, instead of civil service status.
Dudley, who has been unavailable for comment, has said she doesn’t currently have power over personnel matters, which still fall under Bramsen’s domain.
Review the Santa Barbara District Attorney press release at the link below
http://www.noozhawk.com/images/uploads/Lynn_Termination.pdf
Sounds like Josh was playing games Humm?
Monday, June 14, 2010
Josh Lynn loser in the heated Santa Barbara District Attorneys race is claiming there is corruptuion in his Office, Really?
I sit here in daze and cannot make up my mind. Since early this morning when I first read the Santa Barbara new press story about Josh Lynn I wonder is he just a God send, no just plane too DUMB for his own good! Please review a quote from the front page story regarding Mr.Lynn and I will go from there.
," Mr. Lynn said. However, claimed Mr. Lynn, "paid administrative leave doesn't exist unless you have done something wrong."
Mr. Lynn said that he believes this to be an illegal order, but will abide by it because he doesn't want to be "disruptive".
As always Mr. Lynn’s lack of professionalism and respect for his office co-workers is the first thing that comes out of the above quote for me. What ever happen to keeping things in house and not going public? The second thing that immediately comes to mind is the stupidity in acting as if we should have concern over ANOTHER Illegal act has been handed down by our Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office. Are you kidding me, do you really want me to count the illegal act’s the Santa Barbara district attorneys office is involved in.
1- the sentencing of Denise D'Sant Angelo which because of my Real Estate back ground called her crime an escrow violation at best. I was referring to the possible co-mingling of funds which is all she is really guilty of. In fact in her other “alleged crime” or second case I ask this question to the public. Are we to believe that A- the Sanchez’s had 19,000 to pay her and not there mortgage payment? B why the need for her help if they had 19,000 dollars in there possession unless they were guilty themselves (the Sanchez’s) of some type of mortgage fraud? C- that the 2 spouse’s disagree over her alleged act and still resultied charges?
2- That a person was sentenced to 40 years on Voluntary Manslaughter last week in Santa Barbara yet manslaughter carries a maximum of an 11 year sentence? Do you think this person gives a damn Josh Lynn had his hand spanked in public? 4 x the original sentence with special allegations which is the only reason I called into questioned the legality of the additional 29 years coming from special allegations.
3- How about the fact after you completed your Hollywood trial the Jury had no clue how the law applied to the case you had just presented them. Than had to call a bailiff to the jury room to ask that this portion be cleared up for them? The story in the Santa Barbara Independent verifies that fact? This is your legal highlight?
4- That the Santa Barbara police allowed a “Alleged Gang “ fight to happen on State street 03/14/07 that has resulted in 1 death that day and resulted in further acts of violence after the fact.
5- How about in the trial of Angel Linares from above, Jr. High students were forced to give false testimony on the stand by a select few in local law enforcement. I wonder what kind of threats they received from those sworn to protect them?
6- I dare Mr. Lynn to speak of the abuse’s handed down to one of the Mothers of a recent Murder victim here in Santa Barbara and what she has been put through with out the public’s knowledge? Stop acting like you care Josh Lynn.
7- In the Lyons Double murder trial what happens to the “Whisper Tape”. An by the way how is it a listening device designed to pick up conversation in secret never seams to come through with proper audible? Do you really thing the general public is so dumb they have not questioned that for themselves.
8- How about case 1213063 & 1212944 where I Larry Mendoza CDL# N8858927 was held illegally and against my will for almost 3 months in Santa Barbara county jail for a protection order that was only not allowed but never had grounds to be issued.
9- Case numbers 1188728, 1189598, 1211869 were I again Larry Mendoza was charged with 7 strike-able felony’s all for alleged terrorist threats I never made. In fact one case is a private discussion that should have never seen a jail cell much less a court room. 1 alleged threat accusation was made to be used as a divorce tactic and law enforcement is well aware of the use. The police 911 transcript called it a disturbing the piece call. Yet again I received a felony strike-able charge. How about the breaking into a hotel room after me having 3400 dollars cash stolen from it than arresting me with out a warrant. The term “in hot pursuit” was used to by pass the legal process our Country requires. An all charges were later dropped but 1? How about the beating I took while under doctor’s care at our local Health Facility that has not bee investigated?
10- How about Ricardo Juarez the young 14 year old framed in the Angel Linares murder? How about the document supplied in Superior court regarding a witness’s testimony and granting of use immunity to the likely guilty party? Would you like me to forward that Mr. Lynn and this was done during the first preliminary hearing.
11- How about the Billion dollar cover up regarding the County Pension and by the way before I forget why must the County make up the difference in funds? The county according to the Government code cannot be held responsible for a debt beyond 1 year. Thus the importance of yearly budgeting. Look up the P.E.R.’s drama people they asked for help from the State it was not required. In fact P.E.R.’s accounts are frozen while further investigations occur.
12- DO YOU REALLY WANT ME TO CONTINUE?
In closing Josh Lynn just think before you speak because I already have enough documentation to send Mary Barron, Greg Boller, Judge Brian Hill and public defender Karen Adkins to federal prison for R.I.C.O. act violations and would love to add you to this list!
Best Regards
Larry Mendoza
Below is the news press story I referenced at the top of my posting;
CHRISTINA KIRCHNER, NEWS-PRESS CORRESPONDENT
June 14, 2010 6:39 AM
Santa Barbara County Deputy District Attorney Josh Lynn said Sunday he has been placed on administrative leave by Acting District Attorney Ann Bramsen.
Mr. Lynn, who recently was an unsuccessful candidate for the position of district attorney, told the News-Press that he was instructed not to report for work Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.
According to Mr. Lynn, he received a message at 5:15 p.m. on Friday from Ms. Bramsen, ordering him to not come in Monday through Wednesday. "I asked her if I was fired and she said, 'No,' that I was just on paid administrative leave," Mr. Lynn said. However, claimed Mr. Lynn, "paid administrative leave doesn't exist unless you have done something wrong."
Mr. Lynn said that he believes this to be an illegal order, but will abide by it because he doesn't want to be "disruptive."
He said that he will not know anything concerning his position until after Wednesday." I find it very hard to move on when I don't know what is going to happen," he said. "They refuse to tell me anything," referring to the DA's office.
Before the recent primary election, tension was reported between the newly elected district attorney, Joyce Dudley, and Mr. Lynn. In an interview with the News-Press in May, Mr. Lynn said, "She's said from day one she would fire me. I think that says it all."
However, Ms. Dudley had no definitive response to this allegation.
"I have no authority to order Josh to stay home," Ms. Dudley said by telephone Sunday afternoon. "All questions have to be directed toward the acting district attorney."
Repeated attempts to contact Ms. Bramsen for comment were unsuccessful.
," Mr. Lynn said. However, claimed Mr. Lynn, "paid administrative leave doesn't exist unless you have done something wrong."
Mr. Lynn said that he believes this to be an illegal order, but will abide by it because he doesn't want to be "disruptive".
As always Mr. Lynn’s lack of professionalism and respect for his office co-workers is the first thing that comes out of the above quote for me. What ever happen to keeping things in house and not going public? The second thing that immediately comes to mind is the stupidity in acting as if we should have concern over ANOTHER Illegal act has been handed down by our Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office. Are you kidding me, do you really want me to count the illegal act’s the Santa Barbara district attorneys office is involved in.
1- the sentencing of Denise D'Sant Angelo which because of my Real Estate back ground called her crime an escrow violation at best. I was referring to the possible co-mingling of funds which is all she is really guilty of. In fact in her other “alleged crime” or second case I ask this question to the public. Are we to believe that A- the Sanchez’s had 19,000 to pay her and not there mortgage payment? B why the need for her help if they had 19,000 dollars in there possession unless they were guilty themselves (the Sanchez’s) of some type of mortgage fraud? C- that the 2 spouse’s disagree over her alleged act and still resultied charges?
2- That a person was sentenced to 40 years on Voluntary Manslaughter last week in Santa Barbara yet manslaughter carries a maximum of an 11 year sentence? Do you think this person gives a damn Josh Lynn had his hand spanked in public? 4 x the original sentence with special allegations which is the only reason I called into questioned the legality of the additional 29 years coming from special allegations.
3- How about the fact after you completed your Hollywood trial the Jury had no clue how the law applied to the case you had just presented them. Than had to call a bailiff to the jury room to ask that this portion be cleared up for them? The story in the Santa Barbara Independent verifies that fact? This is your legal highlight?
4- That the Santa Barbara police allowed a “Alleged Gang “ fight to happen on State street 03/14/07 that has resulted in 1 death that day and resulted in further acts of violence after the fact.
5- How about in the trial of Angel Linares from above, Jr. High students were forced to give false testimony on the stand by a select few in local law enforcement. I wonder what kind of threats they received from those sworn to protect them?
6- I dare Mr. Lynn to speak of the abuse’s handed down to one of the Mothers of a recent Murder victim here in Santa Barbara and what she has been put through with out the public’s knowledge? Stop acting like you care Josh Lynn.
7- In the Lyons Double murder trial what happens to the “Whisper Tape”. An by the way how is it a listening device designed to pick up conversation in secret never seams to come through with proper audible? Do you really thing the general public is so dumb they have not questioned that for themselves.
8- How about case 1213063 & 1212944 where I Larry Mendoza CDL# N8858927 was held illegally and against my will for almost 3 months in Santa Barbara county jail for a protection order that was only not allowed but never had grounds to be issued.
9- Case numbers 1188728, 1189598, 1211869 were I again Larry Mendoza was charged with 7 strike-able felony’s all for alleged terrorist threats I never made. In fact one case is a private discussion that should have never seen a jail cell much less a court room. 1 alleged threat accusation was made to be used as a divorce tactic and law enforcement is well aware of the use. The police 911 transcript called it a disturbing the piece call. Yet again I received a felony strike-able charge. How about the breaking into a hotel room after me having 3400 dollars cash stolen from it than arresting me with out a warrant. The term “in hot pursuit” was used to by pass the legal process our Country requires. An all charges were later dropped but 1? How about the beating I took while under doctor’s care at our local Health Facility that has not bee investigated?
10- How about Ricardo Juarez the young 14 year old framed in the Angel Linares murder? How about the document supplied in Superior court regarding a witness’s testimony and granting of use immunity to the likely guilty party? Would you like me to forward that Mr. Lynn and this was done during the first preliminary hearing.
11- How about the Billion dollar cover up regarding the County Pension and by the way before I forget why must the County make up the difference in funds? The county according to the Government code cannot be held responsible for a debt beyond 1 year. Thus the importance of yearly budgeting. Look up the P.E.R.’s drama people they asked for help from the State it was not required. In fact P.E.R.’s accounts are frozen while further investigations occur.
12- DO YOU REALLY WANT ME TO CONTINUE?
In closing Josh Lynn just think before you speak because I already have enough documentation to send Mary Barron, Greg Boller, Judge Brian Hill and public defender Karen Adkins to federal prison for R.I.C.O. act violations and would love to add you to this list!
Best Regards
Larry Mendoza
Below is the news press story I referenced at the top of my posting;
CHRISTINA KIRCHNER, NEWS-PRESS CORRESPONDENT
June 14, 2010 6:39 AM
Santa Barbara County Deputy District Attorney Josh Lynn said Sunday he has been placed on administrative leave by Acting District Attorney Ann Bramsen.
Mr. Lynn, who recently was an unsuccessful candidate for the position of district attorney, told the News-Press that he was instructed not to report for work Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.
According to Mr. Lynn, he received a message at 5:15 p.m. on Friday from Ms. Bramsen, ordering him to not come in Monday through Wednesday. "I asked her if I was fired and she said, 'No,' that I was just on paid administrative leave," Mr. Lynn said. However, claimed Mr. Lynn, "paid administrative leave doesn't exist unless you have done something wrong."
Mr. Lynn said that he believes this to be an illegal order, but will abide by it because he doesn't want to be "disruptive."
He said that he will not know anything concerning his position until after Wednesday." I find it very hard to move on when I don't know what is going to happen," he said. "They refuse to tell me anything," referring to the DA's office.
Before the recent primary election, tension was reported between the newly elected district attorney, Joyce Dudley, and Mr. Lynn. In an interview with the News-Press in May, Mr. Lynn said, "She's said from day one she would fire me. I think that says it all."
However, Ms. Dudley had no definitive response to this allegation.
"I have no authority to order Josh to stay home," Ms. Dudley said by telephone Sunday afternoon. "All questions have to be directed toward the acting district attorney."
Repeated attempts to contact Ms. Bramsen for comment were unsuccessful.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Corruption in the Santa Barbara Superior Courts, you be the Judge! We must do better and be "JUST'
A follow up from yesterday's posting.
As I have done many times in the past I share information with you from a first glance and almost miss so much more than I originally thought. In my posting yesterday I was following up with a statement made during the Santa Barbara District attorney race by the eventual winner Joyce Dudley. The term ‘JUST” in reference to all aspects of the Law was well covered but something kept bothering me. I had failed to refer by name a Fraud case used in the posting. I referenced circumstances from the case and that was just not proper of me. The guilty party in that case I named “Michael L. Wilson”, and below is just a portion of what was found on the Internet.
Biz Buzz: Plea bargain could get Santa Maria hard-money lender Mike Wilson at least 10 years
“He has also been given an incentive to repay his investors for their losses. If he can repay investors $1 million to $2 million of what they’ve collectively lost, the district attorney will reduce Wilson’s sentence by five or 10 years, depending on how much he collects. At a minimum, Wilson will serve 10 years and four months”.
Please read the story in it’s entirety at the bottom of this posting, included is the web page from the San Luis Obispo news press where it originated.
There is so much wrong here where does one begin? I will start with the length of time from charges to obtaining a conviction, 80 whole days. Why I bet the investigation had to take longer than that since it resulted in 147 felony charges? Hell we have people in jail for killing 3 people wait 2 years just for a preliminary hearing but more on that in just a moment. I am still a bit confused I must admit. How does a person get investigated by 2 State agencies; D.R.E. the Attorney General and 1 District Attorney’s office and not uncover ever aspect of this man’s assets and those he allegedly stole? Now if what I read was indeed offered to Mr. Wilson would he not have to bring with the cash bribe a paper trail? Again at second glance I almost thought this might be a trick played on the defendant in order for him to expose the other non found assets. As you may well know this county is getting a bit of a reputation for filing perjury charges in regards to assets or signed statements they consider to contain or have committed perjury. Although to date that area of expertise tends to remain under the umbrella of D.M.V..
Which brings me smack dab in the middle of the Lyons ‘DOUBLE MURDER TRIAL’ and the Honorable Judge Brian Hill. As luck would have it Mr. Lyons gave a lower value on purchase of a motor bike, he stated 1500.00 when according to our diligent District Attorneys office the value was closer to 5000.00. Talk about shooting fish in barrel can I guess that EVERY ONE that reads this may also be guilty of that same crime? Let’s see life in prison + 1 way to go!
Oh wait a ‘Double Murder” and no press, that’s right you need a American/Mexican sir name for un-just media coverage. Now the Lyons “DOUBLE MURDER” has a special interest to this community in regards to whether or not Judge Hill allows the County’s second “Whisper Tape” and the alleged secretly taped confession. In the framing of 14 year old Ricardo Juarez the 1st “Whisper Tape’ and secret confession was allowed during his trial by the same Honorable Judge Brian Hill. Yet to date he has not stated if he will allow the prosecutor to use the “2cnd Whisper Tape” during the Lyons trial. Again with no press coverage and with the low quality of what might hit print one can never be sure of the on goings of any trial here in Santa Barbara. Take for example during the preliminary hearing of framed defendant Ricardo Juarez of murder he did not commit a document was in the court files that clearly indicates the district Attorneys office was aware he was the wrong defendant. I possess this document and would be glad to forward it to any one who might request it.
Now let’s quickly get back to the preliminary hearing that has taken two years for triple murder. “The man accused of killing his father and 3 other( that’s 4 not 3) men in a Santa Maria junk yard two years ago is a paranoid schizophrenic who has psychotic delusional thoughts and could not adequately help his attorneys in his defense, according to two defense witnesses during testimony Monday”. That is the first paragraph reported in the Santa Barbara News Press 06/08/2010. This whole situation bothers me on so many level’s but the real question is must we go beyond the first paragraph to realize he is in the wrong type of Court?
Below is the location for a P.D.F. copy of what is allegedly the original criminal charges filed by the Santa Barbara District Attorney against Michael L. Wilson. Even though this document may appear correct I have a few reservations about it. Under DA No. 09-07-225191 on the right had upper side of this complaint Court No. is left blank. That would be where they County clerk would put a Santa Barbara Superior Court case number. Also below the case number would come the Court Stamp, Gary Blair’s stamped name and the deputy clerk name, all missing.
http://www.mortgagefraud.org/storage/pcm_wilson_information.pdf
The above complaint is 44 total pages.
147 Counts times 2 years = 294 year than add at least 1 year per special allegation and we have almost 450 years possible if convicted and sentenced lightly. 2800.oo that my have had an escrow violation at best. Yet Denise D’Sant Angelo was sentenced to two years in a jury trial, I wonder what the jury picked as her sentence?
As for David Abraham I found this update on the CL under Rants and Raves for Santa Barbara.
Santa Barbara Just System - David Abraham (Crime Does Pay)
________________________________________
Date: 2010-06-12, 7:46PM PDT
Reply To This Post
________________________________________
To the gentleman who correctly wrote that we need a "just" system, you stated David Abraham received 90 days in jail. You are incorrect in your statement.
HE SERVED NOT ONE DAY IN JAIL! Imagine that?!?! Steal $2.1 million and you walk. He was allowed to remain in the comfort of his beautiful home
which he fixed up with the elderly victims' money. All he had to do was were a tracking device. How wonderful...he was allowed out to shop, pay bills, etc.
So tell me about our just system. The judge allowed this crap ass crook to buy off a PRISON sentence.
Let me ask D.A. Joyce Dudley: Would you risk stealing $2.1 million (send $1m to an off shore account where it remains today) and risk being caught only to
be punished by wearing some accessory which tracks your wonderings of beautiful SB? (This is a rhetorical question!).
Signed: Just Me!
Penalties, Punishment, and Sentencing for Grand Theft under California Penal Code 487
http://www.shouselaw.com/grand-theft.html
California Penal Code 487 PC "grand theft" is a "wobbler". This means that depending on (1) the circumstances of your case, and (2) your criminal history, the charge may be filed as either a misdemeanor or a felony.
If you are convicted of grand theft as a misdemeanor, you face up to one year in a county jail. If you are convicted of grand theft as a felony, you face 16 months, or two or three years in the California State Prison.
It should be noted that "grand theft firearm" will always be charged as a felony and will additionally count as a "strike" on your record.
• Enhancements
In addition to the penalties noted above, you can receive an additional and consecutive state prison sentence for any of the following7:
• One year if the amount of the property was worth more than $65,000
• Two years if the amount was worth more than $200,000
News Story from San Luis Obispo news press!
Biz Buzz: Plea bargain could get Santa Maria hard-money lender Mike Wilson at least 10 years
Mike L. Wilson of Santa Maria is expected to plead guilty to grand theft
A plea bargain is expected today in the criminal mortgage fraud case of Santa Maria hard-money lender Mike L. Wilson, according to Jerry Lulejian, the Santa Barbara County deputy district attorney prosecuting the case.
Wilson, who operated the now-closed Pacific Coast Mortgage, was arrested July 10 on suspicion of grand theft, forgery of real estate deeds, misrepresentations in the sale of securities and elder abuse by embezzlement. Some of his alleged victims live in San Luis Obispo County.
Wilson was facing a maximum sentence of 50 years or more.
In his deal with the state, Wilson, 55, will plead guilty to one count of grand theft for each of the approximately 45 victims named in the case, including his mother and father and many friends.
He has also been given an incentive to repay his investors for their losses. If he can repay investors $1 million to $2 million of what they’ve collectively lost, the district attorney will reduce Wilson’s sentence by five or 10 years, depending on how much he collects. At a minimum, Wilson will serve 10 years and four months, Lulejian added.
Wilson also has to liquidate his personal assets and make a concerted effort to correct the real estate deeds of trust that he failed to record properly, in order to repay investors for their losses, the deputy district attorney said.
Wilson’s arrest last July followed the filing of at least seven lawsuits against him in Santa Barbara County Superior Court. Those suits, which will proceed, mirror the criminal complaints alleging losses of more than $5 million that were supposed to go toward commercial and residential investments in Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Monterey counties.
Wilson first made headlines at the end of February, when he had to be rescued by the Coast Guard after falling from his boat into the deep chilly waters of the Santa Barbara Channel. Wilson said a wave had knocked him overboard.
One of the investors suing Wilson, Sandee Ogilvie, said Wednesday that she thinks even a 20-year sentence for Wilson is too light, given the damage he has done to those who entrusted him with their money, some of whom were elderly and gave Wilson all of their savings. But, given what she believes would be a “huge expense” in taking the Wilson case to trial, Ogilvie said, “I think this is an acceptable resolution.”
— Melanie Cleveland
Read more: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2009/09/30/868947/biz-buzz-plea-bargain-could-get.html#ixzz0qhwqc31V
In closing of this extremely lengthy posting I wish to review 1 more sentencing from our Santa Barbara District Attorneys office. A defendant was recently found guilty of Voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to 40 years in prison. If the defendant had been found guilty of the higher crime of Murder the sentence may come back at only 25 years. He had a gun and was also charged with Gang enhancements, probably illegally.
I do not condone any crime and my deepest sorrows to the victim’s family and friends but our courts are not legal or “Just”. In fact we seam to be all over the place and lack the very consistency that is required by our society.
Having been called a defendant and almost sentenced to two life sentence’s now get this for “WORDS I NEVER SAID” you can see the fear one has regardless of act when being accused in Santa Barbara Superior Court, “ Just’ must be more than a campaign slogan I truly hope.
If you have the will to go one here is a little more data in regards to the charge of Voluntary Manslaughter.
http://www.shouselaw.com/voluntary_manslaughter.html
Jury Instructions on Voluntary Manslaughter:
The defendant killed someone out of a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion if:
1. The defendant was provoked;
2. As a result of the provocation, the defendant acted rashly and under the influence of intense emotion that obscured his reasoning or judgment;
AND
3. The provocation would have caused a person of average disposition to act rashly and without due deliberation, that is, from passion rather than from judgment.
Heat of passion does not require anger, rage, or any specific emotion. It can be any violent or intense emotion that causes a person to act without due deliberation and reflection.
In order for heat of passion to reduce a murder to voluntary manslaughter in California, the defendant must have acted under the direct and immediate influence of provocation as it has been defined. While no specific type of provocation is required, slight or remote provocation is not sufficient. Sufficient provocation may occur over a short or long period of time.
It is not enough that the defendant simply was provoked. The defendant is not allowed to set up his own standard of conduct. The jury must decide whether the defendant was provoked and whether the provocation was sufficient. In deciding whether the provocation was sufficient, consider whether a person of average disposition would have been provoked and how such a person would react in the same situation knowing the same facts.
As I have done many times in the past I share information with you from a first glance and almost miss so much more than I originally thought. In my posting yesterday I was following up with a statement made during the Santa Barbara District attorney race by the eventual winner Joyce Dudley. The term ‘JUST” in reference to all aspects of the Law was well covered but something kept bothering me. I had failed to refer by name a Fraud case used in the posting. I referenced circumstances from the case and that was just not proper of me. The guilty party in that case I named “Michael L. Wilson”, and below is just a portion of what was found on the Internet.
Biz Buzz: Plea bargain could get Santa Maria hard-money lender Mike Wilson at least 10 years
“He has also been given an incentive to repay his investors for their losses. If he can repay investors $1 million to $2 million of what they’ve collectively lost, the district attorney will reduce Wilson’s sentence by five or 10 years, depending on how much he collects. At a minimum, Wilson will serve 10 years and four months”.
Please read the story in it’s entirety at the bottom of this posting, included is the web page from the San Luis Obispo news press where it originated.
There is so much wrong here where does one begin? I will start with the length of time from charges to obtaining a conviction, 80 whole days. Why I bet the investigation had to take longer than that since it resulted in 147 felony charges? Hell we have people in jail for killing 3 people wait 2 years just for a preliminary hearing but more on that in just a moment. I am still a bit confused I must admit. How does a person get investigated by 2 State agencies; D.R.E. the Attorney General and 1 District Attorney’s office and not uncover ever aspect of this man’s assets and those he allegedly stole? Now if what I read was indeed offered to Mr. Wilson would he not have to bring with the cash bribe a paper trail? Again at second glance I almost thought this might be a trick played on the defendant in order for him to expose the other non found assets. As you may well know this county is getting a bit of a reputation for filing perjury charges in regards to assets or signed statements they consider to contain or have committed perjury. Although to date that area of expertise tends to remain under the umbrella of D.M.V..
Which brings me smack dab in the middle of the Lyons ‘DOUBLE MURDER TRIAL’ and the Honorable Judge Brian Hill. As luck would have it Mr. Lyons gave a lower value on purchase of a motor bike, he stated 1500.00 when according to our diligent District Attorneys office the value was closer to 5000.00. Talk about shooting fish in barrel can I guess that EVERY ONE that reads this may also be guilty of that same crime? Let’s see life in prison + 1 way to go!
Oh wait a ‘Double Murder” and no press, that’s right you need a American/Mexican sir name for un-just media coverage. Now the Lyons “DOUBLE MURDER” has a special interest to this community in regards to whether or not Judge Hill allows the County’s second “Whisper Tape” and the alleged secretly taped confession. In the framing of 14 year old Ricardo Juarez the 1st “Whisper Tape’ and secret confession was allowed during his trial by the same Honorable Judge Brian Hill. Yet to date he has not stated if he will allow the prosecutor to use the “2cnd Whisper Tape” during the Lyons trial. Again with no press coverage and with the low quality of what might hit print one can never be sure of the on goings of any trial here in Santa Barbara. Take for example during the preliminary hearing of framed defendant Ricardo Juarez of murder he did not commit a document was in the court files that clearly indicates the district Attorneys office was aware he was the wrong defendant. I possess this document and would be glad to forward it to any one who might request it.
Now let’s quickly get back to the preliminary hearing that has taken two years for triple murder. “The man accused of killing his father and 3 other( that’s 4 not 3) men in a Santa Maria junk yard two years ago is a paranoid schizophrenic who has psychotic delusional thoughts and could not adequately help his attorneys in his defense, according to two defense witnesses during testimony Monday”. That is the first paragraph reported in the Santa Barbara News Press 06/08/2010. This whole situation bothers me on so many level’s but the real question is must we go beyond the first paragraph to realize he is in the wrong type of Court?
Below is the location for a P.D.F. copy of what is allegedly the original criminal charges filed by the Santa Barbara District Attorney against Michael L. Wilson. Even though this document may appear correct I have a few reservations about it. Under DA No. 09-07-225191 on the right had upper side of this complaint Court No. is left blank. That would be where they County clerk would put a Santa Barbara Superior Court case number. Also below the case number would come the Court Stamp, Gary Blair’s stamped name and the deputy clerk name, all missing.
http://www.mortgagefraud.org/storage/pcm_wilson_information.pdf
The above complaint is 44 total pages.
147 Counts times 2 years = 294 year than add at least 1 year per special allegation and we have almost 450 years possible if convicted and sentenced lightly. 2800.oo that my have had an escrow violation at best. Yet Denise D’Sant Angelo was sentenced to two years in a jury trial, I wonder what the jury picked as her sentence?
As for David Abraham I found this update on the CL under Rants and Raves for Santa Barbara.
Santa Barbara Just System - David Abraham (Crime Does Pay)
________________________________________
Date: 2010-06-12, 7:46PM PDT
Reply To This Post
________________________________________
To the gentleman who correctly wrote that we need a "just" system, you stated David Abraham received 90 days in jail. You are incorrect in your statement.
HE SERVED NOT ONE DAY IN JAIL! Imagine that?!?! Steal $2.1 million and you walk. He was allowed to remain in the comfort of his beautiful home
which he fixed up with the elderly victims' money. All he had to do was were a tracking device. How wonderful...he was allowed out to shop, pay bills, etc.
So tell me about our just system. The judge allowed this crap ass crook to buy off a PRISON sentence.
Let me ask D.A. Joyce Dudley: Would you risk stealing $2.1 million (send $1m to an off shore account where it remains today) and risk being caught only to
be punished by wearing some accessory which tracks your wonderings of beautiful SB? (This is a rhetorical question!).
Signed: Just Me!
Penalties, Punishment, and Sentencing for Grand Theft under California Penal Code 487
http://www.shouselaw.com/grand-theft.html
California Penal Code 487 PC "grand theft" is a "wobbler". This means that depending on (1) the circumstances of your case, and (2) your criminal history, the charge may be filed as either a misdemeanor or a felony.
If you are convicted of grand theft as a misdemeanor, you face up to one year in a county jail. If you are convicted of grand theft as a felony, you face 16 months, or two or three years in the California State Prison.
It should be noted that "grand theft firearm" will always be charged as a felony and will additionally count as a "strike" on your record.
• Enhancements
In addition to the penalties noted above, you can receive an additional and consecutive state prison sentence for any of the following7:
• One year if the amount of the property was worth more than $65,000
• Two years if the amount was worth more than $200,000
News Story from San Luis Obispo news press!
Biz Buzz: Plea bargain could get Santa Maria hard-money lender Mike Wilson at least 10 years
Mike L. Wilson of Santa Maria is expected to plead guilty to grand theft
A plea bargain is expected today in the criminal mortgage fraud case of Santa Maria hard-money lender Mike L. Wilson, according to Jerry Lulejian, the Santa Barbara County deputy district attorney prosecuting the case.
Wilson, who operated the now-closed Pacific Coast Mortgage, was arrested July 10 on suspicion of grand theft, forgery of real estate deeds, misrepresentations in the sale of securities and elder abuse by embezzlement. Some of his alleged victims live in San Luis Obispo County.
Wilson was facing a maximum sentence of 50 years or more.
In his deal with the state, Wilson, 55, will plead guilty to one count of grand theft for each of the approximately 45 victims named in the case, including his mother and father and many friends.
He has also been given an incentive to repay his investors for their losses. If he can repay investors $1 million to $2 million of what they’ve collectively lost, the district attorney will reduce Wilson’s sentence by five or 10 years, depending on how much he collects. At a minimum, Wilson will serve 10 years and four months, Lulejian added.
Wilson also has to liquidate his personal assets and make a concerted effort to correct the real estate deeds of trust that he failed to record properly, in order to repay investors for their losses, the deputy district attorney said.
Wilson’s arrest last July followed the filing of at least seven lawsuits against him in Santa Barbara County Superior Court. Those suits, which will proceed, mirror the criminal complaints alleging losses of more than $5 million that were supposed to go toward commercial and residential investments in Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Monterey counties.
Wilson first made headlines at the end of February, when he had to be rescued by the Coast Guard after falling from his boat into the deep chilly waters of the Santa Barbara Channel. Wilson said a wave had knocked him overboard.
One of the investors suing Wilson, Sandee Ogilvie, said Wednesday that she thinks even a 20-year sentence for Wilson is too light, given the damage he has done to those who entrusted him with their money, some of whom were elderly and gave Wilson all of their savings. But, given what she believes would be a “huge expense” in taking the Wilson case to trial, Ogilvie said, “I think this is an acceptable resolution.”
— Melanie Cleveland
Read more: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2009/09/30/868947/biz-buzz-plea-bargain-could-get.html#ixzz0qhwqc31V
In closing of this extremely lengthy posting I wish to review 1 more sentencing from our Santa Barbara District Attorneys office. A defendant was recently found guilty of Voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to 40 years in prison. If the defendant had been found guilty of the higher crime of Murder the sentence may come back at only 25 years. He had a gun and was also charged with Gang enhancements, probably illegally.
I do not condone any crime and my deepest sorrows to the victim’s family and friends but our courts are not legal or “Just”. In fact we seam to be all over the place and lack the very consistency that is required by our society.
Having been called a defendant and almost sentenced to two life sentence’s now get this for “WORDS I NEVER SAID” you can see the fear one has regardless of act when being accused in Santa Barbara Superior Court, “ Just’ must be more than a campaign slogan I truly hope.
If you have the will to go one here is a little more data in regards to the charge of Voluntary Manslaughter.
http://www.shouselaw.com/voluntary_manslaughter.html
Jury Instructions on Voluntary Manslaughter:
The defendant killed someone out of a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion if:
1. The defendant was provoked;
2. As a result of the provocation, the defendant acted rashly and under the influence of intense emotion that obscured his reasoning or judgment;
AND
3. The provocation would have caused a person of average disposition to act rashly and without due deliberation, that is, from passion rather than from judgment.
Heat of passion does not require anger, rage, or any specific emotion. It can be any violent or intense emotion that causes a person to act without due deliberation and reflection.
In order for heat of passion to reduce a murder to voluntary manslaughter in California, the defendant must have acted under the direct and immediate influence of provocation as it has been defined. While no specific type of provocation is required, slight or remote provocation is not sufficient. Sufficient provocation may occur over a short or long period of time.
It is not enough that the defendant simply was provoked. The defendant is not allowed to set up his own standard of conduct. The jury must decide whether the defendant was provoked and whether the provocation was sufficient. In deciding whether the provocation was sufficient, consider whether a person of average disposition would have been provoked and how such a person would react in the same situation knowing the same facts.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Santa Barbara Superior Courts and District Attorneys office must be "Just' as per Joyce Dudley's remarks!
Saturday June 12th 2010
Joyce Dudley District Attorney
Santa Barbara District Attorney’s Office
1112 Santa Barbara Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2008
(805) 568-2350
Dear Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office and Joyce Dudley;
I would first like to congratulate Joyce Dudley on a brilliant campaign and well deserved victory in being elected Santa Barbara County’s District Attorney, but that is only the beginning. I hope there is a message that was delivered loud and clear through the people of this County to the office I am addressing with this letter. The time has come that we act “JUST” in all aspects of Santa Barbara Law Enforcement. I am talking about anything from a simple parking ticket to a procedurally correct arraignment in our Superior Court. So why am I taking the time to write you all today? Because of the un-Just and let me be blunt corrupt Santa Barbara legal system, top to bottom left to right we are currently experiencing here.
Now before I go into my concerns I want to review the campaign for District Attorney and the one item of value I took from the ten months of mayhem that we all had to endure. During one of Joyce Dudley’s first interviews on the campaign trail she made a very bold and accurate statement that the “ the Courts must be Just”. However I am here today to state that the statement must be expanded to include all law enforcement from parking meter personal to SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES and on the way to the courts please include your office of District Attorney. Now than what does “JUST” mean that the public should expect? I hope the legal definition I found and included below will help you figure that out
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/just
“just adjective aboveboard, according to law, aequus, affording no undue advantage, appropriate, as it should be, authoritative, awarded deservedly, befitting, bona fide, cogent, condign, constitutional, deserved, deserving, detached, disinterested, dispassionate, due, equable, equitable, ethical, even-handed, exact, expected, express, fair, fair and square, fair-minded, fit, fitting, forceful, honest, impartial, incorruptible, iustus, judicious, juridical, justifiable, justified, lawful, legal, legitimate, licit, logical, merited, meritorious, meritus, moral, objective, open to reason, owed, owing, precise, principled, proper, rational, reasonable, reputable, right, righteous, rightful, scrupulous, sincere, solid, sound, square, straight, straightforward, sufficient, suitable, unbiased, unbigoted, unbribable, unbribed, unchallengeable, uncolored, uncorrupt, uncorrupted, unimpeachable, uninfluenced, unswayed, upright, upstanding, veracious, weighty,os.”
Before I close my correspondence today I would like to include just few examples of the top of my head taken from the slim pickens our local media has to offer. Now we all now that I have over 4 year of examples and my data is always verified and my sources offered for review unlike the District Attorneys office.
How is it that the “ Nun Scammer as your office has allowed her to be referred as but her name is Denise D’Sant Angelo was just sentenced to two years state prison? I feel this was a very vindictive and harsh act the Judge. Now I may be wrong but had it not already been reported in the media that had she not delayed sentencing her time would have been completed within a week or two beyond that point? In my opinion the only message delivered by Judge Dandona with this sentencing is that we are not allowed to use our Constitutional rights and to do so is unwise in our local Santa Barbara Superior Courts.
Did we not offer the Mortgage fraud gentlemen from the north county who’s name escapes me at this moment 20 years for 14 million dollars of fraud. Now wait minute because this gentleman than files for bankruptcy protection and than gets an offer our District Attorneys office. Our D.A. office allows this gentleman to buy five years off his prison sentence for 1 million dollars returned and up to ten years for 2 million dollar. Now based on the cracker jack investigations completed pretrial and the fact he has filed for bankruptcy how could the prosecutor make and expect that gentleman to have 2 million un traceable dollars to met that offer. Sounds like perjury charges are in hi future.
What about David Abrahams who stole 2.1 million dollars in Santa Barbara and with the blessings of the State Insurance commissioner Steve Poizner and our local D.A.’s office received 90 whole days jail time for 14 counts FELONY of fraud. I wonder why his tough on crime stance did not take and he lost in his bid to be the next Governor of California.
Wait we have the Randy Quaid and his wife who allegedly attempted to beat a ten thousand dollar hotel bill and again received no jail time and were allowed ‘VOLUNTARY ARRAIGNMENTS BY JUDGE ANDERSON”
In Closing I hope the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office will finally leads us down the path of “JUST” in bold neon lights so that others who have lost there way can be returned on the right path.
Regards
Lawrence Zuniga Mendoza
Joyce Dudley District Attorney
Santa Barbara District Attorney’s Office
1112 Santa Barbara Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2008
(805) 568-2350
Dear Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office and Joyce Dudley;
I would first like to congratulate Joyce Dudley on a brilliant campaign and well deserved victory in being elected Santa Barbara County’s District Attorney, but that is only the beginning. I hope there is a message that was delivered loud and clear through the people of this County to the office I am addressing with this letter. The time has come that we act “JUST” in all aspects of Santa Barbara Law Enforcement. I am talking about anything from a simple parking ticket to a procedurally correct arraignment in our Superior Court. So why am I taking the time to write you all today? Because of the un-Just and let me be blunt corrupt Santa Barbara legal system, top to bottom left to right we are currently experiencing here.
Now before I go into my concerns I want to review the campaign for District Attorney and the one item of value I took from the ten months of mayhem that we all had to endure. During one of Joyce Dudley’s first interviews on the campaign trail she made a very bold and accurate statement that the “ the Courts must be Just”. However I am here today to state that the statement must be expanded to include all law enforcement from parking meter personal to SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES and on the way to the courts please include your office of District Attorney. Now than what does “JUST” mean that the public should expect? I hope the legal definition I found and included below will help you figure that out
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/just
“just adjective aboveboard, according to law, aequus, affording no undue advantage, appropriate, as it should be, authoritative, awarded deservedly, befitting, bona fide, cogent, condign, constitutional, deserved, deserving, detached, disinterested, dispassionate, due, equable, equitable, ethical, even-handed, exact, expected, express, fair, fair and square, fair-minded, fit, fitting, forceful, honest, impartial, incorruptible, iustus, judicious, juridical, justifiable, justified, lawful, legal, legitimate, licit, logical, merited, meritorious, meritus, moral, objective, open to reason, owed, owing, precise, principled, proper, rational, reasonable, reputable, right, righteous, rightful, scrupulous, sincere, solid, sound, square, straight, straightforward, sufficient, suitable, unbiased, unbigoted, unbribable, unbribed, unchallengeable, uncolored, uncorrupt, uncorrupted, unimpeachable, uninfluenced, unswayed, upright, upstanding, veracious, weighty,os.”
Before I close my correspondence today I would like to include just few examples of the top of my head taken from the slim pickens our local media has to offer. Now we all now that I have over 4 year of examples and my data is always verified and my sources offered for review unlike the District Attorneys office.
How is it that the “ Nun Scammer as your office has allowed her to be referred as but her name is Denise D’Sant Angelo was just sentenced to two years state prison? I feel this was a very vindictive and harsh act the Judge. Now I may be wrong but had it not already been reported in the media that had she not delayed sentencing her time would have been completed within a week or two beyond that point? In my opinion the only message delivered by Judge Dandona with this sentencing is that we are not allowed to use our Constitutional rights and to do so is unwise in our local Santa Barbara Superior Courts.
Did we not offer the Mortgage fraud gentlemen from the north county who’s name escapes me at this moment 20 years for 14 million dollars of fraud. Now wait minute because this gentleman than files for bankruptcy protection and than gets an offer our District Attorneys office. Our D.A. office allows this gentleman to buy five years off his prison sentence for 1 million dollars returned and up to ten years for 2 million dollar. Now based on the cracker jack investigations completed pretrial and the fact he has filed for bankruptcy how could the prosecutor make and expect that gentleman to have 2 million un traceable dollars to met that offer. Sounds like perjury charges are in hi future.
What about David Abrahams who stole 2.1 million dollars in Santa Barbara and with the blessings of the State Insurance commissioner Steve Poizner and our local D.A.’s office received 90 whole days jail time for 14 counts FELONY of fraud. I wonder why his tough on crime stance did not take and he lost in his bid to be the next Governor of California.
Wait we have the Randy Quaid and his wife who allegedly attempted to beat a ten thousand dollar hotel bill and again received no jail time and were allowed ‘VOLUNTARY ARRAIGNMENTS BY JUDGE ANDERSON”
In Closing I hope the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office will finally leads us down the path of “JUST” in bold neon lights so that others who have lost there way can be returned on the right path.
Regards
Lawrence Zuniga Mendoza
"The Apology for the 1930's "Mexican Repatriations Program" A Plaque?" Are you aware Americans were illegally taken from this Country and we did not go to war?
Your blog post "The Apology for the 1930's "Mexican Repatriations Program" A Plaque?" has been approved on George Lopez Tonight Community. To view your blog post, visit:http://community.lopeztonight.com/profiles/blogs/the-apology-for-the-1930s?xg_source=msg_appr_blogpost
http://law.justia.com/california/codes/gov/8720-8723.html
GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 8720-8723
8720. This chapter may be cited as the "Apology Act for the 1930s
Mexican Repatriation Program."
8721. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Beginning in 1929, government authorities and certain private sector entities in California and throughout the United States undertook an aggressive program to forcibly remove persons of Mexican ancestry from the United States.
(b) In California alone, approximately 400,000 American citizens and legal residents of Mexican ancestry were forced to go to Mexico.
(c) In total, it is estimated that two million people of Mexican ancestry were forcibly relocated to Mexico, approximately 1.2 million of whom had been born in the United States, including the State of California.
(d) Throughout California, massive raids were conducted on
Mexican-American communities, resulting in the clandestine removal of thousands of people, many of whom were never able to return to the United States, their country of birth.
(e) These raids also had the effect of coercing thousands of people to leave the country in the face of threats and acts of violence.
(f) These raids targeted persons of Mexican ancestry, with
authorities and others indiscriminately characterizing these persons as "illegal aliens" even when they were United States citizens or permanent legal residents.
(g) Authorities in California and other states instituted programs to wrongfully remove persons of Mexican ancestry and secure transportation arrangements with railroads, automobiles, ships, and airlines to effectuate the wholesale removal of persons out of the United States to Mexico.
(h) As a result of these illegal activities, families were forced to abandon, or were defrauded of, personal and real property, which often was sold by local authorities as "payment" for the transportation expenses incurred in their removal from the United States to Mexico.
(i) As a further result of these illegal activities, United States citizens and legal residents were separated from their families and country and were deprived of their livelihood and United States constitutional rights.
(j) As a further result of these illegal activities, United States citizens were deprived of the right to participate in the political process guaranteed to all citizens, thereby resulting in the tragic denial of due process and equal protection of the laws.
8722. The State of California apologizes to those individuals
described in Section 8721 for the fundamental violations of their basic civil liberties and constitutional rights committed during the period of illegal deportation and coerced emigration. The State of California regrets the suffering and hardship those individuals and their families endured as a direct result of the government sponsored
Repatriation Program of the 1930s.
8723. A plaque commemorating the individuals described in Section 8721 shall be installed and maintained by the Department of Parks and Recreation at an appropriate public place in Los Angeles. If the plaque is not located on state property, the department shall consult with the appropriate local jurisdiction to determine a site owned by the City or County of Los Angeles for location of the plaque.
http://law.justia.com/california/codes/gov/8720-8723.html
GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 8720-8723
8720. This chapter may be cited as the "Apology Act for the 1930s
Mexican Repatriation Program."
8721. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Beginning in 1929, government authorities and certain private sector entities in California and throughout the United States undertook an aggressive program to forcibly remove persons of Mexican ancestry from the United States.
(b) In California alone, approximately 400,000 American citizens and legal residents of Mexican ancestry were forced to go to Mexico.
(c) In total, it is estimated that two million people of Mexican ancestry were forcibly relocated to Mexico, approximately 1.2 million of whom had been born in the United States, including the State of California.
(d) Throughout California, massive raids were conducted on
Mexican-American communities, resulting in the clandestine removal of thousands of people, many of whom were never able to return to the United States, their country of birth.
(e) These raids also had the effect of coercing thousands of people to leave the country in the face of threats and acts of violence.
(f) These raids targeted persons of Mexican ancestry, with
authorities and others indiscriminately characterizing these persons as "illegal aliens" even when they were United States citizens or permanent legal residents.
(g) Authorities in California and other states instituted programs to wrongfully remove persons of Mexican ancestry and secure transportation arrangements with railroads, automobiles, ships, and airlines to effectuate the wholesale removal of persons out of the United States to Mexico.
(h) As a result of these illegal activities, families were forced to abandon, or were defrauded of, personal and real property, which often was sold by local authorities as "payment" for the transportation expenses incurred in their removal from the United States to Mexico.
(i) As a further result of these illegal activities, United States citizens and legal residents were separated from their families and country and were deprived of their livelihood and United States constitutional rights.
(j) As a further result of these illegal activities, United States citizens were deprived of the right to participate in the political process guaranteed to all citizens, thereby resulting in the tragic denial of due process and equal protection of the laws.
8722. The State of California apologizes to those individuals
described in Section 8721 for the fundamental violations of their basic civil liberties and constitutional rights committed during the period of illegal deportation and coerced emigration. The State of California regrets the suffering and hardship those individuals and their families endured as a direct result of the government sponsored
Repatriation Program of the 1930s.
8723. A plaque commemorating the individuals described in Section 8721 shall be installed and maintained by the Department of Parks and Recreation at an appropriate public place in Los Angeles. If the plaque is not located on state property, the department shall consult with the appropriate local jurisdiction to determine a site owned by the City or County of Los Angeles for location of the plaque.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
George Lopez follows Larry 'Magic" Mendoza in Santa Barbara! Thank You Mr. Lopez!
Your blog post has been approved on Lopez Tonight Community.
From: Lopez Tonight Community (mail@community.lopeztonight.com)
Sent: Wed 6/09/10 1:16 PM
To: Larry Mendoza (sb_magic@hotmail.com)
Your blog post "Terrorism in Santa Barbara California( a very old posting)" has been approved on Lopez Tonight Community. To view your blog post, visit:http://community.lopeztonight.com/profiles/blogs/terrorism-in-santa-barbara?xg_source=msg_appr_blogpost
From: Lopez Tonight Community (mail@community.lopeztonight.com)
Sent: Wed 6/09/10 1:16 PM
To: Larry Mendoza (sb_magic@hotmail.com)
Your blog post "Terrorism in Santa Barbara California( a very old posting)" has been approved on Lopez Tonight Community. To view your blog post, visit:http://community.lopeztonight.com/profiles/blogs/terrorism-in-santa-barbara?xg_source=msg_appr_blogpost
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Josh Lynn bush league till the Bitter end. The lack of conceding was just more amateur hour on Mr. Lynn’s part.
Well just as it had started with Mr. Lynn’s effort to be elected Santa Barbara District Attorney it ended with his usual flair for a bush league act. An if not for the strong feelings of others I doubt I would have been sharing this with you all just as I am about to end my very long day.
Regardless of what had already transpired between the two District Attorney candidates I would have appreciated some class and the end of what I sure was a grueling campaign for the two of them. Just think of the goodwill Mr. Lynn could have shown his family friends and co-workers by admitting defeat and allowing the people’s choice a chance to speak. Could we not expect him to act like a grown up, a professional, a servant of the people and had have him concede defeat to a worthy opponent Joyce Dudley? I feel by Mr. Lynn allowing Joyce Dudley the opportunity to thank her supporters and show us the class she will bring to her newly elected office. An element that many feel has been missing for almost 2 decades and his act further reflects that.
It was surely not his opponent’s fault that one could fall from grace with such swiftness and loud thud. At one time Mr. Lynn must have felt he was sitting on top of the world being hand selected as the next District Attorney of Santa Barbara County. To have the much publicized Jesse James Hollywood case placed in his path to success, but a funny thing happen on the way to the Forum. Josh Lynn placed himself before the office or the will of the people of this county and lost. It seams no matter how many times Mr. Lynn said the word Gang the math just never added up to the public. His constant reminder of the element of Gangs as it turns out just never touched the average person of this county. With the lose of homes and funding issues arising on a daily basis those concerns far out weighted his attempt to play what I feel was the race card. I have shown my colors many times over and the start Red White and Blue with a beautiful Mexican heritage intertwined.
I have shared many of my thoughts on how this race was played out and the only thing I can add is what a school yard whopping Joyce Dudley gave Josh Lynn. What a master politician with the skill of a surgeon did Joyce Dudley work her Magic( had to do it sorry)! Only now can I begin to hope the office of District Attorney will once again be open to and serve the greater good of and all the public as it is required to do!
In closing we start back at the beginning. It was felt by the many contributors of thought I work with that the weak unprofessional and classless act displayed by Josh Lynn and of his followers must be exposed for what it is. Furthermore those that contribute discussion and feed the thought that I share on my blog want this next portion stated very loudly and clearly. A time for Just acts from ALL Law Enforcement is not a request but a requirement to keep your positions. Regardless of my love of Country the time to hold those in office accountable has come and we will work to see that it is done. Please do not flatter yourself and think that I Larry Mendoza claims to be the only thought used for my blog. It comes from the hearts and sprits of all those good people that cross my path. Why just tonight I gave a bad answer to a law enforcement officer now that I think about it. I was asked by this officer what does it take time wise and effort to put forth my stories as he thanked me for writing them. The answer should have been the same love of Country that runs through his soul runs through mine and that is were I get the energy to do the important work that I do. Good night and God Bless us All!
Regardless of what had already transpired between the two District Attorney candidates I would have appreciated some class and the end of what I sure was a grueling campaign for the two of them. Just think of the goodwill Mr. Lynn could have shown his family friends and co-workers by admitting defeat and allowing the people’s choice a chance to speak. Could we not expect him to act like a grown up, a professional, a servant of the people and had have him concede defeat to a worthy opponent Joyce Dudley? I feel by Mr. Lynn allowing Joyce Dudley the opportunity to thank her supporters and show us the class she will bring to her newly elected office. An element that many feel has been missing for almost 2 decades and his act further reflects that.
It was surely not his opponent’s fault that one could fall from grace with such swiftness and loud thud. At one time Mr. Lynn must have felt he was sitting on top of the world being hand selected as the next District Attorney of Santa Barbara County. To have the much publicized Jesse James Hollywood case placed in his path to success, but a funny thing happen on the way to the Forum. Josh Lynn placed himself before the office or the will of the people of this county and lost. It seams no matter how many times Mr. Lynn said the word Gang the math just never added up to the public. His constant reminder of the element of Gangs as it turns out just never touched the average person of this county. With the lose of homes and funding issues arising on a daily basis those concerns far out weighted his attempt to play what I feel was the race card. I have shown my colors many times over and the start Red White and Blue with a beautiful Mexican heritage intertwined.
I have shared many of my thoughts on how this race was played out and the only thing I can add is what a school yard whopping Joyce Dudley gave Josh Lynn. What a master politician with the skill of a surgeon did Joyce Dudley work her Magic( had to do it sorry)! Only now can I begin to hope the office of District Attorney will once again be open to and serve the greater good of and all the public as it is required to do!
In closing we start back at the beginning. It was felt by the many contributors of thought I work with that the weak unprofessional and classless act displayed by Josh Lynn and of his followers must be exposed for what it is. Furthermore those that contribute discussion and feed the thought that I share on my blog want this next portion stated very loudly and clearly. A time for Just acts from ALL Law Enforcement is not a request but a requirement to keep your positions. Regardless of my love of Country the time to hold those in office accountable has come and we will work to see that it is done. Please do not flatter yourself and think that I Larry Mendoza claims to be the only thought used for my blog. It comes from the hearts and sprits of all those good people that cross my path. Why just tonight I gave a bad answer to a law enforcement officer now that I think about it. I was asked by this officer what does it take time wise and effort to put forth my stories as he thanked me for writing them. The answer should have been the same love of Country that runs through his soul runs through mine and that is were I get the energy to do the important work that I do. Good night and God Bless us All!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
