Graffiti was NOT removed as stated: "CRM #362877,

Date Closed: March 14, 2010 3:46 PM,

Reason closed: Graffiti removed 3/14/2010" – Not so fast.

Why do I find that some if not many work orders for graffiti abatement in the city of San Bernardino are closed without the work actually being completed?  This is a major issue for other residents I have spoken with and calls into question the trustworthiness of the crews and supervisors responsible for ensuring the work is completed accurately and in a timely manner.

Originally, when I first experienced CRM#'s being closed and the work was NOT completed, I assumed this was an isolated mistake or oversight.  It now has occurred with enough frequency at this point, I no longer believe this to be the case.

I am very troubled by the fact that there isn't more of a concern within the street department, by councilman Shorett or the Mayor and City Manager. To date, I have submitted over 875 CRM requests and this continues to occur after many months now of reporting and checking.  This lack of accuracy and oversight is unacceptable, in my view.

Voters may remember Mr. Shorett pledged to make sure residents, "get the most bang for their buck."  How's that working out, Shorett?  He promised accountability and ensured transparency, when he voted to more than double the cost of this program to taxpayers, and from what I can tell...you continue to sit silent, hold no one accountable, and have not so much as even publicly requested an update on this program.

I wonder Mr. Shorett if your idea of, "getting the most bang for our...I'll remind-you, taxpayer buck," is to spend $150,000 on a frivolous charter amendment campaign.  There are laws governing frivolous lawsuits throughout this country.  There ought to be laws governing frivolous taxpayer spending waste, but I don't suppose you’re concerned about this either. In fact you continue to vote for more and more of these frivolous expenditures, instead of spending on real priorities focused on improving the quality of life for residents.

This $150,000 could be spent better on priorities (even stemming from your own council retreat) on things like libraries, parks, filling a pot-hole, fixing a street light. For example: like the one on the southbound side of the bridge at Valencia and the 210, or helping to better fund CID. All of these things would actually do something good for the people in this community. Fix a sprinkler at a park, snake out a sewer as winter flooding approaches, put in a sidewalk ramp or fix a broken curb CRM# 419821.  There are frankly all kinds of smaller deferred maintenance projects throughout the city at large that would benefit from targeted spending on real priorities instead of attempts to silence voter rights.

All this talk about modernizing the charter language to realize better efficiencies is frankly a wild intangible with unknown outcomes, which the City Manager, Charles McNeely can't even quantify himself, when he was asked to do so by councilman Kelley during the 8/2/2010 council meeting. Most people care more about what is happening in their back yard like the two recent gang shootings in the last 3 weeks, around the 40th and Sierra area - than they do about the political structure of this city.

And, you all wonder why voter turn out is so low.  It's got a lot to do with the fact that many residents feel disenfranchised because those they elect are more concerned with protecting their power and getting reelected than they are with fixing our broken, streets, parks, sidewalks, and windows in our neighborhoods. But I digress.

The costs for graffiti abatement more than doubled when city crews were hired and equipment purchased, Mr. Shorett, you voted for this.  The taxpayer bill for graffiti abatement now tops 1 million dollars and for that price tag there was an expectation that graffiti would be removed in 24-48 hours.  Now, I do recognize some incremental improvements in "time to respond," but there is still way too much graffiti and blight and trash throughout the city of San Bernardino and it remains there for much too long. Little overall progress is being made to change our reputation and outward appearance for residents, travelers, and other communities.

Attempts to paint more-and-more, faster-and-faster (clearly, a band-aid approach) while not prosecuting enough of these individuals who blight our city, make cleaning up the city's reputation more-and-more difficult.

Mr. Shorett you also voted to approve a public relations assistant for the City Manager who as I recall was going to be specifically tasked with the lion’s share of improving the reputation of San Bernardino.  What is this person doing to ensure the graffiti program is meeting its goals or improving its relations working with other jurisdictions? Lack of jurisdictional cooperation only benefits one side of the street and the criminal – these other corners remain covered with obscenities, tags and gang symbols, all because a worker can't cross the street or make a field decision independent of a work order.  Why is this not addressed?

Why has it been months of silence regarding the cities attempts to form neighborhood-spotting teams?  Since, the city appears to be unwilling, reluctant or apathetic towards this need I want the residents listening, friends and neighbors living in San Bernardino to shoot me an email, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it or call 866-565-0330 if you want to coordinate spotting efforts with me.  Leave me your name and contact number and we will get this effort underway, and I’ll get back to you. Working with neighborhood groups, and neighborhood watch groups we can form our own adopt-a-street teams and will be able to more effectively coordinate our reporting efforts to fan out, span more area of coverage and take back our streets, all of which those who voted for the graffiti program should be doing yourselves and demanding of paid staff.

I really wish there would be more of a cooperative agreement where the city can paint any jurisdiction in the area and bill the appropriate agency for the cost associated with the clean up.  Isn’t that the same logic being used to push forward a city-run tow yard, that is, to recoup the cost associated with policing?  Ok, well how about we recoup the costs associated with graffiti abatement in county pockets.  Work it out.  Work on the issue.  Capital follows certainty, so I’m told, right, Mr. Shorett.  Well make certain there is no graffiti in San Bernardino, regardless of what it takes and you might actually be able to attract a business to town that doesn’t fear property damage or threats to his customer base. It would sure make certian our city looks a whole lot better, throughout the major corridors, along the freeways, around business centers and throughout the city at large.  This should be your focus.

Some elected officials have chosen to focus council time on a frivolous charter amendment changes (you included) that will only further divide the city more and more the real problems will go unchecked and solutions avoided.  The neighborhoods are going to speak on this charter reform amendment just as they did regarding your ridiculous tax-hike proposals.

Lastly, when a CRM is closed, it means that the graffiti should ACTUALLY be removed, completely and thoroughly.  I should note here...”without a shadow remaining.”  When the CRM is closed and the work in NOT completed is gives the impression that Randy Kettle or the graffiti abatement program crews and supervisors are padding their response time stats.

Closing CRM's without doing the work is a breach of the public's trust and more attention and detail needs communicated to the department supervisors and crews with regards to tracking their CRM numbers otherwise the public (myself included) will grow to not trust the program statistics or the personnel responsible for ensuring the job is completed.  Somewhat reminiscent of the mistrust officials in the city Bell now experience.

Residents of San Bernardino have also been told that photos are taken before and after abatement efforts commence.  I have requested the "after" photos be attached to the closed CRM for accuracy.  I guess taxpayers know now why this doesn't happen.

And by the way, a charter amendment if approved, that would give the same group of individuals who can't get graffiti cleaned up -- more control and unchecked power over the people in this community and over many more areas of government responsibility is a losing solution to our problems.  Bigger appointed government, as will be the case if the charter amendment is approved - is never the solution.

For anyone interested… a full copy of this text is available on my web site: www.JoeArnett.com

As well as my recent comments regarding “public job classification pay salaries” actually being made public. Thank you for allowing me the time to speak.

Controller orders cities, counties to provide data
James Rufus Koren, Staff Writer, San Bernardino County Sun
Posted: 08/03/2010 05:38:53 PM PDT

As the outrage over city officials' pay in Bell continues to spread around California, the state's top financial manager says he wants to make sure all Californians can easily find out how much their local leaders take home.

Local leaders said they support Chiang's order, although some say posting information won't necessarily lead to people using that information or demanding accountability.

The San Bernardino city council and the Mayoral majority are attempting to raise taxes on you and me.  Don't let them get away with padding their own pockets on the backs of this community.  Some will say, “That's inflammatory and not true”.  San Bernardino has the highest paid Mayor (as reported in the San Bernardino Sun) in ALL of the inland empire as well as the highest paid city manager.  In a city where 1/2 the residents rent and 1/2 the residents are on some kind of government assistance we should not have the highest paid top level administrators.  For these people to take advantage of the socio-economic population in San Bernardino is an insult to tax payers and we deserve better.

We have heard of some time now how San Bernardino faces some of the most serious economic challenges in the Inland Empire yet that hasn't stopped this same leadership from hiring multiple new administrative positions, reclassifying others and handing out raises for the select chosen.  The pattern of tax and spend continues in spite of this economic condition.  Some will say, "We are cut to the bone."  Some will say, "We can't cut our way to solvency."  Some will say, "We don’t have any alternatives."  Either raise taxes or face drastic cuts to public services.  All of this is INACCUARATE!

The fact of the matter is... if the Mayor and his majority would stop spending on new government jobs and programs, frivolous studies and attempts to change the charter to consolidate power at the top and seriously look at the alternatives, presented many times by others... if these ideas were fully vetted in a public forum so the tax payers had true and honest choices when it comes to voting we wouldn't be in this mess.

Some will say, "We are in this mess because of the housing meltdown, it was out of our control."  I would say to any public leader…if you really think that, then you shouldn’t hold office. 

ALL SPENDING IS UNDER YOUR CONTROL.  Simply spend less!  And next time the housing market swings positive, property values rise and the good times are here again – Put some money in reserve this time.

Call you councilman and tell them – NO TO NEW/HIGHER TAXES on this community.

Summarized below is the most recent response from the County provided by the San Bernardino City Manager's office regarding graffiti abatement efforts in County Pockets (Islands).

County Contact: "our abatement crew is basically responding to calls in the order they are submitted"
Joe: First up, first down. Ok, what about county graffiti reported months ago that still isn't removed?

County Contact: "at this point...the county system provided by our abatement contractor...is not available for public use."
Joe:  Suggestion, get a new contractor who can provide the type of services residents demand and deserve.

County Contact: "it can be a few days before the crew would return to one area"
Joe: This means, no graffiti in county areas older than a a few days?

County Contact: "on average our guys are in Muscoy on a weekly basis"
Joe: Ok then, does this mean no graffiti in Muscoy county areas older than a week?

County Contact: "unless a call comes in, which they would respond to within 24-48 hours"
Joe: Wait a minute...what kind of call gets this type of priority attention? This means, no graffiti in Muscoy county areas older than 48hrs. It sounds to me like the country doesn't really have a strict time table, or it can't be articulated.

County Contact: "these areas are basically 'islands'"
Joe: The negative impact these dirty graffiti filled areas impose on the City of San Bernardino is not limited just to the island's geographical area. This cost factor negatively impacts neighboring property values, business development, our city's reputation as well as a whole host of other additional concerns, gangs and turf was just to name a few.

City Contact, Cat Pritchett: "interagency collaboration is been a great tool"
Joe: Maybe, better than before!? A suggestion would be to charge back the county for our city abatement efforts in county areas. Further establish and conduct an annual audit of the time and resources allocated to San Bernardino County areas. I would even go one step further and impose a penally on the county for not taking swifter and more thorough comprehensive action.

City Contact, Cat Pritchett: "and there is still a lot of learning and tweaking to be done as it develops"
Joe: Needed volunteers to serve as TAAG SPOTTERS call 909-384-5687. I contacted this number and submitted my name months ago and have had no follow-up. I have to ask what exactly are we learning and tweaking when after the public call for help is pitched and there seems to be no follow-up or collaborative efforts moving forward? Even 4th ward councilman Shorett stated during his election cycle that he was supporting the new city run abatement program (SB TAAG) doubling the spending, and was going to be a fiscal watch dog to make sure the tax payers get the most bang for their buck. He too has sat silent.  If not you, who is supposed to help? I guess we should all just wait and wonder when we might be contacted or updated and for that matter when politicos will take this problem seriously. Will there ever be a time when the city and county collaborate for the public good, rather than for their own political good. If not now, when.

Joe's Final Thoughts:
San Bernardino neighbors, visitors and travelers live, shop and drive through and around these islands everyday and are faced with a dilemma. One side of the street is City the other side of the street is County.  Or pause to question if a light pole is City property while the other signs or utility box right beside may be county?

San Bernardino City residents will be more empowered to take back our streets and not let graffiti fester due to jurisdictional red tape at the county level, because the City can provide better more efficient services to the residents (whom we all call neighbors) regardless of whether there is a curb in front of the driveway.

I have heard recently a lot of discussion about governmental efficiencies and the city effort to lean the process and save money and resources as a budget balancing strategy. The duplication of county and city efforts, cross-over route planning and poor communication between all parties involved at the city, county, their contracted service provider and the residents raises BIG questions about how serious government leaders actually are about efficient government strategies when graffiti abatement workers can't even walk across the street or down to the next cover, where graffiti is obvious and needs attention.

I have literally whiteness city crews painting over graffiti and driving away from locations where other tags were within walking distance (without even moving their truck) stating that side of the street is county. Next time I drive the area, I will remember to only look at one side of the street.

All residents city and county alike would get a much faster response, because a city crew can be authorized to work hands-on locally without impediments.  Also there would be clearer more accurate and transparent communication, because the SB City CRM system is better and more resident-user friendly than the current county implementation.  Lastly, these issues are not unique to the county.  There are multiple jurisdictions ranging from CalTrans, Schools, Water Districts, Edison and Flood Control to name just a few that should be subject to this same charge-back policy.  We can not expect to put all our hard working efforts in only some geographic areas and not others if we expect to positively change our city image.