A+ R A-

Hardy L. Brown

Pete Aguilar for the 31st Congressional Seat in 2014

E-mail Print PDF

The race for the 31st Congressional seat in 2014 has already drawn many democratic contenders to run. The seat is currently occupied by Republican Gary Miller. Miller has the money but democrats have the majority voters in the district and for all practical purposes the right candidate should get elected without much effort. However that is easily said than becoming a reality as the last election showed us.

Currently we have Mayor of Redlands, Pete Aguilar who was born and raised on the west side of San Bernardino where his parents told family members that in order to make it in America they must learn and speak English as their primary language. He did as his parents told him and got a good education that allowed him to grow up and lead one of our premier cities in the Inland Empire. Not bad for a Latino boy from the west side of town where he also worked with his blind grandfather in the family business.

This diverse community of African Americans and Hispanics with his family experience taught him how to relate to all people and has propelled him to lead Redland’s citizens as mayor and council member. He led all Democratic contenders in the June 2012 election but came in third behind two Republicans because four democrats split up their votes. The National Democratic Party has already committed to helping Aguilar which he has said yes to their support.

Also we have former congressional member Joe Baca who was defeated by Gloria Negrete McLeod in 2012 for the 35th Congressional seat. Joe decided to move from Rialto to Fontana so he would not have to run against his republican friend Gary Miller. The voters in this new district heard of Joe using his office as a personal bully club and rejected his family style of representation and his close relationship with the National Rifle Association.

Next we have Danny Tillman of the San Bernardino School Board who is talking about running for the seat. Tillman has been elected to the school board for four terms and we have witnessed the decline in test scores and high dropout rate in the African American student population. He has to take responsibility for that decline even though some movement is being made.

I know that Tillman is being giving advice by a losing candidate Renea Wickman who believes that being African American should be a part of the qualifying criteria for seeking office. The voters an myself have rejected that kind of thinking even though the candidate should be inclusive of all people that they represent.

Last we have Eloise Reyes, Esq. talking about exploring a shot at running for congress. She is a very successful attorney and has expressed an interest of being appointed a Superior Court Judge. Maybe she changed that line of thinking and wants to make public law instead of interpreting public law. I am not sure if she is aware of the effort, time, money and commitment it takes to seek a seat in congress.

In my opinion, I believe every citizen has the right to run for office just like I did when I ran for the school board. Having said that, all candidates need to know what they are up against, why they are running, what they hope to accomplish and have some plan as to how they might pull it off.

From what I know thus far, Pete Aguilar has all of those things I just mentioned and more because he has garnered the support of many leaders in the district and the National Democratic Party, plus he has my support for what it is worth. Pete will provide the leadership our district needs.

Norma Torres For 32nd District Senate Seat

E-mail Print PDF

With the election of Gloria Negrete McLeod to the 35th Congressional District, her former state senate seat became vacant and as of Monday, early voting began to fill this vacancy. On the ballot for the position are Assembly Member Norma Torres (D) of Pomona and Paul Leon (R) of Ontario.

Both individuals have local government experience - serving on city council and serving as mayor of their respective cities. Torres has additionally served her district well as a member of the state assembly since 2008.

While both candidates have similar backgrounds at the local government level, in my opinion the edge would go to Torres with her Assembly experience. And with the Democrats in control of the Senate, Assembly and executive branch of our government, she will have a greater chance of being heard in bringing our regions issues to the top of the state’s agenda.

I know Torres will continue in the fine tradition of female senators that started with Nell Soto and continued with Negrete McLeod. In her current position Torres serves on the Economic Development and Job Creation Committee, Housing & Community Development Committee, and the Banking & Finance Committee. She has the full support of labor unions and the Democratic Party.

The 32nd Senate District serves the communities of San Bernardino, Rialto, Fontana, Ontario, Colton, Montclair, Bloomington, Muscoy and Pomona. So citizens living in these cities must exercise their civic duty and vote.

Our district is in great need of good paying jobs that will sustain families above the poverty level. Our local cities need help recovering from current financial hardships. Our educational institutions are in need of attention and Torres will help with that as well.

I am recommending that the voters in the 32nd Senate District vote and elect Norma Torres.

Wall Street Journal Wrong on "Pay to Play" Bill

E-mail Print PDF

Last week the Wall Street Journal’s Allysia Finley published an opinion that California liberals were at it again for introducing Assembly Bill 475 that would require all NCAA associated universities give student athletes an additional $3,600 annual stipend from their $20 million revenue generated from media and merchandising profits.

It is estimated that the NCAA, a non-profit organization, makes $11 billion each year from televised college sports, specifically basketball’s “March Madness” and football’s various bowl games. Of that revenue, the athletes get nothing. Even the coaches and their staff earn multi-million dollar annual salaries to coach these gifted athletes.

Many in the public are not aware that if the athlete is injured, he or she is left to figure out a different method for paying for school or has to dropout entirely because of a lack of tuition. Often these scholarships are given with annual contingencies for that very reason. This total control over our young athletes reminds me of some systems that have been practiced in the past and are now outlawed in America.

First there was “slavery” which was legal from 1619 to 1863. Slaves had no rights and helped build the economic foundation in America of which we now enjoy as citizens. Many people watched that practice and thought it was a fair system to work people for no wages but give them food and shelter in exchange for their free labor.

We had another unfair labor practice under the “Indentured Servitude” law. An owner was allowed to work a person for up to seven years and give them food, accommodations and no payment for their free labor. It was a binding contract and the person had no rights to speak out against the owner. Again many people watched that practice and thought it was a fair system for people to work for no wages.

After that we had (and still do in some states) a system of “share cropping” of which I have some personal experience because I worked under it. The owner will give you food and a house to live in during your agreement to work the farm and share in the profits after the crops are harvested. Some people were able to live well under this system depending on the owner but the majority of the share croppers left the farms with only the clothes on their backs and no place to go.

Just like the athletes of today it depends on the coach of the team as to how athletes are treated. If you attend a school where the coach put your academics first and sports second, then you make out good because you leave with a degree in hand.

Now we have the bigger than life NCAA which is run by a group of individuals that set the polices that govern the honed skills of our young and gifted boys and girls and give them nothing in return while the owners make billions of dollars.

In the article, Finley even suggested that low-income athletes should take out Pell Grants to cover any additional cost while attending college and playing ball. This is a new one for me. She is suggesting that now the student should take out a loan and give it to the college or university to play on the team. Neither the person in slavery, indentured servants nor sharecroppers had to do that.

So in my business opinion the Wall Street Journal is suggesting a new system of Pay to Play for the student athletics in America. Also California is leading the way to ensure our students are treated fairly and not being exploited by greedy hungry organizations exploiting them financially.

In my opinion this “pay to play” practice must stop.

San Bernardino City Says One Thing Then Does Another

E-mail Print PDF

To borrow a quote from Dr. Benjamin Mays of Morehouse College on Leadership and Core Values: “It will not be sufficient for Morehouse, for any college, for that matter, to produce clever graduates, men fluent in speech and able to argue their way through; but rather honest men, men who can be trusted in public and private--- who are sensitive to the wrongs, the sufferings, and the injustices of society and who are willing to accept responsibility for correcting the ills.”

I had the opportunity to watch the televised city council meetings for Riverside, Fontana, and San Bernardino and after watching the latter I thought, I have taught Bible classes for over forty years and one thing I have found is that nations or cities with the strongest and best trained armed police forces have not always prevented crime, corruption in government or those in authority from taking advantage of its people. I have also read many history books and watched many movies portraying stories where the highest paid gun slingers only added to the town’s problems; it was only when good citizens raised up with enough backbone to confront the towns bullies that these bullies turned themselves around.

The city of San Bernardino has been drifting towards bankruptcy and not electing strong leaders for many years especially under its present system of public safety association funded political campaigns. Although the leadership has been different (different mayors and council members), they have all served under the same legal advisor, City Attorney Jim Penman. And all of them have been funded by public safety associations. And they have all had to enforce Charter section 186 which provides public safety workers automatic salary increases regardless of the city’s ability to pay.

The council has a tendency to say one thing and turn around and do another all while being gently nudged by its legal advisor. A few examples: The council was faced with having no money to pay for a section 186 pay raise of over $1 million to police and firefighters. Penman took to the mic and proceeded to scold the mayor and told the council if they did not approve the raise they would lose the vote in court. That might or might not be true but since the city is broke they could tell the court we have no money to pay them like we had in the past as we are also required to provide other services to our citizens.

Now all of the blame does not fall at the feet of Penman because the council approved the salary increase on a 5-2 vote with Fred Shorett and Virginia Marques voting no, showing courageous leadership in opposition to charter section 186.

The mayor opened the agenda item explaining the problems with section 186 but then turned the meeting over to Penman for a history lesson in politics and not a legal opinion. Mayor Morris must shoulder some responsibility as the city’s Chief Executive Officer and spokesperson. He must take charge of these meetings and keep it a meeting of the mayor and council.

Another one of his political opinions has now put the city on the hook and in the crosshairs of the State of California, by keeping millions in redevelopment funds. Penman has recently written a legal opinion to the state only to have the state say they will withhold payment of any money due the city until the state is paid all that is due them.

Penman prides himself as being the city’s watchdog for good government. But why would he take on the State of California but not public safety? Is it because the state does not give to political campaigns?

T mayor and the council say we have the best cops in the state because we pay them high wages, while in the same sentence say we have the most dangerous city in the state. Mind you we have been paying these high wages ever since the voters added section 186 to the city charter over two decades ago.

Then they say we want to bring high paying jobs in the city. The highest paying jobs in the city are the police and fire fighters but less than 10% of them live in the city with 90% taking over $40 million into other communities where they live. Penman tells us that other police officers that work in other cities live in San Bernardino but fails to give any evidence to back up that statement. They say one thing then do another.

They want the citizens to spend money in the city but they give contracts to vendors outside the city.

They want the best employees yet they belittle all employees who come before them at the meetings.

They want the cleanest city in the region yet they give those departments with the responsibility to keep it clean, no money and ask for citizen volunteers to pick up trash in the parks.

They are in bankruptcy then hire a city manger who has filed personal bankruptcy two times. It’s time for our elected city leaders to stop saying one thing and doing another.

Assembly Bill 335 is a Common Sense Bill

E-mail Print PDF

Recently my wife, the newly elected Assembly member Cheryl Brown of the 47th District, introduced AB 335 that will assist low income or working class communities by prohibiting law enforcement from impounding vehicles that can be parked legally or released to a licensed driver. I’m very proud of her for a number of reasons, but the most important one is that as a Sacramento lawmaker she is staying true to her life’s mission to help the disadvantaged, the voiceless, and those who are working hard to support their families.

In the state of California, the current law allows law enforcement officers to impound a car if the driver is stopped for some reason and found to have a suspended or revoked license or if they left it at home. In most cases, the person driving the car is released on the spot while the car, which has no violation of registration is impounded or put another way, is taken off to jail and locked up for 30 days at $50 a day plus towing fees of $225 and sold if the owner of the car does not pay all of these fees which is shared by the jurisdiction and the company.

The current law is disproportionately enforced in low-income communities as well as in communities of color. Who is going to believe the grandmother speaking in broken English who tries to explain that she did not know her grandchild was driving her car with a revoked licensed? Or the African American mother who did not know her son’s drivers license was suspended when he drove the car to the store for her? I even heard a story where a woman was stopped at night by law enforcement with her four children in the car. When she told the officer she left her license at home he sent for a tow truck and impounded her car while leaving her on the side of the road with her children. It cost her over one thousand dollars to get her car back.

There are hundreds of stories like this up and down the state. These people do not have the funds to pay the impound charges or a voice to combat this practice. I see no problem with a bill that will allow a car to be legally parked until a licensed driver or its legal owner can come and drive it away.

While I don’t talk to my wife about her legislation, like anything else I started reading more about the current practice. I found that some cities like Los Angeles already have a similar policy where the car can be parked and picked up instead of impounded if the car is not in violation. Even the current laws regarding DUI checkpoints require officers to arrest the drunk driver and release the car to a licensed driver. The person caught in a checkpoint without a license cannot lose his car to impoundment.

So why the inconsistency with the law? I think the state should use this legislation as an opportunity to study where this practice is taking place and see where these victims live. I would like to know if people in middle or high-income communities have their cars towed at the same rate as those in low-income communities and communities of color. In my opinion, I believe it can bring some parity to a practice that has been unfairly executed in communities of less influence.

Page 4 of 121

Quantcast