A+ R A-

Hardy L. Brown

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.

Ain't Black Americans U.S. Citizens, Justice Scalia?

E-mail Print PDF

United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 signed into law by then President Lyndon Baines Johnson, which had been reauthorized unanimously by congress for the past fifty years, is a “racial entitlement” law.

I don’t know which country Justice Scalia has been living in but it is not the United States. Ever since this law took effect, some White people with racial biases and an un-American idea of our democracy have tried to dismantle the rights of Black, Latino and, Asian Americans to exercise their right to vote as citizens.

In the Bible, Paul had to exercise his citizenship rights in Acts 22:25 when the centurion soldier was about to whip him. Paul said “is it legal to whip a Roman citizen who has not been tried?” Paul was saying you might have a desire to whip me for being a follower of Christ but you can’t whip me until I have been tried and found guilty.

To Justice Scalia: you might not like how I vote but you cannot take my right to vote away unless you remove all citizens’ right to vote. Race, sex, age, and religious entitlements have been a part of the American agenda every since an all-White male group wrote, enacted, and enforced the laws of the constitution of these United States.

Let me say it another way. Sojourner Truth rhetorically asked some White women during her speech of 1851, “Ain’t I a woman?” Truth had every thing that White women had, she had even bore children, 13 to be exact, and what she did not have was White skin that would allow her the privilege to go about in America as a free woman. So my question to Justice Scalia is “Ain’t I a United States Citizen?” I was born and raised in this country with over four hundred years of family lineage, does that not allow me the same guaranteed constitutional rights as any White citizen? Maybe what you are saying Justice Scalia is you do not want Blacks, Latinos and Asians to have the same “racial entitlements” as the White race in America.

To my brothers and sisters, this is why politics is so important to me. Part of the process is appointing people to our court system on a national and local level. We must appoint people who have a good understanding of our history and are fair in their deliberation of the issues placed before them on behalf of the people.

 

My friend Frank Stallworth

I first met Frank during a political campaign when he first came to San Bernardino. Frank was the campaign manager of Jerry Herndon for the Sixth Ward City Council and I was the manager of John Hobbs’ campaign for the same seat. Needless to say, Hobbs won and Frank and I became lifelong friends after that. Frank went on to join the staff of Senator Ruben Ayala and Senator Nell Soto where he served our community.

Everyone got to know Frank by his jovial way of greeting anyone and always approached me with kindness, “Brother Brown, let me tell you about this business venture I am thinking about.”

Frank loved the church and all of the things that went along with it and he was most at home being in front of the church, it was like tossing a rabbit in a briar patch.

If I didn’t see Frank for a while, I knew I could always see him on New Years Eve at St. Paul AME’s 10 PM night watch service with his entire family. He was a faithful worshipper of Jesus Christ and lived his life as such.

Frank, along with Rev. Lamar Foster, talked me into serving on the Boys and Girls Club Board of Directors with his friend Jerry Herndon as Executive Director. From that relationship we developed a bond that would draw laughter everytime we would greet one another because the club was struggling from a lack of funds during our tenure.

Our community has lost a committed citizen, his family a great leader, and me a good friend.

Your Customers Can Get You in Trouble

E-mail Print PDF

Most of us know and have used the statement, “the customer is always right” but in some instances it’s not always the case. In Saturday’s business section of the Press Enterprise the top story caught my attention, as did two other stories on that page. The top story headline was “Some patients won’t see nurses of different race”. The second story was “Black contractors group seeks hiring parity and the third was “Unemployment rate dip”.

The first story cited the request of a White father in Detroit, with a swastika tattoo insisting that Black nurses not be allowed to touch his newborn and the request was written on the patient’s chart. Of course the two Black nurses on duty read the note and wondered what were they to do if the baby needed care and no other White nurses were on duty with them. There were no compelling reasons stated with the note and of course the nurses filed a charge against the hospital for honoring this “racial preference” request from their customer.

This first story reminded me of a phone call I received from the head nurse at Kaiser Hospital’s maternity ward during my early days as the Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinator at Kaiser Hospital in Fontana. She said, “Hardy I have a problem, there is a young White girl here in labor and she does not want our Black doctor to help with her delivery and there is no other doctor on duty.“

I told her we couldn’t assign our services to members based on race, so she will have to go somewhere else for service because we cannot honor her request.

A few hours went by and I received another call which the head nurse informed me that it worked out quite well. As the baby moved closer to being delivered and discomfort came with pain the doctor’s race became less of an issue. The doctor did such a great job that she selected him to be her doctor after the delivery.

Now there are times when certain circumstances of race or gender might be a reasonable request from a patient or family member because of some traumatic life experience that is motivating the request, which must be evaluated and considered. If you are in the emergency room for care after just being beat up by a group wearing swastikas, you might reject the care from a health worker with those tattoos all over his arms and body.

Not fully understanding discrimination law at the time, I relied on my personal experience as the first Black meter reader at Edison. I came into the office after reading meters on my shift and my supervisor, Bill Slaven, called me into his office and said, “Hardy we received a call from a customer who told me he did not want any Negros coming on his property reading his electric meter.” Mr. Slaven said “I told him we would send a crew out to disconnect his service and he could sign up with another company for electrical service or he will accept whoever we send out regardless of race or sex.”I just wanted you to know customers do not tell us how to run our business.”

My experience has told me the customer is not always right and sometimes can get you into real trouble.

Black Workers Need Work Too

The second PE story involved Black workers in the construction industry protesting the lack of being hired on a state funded project worth $63.2 million to build a courthouse in Banning. The Young Black Contractors Association of South Central spokesperson Drexell Johnson said in the article that officials made a commitment to put a racially diverse pool of local laborers and contractors to work on the project but that has not happened. They have hired many minorities but none are Black.

Banning is a city in Riverside County that has a good reputation over many years in the Black community. The mayor, Debbie Franklin is African American and Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Botts is White and the city has a long history of inclusion of all races in public policy and the citizens elect minorities to the city council and to the school board.

I wonder what went wrong with the contractors in charge of this project to think that they could build without the Black community noticing or saying anything?

With the unemployment rate for Blacks doubled that of any other group in California, I can see why they would protest. If the contractor was using his on money maybe he could hire whomever he pleases, but since this is public money and being built for public use he is wrong. So I encourage him to get with the program and be more inclusive or not go after publicly funded projects.

Page 4 of 121

Quantcast