Archive | Byrnes Mill RSS feed for this section

County Purchasing Evidence Building; Could be Used by City PDs

16 Apr

On April 8 the Jefferson County Council approved the purchase of a building in Pevely to be used by the Sheriff’s Office for evidence storage. The Sheriff is running out of space for evidence storage, and new laws and litigation require police to keep evidence for longer time periods than before, while being sure to maintain the integrity of the evidence for use at trial. So the need for space to store evidence will only increase.

The building the county is buying is on Mason Circle Drive, off of Highway 61/67 just north of Highway Z. The purchase price was $780,000, and it is about 10,000 square feet on 3 acres.

new evidence bldg

Municipal Option

The Sheriff is considering the option of allowing municipal police departments in the county to use Sheriff services for evidence storage. Handling of evidence has been a major area of concern among local police agencies. The Sheriff investigated the police in Hillsboro and DeSoto within the past year after problems arose in both cities, and found problems such as unsecured, unlabeled, and missing evidence, lack of training, and water leaks and mold in evidence rooms.

When new police chief Frank Selvaggio took over in Byrnes Mill after poor practices were revealed there, he found drugs and weapons that were not packaged and labeled correctly, as well as a rape kit without a case number to identify it. He also discovered a lack of proper officer training in evidence procedures.

And this is just the police departments that have been investigated or released information on their own. Who knows what evidence situation we would find in other JeffCo police departments?

The Proposal

The Sheriff would charge a monthly fee to participating police departments, and require them to follow JeffCo policies and procedures. Selvaggio mentioned at the March 6 Byrnes Mill Board of Aldermen meeting that the proposal would cost that city an estimated $220 per month. The board indicated that it would be interested in participating.

Sheriff Dave Marshak indicates that the Sheriff’s Office would not pursue this plan unless it is cost-effective for his office and there is room for the additional evidence (the new property does have room for expansion). This idea is still in the phase of assessing the potential interest from the cities and the ability for the Sheriff’s Office to offer the service on top of its own responsibilities, and will move to the next phase later this year when the Sheriff takes possession of the new evidence building and completes necessary modifications.

If adopted, a shared evidence facility would be another great step forward in improving municipal policing in our county, along with the changes that have been forced in DeSoto, Byrnes Mill, and Hillsboro. This would contribute greatly to the ability of crime victims in the county to achieve justice by improving the ability to successfully prosecute criminals.

Advertisements

Municipal Election Notes, 2019 Edition

8 Apr

A few observations on last week’s voting:

School Bonds: While there were many school propositions on the ballot, Fox and Grandview had the only bond issues (as opposed to straight tax levy hikes). These proposals required approval by 4/7 of the voters, or 57.14 percent, as per state law. While Grandview barely cleared this threshold, Fox did not, and so its Prop S failed, although it did get over 50%. I am not sure that many realized that the 4/7 requirement was in place – there was some early excitement among Fox fans (and sadness among Prop S opponents) when the vote totals initially came in.

In some cases, a 2/3 vote is required for bond issues. According to MuniBondAdvisor:

A four-sevenths majority is required for general-obligation bond issues submitted at regular elections in April, in August primaries (in even numbered years) and in November general elections (in even numbered years). At all other elections, a two-thirds majority is required.

I guess the idea is to encourage government entities to hold these votes during higher-turnout voting dates, although with only 17% turnout in JeffCo, April elections don’t get much interest from voters.

In any event, expect Fox to come back with another bond proposal. They will lower the dollar value (this one was worth $70 million) and perhaps add some other tweaks in an attempt to make the proposal more palatable. They will say that the fact that a majority of Fox voters were for Prop S gives them the moral authority to try again.

911 tax: The vote to retain a 1/4-cent sales tax for JeffCo 911 passed big, with 70% of the vote, despite vocal opposition by state senator Paul Wieland, a Republican. The Southern Missouri Conservative Fund also sent a mailer opposing the tax. This political action committee got all its money this cycle ($7,000) from…Wieland’s campaign account. The mailer also weighed in on the race for JeffCo Health Board, with the main interest of denying re-election to John Scullin, who is also chairman of the 911 dispatch board. This effort was successful.

I am not totally sure everyone understood that 911 does not provide ambulances and fire trucks, but merely does the dispatching (which is important, of course).

The big question of this campaign was: is this a tax increase or not? The 911 people said no. A 1/4-cent sales tax for 911 was passed in 2009 with a 10-year sunset provision, meaning that it was going to go away unless the 911 proposition passed at this election. So your taxes would have gone down had nothing happened or had the vote failed (911 has another 1/4-cent sales tax besides this one). Therefore I believe that this is, in fact, a tax increase.

Byrnes Mill: I have long begged for some competition for the inept group that runs Byrnes Mill, but beyond a close race for mayor in 2017, there has not been much of it. This year, however, saw challengers for mayor and two board of aldermen seats.

However, the mayor’s race was not much of a contrast. You had the incumbent, Rob Kiczenski, who has been in BM government long enough that he should have known the city PD was a raging dumpster fire (as we saw last fall), taking on Gary Dougherty, who as police chief presided over said dumpster fire. Kiczenski won the race with 62% of the vote.

The two contested board races were not close, either, as both incumbents (who were also willfully ignorant about the state of the PD) cruised to re-election.

Hillsboro Mayor: Buddy Russell remarkably won a write-in campaign with 71% in a three-way race for Hillsboro mayor. One of the people he defeated was former mayor Dennis Bradley, who in his previous stint was accused of assaulting a sheriff’s deputy, after which he resigned. During the campaign he was accused of stealing an opponent’s sign. Russell will have to oversee the rebuilding of the city police after it was found earlier this year to be in poor, poor shape, and the previous mayor, Joe Phillips, weakly resigned when he got criticized over even considering turning policing over to the county sheriff.

Fox C-6 School Board: As usual, the Dianne Critchlow supported/associated (and also teachers’ union endorsed) candidates won, Judy Smith and Carole Yount.

A Tale of Two Cities’ Responses

21 Jan

Both Byrnes Mill and Hillsboro have had to face issues of police misconduct in recent months. The responses of their respective political leadership could not have been more different. Let’s compare.

-In both cases, officers privately approached city leadership to report the misconduct. In Byrnes Mill, the leaders ignored the officers. In Hillsboro, the mayor reacted right away.

-Hillsboro requested that the competent, trusted, impartial JeffCo Sheriff conduct an investigation. Byrnes Mill requested that the not-impartial, not trusted Arnold police department, which has a history of attacking accusers and denying allegations, do an investigation, but only after the officers took their concerns public.

-The Hillsboro report was released within a few days by the sheriff. The Arnold investigation took weeks, and Byrnes Mill only released a short summary. They say they are going to ask a county judge what information they can release from the full report, which really makes no sense and appears to be a delay tactic. Byrnes Mill has apparently still gotten no order from a judge, over three months later.

-The Hillsboro report included a thorough review of the problems within the PD. The Byrnes Mill report was narrowly focused on the allegations in the no-confidence letter. Can you imagine what the sheriff would find if he investigated Byrnes Mill?

-Also within a few days, the Hillsboro chief resigned and an officer was fired. In Byrnes Mill, the officer who was the subject of the no-confidence vote, Roger Ide, was eventually separated from the department, and the police chief was shunted over to a cushy PR job. Four of the eight officers who signed the no-confidence letter have also left the department, one way or another. Byrnes Mill then secretly installed a buddy of the Arnold police chief as its new chief.

-Hillsboro allowed an officer from the sheriff’s department to serve as its temporary chief, and is at least open to the idea of turning policing over to the sheriff for good, although the weak resignation of the Hillsboro mayor probably kills the chances of that happening. Byrnes Mill reportedly had a few Arnold officers help out, and you will have to pry the BMPD out of the cold, dead hands of city leadership, despite a series of embarrassing failures over the past decade.

Police Purge at Byrnes Mill

9 Jan

In addition to the child molester in its ranks, Ryan Shomaker, the Byrnes Mill police department has parted ways with a number of other officers through firing and resignation in recent months in the wake of the big no-confidence incident that began in August 2018.

Back then, eight city police officers submitted a letter of no confidence, alleging certain offenses by Lt. Roger Ide. The Arnold PD was chosen to investigate, and its report synopsis is here.

In the aftermath, Police Chief Gary Dougherty was shunted over to the newly-created, cushy Director of Community Relations position. Ide was fired, but so was Kevin Schroeder, the guy who wrote the no-confidence letter. What kind of message does that send? Fire the guy causing a bunch of problems, but then simultaneously fire the guy who blew the whistle, who organized the letter after city officials ignored his privately-expressed concerns.

Here is the list of other signees of the letter. Those that are no longer with the BMPD, according to the city, are struck through. I do not know if these individuals (other than the first one) were fired, resigned, or forced to resign:

Cpl. James Iken – resigned

Jamie Mayberry

Mike Stivers

Justin Robinson

Chris Hancock (updated)

Jason Holt

Bradley Tritch

As you see, only half of those who spoke out have retained their jobs.

How Now?

I find it interesting that new BM police chief Frank Selvaggio is the one who turned the Shomaker case over to the JeffCo Sheriff. Selvaggio just took over as chief in late October. Shomaker had been abusing the kid, while serving as a reserve police officer, for over four years. How did the fact of this abuse escape all of the previous BM chiefs, but was immediately found out by Selvaggio? Were the other chiefs just that blind? Seriously, Shomaker “separated” from the BMPD only six days after Selvaggio arrived.

Update: A Leader article states that the BMPD came into contact with Shomaker’s victim on October 30 for an unrelated manner, at which time he reported the abuse.

 

Potential Byrnes Mill Solutions

26 Oct

I would like to propose three possible solutions for the residents of Byrnes Mill to pursue if they are interested in ending the constant parade of scandals and mismanagement in their city. That seems to be a rather large if, considering how long this has been allowed to go on, but I will offer these options anyway.

Run for Office

Year after year we see Byrnes Mill aldermen run for re-election unopposed. People can’t vote the bums out if there are no other options. Here is what happened in recent election years, as best as I am able to determine:

  • 2018: Three incumbents ran unopposed.
  • 2017: Three incumbents ran unopposed. The then-mayor, Susan Gibson, actually had an opponent, who she only beat by 17 votes.
  • 2016: Three incumbents ran unopposed (two incumbents).
  • 2015: Three candidates ran unopposed. There was competition in the mayor’s race, and Gibson won big.
  • 2014: Three incumbents ran unopposed (two incumbents). Jim McBroom originally had an opponent, but for some reason he was not on the April ballot.

You get the picture. The regime also apparently prefers to fill vacancies by appointment after officials leave in the middle of their term, instead allowing voters to select new blood. Three current aldermen and the mayor got their jobs in such a manner.

Byrnes Mill board members need election opponents. There will actually be four board members and the mayor up for re-election this coming April. Knock them out. The candidate filing period will be in December and January. But if you decide to file, make sure you have your ducks in order, because the city will investigate every possible reason to kick you off the ballot.

Get a State Audit

While it is true that the city recently started doing an annual financial audit after years of not doing them, what Byrnes Mill really needs is a state audit, as was done on the Fox school district and is now being done on the DeSoto school district. Instead of just looking at balance sheets, the state auditor looks at “financial accountability, waste, opportunities for fraud, and whether government organizations and programs are achieving their purposes and operating economically and efficiently.” Does this sound like something Byrnes Mill needs? The Fox audit uncovered the depths of disgraced former superintendent Dianne Critchlow’s theft from the district. An audit of Byrnes Mill would perhaps bring to light things that the city prefers to keep hidden.

As part of the audit process, the auditor’s office will meet with local residents and ask for their input about what areas to look into. Before the DeSoto audit started, such a meeting was held, and it was closed with only a certain group of residents present, so that nosy school officials could not check out who was airing the district’s dirty laundry.

Through the petition process, BM residents can force an audit without the city’s consent. The process is as follows:

  • Submit an audit request form, which lays out the public’s concerns. While the concerns are confidential, the name of the person who sent for the form is public record, so beware of retaliation.
  • The auditor’s office will use that form to come up with a cost estimate for the audit (the city has to pay for it). The auditor will then provide signature forms.
  • For Byrnes Mill, only 274 signatures from city residents who are registered voters would need to be collected to force an audit, according to my calculations (15% of 1,823, the number of people from Byrnes Mill who voted in the 2016 race for governor). That seems to me to be eminently doable.
  • The person that submits the signatures to the auditor must also be a resident. The name of this person and all of those who sign is a public record.
  • The county clerk will verify that people who signed the petition are eligible. At this point, the city goes on the list of entities to be audited.

This would require a small group of committed individuals to organize the process and go out and collect the signatures. Be sure you collect more than enough signatures, in case some get thrown out. Again, make sure you follow the rules to the letter to make sure the process gets completed successfully.

Disincorporate the City

The nuclear option would be the disincorporation of the city. It would then become an unincorporated part of the county. To make this happen, residents would have to collect approximately 708 signatures (25% of the city’s 2,832 registered voters). When the signatures are certified, the county places a disincorporation question on the ballot, and a majority vote in the city would be needed to pass it. (Recent example here).

This is a legitimate option because the city seems to have trouble collecting enough revenue. For years the city used traffic tickets to bolster its bottom line, but SB5 a few years ago put a 20% cap on the amount of city revenue that could come from that source (over the city’s vociferous objections). Periodically, the city talks about trying to annex land, like the High Ridge Walmart, in order to seize the sales tax revenue. Lately, the city has turned to tax hikes. Three measures (two sales tax, one property tax) were shot down in 2017, in a welcome sign of life from BM voters. They tried again with the sales taxes in 2018, and one of the two passed.

So, BM residents, you have a few options if you want to clean up your city. I hope you will seriously consider them.

Byrnes Mill Investigation Update

19 Oct

Ralph Waldo Emerson once said “When you strike at a king you must kill him,” meaning that if you don’t, royal retaliation will be swift and severe. I think this quote is relevant to the current situation in Byrnes Mill. Eight valiant police officers made a declaration to city leadership of no confidence in police lieutenant Roger Ide, putting their careers at risk to expose wrongdoing. However, they must finish the job and metaphorically overthrow the regime in the city, or it will strike back and the status quo will be preserved.

We have begun to see this manifested, as the powers that be in Byrnes Mill have struck back at the whistleblowers. While Ide has been suspended without pay, according to the Leader, so has Kevin Schroeder, the officer who wrote the letter. In addition, another signee, James Iken, has resigned. All indications are that he was pushed out. There may have been other officers punished, but the city is, of course, refusing to comment. The police chief, Gary Dougherty, seems to be in limbo as well.

Given the pushback, it seems that the officers and anyone else with knowledge has gone to ground, refusing to talk at all about what is going on. While this is understandable, the fact is that the battle is now engaged. The city will fight to bury this story and punish those who went rogue, hoping it all blows over. But this needs to stay in the news. We need to know the lengths to which the city is going to quash this, and what kind of punishments they are handing out. Also, who is doing the punishing? The police chief seems to have totally removed himself from the situation. Shouldn’t he be the guy running the police department? What are the mayor, city administrator, and board of alderman saying and doing?

Arnold: Questionable Choice

One part of the strategy to get past this episode with minimal repercussions, I think, is that the city chose the Arnold PD, of all places, to investigate. Had Byrnes Mill chosen the county sheriff, as did De Soto during their recent turmoil, people would have had faith in the outcome. But the ties between Byrnes Mill and Arnold are enough to give one pause.

The crux of the connection between the two entities is that they share the same city attorney, Bob Sweeney. Sweeney has, in both places, acted in a questionable manner to preserve the ruling regimes, primarily by selectively kicking candidates off the ballot. He has an interest in protecting the status quo, because changes in city government could cause him to lose a client. Sweeney was fired from Arnold in 2010, but he helped get his cronies back into power and he was quickly rehired. So what is good for the ruling regimes is good for Sweeney, so he probably wants to help quash this.

Arnold has a history of poor investigating. They hired out to a private individual to do an investigation of what I believe were politically-motivated harassment allegations in 2013. The results of this investigation were, as I wrote, shockingly shoddy. The council originally refused to pay for the abomination, but again, after an election, the new cronies came in and handed over the cash.

In an interesting coincidence, one or more officers in 2007 wrote an anonymous letter making allegations against Arnold police department officers, including the chief. While denying all the allegations, the city (and Sweeney) went after a former officer that they claimed wrote the letter, even filing a lawsuit against her (07JE-CC01259 – CITY OF ARNOLD ET AL V SONIA ADAMS). Some of the allegations in the suit involved the guy who is still chief of the Arnold police, Robert Shockey, selling items from his personal business to the city. I exposed this activity in 2014 (the above incident was before my time), leading to a front-page story in the Post-Dispatch. This provides reason to believe that other denials by the city of Arnold were lies. And so now we have the city of Arnold investigating another incident of officers making credible claims of wrongdoing against their leadership. And you wonder why people are skeptical of this arrangement? Arnold has experience in dismissing accusations it does not like and then retaliating against whistleblowers.

Byrnes Mill does too, allegedly. In 2014, former interim chief Michael Smith filed a lawsuit alleging that he was fired after refusing orders from then city administrator Larry Perney (now with Manchester) to fix tickets, enforce ticket quotas, and not do checkpoints. Smith was suspended and told to resign the very day he reported these accusations to Bob Sweeney. Smith was awarded a settlement by the city. It should be noted that Smith pled guilty to wire fraud this year but got no jail time. Yet nothing changes in city hall. It is a regular den of thieves.

It should also be noted that Sweeney has a brother who is an Arnold cop.

Willful Ignorance Among City Leaders

I would like to highlight a couple of statements that show how ridiculous city leaders are. In the Leader article, it mentions that deputy city clerk Tracy McAfee resigned from the city. Mayor Rob Kiczenski says he does not know why. But I understand McAfee submitted a resignation letter to the city, laying out in detail what her complaints were. So Kiczenski is seemingly lying.

Here is a comment that alderman Bob Prado made on Facebook:

prado comment1prado comment2

Here’s the thing. This was written on about September 8, two weeks after the board voted to have Arnold do its investigation. Yet in desperation to deny the accusations, Prado is still peddling the idiocy that the letter could be a forgery or fabrication. He also acts like he is sticking up for the eight officers, when in fact his board is aiding and abetting the retaliation against them.

Advance the Attack

Back to my original analogy, now is the time for the valiant officers, and other right-minded city employees, to tell their tales publicly. Let us know what is going on behind the curtains through all these scandals. You don’t have to necessarily identify yourself – you can speak anonymously (I can help). This story needs continued attention if it is going to lead to change in Byrnes Mill, whether through the ballot box or outside intervention. Otherwise, things will just return to the status quo, like they did after previous scandals in the city and police department.

April 2018 Election Recap

8 Apr

Let’s look at some of the headlines from the local elections held a few days ago.

Taxes: Six of nine tax measures succeeded in all.

The property tax for the county sheriff passed in a big way, with 64% of the vote. A sales tax hike for police passed in Hillsboro with 71% of the vote.

Byrnes Mill went 1 for 2 on tax hikes after going 0 for 3 last year (with two close losses). This time, a road maintenance tax won by 31 votes and a transportation tax failed by six votes. Will the city try the failed tax proposal again in a future election?

Antonia Fire’s 35-cent property tax proposal failed by 56-44%, after a 50-cent tax lost by the same margin in November. This time 2,100 people voted, versus 1,489 last time. Will the district try again in a future election? Maybe 25 cents next time?

A tax for a Hillsboro library failed for the third time in recent years, with 64% voting against a property tax proposal. Will they try again in a future election?

Despite all the turmoil in city government with firings, resignations, and lawsuits, DeSoto’s Prop P park and stormwater tax passed with 67% of the vote.

DeSoto: Some shake-up took place, as one city council member who was serving as mayor, Larry Sanders, was knocked off, and one school board member (recently fired as city manager) who was previously appointed to the board to fill a vacancy, David Dews, failed to win a full term.

Pevely: Big turnover, as three incumbents, all part of the faction that wanted to fire acting police chief Tony Moutray, were defeated. One, Rick Arnold, also facing an n-word controversy, lost to a write-in candidate.

Arnold: Two incumbent councilmen won close races. In ward 4, Gary Plunk beat Randy Hoselton by three votes. In Ward 3, Vern Sullivan beat Rod Mullins by 12 votes. Sullivan was assisted by a third candidate, William Denman, who received 62 votes, which would have been more than enough to put Mullins over the top. Denman also played spoiler in the mayor race last year, when incumbent Ron Counts beat councilman Phil Amato by 176 votes while Denman got 276 votes. It’s almost like Denman entered these races for that specific purpose…

Denman’s name has popped up in Arnold before in association with a shady political group called Citizens For a Better Arnold (CFABA) that used outside money to push candidates who supported red light cameras. Early on, CFABA supported Amato, but later on Counts moved over to the dark side, and Amato recently broke with the Counts regime (and with the Democratic party, he claims). It is all rather shadowy.

Also in Arnold, he who I like to call the Critchlow candidate, Jim Chellew, was predictably voted onto the Fox school board.

%d bloggers like this: