Thursday, August 4, 2016

CODE ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE USES CITY OWNED VEHICLE FOR PERSONAL USE - CITY REFUSES TO ANSWER QUESTIONS



Alice Taylor,  a Code Enforcement Officer with the Planning Department was caught using a city vehicle that is apparently assigned to her (apparently because the city refuses to say if it is a Planning pool vehicle or one assigned to Taylor) at the Goodwill store in West Little Rock.


Taylor was shopping in the store and then seen carrying a bag of items she purchased to the city owned vehicle. As Taylor was opening the car door she was asked what city business she was conducting. Taylor refused to answer and quickly drove off.

One Freedom of Information request and several follow up questions were made to the city.  The FOI request was answered but the city balked on answering the following questions:

1.  Is vehicle 13A291 a pool vehicle in the Planning Department or is it assigned to Taylor?

2. Is there a policy/procedure regarding personal use of a city owned vehicle?

3. Are city employees permitted to use city owned vehicles for personal use?

4.  What city business was Taylor conducting at the Goodwill Store on August 1, 2016 at approximately 3:30 p.m.?

The public has a right to have questions answered by their city government and its employees, both elected and hired.




Tuesday, August 2, 2016

LRPD SLOW TO RESPOND TO CALLS IN WEST LITTLE ROCK

The Little Rock Police Department has organized Little Rock into three geographic divisions, Downtown, Southwest and Northwest.




If you live in the Northwest Division, LRPD will be slow to respond to your calls if at all. Response time for the Northwest division is much slower that the other two divisions.
 
LRPD Officer Richard Hilgeman calls the delayed response "stressful."

OFFICER RICHARD HILGEMAN
  
Hilgeman said there is a slightly delayed response time for people who live in the city's Northwest Division.

According to statistics from June 2016 the slight delay is almost double for the Northwest division than in the Downtown and Southwest divisions. 







Hilgeman said they're still working to open a new police substation in west Little Rock at the Pankey Community Center which he says should lower response times. He says adding more police officers would lower the response times as well.
 
THE NEVER USED AND UNFINISHED JOSEPHINE PANKEY EDUCATION CENTER


In November of 2013 the Little Rock Board of Directors approved the creation of the LRPD Panky Substation in the vacant and never used Josephine Pankey Education Center.  The center sits on property that was owned by the Little Rock Public School District and deeded to the city in February 2014. One million dollars from  a one cent sales tax measure is to be used to make internal improvements and complete the parking lot (unless the city used the funds for other purposes).

The existing Northwest Division station is located at 10001 Kanis Road and is only 6 miles or 10 minutes from the Josephine Pankey Education Center at 13640 Cantrell Road.

A call made to LRPD on August 1st about a stolen lawnmower in West Little Rock, had a much longer response time.

At approximately 7:30 p.m. a WLR homeowner observed three black males in a white Chevrolet SUV with Arkansas license plate 845 WTF drive off with their lawnmower. A call was immediately made to 911. Almost three and a half hours later, LRPD stopped in (without the lawnmover).  The residence where the theft took place is approximately 2 miles from the Northwest LRPD Station.  Incredible.

LRPD needs to stop making excuses and don that expensive riot gear and protect the citizens of Little Rock.

As long as a majority of LRPD personnel refuse to live in the city, the problems are just going to continue to grow.



Saturday, July 30, 2016

LRPD TELLS CITIZENS THEY WON'T SEND AN OFFICER TO RESPOND TO PROPERTY CRIMES




Someone loitering near your home or steal something out of your garage or carport?  Little Rock Police ain't got time for that says LRPD Chief Kenton Buckner.

Back in May,  Chief Buckner told a reporter for KTHV that their agency is down 50 sworn in officers, which is forcing him to move officers around to meet the highest priority safety need.

“We had to take COP officers from all three of our patrol divisions to help fill some of those gaps, and those folks are still in those positions,” said Buckner.

COP officers are Community Oriented Police, meaning they target niche neighborhoods, helping crime prevention.

With low recruitment numbers, now those COP officers are being moved to high priority crimes, like 911 calls and public danger.

“We're certainly going to respond to a domestic violence call a lot quicker than we would be for a stolen bike,” said Buckner.

Which makes sense, but in Little Rock, 80 percent of crime is property theft.

Working with short staff, Chief Buckner is looking to other options to tackle property crimes.

“Maybe do that via telephone or some online service because I want to reduce the number of calls I’m sending officers to that don't involve violent crime,” said Buckner.


This is what happens when you have a police department that only has 34% of their officers that actually reside in the city of Little Rock.

These officers don't want to live in Little Rock, next door to you, or send their kids to school with your kids, so why would they care what happens to your property?

It's time for a change in city government... from the mayor, city manager, board members down to department heads.

Thursday, June 9, 2016

JUDGE LEVIES A $10,000 SANCTION AGAINST THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK AND ORDERS LITTLE ROCK CITY ATTORNEY TO ATTEND EDUCATIONAL SEMINAR

SMART-ASS CITY ATTORNEY TOM CARPENTER ORDERED TO ATTEND SEMINAR ON CASE MANAGEMENT AND ETHICS

The city of Little Rock has filed a notice of appeal of the $10,000 sanction and contempt-of-court citation issued against it by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Tim Fox.

The notice was a formality that comes before City Attorney Tom Carpenter will file an official appeal with the Arkansas Supreme Court that will include briefs detailing his legal argument.

Carpenter stated that his argument will be the same as when he petitioned Fox to reconsider the sanction and argued against the judge holding the city in contempt.

"The appeal is about whether proper procedures and notice were provided. All the city has asked is that the court follow the rules. So, we are asking the Arkansas Supreme Court to determine whether the written rules should be followed, or whether they can be ignored," Carpenter said Wednesday.

Fox issued the $10,000 sanction on April 25 after approving a third motion for additional time for the city to prepare for trial in the case of Tiffany Malone v. City of Little Rock.

Malone, a former Little Rock police officer, is alleging gender discrimination and retaliation in her lawsuit against the city. The case was originally set to go to trial in May.

Fox expressed frustration that the trial had to be postponed, and said the city attorney handling the case -- LaTonya Austin -- wasn't prepared. Austin resigned the day of the fine under threats that she would be fired if she did not resign, she said.






LATONYA AUSTIN

Austin "made numerous statements on the record indicating she had not properly or professionally prepared the case for trial and that she had failed and refused to comply with the court's Scheduling Order," Fox wrote when issuing the fine.

Carpenter argued in court filings at the time that the city was prepared for trial and that the sanction was improper under Arkansas law.

He said the rule Fox cited when he issued the sanction -- Rule 11 of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure -- is to punish an attorney, not a defendant. The city is the defendant in the case and was the entity Fox sanctioned.

In the event a judge does sanction a party to a lawsuit, certain procedures must be followed and Fox did not follow those guidelines, Carpenter said.

"The Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure provide limited grounds for the entry of a sanction against a party represented by counsel, and both of these instances mandate notice and an opportunity to respond within 14 days of such notice," Carpenter wrote.

He also said the rule requires the court to issue a show cause order and give notice so that the party has an opportunity to respond to the charges levied against it, which Fox didn't do.
Carpenter added that Rule 11 "does not extend to failure to comply with a court's orders," which is what Fox alleged the city's attorney did by not following the scheduling order that set trial for early May.

*********

It's way past time for City Manager Bruce Moore to ask Tommy Boy to "retire".

Saturday, May 7, 2016

LITTLE ROCK FORKS OVER $1.5 MILLION IN SETTLEMENT FOR QUESTIONABLE FATAL SHOOTING BY OFF-DUTY OFFICERS


EUGENE ELLISON -KILLED BY OFF-DUTY COPS


An attorney for the family of a Eugene Ellison fatally shot by Little Rock police in 2010 says the roughly $1.5 million settlement in the family’s lawsuit marks the largest settlement in the city’s history for a police shooting.

The city agreed Friday to pay the family of Eugene Ellison $900,000 and formally apologize. Attorney Mike Laux says that brings the total settlement in the family’s lawsuit to about $1.5 million, when added to the agreement reached in April with the apartment complex where the shooting occurred.

Laux says that’s the largest settlement in Little Rock history for such a case, and likely the state.

Laux says the apology from the city is more important to Ellison’s sons, one of whom is a Little Rock police lieutenant and another who is a former Little Rock police officer.

Ellison was shot after the two off-duty officers who were working security at the building entered Ellison’s apartment without a warrant. The lawsuit alleged that one of the officers improperly used deadly force by shooting Ellison following an argument and scuffle.

Neither of the officers, who are both white, were criminally charged. Both remain on the Little Rock police force.


 
DONNA LESHER



TABITHA MCRILLS
 
WATCH IN DEPTH REPORT BY KARK-TV 

WATCH THE DEPOSITIONS 

 **********

These two loose cannons need to be fired from the Little Rock Police Department.  

The citizens of Little Rock are in jeopardy with them carrying guns and roaming the streets of the city. 

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

LR DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY LATOYA AUSTIN DRAWS WRATH OF CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE TIM FOX

LATOYNA AUSTIN - FORMER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY FOR LITTLE ROCK


A circuit judge fined Little Rock $10,000 Monday for not being ready for trial in the case of a former police officer suing the city and for failing to follow the judge's scheduling order.

Judge Tim Fox issued the fine after Latonya Austin, the attorney for Little Rock, filed several motions for continuance of a jury trial that was set to begin next week. Fox took issue with the city only assigning one attorney to what he described as a "complex" case. Austin resigned after the fine was assessed.

It isn't the first time a court has said Austin didn't follow rules, leading to the city having to pay out money.

City Attorney Tom Carpenter said in an emailed statement Monday that he understands the court's frustration, but that he doesn't believe the fine is appropriate. The city is reviewing the matter and may challenge it, he said.

Fox chastised the city throughout his written order issuing the fine.

"Even though the Little Rock City Attorney's Office has a number of attorneys who regularly engage in trial work in both the state and federal courts, the defendants have elected to only have a single attorney make an entry of appearance as attorney of record for purposes of trying this matter," Fox wrote in his fining order.

"[Austin] made numerous statements on the record indicating she had not properly or professionally prepared the case for trial and that she had failed and refused to comply with the court's scheduling order," Fox said.

The $10,000 penalty assessed on the city is pursuant to Rule 11 of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure, Fox said. The city must pay the fine to the Pulaski County Circuit Clerk within 10 days.

Carpenter said in his statement that sanctions under the rule "are not appropriate," and that the city is investigating the matter and will take the appropriate steps to possibly challenge the penalty.

Austin, a deputy city attorney in Carpenter's office, is handling defense in the case of Tiffany Malone vs. City of Little Rock, which was filed almost two years ago.

Fox's order came four days after Austin filed a third motion to continue trial in this case Thursday. Austin's third request was after Fox had already denied her second rescheduling motion in March and also denied her request to reconsider that denial.

"At the pre-trial hearing on April 4, 2016, [Austin] stated she has never previously handled any litigation involving the legal issues present in this case," Fox wrote Monday.

Austin is the same attorney who handled an appeal to the Arkansas Supreme Court in December on a circuit court decision in which the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal over the city failing to follow rules. That meant the city had to pay a $510,675 judgment to land owners in an eminent domain case decided by a jury in circuit court.

In that case, the Supreme Court said the city didn't order and pay for a $1,500 trial transcript on time. It also involved Austin filing motions for extension of time.


In the current case, Malone, formerly an officer of the Little Rock Police Department, filed a suit against the city in May 2014 alleging gender discrimination and retaliation.

She said she was sexually harassed by her supervisor -- including inappropriate sexual requests, comments, text messages and discipline -- on a regular basis.

Malone said she repeatedly rejected the advances and complained to the captain and to the Human Resources Department, but that no investigation was conducted and no action was taken.

When she went back to the officials with recordings that she says are of her supervisor admitting to the harassment, she said she was disciplined for recording him and received the same punishment levied on him for the alleged harassment.

The city denied that the supervisor admitted to harassment in the recording and said that he was never disciplined for harassment as Malone alleged. The city stated further that Malone's 30-day suspension was for multiple offenses, not just the recording.

The city did say that Human Resources told Malone she needed proof of alleged harassment "before anything could be done."

Malone further alleged that she was treated differently than male counterparts when a group of officers were disciplined for "unbecoming" behavior that did not involve violence or a criminal act.

Malone was eventually fired, with the city citing dishonesty and the use of excessive force. She said she pepper sprayed a man who kicked her. The city said Malone's firing was unrelated to her allegations.

The city denied Malone's allegations and said Malone complained to her sergeant for the first time three days before filing her complaint.

Fox's court canceled the jury trial that was scheduled for Wednesday of next week. A new trial date has not been set.

Austin has been employed in the city attorney's office for 2 and a half years. Prior to that she worked at the Center for Arkansas Legal Services, handled her own cases under her self-owned law firm, and was a public defender in the Pulaski County Public Defender's Office.

She's also been a prosecutor in Pulaski County and a law clerk to the Arkansas attorney general. She graduated from the William H. Bowen School of Law at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
 
After Carpenter filed his motion for Fox to reconsider the sanction, he subsequently filed a motion to stay the payment of the fine until Fox had ruled on the reconsideration request.

Fox's April 25 order told the city to pay the fine within 10 days. That deadline came and went without the city paying and without Fox responding to Carpenter's motions.

After the deadline had passed, Fox declined both motions without comment and ordered City Manager Bruce Moore to appear in a contempt hearing to explain why the fine wasn't paid on time.

At that hearing, a back-and-forth exchange with Carpenter and Fox ensued, with Fox interrupting Carpenter several times. A few days after the hearing, Fox issued a written order finding the city in contempt for failure to pay the fine on time.

"The defendant Little Rock's failure to pay the fine as ordered was based, in whole or in part, on advice of legal counsel from its city attorney," Fox wrote. "Such advice fell below professional standards of competence and was in direct violation of established case law. The Arkansas Supreme Court has previously held that acting on advice of counsel is not a defense to a charge of contempt of court but that such reliance does lessen the seriousness of the offense."

The city had already paid the fine before the contempt hearing and argued that the hearing was moot and had asked Fox to cancel it, but Fox didn't.

"This is a civil contempt; the city did not willfully disobey the order of the court, but instead pointed out that the order was not entered in accordance with Arkansas law and sought appropriate relief," Carpenter wrote in his request. "Civil contempt can be cured by the alleged contemnor by performing the necessary action, i.e., the payment of the sanction."

"... the Arkansas Supreme Court has clearly stated that a finding of criminal contempt for the failure to pay Rule 11 sanctions constitutes 'a plain, manifest, and gross abuse of discretion' that cannot be upheld. Ivy v. Keith, 351 Ark. at 285," Carpenter cited.

Fox said in order for the city to cancel out its contempt, Carpenter must go to six hours of continuing legal education on case management and ethics by January or be faced with a default judgment against the city in the Malone case.

Carpenter said at the time that Fox's finding wasn't based on fact.

"The Arkansas Supreme Court -- not any circuit court -- in control of the requirements for continuing legal education, which I meet and exceed every year," he said.

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

LITTLE ROCK FIRE CHIEF ENCOURAGES AND CONDONES ILLEGAL PARKING OF DEPARTMENT VEHICLES FOR LUNCH

A Little Rock Fire Department vehicle was observed parked in a clearly marked 'no parking zone' this week on Towne Oaks Drive, next to the Rodney Parham U.S. Pizza location.

The vehicle's driver side tires had rubber chocks placed behind them and no other emergency vehicles were nearby.

LRFD PARKED ILLEGALLY FOR A LUNCH BREAK

LRFD - WE PARK WHERE WE WANT, WHEN WE WANT




So we sent a Freedom of Information request to LRFS Chief Gregory Summers to find out who or what needed to be rescued. The photos of the illegally parked truck were attached to our request.




We received this response from Chief Summers.




Based on his short and sweet response we deduced that the Search & Rescue guys were chowing down on some pizza and felt that they could park wherever the hell they wanted.  After all they are firemen and don't have to follow the laws, even at lunch.

So we replied back to Chief Summers and asked if they were eating lunch instead of responding to an emergency.  Chief replied that they were indeed having lunch as part of their "public relations" efforts.


Summers affirmation that his firemen were at lunch in his second email received this response from us.



We waited for a response for Chief Summers, but none was forthcoming.

It appears that Summers permits his employees to break the law. That is shameful and is actionable. 


LRFD CHIEF GREGORY SUMMERS

***UPDATE***

After we posted the story, we received another email from Chief Summers.


Smart move Chief Summers.