It was a victory for transparency when a Superior Court docket choose final week ordered San Jose officers to launch investigative data of firefighters’ involvement within the Pink Poodle strip membership fiasco.
Too many native authorities leaders throughout the Bay Space and California have forgotten whom they work for. Public staff have cheap rights to privateness. However that doesn’t lengthen to malfeasance on the job.
That doesn’t lengthen to social staff in Alameda County who fail to guard weak youth. Nor to Contra Costa County regulation enforcement who ship racist texts or abuse their energy. And, as Decide Thomas Kuhnle dominated in a case introduced by this information group, it doesn’t lengthen to San Jose firefighters who take a bikini-clad girl for a journey in a firetruck after which drop her off at a strip membership.
California regulation is obvious: The general public has a proper to see particulars of investigations by which the complaints are well-founded and substantial. The Pink Poodle incident met each assessments. As then-Mayor Sam Liccardo stated instantly after the Oct. 5 incident, a part of which was caught on video, “We can not have a life-critical emergency rescue equipment relegated to a frat celebration bus.”
Mayor Matt Mahan understands this. He lauded the ruling, which provides town 30 days to launch the data. “The general public will now have the ability to see key particulars of the investigation. … San Jose received’t tolerate deviation from the excessive requirements the overwhelming majority of our workforce upholds day by day.”
However what about the remainder of the Metropolis Council? And what in regards to the metropolis lawyer, who takes course from the council majority? Their actions elevate questions on whether or not disclosure selections are pushed by political fealty to town’s highly effective labor unions relatively than the substance of the regulation.
In cringeworthy arguments earlier than the courtroom, Deputy Metropolis Lawyer Elisa Tolentino claimed that misbehavior right here was not substantial sufficient to advantage disclosure. “The complete incident … spanned a complete of solely 20 minutes,” town argued.
Solely 20 minutes? In what universe is it OK to take a taxpayer-financed firetruck, which needs to be at all times out there for emergency response, for a joyride?
The argument suggests a mindset that fireplace division personnel and equipment are a part of a personal fiefdom. It ignores that the general public pays firefighters’ salaries, owns the tools and is entitled to full disclosure when the general public belief has been violated.
As Liccardo stated final fall, “If the investigation concludes that this video is as unhealthy because it appears to be like, then heads should roll.” The investigation is now full. However up to now, the general public has solely been offered selective snippets about what occurred.
In a public memo, Hearth Chief Robert Sapien stated that fireplace crews have been dropping off an unauthorized male passenger who labored on the Pink Poodle when the bikini-clad girl requested the crew for a ride-along.
The firetruck drove across the membership for roughly 4 minutes after which returned the lady to the Pink Poodle. The firetruck then drove to AJ’s, a bikini bar about two miles away and stayed there for a number of minutes earlier than returning to the fireplace station.
The account raises as many questions because it solutions: Who was the unauthorized male passenger? Why was he given a journey in a firetruck? Who approved the journey? Why was the firetruck then pushed to AJ’s?
Solely after town was sued for its secrecy did it disclose that an unnamed fireplace captain had been demoted for violating coverage on the usage of metropolis and private automobiles, town’s code of ethics and fireplace division guidelines and rules.
However what in regards to the others? As Decide Kuhnle famous in his ruling, “nowhere is there an evidence of why members of the crew weren’t disciplined in the identical method as the fireplace captain.”
It’s yet one more query that deserves a solution — another excuse why paperwork from the case should be launched.
The Metropolis Council can enchantment the courtroom ruling, by which case it must be held accountable for a tradition of secrecy and reckless expenditure of taxpayer {dollars} on authorized bills. Or it could possibly respect state regulation and the California Structure’s clear directive for transparency.
