Warning Sign Goes Up at the Scene of the Concord Police Crash – No Warning Sign at Fatal Motorcycle Crash Site

December 2, 2011 15:27 pm · 81 comments

A warning sign, telling drivers to “yield to all three lanes” has gone up on Galindo Street, directly in front of the Concord Police Station.

The warning sign went up a few weeks after the collision between an off-duty Concord Police Lieutenant & a motorist. In the collision, which we reported on earlier this week, the Lieutenant failed to yield to oncoming traffic while she was turning left from Galindo into the Concord Police Department, and was struck by the driver going towards Downtown Concord on Galindo. The Lieutenant was issued a citation, which was then voided by a Concord Police Captain.

A similar collision almost exactly a year earlier, on October 6, 2010, occurred at Concord Avenue & California Street, but the results of that collision in 2010 were far more devastating, however, no warning sign has been erected. In that collision, a motorist made a left turn from Concord Avenue on to southbound California Street. Before the motorist reached California Street, a motorcyclist, who was driving eastbound on Concord Avenue, struck the vehicle, and died a short time later.

There is a “no left turn between 3pm-6pm” sign on Concord Avenue & California, but the fatal collision did not happen between those hours.

It’s interesting that a sign would go up at the scene of a minor injury collision, but not at the scene of a fatal collision.

{ 81 comments }

1 funny man December 2, 2011 at 3:37 PM

CYFA politics at its finest

2 Dear Mayor December 2, 2011 at 3:37 PM

Keep up the good work, but be watchful for cars with darkened windows either following you, or parked near your home. You may think you’re anonymous, but GUIDO and his boys know who you are.

3 Shasta Daisy December 2, 2011 at 3:40 PM

Mayor….Did you hear anything about a one car accident on Ygnacio, just west of Cowell? Around 1 o’clock, I saw a couple of police cars, ambulance and fire truck….and just one car.

Regarding this post, maybe you could get an explanation from the city about this.

4 Why is a sign needed? December 2, 2011 at 3:41 PM

There should be no reason for such a sign. It is obvious that if you are turning across 3 lanes, you need to make sure nobody is coming in those 3 lanes. I am sure that the police officer knew that, too. Most likely, she didn’t notice/see the car coming for some other reason. One does not just make a left turn without checking to see whether traffic is going to hit you when you turn.

I don’t understand why such a big deal is being made of this whole thing.

5 tess tickles December 2, 2011 at 3:44 PM

i think its pretty obvious why mr mayor……… thanks for keeping the every day , hard working , tax paying citizens up on the shenanigans going on around here.

6 Wayne Landana December 2, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Sign doesn’t matter really. Apparently if you are a cop, the laws don’t apply. A sign just warns the rest of us that we can get a ticket if we do something wrong.

7 Concord Born December 2, 2011 at 4:05 PM

#4 ‘s comments are exactly in line with my thinking.

8 anon December 2, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Shasta, I saw it too around 1:30, I kind of wondered if it was a medical emergency.

9 Jeff December 2, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Explains a lot. Not having a sign there was cause for the dismissal of the cop’s ticket – “in the interest of justice”.

Politics at it’s finest. I’m sure that fact that we’re dealing with a litigious cop doesn’t hurt either….

10 mike December 2, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Mayor, good job bolding the writing about the ticket being voided! We need to be reminded day in and day our so if cpd pulls us over we have a scapegoat, im using it!!! Thanks mayor!!! I think it should be written in atleast 1 post a day to keep us hard working people reminded of how we are treated!!

11 Reality says... December 2, 2011 at 4:39 PM

You got some moxy Mayor, I like that.

12 Take a breath! December 2, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Here we go again. More than 300 posts in response to the first story; more than 145 to the second on the same subject…a dismissed traffic ticket. Now, a quick batch about a new traffic sign, possibly related to the traffic ticket. I think journalists would call this a “slow news day.” The next time you haters need to call a Concord cop, you can rest assured the officers will respond professionally, as they always do, regardless of your snarky generalizations about them and their department. Be thankful they’re there for you, 24/7, and take a breath, please.

13 anonomous December 2, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Jeff your so on point with this. It makes me sick. Coruption mean anything not much better than those behind bars

14 Always Right December 2, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Agree with poster 4. Obviously no need for this sign. Just a waste of taxpayer money.

Thank you Mr. Mayor for keeping the heat on.

I wonder who requested and who authorized this sign installation?

15 KenInConcord December 2, 2011 at 5:17 PM

OOOOoooooooOOOOOOOOOoooooooOOOOOOOOhhhhhhhhhhh……. I need to yield to ALL cars!!!!! Thanks for clearing that up!

16 Driving by Braille December 2, 2011 at 5:19 PM

The lieutenant did it by Braille, sign is for the rest of the people.
(Per Wikipedia, Braille system is a method that is widely used by blind people.)

17 Brother C December 2, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Red Robin sign. God Bless Cpd.

18 j December 2, 2011 at 5:42 PM

I saw the sign a few weeks ago before the article about the accident. I think it is at the sally port turn lane which is not where the public would turn.

19 j December 2, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Second look at the picture it is at the main entrance. Is there a second one at the sally port turn?

20 Cowellian December 2, 2011 at 5:54 PM

As I explained to my kids, back when they were learning to drive: for every stupid sign, there was at least one stupid person who made that sign necessary.

21 Curious December 2, 2011 at 6:00 PM

Tess Tickles #5 and I think alike.

Has anyone’s request for driver or pedestrian safety signs in their neighborhood been this quickly acted upon by the CPD? If so, let’s hear from you.

22 NoMoreFreeRide December 2, 2011 at 6:03 PM

It’s there just in case the off duty officer didn’t understand traffic laws. Anyone who wouldn’t understand to yield to all 3 lanes should not have a drivers license issued to them!

23 Curious December 2, 2011 at 6:04 PM

(clarifying my previous post) …quickly acted upon by the City of Concord?

24 Quietly armed December 2, 2011 at 6:15 PM

I trust no one.. I assume everyone is out to kill me.

26 years of motorcycling has taught me a few things..
Some lessons hurt.
Some lessons are final.

I don’t care what the sign says.. Ask yourself, are you willing to bet your life on it?

Look, listen, look again, proceed quickly.
Cat’s have 9 lives with this in mind.. It works for them.

25 Mik December 2, 2011 at 6:30 PM

@4; I agree the sign isn’t needed and that drivers just NEED to be aware and to know the laws and regulations. But to say that maybe the Lt. didn’t see/notice the car is just plain moronic. As a driver, especially because she’s an Lt., she should have known to look out and be aware of the other cars. If any one knows the laws and regulations best, it would have probably been her over the guy that hit her. Perhaps she was busy texting/talking on her phone or doing who knows what, but regardless of that, she still shouldn’t have been excused from her ticket.

26 It’s interesting that a sign would go up at the scene of a minor injury collision, but not at the scene of a fatal collision. December 2, 2011 at 6:44 PM

Everyone is running scared of Lt. H. One false move and she gets another $250K of the cities money.

Its far more important to the fat buffoons who pretend to run this city to cover their collective a$$es than to do anything to protect the public.

27 G December 2, 2011 at 6:56 PM

@ Take a breath!
Consider that the number of posts, an tone is a reflection of people being fed up with what they perceive as the Gross Arrogance exhibited by some so called public servants.

28 mikeyg925 December 2, 2011 at 6:57 PM

Not surprising at all. The Concord Police Department “protect and serve” themselves first. That’s life. Let’s move on.

29 Isabeau December 2, 2011 at 7:07 PM

I worked with the gentleman who lost his life in that accident. A huge loss to his family, friends and co-workers.

I hate driving that stretch of Concord Ave in high traffic conditions. People in a hurry do all sorts of stupid moves – changing lanes with no room/warning, rushing to turn right on red, running lights. If two lanes are stopped, it’s really hard to see around the cars to know what’s going on in that third lane. Most traffic signs can be summarized to say “slow down, pay attention and yield right of way”. None of that happens…

30 ACC December 2, 2011 at 7:09 PM

Why is a sign even needed? Is this not a regular, normal rule of the road? Does there need to be a sign for every effing thing in this world? Maybe certain people need to retake the CDL written part of the test.

31 Zoey December 2, 2011 at 7:28 PM

Mayor, I am with you about 90 % of the time, but not on this. There is a difference between “staying on top of it” and “beating it to death”. This is a good story, but all that can be said has been said. Much of it pretty nasty and hostile.

The sign probably went up because that have been at least a dozen crashes due to failure to yield in front of the PD.

32 Great sign December 2, 2011 at 7:39 PM

That’s a great sign. Now we just need to install a million that say to look both ways before crossing the road, then maybe some to remind people to stop at stop signs, what other usless stuff can we junk up the city with. I still don’t get why in “the interest of justice” the off duty cop didn’t get to plead her case to the judge like the rest of us. Isn’t that what judges are for? Isn’t that what all the cops tell people, that it’s up for the judge to decide. I’m behind all of our honest police, but the one that caused this accident needs to take care of it like everyone else. Time to put on the big girl pants.

33 Cvhs 94 December 2, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Agree w 28. Police serve themselves and friends first. Public safety is not their concern. They want their pension and fat pay checks. They wont hesitate to ruin your life. Be careful Mayor. These guys are not nice.

34 Gerwah December 2, 2011 at 8:03 PM

Well we know the reason why but will it help? This assumes the police will read the sign and obey the law..

35 Skooled December 2, 2011 at 8:09 PM

Yield to “ALL” oncoming lanes when turning left. Thanks to the sign I now know.

36 CLAYCORD.com December 2, 2011 at 8:11 PM

@Zoey, Thanks for your support. It’s ok not to agree with me 100% of the time, but I always appreciate your support. Warning though, there’s an even bigger story about this coming up on Monday.

Mayor

37 No habla December 2, 2011 at 8:12 PM

They need to put up the same sign in Spanish.

38 CLAYCORD.com December 2, 2011 at 8:18 PM

@cvhs94, Thanks for the note. I’m not worried about the police, I support their efforts, and always have, and they know that. However, when somebody needs to be called out on something, I’m not going to hesitate. It’s my job, and I will continue to do my job to the best of my ability.

Mayor

39 Miket December 2, 2011 at 8:33 PM

@ Quietly Armed, # 24, Right on. I taught my kids as they were lerning to drive, never proceed because you may have the “right of way”. Right of way is useless if your dead. Assume every car is aiming for you.

40 Miket December 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Mayor, already looking forward to the Monday blog!! Thank you for doing such a great job, and looking out for the people here!

41 CLAYCORD.com December 2, 2011 at 8:40 PM

Thanks, Miket

42 @cvhs 94 December 2, 2011 at 8:52 PM

What a dumb, & ignorant individual you are. You have obviously had run in’s with the law otherwise you wouldn’t be such a hater! Please feel free to share why the police are not nice and how they have ruined your life!

43 Miket, #39 December 2, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Also remind your kids of those famous last words on the headstones at the local cemetery that say “I HAD THE RIGHT OF WAY“. Famous last words. Really last.

44 Supportive December 2, 2011 at 10:21 PM

I’ll add my thoughts to this link too. You’ve got my support and the support of many, Mayor. You, I and All deserve answers to the voided ticket fiasco. If upper management feels it’s not a story then why are they threatening “consequences?”
Your hard work and perseverance benefits everyone outside the CPD walls. Thank You. :)

To #31 Zoey:
It makes NO sense for the Mayor or anyone else to walk away when their questions aren’t being answered. Your reasoning is a big part of the problem. Allowing government officials to ignore the public’s request for an explanation when they’re called out on something is what contributes to rampant corruption. It’s imperative the Mayor and All “stay on top of it.” Limping away from this challenge is not going to help prevent more of the same actions by the Concord PD.

45 Michael December 2, 2011 at 11:36 PM

# 44, well said…

46 Mr. Anon E. Mouse December 3, 2011 at 12:07 AM

So I’ve decided not to leave a public comment, I have finals to study for in less than two weeks. No matter how relevant, compelling, ah COGENT my speech will be, it will be just that. A speech asking for the truths of the matter and falling on deaf ears. I will be thanked and the matter will be quietly shuffled aside, hoping it will just disappear. I’ve seen it with other ethical issues in the chambers before. Like so many other disturbing ethical quandaries that have come out of Parkside in as many years, let’s just hope it goes away. *rolls eyes*
The citizens have the right to know. OUR public servants think otherwise. It would be great to see the council chambers packed with upset constituents demanding answers. And hopefully they remember which councilmemeber was on the citizen’s side next November.
I have one question does Concord or Concord PD have something similar to this? (standards of ethical conduct policy)
http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/defense_ethics/ethics_regulation/2635/
Yes, yes, I know the council and maybe even city management has to take an ethics class.. but is there a written policy in our city.

47 rascul December 3, 2011 at 6:51 AM

I agree with #4, she is one dumb cop.

48 CW December 3, 2011 at 7:06 AM

FWIW, I know someone who campaigned to have a warning sign put up at a dangerous intersection and he was told that there was actually a formal policy that a certain minimum number of accidents had to happen before a sign would be placed. So it’s POSSIBLE that this was the case here. Mighty big coincidence that it was a policewoman but still possible.

49 SIGNS INSIDE December 3, 2011 at 7:12 AM

The signs you Dont see are the ones posted in the hallway and locker room of the department. According to sources and the quote from the Chief of Police they say
YIELD /TO LIEUTENANT HYPOCRITE
OBEY/ CAPTAIN DONT QUESTION ME
STOP/ BEING ETHICAL
CURVES AHEAD/WITH CHIEF SWANGER
STEEP DOWNGRADE/UNTIL COUNCIL CLEANS HOUSE
SCALES ARE OPEN/BUT ROBIN,DAVE,GUY,DONT HAVE TO STOP
CAUTION/DONT SPEAK UP
55MPH/NOT SO FAST POA
TRAILERS IN THE SLOW LANE/ IF YOU HAVE BAGGAGE STEP ASIDE
PAY TOLL/PROMOTION IS COMING
PROHIBITED TRUCK ROUTE/ONLY BRASS DRIVE HERE
SLIPPERY ROAD/WHEN YOU QUESTION AUTHORITY
ICY AHEAD/IF YOU LET THIS GO
ROAD CLOSED/DETOUR/IF YOU BLOW THE WHISTLE

When I call 911 send me the one that doesn’t obey the signs please.

50 Lt December 3, 2011 at 8:06 AM

CCT 12/03/11 – “In January the city agreed to pay $150,000 to settle Heinemann’s gender-discrimination suit against the city, which claimed department brass passed her up for a promotion and were hypercritical of her work while male officers got away with more serious transgressions. Bruckert was named as one of those officers.”

Bruckert obviously has it out for Heinemann and will do anything he can to continue to harass her. Case closed IMO.

51 CLAYCORD.com December 3, 2011 at 8:17 AM

Lt. That’s not the full story.

52 Sassy December 3, 2011 at 8:29 AM

A great reporter takes on the controversial stories and brings the brushed under the rug news to the attention of the public. Mayor, you are a GREAT news journalist! Tipping my hat to you ….

On another note, that sign is a ridiculous waste of funds …

53 CLAYCORD.com December 3, 2011 at 8:31 AM

Thank you, Sassy. :) I appreciate the kind words.

Mayor

54 tiger woods December 3, 2011 at 8:39 AM

who takes care of those islands, they look terrible.

55 From Fly over country December 3, 2011 at 8:45 AM

This keeps getting funnier and funnier!! Flipping CPD, as a whole I can’t believe there hasn’t been a locker room meeting (by the rank and file) on how to get Lt. “I Sue U” out the front door or backdoor, Hell even a second story window would work!

As always Fine work and Mr Mayor keep the bright light shining on this pack of roaches, and they will crawl away!

56 Chief responds to Claycord et al December 3, 2011 at 8:51 AM

As NO ONE here reads the CC Times……….

Concord chief looks to smooth over traffic-ticket flap
By Robert Salonga
Contra Costa Times
Updated: 12/02/2011 08:55:15 PM PST

When a Concord police lieutenant’s citation for causing a crash in front of the department was rescinded a week later, it sparked grumbling about favoritism and officers being above the law.

Not so fast, says the police chief. He said the citation was dismissed because the investigating officer had a conflict of interest, his documented history of conflict with the lieutenant.

Chief Guy Swanger this week sought to clarify the ticket flap that began with an anonymous letter to several city officials and news outlets decrying the decision, and then was reported in the Claycord community blog.

The news elicited accusations of corruption. One resident, Lee T. White, went as far as to write a letter to state Attorney General Kamala Harris asking her office to look into the matter.

According to police, on Oct. 7 off-duty Lt. Robin Heinemann turned left across Galindo Street into the police department’s parking lot in front of an oncoming vehicle driven by a 40-year-old Concord resident.

A report written by Officer Ron Bruckert said the lieutenant was at fault. A citation for failing to yield was issued a few days later, Swanger said. Doing so is within department guidelines that give officers discretion citations for traffic stops and accidents.

But the citation shouldn’t have been issued, Swanger said, because of the history between Bruckert and Heinemann.

In January the city agreed to pay $150,000 to settle Heinemann’s

gender-discrimination suit against the city, which claimed department brass passed her up for a promotion and were hypercritical of her work while male officers got away with more serious transgressions. Bruckert was named as one of those officers.

“In this particular incident, the investigating officer and the off-duty officer involved in the accident have a prior strained working relationship,” Swanger said. ” … the decision to issue a citation in the week following the accident was not appropriate.”

Whatever happens in the police department, an attorney is representing the other driver who has an insurance claim for neck, back and shoulder injuries.

Concord-based attorney Dirk Manoukian takes issue with the brief supplemental report detailing the dismissal, noting that it listed Heinemann as one of the officers involved in the citation review.

Swanger said she was consulted as one of the two parties involved in the crash.

The police union defended Bruckert.

“It would be unfortunate, however, if the decision to void the citation negatively affects the relationship and trust the men and women of the Concord Police Association have worked hard to build within our community,” union President Joseph Higby said. “Rest assured, our officers will continue to do the right thing.”

The chief said he also couldn’t comment further.

“I am sorry there is a perception of special treatment in this incident,” Swanger said. “I have tried in my first year here at this police department to make our agency transparent to all the citizens of Concord. I’m going to work even harder to make this department even more transparent next year.”

Staff writer Paul Thissen contributed to this report. Contact Robert Salonga at 925-943-8013. Follow him at Twitter.com/robertsalonga.

57 CLAYCORD.com December 3, 2011 at 8:55 AM

@Chief responds to Claycord et al,

First off, the Chief has only responded to Claycord once, and he didn’t answer my question(s).

Second, the Chief gave some interesting quotes, but he left A LOT out, which I asked him about yesterday, and he has yet to respond. Wait until Monday, I will have another story about it then.

Mayor

58 SS December 3, 2011 at 9:41 AM

“I am sorry there is a perception of special treatment in this incident,” Swanger said. Oh, is that what it is? Only a “perception?”

59 Citizen Watchdog December 3, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Last week when I called the police department to ask about this issue and register my disgust with them I was handed off to an Officer Carrol (I may have the spelling wrong).

I asked him if he was familiar with the situation, he replied, “Of course, I designed the sign.” He then promptly hung up on me. I immediately called back, proclaimed him to be an A’hole for hanging up on a citizen and asked to talk to Capt Downing myself. He was unable to forward me due to his supposed “trouble with our phone system this morning.”

When I told him I had Capt. Downing’s number and recited it to him, he backtracked and apologized so fast that I almost broke out laughing.

This is the kind of “customer service” the citizens of Concord can expect from their PD.

60 antfarmresident December 3, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Using Chief Swanger’s logic, any police offficer with whom I don’t have a good relationship, is forbidden to write me a ticket, even if he is a traffic officer and my violation is obvious. What is your opinion? The CPD brass thinks the general public is stupid, or do they just not care? What CPD will do, is wait this incident out until something more interesting captures our attention.

61 starman December 3, 2011 at 12:14 PM

the one percent are covering there butts again

62 ticketing residential vehicles parked outside the home? December 3, 2011 at 12:15 PM

There’s been an upsurge of this the last couple of weeks where we live. Nice cars, registered and legally parked in front of the owner’s homes have received tickets based on “complaints”. Yet the commercial vehicles parked on our street which do not belong to anyone on the street, in fact the owner’s can be seen moving them a few feet every couple of days (to avoid tickets?), these weren’t ticketed. I have emailed complaints several times about them to the parking control office yet I’ve never gotten a response and they are not ticketed and are still parked on the street. I haven’t done so in several months because we’ve just given up, frankly. So far no one we’ve spoken to will challenge the ticket because of the trouble and time off work that is necessary to do so. /strange

63 starman December 3, 2011 at 12:21 PM

even more transparent next year means you have something to hide

64 Kirk December 3, 2011 at 12:40 PM

@Take a breath

“The next time you haters need to call a Concord cop, you can rest assured the officers will respond professionally, as they always do, regardless of your snarky generalizations about them and their department.”

In case you missed it the reason the chief gave for voiding the ticket was because one his officers was not “acting professionally” in this incident (one officer was out to get the other), and the department just paid out a lot of money recently because a court found that they were not “acting professionally” in a previous incident involving the other officer.

This in the aftermath of a stolen vehicle and CNET. So your statement “as they always do” in regards to their professionalism is just as much of a generalization.

Holding public servants accountable in this forum and others is a valuable and needed resouce. The days of blindly following anyone just because they are an authority figure are dead.

65 anon December 3, 2011 at 1:50 PM

“There’s been an upsurge of this the last couple of weeks where we live. Nice cars, registered and legally parked in front of the owner’s homes have received tickets based on “complaints”. Yet the commercial vehicles parked on our street which do not belong to anyone on the street, in fact the owner’s can be seen moving them a few feet every couple of days (to avoid tickets?)”

I wrote tickets @ CPD for 20+ years. Just what violations did the “Nice cars, registered and legally parked in front of the owner’s homes ” get????
And NO – moving a car/truch a few feet does not stop it from geting towed for being abandoned. Also the fact that “Yet the commercial vehicles parked on our street which do not belong to anyone on the street” anyone can park a car anywhere–you do not have to live on the street. Pleasse answer my questions so I can tell you how it is really done & yes ..we responded to complaints & also by seeing the same car @ the same place for weeks made us tow them after following the proper “green tag” procedure. I am standing by…..

66 Panic isn't logged in December 3, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Can we have a record of the cost-benefit analysis done for these signs?

67 Captain Crunch December 3, 2011 at 2:16 PM

“Not so fast, says the police chief. He said the citation was dismissed because the investigating officer had a conflict of interest, his documented history of conflict with the lieutenant.” – Shame on you Chief Swanger, there is no documented conflict of interest between them and you know it. Way to throw Bruckert under the bus while trying to protect a known liability.

“I am sorry there is a perception of special treatment in this incident,” Swanger said – Special treatment, like allowing the Lt to adjust her scheduled work hours to suit her daycare needs. Isn’t that why she was arriving to work at 9:00 am when her shift started at 6:30 am….? Nobody else in rank and file is afforded that job perk.

@ Lt….FYI – Bruckert was not named in Heinemann and Runyon’s law suit, go on-line and check for yourself.

68 Always Right December 3, 2011 at 3:15 PM

Very disappointed in Chief Swanger’s response to date.

He needs to change the policy in the department to handle these situations. A policy is needed to address ANY situation where one police officer observes another violating laws of any kind.

Officers should not be required to write tickets on other officers – those situations should always be ESCALLATED to internal affairs for investigation and resolution, and such investigation and resolution (a fine or other consequences similar to what the general public is exposed to) should be independently reviewed.

69 SanDee December 3, 2011 at 4:00 PM

@auntfarmresident.
Your post made me think..and I like your logic.

70 Fred P. December 3, 2011 at 4:24 PM

@MR. Mayor #57,

We’re eagerly awaiting new developments on this story….

While this is a relatively minor issue in the grand scheme of things, we do need to root out these perceptions of “us vs them” at all levels.

Thanks for all you do – which the CCT and other media dare not touch!

71 CLAYCORD.com December 3, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Thanks Fred P. I appreciate the kind words. :)

Mayor

72 anonymous December 3, 2011 at 6:11 PM

How about a big sign that says: NO CONSENT DECREES ?

73 who cares December 3, 2011 at 6:30 PM

Mayor, who cares? Why do you keep pushing this? It’s played out time to let it go and move on to more important topics.

74 funny man December 3, 2011 at 7:46 PM

who cares? really? so we let all the little things slip. when do we say enuf is enuf? Has ANYONE ever heard of Bell, California??? (and im sure there are worst examples out there)
power corrupts
absolute power corrupts absolutely.

75 anon December 3, 2011 at 7:57 PM

A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I wrote a ticket to a tow company owner. A new sheriff called me in and said the tow company owner was a friend to the department and you know what we do for our friends. I thought, Ah crap, same old politics, and said, “What”. He said, “We pay the ticket.”, and he did so, out of his own pocket. Have thought highly of that man ever since.

76 mika December 3, 2011 at 8:30 PM

Something is so wrong here. City immediately posts a traffic control sign, but isn’t it in Palo Alto where recently an elementary student was kiled in front of ther school, (the second fatality at same location) and also a scene of several serious traffic accidents, but city won’t put in a stop sign because ther haven’t been enough incidents!

77 anonamom December 3, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Councilman Shinn is a retired cop. It would be interesting to have his opinion on the whole rescinded ticket issue, as well as the City Manager’s letter “on behalf of” the Board.

78 rw December 3, 2011 at 9:17 PM

@ Take a breath: You wrote, “The next time you haters need to call a Concord cop, you can rest assured the officers will respond professionally, as they always do, regardless of your snarky generalizations about them and their department. Be thankful they’re there for you, 24/7, and take a breath, please.”

Seriously, be thankful they’re there 24/7? Isn’t that what they’re paid to do? You make it sound like the CPD is performing some sort of charity work to the citizens of Concord. As if!

79 Carl Sagan December 4, 2011 at 12:59 AM

“Mayor, who cares? Why do you keep pushing this? It’s played out time to let it go and move on to more important topics.”

Who cares?

Every average guy like me who has never been cut a break once, that’s who. I have always gotten a ticket when pulled over, even for minor stuff like failing to signal.

However, my wife, who is young and cute, is let off about 50% of the time she is pulled over.

Everyone knows cops do this for each other when no one’s looking, they just happened to get caught this time so you can expect people to rub this in.

80 michael December 4, 2011 at 5:32 AM

The purpose of that sign is painfully obvious.

If the officers weren’t such bullies half the time, most of us would let this go. But we have looong memories.

I worshipped the police when I was young, I am so sad.

Great reporting mayor! Can’t wait till Monday.

81 Betty Sanchez December 4, 2011 at 6:44 AM

Maybe it’s time to contract our PD to the county? I’m sure there would be a savings.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: