Let's be clear about this...
I don't know whether or not this is an issue of how the meeting was reported, but having the vehicle code enforced is a completely different thing than being able to enforce other state and local laws withing RM. Apples and Oranges. Given the correct authority, our security officers *can* enforce state and local laws. However, enforcement of the vehicle code is up to RMA and also someone around with LE authority. Mixing these two issues together, leads to further confusion. They are separate issues -- perhaps trying to keep us confused is part of the agenda?
RMA President Dick Cox again said he has “major concerns” about security, and views the community as “unprotected by law enforcement.” He said CSD Security patrol officers “can’t do a damn thing except observe and report” and told the CSD directors who were present, “You guys are sitting on your hands.”
One issue is that we do have a relatively safe neighborhood, which is why we don't warrant law enforcement coverage that is given in other areas -- they have to delegate resources according to serious crime. It is good that we are getting increased coverage since the SSD alignment, and since the Mobleys have taken an interest in the security out here. Luckily, we don't have the serious level of crime that would warrant SSD putting a couple of deputies out here 24/7 and involved in the community as we would want to direct them. HOWEVER, we do have issues, we have crimes, we have criminals and a number of relatively undesirables that either live or frequent here. I guess we will have to wait before it gets much worse for the residents to push the board in a different direction. For now, it's a train that has been derailing for quite some time.
It may be that fire officials have told him the landowner has to be willing to bring charges against trespassers who build fires or otherwise damage property.
But what good is the willingness to prosecute when most of the time there is still not anyone here on a regular basis that is able and willing to enforce?
We should keep in mind the following resolution passed by the CSD board of directors:
[security officers]...are not responsible for and shall not engage in any law enforcement activities, including but not limited to: chasing, apprehending or detaining suspected criminals; investigating criminal acts; or enforcing state or county laws, including traffic violations.
Not only are they "not responsible for", but they "shall not". IF OUR SECURITY OFFICERS DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN OBSERVE AND REPORT, THEY COULD BE DISCIPLINED. This really has nothing to do about people not wanting their taxes raised. It wouldn't take much to have the level of enforcement that we need locally. There are rumors that it takes 70K to do a background search for employment? Well, when I talked to the other police departments that would be our size, they quoted me a price of $400-$700. So what's with the CSD board member that is quoting the 70K amount? Is that someone that has an agenda? Someone that hasn't done her homework??????
The DA has been working with RM to "solve" these issues. Can I ask what solutions we have found? I think she said we could pass out slips of paper to skateboarders at the Plaza saying that they could get into trouble. Do we have a full report of solutions that have been developed and thus implemented so far? Joint Security Committee members -- are there any reports on this for the community? Or are we just using the DA as an excuse for the district's own lack of action?
(will be updated this weekend)