Mayor’s address focuses on crime, culture, green energy

By GERRY PRICE
Valley Press City Editor/Assignments

LANCASTER — Mayor R. Parris sees his city as strongly Christian, and he’s proud of that.

“We’re growing a Christian community, and don’t let anybody shy away from that,” he told an audience of 160 people, mainly pastors and their spouses, during his State of the City address Tuesday at the John P. Eliopulos Hellenic Center.

He said he wants the community’s electorate to validate a Christian stance in the April municipal election, in which a ballot measure endorses prayers at city meetings, specifically with permission to invoke a specific deity, including Jesus.

While Parris, who is running for a second term as mayor in April, said he didn’t care which candidates the voters favored, “I do want them voting for that prayer amendment,” referring to a measure asking voters whether or not the City Council should seek religious guidance before its meetings.

The council put the measure on the ballot after the American Civil Liberties Union sent the city a letter of warning that said allowing “sectarian” prayers, such as those that mention Jesus Christ, at government meetings is divisive and unconstitutional.

“I need them standing up and saying we’re a Christian community, and we’re proud of that,” he said, speaking as his multimedia PowerPoint demonstration flashed a big-screen picture with a large Christian cross and the phrase “2010 Growing a Christian Community.”

Asked afterward whether his talk of being a “Christian community” tends to leave out or anger residents who are not Christians, the mayor said he doesn’t mean to exclude anyone.

Noting that he had a meeting scheduled that evening with members of the local gay and lesbian organization, Parris said, “My vision of it is not a vision of exclusion. It’s a vision of attraction. I understand for so long it has an exclusionary feel to it. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it. We should remove the exclusionary aspect.”

Parris maintained in post-speech remarks that a Christian city had a better sense of community than what he described as an “atheistic city,” and said progress Lancaster has made over the past several years came about because of the sense of cooperation between the various elements in the city.

As a prime example, he referred to the recently announced 31% drop in the Lancaster crime rate in the past two years, commenting, “That 31% is the difference between a city that is dangerous to live in vs. A city that is safe to live in.”

Despite the best efforts of the Sheriff’s Department, that drop wouldn’t have occurred without the cooperation of all the city’s departments and its citizenry, Parris said.
“It was all of us coming together,” he said.

Parris praised the jump from 118 active Neighborhood Watch groups in 2008 to 192 in 2009, and an even greater hike in involvement in Business Watch.

Other city-led actions took a large step to reduce what he described as the “hyper vigilance” of youth, which led them to become more vulnerable to gang involvement.
Specifically, by allowing graffiti, truancy, roving pit bulls and gangs to proliferate, we were putting our children in harm’s way, Parris said.

To that end, the city: 1) Cleaned up graffiti in 18,114 locations in 2009. 2) Removed 1,034 pit bulls from city streets during that same time frame.

Parris also touted the planned Voyager Sky Sentinel project, which will allow a Sheriff’s Department official to keep an eye on crime above the city from some 8,000 feet above the ground.

He noted that, during one demonstration of the aircraft, the brainchild of aviation pioneer Dick Rutan, he was able to see every detail of an accident or crime in real time.
He discounted any idea of the plane infringing on the privacy of law-abiding individuals, noting, “This device will not do anything a current (Sheriff’s Department) helicopter can’t do.”

At the same time, by using the aircraft, “we’ll be able to utilize services like we’ve never done before.”

“I honestly believe we’re on the way to becoming the safest city in America,” Parris said, despite the many reasons that shouldn’t happen, including the city’s proximity to a state prison and the high number of parolees in the community.

The mayor also praised the introduction of Community Impact Homes in the community.

The first two, one near Piute Middle School and the other in the Trend tract, are run by personnel from Grace Chapel and Central Christian Church.

Parris said, “We’re not putting churches (running neighborhood houses) in every impoverished neighborhood. I’d like to put them in every neighborhood.”
The mayor also said he would like to have health workers operate out of the community houses.

He also said that on Sundays, church buses should be stopping at homes in all the neighborhoods to take children to church.

Another area the mayor praised was the city’s support for the arts, especially in the development of Lancaster Boulevard as a mecca for artists and patrons of the arts, and as a place for fine dining.

Noting the opening of Brooklyn Deli and Giannini Bistro and upcoming opening of BeX, the mayor bragged, “Pretty soon, when you go out to eat, you’ll be going to Lancaster Boulevard. They’ll have better restaurants than the (Antelope Valley) Mall, and more fun, too.”

Upon revealing a slide titled “Alternative Energy Capital of the World,” Parris said a Monday meeting between a foreign company and a “major home builder” will lead to the construction of 10 of the most energy-efficient homes in the world within the next year.

Touting the “best sun in the world” and the Valley’s nearly constant winds as wonderful sources of green energy, Parris said a planned trip to China will allow him to meet with representatives of a major company that builds batteries designed to store green energy.

The mayor also said the city hopes to be announcing that 6,000 to 10,000 new jobs will be coming to the city in the near future.

Other statistics cited by Parris were a 36% drop in fatal collisions from 2008 to 2009, the elimination of 5,421 illegal dump sites during 2009 and the repair of 24,129 pot holes in that time frame.

[Managing Editor Charles F. Bostwick contributed to this report.]

By CRAIG CURRIER
Valley Press Staff Writer

LANCASTER – Mayor R. Rex Parris said his “heart will be broken” if residents do not support Measure I at the polls on April 13.

What else is riding on the vote about six weeks from now remains to be seen, though, as the practice of prayer at City Council meetings and threats of a lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union may also be influenced by the decision.

Measure I reads: “In response to a recent complaint, with respect to the invocations that contained reference to Jesus Christ, shall the City Council continue its invocation policy in randomly selecting local clergy of different faiths to deliver the invocation without restricting the content based on their beliefs, including references to Jesus Christ?”

Peter Eliasberg, managing attorney for the ACLU of Southern California, last week refused to say whether the people’s support of the measure would change the group’s strategy for a potential lawsuit, but during a November Antelope Valley Press interview he called the City Council’s practice “unconstitutional” and said, “the people can’t violate the establishment clause.”

While the ACLU has not officially engaged the city in a court battle, threats of a lawsuit stem from the organization’s demand in August that the council halt “sectarian” prayers, deeming them unconstitutional and divisive.

Parris has not wavered, though, and is confident that should the ACLU proceed with a case the city’s decision will be affirmed.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if they filed a lawsuit,” the mayor said. “I’d be disappointed. It’s just astonishing to me that people wouldn’t want their city leaders praying for some guidance. I couldn’t do the job if I didn’t pray for guidance.”

Parris disputes the ACLU’s claim that referring to Jesus Christ in prayer at City Council meetings is a definitive exclusion of all other faiths.

Instead, Parris said, it is signifying the strong relationship between the church and the community, which is changing the direction the city was headed before he became mayor.

Parris said the ACLU is an organization that “has done some wonderful things in the past, but clearly doesn’t want any mention of faith-based efforts in government, especially if it’s a Christian movement.”

Eliasberg called the assertion “ridiculous” and said though the ACLU’s establishment clause suits are often filed against government agencies favoring one religion, it is not always Christianity.

Eliasberg said he clearly remembers a case in the late 1990s when city leaders in Beverly Hills allowed a Jewish group to mount a menorah in a public park.

“That was a long time ago, but the reality is we would do that case today if it happened to come down the pike,” Eliasberg said.

“(Parris’ comment) is such a factually inaccurate statement.

“It is true more often than not that when government features a religion it happens to be Christianity, but those are not the only cases we take on.”

Parris sent Eliasberg a letter requesting the organization draft an argument against public prayer in an effort to help Lancaster citizens make a more informed decision. The ACLU has yet to file such an argument, though Parris said the door remains open for any kind of public discussion should the organization decide to accept his invitation.

Independent of the pressure from the ACLU, Parris said he does not want to be misunderstood.

“What I’m trying to do is create a community where every person can shine as bright as they want to,” he said. “The last thing I’m trying to do is exclude anybody.”

By using prayer as it has been used at council meetings, though, Eliasberg said exclusion is undoubtedly implied.

“Over and over again, the council invokes Jesus’ name,” he said. “How is anybody from any other religion going to feel welcomed?”

Here are excerpts from e-mail exchanges between Lancaster Mayor R. Rex Parris, Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission chairman Darren Parker, task force vice chairman Bob Forshay, Lancaster City Manager Mark Bozigian, Lancaster Councilwoman Sherry Marquez and other officials. All the e-mails were sent to local news outlets including the Antelope Valley Press.

From Parris to Forshay, copied to Lancaster City Council members, and others, Saturday, Feb. 6, 7:54 a.m:

Mr. Forshay: It is unfortunate that you decided to ignore my request for the contact information of everyone on the “Commission.” Since you obviously have an e-mail distribution list that you used to send out the notice of the meeting, it seems that this is a simple task. Since the “Commission” is partially funded by the City of Lancaster, and I am the Mayor of Lancaster, there is no reason I can see why this request was not complied with in a timely fashion. In addition, Mr. Darren Parker advised me, after I was elected, that as Mayor, I automatically had a seat on the Board of the “Commission.” Shouldn’t board members have access to this information?

I can only assume that you don’t want me, or anyone else from Lancaster, communicating with the “Commission” before Monday’s meeting. This refusal to disclose who is attending, and Mr. Parker’s inflammatory interview with the press, creates the appearance of unfairness before the meeting even begins.

I am curious as to the specific authority the “Commission” operates under in regards to the County of Los Angeles. When I was elected Mayor, Mr. Parker told me that the “Commission” was part of the Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission. I took him at his word when I voted to fund the Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission. In light of recent events, I am compelled to ask: Who specifically does the “Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission” report to in Los Angeles County, and under what ordinance or authority was it created?

I am also wondering what specific ties the Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission may have with the Council on American-Islamic Relations? … Finally, what specific conduct does Mr. Parker allege is a hate crime. Is he, or anyone else, seriously contending that it is a hate crime to want to “grow a Christian community?” Or, is it his contention, that I can want to do it, but it is a crime for me to say it. … R Rex Parris, Mayor

From Parker to Parris, copied to Forshay, city council members, and others, Saturday, Feb. 6, 1:09 p.m.

As Chairman for the Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission (AVHRTF), it is part of my duties of the office to be the spokesman for the body. After reading the e-mail from the Mayor to our Vice Chairman, I wanted to make sure I clear up the numerous allegations from the Mayor. I have copied the text below (in bold face type in this reproduction) and will … respond accordingly.

It is unfortunate that you decided to ignore my request for the contact information of everyone on the “Commission.”

Your request was not ignored but in fact quickly circulated to the officers for their consideration. It is my understanding that your original request was for the officers contact information and speaking for myself, I agreed. The Commission has long held the policy that e-mail addresses and contact information access is giving by the individual members themselves and the contact list would not be giving out by the officers.

…

Since the “Commission” is partially funded by the City of Lancaster, and I am the Mayor of Lancaster, there is no reason I can see why this request was not complied with in a timely fashion.

This statement troubles me, “is partially funded by the City of Lancaster”… This organization would never accept donations that require anything other than the education and investigation of Hate crimes and Incidents in the Antelope Valley and surrounding areas. Your statement appears to imply otherwise. The city of Lancaster support has been spent 100% locally for the reasons stated above. Additionally, your statement implies that you have an unethical expectation. This body over the past 10 years has been an invaluable, immeasurable resource for the citizens of Lancaster. History will show that some of most horrific acts of Hate have occurred in the city of Lancaster. Until recently the title of Hate Crime capitol and Lancaster had not been used in almost a decade. In fact, it is Lancaster that is documented in the educational program from PBS “Not in my Town” to help other communities fight Hate.

…

I can only assume that you don’t want me, or anyone else from Lancaster, communicating with the “Commission” before Monday’s meeting.

You are correct in the above statement. It would be a willful act in violation of the Brown Act to communicate and/or discuss this matter via e-mail or anything else before Monday’s meeting and public testimony. This organization has strictly adhered to the Brown Act from inception … None of the statement made by me are inflammatory but direct first hand information to the best of my ability. Documentation will reflect that what is deemed as inflammatory is the statement made by both you Mr. Mayor and the Honorable Councilwoman, nationally covered.

I am curious as to the specific authority the “Commission” operates under in regards to the County of Los Angeles.

The AVHRTF is a COMMUNITY/Government partnership to fight Hate Crimes ad Hate Incidents in the Antelope Valley and surrounding areas. … The Los Angeles County Commission of Human Relations used us as their arm to the Antelope Valley. The facts are that the budget and small staff of the Commission did not have the ability to have full time support here in the valley. The cities joined the county HRMAC agreement and the partnership with the AVHRTF was supported through resolutions of from each of the cities Supervisor Antonovich was and is one of the driving forces behind our Community/Government relationship.

In light of recent events, I am compelled to ask: Who specifically does the “Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission” report to in Los Angeles County, and under what ordinance or authority was it created?

The AVHRTF reports to the Citizens and communities of the Antelope Valley and surrounding areas. Your statement above is only one of the reasons that from the inception of the AVHRTF that this organization would not have elected officials as officers. The public could not have the confidence it has in the process, if it is controlled by the politics of an elected office.

I am also wondering what specific ties the Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission may have with the Council on American-Islamic Relations?

There is no relationship.

…

Finally, what specific conduct does Mr. Parker allege is a hate crime.

Mr. Mayor, I don’t allege anything. What I have said as Chairman of AVHRTF is that I have received complaints that the statements by you Mr. Mayor and the Councilwoman are Hate Incidents. I have confirmed receiving them and based on numerous others request scheduled an emergency meeting for the Monday. I have also been clear that it will be the AVHRTF members that decide whether the statements from either of you rise to the level of a Hate Incident or as in other cases be referred to the appropriate agency for review (Local, State, or Federal)

…

Thank you for the opportunity to respond, Darren W. Parker, Chairman AVHRTF

From Bozigian to Parker, with copies to Parris, council members, Palmdale and Los Angeles County officials, and others, Saturday, Feb. 6, 4 p.m.

As the City Manager for the City of Lancaster, I am extremely troubled by comments and assertions in your e-mail. … Your go beyond political commentary or your personal opinions and to the very heart of the legal legitimacy of the Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission and its relationship with the City of Lancaster; that is where I need to get involved. I am particularly concerned in the three areas detailed below.

…

1) As City Manager, I have relied upon numerous assertions by you and others that the AVHRTF exists under the direct authority of the County of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Commission of Human Relations. Your response below, Brown Act assertions notwithstanding, now leads me to believe otherwise and I feel mislead to some extent. I need your direct and unambiguous response to the following question: Is the AVHRTF established and empowered by official action of Los Angeles County and/or the Los Angeles County Commission of Human Relations?

…

2) Most troubling to me is your continued characterization of Lancaster as a “hate capitol” or a community defined by hate crimes and incidents. Even in your e-mail below, you continue this characterization even as you talk about progress. I am particularly sensitive to these comments given that not even three months ago, you were interviewed by local media (Time Warner Communications) and went on air referencing the “just released” Hate Crime Report for Los Angeles County where you claimed that Lancaster had the “most hate crimes per capita of any city in Los Angeles County.” We now know that you did not have the report, had not yet seen the report, and had absolutely no basis for your statements. Further, you now know that what you said about Lancaster is not true. In north L.A. County alone, Santa Clarita Valley has a much higher per capita rate than the A.V. (I am writing this e-mail from home so I cannot quote the exact statistics).

…

3) You misstatements (as referenced in 2 above) and insistence from the start on making your “investigation” of comments made by Councilwoman Marquez and Mayor Parris such a public undertaking are harmful to both cities’ efforts to attract jobs, engage citizens, and promote public safety. The statements in question by the Councilwoman and Mayor have both been publicly reported and they have both commented extensively about those statements since. I fail to see what would be “investigated.” Further, your statements that this is the worst racial unrest you have seen since 1996 and “not since then have we had an issue that has truly shook up the fabric of the entire community,” and referencing “harmful threats and rising emotions” as your reason for calling an “emergency meeting” are inflammatory.

…

I await your immediate response. Thank you. Mark Bozigian
From Robin Toma, executive director of the Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations, to Parker, Parris, Bozigian and others, Tuesday, Feb. 9, 7:34 a.m.

The AVHRTF operates as its own entity, by which its members elect its President and other officers. It has created a ‘hate crimes hotline’ for the region, carried out ‘Teen Summits’ (youth human relations conferences) with schools in the Antelope Valley, and most recently trained a group of Antelope Valley to serve as conflict mediators.

However, the AVHRTF is not under the direct authority of the Commission, nor is it a L.A. County government body. The Commission does not control AVHRTF, but like all members, have the right and responsibility to be part of the collective that holds its leadership accountable.

Moreover, the AVHRTF’s decision as to what is or is not a hate crime does not determine what is listed in our annual hate crime report. The Commission regularly receives police hate crime reports from law enforcement, and sometimes from other entities like the Anti-Defamation League, AVHRTF, and others. We screen each to ensure that they qualify to be included in our hate crime statistics, and to avoid any double-counting.

Over the years, the Commission has lent technical assistance and advice, as have AVHRTF members, to the AVHRTF as the primary human relations umbrella entity in the region. AVHRTF is like many of the human relations commissions and coalitions based in cities in L.A. County, in that they are a special partner of the Commission given our common mission. But in no way are they ‘an arm’ of the Commission over which the Commission has any direct control or oversight.

From Parker to task force members, Wednesday, Feb. 10, 9:14 a.m.

Everyone knew we were official and controlled only by the community. I hope this helps everyone

From Parker to Bozigian and Lancaster City Hall administrative secretary Anita Davis, Wednesday, Feb. 17, 9:03 a.m., concerning a document previously sent by Bozigian describing task force funds held by the city and how they would be returned:

Good morning Mark, I tried but could not open the document. Please forward it via US mail, as it seems that the Commission Web site and my personal e-mail boxes have been hacked. Additionally, it appears to be a new policy of the city to share internal and private e-mails with the media and local blog. You are welcome to call me but until the authorities can look into how and who is responsible, e-mail is not an option to correspond with the city. Thanks Darren

From Parris to Parker, Bozigian and Davis, Wednesday, Feb. 17, 1:41 p.m:

I am … bemused as to why he would think his e-mails to the city are confidential. He knows that they are subject to both the Brown Act and the Freedom of Information Act.

From Parker to Parris, Bozigian and Davis, Wednesday, Feb. 17, 4:53 p.m:

… As true as your statement is about the Brown Act and Freedom of information, you also know the normal process allows for information after it is requested, not before. Information shows that you sent your first e-mail addressed to me and copied numerous media outlets (AV Press). This act by you is a first for Lancaster or any other city. We can ask the authorities to look into this breach of personal information. Oh! I also have word that your office called ATT. This too is a first. Thanks Darren

From Parris to Parker and Bozigian, Wednesday, Feb. 17, 5:06 p.m:

Mark: Please forward this to the Sheriff’s Department. Since Mr. Parker is now making allegations of criminal activity, they are the appropriate agency to investigate. For the record, I have no knowledge of any illegal, or otherwise inappropriate activity by the city or my office. I also do not have any knowledge of anyone contacting ATT regarding Mr. Parker. If someone is impersonating the Mayor or his office, they should also look into this. R Rex Parris, Mayor
From Parker to Bozigian, Wednesday, Feb. 17, 5:24 p.m:

Good afternoon Mark, I have received your e-mail. I humbly request that you do not disburse the funds of the Commission to anyone until the board and members have met. I am aware that the city of Lancaster is changing its role in regards to the Commission. I also know that all of the funds that the city is holding for the Commission were earmarked to the Commission and not the city. … It is ironic that the city was the one who suggested we place our funds with the foundation instead of opening our own account and has done this for almost 10 years. I’m not even sure how you came up with the break down since all the funds are deposited at different times. So we formally disagree with whatever break down you have on paper. I think it may be illegal to take funds from anyone’s account without their written permission but will check with the authorities. … Thanks Darren

From Bozigian to Parker and City Attorney David McEwen, Wednesday, Feb. 17, 5:56 p.m.

I doubt we will send the checks out in the next couple of days anyway. However, we are only returning the funds to the agencies that contributed; they are certainly free to contribute directly to the AVHRTF or make other arrangements as their policies dictate. My action has nothing to do with anything but administration of funding — as I explained in my prior e-mail. The City’s overall relationship with the AVHRTF is a policy decision, which is the purview of Council. I have included Dave McEwen on this e-mail only because he is the City Attorney and you have raised some issues which you feel are legal issues. Thanks. Mark

From Parker to Bozigian and McEwen, Wednesday, Feb. 17, 6:20 p.m.

Thanks Mark, the fund are properly of the Commission and were deposited with the Commission name only. … I request that all funds are sent to the Commission directly and we will redeposit them in an appropriate account. The break down of the Commission funds is not up to the city and I would appreciate that since the city no longer is willing to disburse them, that the entire amount be returned to the Commission … Thanks Darren

Lancaster to return donors’ funding

By BOB WILSON
Valley Press Staff Writer

LANCASTER – Less than two weeks after the Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission voted to send letters criticizing comments by Mayor R. Rex Parris and Councilwoman Sherry Marquez, city officials are moving to end a 14-year history of handling operational money contributed to the organization.

City administrators’ plan to return the task force’s funds to the group’s donors rather than transferring the funds to the task force. That has, in turn, generated a request by task force President Darren Parker for an investigation by the Sheriff’s Department to determine whether the city has legal authority to do anything with money contributed directly to the organization.

City Manager Mark Bozigian said the two events, the criticism of the mayor and councilwoman, and withdrawing aid to the human relations group are unrelated.

He said the city simply doesn’t want to be the financial instrument for the Human Relations Group. The group, however, had enjoyed a non-eventful and harmonious relationship, with service and support from the City of Lancaster since its founding 15 years ago, with the active sponsorship of former Mayor Henry Hearns.

Hearns was one of the movers behind original support for the group, flowing from its origins as a means to address what was a cluster of hate crimes that afflicted the Antelope Valley in the mid-1990s.

In the days that led up to a Feb. 8 meeting that convened under the auspices of determining whether Mayor Parris’ remarks about “growing a Christian community” deserved scrutiny as a potential hate crime or incident, city officials made active inquiries into the group’s jurisdiction, and its relationship to Los Angeles County. The group also intended similar scrutiny for Councilwoman Marquez’ online condemnation of the religion of Islam.

Once city officials determined the human relations group had no official connection to the county, the city made moves to rescind its role as a money-handler for the organization.

“I’m trying to figure out how to do this without being confrontational,” Parker said in a phone interview Friday. “I don’t believe the city has the authority to disburse the funds” to anyone other than the task force.

“They can send (funds) to the task force, and if the task force for some reason does not meet the guidelines of those that donated, then the task force needs to deal with those donations. But the city, even with the best intentions, I don’t believe has the right to go in and move our funds,” he said.

The mayor’s comments, made last month to an audience of Christian ministers invited to hear his State of the City address, were about his stated policy goal of “growing a Christian community.” The councilwoman’s comments, made on her personal Facebook Internet site, categorized Muslims as likely prospects to behead their spouses, saying “that’s what their religion is all about.” She predicted a wave of spousal beheading in the United States.

Both since have apologized for their remarks, but both declined to participate in a meeting that was called by the Human Relations Commission on the day the apologies were given during a Feb. 8 news conference.

The letters to be sent by the task force in response to those comments have yet to be delivered, Parker said.

Reached Friday, Bozigian said the move to relinquish oversight of the task force’s money was not spurred by that group’s decision to send letters of condemnation to the two councilmembers.

“It was during that (process) I discovered – well, actually I think the community discovered – that the Human Relations Commission was not officially created by the county, and that is what triggered this (move),” the city manager said.

“We were under the impression, as a city, that the Human Relations Commission was somehow created by, or under the authority of, Los Angeles County or the county Commission on Human Relations. It’s (now) clear that that is not the case,” Bozigian said.

Support for the task force was voted in by the Lancaster City Council in 1996, and a similar vote happened in Palmdale.

Based on the assumption that the task force was a county-authorized entity, the money contributed to its operations were held by the Lancaster Community Services Foundation.

Now, “Because (the task force) is not a quote-unquote ‘county organization,’ I do not feel comfortable with our foundation continuing to act as a fiduciary,” Bozigian said. “It’s an administrative function that I’m responsible for.

“All we are simply going to do is return the funds” to those who have contributed them to the task force, he said. “We’re not doing anything other than saying, ‘We’re not going to act as a fiduciary.’ ”

From this point, the task force could become a nonprofit organization empowered to accept and hold its own contributions or “they could find someone else to act as the fiduciary,” Bozigian said.

“How we return the funds and the technicalities of it – we’re still working out, because we want to make sure we do it right,” he said.

“This has nothing to do with the city’s relationship” with the task force’s continued operation, and whether the city continues to help fund the organization “is a policy matter for the council,” Bozigian said.

“This has nothing to do with the activities of the task force,” he said.

Multiple requests seeking comment from Parris drew no immediate response.

Bozigian said Parris should not be expected to comment “because this is an issue of administration of funds, and that’s in my purview and the city attorney’s purview.”

Parker, a longtime community activist, helped establish the task force and has been its only elected president. He said Lancaster officials agreed to oversee the group’s funding because Palmdale agreed to fund the operation of the task force’s hate-crime hot line.

“Each city wanted to have its stake in the claim of a success, so Lancaster took the responsibility for watching the money, and Palmdale took the responsibility of paying for the 1-800 number,” Parker said.

Valley Press records show an outcry for a community-based organization to confront racial violence in the Antelope Valley came in March 1995 from the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, particularly 5th District Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, whose jurisdiction includes Lancaster and Palmdale.

A directive from the supervisors came shortly after back-to-back attacks – one a drive-by shooting – on black Lancaster residents by white supremacists in February 1995.

The supervisors directed the county Commission on Human Relations to develop a strategy to halt such attacks by working with the cities of Lancaster and Palmdale, the NAACP, area school districts, the Sheriff’s and Probation departments and community groups.

The result was the creation of the Antelope Valley Human Relations Study Group, which spent a year formulating a plan to track and investigate hate-crime reports and seek prosecution of perpetrators.

The study group, which included Parker, evolved into the Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission headed by Parker. The group was directed to use volunteers to log hate-crime reports while its hot line, billboards and anti-crime outreach efforts were to be funded by contributions from the county, Lancaster, Palmdale and other willing supporters.

Since its inception, the task force has held public meetings to discuss high-profile hate incidents and crimes, sending its findings to the Commission on Human Relations as well as to the Sheriff’s Department and the District Attorney’s Office.

In the past, the task force has reviewed allegations of:

Allegations of sexism among board members at the Eastside Union School District.
Allegations of racism between campus guards and students at Knight High School.
Racism involving physical attacks and verbal confrontations between blacks and whites, and between blacks and Hispanics.
Religious intolerance involving fliers distributed by a Christian pastor calling on Muslims to repent, followed by anti-Muslim comments made in jest by Lancaster Councilman Ed Sileo.
Religious intolerance prompted by a confrontation between a Christian minister and members of a Wiccan group.
Discrimination by blacks lodged by a group of white supremacists.
Racism when a black middle school pupil died after a fist fight with a white pupil.

None of those incidents, including the one in which the task force reviewed comments by Sileo, have drawn any rebuke or anything resembling retaliation, Parker said.

Additionally, task force members have involved themselves in organization of an International Heritage Picnic annually, and summits to prevent teen violence conducted at local high schools.

Membership of the group is open and consists of a wide spectrum of religions, membership across racial lines and sexual orientation. Essentially, the group gathers to discuss controversies involving aspects of prejudice or controversy, and if warranted, votes to refer reports to county law enforcement. It has no official prosecutorial or legal authority.

The task force reviewed the comments by Parris and Marquez after it received reports of numerous threats against the two Islamic mosques in the Antelope Valley, he said. On a voice vote, the group voted to send letters of condemnation.

“For the work of the task force to be challenged at this point is almost insulting,” Parker said, noting that the move by the city to return the task force’s funding without permission “came up, coincidentally, at the same time that the issue of the mayor and the councilwoman came up.”

The task force was formed under a community-based partnership so it could act independently, Parker said.

“It was the result of a directive by Supervisor Antonovich … to address the hate-crime issues here in the Antelope Valley.

“There are multiple organizations that contribute money to it,” including funds that are earmarked through the United Way, he said. The checks, made out to the task force, are turned over to the city as received.

The task force was approved as a nonprofit organization in 2001, but approval was suspended because no one filed financial reports required to keep its nonprofit status active, Parker said.

“I assumed that when the city of Lancaster filed every year on its foundation, it would file the corresponding paperwork” for the task force, he said. “That means we have to clean up that paperwork. … Since we have records and everything, that’s not a problem. … But in fact, the task force is a nonprofit.”

At this point, “I think that the role that the city is taking with the task force is ‘different,’ ” Parker observed. “For the last decade, we’ve gotten monthly statements from the city on what our balances and expenditures were since they took the funds in.

“The task force was started with zero dollars, and we don’t need any dollars to exist,” he said.

The task force “was created by the leadership of Lancaster, it was supported by the leadership of Lancaster and the only obvious difference is the change in leadership in Lancaster,” Parker said.

“I don’t think that the city of Lancaster has changed its commitment to addressing hate crimes one iota, and I know for a fact that the citizens have not ended their support for addressing those issues,” he said. “As a matter of fact, it was very obvious that the community stood up. It was not the task force that led this (inquiry into the comments by Parris and Marquez). It was the community speaking out on what the community felt.”

By Charles F. Bostwick and Dennis Anderson
Valley Press Editors

LANCASTER – The Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission voted unanimously Monday night to send strong letters of condemnation to Lancaster Mayor R. Rex Parris and Councilwoman Sherry Marquez over their recent comments about the Christian and Muslim religions.

The vote followed a three-hour meeting attended by nearly 100 people of whom about 40 were regular members of the task force, formed in 1996 by the cities of Lancaster and Palmdale following a rash of racially-motivated assaults.

By the meeting’s start, most of the members of the commission had heart that Parris twho hours earlier had issued an apology that some, if not all,accepted as basically sincere. That was not the case for the terse two-word apology uttered by Marquez at a hastily called City Hall press conference.

At the meeting were Christians such as Bishop Henry Hearns, pastor of Living Stone Cathedral of Worship in Littlerock as well as Parris’s predecessor as Lancaster mayor; at least 20 members of the Antelope Valley Muslim community; at least a half-dozen supporters of Marquez from Lancaster Baptist Church, which she attends; Unitarian-Universalists; Wiccans; members of the organized gay community; Buddhists, and Jewish and Orthodox Jewish representatives. Also in attendance were Lancaster mayoral and city council candidates, and Palmdale Mayor Jim Ledford.

“I accept the mayor’s apology. I do not accept her apology,” said Kamal Al-Khativ, exectuive director of the American Islamic Institute of the Antelope Valley in Palmdale. “I am disappointed with both individuals.”

Al-Khatib contended that the remarks of Parris and Marquez — which drew national medial attention — deserved more than the apologies made Monday afternoon at City Hall before local news media.

“They should apologize to the whole community,” Al-Khativ said. “For 16 days, our whole community has lived in agony and insecurity.”

“We reached out several times and she rejected us,” he said.

Juan Blanco, vice president of the local NAACP, said the remarks by Parris and Marquez precipitated a crisis of community leadership.

Pointing at Hearns and Ledford, Blanco said, “This mayor and this mayor never came on from the bully pulpit.”

Speaking of Marquez, he added: “This councilwoman was emboldened by the leadership of our council.”

Dr. Abdullah Farrukh, a Muslim and a personal friend of Parris, suggested to the group that they “try to ratchet down the situation.”

Farrukh said he also doubted the sincerity of Marquez’ terse apology but said that they mayor took “a first step.”

“We met with Mayor Parris and told him ‘You need to deal with this issue.’ I think we should give her time and work with her,” Farrukh said.

But the vast majority of the group, whether task force members or citizens in the audience, believed that more was needed.

Stella Murrell, legal adviser for the task force, formed a motion that letters should be sent both to Parris and to Marquez, advising them their comments were divisive to the community.

The controversy started with Marquez posting comments Jan. 24 on her Internet Facebook page concerning a Muslim man charged with beheading his wife in New York” “This is what the Muslim religion is all about — the beheadings, honor killings are just the beginning of what is to come in the U.S.A.”

Then on Jan 27, in a “State of the City” speech, the mayor said, “We are growing a Christian community, and don’t let anybody shy away from that.”

Kamal Abdul-Jabbaar, resident imam of Masjid Imam Warith Deen Mohammed in Lancaster, said Marquez’ comments endangered Muslim women who wear the hijab head scarf.

“Our women are identifiable,” Abdul-Jabbaar said. “Our women are targets for fanatics. It is about religion. What was done was a crime against society. This could be very dangerous.

“They put all of us in danger. They need to know the severity of their act.”

Denise Josephson of Lancaster Baptist Church said she believe the councilwoman and mayor did not want to appear before the task force because the nature of the comments published about them may have indicated they might be facing “a lynch mob.”

“Mrs. Marquez was concerned sincerely about violence against women.

“She loves women. She’s been a blessing to me. Seeing what’s happening breaks my heart.”

The meeting was held on an emergency basis, task force members said, because of threats that have been made to Antelope Valley mosques, many arriving via e-mail.

Task force chairman Darren Parker said that those threats were referred to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for investigation.

Parker noted that it was not the mission of the task force to investigate hate crimes, but rather to analyze whether a hate crime or hate incident had occurred. Hate crimes, he said, are referred to law-enforcement officials.

During the meeting, Murrell said in her opinion there was not a hate crime or a so-called hate incident involving constitutionally protected speech, but, “You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.”

The meeting was held at the Lancaster office of Mental Health America, the largest mental health provider in the Antelope Valley, and a beneficiary of support from both the city and the mayor.

Judy Cooperberg, executive director of HHA’s Antelope Valley operations, said she considers Parris to be a friend of many years. At the same time, she said she is Jewish and that the continued series of prayers at council meetings invoking Jesus Christ was “upsetting and hurtful.”

“I love Rex, but the only way I would feel accepted and welcome (at a City Council meeting) would be when it would be a generic invocation,” Cooperberg said.

Task force members Farivar Roshanian said his family is originally from Iran, where the Baha’i faith has been persecuted.

“This is dangerous,” he said of the remarks by Parris and Marquez.

The letter that is to be written, task force members decided, was to tell the councilwoman that her comments were divisive and inflammatory and the mayor that his comments were divisive and exclusive rather than inclusive.

The meeting began with Hearns and Ledford citing the origins of the task force as an organization that was needed to air community grievances and assist in the reporting of hate crimes. It also was created to help reduce the incidence of hate crimes.

Also appearing Monday night was Elena Halpert-Schilt, assistant executive director of the Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission, to which the task force sends reports. She established that the cities created the organization, with the active encouragement and support of county Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich.

RON SIDDLE/Valley Press

From the Antelope Valley Press, Tuesday, February 9, 2010:

By Charles F. Bostwick and Dennis Anderson
Valley Press Editors

LANCASTER – Mayor R. Rex Parris issued an unequivocal apology to groups of any and all faiths who he said might have felt excluded by his remarks 12 days earlier to Christian ministers about “growing a Christian community.”

“It was about a week and a half ago that I spoke to the Christian ministerial association and said I wanted to grow a Christian community,” he said during a City Hall news conference. “But in talking to my friends of 30 years, it was clear that a lot of people felt excluded.”

Parris spoke from the City Council chambers podium, accompanied by area representatives of the Hindu, Sikh, Jewish and Muslim communities as well as fellow Christians and Councilwoman Sherry Marquez.

What Parris said he had intended was to express that Christians are a community who love their neighbors.

“I sincerely apologize to anyone who felt excluded,” the mayor said.

“Our communities are robust and vibrant when we do everything we can to facilitate all churches and all faiths and ensure they have a vibrant role in the community.

“When we have diversity we have friction,” Parris said. The question, he said, is “how to have a robust community without making anyone feel excluded.”

Parris said many friends of his, representing many faiths, met with him on Sunday to advise him and to make their feelings known about the response of different faith groups to his remarks delivered Jan. 27 in a “state of the city” speech to an invitation-only audience, largely composed of Christian clergy.

He also acknowledged that an opinion column by Rabbi David Hoffman, published Saturday in the Antelope Valley Press, made him recognize the significance of his statements of the many faith groups that fall outside Christianity.

The mayor’s Jan 27 comments followed complaints that Councilwoman Marquez had posted comments on her Internet Facebook page that characterized Islam as a religion that is violent and fosters violence against women.

At Monday’s news conference, Marquez rose to address the group gathered at City Hall and said, “I have been asked to apologize. I apologize.” Then she stroke from the council chambers.

Hoffman, rabbi of Beth Knesset Bamidbar in Lancaster, said, “When Mayor Parris said he wanted to ‘grow a Christian city,’ I thought that what he meant was that he wanted a more moral and ethical community.”

Hoffman added: “Then there is an implication that other religions are somehow less moral and ethical.”

The rabbi said that if the mayor sincerely wants an interfaith forum for Lancaster he must “move forward and persist in a meaningful interfaith dialogue.”

Turning to Parris, Hoffman said, “It’s important for you to know that my people in this town were hurt and upset when you said you were growing a Christian community.”

So, Hoffman said, he was “really glad” to hear the apology.

Next to speak was Dr. Eugene Morong, who identified himself as a “psychiatrist, a Jew and former chief of staff at Antelope Valley Hospital.” Morong characterized the mayor’s remarks to the ministers as “an egregious statement.”

“When I went to Hebrew school, I was beat up by Polish and Italian kids who beat me because I said I wasn’t a Christian,” Morong said. “My mother lost 30 people in the Holocaust so I have strong feelings. . .
I’ve known Rex for many years and he has accomplished much of a positive nature. I said, ‘You are an intelligent man, a professional man. How could you lend yourself to say something like this?’”

Morong said he would like to see the mayor “go to every congregation in the city and clarity his understanding of the relationship of separation of church and state.”

Speaking on behalf of area Muslims were Dr. Bassam Hadaya and Dr. Abdallah Farrukh. Hadaya said he has known Parris for 20 years and is proud to be his friend. In the Sunday meeting with Parris, Hadaya said he asked, “Why do we need this conflict?” Hadaya added, “We voted Rex Parris Mayor of Lancaster, to be mayor of everybody, Christians, Jews, Sikhs, Muslims.”

Hadaya added: “We do accept what Mr. Parris meant, that to be a good Christian is to be a good neighbor.”

“Muslims are also good citizens and proud of this community,” Hadaya said.

Parris introduced Farrukh as one of his closest friends and “a man who saved more lives in this community than anyone I ever met.”

Farrukh said he was speaking as an American citizen born in a Muslim house in Lebanon, where the nation was nearly destroyed by combat between warring religious factions. For centuries, he added, Europe was ripped apart by religious wars.

“America was formed by people who were running away from religious bigotry . . . Only in this country do we have freedom to speak out,” Farrukh said.

Farrukh took note of the Baptist faith of the mayor and of state Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, and said, “I know there is not a bone of bigotry in any Baptist I know.”

Speaking for the Hindu community was Kris Venkatappa, vice president of the Indian Community Association of the Antelope Valley.

Of Parris, he said, “He is a good-hearted friend. This is a huge misunderstanding.”

“I don’t find any discrimination in him,” Venkatappa said. “Let us come of a free heart . . . Let us not bring this religious issue as a big issue.”

Gurnam S. Pannu, a representative of the Sikh community, said there was nothing wrong with Paris being proud of his religion. He said all believers should be able to be proud of their religion and express that.

Bishop Henry Hearns, pastor of Living Stone Cathedral of Worship in Littlerock and Parris’ predecessor as mayor, said Parris made his comments about “growing a Christian community” because he felt as comfortable among the ministers as if he was in his own home.

Parris said he’s going to have a lot of congregations to visit over the next year on Saturdays and Sundays.

“For us to have a vibrant and healthy community requires vibrant and healthy synagogues, mosques, churches and temples,” Parris said. “If we’re going to be a city of light, we need to b e a Baptist light. We need a city where we are free to be bright as we can be.”

You Are Cordially Invited to AV YouthBuild’s Fall Open House

YouthBuild Charter School of California

• Meet the Teachers
• See Our Classroom and Program
• Register for the New School Year
• 16-24 year old students can earn their High School Diploma while obtaining valuable work experience

When:
Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 6:00 p.m.

Where:
AV YouthBuild Campus
39360-B Summerwind Drive
Palmdale, CA 93551

RSVP:
661-266-8900 or
JStowe@YouthBuildCharter.org

By Daisy Ratzlaff
Valley Press Staff Writer

LANCASTER – Palmdale and Lancaster officials hope a newly-instated mediation program resolving neighborhood disputes will help foster greater communications between neighbors and relieve courts, code enforcement and sheriff’s department personnel of having to deal with issues pertaining to matters residents could otherwise solve themselves.

Darren Parker, president of the Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission, said residents who have complaints about their neighbors’ cars being parked on their front lawns or overgrown tree branches that grow into their yards now have an alternative option rather than notifying city or deputies to handle “the more civil rather than criminal matter.”

“This program is designed to help neighbors who are in dispute at no cost to them t solve their problem in order to build safer, better and stronger neighborhoods,” Parker said.

The mediation program, which runs under the Neighbor Dispute Resolution Program, was developed by the Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich and the Antelope Vally Human Relations Commission as well as Lancaster and Palmdale city officials. It officially began operation Thursday and will allow residents to call a special hot line and ask for one of 20 mediators and four senior mediators to help resolve neighbor-to-neighbor problems, Parker said.

“we found out that one out of every three cases that the task force deals with may at some point have started as a neighborhood dispute,” he said. “We are happy that we have law enforcement with us, and it looks like it will take the work off their desks and put in the proper place, where the issues can be addressed on a one-on-one basis.”

Mediators are simply residents with an interest in helping fellow residents and neighbors solve problems. The voluntary position does require training, said Anne Ambrose, Palmdale’s director of public safety and community relations.

“This program is a great way to resolve conflicts. Most of the time neighbors are just not communicating well; there is a breakdown in communication,” she said. “Offering mediation is an opportunity to bring people to the table and give the parties who are involved in the conflict the power to resolve it. That’s what we all want; we all want control over our own destiny. And mediation will give them the opportunity to do that.”

The mediation program is a private, voluntary process in which an impartial person facilitates communication between two or more parties to promote settlement. Each person has an opportunity to explain problems from his perspective in a mediation session; the mediator is simply present to help facilitate discussions to achieve mutuality, Parker said.

Mediation sessions are scheduled a a time and location convenient to all parties, said Kelvin Tainatongo, Lancaster’s assistant to the city manager.

“The key is to get the parties together and give them a chance to talk about the issues,” Tainatongo said. “That’s why the city is offering the Stanley Kleiner Activity Center at Lancaster City Park on two Saturdays within a month. It’s a neutral place where individuals can find a peaceful resolution and come to a mutual agreement.

“We have a lot of residents that contact the city because of issues that they have with their neighbors, but most of the time they are not criminal issues. With the mediation program we can now refer them to the task force.”

Parker said the program, which will start out on the weekends and might be moved to weekdays depending on the demand, will work closely with other resources to help solve the problems.

“We will analyze the situation from every angle possible. We want to stop the issues before they escalate into something else,” he said. “If we find that there is enough evidence to point at a criminal case, may it be a hate crime or something else, we will contact the Sheriff’s Department and they will investigate further.”

Bishop Henry Hearns, pastor at the Living Stone Cathedral in Littlerock and one of the founders of the program, said he has no doubt the program will have a big difference in the Antelope Valley.

“The more we get together, the happier we are,” he said. “This (program) will make it happen.”

For details about the program or to schedule a mediation sessions, call (877) 7AT-PEACE.

City of Lancaster announces a joint effort with the Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission, Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission, and the City of Palmdale which will provide citizens with a neighbor-to-neighbor dispute resolution program

WHEN:

Thursday, August 6, 2009, at10 AM

WHERE:

Los Angeles County Superior Courthouse
42011 4th St E
Lancaster, CA 93534

WHO:

Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission
City of Lancaster
City of Palmdale