Antelope Valley Human Relations Commission

Antelope Valley Press – Sunday, February 21, 2010

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

Tags: Uncategorized // Add Comment »