Platypus

A couple of questions:

*Why does the Kristie's Law Web site go beyond the law itself--and other legislation related to police pursuit policy--and show the support for the death penalty by its creator(s)?

*Why did somebody at the very least claiming to be Candy Priano--Kristie's mother--post a link to the Kristie's Law Web site in The Post's online feedback, although I would imagine someone as close to the law as she would be would have known it wouldn't have applied in the crash that killed Kathryn Bogosian and Shayne Tinnel?

Posted by Robert at 10:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I was in Wal-Mart tonight on the way home to pick up some Halloween candy for the trick-or-treaters that will inevitably show up at my front door. (and some mouthwash -- and a Samsonite iPod case -- and an iTunes card -- blasted Walton family and impulse shopping)

I headed toward the garden section where all the Halloween merchandise and signs had been just two days before when I was buying a clown mask, rainbow wig, plastic cleaver and fake blood. (don't ask)

But the Halloween signs were gone. In their place were not Thanksgiving signs, but signs about Christmas.

I double-checked what day it is. Yep, it's still October, although the price of all the Halloween candy not being drastically cut and the lack of college students not rabidly scavenging said cheap candy should have been evidence enough.

When I went into the garden section to get a bag of fun-size Kit-Kats, the madness was confirmed. Right next to plastic pumpkins and people scurrying for last-second Halloween costumes, there was a display of artifical Christmas trees.

One can complain about rabid consumerism in this situation, but I'm prefering to look at the religious irony of this whole situation with a bit of a laugh.

Think about it. You've got the decorations for Christmas -- the day celebrating the birth of the son of God, of God himself in the flesh -- right next to the decorations for Halloween -- the day with the stereotyping of roaming evil spirits.

I had a laugh. Also, I planned how to snag some discounted candy early Wednesday morning before work.

Posted by Robert at 10:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Just a heads-up on a couple of opinion polls out there regarding the pursuit crash.

For some reason, ParadisePost.com's poll question wasn't updated from last week. But the new question, when it's updated, will be "Do you think law enforcement handled the Shayne Tinnel pursuit properly?"

Meanwhile, over at Magalia-based online scanner Web site TheNet411.net, the question being asked is more direct, "Should police pursuits be outlawed on the Ridge?"

Feel free to take part.

Posted by Robert at 10:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Reading over the 131 total comments posted on the two ParadisePost.com stories on the collision that took the lives of Kathryn Bogosian and Shayne Tinnel, there is only one thing that is crystal clear:

Nobody's going to be happy.

There's already two strongly-entrenched sides developing: The "cops screwed up" side against the "there's nothing cops could have done to prevent this" side.

I wasn't on the Ridge at the time this accident occurred; I was driving back from Oroville where I was covering a court hearing. But when I got back into the office, I became involved in the process of adding updates to the web stories with information coming from police scanners and reporters (or editors) on the scene.

But something was different this time around—the Web site's feature allowing readers to post comments to a story started going crazy, a level of activity this particular newspaper has not seen online before.

It's an interesting cross-section of thoughts. Here's a sampling, warts and all:

"If Police had shot him when they had him stopped before the accident occurred, an innocent life would not be lost today."

"It is amazing to me how no one ever says a word about the police/sheriff until something bad happens and then everything in the world is their fault. Our little "sleepy" town is not so sleepy and it is time people woke up to the fact things will only get worse."

"If the man was known to be armed and dangerous, then when the car stopped, and the girl got out of the car...why didn't the police shoot him? Shoot him in the leg, or how about shoot the tires out???"

"Do you honestly believe that that man would have slowed down if the cops had stopped chasing him? HE was the idiot, he was the one who killed her. I'd bet that he would have been going just as fast to where ever he was headed even if they did slow down."

"This guy Shayne has a long rap sheet. You can look it up at www.buttecourt.ca.gov. I think there is a major problem in our Justice System. He should have never been able to post bail, he has a history of violence and being a wanted criminal."

Even so, I've spent a long time around Internet message boards both posting and moderating, so I'm taking everything being posted with a grain of salt. Anonymity plus a general disability to easily prove you're someone you claim to be (such as a family member or friend of the victim) brings about high risks of trolling, flaming and pie fights -- Internet terminology relating to a breakdown of civil discussion.

But, what do these comments say?

First off, many people badly want to find someone to blame in this ASAP. The likely suspects:

*The Butte County Sheriff's Office for not busting down the door to Tinnel's house and grabbing him before the collision, for not shooting him at the traffic stop, for not shooting out the tires of the SUV or for not calling off the chase regardless of whether their pursuit was actually motivating Tinnel's speed or not. All of those have been suggested as alternative actions by posters.

*The Paradise Police Department, who were still responding to the scene when the collision occurred.

*Shayne Tinnel for deciding to try and make a run for it rather than face his third strike and a life prison sentence, even though he would still have to be convicted.

*Tinnel's girlfriend, Jennifer Street, the SUV's original driver, for harboring Tinnel rather than turning him in.

*Mike Ramsey and Perry Reniff for what some believe will be an eventual clearing of officer wrongdoing, although it's a state law enforcement agency (in the form of CHP) handling the accident investigation rather than various agencies in the county which handle an office-involved shooting.

*The state Legislature for not passing Kristie's Law, even though the chase would have been free and clear anyways since Tinnel was wanted for a violent felony, the one exemption in the most recent form of the bill written by Senator Sam Aanestad. (On a personal side note, anybody catch local TV's blitz on the Kristie's Law angle? I'm questioning that, especially because of the violent felony exemption)

That's just the stuff off the top of my head. A more detailed re-read likely would have produced more.

Second, I have seen some interesting questions asked by posters—such as placing dashboard cameras in police vehicles, just how clear local law enforcement policy is on police pursuits are, etc. The public can have some good ideas despite the large amount of finger-pointing dominating discussion.

Third, posters are giving the possibility of future stories in their posts. It will be interesting to see if anyone actually brings up the issue of pursuit policy to the Town Council. Or if anybody actually tries to petition for Reniff and Jerry Carrigan to lose their jobs over this.

Fourth, posters are also taking the chance to remind people of donation jars for Bogosian's family at Albertsons or the memorial fund at Butte Community Bank--both ways to help out the one person all sides are agreeing was the innocent in this entire ordeal.

All interesting stuff. It will be fun to see where this goes, and whether such use of The Post's Web site continues in the future.

Posted by Robert at 11:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

This is the 150th post on Platypus.

But, it's going to be on the tail end of this blog. For soon it wll be no more.

Nov. 10 is my last day at The Post. I've taken a reporter position with the Appeal-Democrat in Marysville, which covers Yuba and Sutter counties.

I'm not a big guy as far as change goes, so this move is simultaneously frightening and exciting. It's a weird place to be in emotionally.

Posted by Robert at 11:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the opening scenes of The Big Lebowski has The Dude (the main character, played by Jeff Bridges) writing a check for 69 cents. The humor in this is people generally avoid writing a check that small.

But, have you gotten your PG&E bill for October yet?

You're getting 15 percent off whatever you were charged in July. Here's PG&E's plan for this bill credit, filed with the California Public Utilities Comission.

Now, here's the interesting part for me. Because the only energy hog in my apartment is the air conditioning, my October bill is now $1.14.

I'm seriously considering writing the check, instead of utilizing another payment option. It's just The Dude in me.

Posted by Robert at 11:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Everybody makes mistakes. In my time here at The Post, I've made some real whoppers.

But then there's ones that just get under your skin really bad.

I found one in a July press release from California's own Senator Dianne Feinstein.

In a press release advocating the "Voting Rights Act," Feinstein makes reference to her stance on this particular issue similar to the action by a previous California senator, the North State's own Clair Engle.

Let me set the stage here. Engle is a Chico State graduate, practiced law in Corning, was Tehama County District Attorney for eight years, was elected to the state Senate, won a vacant congressional seat and held it for 16 years, then was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1958.

Engle was just one of 67 votes that broke the filibuster of Southern Democrats over the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but his the most memorable. I'll let the description from Senate.gov go from here:

Never in history had the Senate been able to muster enough votes to cut off a filibuster on a civil rights bill. And only once in the 37 years since 1927 had it agreed to cloture for any measure.

The clerk proceeded to call the roll. When he reached "Mr. Engle," there was no response. A brain tumor had robbed California's mortally ill Clair Engle of his ability to speak. Slowly lifting a crippled arm, he pointed to his eye, thereby signaling his affirmative vote. Few of those who witnessed this heroic gesture ever forgot it.

Engle died one month after casting that vote. He's buried in Red Bluff, and for a time Trinity Lake was renamed for him.

So, in an attempt to paint herself as grand and wonderful over her own personal piece of legislation, Feinstein thought it a great idea to coattail on Engle's vote. But, her office managed to botch it (look at the bold print for what I mean):

On this day, I am also mindful of the contributions Californians have made in the fight for civil rights.

On June 10, 1964, the Civil Rights Act was being filibustered on the Senate floor. No filibuster of a civil rights bill in the 20th Century had ever been broken. Senator Claire Engle of California, who held the seat I now occupy, was suffering from terminal brain cancer. He was wheeled into this chamber. Though he was too sick to speak, he indicated his “aye” vote for cloture by gesturing toward his eyes.

Claire Engle?

Where did the "e" come from?

Isn't that the female spelling?

Senator, I didn't serve with Clair Engle. I didn't personally know Clair Engle. But Senator, you're no Clair Engle.

If you're going to try to compare yourself with another senator, and one from the real Northern California at that, could you make sure your people at least spelling his CENSOREDing name right?

Posted by Robert at 11:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I'm counting down the days to the couple of days I'll get off for Thanksgiving vacation...

Photo courtesy of Alli's MySpace

Yeah, there is a town in that photo. I swear.

Posted by Robert at 10:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I began my journalism career as a high school junior seven long years ago covering high school sports.

It was a small, rural paper, so things such as conflicts of interest -- I wrote stories about games I played in -- never came up at that time.

I have also on occasion pitched in and helped Post Sports Editor Vince Vosti cover youth sports here on the Ridge.

But this isn't a piece on small-town journalism or conflicts of interest. It's about youth sports.

I know folks up here on the Ridge take their high school sports, particularly Bobcat football, seriously. And in a group of supporters as big as the Bobcats have, there's bound to be a few that take it a little too serious, if you know what I mean.

Heck, I played football at a high school one-sixteenth the size of Paradise High and there were parents there that took sports too intensely, so I know for a fact there are parents that take the wins and losses of the 'Cats on overload.

But, fear not, Paradisians and Magalians, there are parents out there that take sports much more seriously than even the most hardcore of your brood. (not that that's permission to up the ante)

Our case study today are parents of the varsity girls basketball team as Castro Valley High School, in the southern regions of Alameda County along Interstate 580.

These parents' lack of anything resembling common sense was chronicled on the front page of Sunday's San Francisco Chronicle by one of my favorite columnists, C.W. Nevius.

Basically, Nevius writes about some parents having problems with Castro Valley coach Nancy Nibarger for what they say was an "out of control" program because the coach kicked the team out of the gym early after a lackluster practice, not being present at photo day and not saying hi to some of the girls when they out in public together.

Having spent time on sports teams, let me translate you to what that means: The parents are peeved their kids didn't get enough playing, even though the team had an 11-15 season last year.

Even Nevius points this out:

...Nibarger thinks the heart of the issue is the difference between offseason, paid programs and varsity high school sports, and her former team captain agrees.

Otten says parents typically pay $1,500 a year for private basketball club teams. They don't expect to shell out that kind of money to see their daughter sit on the bench. Nor is it atypical for club coaches to praise a marginal player to the skies. After all, the program needs to keep that money coming. That environment sets unrealistic expectations.

"A lot of people came in thinking great things about themselves," says Otten. "They were expecting a lot of playing time just because they were on the team.'' That sense of entitlement is threatening to overwhelm varsity sports in high school. Parents aren't just questioning the coaches, they are demanding their heads on a platter.

"If we don't stomp this out," says athletic director Gray, "whosever mommy or daddy has the most power is going to be the starter. And if you look around the country, you see we are losing that battle.''...

For more on this, here's a story written by one of The Post's sister papers in the Bay Area.

First, the parents complained to the school's principal. An investigation determined Nibarger did nothing wrong. The parents appealed the decision to the superintendent. Another investigation determined Nibarger did nothing wrong. So the parents complained to the school board. The last hearing on the team lasted nine hours, with the board enforcing some concessions.

You can say "third time's the charm." I would also offer "only in an election year" but no member of the Castro Valley school board is up for election next month.

Here's the run-down of what Nibarger will have to deal with:

1) Nibarger will not choose who makes the team, but will be part of a six-member "panel" made up of parents and community members who will determine the makeup of the varsity squad. I mean come on, Nibarger only played at Kansas State and was only an assistant coach at Berkeley and Kansas, Big 12 and Pac-10 schools which all had winning records last season. What could she possibly know about basketball that anybody else in Castro Valley wouldn't?
2) Her two assistant coaches, one a member of Berkeley's Hall of Fame and the other a cop, got the axe even though neither one had a complaint filed against them by anyone. Heck, the cop wasn't even accused of racially profiling someone in a lay-up drill.
3) An "omsbudsman" must be present at every Castro Valley basketball practice.
4) At least once every game, Nibarger must take a straw poll of the parents in attendance to determine what type of defense to use. Okay, I added this one, but looking at the first three, does it seem that crazy?

Nevius' column brought some attention to the Castro Valley situation, which isn't good news for these parents. Sports satire blog Deadspin titled their comments on the issue "Swiftboat Veterans for Truth in High School Girls Basketball"

It's situations like these that, no matter what, always cause me to tense up a bit when covering youth sports. Even here on the Ridge. It's a phobia, really.

Maybe you've seen me at sports events in the past—high school basketball, Little League baseball -- in a corner of the bleachers scribbling away on a notebook. It probably wasn't a close look; I tend to stay as far away from other people as reasonably possible at sporting events.

It's not because I forgot to shave, shower or put on deodorant. It's because I'm always fighting, on some level, the fear that I will come across the Sports Parents from Hell. I figure, if I stay far enough away from the parents and concentrate on the kids playing (you know, kids playing games, having fun, the whole purpose of me being there) my odds of facing SP's from H diminish.

Needless to say, Nevius covered this with balance and the pleasant jolt of "what the hell is wrong with you people?" common sense that being a columnist allows.

Heck, if anything, it got him on the front page of The Chronicle, which is always a plus.

Posted by Robert at 10:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I was born in Oregon and grew up right along the Oregon border, so while I've been a Californian my entire life, I also consider myself to be a technical Northwesterner.

So when I stopped at the Dutch Bros. Coffee on Park Avenue in Chico the other day before work, it was a random, obscure trip home for me. You see, Dutch Bros. is based in Grants Pass, Ore. (where my optometrist was for years) and has more stores in Medford, Ore. (where about 35 percent of my family lives) than any other city.

No, I didn't get coffee. I got a hot cocoa. And fellow staff writer Nicole Pothier complained about not getting her anything.

But, since people from the Northwest stereotypically hate Californians, does this make me self-loathing? Without even knowing it?

Posted by Robert at 11:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

After tonight's school board meeting (somewhere between 2 1/2 and 3 hours!) I need a laugh.

So I figured I'd share this.

Posted by Robert at 11:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

31 suspended players, one fired color commentator and a few million gallons of newspaper ink used later, where have we come concerning Saturday night's slugfest between the University of Miami Hurricanes and Florida International University Golden Panthers?

For those who came in late, take yourself to the third quarter of the game. Miami has just scored a touchdown to put themselves up 13-0. To celebrate his touchdown reception, Hurricanes receiver James Bryant gave a bow to the crowd.

That in itself, viewing the number of replays now available on YouTube (the first place I went after hearing about this bizarre incident) didn't seem overly ridiculous, especially considering the Joe Horns, Chad Johnsons and T.O.'s of the universe.

But something about the whole thing apparently ticked the FIU players off. Maybe some words got exchanged. Maybe they interpreted the bow as Bryant attempting to moon them. Whatever it was, they were heated.

And on the successful PAT attempt, it blew. Players started shoving and pushing. More players spilled out from both sidelines.

Basically, in a matter of seconds this went from a non-conference college football game to a South American club soccer match. Punches flew. Players kicked other players in the head. Helmets and crutches became weapons.

Now, after any big sports fight like this, you're going to have three separate but distinct camps pop up:

*The first camp is made up of the "tsk tsk" contingent. This would include league officials, most sports commentators and a large amount of the general public. This group decries how horrible the fight was and how it will be the catalyst for a negative impact on our society.

*The second camp is the "inner reflective" contingent. This would include many psychologists, sociologists and sports commentators that took one too many psychology or sociology classes in college. The group decries the negative society that was, in some way, shape or form, the catalyst for the fight to take place.

*The third camp is the fringe group of "diehard fans." These people are fans of one of the teams that participated in the fight, therefore seeing that team as being innocent of any wrongdoing in the entire situation. A great example of this is this column in the University of Miami's student newspaper, reaffirming my personal experiences that every college newspaper has at least one staff member with the common sense of a gerbil.

Actually, I apologize for that last statement. It's insulting to gerbils.

Where do I fall in? Somewhere between the first and second camps. And yes, I did take a class in sports sociology. (Hi, Dr. Chu)

That fight was everything wrong with sports. In football, you use the shoulder pads to beat on each other, not fists, feet, swinging helmets or crutches.

On the flip side, I played football in high school and I can think of a couple of occasions where I started jawing with someone in an opposite uniform or initiated a staredown after I was the victim of a clip, illegal block or late forearm shot. I know that small geographical divisions and different-colored uniforms are all that is needed to turn a friendly contest into a contest of machismo and one-upmanship.

Heck, I even got in a jawing match once as the football team statistician at College of the Siskiyous with a defensive back from Yuba. If I heard the phrase "Thug Life" one more time...

It's not even sports—it's general concept of competition. I have friends that work at the valley papers, but if you rewind the words of my life, there's probably a couple of R-rated words I've said in reference to their places, when the competitive juices of being out first with a story start to convince me that the sole goal of those other media outlets is to make me unemployed and I'll be damned if I let that happen.

Whether violence in sports encourages violence in society or violence in society encourages violence in sports is a real chicken-or-the-egg question. It's all about the thrill of toeing a line in either situation and where we, as a public, choose to draw a line.

Hopefully, that line doesn't involve international soccer.

Posted by Robert at 11:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The latest battleground in California's gubernatorial race?

The Tonight Show! And not even to annex Leno's chin into Orange County!

WWJCD? (What would Johnny Carson do?)

Posted by Robert at 12:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

If you wish to see my ugly mug, tune in to cable access channel 11 at 7 pm, as I'll be a panelist for the League of Women Voters' District 3 Supervisor debate.

If that's not possible, it will also be webcast here...

Hope the cameras catch my good side. Actually, I hope I have a good side.

Posted by Robert at 12:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

So, yeah, the accusations of bias are nothing new.

But as this column shows, it also extends into the sports world.

It's not really a shock. Every West Coast sports fan holds some level of faith in an East-Coast bias in college sports polls and ESPN.

But this article puts an interesting perspective on the play-by-play announcers for the NLCS.

Posted by Robert at 04:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A funny little news spoof (please note, spoof, as in not real) I found on Craigslist:

Breaking news: Associated Press (9/15/2006, 8:30 AM PST)

OAKLAND, Calif.--Oakland Raiders football practice was delayed nearly two hours today after a player reported finding an unknown white powdery substance on the practice field.
Head Coach Art Shell immediately suspended practice and called the police and federal investigators.
After a complete analysis, FBI forensic experts determined that the white substance unknown to Raider players was the GOAL LINE.
Practice resumed after special agents decided the team was unlikely to encounter the substance again.

Posted by Robert at 05:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There's nothing like going to the editorial page and watching the "columnists" get into screaming matches with each other, huh? It's an amazing use of recycled newsprint and ink.

(In case you didn't catch it, that was sarcasm)

Posted by Robert at 07:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

After my NFL performance last week, any possible trip to Nevada to hit up a casino sportsbook is ixed-nay.

A horrid 4-6 mark on the pro games last week had me dreading what the tally was going to wind up being. Fortunatly, a 7-3 performance on the academic (kind of) level kept me about .500 for the week.

The season standings now sit at 54-26. The risk of falling below the two-thirds accuracy mark is a real ability unless I pick it up this week.

So here goes:

College Games

Oregon over Cal
UCLA over Arizona
Iowa over Purdue
Vanderbilt over Ole Miss
Illinois over Indiana
Florida over LSU (I'll go a step further--I think this game will go into overtime)
Oklahoma over Texas (since everybody knows the Sooners are going to get every break possible from the refs for the rest of the year)
Northern Illinois over Miami U
Tennessee over Georgia
Pittsburgh over Syracuse

Pro Games
49ers over Raiders
Saints over Bucs
Vikings over Lions
Panthers over Browns
Bears over Bills
Rams over Packers
Eagles over Cowboys
Steelers over Chargers
Cardinals over Chiefs (I'm calling this Upset Special, since it's the first career start of the quarterback born on the exact same day I was)
Broncos over Ravens

Posted by Robert at 11:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Tonight, the eyes of Paradise are actually focused on Palo Cedro, as the Bobcats are looking to stay undefeated against another team that has yet to lose this season in Foothill.

But I want to take this opportunity to showcase another kind of football--from Down Under, and the final two minutes of a high-drama game from the 2005 season:

If only Aussie Rules could be more popular in the States. I wouldn't have to resort to being dependent on the speed of my Internet connection.

Okay, let me try to explain what the heck is going on:

The object of the game is to kick the balls between the sets of posts. A kick between the two middle posts is worth 6 points, while a kick between other posts are worth 1 point.

Players can advance the ball by running (they have to bounce the ball on the ground every 15 meters), punting, or by "handballing" (which is punching the ball basically).

If a player catches a kick of longer than 10 meters on the fly, it's called a "mark." A player catching a mark has the option of taking a free kick (one where he can't be touched and can also take a running start)

If a player is "tackled" (has an opposing player wrap their arms around them, not necessarily taking them down to the ground), they have to immediatly drop the ball.

The teams are the Fremantle Dockers (purple, red and green uniforms) and the St. Kilda Saints (white, red and black uniforms)

Posted by Robert at 05:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In case you missed it a couple days ago (like I did) the newest franchise, which will eventually face off against the Chico Outlaws in the Golden Baseball League is the St. George Roadrunners.

Now, if only another GBL team comes along and calls themselves the Coyotes. I can watch my favorite childhood cartoons come to life on the diamond.

Posted by Robert at 03:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The proposed alcohol ban on and along Butte Creek will be back before the Butte County Board of Supervisors at their meeting next Tuesday.

It will, however, not be the actual passing of the bill, but just a vote to waive first reading of the ordinance.

But it will be first crack at being able to read the actual ordinance itself, showing the actual boundaries.

(NOTE: The link will be provided sometime Thursday, when the PDF is posted on the county's Web Site. I only receive a copy of the agenda on Wednesday, no item material)

If you recall back a couple months, Supervisor Kim Yamaguchi was originally looking at a ban along the creek from the Steel Bridge to Skyway, but was talked into adding upcreek areas by residents of Butte Creek Canyon and downcreek to the county line by Supervisor Curt Josiassen.

On an interesting side note, the original boundaries was already extending into Josiassen's district. On that map, Josiassen's district is pink, Yamaguchi's district is purple.

With the recommended areas added, things went to the drawing board -- better known as county staff.

I've heard mixed reaction from the public. I've been emailed some grumbles, but not much more beyond that along the lines of formal opposition. I've also heard support citing issues with drunk tubers floating the creek.

Posted by Robert at 11:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I'm sure many people recall the Butte County Board of Supervisors voting to raise their salaries by 56 percent in January as part of implementing a classification compensation study for county employees.

Well, Yuba County supervisors just voted to increase their own pay by 85 percent.

In the case of our southern neighbors, there was some similarity and some differences in how the pay increase.

Just like the local supervisors, the Yuba supervisors said the job of supervisor in their county was no longer a part-time occupation. The actual amount of the pay raise was roughly similar--around $14,000 a year.

But some things came out very different than they did in Butte.

As the story notes, several people in the audience said they were in favor of the supervisors' pay raise. Butte supervisors--not quite as positive a response, not from the union members in the audience or from the public in general.

Two Yuba supervisors voted against giving themselves a raise. All five Butte supervisors voted in favor of their raise.

Also, the Yuba supervisors raise was seperated from the raises of other county employees. The Butte supervisors had an "all or none" vote--if they rejected their own raise, they rejected raises for all county staff.

So similar, yet so different.

Posted by Robert at 03:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I'm in the universal minority in that I don't drink coffee.

My normal morning pick-me-up is a 16 oz. can of Wired energy drink from WinCo in Chico.

But when a fellow reporter comes in with a bunch of cups of coffee for the news staff in the morning, it would be rude not to take some French roast.

Now here comes the bad part.

Speaking from newly-discovered personal experience, never drink both the coffee—doctored with copious amounts of Coffee Mate, sugar and some instant mocha mix I was told existed in the break room—and the energy drink in a relatively short period of time.

Reporters going on four times their regular amount of morning caffeine can be quite a handful.

Posted by Robert at 10:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There was that faint glimmer of hope that I wouldn't ever have to write one of these in my entire journalism career. Many in this situation probably wouldn't.

But, here I am, nine months in at The Post, writing this mea culpa.

And it's all over gun calibers.

Basically, this starts last week, when I was in attendance at a press conference on the officer-involved shooting of Eric Smith, District Attorney Mike Ramsey discussed what guns each officer on the scene had. I thought that would make an interesting detail, so I jotted them down as he said them.

One my jots was ".40 mm" to describe the Glock semiautomatic pistols being wielded by two of the deputies.

And it's there the mistakes begun.

When it came to the actual story, the decimal point disappeared, now making the Glocks 40 mm.

Not good. When discussing ammunition, decimal points are pretty important. In this case, I just took two sheriff's deputies from being armed with handguns to being armed with grenade launchers.

Post reader Carl Stewart noticed this botch-up and called in to the 49er Speakeasy noting the mistake.

Yours truly was editing the 49er that day.

I was already in a funk over the story, having made a somewhat smaller gun caliber error between a .38 and .380. (there's a difference there, too) So, in a fit, I rechecked my notes of what Ramsey said, saw the ".40 mm" in my notes and wrote that the story was correct. Which it wasn't.

And once again, in talking about the "40 mm" Glocks, I didn't include the decimal point.

Is that strike two, three or four against me on this now?

Those reading the 49er in Tuesday's Post, where no less than seven readers called in to the 49er to point out my latest (and hopefully last) screw-up over the gun calibers, will see that this is where I'm issuing my mea culpa in this situation.

Here's what's really up: the deputies were armed with Glocks that shot .40 caliber rounds. .40 cals are 10 mm rounds. No 40 mm grenade lauchers were present.

Technically, mea culpas, Latin for "my fault," are reserved for errors of journalistic ethics or egregious errors.

Some might not consider the lack of a decimal point to be worthwhile of a mea culpa, unless it was done on purpose to intentionally mislead (that would be unethical). This was (these were) purely an accident.

But I'm doing so, for the following reasons.

1) These caliber errors happened more than once, in multiple pieces in The Post.
2) My initial attempts to clear up confusion actually made the problem worse instead of better.
3) A Post reader faced a public accusation of being wrong, when they were actually right.
4) This gun caliber talk took away focus from the key point of the story: Deputies were cleared of wrongdoing in having to take those weapons, with whatever caliber to shoot and kill another human being.

In light of those things, I take responsibility for creating this whole fiasco by not double-checking independently something I heard in the press conference. (although I did so with other statements by Ramsey and Perry Reniff made that day)

I also, in hindsight, can't say that the editor's note with Carl Stewart's initial call-in to correct me. His statement that the gun was likely a 9 mm was far closer to accurate than my 40 mm statement was. For that, I want to publicly give him an apology.

I'll admit when it comes to the .40 cal, I'm ignorant. I grew up with a dad that preferred archery over guns when it came to hunting. My gun background is limited to .22 handguns/rifles and shotguns. I'm more of a gauge guy than a caliber one.

So once again, I'm sorry about the errors (all two to four of them) and will do my best to prevent such mistakes in the future.

Posted by Robert at 08:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)