Roundtable: Mass Shootings, 'Categate,' Transparency Law, Jury Trial For Homeless Man

KG: Another week and a mass shooting. Why do we allow them to continue? What can be done? A San Diego City Councilman says he is the one who leaked a confidential memo to soccer city investors. What happens now? There is progress in making the city's deals with businesses more transparent. 19 years after a voter mandate. Why did the case of a homeless man arrested for sleeping on the street end up in a jury trial this summer? I'm Kenny Goldberg in the KPBS roundtable starts now. Welcome to our discussion of this weeks top stories. I'm Kenny Goldberg joining me to talk about this eventful week are Tony Perry former LA bureau chief. Andrew Bowen, Metro reporter for KPBS News. It's become too frequent a shooter sprays a crowd with gunfire killing dozens of -- and wounding many more. The Union Tribune's editorial on Monday said it's no longer a question if there will be gun violence again like this but who, what and where? What do you make of that? TP: 33,000 gun deaths a year two thirds which are suicide but the remaining one third are one-on-one violence against women. 1700 women killed each year. We have these large-scale incidents like Las Vegas. Now the question is what we do about it. It's like we have ridden -- written off the one on one's. 50 people were killed in 28 days in Chicago. Each of those were one-on-one or one on two. We have written that off as the problem of one city in one portion of the city. The larger issue of Las Vegas seems to be narrowing down to what they call the bumb stocks. These will convert a semi automatic gun to a automatic gun. Will be change that? What does that do to that 33,000 figure? Probably not a lot. Dianne Feinstein has legislation. The NRA has said they are willing to discuss the regulations of bumb stocks. We will see. KG: Let's talk about that. An array says they are open to discussing a regulation -- not a lot necessarily. What is the distinction? TP: What can be done. Category. That's how but -- bumb stocks became legal. The FDA -- FTA loosened the regulation and now the bumb stocks you can get through Amazon. Before that you could get it from overseas for a little bit more. This device is out there and the people who know about these warned us that rifles in particular are modular. That's to say parts can be replaced with generic parts it changes the capacity of the weapon to do what it does. Fire projectiles that kill people that's to say. It is a difficult problem. The NRA has its issues. Part of the bait and we have the same debate is, how powerful is the NRA in terms of influencing? Is their power over stated? Why does not anyone stand up to them? Are they being vilified? And around and around we go. KG: The question is, let's see what's the prominent people in Washington have to say. Here's a cut from Dianne Feinstein. [Clip] You have to say enough is enough. You have to say there is no reason to make a semiautomatic assault weapon into a fully automatic battlefield weapon. KG: Here is what Sarah huckabee Sanders had to say about this. [Clip] We know both members of both parties and multiple organizations are planning to take a look at bumb stocks and related devices. We welcome that. I would like to be part of that conversation. KG: What do you make of the fact that people are saying they are open to discussing these things? Is that significant? AB: If the NRA says it's okay and Republicans can two. This is a specific -- it's a narrow regulation we are talking about. We are not talking about limitations on magazine capacity. We are not talking about limitations -- universal background checks. This is a small regulation that could have a small impact on the capacity and deadliness of the guns that are out there. I'm not sure. It might be a symbol for some people to say, now we are doing something. I don't see much substance to it. TP: The NRA folks are concerned. It's about the leading wedge to larger issues. A discussion they don't want to have. Will be this and this only? Or the leading wedge to talk about? KG: That's a question. To what extent is this the camel's nose under the tent and that kind of thing. What do you think? BR: This whole thing is interesting to me. What about new town? What pressure was put on the NRA to do something or give in? I am curious as to what was happening behind the scenes to make this wedge happen? KG: The question is, how many more of these things are we going to see before there is something done to prevent them or can anything be done? BB: I think of what former president Obama said after new town. Gun safety and gun deaths need to be treat it like a public health crisis. Similar to what happened with car collisions and implementing safety measures on vehicles and roads or even regulating the tobacco industry. At this point we are not allowed to study gun violence and how can you move the needle if you cannot figure out your baseline? TP: Someone wrote that he wished guns were control. You look into the numbers. It's difficult to find any legislation even in places like Australia -- Australia had a mesh shooting some years ago -- it suggest you can legislate this thing. Here we are in San Diego, and central if you will, we had San Ysidro in 1984 and also the school shootings. We are having a district attorneys race. Who is asking those candidates to protect women who have gone orders against a abusive spouse? We are choosing a new police chief. Anyone going to make sure these candidates are saying, will you have the resources to protect women to make sure we don't have women killed by abusive spouses. I have not seen that. It's easy to talk bumb stocks. It's much harder to bring it down to a local level. KG: Let me shift gears. What do you make of the press coverage of this disaster? Tony? TP: Jim Warren had a great piece. He said it's become so recognized that we know when a shooting will be. We have the template and pull it down the shelf. They will have logos and sound effects and have their talkers. We do it in print also. We know we will have the pictures and bios. We will hunt for heroes. All legitimate journalism. The core shows we have had enough of these two where we've turned it into a football coverage. AB: We're getting to the limit. I saw -- I read the initial coverage and I've figured I've read the story before. This has happened so many times it doesn't appear that anything significant will change. TP: Look at Chicago. Everyone has done gang violence. Then they moved away. The number of people killed by guns in Chicago on the south side not citywide is still enormous and appalling months in and month out. What are we going to do? KG: We will have to leave it at that. We will revisit this issue shortly. Legend has it went George Washington was a little boy he admitted to cutting down a cherry tree and praise for his honesty. Earlier this week San Diego City Councilman Chris Cate try to pull a George Washington out of his hat and on Tuesday he admitted he was the one who leaked a confidential memo from the city attorney to FS investors. The group pushing the soccer city initiative. The district attorney said he's investigating the matter what excuses did Chris Cate give for leaking this memo? AB: He said he wanted to get the opinion and feedback of FS investors on the points that were raised in the memo. This was a few days before the city Council was going to vote on whether to approve their initiative the soccer city initiative outright or send it to the voters next year or this year. He felt -- it's worth noting back in June there was not -- no one was calling to this measure to be approved by the city Council because it was clear is going to make it to the ballot either with the countersignature campaign by the opponents of the initiative. Count smoke Chris Cate set this was a important decision. It could've gone either way. That's why he gave the memo to FS investors and says he does not regret it. TP: He doesn't regret it? He yet leaked a confidential memo. What's up with that? AB: If you look at that San Diego ordinance in the municipal code it forbids any current or city official from giving a confidential information to people outside of the city unless it's a part of their duties. He is letting out his legal defense if he was to be charged with a crime under the municipal code. It would be a misdemeanor. He is saying, I felt like giving out this memo to the investors. TP: Any calling for him to resign? Any movement? AB: The city attorney in June before she knew who had leaked this memo said whoever did it should resign. This is a outrage, breach of trust and it undermines the city's negotiating position on many levels. That was before she knew it was Councilman Chris Cate that gives the memo out. She has not repeated that call for him to resign. I heard similar things from David Alvarez. He was saying this is proof the whole soccer city issue is about backroom deals and not transparent. He has not said much on the issue since Councilman Chris Cate. AB: You are suppose to leaked to the media. That gives the appearance of collusion between Councilman Chris Cate and FS investors. He could have leaked it to the media and the media could have published it. The wood of ended up in their desk regardless. This is how it happened. KG: Why did Chris Cate say he brought this forward? There was a lawsuit filed by Cory breaks -- Briggs and he was wanted to lift the confidentiality of the memo and make it a public memo no longer a subject to these confidentiality rules. During that lawsuit he was allowed to ask the city Council offices and may or if they were the ones who leaked the memo and my understanding is those responses were due at the beginning of this week. It was going to become clear and the information was getting out that Councilman Chris Cate gave it away. He held this conference and let it be public on his terms. KG: There seems to be some confusion as to whether the city attorney can take action or the DA. Where do we stand? AB: The city attorney's client is the city of San Diego. They are represented by the Mayor and city Council. It would be a conflict of interest for the city attorney to prosecute its own client Councilman Chris Cate. That's what it was referred to the Dist. Atty.'s office and that County. They are billing -- building a case and looking into it and see whether or not there are charges filed. That would be eight tall order for them to file charges against a sitting Councilman. I would be surprised if that happen. It's still a possibility. KG: We will look at that as it develops. In 1982 San Diego voters approved a measure aimed at making business deals between the city and private companies more transparent. The law mandated that every company doing business with the city disclose the name of everyone involved in the transaction. That sounds reasonable except San Diego has not enforced it. A series of stories from Brad Racino has prompted lawmakers to get with the program. Tell us about this law. BR: In the early 90's city of San Diego almost entered into a $47 million real estate deal with someone who turned out to be a mobster. It was embarrassing. The current Councilman Bruce Henderson along with the Mayor spearheaded this initiative. He said will never get caught with our pants down and let's do something about this. They put into the boater. 86% of voters approve this measure that says from now on when we do business with companies we need to know who's behind him. Nothing ever happened. They have never enforced it. Last year we put in a record request and showed there was more than 1000 contracts that were worth more than $3 billion and no one knew who was behind them. KG: Why has the city not enforce it? BR: That's the million-dollar question. It depends who you ask. Address conspiracy there's they say the city does not wear no. If you ask current council members or people they say it's impossible to enforce. It's so big. After looking at this law for a year, I agree with them that it is very vague around the edges. It's almost unenforceable. If you have a lot like that that mandates, you need to have clear deliverables on what you are asking for. It does not do that. KG: What about the spirit of the law? Is that clear? BR: The spirit of the law is clear. If you read it it says, we need to know who we are doing business with. It's not enough to say we are doing business with XYZ and you have no idea who's behind it. That's not the spirit of the law. We have gotten to city to admit they have fallen down on this and they need to do something. AB: Normally if there is a lot that needs fixing the city Council would pass a fixed to it and make it clear in the municipal code. This is not in the code? BR: If they are clarifying they need to go back before the voters if they add, edit or delete. What they will do is just the ordinance and that will take precedent from now until then. Is the ordinance going far enough? TP: It was difficult, expensive, legally shaken. I don't see the city of San Diego getting involved that are difficult and expensive. Would happen to the businessman and was that the last we saw of him? BR: He is Michael Jackson's sons godfather. He is in Florida and doing fine. KG: Why do they need a law to require transparency? BB: I don't work for the city. I don't know. KG: Give us your opinion. BB: I would want to know why the law was poorly written. Clearly it was not vetted. Were they acting rashly to get this approved to put it in? What was there legal process? BR: I don't know. The city attorney wrote that. I don't know if he's around anymore. The next attorney to fight for this was Michael. He admitted that it was vague and needed to be fixed. He did not have any answers. KG: I understand that Mayor Faulkner has weighed in. What did he say? BR: What he will do is mandate any contracts with $500,000 or more there were full disclosure. This morning is pulling the contracts for consultants, constructions and goods and services and you're looking at a quarter of those contracts do not hit that mark. We are talking tends of millions of dollars that will not be covered under this disclosure.The city wants to know who you've done business with. KG: That falls on the business to decide whether they want to know. It's on the business to comply with the city's lot. It's not for the city to enforce it. BR: Thank you. KG: We will have to talk about that one later. On April 5 a man named Richard Stevenson's was arrested for violating a city lot that prohibits people from sleeping on the street after 5:30 AM. That was nothing new. He had been arrested and taken to jail many times. This time he decided to fight the charges in court and that's what Bionna cup Bruno's story gets interesting. How did you become aware of his case? BB: Through a kid& Homeless and very active in the community. He's a liaison between homeless individuals and the legal battles they face when they get cited in many get arrested. KG: The fact that Stevenson decided to go to trial, how unusual is that? BB: It's fairly unusual. I don't have the figures for this year. Last year there were 20 trials that went to a jury or where a judge decided it was up to the defendant how they wanted the trial to go. This year I'm not sure how many have gone although the public defender's office who helped Richard in his case has defended multiple homeless defendants this year. KG: What did you make of the trial, outcome, tell us about that. BB: He went to trial in June. It was a one-day jury trial. There were multiple police officers called to testify against him including the woman who arrested him. She was a member of the quality of life team downtown. It works in conjunction with the homeless outreach team. They showed some body worn camera where she admonished him for having too many belongings on the street. For being contacted by officers multiple times. There is no standard for how a officer decides at what point someone gets arrested. KG: How frequent is it that officers arrest someone for sleeping on the streets 10 minutes after the deadline? BB: They have contacts which they keep track of which is if someone goes out and offers services to go to a shelter or what have you and denies them. He had multiple contacts by the city attorney's count. I'm not sure at what point they decided he needed to be arrested. Usually it's a tool they are using to say you are not compliant with what we are asking you to do. TP: Did he mouth off or get combative? BB: He was arrested at 5:45 AM which is 15 minutes after the deadline. They knocked on his tent and he was taken to jail. He spent the night in jail. He was able to bail out. It was over $100. He had a family member who helped him with that. He was found guilty. KG: I understand there is a ironic twist regarding Stevenson where he is living. Tell us about that. BB: He was found guilty in June. Multiple jurors were not happy about finding him guilty. He did not get a house in the end. What he did get was people including the judge, city attorney, his public attorney and Mr. McConnell helping him to get shelter. He stayed at the past shelter for a couple of months. He did get kicked out because he got into a fight with a staff member. They have zero tolerance for not following rules. He had been able to save money while staying there and now he lives in Rosarito. KG: Why did he fight this in the first place? BB: He ended up with what he would have ended up with. People are given a stay away order from the point they were arrested and probation. He ended up with two years probation and a stay away order from the area he was arrested. He told me and did testify during trial that he wanted to tell his story. Anyone who covers homelessness in San Diego, people want to be heard and tell their stories. TP: I see no villains. The police doing their job, the man trying to do what he had to do. BB: They did ask to send him to jail for 60 days. TP: There would be efforts to clean his up. BB: This was after he went to Rosarito. He rented his own place. This is before his sentencing hearing. KG: All right. That reps the another week of stories on the KPBS roundtable. Thank you to you all. All the stories are available on her website KPBS.org and also you get your podcast.