Police Chief Ousted (Con't from Page One) put the blame squarely at the city managers door. "I'm appalled at the background check."

The council reprimanded Southard Friday. (LA Times read.)

City manager Southard put the blame squarely at outgoing police chief Moody's door. Southard apparently assigned Moody the task of conducting the background check. "The background check was not done properly." "When I hired Mr. Scheidecker, I did not know of his 1984 suspension."

Moody was excused from his interim police chief duties and will depart this week.

Moody put the blame on Southard and others. "My background report did include some details of the [PDID related] investigation." Moody also said that the suspension was "downplayed" by Scheidecker's former LAPD colleagues, so he didn't "press it" when he interviewed Scheidecker.

City officials may have been unaware of Scheidecker's suspension from the LAPD "intelligence unit", but Southard and Moody were at least aware of his position with this unit.

Court documents in a 1983 ACLU court case exposed the PDID's widespread spying on private citizens including then mayor Tom Bradley.

Comments from the mayor, council and city staff have focused only on the 1983 suspension. Many at last Tuesdays city council meeting view the suspension as an element of a larger ethical question: Why would Southard and Moody consider a candidate who was a key figure in a controversial operation that spied on private citizens?

Some also think that city officials knew more than they've admitted about the 1983 incident.

Mayor Rosenthal is quoted in the Times as saying "There was a reliance on the city of Ripon's investigation [background check performed when Scheidecker was hired as police chief in that city]." Yet the city of Ripon acknowledged in a recent statement that "[Ripon] was aware of all relevant facts and circumstances surrounding Mr. Scheidecker's career with the Los Angeles Police Department, including the incident(s) referenced in recent media reports."

The Modesto Bee ( Modbee.com read) reported on the City of Claremont's firing of Scheidecker in last Thursday's edition.

" Scheidecker, who lives in Modesto, said he never hid anything. "I told them about it," he said. "It's part of my history. Why would I want to hide it?"

Scheidecker said he disclosed his work with the intelligence division to a Claremont-hired background investigator. Police chief candidates routinely receive extensive background checks.

Scheidecker said he didn't know if the suspension came up, but he told Claremont officials that Ripon had thoroughly probed the suspension before hiring him in 1992, and he referred Claremont to that investigator. Claremont officials, he said, disregarded the matter until the Los Angeles Times printed stories on the 18-year-old probe."

Scheidecker said. "I think they opted not to try to fight the battle and thought it was better to rescind the job offer."

Scheidecker is attempting to get his job back with the city of Ripon, but should he be unsuccessful, is the city's mishandling of the hiring actionable? Posturing for this contingency after meeting with attorneys Tuesday and seeming to contradict statements made by city spokesman Michael Maxfield and chief Moody, Southard blamed Scheidecker for withholding critical information. "It is apparent at this point that Mr. Scheidecker did not fully disclose, prior to his hiring, the circumstances of his involvement with the Los Angeles Police Department's Public Disorder Intelligence Division."

The cost of this misstep in dollars remains to be seen. Legal sources tell ClaremontCA to "expect the lawsuit."

With the Landrum affair still a weekly source of negative publicity, Claremont's loss of face within the greater So Cal community has increased dramatically.

Newspaper reports stall police chief's debut. (Con't from Page One)
in newspaper reports. In a Times story (read) Southard said he "did not know of his [ Scheidecker's] 1984 suspension." In previous reports city spokesperson Michael Maxfield was quoted as saying "we were aware of his work in the LAPD unit." Retiring chief Robert Moody was also quoted as saying "My background report did include some details of the investigation." The council will discuss the situation in a closed-door meeting preceding tonight's city council meeting.

City Manager's Office Embarrassed Again. (Con't from Page One

the mishandling of intelligence materials when secret files were found in his home. The legality of the PDID operation was later challenged by the ACLU; the award, $1.8M. And that's just the beginning. Alleged evidence tampering, the CIA, military intelligence materials, fed and state investigations, it's a must read. In defending Scheidecker's choice as police chief, the Times quotes Claremont city official Mike Maxfield as saying "the focus of the interviews was his performance as police chief". Mayor Rosenfeld's response; "we [the council] weren't in charge of picking him." Yet the council finds itself in the soup once again.

ClaremontCA - An IHM Inc. company. 1998 ©Indian Hill Media Inc, All rights reserved.
ClaremontCA™, CLAREMONT ONLINE™ and Space Bar™ are trademarks of Indian Hill Media Inc..