Search
Post New Event| Sheriff’s sergeant’s questionable motives | | Print | |
| Written by PB Letters | |
| Thursday, 18 September 2008 | |
|
A letter to the editor from Steve Smith in Scotts Valley EDITOR, Sgt. Fred Plageman of the Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office is completely wrong when he predicts that a Scotts Valley Target will require service levels similar to that of the old and closed K-Mart on 41st Avenue (“Cops could handle any Target-related crime, chief says,” Aug. 29). Plageman would have you believe that he speaks to the issue of Target in Scotts Valley from the perspective of a neutral observer. In reality, he has friends and colleagues in Manana Woods and Monte Fiore who are opposed to Target. Further, did he forget that Scotts Valley has had its own K-Mart on Mt. Hermon Road? For more than 20 years, the Scotts Valley K-Mart has operated with a low demand on police services. I know this because I was a Scotts Valley police officer and a detective for six of those years. In addition, I was a district attorney’s investigator for another six years and can recall no felony crimes at K-mart in Scotts Valley other than one or two shopliftings that exceeded $400 in value. It is absurd to predict crime in Scotts Valley based on crime at a 41st Avenue store that was in the process of closing. The sheriff’s office does a good job in spite of its staff shortages, but let’s face facts. The crime rate in the unincorporated parts of the county is much higher than in Scotts Valley. Stop comparing apples to oranges and be honest about your motives. Comments (16)
  written by Rickey Tave, September 18, 2008  written by City employees are the most proTarget, September 18, 2008
Have you noticed how many of the Pro-Target letters to the editor seem to be City employees or somehow associated with the city. I appreciate the honesty of Sgt. Fred Plageman who stated the facts as he saw them. He took a great deal of grief for speaking the truth. He was even forced to write a letter of apology so that Chief of Police Weiss could save face. The Chief was so proud of getting the apology that he read it aloud at a City Council meeting. Face it, a Target right off of Highway 17 will attract more crime to Scotts Valley. I'm sure that the Chief feels he is only doing his job protecting his employers on the City Council but if the Target is built and the crime rate inevitably goes up in Scotts Valley then the Chief should honorably resign.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
 written by Thank you Sgt. Plageman, September 19, 2008
Why attack Sgt. Plageman for telling it as he sees it? Why do you assume he must have some ulterior motive simply because you don't like the information he is giving you? It is bad enough that he was forced to publicly make an apology because his real life experience made the comments of the SV Police Chief look bad. We should be thanking Sgt. Plageman for speaking up. We shouldn't be attacking him for speaking up. Thank you Sgt. Plageman we can't afford to look at crime through rose colored glasses.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
 written by Steven Smith, September 19, 2008
Plageman's patronizing and uninformed comments were based on his experiences at Kmart on 41st Ave. not published crime statistics. The Uniform Crime Reports show a much higher crime rate in the unincorporated areas of our county (where the Sheriff has jurisdiction) with one exception; sexual assaults in the City of Santa Cruz. Further, his comments are not the official position of the Sheriff's Office.
Scotts Valley's Kmart registers almost no calls for service. Proximity to Hwy 17 is no indicator of crime either. If that were true Scotts Valley, which straddles Hwy 17, would have a higher rate than say the San Lorenzo Valley. In fact it does not. Similarly Live oak lies farther from Hwy 1 than Scotts Valley does from Hwy 17 yet also has a higher crime rate. I accept the premise Target might be ugly and cause what some consider unreasonable traffic but I will not accept the argument that Target will result in the crime wave the opponents have proffered. The published statistics just don't support that premise. It is classic Rovian politics to first make someone afraid of something then, claim to be the person who will make you safe. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
Proximity to 17, Lowly rated comment [Show]
written by Steven Smith, September 20, 2008
To be clear i have never said that Target will not cause any increase in crime. I said it will not cause an increase in crime similar to Watsonville's Target (or the old Kmart on 41st Ave.) Crime will go up if Target is here. Just like it goes up every time anything is built including retail, parks, housing, etc. Heck even a cemetery can cause an increase in crime. Not building anything can also cause an increase in crime as economic fortunes fade. You should read Small Town in Mass Society. Small towns like Scotts Valley have faced economic marginalization long before Target or Wal Mart ever came along.
Its interesting that you say that SLV and Live Oak are poor comparisons for Scotts Valley. I though Watsonville and a closed Kmart was an even poorer one. Crime is crime is crime. I drew my statistics from the published crime reports. They are fact, not opinion. Crime is loosely broken into two categories; persons and property. Most are related to drug or alcohol abuse in some way either through systemic violence, economic compulsion, or pharmacological violence. How this changes from Live Oak to SLV, to Scotts Valley is perhaps the weakest part of your argument. Crime stats only track the number of incidence and the rate. Could Target attract criminals? Some, yes. Is it manageable? I think the Chief is right. Its manageable. As for your Target/Kmart comparison. One would think that a store that is more "lax" in terms of enforcement would be more likely to be victimized. According to the National Theft Report, retail shrinkage (theft, loss, and embezzlement) runs about 10% for all retailers. Its true I have friends who work for the City of Scotts Valley and have said that I am a former employee of the police department. Not as many as you may think though, as i left the city in 1994. John Weiss, Mike Dean, John Hohmann, and Marc Lopez are the only officers I know there now. As for city staff I think only Tracy Ferrara was there when I was. My comments were not solicited by any of them. If Fred Plageman's weren't solicited then I apologize. But, he's still wrong. I wrote what I wrote because after 21 years in law enforcement on three continents including 7 years in higher educations instructing and researching crime, I think I know something about crime. If you know me, you know i frequently write commentary and opinion pieces in local, national, and international publications on issues I believe are important. Plageman has no idea what the call for service volume is at Kmart nor does he know what he's talking about when he says that it will cause the hiring of additional police officers. He has no idea what the call volume per officer is in Scotts Valley. At best he is guessing. At worse... I'll let his public apology which was read into the record speak to that. What is interesting is that the opponents are using his out of context quote as the banner of their website and the basis for opposition. I believe that the political tactic of scare mongering via crime predictions is the lowest form of campaigning. Hence my use of the term "Rovian". In order to galvanize public opinion and distract from the real issues at hand some politicians will use crime as a bogeyman to distract voters. Politicians who attempt to instill fear in you then claim they can make you safe are the lowest form of the breed. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +9
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
 written by Real issues, September 20, 2008
I find it interesting that an article writte a week ago about hate crimes, which ARE occurring in our community, has absolutely NO comments; but comments/speculation about what will or won't happen with a proposed store are on fire!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Steven Smith, September 20, 2008
The proximity to Hwy 17 is an issue raised by opponents of the project and I was responding to that argument. I didn't mean to attribute it to you.
Retail businesses adopt different enforcement strategies. Often they are based on a simple cost/benefit analysis. The time spent prosecuting shoplifters and embezzlers is not worth the price of the item. They would rather pass on that cost to you. Kmart may indeed have such a policy. In which case I would argue which costs us more? Stores that pass on the cost of thievery to you or one that confronts it? I think we agree on more than we disagree. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +6
written by City Staff once again, September 20, 2008
Why does it seem like the majority of the Pro-Target letters and blogs are coming from the city staff. I don't hear a lot of support coming from the residents.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -5
Response to Lets all be accountable and tolerant, Lowly rated comment [Show]
written by Steven Smith, September 20, 2008
I'm not the mayor but, I played one once on TV...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +6
What's your point, Lowly rated comment [Show]
 written by Be a real citizen, September 22, 2008
Scotts Valley resident wrote, in regards to Kmart: "An employee told me as we watched a man walk out with a boom box under his arm, that they are trained to not interfere with a theft. She was very matter of fact that there was nothing she was supposed to do about it." And you did nothing? You didn't yell "hey, you need to pay for that!" You didn't call the police? You, and everyone else, just watched this without reaction? Wow, that's really pathetic. It's hard enough to believe that someone would steal a boombox to begin with. Add on to that that virtually all merchandise of any value has an RFID tag, both for inventory control and to trigger the magnetic sensors at the doors. And the two of you, and other store patrons, just sat their watching. I'm not sure which is the worse crime -- stealing the boombox, passively watching someone steal the boombox, or making up the story about a boombox being stolen. Time to change your pseudonym because your credibility just fell off the chart.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
 written by Rich LeBlanc, September 30, 2008
"Why does it seem like the majority of the Pro-Target letters and blogs are coming from the city staff."
Probably because they will stand to benefit from it. I think the cops will support it because it means job security for them, more stuff to police, more traffic tickets to give out, shoplifters to prosecute etc.. Empty fields and meadows don't need any policing. Therefore there's no need for cops. That's why I wonder if electing a cop to the city Council is a good idea. She will probably support every development project to provide more jobs for cops. Is that a conflict of interest? I find it ironic that cops are supposed to eliminate crime but if they did they'd be out of a job. So more development and crime and traffic means more jobs for cops. So they'd probably be for it. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Write comment
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Who wants to see it from 17? Who wants the traffic backup onto Mt. Hermon Road and 17? Who needs the grief?