Why won’t City Attorney Albano release the names of the city recipients of Tom Angel’s “jokes”?


Does anyone honestly believe that when Tom Angel was working for the Burbank Police Department he never “forwarded” any of those ethnic jokes to people within the City of Burbank’s email system?


He only sent them to outside parties? He never wanted to share the fun with his fellow employees?

Of course not.

It’s highly suspect that the only such internal email that Albano did release was the one to Denis Cremins about the “72 virgins” question. You mean there was never anything else in a similar vein, even if only sent to Cremins?

No jokes at all, eh. How could that possibly be?

No, Albano and the city manager are sitting on a number of other such city related emails from Angel. But to release them to the public would immediately raise the question about why those other city folks never bothered to report this discriminatory behavior to their superiors or city council members. Or even to a federal agency or two, considering the ongoing outside investigation and lawsuits over Portos and Pavelka.

Raising other names would also call into question these fellow employees’ own possible participation in the fun. Like they would never send anything back? She’d have to release those, too.

Albano and the city manager are clearly hiding more derogatory evidence of employee misconduct and discriminatory behavior, and possibly on a large scale while the Portos police mess was still ongoing. Think our city council cares?

We also still want to know where Councilman Rogers was during that same time period. Does anyone remember him speaking out about this mega-controversy publicly?

We recall him being conspicuously silent and absent from the scene. And when almost no one else was.


Will doesn’t like it when we ask these questions, because it gives credence to our long-held suspicion that he was quietly working on behalf of the city in an opposition research/PR role. Years ago Bud Ovrom wanted him to do so on behalf of the city’s then-airport issues, and then hide him under Peter Kirsch’s attorney budget. So it’s not that odd an idea.

So what else was it? Was he out of town during that entire time period?






Filed under Uncategorized

16 responses to “Why won’t City Attorney Albano release the names of the city recipients of Tom Angel’s “jokes”?

  1. Anonymous

    Why? Because he probably sent them to HER!

    • semichorus

      Wouldn’t that be great to find out?

      The fact too that he was using company equipment to do this is getting conveniently swept aside. If we had a real city council they’d ALL be raising holy hell about this next Tuesday night.

      Of course, if they did, staff would just interrupt them to say how troubling it was that they hadn’t discussed these issues in private with them earlier, and would much prefer they each do so if there was still a concern. You know, the Brown Act and all that.

      This city council always goes along with that stifling nonsense. They immediately shut up, and then that’s that.

      • DixieFlyer

        It’s not just the City Council that is stifled by the CA’s office.

        Gina Oh has the Police Commission tied up in knots, also.

        Someway they need to learn to LISTEN to Oral Communications.

        Then, ASK questions, DEMAND straight answers.

        Take the sock OUT of their EARS and MOUTHS.

  2. Anonymous

    Wait till they get someone to doctor up the emails out there to cover it more. We know La Chasse wouldn’t know how to do any of this. He was probably out of town on some “police department” related trip. Call Las Vegas and see if he will answer?

  3. Anonymous

    Two years ago, I retired from the Burbank Police Department as a Lieutenant with 21 years of distinguished service. I had the opportunity to work with countless community members and several employees at the department/city who are members of the minority groups that Tom Angel degraded and Chief LaChasse tacitly condoned. I am deeply saddened and regret that your leadership has this view and perpetuates it.

    Some historical perspective is in order here. LaChasse was brought in (initially on an interim basis) on the heels of a scandal. His mission was to right the ship, dole out discipline, improve morale, abolish the “good ol’ boy system” of discipline and promotion and address allegations of racism, discrimination and harassment within the department. He was apparently chosen based on his years of working at LAPD and the experience he gained navigating similar problems within that organization. He assembled his “team” of reformers which included Tom Angel (from LASD) to be his Deputy Chief.
    LaChasse was tasked with leading the department though a difficult period, but as one looks at his objectives point by point, it is clear that he has consistently failed. Members from within the department have complained of his ineptness, lying, and hypocrisy for years, but the council and public would not hear it. They had bought into LaChasse and his team of “Reformers” but as the curtain is pulled back, the Reformers are slowly, but consistently, being exposed as Charlatans.

    Since his arrival, he has spent hundreds of thousands of Burbank Tax Payer dollars (with the approval of the City Council) to meet his stated objectives. One of his first commissions was hiring noted police psychologist Larry Blum to survey, evaluate and report on the morale within the ranks. This report was scathing; noting among other things low morale and unfairness in discipline and promotion.

    Soon after taking the helm, LaChasse fired 10 employees. To date four of the ten employees he fired have had their cases overturned resulting in settlements from the city and reinstatement as police officers (including SIGNIFICANT back pay awards). One of the cases (Bill Taylor) resulted in a jury award of over one million dollars to Taylor for wrongful termination. The decision to terminate was made by LaChasse.

    Morale in the department is currently described by many, if not most, as being at all-time lows. This is evidenced by employees fleeing the department; low officer initiated contacts, low observed arrest rates, increasing crime, inability to recruit, staffing shortages and forced hiring. It is also greatly impacted by LaChasse’s self-serving decisions; such as the one to attend the Baker to Vegas race after the Burbank team had to withdraw (the first time in 25 years) do to staffing shortages.

    Much of the funds LaChasse has spent were on oversight contracts such as the costly Office of Independent Review, a team of lawyers who were supposed to also be providing oversight to the LASD during which time their own jail scandal flourished and OIR did nothing to prevent it. They were subsequently fired from LASD, yet LaChasse still has a lucrative contract with them.

    Now evidence is surfacing that supports what department employees realized years ago; Chief LaChasse is out of touch, routinely misleads the City Council, the Police Commission, and the press, is a hypocrite, wastes taxpayer funds and is a failed leader.

    For perspective, emails very similar to the ones sent by Tom Angel were discovered during the DOJ probe of the Ferguson, Mo Police Department. In that case a police sergeant resigned and a city clerk was fired for the emails. In San Francisco, an investigation is underway where 4 low level officers were texting racist and discriminatory texts. To date, three of those officers have resigned and a fourth is facing discipline. Lets not forget that Lachasse’s mantra during his first few years at the department was “The DOJ is whatching us.” Lachasse even flew to Washington DC with then CM Mike Flad to discuss the DOJ’s interest in the BPD! How does LaChasse, the Reformer hired to deal with racial discord, deal with the exact same situation created by his handpicked second-in-command? He talked to him about it. His response was nothing short of the good ol’ boy manner of discipline. How should it have been handled or how would it have been handled if the revelation did not include his loyal companion?

    There would be an investigation that would review the extent of the emails. The employee would have to answer who he got the emails from and who he sent them to. The employee would be asked why he sent the emails and why he did not put an end to them. Ultimately, the employee would have been found to have violated the City’s Harassment and Discrimination Policy, Computer policy, and the policy about maintaining proper working relationships. The employee would have received some meaningful discipline (probably a suspension without pay) and a record would be kept in his personnel file. This record would be one of the things disclosed when/if the employee sought employment at another police agency (as did Tom Angel, when he went back to LASD).

    The behavior is absolutely unacceptable, but the response from LaChasse is yet another example of his failed leadership. Tom Angel was not the focus of an investigation and received no discipline for his involvement in this abhorrent behavior that, aside from exposing his true feelings toward minorities, further tarnished the Burbank Police Department and the Law Enforcement Profession. LaChasse responded that he cannot comment because it is a “personnel matter”, but a review of Tom Angel’s Salary (posted on Burbank’s website) shows that he had no negative financial impact. Rather than address the issue and send a clear message that the behavior was unacceptable, Lachasse tacitly approved it by giving no negative consequences.

    It is apparent that LaChasse and Sheriff McDonnell did not learn Leadership during their decades of working at scandal ridden LAPD, but rather became experts in weathering the storm and manipulating the public, press and elected officials. McDonnell’s response that it served as a, “teaching moment” and defending Angel as, “professional and respectful of everyone he works with and deals with” does nothing to address his underlying racial bias that is devastating to an agency he is responsible for leading, not to mention the community he is policing.

    As far as Burbank is concerned, it is now up to the public, City Council and City Manager to tacitly approve LaChasse’s failed leadership or take a stand against racism, discrimination and harassment. It is time to look at his legacy as a whole, rather than the individual failures. It is time that the Council, the City Manager, and the Police Commission stop believing everything LaChasse says and start holding him accountable. It is time to determine if LaChasse really is branding the department in a manner consistent with the objectives / responsibilities of the City Manager and Elected Officials.

    It is time that the City Council responsibly spends some money to find out what is really happening inside the walls of the department. This should include an audit of Lachasse’s spending, discipline decisions, a critical review of his past leadership including; allocation of resources, recruitment, retention, impact on crime (good or bad), self-initiated activity, and a new study to determine morale within the ranks as well as his ability to lead for the future.

    • Anonymous


      Will Rogers Jess Talamantes How is BPD planning on addressing the increase in crime? I realize it is too early to know what happened in this instance but I really hope the chief is forced to look at the way the department is being run. It isn’t working and Burbank deserves better.

      Will Rogers and Jess Telemantes will have to get back to you on that Laura. Both the Chief and the Deputy Chief are at a conference right now in New York, all on your dime! I guess that the 80+ years of law enforcement experienced they gained while at LAPD did not prepare them for law enforcement in Burbank and they have to travel across the country to stay current.

    • Anonymous

      Mike Cantwell: I happen to be well aware of what is pretty standard in Law Enforcement as I spent 21 years in the BPD. The problem is that your Chief has been exploiting the gratuity of the citizens of Burbank for far to long. I have seen his trips and they are frequent and costly. If the citizens of Burbank are aware and are fine with it, then so be it. The problem is they have no idea. Lastly, why do both need to go? Can one not share the info with the other? Is there no local training (or closer training) that will suffice? These are fair questions that the public and elected officials should be asking.

  4. Anonymous

    Will Rogers

    I gather you haven’t been posting in recent weeks, so apparently you missed the Chief and his command staff making a presentation to the public and the city council just a couple of weeks ago. Moreover, I took several minutes to put to the Chief almost every department-related question and challenge that has arisen on this page – mostly from the same couple of sources. The only questions I did not ask were those already addressed by the Chief and his staff, or asked by other council members.

    If you go to the city’s web page you can track down the specific meeting and watch the video of that portion of the video.

  5. Anonymous

    If I didn’t love Burbank, I wouldn’t live here, and I certainly wouldn’t invest my time with local organizations, including the city government. But I wouldn’t want to discourage criticisms, either. I’ve had them, and will have them again, and expect I’m in fact among those expressed by others.

    Virtually every day we hear about a pothole here, an unkempt park there, and so on. And I’m happy to say we can very often fix that problem quickly. But we have to be open to the complaint, first. Simply saying we have better streets than North Hollywood is setting the bar too low.

    Sometimes legitimate problems are too large to be fixed that easily, and complaints help us gather support, cash, and ideas for solving an issue.

    The only complaints I really take issue with are those from a small handful who offer nothing more than an endless, often inaccurate string of alleged problems, typically portraying themselves as the only truly independent, honest and intelligent arbiters in the community, and routinely condemning the motives and integrity the critics imagine for others. And, of course, the beginning and end of their contributions to the city are the torrents of words. The same lack of regard from me goes doubly for those who engage in the same activity, but do so anonymously, not even being held publicly accountable for their frequent falsehoods, incomplete truths and rampant hypocrisy.

  6. chad

    Reading these posts has put me in a fugue state.

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s