Posts Tagged ‘David Herrera’

Federalist No. 10: Why it’s important for my PI colleagues to understand how democracy works

Tuesday, October 12th, 2010

In a January 3, 2010 letter about me nominating me for CALI’s Distinguished Achievement Award, 53 year career private eye Eddie McClain wrote in pertinent part, “He has also been an effective advocate for the association and profession as a key member of the CALI Legislative Committee. As an active member of alternative organizations such as NOW, LULAC and the NAACP, he often persuades those organizations to support CALI bills or oppose unfavorable legislation detrimental to our fact-finding mission.”

James Madison

This aspect of what I do for the California Association of Licensed Investigators and my profession bears some explanation because it is an important lesson for how democracy is supposed to work in America for interest groups. James Madison spelled it out in the Federalist Papers, in Federalist No. 10, writing as “Publius.”

According to Madison, a threat to democracy exists when large factions contend against one another. When one comes to power as a large faction, there is an inherent danger of dictatorship and authoritarian rule. To counter this, each small faction contends with other small factions and makes alliances with other small factions to create temporary majorities to pass or defeat legislation and to otherwise influence government policies and practices.

I make no secret of the fact that my overall world viewpoint is on the left. For one of the best explanations of what is meant by left and right, read Ideology and Utopia by Karl Mannheim. I eschew the term “liberal” for myself. As Heywood Campbell Broun, founder of The Newspaper Guild (AFL-CIO, CLC, CWA) once wrote, “a liberal is one who leaves the room when the fight begins.” I am a radical, just as that term might have been meant when Karl Hess wrote and Barry Goldwater said, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”

CALI and the private investigative industry as a whole, needs its members who are Democrats or Republicans, Libertarians, or Greens, or like me, members of the Peace and Freedom Party, in order to make the temporary or even long range strategic alliances that enable us to be effective advocates for our profession when sculpting legislative and governmental policies. What I bring to the table in CALI, and in the National Organization for Women, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, League of United Latin American Citizens, and the trade union movement, is the ability to perceive where these organizations on an issue by issue basis have interests in common. That enables us to come together to oppose bills or support them when they will be detrimental to our interests or will advance our interests, respectively.

Then, there are the people who obviously don’t understand Federalist No. 10 and how democracy works in America or if they do, they have some self-destructive need to damage the long term prospects for legislative success for CALI and private investigators. Take the cabal of Rick Von Geldern, David Herrera, Ed Saucerman, and others who resorted to any tactic and proceeded motor-mouthed to either denounce the entire legislature as “whores” or who ratified the conduct of those who did.

One of the things they used in their battle against Mandatory Continuing Education (MCE) for private investigators was to vilify me and attempt character assassination by denouncing my ties to civil rights organizations as though they were inherently unsavory. Note of course that nobody in the profession was upset when I got several NOW chapters to oppose SB 208 because of the effect it would have had on sexual harassment and discrimination cases in the workplace. But when it came to their supporting MCE, all of a sudden I was accused with unabashed sexist language of “hiding behind the skirts of NOW.” I was also bashed with thinly veiled racist attacks against my affiliations with LULAC.

Did this cabal of miscreants care whether that kind of rhetoric might damage the long term interests of private investigators. It probably never even occurred to them. Which is precisely why it was lunacy for David Herrera to appoint Rick Von Geldern as legislative director for PICA (Professional Investigators of California) and for Ed Saucerman to sing Rick’s praises as though he was some kind of genius legislative tactician and strategist.

So, if they actually are literate enough to read and understand it. They should start their own voluntary continuing education by reading Federalist No. 10.


Guilt by Association or Birds of a Feather? You decide!

Tuesday, August 24th, 2010

There is some really strange — no, Mondo Bizarro is more like it — email traffic going viral all over the Private Investigative world as I write. Just when I think that life can’t get any more surreal (see my last posting of earlier today), somebody out there in cyberspace forwards me the following email that has a lot to say about the same crowd that have been denouncing me of late. You decide for yourself whether some of the accusations flying around should qualify as Guilt by Association for those folks or just birds of a feather flocking together…..

Note first of all that I haven’t seen what Mr. Ammons is responding to….maybe somebody out there in cyberspace will be kind enough to forward it to me, preferably just as I’m about to take a stiff drink:

My Esteemed Colleagues:
Here is my response to the issues outlined by Mr. Herrera and Mr. Pipkins. I’m sure Ann Marie, Reinhardt and Rob will have more specific regarding the taxes and accounting of PICA’s business transactions. Nonetheless, feel
free to correct me on any inaccurate statements that I’ve made as it is solely based off of my recollection of events.

1. It is my understanding that are books had been properly maintained and reconciled on a regular basis since Reinhardt Schuerger assumed responsibility. In 2009, Secretary-Treasurer Rob Lough and Ann Marie Batesole
met regularly (I believe every month) to reconcile the PICA accounts via Quick books. Rob Lough never received training or had previous experience (as was the case with all but 3 of the 2009 PICA BOD) and I had informed him
that we would establish an SOP for future Secretary-Treasurers. Mr. Pipkin refused training from Mr. Lough, Ann Marie. Mr. Pipkin and Mr. Herrera ignored our attempts to train and assist them in understanding PICA strengths and weaknesses. They were dead set on reinventing the wheel.

2. If this was true, it wouldn’t take 6 months to go online or request the statements from the bank. This would not prevent a review based off of the documentation that was available.

3. Mr. Pipkin is delusional at best. In my limited experience, using a debt card to pay for transactions is an easier and more secure way of doing business. If a transaction occurs, the credit card company will always give the patron back their funds until the dispute has been resolved. Nonetheless, I am not a CPA and like Mr. Pipkin statement, it is only an opinion.

4. In 2009, the only new agreements that were entered into were for the Online training portal (NATG) and the member’s web site (VOICE). Both contracts we co-authored by myself and reviewed by reputable contract
attorneys. A copy of those contracts, as well as every other documentation relating to PICA was emailed to the entire BOD in December of 2009. Mr. Herrera repeatedly asked for documentation and complained of not being trained yet he failed to review the contents of those 2 emails and refused to have his BOD accept/participate the offered training that the 2009 BOD voted to provide the incoming BOD. In 2009, it was voted that the outgoing BOD would provide training for the incoming BOD at the last BOD meeting of the year. Mr. Herrera attended that meeting, but refused the training. Why?

5. This item was put on the agenda by me as I knew PICA was losing money via the old credit card processing portal (Your Pay). However, I had no idea how much! I obtained a bid and requested others. My goal was to have
3 bids and be able to vote on a new credit card processing company/virtual terminal by the time the PICA main web site was to be completed, because the credit card virtual terminal/shopping cart had to be integrated during
the web site construction. The credit card company that submitted the bid was cheaper than Pay pal with less security issues and hoops to jump through. In my experience, Pay pal is too expensive and a huge headache to deal with!

6. It is my understanding that Mr. Herrera failed to handle this issue as he was PICA’s 1st President. I learned that this was an issue when I came on the Board in 2007, as Mr. Rhetts brought it to the BOD’s attention.
I believe these necessary fees and paperwork were filed by Reinhardt Schuerger in 2007. I have no idea what they are talking about, but it appears that they realized that it was done when PICA was formed and believed it
hadn’t been done. They probably sent in fees and paperwork which had already been completed… Maybe Rein and or Ann Marie have more insight into this matter.

7. Only a FOOL would create a line item that would state “No malfeasance was ever suspected or found.” The fact is it was suspected by Mr. Herrera to me over the phone in December, in a discussion regarding the
Executive Director position. He had a problem with CALI and referenced their ED woes with Sharon Hilke. He believed that Ann Marie was doing something fraudulent and I explained to him that it was highly unlikely as there is not enough money to make it worth while. All checks are reconciled, so unless Ann Marie took cash payment from a member, we will never know unless someone comes forward. I informed him that an audit is costly and doesn’t make sense unless someone is going to watch how the ED & Treasurer manages books, to give us insight on how to better manage our records and transactions. Mr. Herrera had told others that he suspects that Ann Marie and I had misappropriated funds,because my corporate taxes were delinquent. Thomas Tomka & Matthew Garrison were later asked by Mr. Herrera to conspire against me, and requested that they conduct a financial background investigation on my personal finance”s, to determine if there was any evidence of misappropriations of funds. This rumor was spread by Ray Guillermo to discredit me right about the time Thomas Tomka and myself resigned from PICA. Ben Harroll also had knowledge of this rumor and contacted me directly… I even have an email, which I cc’ d many people when Rick Von Gelding made a accusatory statement to me regarding PICA audit. He asked if I wanted to tell the BOD anything for the audit was completed. I cc’ d everyone in my email list and asked him to send out a public apology when he find out that his audit was a futile and costly attempt to find any wrong doing. It was only a smoke screen to cover up there many missteps and beliefs that the 2009 BOD was less than forthright.

8. Missing receipts from credit cards can be replaced by the bank. They have the only 2 new contracts in 2009. Everything else was voted on and is in the minutes. The minutes reflect everything!!! Unlike the 2010 BOD,
we got 3 bids and the BOD voted. We ran PICA as a democracy and not a dictatorship. I have no doubt that their level of intelligence and pride prevents them from wanting to find the documentation. I am confident that although
PICA’s bookkeeping methods were not perfect, we were in the midst of making change for the better, and were far from incompetent. The costly creation of districts, without sustaining members, was more of a sign of incompetence than anything we overlooked in 2009 or prior. The thought that PICA could grow to 1000 members in 2010 without any additional means of advertising, member benefits or real added value from an educational standpoint in my mind, demonstrates a clear lack of intelligence, vision, and planning.

9. I hope the PICA members demand an audit for 2010. This group of RVG & Herrera minions conspire so much to bring harm to others, These guys just don’t understand that most everything they do is sent via email (in
writing) or can be recorded (audio).

10. Lastly, I take responsibility for not filing the taxes on time. I had no prior knowledge of when and how PICA’s taxes were handled. In October, (the same time my corp. taxes were due) I contacted Ann Marie to inquire
about PICA’s tax liability. I was told that she believed we didn’t have to pay taxes, because we were a non profit status, but she would look into it. Ann Marie then worked with Rob to reconcile the accounts, and the taxes
were later sent at the end of December beginning of January. Nonetheless, despite the “Sky is falling hysteria” over the delinquent taxes, no fines or penalties were assessed to PICA…

Best regards,
Claude D. Ammons - QM