We’ve respected incoming 3rd District Supervisor Todd Spitzer as an industrious law-and-order guy who generally has the public’s best interest in mind. He’s never hidden his political ambitions as most high-information Orange County voters know he’ll be going after District Attorney Tony Rackauckas’ job in just two years. If TRack doesn’t retire and runs again in ’14, he’s got some recent baggage to account for — his 2012 election robocalls in support for Larry Agran were inexcusable. And of course, there was Rackauckas’ questionable firing of Spitzer in 2010, so there’s a lot of payback to be made. If he makes it to the DA’s office using the million dollars that Register columnist Frank Mikadeit says he’s accumulated, we’d hope that Todd takes more interest in local corruption than Rackauckas ever has.
Todd’s been a County Supervisor (and a State Assemblyman) before, and should be fine for his District for the next two years. He can be sometimes combative and in-your-face, but that might be refreshing after eight years of Bill Campbell’s less than effective, milquetoasty leadership. At the least, Mr. Spitzer brings some energy to the political process.
It’s unsettling, though, that his campaign for DA seems to have started already. Earlier this week, the Register published this column he authored: DUI getting worse in Orange County. He discusses his very personal interest in the problem of drunk driving — his friend and former Chief of Staff was killed by a drunk in 2006. He writes “the numbers in Orange County, alarmingly, are steadily on the rise”, but he offers no supporting analysis or statistics to prove DUIs ARE getting worse (and why did the Register not challenge this, and support what might be a misleading headline?). One might think, given the significant and voluminous DUI enforcement efforts that we’ve lavishly funded for so many years now, that DUI arrests might actually be decreasing. Who hasn’t encountered a DUI checkpoint, or seen the profusion of notices of them on a weekly basis in the media? Who hasn’t heard or seen a government-sponsored radio or TV ad with their alarming warnings of “buzzed” (the current euphemism) driving? Who’s actually looked at DUI checkpoint strategies and yields to determine if they’ve reached a point of diminishing return, or from a more cynical view, are they now just overtime generators for unionized police officers? If Mr. Spitzer’s done this and found these efforts are still lacking, where are the numbers? If the efforts failing, why do them?
His OCR column says he’ll be:
Co-sponsoring a DUI Summit at the end of February in collaboration with the Orange County DUI Task Force, which includes MADD, the Auto Club, and Orange County’s Health Care Agency, among others. This forum will focus on preventative measures for DUI and will include data from OTS and local law enforcement prevention methods.
Let’s hope his Summit includes a comprehensive analysis of how well, or poorly, checkpoints, media and other enforcement techniques have worked over the years, and what they’ve cost for the results they achieve. AND let’s also hope there’s a discussion of how ultimately intrusive these techniques are on the FREEDOMS and civil rights of sober citizen drivers who are being stopped withOUT cause (guilty until proven innocent?) and forced to submit to police scrutiny and questioning. These violations of personal freedom on the millions of responsible drivers who aren’t loaded, and probably just trying to get home, never seems to get adequately addressed.
The column goes on:
Local policymakers will be given a forum and opportunity to brainstorm strategies to reduce the devastating impacts of DUI in Orange County. It’s time to map out solutions that we can enact at a local level. As the incoming Third District county supervisor, I plan to lead the charge to bring the DUI issue to the forefront year round. The solutions currently in place (check points and saturation patrols, DUI media campaigns, responsible beverage service, social host ordinances) are just not enough.
The “solutions currently in place” may be as far as this issue can be taken, given it’s been beaten into the ground for so many years. Another “forum” isn’t going to solve anything or reveal any new technique that won’t take away more of our freedoms. That the current “solutions” are “just not enough” is troubling as it implies MORE invasive methods are necessary. Does Mr. Spitzer believe, for example, that breathalyzers installed in vehicles to prevent their operation might be next? That’s a non-starter, but what else would there be?
Aside from more tromping a little more on the rights of honest, sober citizens, Mr. Spitzer’s summit isn’t going to unearth anything more revolutionary, but it would be a resume enhancement for a 2014 DA race. Some analysis we found at a legal website is illuminating:
While 5,000 DUI arrests occurred at sobriety checkpoints in 2008, this number is actually small compared to the total number of alcohol related arrests in California. According to the OTS, there were 215,000 DUI arrests in California in 2008, meaning that the number of arrests at sobriety checkpoints accounts for only 2.3 percent of all DUI arrests. Law enforcement spent $14 million in federal grant money to arrest 5,000 people at sobriety checkpoints. Many wonder whether that money could have been used more efficiently elsewhere.
As well, let’s be a bit careful with MADD. These folks may have meant well once (before their founder quit in disgust), but they’re not looking very reasonable and freedom-loving these days.
There are other issues in Orange County that CAN be resolved — let’s take a look, please, at the malfeasance that’s occurred in County Human Resources, the unposted crony appointments and some plain old corruption. Have a look at a half-billion dollars of unjustified transportation projects supported by Measure M funds in Anaheim since Mr. Spitzer will be an OCTA Director. And particularly, let’s take another look at the pension issues that Supervisors of the past have left us to pay for instead of building or updating infrastructure and reducing our tax burden.
Let’s stop grandstanding and accept that DUI enforcement might not be improved — as the cliché goes, don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. And please don’t forget that freedom business.
Labeling my efforts to save lives “grandstanding” is way out of line. For decades, I’ve stood up for victims’ families and for the safety of drivers on the road. During the 90s while I was a prosecutor, I was recognized by MADD for putting drunk drivers behind bars. While I served as an officer with LAPD, I led a division of reserve offices aimed at DUI enforcement. While in the Assembly, I twice authored legislation to combat DUI – the Ambriz Act and the Interlock Ignition Device bill which prevents convicted drunk drivers from starting up their cars when intoxicated.
We could have included more statistics to demonstrate that Orange County is losing the battle on DUIs, but I also wrote on this issue in the OC Register last April where I did cite recent DUI data (http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dui-351200-orange-county.htm).
A front-page OC Register story published last year, “Some O.C. cities post worst DUI crash rates,” provides evidence from the California Office of Traffic Safety that ten Orange County cities rank amongst the worst in California for rates of injuries and fatalities caused by DUI. Of all cities with a population between 100,000 and 250,000 in California, Orange ranks No. 1 for drunk driving fatalities and collisions. Newport Beach is No. 1 for cities with populations between 50,000 and 100,000, and Santa Ana (No. 3) and Anaheim (No. 10) are the worst for cities with greater than 250,000.
In OC college towns, we are seeing troubling growth in DUI arrests: Fullerton went from 5th in 2009 (13 arrests) statewide, to No. 1 in 2010 (23 arrests) for drivers under 21. Orange went from 36th (five arrests) to 9th (11 arrests) during that same period.
There are so many statistics to show that DUI is still a problem Orange County that we need to focus on and address. The CHP Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (2010 Annual Report of Fatal and Injury Motor Vehicle Traffic Collisions) (http://www.chp.ca.gov/switrs/) shows that Orange County ranked second only to Los Angeles County in the State for DUI deaths and injury collisions. During that year, there were more than a thousand DUI-related injury collisions in Orange County, more than both San Diego and San Bernardino.
And, Orange County ranked just behind Los Angeles County (a county of ten million residents) for drivers and passengers killed or injured because of DUIs.
We can crunch numbers and analyze data all we want, but when it comes down to really resolving the DUI situation in Orange County, the DUI Summit will allow local leaders and law enforcement to come together and build on what works best to help this problem. This forum will help foster a constructive dialogue which will form a foundation for creating Orange County Best Practices for DUI prevention.
Todd Spitzer, Orange County Supervisor-elect, Third District
Thank you for your response Supervisor Spitzer. We may not always agree with you but we appreciate your candor.
I have previously met with former SAPD Chief Paul Walters to discuss DUI checkpoints. The numbers show that they are an noneffective way to stop drunk drivers. More DUI drivers are caught randomly by patrol cops than are ever caught at checkpoints. In fact checkpoints appear to exist in order to give overtime pay to cops.
Too many of our cities are encouraging too many liquor licenses. That is certainly the case in many of our downtowns. And the bars and restaurants close their kitchens at 10 or 11 pm but they keep selling hard liquor until 2 am. There is the problem!
Force bars and restaurants to keep their kitchens open and do not allow them to sell lucrative bottle service without food. If the drinkers have food in their stomachs they won’t get as drunk.
As for checkpoints, why not just motorcycle cops in our downtowns where DUIs are a problem, on a nightly basis. The cities can use the ticket revenue…
Mr. Spitzer, the aggressiveness of your reply proves our point — your campaign for DA started even before you were sworn in yesterday as Supervisor.
Preventing or diminishing DUIs is not, in our opinion, an issue the BOS should be concentrating on — your effort seems only focused on law enforcement’s dealing with the issue and increasing the use of Checkpoints from the substantial Federal and State money that seems to be sloshing around for everyone’s use. Per the Register just today, the city of Fountain Valley is running a Checkpoint with grant money in a few days. Their police chief has said in the past that such traffic stops are more productive for arresting unlicensed drivers and nabbing expired registrations than drunks.
In researching this reply, we looked over the OC DUI Task Force website (http://tinyurl.com/a5qxavy) you’d mentioned. Please appreciate this quote from their Facts page: “It’s encouraging that, while alcohol-related traffic deaths grew by 93% from 1998 through 2006, they have dropped 19% since then (through 2009)”. We also wanted to review the Register link you used in your reply, but it produces nothing. We also researched the CHP link you referenced for “Fatal and Injury Motor Vehicle Traffic Collisions”. It produced this very revealing table:
TABLE 5A ALCOHOL INVOLVED FATAL AND INJURY COLLISIONS BY MONTH – 2006-2010
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Fatal Injury Fatal Injury Fatal Injury Fatal Injury Fatal Injury
MONTH
January 107 1,621 107 1,515 90 1,524 95 1,532 73 1,391
February 97 1,635 104 1,447 128 1,617 94 1,384 86 1,273
March 123 1,713 110 1,751 91 1,736 106 1,583 59 1,388
April 101 1,736 114 1,701 102 1,570 91 1,575 82 1,316
May 110 1,681 108 1,787 87 1,682 103 1,599 73 1,465
June 127 1,734 112 1,805 100 1,720 88 1,457 76 1,391
July 126 1,910 96 1,929 105 1,595 93 1,507 89 1,563
August 148 1,762 146 1,841 117 1,780 113 1,520 88 1,410
September 140 1,680 116 1,758 105 1,513 77 1,399 84 1,356
October 109 1,883 120 1,764 98 1,640 117 1,537 89 1,557
November 118 1,692 113 1,722 102 1,668 90 1,435 84 1,326
December 114 1,865 101 1,857 114 1,614 79 1,448 89 1,448
TOTAL 1,420 20,912 1,347 20,877 1,239 19,659 1,146 17,976 972 16,884
Unfortunately, there’s no research past last decade, but this table CLEARLY SHOWS that both fatalities and injuries from “alcohol involved” accidents are trending DOWN, and fairly substantially, over the five-year period analyzed. Another table revealed more specific statistics for Orange County (use the same headings above — sorry this textual format doesn’t allow us to plot these numbers graphically, but we’d be happy to if you’re interested in the detail):
Orange 80 1,525 75 1,501 62 1,492 62 1,340 45 1,317
Here are the Orange County number for actual deaths and injuries (not just “involved”) for the reported period:
Orange 85 2,192 83 2,153 66 2,160 69 1,888 51 1,918
Your said in your 1/2/13 OCR column that “the numbers in Orange County, alarmingly, are steadily on the rise”. From even a brief review of the tables and extracts above, that’s simply NOT the case. Why are you claiming it is, and “alarming” us about something that simply isn’t so? We’re looking through your hyperbole, but NOT seeing why DUI issues require any more attention than they’re already receiving. It appears that everything that can be legally done is being legally done. We’re using the numbers you suggested we look at, but not seeing that any more attention, or money, will enhance these reasonably successful results.. Simply put, the problem is not growing and perhaps we’re already doing enough, or all that can practically be done. But of course, this doesn’t make for good press.
More concerning to us in your reply is that there seems no concern for the effect that aggressive DUI enforcement, especially Checkpoints and “saturation patrols”, have on ordinary, sober citizens’ freedoms. Neither did you address our point re. the overtime that benefits the unionized police from these Checkpoints which are obviously run during late evening hours.
Our grander concern in this is how far the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution can be bent. Per http://tinyurl.com/9snlb, it “guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.” What do you say to a non-drinker (like me) who’s stopped at a Checkpoint for no probable cause, asked questions of suspicion and is nose-to-nose with a police officer who’s trying to smell my breath and delay me from conducting my personal business? That’s an intrusion (in my opinion, but obviously not MADD’s) of my civil rights. Not one drunk driver was ever arrested by smelling my breath.
We think you have more important things to do, Mr. Spitzer, in the two years you’ll serve on the BOS. We’re aware, and generally appreciate, your law-and-order focus. And let’s also be clear that we’re not trying to diminish or trivialize the problems and costs in lives and property of drunk driving. But there’s a balance to be found — in my opinion, DUI enforcement has already gone over the line and is intruding on our Constitutionally-protected civil rights.
We ARE encouraged by your very recent statements re. the Great Park and how one of your District’s cities has wasted $220 million in not building it. We hope you’ll seriously take some of the suggestions we’ve made here in the OCP Blog and put the El Toro use issue on a ballot again. You’d certainly have our strong support in doing that, but please stop with the hyperbole.
Thanks for your reply to our post.