Steve Cooley Los Angeles County District Attorney
STEVE COOLEYLOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY18000 CLARA SHORTRIDGE FOLTZ CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER210 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-3210 (213) 974-3501June 25, 2008The Honorable Michael D. AntonovichSupervisor, Fifth DistrictBoard of Supervisors, County of Los Angeles869 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration500 West Temple StreetLos Angeles, CA 90012Dear Supervisor Antonovich:The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office strongly opposes NORA, the NonviolentOffender Rehabilitation Act of 2008, slated for the November 4, 2008, ballot. For the reasonsstated below, we urge the CCJCC to oppose this unneeded and incredibly wasteful proposition.While NORA promises to end the cycle of drug abuse, crime, and incarceration by adding and/oramending 47 sections of the Government, Health and Safety, Pe'nal, and Welfare and InstitutionsCodes, the provisions are both vague and filled with minutiae. There is no proof that theprograms proposed by NORA will be successful; but once passed, the provisions of NORAcould only be changed by a four-fifths vote of the Legislature.The provisions of NORA set the price tag for this reform at a minimum of 2.9 billion between2009 and 2015. For this money, the People of the State of California will receive nearly 50 newsupervisory positions and two new divisions in the Department of Corrections andRehabilitation, a 19-member "Parole Reform Oversight and Accountability Board," and a 23member "Treatment Division Oversight and Accountability Commission."Despite claims to the contrary, a court must grant probation to most convicted criminals if theyappear "to have a problem with substance abuse or addiction." NORA clearly states that "Anydefendant found eligible for treatment diversion under Track I, Track II or Track III shall beplaced into appropriate treatment." A court "must rely upon the clinical assessment of thedefendant" in determining appropriate treatment. (See Proposed Penal Code section 1210.02,subd. (a).)
The Honorable Michael D. AntonovichPage TwoJune 25, 2008Convicted criminals receiving "treatment" under NORA may continue drug use without fear ofincarceration. They may also qualify for housing assistance, childcare, education stipends forcollege or trade school, transportation to and from drug treatment, and "harm reduction therapy"aimed at teaching responsible drug use.Many prison inmates, including drug dealers and thieves, will benefit from shortened paroleperiods, and the ability to abscond from parole, use drugs and commit misdemeanors withoutbeing sent back to prison for the violation.Two California universities will receive at least 29 million of NORA funds between 2009 and2015 to study the effectiveness of the NORA provisions.Finally, an undetermined portion of the 2.9 billion is to be spent on an "annual internationalconference on the subject of prisoner and parole rehabilitation."Although freeing addicts from the cycle of drug use and criminality is a laudable goal, mandatingtreatment for all drug users is as inappropriate as mandating prison. Current alternatives toincarceration such as Diversion, Deferred Entry of Judgment, Proposition 36 and Drug Courtssuccessfully serve those who want to end their dependence upon controlled substances and livecrime-free lives. Diverting scarce public resources from these existing programs to fundcommissions, studies, boards, and conferences with no guarantee of success is not going todecrease crime in California or free people from addiction. NORA, and the billions of dollars itwill divert from existing programs, is not the right solution for California.Very truly yours,STEVE COOLEYDistrict AttorneySP/lktc:Judy HammondPublic Information Office
STEVE COOLEYLOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY18000 CLARA SHORTRIDGE FOLTZ CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER210 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-3210(213) 974-3501June 25, 2008The Honorable Gloria MolinaSupervisor, First DistrictBoard of Supervisors, County of Los Angeles856 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration500 West Temple StreetLos Angeles, CA 90012Dear Supervisor Molina:The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office strongly opposes NORA, the NonviolentOffender Rehabilitation Act of 2008, slated for the November 4, 2008, ballot. For the reasonsstated below, we urge the CCJCC to oppose this unneeded and incredibly wasteful proposition.While NORA promises to end the cycle of drug abuse, crime, and incarceration by adding and/oramending 47 sections of the Government, Health and Safety, Penal, and Welfare and InstitutionsCodes, the provisions are both vague and filled with minutiae. There is no proof that theprograms proposed by NORA will be successful; but once passed, the provisions of NORAcould only be changed by a four-fifths vote of the Legislature.The provisions of NORA set the price tag for this reform at a minimum of 2.9 billion between2009 and 2015. For this money, the People of the State of California will receive nearly 50 newsupervisory positions and two new divisions in the Department of Corrections andRehabilitation, a 19-member "Parole Reform Oversight and Accountability Board," and a 23member "Treatment Division Oversight and Accountability Commission."Despite claims to the contrary, a court must grant probation to most convicted criminals if theyappear "to have a problem with substance abuse or addiction." NORA clearly states that "Anydefendant found eligible for treatment diversion under Track I, Track II or Track III shall beplaced into appropriate treatment." A court "must rely upon the clinical assessment of thedefendant" in determining appropriate treatment. (See Proposed Penal Code section 1210.02,subd. (a).)
The Honorable Gloria MolinaPage TwoJune 25, 2008Convicted criminals receiving "treatment" under NORA may continue drug use without fear ofincarceration. They may also qualify for housing assistance, childcare, education stipends forcollege or trade school, transportation to and from drug treatment, and "harm reduction therapy"aimed at teaching responsible drug use.Many prison inmates, including drug dealers and thieves, will benefit from shortened paroleperiods, and the ability to abscond from parole, use drugs and commit misdemeanors withoutbeing sent back to prison for the violation.Two California universities will receive at least 29 million of NORA funds between 2009 and2015 to study the effectiveness of the NORA provisions.Finally, an undetermined portion of the 2.9 billion is to be spent on an "annual internationalconference on the subject of prisoner and parole rehabilitation."Although freeing addicts from the cycle of drug use and criminality is a laudable goal, mandatingtreatment for all drug users is as inappropriate as mandating prison. Current alternatives toincarceration such as Diversion, Deferred Entry of Judgment, Proposition 36 and Drug Courtssuccessfully serve those who want to end their dependence upon controlled substances and livecrime-free lives. Diverting scarce public resources from these existing programs to fundcommissions, studies, boards, and conferences with no guarantee of success is not going todecrease crime in California or free people from addiction. NORA, and the billions of dollars itwill divert from existing programs, is not the right solution for California.Very truly yours,STEVE COOLEYDistrict AttorneySP/lktc:Judy HammondPublic Information Office
STEVE COOLEYLOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY18000 CLARA SHORTRIDGE FOLTZ CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER210 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-3210 (213) 974-3501June 25, 2008The Honorable Yvonne B. BurkeSupervisor, Second DistrictBoard of Supervisors, County of Los Angeles866 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration500 West Temple StreetLos Angeles, CA 90012Dear Supervisor Burke:The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office strongly opposes NORA, the NonviolentOffender Rehabilitation Act of 2008, slated for the November 4, 2008, ballot. For the reasonsstated below, we urge the CCJCC to oppose this unneeded and incredibly wasteful proposition.While NORA promises to end the cycle of drug abuse, crime, and incarceration by adding and/oramending 47 sections of the Government, Health and Safety, Penal, and Welfare and InstitutionsCodes, the provisions are both vague and filled with minutiae. There is no proof that theprograms proposed by NORA will be successful; but once passed, the provisions of NORAcould only be changed by a four-fifths vote of the Legislature.The provisions of NORA set the price tag for this reform at a minimum of 2.9 billion between2009 and 2015. For this money, the People of the State of California will receive nearly 50 newsupervisory positions and two new divisions in the Department of Corrections andRehabilitation, a 19-member "Parole Reform Oversight and Accountability Board," and a 23member "Treatment Division Oversight and Accountability Commission."Despite claims to the contrary, a court must grant probation to most convicted criminals if theyappear "to have a problem with substance abuse or addiction." NORA clearly states that "Anydefendant found eligible for treatment diversion under Track I, Track II or Track III shall beplaced into appropriate treatment." A court "must rely upon the clinical assessment of thedefendant" in determining appropriate treatment. (See Proposed Penal Code section 1210.02,subd. (a).)
The Honorable Yvonne B. BurkePage TwoJune 25, 2008Convicted criminals receiving "treatment" under NORA may continue drug use without fear ofincarceration. They may also qualify for housing assistance, childcare, education stipends forcollege or trade school, transportation to and from drug treatment, and "harm reduction therapy"aimed at teaching responsible drug use.Many prison inmates, including drug dealers and thieves, will benefit from shortened paroleperiods, and the ability to abscond from parole, use drugs and commit misdemeanors withoutbeing sent back to prison for the violation.Two California universities will receive at least 29 million of NORA funds between 2009 and2015 to study the effectiveness of the NORA provisions.Finally, an undetermined portion of the 2.9 billion is to be spent on an "annual internationalconference on the subject of prisoner and parole rehabilitation."Although freeing addicts from the cycle of drug use and criminality is a laudable goal, mandatingtreatment for all drug users is as inappropriate as mandating prison. Current alternatives toincarceration such as Diversion, Deferred Entry of Judgment, Proposition 36 and Drug Courtssuccessfully serve those who want to end their dependence upon controlled substances and livecrime-free lives. Diverting scarce public resources from these existing programs to fundcommissions, studies, boards, and conferences with no guarantee of success is not going todecrease crime in California or free people from addiction. NORA, and the billions of dollars itwill divert from existing programs, is not the right solution for California.Very truly yours,STEVE COOLEYDistrict AttorneySP/lktc:Judy HammondPublic Information Office
STEVE COOLEYLOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY18000 CLARA SHORTRIDGE FOLTZ CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER210 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-3210 (213) 974-3501June 25, 2008The Honorable Don KnabeSupervisor, Fourth DistrictBoard of Supervisors, County of Los Angeles822 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration500 West Temple StreetLos Angeles, CA 90012Dear Supervisor Knabe:The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office strongly opposes NORA, the NonviolentOffender Rehabilitation Act of 2008, slated for the November 4, 2008, ballot. For the reasonsstated below, we urge the CCJCC to oppose this unneeded and incredibly wasteful proposition.While NORA promises to end the cycle of drug abuse, crime, and incarceration by adding and/oramending 47 sections of the Government, Health and Safety, Penal, and Welfare and InstitutionsCodes, the provisions are both vague and filled with minutiae. There is no proof that theprograms proposed by NORA will be successful; but once passed, the provisions of NORAcould only be changed by a four-fifths vote of the Legislature.The provisions of NORA set the price tag for this reform at a minimum of 2.9 billion between2009 and 2015. For this money, the People of the State of California will receive nearly 50 newsupervisory positions and two new divisions in the Department of Corrections andRehabilitation, a 19-member "Parole Reform Oversight and Accountability Board," and a 23member "Treatment Division Oversight and Accountability Commission."Despite claims to the contrary, a court must grant probation to most convicted criminals if theyappear "to have a problem with substance abuse or addiction." NORA clearly states that "Anydefendant found eligible for treatment diversion under Track I, Track II or Track III shall beplaced into appropriate treatment." A court "must rely upon the clinical assessment of thedefendant" in determining appropriate treatment. (See Proposed Penal Code section 1210.02,subd. (a).)
The Honorable Don KnabePage TwoJune 25, 2008Convicted criminals receiving "treatment" under NORA may continue drug use without fear ofincarceration. They may also qualify for housing assistance, childcare, education stipends forcollege or trade school, transportation to and from drug treatment, and "harm reduction therapy"aimed at teaching responsible drug use.Many prison inmates, including drug dealers and thieves, will benefit from shortened paroleperiods, and the ability to abscond from parole, use drugs and commit misdemeanors withoutbeing sent back to prison for the violation.Two California universities will receive at least 29 million of NORA funds between 2009 and2015 to study the effectiveness of the NORA provisions.Finally, an undetermined portion of the 2.9 billion is to be spent on an "annual internationalconference on the subject of prisoner and parole rehabilitation."Although freeing addicts from the cycle of drug use and criminality is a laudable goal, mandatingtreatment for all drug users is as inappropriate as mandating prison. Current alternatives toincarceration such as Diversion, Deferred Entry of Judgment, Proposition 36 and Drug Courtssuccessfully serve those who want to end their dependence upon controlled substances and livecrime-free lives. Diverting scarce public resources from these existing programs to fundcommissions, studies, boards, and conferences with no guarantee of success is not going todecrease crime in California or free people from addiction. NORA, and the billions of dollars itwill divert from existing programs, is not the right solution for California.Very truly yours, STEVE COOLEYDistrict AttorneyC,- CJSP/lktc:Judy HammondPublic Information Office
STEVE COOLEYLOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY18000 CI.JI.RA SHORTRIDGE FOLTZ CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER210 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-3210 (213) 974-3501June 25, 2008The Honorable Zev YaroslavskySupervisor, Third DistrictBoard of Supervisors, County of Los Angeles821 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration500 West Temple StreetLos Angeles, CA 90012Dear Supervisor Yaroslavsky:The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office strongly opposes NORA, the NonviolentOffender Rehabilitation Act of 2008, slated for the November 4, 2008, ballot. For the reasonsstated below, we urge the CCJCC to oppose this unneeded and incredibly wasteful proposition.While NORA promises to end the cycle of drug abuse, crime, and incarceration by adding and/oramending 47 sections of the Government, Health and Safety, Penal, and Welfare and InstitutionsCodes, the provisions are both vague and filled with minutiae. There is no proof that theprograms proposed by NORA will be successful; but once passed, the provisions of NORAcould only be changed by a four-fifths vote of the Legislature.The provisions of NORA set the price tag for this reform at a minimum of 2.9 billion between2009 and 2015. For this money, the People of the State of California will receive nearly 50 newsupervisory positions and two new divisions in the Department of Corrections andRehabilitation, a 19-member "Parole Reform Oversight and Accountability Board," and a 23member "Treatment Division Oversight and Accountability Commission."Despite claims to the contrary, a court must grant probation to most convicted criminals if theyappear "to have a problem with substance abuse or addiction." NORA clearly states that "Anydefendant found eligible for treatment diversion under Track I, Track II or Track III shall beplaced into appropriate treatment." A court "must rely upon the clinical assessment of thedefendant" in determining appropriate treatment. (See Proposed Penal Code section 1210.02,subd. (a).)
The Honorable Zev YaroslavskyPage TwoJune 25, 2008Convicted criminals receiving "treatment" under NORA may continue drug use without fear ofincarceration. They may also qualify for housing assistance, childcare, education stipends forcollege or trade school, transportation to and from drug treatment, and "harm reduction therapy"aimed at teaching responsible drug use.Many prison inmates, including drug dealers and thieves, will benefit from shortened paroleperiods, and the ability to abscond from parole, use drugs and commit misdemeanors withoutbeing sent back to prison for the violation.Two California universities will receive at least 29 million of NORA funds between 2009 and2015 to study the effectiveness of the NORA provisions.Finally, an undetermined portion of the 2.9 billion is to be spent on an "annual internationalconference on the subject of prisoner and parole rehabilitation."Although freeing addicts from the cycle of drug use and criminality is a laudable goal, mandatingtreatment for all drug users is as inappropriate as mandating prison. Current alternatives toincarceration such as Diversion, Deferred Entry of Judgment, Proposition 36 and Drug Courtssuccessfully serve those who want to end their dependence upon controlled substances and livecrime-free lives. Diverting scarce public resources from these existing programs to fundcommissions, studies, boards, and conferences with no guarantee of success is not going todecrease crime in California or free people from addiction. NORA, and the billions of dollars itwill divert from existing programs, is not the right solution for California.Very truly yours,STEVE COOLEYDistrict AttorneySP/lktc:Judy HammondPublic Information Office
STEVE COOLEY LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY 18000 CLARA SHORTRIDGE FOLTZ CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER 210 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-3210 (213) 974-3501 June 25, 2008 The Honorable Yvonne B. Burke Supervisor, Second District Board ofSupervisors, County ofLos Angeles 866 Kenneth Hahn Hall ofAdministration 500 West Temple Street
STEVE COOLEY LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATIORNEY 18000 CLARA SHORTRIDGE FOLTZ CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER 210 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-3210 (213) 974-3501 July 21, 2009 The Honorable Board of Supervisors County of Los Angeles 383 Kenneth Hahn Hall ofAdministration
STEVE COOLEY LOS ANCELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY 18000 CUR4 SHORTRIDGE FOLTZ CRIMINAL JUSTICE CEffMR 210 WESTTEMPLE STREET LOS ANQELES, CA QWf2-3210 (213) 874-3501 September 5,2006 The Honorable Board of Supervisors County of Los Angeles 383 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, California 9001 2 Dear Supervisors:
This Voter Guide contains information about: STATE BALLOT PROPOSITIONS and about the following non-partisan Los Angeles County Offices: LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF LOS ANGELES COUNTY ASSESSOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERVISOR, DISTRICTS 1 AND 3 On June
Los Angeles County Superior Court of California, Los Angeles 500 West Temple Street, Suite 525 County Kenneth Hahn, Hall of Administration 111 North Hill Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Dear Ms. Barrera and Ms. Carter: The State Controller’s Office audited Los Angeles County’s court revenues for the period of
Los Angeles Los Angeles Unified Henry T. Gage Middle Los Angeles Los Angeles Unified Hillcrest Drive Elementary Los Angeles Los Angeles Unified International Studies Learning Center . San Mateo Ravenswood City Elementary Stanford New School Direct-funded Charter Santa Barbara Santa Barbar
for inclusion in this report include the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Unified School District and Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts. The Los Angeles County Superior Court is not included due to legislation (AB233) which transferred oversight respo
Los Angeles Lawyer July/August 2018 5 LOS ANGELES LAWYER IS THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 1055 West 7th Street, Suite 2700, Los Angeles CA 90017-2553 Telephone 213.627.2727 / www.lacba.org LACBA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
THE DIRECTORS’ BIOGRAPHIES Ø Worked for 33 years with HSBC Group, including at Board level positions across banking & NBFI businesses, in Asia, Africa and Europe. Assumed the role of Head of International at HSBC Group prior to retirement from HSBC in 2011 Ø Acted as Group Chief Executive Officer of Cim Financial Services Ltd, a Mauritian-based group engaged in financial services, leasing .
