Feasting At The Public Trough

Or a Tool For Sexual Predators?

I was a renter in San Francisco for years. Last year I inherited some money. I then bought a house in Novato. Novato is the furthest town north in Marin County. As a homeowner I now pay real estate taxes that go to the City of Novato and Marin County. My understanding is they go to pay for infrastructure. Like police, sheriff, district attorney, fire department, animal shelter, 911, schools, recreation departments, etc. I also pay rent for my office, also in Novato. I pay insurance, advertising, maintenance and utilities for my office. I have a doctorate in Psychology, a license from the State of California and a business license from the City of Novato.

I’m wondering why the City of Novato subsidizes people using the City to earn a living. I’m talking about all the “instructors” who are paid to teach classes through the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. These instructors are getting a building and services free, as we taxpayers paid for it. 1. A building. 2. A building with tenant improvements. 3. A building with utilities all paid for. 4. A building with real estate taxes not charged on. 5. A building with fire and liability insurance all paid for. 5. These “instructors” have all their advertising paid for. 6. These “instructors” are not required to hold licenses for what they are instructing in. In fact, these “instructors” are not even required to have any demonstrable proficiency in what they are “instructing” in. 7. A building where all the maintenance, upkeep and landscaping is all paid for. 8. A building with parking. 9. A building with exterior lighting.

Reprinted with permission.

Comments

Jen and Tonic: This is happening all over the place. I recently read a story about how a man in Germany was sent to do community service at an elementary school after he committed fraud. Their system failed to check that a few years prior he had been in jail committing sexual acts against a child. Scary stuff.

Steven Lane: What are they instructing and are they charging for the lessons? Sounds crazy.

yesteryear: It's actually not that cut and dry - course instructors for classes at most of these facilities aren't charged for use of the rooms because they have provided a 'proposal' to the city and are in essence 'hired' by the City to teach their course. It does pose a threat to other businesses (see my example below), but the City's benefit isn't financial - ideally it's a benefit to the whole community by providing a affordable, local way for residents to access enrichment and educational courses. But I do agree with the sentiment of your article. As a former small business owner with a business in the downtown of an East Bay city that will remain nameless, I was always furious when the "craft fair" folks would come to town for a weekend, block off the streets, drive away my regular customers, and take away all of the parking spots my customers used -- all for the price of a simple "vendor fee" for setting up their booth. Ironically, the city did not provide those of us who paid rent every day of the year, and taxes, with free booths so we could compete with the out-of-towners who came once a year. It's a racket.

Anonymous: It's also a publically funded conduit for pedophiles, etc., as, at least where I live, NO background checks are done on the one doing the proposal. Hell, for that matter, the instructors don't even have to prove they even have the minimum qualfication to teach.

Creedon: It's the same story in LA. As a small business owner I knew about the unfair perks the city gives these jokers with no credentials to support their "proposals." What I hadn't considered before was no background checks as a way in for sexual predators. I also didn't know about the extra perks the cities give to the crafts fairs when they come to town. Probably the same for the flea markets. I shop and buy local from a local who is here 365 days out of the year.

Lois: It's both feasting at the public trough and a tool for sexual predators. These "teachers" submit their "proposal" and then get half of the "tuition" brought in by the "students" that attend. Same for the community college's non-credit classes who also don't do background checks. These community college teachers and recreation department "teachers" are not good enough to "teach" at a legitimate place. It certainly is a racket. In many cases, the strong possibility for a dangerous racket.

Craig B.: So, Novato Parks and Recreation Department, dahlings, bubbaluhs, why don’t you consider talking to me? I’m very open-minded. I won’t even put our interview in a paper with those escort, B & D Clubs and pot-club ads. I won’t pester you with the questions that some want to ask you after this Feasting at the Public Trough story came out.

Not that I’d hound the Novato Parks and Recreation Department, and their no qualifications or background check required of their “instructors,” but if I did, here’s a list of due diligence questions I’d promise not to pose to them.

Do you believe the Novato Parks and Recreation Department has a duty of care to the public?

Do you believe that verifying “instructor” qualifications and doing “instructor” background checks meets an reasonable amount of care standard in dealing with others?

Do you have an Age of Majority requirement for your “instructors” or students? Ya know, the age at which an individual is considered legally capable of conducting themself responsibly.

Are your “instructors” in an agency relationship with you since you pay them as independent contractors?

Have you done any sort of background check that any of your “instructors” are really aggressors who just might acquire another in a take-over attempt such as a pedophile or other type sexual predator would do?

What are your “instructor’s” qualifications? Or are you just using a logic analogy as a trade-off by assuming that if the instructor tells you they are qualified that they are? That implies a course of dealing that is based on a false understanding, and that you are trading off the safety of the public attending those courses for your desired result of “courses” to fill up your schedule.

Are you using anticipatory repudiation as to why you have not done “instructor” background checks or verified qualifications?

Why are you relying on your “instructor’s” apparent authority to teach their proposal class instead of verifying it’s real?

Aren’t your “instructors” practicing appropriation, the act of making the Novato Parks and Recreation Department their own, or exercising or making use of the Novato Parks and Recreation Department to subserve the “instructor’s” own interest?

What do you think of the assumption of risk doctrine if one of your “instructor’s” questionable activities has been repeatedly brought to your attention and you still keep on the instructor? Doesn’t the laches’ doctrine and negligence per se kick in at some point?

What do you think of the doctrine of attractive nuisance if one of your “instructor’s” is using the venue the Novato Parks and Recreation Department to lure children by something enticing therein?

What do you think of beyond a reasonable doubt when assessing your “instructors?” What would make you hesitate before acting in a matter important to you such as filling out your schedule offering versus the safety of a child or vulnerable woman?

Have you utilized categorical imperative as an ethical standard in the hiring of your instructors?

What do you think of consequential damages to students as they are reasonably foreseeable when “instructor” qualifications and backgrounds checks are not done?

What do you think of the likelihood of “instructor” duress on their students?

Does the Novato Parks and Recreation Department undertake any activity up to the point at which the marginal benefit equals the marginal cost?

So there you have it. How does that sound Novato Parks and Recreation Department? If you’re interested, drop me a line.

Morgana: Ballroom dance also rips off musical artists. Music, Archival Sound Recording and Synchronization licensing requirements apply to all ballroom dance studios, dance instructors, dance operators, dance associations, dance clubs, dance bands, dance DJs, dance organizers, municipal recreation departments who have music in their classes, non profits who have music in their classes, etc. This article missed mentioning the fact that municipal recreation departments are also required to obtain copyright permission for the music used in their programs. That is more feasting at the public trough as it is another unfair economic benefit at the public expense and is another detriment to artists as dozens of music artists are repeatedly deprived of lawful income as a result, another dirty secret.

“Teaching for pay makes an amateur a professional,” according to the United States Dance Sport Eligibility Committee. For several years now, the cities of Reno & Sparks, Nevada and Washoe County, Nevada has all required finger printing and police cards for their instructors of programs involving youth under the age of 18, and One Million Dollars in liability insurance. Washoe County, Nevada also requires accreditation from a member organization of the National Dance Council of America (NDCA), city, county and state business licenses, and BMI, ASCAP & SESAC music performance licenses from their dance instructors and that their instructors pay business and personal income taxes on their revenues, like any legal business owner. These requirements eliminated many of the "instructors."

Diana's Art: Outstanding article! Aside from the obvious unfair financial advantage given to those that “teach” at these recreation departments without licenses, insurance or any check of their experience or credentials to “teach,” recreation facilities are major attractions of pedophiles and for that reason this link lists implications for recreational professionals to ensure they are keeping children safe by not hiring pedophiles. Realize that pedophiles and sexual predators of adults can be charming individuals who live double lives very well. County commissioners have put a proposed ordinance on hold that would ban anyone who had ever been convicted of a sex crime from public parks or recreation centers.

The City of Novato, California Parks and Recreation Department’s email is prcs@ci.novato.ca.us. They and the City of Novato, California must know they have some very grave injustices going on here as well as a publicly paid for invitation to sexual predators.

How can a business compete against these public trough subsidies? They can’t.

I add to these issues another one. The City does no sort of background check, does not require a bond, nor require proof of any sort of proficiency in what is taught. The result? A magnet for those deliberately looking to slip between the cracks. That, for various reasons, an individual won’t or can’t work elsewhere. That would be two types of an individual. One being the individual who works the system to feast at the public trough. Get out of paying all the costs I, or a restaurant, or an attorney, or an artist, etc., have to pay. Another is a predator. A predator that creates a class to draw in their victims. The victims usually are children and women perceived to be desperate. The roster of classes offered by the Novato Parks and Recreation targets that audience.