Pasadena Says It Won’t Help Find Site for Parole Office

The Board of Directors decided to just say no.

Not to drugs, but to plans by the state Department of Corrections to locate a parole office in Pasadena.

Two months ago, the city agreed to cooperate with the department in finding a parole office site that would be acceptable to residents.

But the brief interlude of cooperation collapsed Tuesday when the Board of Directors decided that as far as it is concerned, there was no acceptable site in the city.

More Than Its Share

Mayor William E. Thomson Jr. said the city has more than its share of institutional and governmental facilities, such as drug rehabilitation centers and emergency shelters.

Adding a parole office, which many residents say could increase crime in their neighborhoods, would be unfair, he said.

Thomson added that he believed the Department of Corrections was less than enthusiastic about working with the city to find a better site, possibly in another city.

“We’ve tried cooperating, and now its time to take a stand,” he said.

Directors William Paparian and Rick Cole, who abstained from voting on the issue, were the only two on the seven-member board to disagree.

‘Has to Go Somewhere’

Cole and Paparian said they believe that since Pasadena has the most parolees in the area, it was only fair that it accept a parole office.

“That parole office has to go somewhere,” Cole said. “I would not like to have it in Pasadena, but if it has to be here, I think we should take our medicine and find the best location.”

Despite their views, Cole and Paparian said they would help in the city’s effort to use its political clout to stop the state’s plans.

Frank Marino, the local parole official in charge of finding a site, called the board’s decision a political and symbolic gesture with little impact.

The state has the power to overrule local governments in locating a parole office, he said.

“The board just wants to get out from the heat,” he said. “If we want an office, we’ll have an office.”

Marino blamed the collapse of the joint effort to find a site on the city.

“Even though they talked about good faith, they didn’t provide us with any sites on their own,” Marino said.

3 Sites Being Considered

He said the department is considering three sites in Pasadena: 990 Fair Oaks Ave., 2650 E. Foothill Blvd. and 468 N. Rosemead Blvd.

Marino said a new office must be opened by October, when one of two offices in Alhambra is scheduled to close.

The department agreed to close the office at 1721 E. Garvey Ave., which is near the Alhambra-Monterey Park border, because of complaints from residents and city officials that crime has increased in the area.

The department agreed to move the office, although it disputed any connection between crime and the number of parolees coming into the area.

Alhambra and Monterey Park agreed to help pay relocation costs and other expenses that could cost each city up to $100,000.

Marino said Pasadena was chosen as the new location because it has the most parolees in the area.

The department first considered the Rosemead Boulevard site but ran into heavy opposition from neighbors. Residents also have opposed the other Pasadena sites.