Activist Says Criticism of Rail Plan Cost His Job

At a recent state Senate hearing, Perry Crouch wanted some answers to his questions about the $2-billion Alameda Corridor--the proposed rail expressway designed to speed cargo to and from the county’s ports.

Would the project generate enough jobs to help the area’s unemployed, Crouch asked members of the Senate Transportation Committee.

Were there conflicts of interest involving prominent lawyers and companies doing business with the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority?

It may have been a costly line of questioning for the veteran community activist from Los Angeles, who has been honored by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and the Los Angeles City Council.

Two weeks later, he was suspended from his $42,000-a-year job at Shields for Families, a social service agency where he had worked for six years. Two months later, he was fired.

Crouch, 48, still jobless and with six children to feed, is now suing Shields for Families in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleging wrongful termination and denial of his constitutional right of free speech. He wants reinstatement, back wages and punitive damages.

The lawsuit claims that his former employer was interested in obtaining a lucrative job-training grant from the government agency responsible for building the 20-mile rail link.

To bolster its chances, the nonprofit organization allegedly fired Crouch to placate the corridor’s general manager, Gill V. Hicks, who loudly berated Crouch at the Senate hearing and threatened to sue him for slander.

“Shields for Families wanted to strike a deal with the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority,” Crouch said. “In order to make it happen, they had to silence me.”

Shields, the winner of a 1995 C. Everett Koop Award for effective community service, denies any wrongdoing. Executive Director Kathryn Icenhower says Crouch was suspended for repeatedly speaking at public gatherings without permission and eventually fired for threatening other members of the staff.

She also says her agency has never received a penny from the corridor authority.

“None of this has anything to do with the Alameda Corridor,” she said. “He is hurting us professionally and personally. There is no reason to damage the community and the 700 families that use our services.”

Hicks declined to comment on the specifics of the lawsuit. “It is unfortunate he lost his job. But apparently he lost it for reasons that do not relate to the corridor project,” Hicks said.

Crouch’s problems began April 16, when he testified for 20 minutes at a Senate hearing held in South Gate City Hall. State Sen. Quentin Kopp (I-San Francisco), the chairman of the Transportation Committee, was gathering information about the Alameda Corridor project.

Crouch, a member of the Alameda Corridor Jobs Coalition, asked about potential conflicts of interest involving Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, a powerful and politically connected law firm based in Los Angeles.

At the time, attorneys in the same Manatt unit were representing the Alameda Corridor authority and Bechtel Infrastructure Corp., which was interested in bidding on the most expensive part of the project. Authority officials, the Manatt firm and Bechtel deny that any conflict existed.

Crouch made a similar query about Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall, an engineering firm that serves as project manager. Two of its sister companies have contracts with the corridor authority. The firms also deny any conflict of interest.

Finally, Crouch questioned the corridor agency’s willingness to honor a promise to hire a certain percentage of unemployed people from cities along the project’s route.

Witnesses said that during his talk, Crouch made repeated references to the James gang, an infamous band of 19th century outlaws.

Hicks was not named as a defendant in Crouch’s suit, but the document alleges that the corridor executive stormed out of the hearing room that night and later berated Crouch for almost 10 minutes.

“How dare you say the things you are saying in there! They are all lies!” the lawsuit quotes Hicks as saying. His reaction was so loud, witnesses said, that he drew a crowd.

Although government officials generally cannot sue for statements made at public hearings, Hicks threatened to file a slander case against Crouch.

Days after the hearing, Crouch’s lawsuit alleges, Shields director Icenhower talked to Hicks on the telephone. Crouch says she inquired about a $1-million grant to provide job training for women.

During their conversation, Hicks purportedly complained about Crouch’s testimony, something that Icenhower conveyed to Crouch shortly afterward, the suit says.

“You are in the minor leagues and Gill Hicks is a major league player,” Icenhower is quoted in the suit as saying. “He said that you slandered his agency and he is going to sue our agency and wipe us out. . . . Perry, do you understand that he is going to wipe us out?”

On April 30, Shields suspended Crouch for a week without pay. His notice stated that he had been warned in the past about making public statements without permission. The Senate hearing was one of two instances mentioned.

At the end of June, Shields fired Crouch after 6 1/2 years with the agency, during which he was promoted several times. “Threatening staff” was the only reason cited in the termination notice.

Crouch says his supervisors knew that he regularly spoke at public meetings as part of his job. He denies that he threatened anyone and says the accusation was based on third-hand information that was never confirmed.

“Perry has a book full of awards. He has done great work for Shields. That is why all of this is so surprising,” said David G. Spivak, his attorney.

Even after Shields suspended Crouch, Icenhower praised him in a newspaper article May 19. “He is very energetic and he works hard,” she told the Los Angeles Daily Journal, a publication that covers the legal community.

Now the Shields executive contends that Crouch is a liar: that he requested the telephone call to Hicks, which Crouch denies. Considering his background, Crouch cannot be trusted, Icenhower said.

Crouch admits that he is no angel. He says he is a former gang member and ex-cocaine addict. Before he went to work for Shields, court records show, he was convicted of assault, possession of marijuana for sale, petty theft and domestic violence--all misdemeanors.

“Yes, I have been in trouble,” Crouch said. “But that is why I am able to effectively deal with those who have trials and tribulations. That is why agencies like Shields hire people from the street. Now they are just trying to turn my past against me.”