Westminster, Sheriff to Split Bill for Little Saigon Protest Control

The city of Westminster and the Orange County Sheriff’s Department have agreed to split a $327,000 overtime bill for deputies who helped control protests last year in Little Saigon after a store owner raised the Vietnamese flag and posted a picture of Communist leader Ho Chi Minh.

Sheriff Mike Carona’s decision to bill Westminster angered city officials because they thought it violated “mutual aid” protocol. City officials said that according to Orange County Chiefs of Police and Sheriff’s Assn. rules, the help should have been free of charge. Half a dozen other agencies helped Westminster during the protests, and none sent a bill.

At the time, Westminster Mayor Frank Fry Jr. and other city officials said the sheriff’s bill could discourage cities and officers from seeking help.

The protests began Jan. 17, 1999, in front of Hi Tek TV & VCR in a Bolsa Avenue strip mall. Crowds peaked at 15,000 people, some of whom plastered the electronics store with flags of the U.S. and the former South Vietnam. Store owner Truong Van Tran said he was trying to make a point about free speech; protesters countered by saying they wanted to draw attention to human rights abuses in Vietnam.

Under rules between law enforcement agencies, mutual aid should be free, with the exception of dealing with a planned event. The rules became muddy in this case because the city eventually knew of coming protests in the Vietnamese community--at which point they could be considered planned events--and because the protests were not unwieldy.

“Because it was preventive, because we took the ounce of prevention, we were kind of penalized,” Fry said Tuesday. Commenting on the settlement, he said: “I think the [entire] cost should have been covered; we went out there with more [officers] than we needed . . . to be prepared. But I suppose the settlement is pretty good.”

Assistant Sheriff George Jaramillo said he will propose the establishment of a better definition of mutual aid. “We were specifically asked ahead of time [for help], and it was agreed that it would be paid for,” he said Tuesday. In any case, he added, “the incident was valuable because it caused people to debate the matter. We are comfortable with [the settlement].”