Atwater city manager ‘abused power,’ used police in tenancy dispute, says claim against city
A woman who was renting a residence from Atwater’s city manager has filed a claim against the city, alleging the top city executive abused her authority by using the city’s police officers in an attempt to solve a private tenancy dispute.
Sandra Rahn, the former resident and a retired Atwater recreation supervisor who worked for the city for 20 years, filed the claim on May 4.
Rahn said she did so following heated incidents in November when she was renting the property from Atwater City Manager Lori Waterman.
The disagreement festered when Waterman sold the home and gave Rahn notice to move out. Rahn said she complied, but took issue with outside individuals entering the property while she was still a tenant.
According to the claim, the COVID-19 pandemic and the traumatic loss of a loved one led Rahn to request that a real estate inspector refrain from entering the house for two weeks until she got her affairs in order and moved out.
Waterman denied this request and said the inspection had to take place on Nov. 18, according to Rahn.
The dispute led to Atwater Police Chief Mike Salvador and another officer showing up at the residence to facilitate the inspection — something that Rahn and her family allege would never happen if the city manager wasn’t the property owner.
“You don’t have the power to direct a city-funded police force to do your private business,” Adam Stewart, Rahn’s attorney, told the Sun-Star.
According to the city’s attorney, however, the alleged misappropriation of power by police and the city manager is an unfounded accusation.
Atwater Police Chief Salvador told the Sun-Star that he could not comment on any matters concerning open investigations or potential litigation.
It is unclear how the police chief became aware of the disagreement and was called to the property. The Sun-Star has filed a Public Records Act request with the City of Atwater with the intent of discovering this.
Waterman did not respond to phone calls by the Sun-Star, but did provide comment via email.
“The only statement I want to make clear, is that this was a personal and civil issue as a property owner and tax payer in Atwater, not as the City Manager, nothing different than any other resident,” Waterman said in the email.
Renter disagreement led to police involvement
In videos taken by Rahn’s family on Nov. 17 and obtained by the Sun-Star, the police chief is seen outside the home with another officer.
Salvador stated in the video that he was present to resolve a landlord-tenant dispute and facilitate the inspection, which had already been delayed once and was necessary for the property to sell, he said.
“I’m just here to try to facilitate this and get this over,” Salvador said. “For us, its a landlord-tenant dispute,” he later elaborated in the video.
But Rahn and her family claim the city’s top cop only responded personally because the city manager — Salvador’s boss — owned the property. “No, you’re here on behalf of (Waterman) on city time, and so is this officer, on a personal matter,” Rahn said to Salvador in the video.
Rahn, in the video, asked what legal issue the chief was responding to. Salvador said there was a renter agreement of 24 hours notice for inspections.
Under California law, 24 hours is considered reasonable notice in most circumstances in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Emergency scenarios can permit entry with less notice due to health and safety risks.
In a second series of videos obtained by the Sun-Star and taken the next day on Nov. 18, Waterman is present at the property with a police officer. The inspection had to take place that day, Waterman said.
Waterman was again told by Rahn that it could not take place until she moved out.
In the video, Waterman told Rahn and her family that she had provided enough notice for both the inspection and for Rahn to move out. Rahn and her family disputed this.
The disagreement later devolved into shouting between Waterman, Rahn and her family. Waterman and the officer eventually left.
Rahn told the Sun-Star that the confrontation with Waterman and police left her feeling intimidated. “I had cops standing on my lawn,” she said. “I was humiliated by that. I’m not a trouble maker.”
Rahn has since moved out of Atwater.
Government claim alleges city intimidated former resident
The Sheriff’s Office is charged with overseeing certain civil issues like serving property levies or eviction notices. But landlord-tenant disagreements over issues like entering a property are typically resolved through the courts, said Merced County Sheriff’s Lt. Delray Shelton, who oversees the department’s Civil Bureau.
A sheriff’s deputy may get involved in a civil issue such as this in order to educate individuals about the law and their rights, Shelton said. City police at times also get involved in civil issues depending on the circumstance and jurisdiction, he said.
The claim against the city stated the personal dispute, absent any official city business, caused her to be intimidated, threatened and harassed by officials. The claim alleges Waterman used her position to leverage police as “her personal enforcement agency.”
An ordinary citizen would not have been able to utilize police in the same manner, according to Rahn’s attorney, who said the alleged actions violated Rahn’s constitutional rights. Regardless of whether an individual is a tenant or a landlord, the right to peaceful enjoyment of one’s property is guaranteed, Stewart said.
The claim against the city cited violations of emotional distress, false imprisonment, assault and protections against unreasonable search and seizure under the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment and the California Constitution.
Dispute mischaracterized?
Atwater City Attorney Frank Splendorio said staff is looking into the alleged incident and deciding how to proceed with the claim.
Splendorio said while he’s unable to speak in-depth about active investigations, he said the accusations of power abuse against the police chief and city manager appear to be a mischaracterization.
“Our investigation is very preliminary, but I think that (the plaintiff’s) characterization would be grossly inaccurate,” Splendorio said.
Filing a government claim is a formal precursor to suing a government. A government has 45 days from when the claim is filed to respond.
The claim allows the city the opportunity to investigate before an official lawsuit is filed. Depending on the findings, the city will either accept liability and settle, or reject the claim and potentially go to court.
Stewart said that he expects the city to settle with a fair resolution in monetary compensation prior to the issue ever going to court.
Splendorio said the investigation for Rahn’s claim is in its early stages still and no decisions have been made. A third-party investigator is evaluating the facts and details, he said.
This story was originally published June 1, 2021 at 10:23 AM.
