Archive for May, 2012

CITY OF RIVERSIDE MAYORS RACE: FINAL TALLY: 96/96 100% AS OF 1:30AM 06/06/2012.  COUNCILMAN WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY WINS TOP POSITION OF THIS MAYORS ELECTION  THE MAYORS POSITION, WHILE FORMER COUNCILMAN ED ADKISON CLOSES AT SECOND, CURRENT COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER AT THIRD, AND COUNCILMAN ANDY MELENDREZ AT FOURTH!  THAT MEANS THERE WILL BE A RUNOFF THIS NOVEMBER BETWEEN CURRENT COUNCILMAN WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY AND FORMER COUNCILMAN ED ADKISON.

  1. RUSTY BAILEY                      7,800    32.30%
  2. ED ADKISON                         6,561     27.17%
  3. MIKE GARDNER                  4,118      17.05%
  4. ANDY MELENDREZ             3,389      14.03%
  5. DVONNE PITRUZZELLO       900          3.73%
  6. AURORA CHAVEZ                  846         3.50%
  7. PETER BENAVIDEZ               533        2.21%

         TOTAL                                   24,147         100%

Of all the candidates for mayor, only Dvonne Pitruzzello has demonstrated the heart of a reformer and the courage to take on the political establishment, therefore she gets my vote. It also helps that she hasn’t sent me one of those stupid mailers.  – Bill Scherer, Riverside Conservative Examiner

UPDATE:02/20/2012: AURORA CHAVEZ HAS JUST ENTERED THE MAYOR’S RACE.

UPDATE:02/16/2012: RUMOR HAS IT THAT FORMER MAYOR TERRY FRIZELL AND ANOTHER FORMER COUNCILMAN CHUCK BEATTY MAY BE ENTERING THE MAYOR’S RACE!  IT GOING TO BE AN EXCITING RACE! STAY TUNED.    A new entry to the Mayor’s race is 27 year old Bryan D. Pelkowski.

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS:

FORMER COUNCILMAN ED ADKISON WILL BE SPEAKING AT THE FRIDAY MORNING CLUB FEBRUARY 24, 2012, AT THE JANET GOESKE SENIOR CENTER, ROOM D, 5257 SIERRA ST. (AT THE CORNER OF STREETER), RIVERSIDE, CA FROM 10:00AM TO 11:30AM. http://edadkison.com http://www.facebook.com/ed.adkison http://www.michaelwilliamscompany.org/documents/ed_adkison.html

DVONNE PITRUZZELLO A FORMER CANDIDATE FOR CITY COUNCIL WILL BE SPEAKING AT THE FRIDAY MORNING CLUB MARCH 23, 2012, AT THE JANET GOESKE SENIOR CENTER, ROOM D, 5257 SIERRA ST. (AT THE CORNER OF STREETER), RIVERSIDE, CA FROM 10:00AM TO 11:30AM.

WARD 2 CITY COUNCILMAN ANDY MELENDREZ WILL BE SPEAKING AT THE FRIDAY MORNING CLUB MARCH 30, 2012, AT THE JANET GOESKE SENIOR CENTER, ROOM D, 5257 SIERRA ST. (AT THE CORNER OF STREETER), RIVERSIDE, CA FROM 10:00AM TO 11:30AM. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Andy-Melendrez-for-Mayor-of-Riverside-2012/166645973391187 

WARD 3 WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY WILL BE SPEAKING AT THE FRIDAY MORNING CLUB APRIL 6, 2012, AT THE JANET GOESKE SENIOR CENTER, ROOM D, 5257 SIERRA ST. (AT THE CORNER OF STREETER), RIVERSIDE, CA FROM 10:00AM TO 11:30AM.  http://www.rustybailey.com

PETER BENAVIDEZ, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF BLINDNESS SUPPORT SERVICES, WILL BE SPEAKING AT THE FRIDAY MORNING CLUB APRIL 13, 2012, AT THE JANET GOESKE SENIOR CENTER, ROOM D, 5257 SIERRA ST. (AT THE CORNER OF STREETER), RIVERSIDE, CA FROM 10:00AM TO 11:30AM.   http://www.pe.com/local-news/riverside-county/riverside/riverside-headlines-index/20120128-riverside-sixth-candidate-enters-mayors-race.ece

TMC WOULD LIKE ALL THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED IN “VOTE FOR MAYOR 012″ STRAW POLL ABOVE.  AS OF 06/06/2012 AT 12 MIDNIGHT, TMC CONGRATULATES COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER AT 118 VOTES!

CAMPAIGN MONEY RAISED FOR THE MAYOR’S RACE

Ed Adkison $128,000.00

William “Rusty” Bailey  $57,000.00

Andy Melendrez $16,000.00

Mike Gardner $19,500.00

Dvonne Pitruzzello $1,000.00

TMC ENDORSES DVONNE PITRUZZELLO FOR CITY OF RIVERSIDE MAYOR

STEVE CLUTE ASK FOR YOUR VOTE ON JUNE 5TH FOR THE OFFICE OF STATE SENATE!

BOB BUSTER ASK FOR YOUR VOTE FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERVISOR ON JUNE 5TH

TMC THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC…

“We come, not to mourn our dead soldiers, but to praise them”.  – Francis A. Walker

To those who died securing peace and freedom; To those who served in conflict to protect our land, and sacrificed their dreams of the day to preserve the hope of our nation keeping America the land of the free for over two centuries we owe our thanks and our honor. It is important to not only recognize their service but to respect their devotion to duty and to ensure that the purpose for which they fought will never be forgotten.

From the soldiers who fought bravely during the American Revolution to the men and women of today’s Armed Forces, America’s fighting forces, have responded bravely to this nation’s call to duty. Both on the battlefield and in their assurance of readiness, members of the nation’s military remain bound to their duty.  For more than 200 years, America’s Armed Forces have been the surest  guarantee that Freedom will continue to ring across this land …

Our prayers go out this Memorial Day to one of Riverside’s finest, RPD Officer Ryan Bonaminio and to his family.  Ryan went out to doing the right thing, the right thing was to maintain the safety and security of our community, and that he did.

After high school, Ryan joined the United States Army. He completed his Army Basic training and Military Police training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Ryan served two tours in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. He was a military police officer with the 314th Military Police and his assignments included serving in Umm Qasr, Kuwait City, Bagdad, and Mosuc. He also served in the 282nd Base Support Battalion in Hohenfels, Germany. Officer Bonaminio served with honor and distinction. He was highly praised by his peers and superiors. He earned several medals including the Army Commendation Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Army Reserve Mobilization Medal, Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Army Reserve Overseas Training Ribbon, Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal, and Expert Qualification Badge- 9mm pistol.

Ryan transitioned from military service to law enforcement with the Riverside Police Department on July 7, 2006. He continued his commitment to the US Army Reserves. According to his US Army Military Police Reserve Sergeant Tamara Colosimo, “Ryan has always done what is morally right. He has integrity in everything that he does. Ryan would make a great police officer.”

Riverside Police Department Chief of Police Sergio Diaz stated, “Officer Ryan Bonaminio’s tragic death is a reminder to all of us in the law enforcement family that the supreme sacrifice of our service is also a cost borne by our loved ones, our families, and our community”.

THE PRESS ENTERPRISE’S DAN BERSTEIN’S ARTICLE ON MEMORIAL DAY.

Homage to fallen heroes is not an invention of our days. History beams with examples how various nations in various ages have honored their patriot dead. It was a custom established by the laws of Athens that the obsequies of those who had fallen for their country in battle should be performed in the most public and solemn manner. The bones of the slain were gathered on the plains or mountains, and were brought in solemn procession to the city. There, in tents, they were guarded in state, and received the votive offerings of friends and relatives, such as flowers, weapons, and precious ornaments, which were brought as tributes of affection and evidence of the proper appreciation of their services. … Where such a custom existed, it is not to be marveled at that patriotism and love of country burned in every Grecian breast with a flame which a thousand years of oppression and tyranny were unable to crush out. … Can we be surprised that in such hearts the memory of Thermopylae and Marathon was always fresh? And shall we, the freest of all nations, in our paradise of liberty feel less patriotic fire in our breasts … ? Shall we neglect the graves of those who sacrificed their lives to defend the palladium of our liberty, to perpetuate our national unity, and shield our rights forever? … This Memorial Day, on which we decorate their graves with the tokens of love and affection, is no idle ceremony with us, to pass away an hour; but it brings back to our minds in all their vividness the fearful conflicts of that terrible war in which they fell as victims. … Let us , then, all unite in the solemn feelings of the hour, and tender with our flowers the warmest sympathies of our souls! Let us revive our patriotism and love of country by this act, and strengthen our loyalty by the example of the noble dead around us….    – Major General John Logan, On May 30, 1870, Delivered upon the occasion of the Decoration of Union Soldiers’ Graves at the National Cemetery, Arlington, VA

UPDATE: 06/06/12: CALIFORNIA JURY URGES DEATH FOR OFFICER’S KILLER…”HE’S NOT IN THE DIRT YET,” THE SLAIN OFFICER’S FATHER, JOE BONAMINIO, SAID LATER AT A NEWS CONFERENCE OUTSIDE THE COURT.

It has been apparent to the community of the close working relationship between the law firm Best, Best & Krieger and the City of Riverside.  What’s quite evident in fact is that the working relationship between the two entities involves oral contracts.

According to City Attorney Gregory Priamos no hard contracts exist not even a retainer agreement, when a public request act is initiated.   When it comes to a public accounting of the expenditures of the City Attorney, as requested by Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello, a rejection letter below, for the request was sent.  According to the letter Gregory sent, there is no such accounting that has been prepared, and according to law, the law does not impose any duty to create such a record.  Therefore, non is required.  Since when has the taxpayer not be allowed to know what their money is being spent on?  This should be disturbing to many people, because it states that they treading waters they should not be treading.  And according to the law, the City Attorney’s office is not required to disclose the spending of taxpayer monies.  You have to know there is something very wrong with this picture.  Common sense would tell you there is something to hide behind the dark glasses of City Attorney Gregory Priamos.  But there was nothing to hide after allowing $159 million in illegal RDA loans to be approved by City Council, then rejected by the Finance Office for the State of California.  What would then be the result of his performance evaluation, which was being discussed in closed sessions Tuesday April 4, 2012, at City Council?  I’m sure, just as it went well for our former City Manager, this will go well..

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DENIAL LETTER

Above is a letter sent to Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello regarding her request for an accounting of the City Attorney’s from Gregory Priamos.  The law does state that if no documents are responsive to ones request, they, the city has to help you identify the request.

On 05/15/2012 at City Council, Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello stated to City Attorney Gregory Priamos, ‘how many denials of public records act does it take to get disbarred”?  What’s a real contradiction is that the City of Riverside has ‘retainer agreements’ for services with every other law firm they do business with.  Though an excess in millions of dollars have been paid out to BB&K, there has been no pertinent or rational explanation to the taxpayer.  We were even denied BB&K’s billing hours under the public records act.  As taxpayers, should we believe that we should expect anything less than a written contract?  I would say not.  When individuals ask for a rational explanation regarding no contracts, the city’s implication to the community is that “we don’t need no stink’n contracts”?  Is this an act of arrogance or defiance by a public servant toward their employer, the taxpayer?  If anyone has dealt with lawyers there is always a contract, but it appears that the City is the only entity that is allowed to perform this “verbally”, or as we understand it, not even with a “memorandum of understanding.”  One of the biggest law firms in the nation, Best, Best & Krieger is hands down an exception with the City of Riverside?   What is it between the two?  As community residents, are we also to accept the fact that Best, Best & Krieger is allowed to dictate carte blanche their legal fees to the taxpayer via their own credit card?  It seems so, according to the following documents, but what else is the public to otherwise believe?

CLICK LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT

 And we’re not talking nickels and dimes, but six figures and more.  So the question is, who’s in charge and watching taxpayer’s coffers?  It appears the city council is not, not even the mayor, it definitely appears that the city attorney’s office isn’t according to the excessive litigation cost.  So who’s minding the store?  Inquiring taxpayers would like to know.  But just maybe, the store has an open door policy, right to the cash register.  Why? Quite possibly in their incestuous relationship that has grown over the years.

Such as the cozy arrangement between certain ex city of riverside employees or just BB&K employees who are strategically now on city committees.  Conflict of interest?   The cast of BB&K characters interlaced with City of Riverside are numerous.  Former Grover Trask (former Riverside County District Attorney), Michelle Quellette (City of Riverside’s Charter Review Committee), Jack Clark (Committee to name City Hall after Mayor Ron Loveridge) or Charity Schiller (Vice Chair of Riverside Downtown Partnership).  BB&K has also been in the media with the City of Bell, whereby the city is now suing BB&K attorney Edward Lee for faulty legal advice.  Even Governor Jerry Brown subpoenaed BB&K records regarding pay packages in Bell, California.   In any case, we don’t know how this one fell through the roof, but we did manage to receive one arrangement between BB&K and the City of Riverside to represent Former Chief of Police Russ Leach.  What a surprise, it’s signed by City Attorney Greg Priamos and Grover Trask, former Riverside County District Attorney now in the employment of BB&K.  Oh lets’ just call it a “contract”, or correctly a “retainer agreement”.  Tomato, tomahto, oh let’s just call the whole thing off…  Wish we could, but it gets better.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW WHOLE DOCUMENT

Then there is developer Mark Rubin’s connected liaison with the City of Riverside and the City’s alter ego, the Redevelopment Agency. There is no doubt the brazen display of a conflict of interest displayed and perpetrated by the City of Riverside in approving the Citrus Tower’s lease deal between Best, Best & Krieger, Developer Mark Rubin and the City of Riverside.  “Three peas in a pod?”  Is it at all possible that the BB&K deal was orchestrated and designed to provide a lease revenue stream for the bonds held on the Citrus Tower project?  Was BB&K involved in bond advice for the city?  Councilman Paul Davis first told colleagues he’d heard concerns about “the general perception of the gift of public funds and creating a monopoly” to benefit a private developer, but he ended by saying it was a moot point because the city already has signed a lease.  How long will the City of Riverside continue to terrorize the taxpayer with shear incompetence and their breach of fiduciary duty to protect the coffers of hard earned taxpayer monies by the City Attorney’s Office? Good questions for City Attorney Greg Priamos, who coicidently has attended two of my alma maters, Loyola Marymount University and the University of Southern California.  A sad day for both university’s Gregory.  The question in the community are the ruthless expenditures within the City Attorney’s Office.  How much taxpayer money has been litigated out, or settled out as if it was your own, without any rational cognitive reasoning?  Or was it just for sport?  Or is the threat of litigation just a city tool used against the opposition for what is known in the business as “client control”?  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.  TMC believes the later is mostly true at our expense.  Therefore why would the city litigate to the tune of 9 million, then lose, and then have to award out 250K in one documented case?  Of course, that wouldn’t happened because after all as taxpayers we should all believe what the city does is rational and in our best interest.  Well the truth of the fact is, that it did, and nothing was in our best interest.  Though he serves at the pleasure of the council, should the City Attorney answer rightfully to the employer, which would be “we the people”?  This I say because the council and mayor has failed to supervise the activities of the city attorney.  The failure is such that we must ask the question of what makes one believe the city attorney needs to incorporate police lights with all the bells and whistles in their pimped out city vehicle? Where did one lose the sight of whose money it really is?  TMC can’t answer that, but I’m sure there is a rational answer from our city attorney, as in the case with the ‘no contracts allowed with our best customer.’  It may not be right but it is an answer.  Ultimately, the council and mayor is responsible for the activities, failures and actions of the city attorney.  In an article in Cactus Thorns, the 29 Palms City Council questions the spending to their City Attorney,  and when they looked at public records, that was even a total shock.   In this continuing painful saga, one can hire BB&K to run a city attorney’s office.  Carte Blanche in Riverside. For a price, instant city attorney, as in this article in The Orange County Register?  In the City of Yorba Linda, for example, BB&K attorney Sonia Carvalho represented the city in the capacity of the City Attorney for over a decade.  Conflict of interest? 

What is the responsibility of the city attorney?  What is the responsibility of the Federal Government?  Gregory Priamos is now after marijuana dispenseries as Hoover was after so called Communist. But now that Gregory is going after business owners such as the Johnson’s for leasing their property to a marijuana dispensery.   How allegedly connected is Gregory to pot smoking friends?  The contradiction is even Gregory allegedly has pot smoking friends, so why is he doing this?  Why does City Attorney Gregory Priamos think, as Vivian Moreno Self Appointed Citizen Auditor states, ” go and want to beat everybody up” in our fare city?

Gregory, even our forefathers smoked pot….. Gregory do you have pot smoking friends?  Do you need time to think about this one?

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE VIDEO

Well the contradiction is our first President was known to smoke hemp as it was called from time to time… or do we have to help remind you? So why is Gregory not after the most addictive drug of all time? Tobacco? or even Alcohol?

Questions have also arised in the controversial ambulance monopoly in the City of Riverside between AMR’s Peter Hubbard and City Officials.  The community is asking what are the alleged ties between City Attorney Greg Priamos and Peter Hubbard?  What are the alleged ties between Councilman Steve Adams and Mr. Hubbard?  What are the alleged ties between Fire Chief Steve Early and Mr. Hubbard?

What are the alleged ties between President of the City of Riverside’s Firefighter Union Tim Strack and Mr. Hubbard?  Why is AMR now a primary advertising entity at Regal Cinemas at the Riverside Plaza?  Does the following have any weight in the decision making process of the Council and Mayor’s influence in allegedly favoring AMR (American Medical Response)?  Bruce Barton, Director of the Riverside County Emergency Medical Services Agency, according to the corresponding document, appears was previously in the employment of AMR in 2004.

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DOCUMENT

Could this contribute to a conflict of interest outcome?  Will we find it is too close for comfort in the back of an AMR ambulance?  For a price maybe.  But AMR and the City of Riverside is not an isolated incident.  Alameda County has been a battleground for AMR’s ambulance wars.

UPDATE: FORMER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RAYCHELE STERLING SERVES CITY OF RIVERSIDE COMPLAINT SUIT!

Last week former Deputy City Attorney, Raychele Sterling served the following complaint to the City of Riverside.  The suit incidently, names City Attorney Gregory Priamos, Former City Manager Brad Hudson, Supervising Deputy City Attorney Kristi Smith and of course, the City of Riverside.  This complaint was filed in United States District Court-Central District of California-Western District.  Besides the demand for jury trial, the complaint is for damages relating to violation of individual Civil Rights and Federal Law.  Already, the attorney defending the City, Brian Walter of Los Angeles based Liebert, Cassidy and Whitmore, is using Priamos’s famous words, “We believe there is absolutely no merit at all to any of her (Sterling) claims”.  In addition, wrongful retaliation in exercising free expression under the auspices of the whistleblower act.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL COMPLAINT

EXCERPTS FROM THE COMPLAINT

Priamos threatened plantiff not to have any contact with the City Council…

Priamos stated that Hudson “never wanted to see her (Plaintiff’s) face again”..

Misuse of the 550 Sewer Fund has been a pervasive pattern in the City since Brad Hudson was appointed City Manager. Public Works Director, Siobhan Foster, and Deputy Public Works Director, Tom Boyd, routinely advised Public Works staff to use the 550 Sewer Fund for non-sewer related work.

     

During lunch SB ( Superintendent of Parks Division) stated to Plaintiff that she had been instructed by the Park and Recreation Director to set aside money from her budget to subsidize the City Hall café, as Provider (Company contracted with Rodney Couch to operate the Raincross Café) , was not making enough money and Hudson wanted to assist Provider.

The bond issuance documents were prepared by Best, Best & Krieger LLP (BBK) in Riverside, California, and had advised potental investors that the issuance of the bonds was to remimburse certain previously incurred improvement cost ($14,377,083.00) and to finance certain capital projects ($186,382,300.00) of the City’s Sewer System.

through its CFO, Paul Sundeen, did submit fraudulent and false documentation to the IRS to secure Treasury Credits it knew it was not eligible for…

LETTER WRITTEN BY STERLING TO THE SECURTIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

The city, through Hudson, hired an outside law firm to investigate the claims, and it found no wrongdoing. Walter, attorney defending the City, pointed to this internal city probe and an apparent investigation by the Riverside County’s District Attorney, Paul Zellerbach’s office, none of which resulted in any censure or charges.  But should we be surprised?  Considering the close quarters they all live in?  We experienced a similar result when citizen concerns were brought to his attention regarding Connie Leach, former wife of former Chief of Police Russ Leach and the City’s use of Asset Forefeiture monies in the amount of $35,000.00 to fund the Multi Cultural Youth Organization or was it really used to fund Connie Leach?

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW

I believe the internal probe they are referring to was former City Manager Brad Hudson’s hiring of the law firm Chigoyenetche, Grossberg & Clouse to investigate the allegations of himself.  This was whereby city employees told Sterling that Public Works bids were being fixed in order to favor one company.  Any monies left over from this department were diverted to subsidize Hudson’s friend, Rodney Couch, who ran the City Hall Raincross Café, or is know better in the community for running the Market Broiler Restaurants.  Of course after $150,000.00 legal bill to the taxpayer for this investigation, nothing pertinent was found.  Maybe if this crack law firm was to actually interview those involved, such as City Engineer Warren Huang, Sewer Treatment Plant Manager Craig Justice an former Deputy City Attorney Raychele Sterling, we may have come up with a different story.  But for $150,000.00 it allegedly appears that the conclusion derived was well orchestrated and designed to achieve an intended end result.  According to Sterling, Priamos was told about these incidents, and she was fired for doing the right thing and trying to protect the council.

In addition, where did Hudson’s paranoia lead?  It led, according to Sterling, to hacking into both Sterling and Priamos’s emails.  It led to Hudson ordering the Human Resource department to hire a private detective to tail Ms. Sterling and her children.  This at a cost to the taxpayer in excess of $80,000.00.  A similar incident of tailing took place with former Public Works Contractor Sean Gill, with a similar cost.  But according to Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey, Hudson was a ‘moral compass’.  Further, at public comment Raychelle Sterling talked about Priamos’s secretary decorating his house during a party, a former employee Kathy Gonzalez and alleged insurance fraud and Priamos playing golf with the former police chief while being paid for working.  If this is all true, should we as constituents of the City of Riverside allow this to happen?  While the council continues to be oblivious to these alleged activities, shouldn’t all involved be accountable if at all true?

The City should have fired Priamos years ago. His marginal legal advice has cost the City so much money during his tenure.  I hope Ms. Sterling takes the City to the cleaners. I hate to say that as a Riverside resident, but when the City starts acting like organized crime, they deserve to be punished.  I hope that Priamos’ days as City Attorney are numbered. Hudson is gone; Sundeen is on hiatus; it’s time for Priamos to leave. Maybe with a clean state in the leadership positions, and an new mayor, the City can start to make amends to the populace. With Priamos still in place, that can never happen.               – Kaptalizm, Commenter on the PE

City Attorney Greg Priamos should be tried under the RICO act.  – C’mon…Really?, Commenter on the PE

Again, in the name of transparency, good will and trust … TMC request the positions of the City Attorney, City Manager and the Chief of Police be elected positions, due to their failure to lead and their failure to protect the taxpayer.  Elected positions which would answer to the ‘people’ as opposed to a ‘do nothing or should we say do anything they want’ delegated source.  Now that the state auditor was in, will certain documents disappear?  Will the City again ‘verbally’ employ BB&K for advice or even a possible defense?  We know you heard the rings of Bell and even the clangs of Montebello, but are you hearing the Raincross Bells in the City of Riverside? Or is it just dumb bells I’m hearing?

Related Links to Stories in this TMC Blog:

Public Works Foster’s & Boyd’s the Bid Process

Fuzzy Math and the Bid Process in the Sewer, Bubbles Up the Usual Suspects

Fired Employee Alleges City Officials Awarded Millions in Contracts Without Bid

UPDATE: 05/22/2012: Former Deputy City Attorney Raychele Sterling drops another bombshell, another employee lawsuit against the City of Riverside.  Human Resources Department named in the suit.  Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello, spoke of the denial of public records regarding the City Attorney Gregory Priamos’s expenditures.  She state she will resubmit her request, and where is Priamos?  Is he making his exit strategy? Mary Shelton told the council that her public records were 3 week tardy.  The question to Mr. Barber, who was also not in attendance, was if the city gave it’s request to vacate from their current location. Usually a two year notice is given, and so far no response.  Self Appointed Citizen Auditor Vivian Moreno, asked for a refund of $250.00 for documents requested.  When these particular documents were requested, the documents that were delivered were not what was requested.  They were different, altered and bogus documents. 

Currently, no response from Congressman Ken Calvert when asked by Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello to investigate sewer bond fraud in the City of Riverside.  Interesting enough, from old research, we were surprised to see why he may not be of help, but helping himself in other self gratifying endeavors..

  There are other interest Congressman Calvert has that may not concern the constituents he represents.  Getting ‘caught with your pants down’ means, of course, what it is intended to mean.

“I noticed the male subject was placing his penis into his unzipped dress slacks, and was trying to hide it with his untucked dress shirt.”

It also appears according to a campaign he is not sensitive to the issues of the gay community, and quite possibly gay people in general, according to this 1994 campaign mailer against an openly gay opponent Mark Takano, running for the Congressional office.

Further, Congressman Ken Calvert allegedly benefited from earmarked projects he earmarked for Perris, California in 2005 with tax payer money, where he incidently owned seven properties.

 CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE YOUTUBE INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

But in all fairness, it appear that the House of Representatives came to the rescue on this one.  They concluded that the earmarked project would not provide any other direct or unique benefits to the properties. 

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL DOCUMENT

They concluded that any increase in the value of the properties resulting from the earmark would be incremental and indirect.  I realize the House usually has a way with words, but is this about semantics? or degrees?  Really now, how closely tied are all these individual in Washington D.C.?  Any guesses?  Interesting enough, I am told that many of his constituents are now seeing him much more differently than before..

Right you are, that’s an unexpected thumbs up by the Chief with respect to this unexpected bit of information regarding our local Congressman.

But in another aspect, there still has been no apology from Chief Sergio Diaz to public commenter Karen Wright, whereby she was confrontationally acosted and verbally berated at a March 16th City Council Meeting, on her opinion regarding the naming of Tequesquite Park after fallen officer Ryan Bonamino.  It appears that there are more instances of information coming into TMC whereby the Chief’s behavior was not up to professional standards, and many others who need apologizies that we can name, and others who recognize his abhorrent behavior within his own working environment that find it unprofessional.  And oops, does he have a hell of problem with bloggers?  Yes he does, and he doesn’t hold back, as apparent in many of his community and work related forums.  Many who appeared at his breakfast at the Mission Inn were vehemently aware of his focus, which again speaks of his professionalism.  One individual present, called the display of behavior “unfortunate”.

                                 

Chief Diaz is not one for freedom of speech as the majority sees it, this is suppose to be America.  There is no place for a strong repressive government ideals as he may be familiar with from his roots, this in essence can have counterproductive repercussions on our Democracy.  In a quote from the PE,  Before the evolution in technology, Diaz said, “We didn’t have the benefit of ignorant, inexperienced and hateful and cowardly and anonymous people give us their unsolicited opinions on the internet.”  But let’s not forget that’s what blogs and comment sections of many news agencies were intended to be.  It’s to get a true, raw and real opinion of how many feel, without the fear of retaliation, no matter how extreme one may percieve an opinion to be.  These comments should be put into good use, rather than censor them as some type of Batista/ Castro government would.  They are one person’s opinion, just as Diaz has an opinion, and this is all good in the central mix of opinions, whereby people can listen to all opinions and deduct their own.  The problem is whereby, censorship becomes acceptable, and one’s opinion becomes the only opinion.

There are many times when, even though there is freedom of the press and freedom of speech, it is hard to get a hearing for certain noble causes. I often think that we, all of us, should think very much more carefully than we do about what we mean by freedom of speech, by freedom of the press, by freedom of assembly. I sometimes am much worried by the tendency that exists among certain groups in our country today to consider that these are rights are only for people who think as they do, that they are not rights for the people who disagree with them. I believe that you must apply to all groups the same rights, to all forms of thought, to all forms of expression, the same liberties. Otherwise, you practically deny the fact that you trust the people to choose for themselves, in a majority, what is wise and what is right. And when you do that, you deny the possibility of having a democracy.  –Eleanor Roosevelt

What Chief Diaz needs to remember is that if he strived to make his department more transparent, questions of police tactics wouldn’t arise, or at least there would be a dialogue.  This was the very reason he was brought in and hired, to change the public’s perception after many years of allegations of favoritism, double standards and special treatment within the ranks of RPD.  In addition, just because community leaders have an opinion, you should’t castigate them, as a leader, he should embrace those concerns and work to bring the community closer together, rather than plant the seeds of divisiveness.  And if Chief Diaz feels that local bloggers are the problem, as he appears to be evidently consumed with, we have bigger problems.  Because bloggers are not the problem, leadership is, and I believe are community is seeking this in our Chief.

Mary Shelton from Five Before Midnight Blog, has much to say regarding Emperor’s with no clothes in this new blog posting..(click this link).

Or before you hit the above link to get to the really good stuff, and find free speech offensive, you may want to click this link instead..

Diaz told The Press-Enterprise at that time those posters were “sitting at home eating Cheetos in their underwear” and making anonymous comments online.

“Respect for the community, respect for other officers, respect for ourselves is going to be the byword by which I will attempt to lead the city of Riverside over the next few years”  – Chief Sergio Diaz

A contradiction in terms?

“I want to live in a society that people can voice unpopular opinions because I know as result of that a society grows and matures,”   – Hugh Hefner

Double dipping must be a public sector phenomenon, but again we see a retirement at age 55, something unheard of in the private sector…and again, the gain of secondary benefits at taxpayer’s expense.  Possibly for their second life?  And another double dipping story as the one regarding former City Manager Brad Hudson below..

UPDATE: 05/24/2012: THE SACRAMENTO BEE STATES THAT BRAD HUDSON IS FLUNKING A KEY TEST- TRANSPARENCY..

According to the Sac Bee, Hudson, Sacramento County Executive plans to release his first budget proposal late.  Hudson planned to release his budget as late as June 7, whereby the Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote on the budget June 14 or 15.  Even Hudson’s predecessor, Steve Szalay, released his budget last year in mid-May.  Well, as Councilman Mike Gardner said when Hudson was City Manager, ” you’ve got to pay for talent”.  Well alright, we did, now Sacramento is paying for it now.

People from Riverside could tell you a lot about Brad Hudson.  His few admirers (mostly wealthy, and involved in dealings with the city) said he was effective, but most people were distressed by his manipulations, his secretiveness, and his obvious collaboration with a few corrupt developers.  I am sure that the Sacramento County Supervisors were aware of this reputation before they

 hired him, and in fact that is probably why they hired him.  The supervisors’ feet should be held to the fire by voters until they fire him, as this will be the only way any transparency or honesty can come to Sacramento county government.  – Kevinakin1950, Commenter on the Sacramento Bee

The question that Sacramento should be asking…Is Hudson competant or even qualified for the position?  These were the same questions Riverside constituents were asking, but were turned a blind eye by the Council and the Mayor on this issue.  So far according to the Bee, the way he’s runnig the budget only adds to questions about his judgement, skills and qualifications.  Sac is on to him, for River City, he just might have bamboozled them…
A Little Sac Humor..
UPDATE: 05/31/2012:  RIVERSIDE’S VERY OWN “MORAL COMPASS”, CONTINUES TO MAKE NEWS.  SACRAMENTO GET’S IT! HOW BOUT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE? SACRAMENTO COUNTY SUPERVISORS NOT HAPPY ABOUT  HOW COUNTY EXECUTIVE BRAD HUDSON IS HANDLING THE FISCAL YEAR BUDGET PROPOSAL!  AND NEW EDITORIAL ON HUDSON FROM SAC BEE: COUNTY EXEC HUDSON COMES TO HIS SENSES ON BUDGET SCHEDULE, SORT OF..   HUDSON EVEN RECEIVED THE ATTENTION OF PRESS ENTERPRISE’S ALICIA ROBINSON WITH HER BLOG POSTING: FORMER CITY MANAGER HUDSON UNDER FIRE AGAIN.  ALSO, TAKE A LOOK AT THE UNCENSORED COMMENT SECTION ON THE SAC BEE, COMPARED TO OUR PRESS ENTERPRISE WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH ZIP.   POSSIBLY DUE TO THE IRON FIST OF CHIEF SERGIO DIAZ?

UPDATE: Alicia Robinson blogs regarding the Status quo on the menu at Riverside City Hall cafe.  The taxpayer has paid in excess of $3 million dollars to construct this cafe, which is open to the public.  The question TMC asks as Ms. Robinson ask, is the question is it the role of the public sector to pass that gray line and began to run their own businesses at taxpayer expense, in direct competition with the private sector?  TMC brought this to the attention with a posting regarding Rodney Couch, Provider Foods/ Market Broiler, and the thin line that exist between associations, friendships and favoritism:  You Provide the Food and the Couch, I’ll Provide the Millions!

UPDATE: 05/25/2012:  Standing outside our home, I watched elderly female individual taking a photo of the no parking sign during street sweeping. When I asked if she received a ticket, she said yes.  She lives down the block, her husband just had a stroke, and her son left the car out on that Wednesday, and they cannot afford the $42 ticket.  What we have been telling council is that there are families who are on tight budgets, and can’t afford a $42 dollar parking ticket.  Forty dollars can very well be food on the table.  Many who receive tickets around the wood streets are students.  The irony is that the City champions education, and would like students to eventually think of Riverside as a city to reside in.  Well, not this way… and the city doesn’t have to spend $25,000.00 on an outside consultant to find that answer.  I just gave it to you for free.  Remember, just because the street sweeper and the parking nazi have left the vicinity, they can still ticket between the hours indicated on the sign.  As a result, the residents know this isn’t an issue about cleaning streets, it’s about raising revenue at our expense..  Who makes a profit on your blue can recyclables while you pay a service fee for pick up.   A month ago we brought to our readers attention that tickets were even being issued to business vehicles as in the following TMC posting.

 In these tough economic times, will the city’s next endeavor be to ticket vehicles during trash pick up?  Will they consider billing Riverside residents for weekly garbage pick-up by the pound?  Especially now that they are doing a bang up job on creating a profit  debt with the Fox Theatre and City Hall’s Raincross Cafe.

UPDATE:05/26/2012: REDDER THAN A FOX’S COAT?  HAS THE FOX LOST IT’S PANTS?  NEW ARTICLE IN THE PE REGARDING OPERATING COST WERE GREATER THAN EXPECTED LEAVING THE FOX IN THE RED, OR SHOULD I SAY, “THE TAXPAYER”.

Councilman Paul Davis stated that, “the council should look at options such as offering a long-term lease or selling the theater”.  Now, selling the Fox Theatre is not a bad thing, it should be up for sale to be runned by private enterprise.  This is what Self Appointed Citizen Auditor, Vivian Moreno stated a year ago.  The Fox would have financial problems and it’s likelyhood that it would be closed or sold by summer 2012.  Why would the city feel that they can run a business when they fall short at running city government.  If these same numbers were corresponding to a private business enterprise, the Fox would be in foreclosure or up for sale.  That’s the real world, you just can’t continue to subsidize a deficit at taxpayer expense and believe that it is alright.  This is just a skewed way of thinking.

 City Finance Director Brent Mason said he doesn’t think city officials consider the theater a failure.  If anyone can consider any business not to be a failure when it loses close to a million dollars a year it would be someone that is spending other peoples’ money.  – Welrdelr, Commenter on the PE.

The Council and the Mayor has given a smoke screen to the problems and lost of revenue in the Fox Center.  The topic came up at the Mayoral debate and each Council candidate praised it but one honest candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello spoke out about how much this was costing the taxpayers and we didn’t make money we were losing money each year.  Dvonne suggested the City sell the Fox Center to stop losing money.  Adkison, Bailey, Gardner and Melendrez felt the city should keep Fox Center and hope for a profit in the future.  But Dvonne shocked the candidates and the crowd with the yearly lost can be doing nothing the loss would increase.  She suggested we sell it and recoup our loses.  Now that the public knows we see the same councilmen changing their view.  Dvonne has the facts of most of the debt and future debt we will learn about but the council just hope voters will elect them to stay Mayor Loveridge course and keep the deals secret and the large debt secret.  God does things for a reason and we ar learning things that have been kept secret.  Dvonne has a plan to clean up the debt and keep the council on track to do the work for the citizens not business friends.  We can expect more shockers to come as Dvonne said.  We need her to lead up to recovery and the council should be glad she took the time to get the facts to correct the mess.   - Airjackie, Commente on the PE.

According to Chief Financial Officer Bret Mason the expected deficit will be $900,000.00 for fiscal year 2012-2013.  While some of the council disturbingly feel the deficit is acceptable, no one in their right mind within the private sector would consider this acceptable.  Since when is losing money acceptable? Not in the private sector, this must be a public sector phenomenom, because when the money you are dealing with is not your own, you don’t feel the pain..  As I see it, that $900,000.00 loss could have been used for police and fire.  The city would rather have a loss then to utilize the wasted funds to pay for a police or fire salary.

UPDATE: 05/28/2012: Reported by 24/7 Wall Street, Riverside number one in home foreclosure’s.  In Riverside metro home prices fell by 56.6%, the foreclosure rate is 1 in 213 homes.

Current home values Riverside real estate and homes for sale as indicated by this link.

UPDATE: 05/29/2012: Lucky Greek owner sues the City of Riverside for $750,000.00 

Imagine what the old Marcy Library would like now if it was handed over to Lucky Greek?  What were the Council thinking?  According to the Press Enterprise the suit claims the restaurant suffered first from restricted traffic during construction of the nearby Magnolia Avenue railroad underpass as well as street configurations.  Many on the Main Street suffered from the construction, but were told they could not sue for loss of business, the city was protected against this.  Other businesses suffered from eminent domain and construction on Market Street.  Do these current businesses, some evicted and others who have gone, have someone to speak for them?  Or do they have any recourse against the City after the Redevelopment debacle?

UPDATE: 05/29/2012: RIEMER REAMING THE TAXPAYER NEVER HURT SO BAD?…According to the Press Enterprise, “Judge Riemer declared a mistrial after a week of trial testimony so he could take his vacation — costing the taxpayers (by his own estimate) up to $25,000 — on the day of closing arguments.”

          

WILL THE REAL JUDGE RIEMER PLEASE STAND UP?

WAS THE RIEMER FAMILY TRUCKSTER PACKED AND READY TO GO?

Riemer affirmed he said “something to that effect” regarding his comment to Cook. He agreed that it was regrettable. “It would be better to keep thoughts like that to oneself.”..  According to some, Rogue Judge Riemer making rogue judgments?  Not surprised, this is Riverside…

UPDATE: 06/01/2012: STATE FINANCE DEPARTMENT SENDS LETTER OF APPROVAL TO CITY OF RIVERSIDE ALLOWING COVERAGE OF $26 MILLION OF THE ORIGINAL $159 MILLION ORIGINALLY REJECTED.  THEREFORE, CURRENTLY, APPROXIMATELY $133 MILLION IS UNACCEPTABLE TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND REMAINS A DEBT OF THE CITY, OR SHOULD I SAY THE TAX PAYER.   

    

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW MAY 26TH APPROVAL LETTER IN PDF FORMAT

ACCORDING TO CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER’ S BLOG, THIS LETTER RECEIVED FROM THE STATE, GIVES “CONFIRMATION THAT THE ACTIONS OF OUR FORMER REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DID MEET THE LETTER AND SPIRIT OF THE LAW”.  BUT ACCORDING TO THE PRESS ENTERPRISE ALICIA ROBINSON’S BLOG, THE AMOUNT OF THE REMAINING DEBT IS ACTUALLY $21 MILLION.  WHICH DIFFERS FROM OUR AMOUNT OF $133 MILLION.  THEREFORE, IT APPEARS FROM THE CITY’S VIEW TO IMPLY THAT $138 MILLION HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE STATE FINANCE DEPARTMENT AS LEGITIMATE ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATIONS.

ACCORDING TO THE PE, DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR EMILIO RAMIREZ STATED THAT NOT ONLY IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT STILL UNRESOLVED DOWN TO $21 MILLION, BUT “(JUST) BECAUSE THE LETTER DOESN’T INCLUDE EVERYTHING IT DOESN’T MEAN THAT THE OTHER (ITEMS) ARE DENIED”.   WE ARE THEREFORE ASSUMING THAT ALTHOUGH THE LETTER LIST $26 MILLION, THAT THE UNLISTED AMOUNTS ADDING UP TO $112 MILLION HAS BEEN BILATERALLY VERBALLY RESOLVED (Of course, no documents currently exist to corroborate Mr. Ramirez’s figure).  THEREFORE WE ASSUME THE FOLLOWING: $26 MILLION + $112 MILLION = $138 MILLION (STATE ACCEPTED EO’S).  THEN, $159 MILLION – $138 MILLION = $21 MILLION REMAINING DEBT IN QUESTION.  SO WAS THE THE $138 MILLION JUST WRITTEN OFF OR REMOVED IN WHAT IS KNOWN AS A STAFF OVERSIGHT?  OR WERE THEY, THE CITY, JUST TRYING TO PAD THE ROP’S TO SEE WHAT THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH?  OH WHAT THE HELL, I GIVE UP..I ADMIT IT, THEY’VE WORN US DOWN..

UPDATE: 06/02/2012: NOW, FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, JACK OF ALL TRADES, ASSISTANT DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TINA ENGLISH IS NOW ASSISTANT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR? 

YES, IT’S TRUE..  BUT WILL SHE ASK THE QUESTION, FORMER PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ALLEGEDLY ASKED?  “WHAT’S A POT HOLE”?  ACCORDING TO FIVE BEFORE MIDNIGHT BLOG, “MS. ENGLISH BRINGS A WEALTH OF PUBLIC WORKS EXPERIENCE TO THE JOB TO FIT IN WITH THAT PROUD TRADITION”.. AGAIN, WHAT DOES SHE HAVE A DEGREE IN?

 UPDATE 06/04/2012: IS RODNEY STILL PROVIDING THE FOOD AND THE COUCH, WHILE THE TAXPAYER PROVIDES THE MILLIONS?

WILL COUNCIL CONSIDER APPROPRIATING RODNEY COUCH, OWNER OF MARKET BROILER RESTAURANTS, WITH $48,000.00 FOR OPERATING COST ($35,000.00)  AND ADVERTISING ($13,000.00), FOR THE NOW TAX PAYER SUPPORTED CITY HALL RESTAURANT KNOWN AS THE ‘RAINCROSS CAFE’?  ACCORDING TO THE BELOW DOCUMENT, RODNEY IS ALSO CLAIMING LOSSES OF $123,800.00 THAT NEEDS TO BE REIMBURSED TO HIM BEFORE THE CITY CAN MAKE A PROFIT.  CLAUSE 4.2.1 STATES THAT ANY PROFIT RECOGIZED UP TO $100,000.00 SHALL BE PAID TO THE CITY.  IF PROFITS EXCEED $100,000.00, THEY WILL BE SHARED EQUALLY BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE OPERATOR.  BUT IN CASE THERE IS A LOSS, AS THERE IS,  THE LOSS SHALL BE CARRIED FORWARD TO OFFSET THE PROFIT IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL DOCUMENT

 WHAT DOES THE TAX PAYER GET?  WHAT DOES RODNEY GET?

1. Advertising on the electronic billboard overlooking the 91 freeway.  (so the City/ Taxpayer is paying for advertising of the billboard.  All other restaurant owners in the City get this)?

2. Rodney is the preferred provider for catering of all City Hall events.  (Since when does the taxpayer pay for event food for city hall elite)?

3. The City provides all the furniture, fixtures and equipment.

4. The City provides all janitorial services.

5. The City will pay all utilities.

THIS APPEARS TO HAVE COUNCILMAN AND MAYORAL CANDIDATE MIKE GARDNER’S WRITING ALL OVER THIS…BY GOLLY IT DOES!  IF THIS PASSES THEY CERTAINLY HAVE TO PAY FOR IT IN SOME SORT OF FEE, PSEUDO TAX  OR SERVICE FEE…

UPDATE: 06/05/2012: OPP’S! WE DID IT AGAIN!  PASSED 7-0 ON THE CONSENT CALENDER.  EVEN OUR INDEPENDENT VOICE, WHO STANDS FOR PEOPLE VOTED FOR IT..

UPDATE: 06/05/2012: DOES THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TOM BOYD’S NEW RED CORVETTE?

RECYCLING THE MAYOR?  ACCORDING TO PUBLIC COMMENT SPEAKER REBECCA LUDWIG, IF JOHN TAVAGLIONE IS ELECTED TO CONGRESS, WILL HE RECYCLE THE MAYOR (RON LOVERIDGE) TO REPLACE HIS VACANT POSITION?

UPDATE: 06/13/2012:  City Manager presents budget, rebuttles community concerns.  I just could not help myself but add this tid bit of information regarding a response by  City Chief Finance Officer Bret Mason to Blogger Mary Shelton regarding the use of Firestations as colateral for a loan the City took out.  Mason said those assets (firestations) make good collateral because lenders assume the city would be more motivated to avoid defaulting on the debt.  This financial relationship I’ve never heard of in the current market place.  If you take a second on your home, you will as the owner be motivated to avoid default, when you home is used for colateral?  Mason went on to say, even if the city defaulted, the lender may only use the facilities until the debt is resolved but may not foreclose and take them from the city.  The key to that statement is “may”, and these are the if’s and but’s which envelop citizen concerns.  So if one defaulted as a home owner, the bank will only take your home over and never foreclose.  They will hold it and give it back to when you catch up and resolve your debt?   He goes to finish that his statement by saying basically that scenario would never happen..  “It’s beyond comprehension that the city would allow itself to get in a position where it could not make debt service payments,” Mason said.

UPDATE: 06/16/2012: Pravda Press Enterprise continues it’s art of molding popular public opinion?  Does our Chief Sergio Diaz have a starring role?  PE leading the way to absolutely no comments?

WHAT’S WRONG PE? CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA & ILLEGALS STEALING AMERICAN JOBS? WHY YOU SENSORING ALL THE COMMENTS THAT ARE TRUE. WE ARE IN AMERICA ( OR I THOUGHT ) WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH SO LET OUR OPINIONS BE KNOWN!!   – obama hater, commenter on the Press Enterprise possibly prior to being censored..

JUST FOR LAUGHS!  EVEN THOUGH I KNOW YOU’RE REALLY MAD BY NOW..

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU.  RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

If you think the City of Bell had serious taxation problems and mis-appropriation of funds, if you were shocked by the posting on electric rates, grab your socks again, and you may want to grab everbody else’s!  Every city’s doin it! Is what’s being said…but it looks as if the people are taking the upper hand on this, or as Charley Sheen would say, “Winning”!  For example, the City of Fullerton.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL LETTER

Or in this article in the Orange County Register questioning $27 million in illegal water fees..  And of course challenging Fullerton’s illegal water tax as in this article.  And again, more on the City of Fullerton and illegal water rate increases.  But onward, let’s look at the City of Riverside.

Riverside levies hidden taxes on your utility bill.  They are simply and stealthily included in the utility rates the city charges residential customers.  Your minimum tax rate on water and electric utility services to your property is 11.5%.   It expands upward from there depending on how much utility service you use that is subject to punitive tiered pricing.

Let us look at your bill for water and the city’s wa-1 residential winter water rate schedule.  The first tier or the base metered rate for water service is $1.13 per ccf (this is the metered unit of measure for water service and is 100 cubic feet of water).   The base rate is charged to the consumption of each of the first 15 ccf of water service each month.   On a per ccf basis $0.13 of the first tier rate per ccf is tax revenue paid to the general fund.  That is a tax rate of 11.5%.

Should you exceed first tier usage as most homeowners do then, you are charged at the second tier price of $1.64 per ccf from the 16th thru the 35 th ccf of service.   The difference of $0.51 per ccf in the second tier water rate is an additional tax for using more water service than the city thinks you should.  It is a punitive tax to economically force you the consumer to conserve water.   You are being taxed even though you are using water for beneficial purposes and not wasting water.   Looking at just the $0.51 price difference per ccf of first tier and second tier ccfs the effective tax rate is 39%!

Should you use more than 35 ccf of water service per month you are billed at the 3rd tier rate of $2.26 per ccf for those units consumed from the 36th thru the 60 th ccf.   The third tier tax is $1.26 per ccf.  This is an effective tax rate of 56%!

Now, if you are a big-time water waster according to the city, you pay the fourth tier rate of $2.75 per ccf for any ccfs consumed over 60 ccf per month.   The price difference from the 1st tier is $1.62 per ccf and the 4th tier effective tax rate is 64%!!   Now that’s a punitive tax!

 

If this really bothers you, wait until the summer rates kick in on your June billing.

Residential water rate schedule wa-1 summer.

1st tier 0-15 ccf      $1.14       your tax rate=11.5%

2nd tier 16-35 ccf   $1.83       your tax rate=44%

3rd tier  36-60 ccf   $2.85      your tax rate=64%

4th tier  >60ccf        $4.10      your tax rate=75%

To help put this into perspective with how our water is produced by pumping wells and the fact that Riverside does not buy expensive imported water please review the following facts:

  • Water production is measured in acre feet of water.  That is enough water to stand 12 inches deep on one acre of land.
  • A ccf is water  your city water meter records as you consume water service.  A ccf is one hundred cubic feet of water.   There are 436 ccfs in an acre foot of water.
  • Imported water from northern California or the Colorado River is priced between $550-800 per acre foot.  According to Dave Wright, the city does not buy imported water.   Dave also says, we are water independent even during the statewide drought of recent years.
  • The city’s cost to provide ground water to you is less than $300 per acre foot.   That calculates to $0.68 per ccf at your meter.  They do need some funds to maintain the infrastructure (the extra $0.32 ??).
  • At the city’s summer 1st tier rate of $1.15 per ccf , you are paying $500 per acre foot of water at your meter. 
  • At the city’s 2nd tier summer rate of $1.83 per ccf, you are paying $800 per acre foot of water at your meter. 
  • At the city’s 3rd tier summer rate of $2.85 per ccf, you are paying $1,243.00 per acre foot of water.
  • At the city’s 4th tier summer rate of $4.10 per ccf, you are paying $1,788.00 per acre foot of water.
  • A municipal utility is not allowed to make money.  It is a government owned monopoly and may not charge more than the actual cost of providing the service to you at your property.  They are budgeted to break even.  They have reserve funds in case of a bad year and the City can always make a loan or spend other tax revenue to cover an annual loss.
  • In recent years the city has taken no steps to reduce costs of operating its’ utilities.  They have taken every opportunity to expand the cost to residential consumers.
  • The water utility has a huge fixed annual cost (mostly debt payments) averaged over the calculated water rates and total annual production.  It must sell all of its planned annual production to recoup the funds needed to pay the bills.  If you are forced to conserve water, the city has to automatically raise the price.  It is the Math!
  • The city makes more money by transfers to the general fund with every rate increase!  A city general fund may only receive tax revenue.

Now that is some profit margin of hidden taxes!  Where is your money going?  I hope you can live on 15 ccf of water service per month!!

Remember the City Municipal Code requires all property owners to landscape, irrigate, mow, trim and weed all portions of their property that faces a public street or right of way.  Code enforcement may issue you a citation and a fine of up to $1000.00 per day and/or prosecution of a misdemeanor for failing to adequately water your front yard!  If you fail to comply with Code enforcement a lien for the fines will be placed on your property and the city will enforce the lien and auction your house on the court house steps to satisfy the lien.   See Municipal Code Chapter 6.14.

Most residential properties in the city have a right to a water allotment equal to the annual amount originally supplied to your land by any of the original water companies that first supplied water to your property via canal, ditch or pipes (Cal. Supreme, A.O. Price v. The Riverside Land & Irrigation Co. , 1880).  Historical records indicate you may have a right of up to 10 acre feet of water supply per acre of land per year.  In the Supreme Courts words, “the water is welded to the land as a permanent right to the same level of water service as originally provided,  … it cannot be separated or sold from the land by the water company or the land owner or owners of either in succession.”  You are the current landowner in succession and the city is the current water company owner in succession.  This is a right to water, “the water stays with the land in perpetuity.”  This is the legal reason the City must sell 18% of its water production each year to areas outside the city in Home Gardens and Corona (but the city won’t tell you this).

The city by approving 50% increases in water rates over the last six years and instituting punitive tiered pricing is forcing you to conserve water you are entitled to use beneficially on your property (October 2006, city council approved rate hikes and tiered pricing to fund the “$1.5 billion Renaissance”).  This burden of hidden taxation falls most harshly on fixed income (retirees) and low income families in the city.

UPDATE: 05/06/2012: PRESS ENTERPRISE ENDORSES FORMER COUNCILMAN ED ADKISON..

“THE ONE WHO DOES NOT REMEMBER HISTORY IS BOUND TO LIVE THROUGH IT AGAIN”..  – GEORGE SANTAYANA

UPDATE: 0505/17/2012: FORMERS DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RAYCHELE STERLING SUES THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, INCLUDING CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS  AND FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON.  OF COURSE, WERE WE SURPRISED? ACCORDING TO GREGORY, THE CASE HAS NO MERIT.

8:27 PM on 5/17/2012

I believe her claims.There’s a reason why over the years, those in office use the same construction firms, law firms, management firms, environmental firms and so on..they know people in those business so when they get “approved” for their services, the price is millions over the cost than it should be so each side makes a profit under the table..on our dime..but yet..city services are struggling to make ends meet. perhaps if they take a look at their dirty deeds and wasteful/corrupt spending and bilking and quit looking toward us to pay for their actions, they would have money to pay the paychecks and their bills instead of using the guise of “the money just isn’t there”..it’s there buried under “official accounts” for various services that don’t exist.  – Navyguyhm3, commenter on the PE.

TMC ENDORSES DVONNE PITRUZZELLO FOR CITY OF RIVERSIDE MAYOR

STEVE CLUTE ASK FOR YOUR VOTE ON JUNE 5TH FOR THE OFFICE OF STATE SENATE!

CLUTE SAYS NO! TO DOM BETRO AND JANE CARNEY!

BOB BUSTER ASK FOR YOUR VOTE FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERVISOR ON JUNE 5TH

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED ONE TWO STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!  WE REALIZE IT’S TOUGH, SO HANG IN THERE.. COMMENTS ALWAYS

OOPS! I DID IT AGAIN!!  

When Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Petruzzello confronted the Mayor Ron Loveridge and asked his to retract his 15% raise of his Chief of Staff Kristen Tillquist, no answer was given.  If you are making $100,000.00 per year, a 15% raise means and additional $15,000.00, a 10% raise means $10,000.00, not to shabby in a down economy when the City of Riverside is expected to experience a $10,000,000.00 deficit this year according to City Manager Scott Barber.  But, Oops, I did it again! Another 10% increase in the Mayors Office by Ron Loveridge,  when many are not even getting a 1% increase or nothing at all.  This was given March 2, 2012 to Community Relations Consultant Lizette Navarette per the Mayor’s request.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT

This is the third increase in the Mayor’s office, since Chief of Staff Kristin Tillquist with 15% raise in July 2011 and Assistant to the Mayor Eric Ustation with a 15% raise in August 2010.  This we notes in our January 27, 2012 posting of  CITY OF RIVERSIDE: MAYOR’S OFFICE: PEN$ION SPIKING: MR. ANGRY VS. MS. KINDNESS VS. MR. WARMTH?

 The Press Enterprise release a new article by Alicia Robinson regarding city staffers which make more than their elected bosses..

BARBER BLOG REBUTTLE VERSUS THIRTY MILES!

BARBER BLOGS REGARDING FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON’S DISCRETIONARY SPENDING IN A POSTING CALLED THE “TRUTH SQUAD”!

I’d like to address this article because TMC posted an article recently that City Manager Scott Barber may have been referring to.  His posting may have been in response to this article, CITY COUNCIL OVERSIGHT OF DISCRETIONARY SPENDING….A PATTERN OF FIDUCIARY NEGLIGENCE?  There is no question regarding the legalities of the prior city managers discretionary spending. But why would the then City Council embrace a plan to give more spending power to an unelected individual?  Referring of course, to the then City Manager Brad Hudson?   This was done with little oversight by the responsible party themselves the Council and the Mayor.  In addition, could we justify the spending as a benefit to the tax paying constituents?  Was it bad business? Or was it just unethical?  We can accept the fact that the Council passed it’s authority to the city manager, but what justifies their abusive spending? or can we even justify that?  We find passed city council member such mayoral candidate Ed Adkison, Frank Schiavone, Dom Betro, Steve Adams, Art Gage, Nancy Hart, Andy Melendrez and Ron Loveridge gave free rein to this management entity that to this day continues to have a track record of inappropriate spending, even now in Sacramento.  What are we to believe when this so called legal entity is set up for abuse and special interest.  There have been instances whereby the city manager has cut 12 checks in one day. There has been instances, whereby the city manager has cut checks just under the $50,000.00 cap, several or multiple times overting the rule that anything over $50,000.00 must be brought to Council.  How does one answer that?  Filthy Fifty thousand is a lot to be allowed without oversight and it appeared that Council was unaware to what extent the city manager was spending, until Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello asked for the city managers discretionary spending back in May of 2011.  If it wasn’t for her, the council would have been non the wiser, and the spending would have continued and City Manager Brad Hudson may have well still be here, as well as Public Works Director Siobhan Foster, Chief Financial Officer/Treasurer/Assistant City Manager Paul Sundeen etc.

Regarding the legalities of the discretionary spending we are aware and accept the fact of it’s legalities, and of course, there was nothing wrong according to the charter.  Before City Manager Brad Hudson in 2005, there was City Manager George Carvahlos.  Wasn’t he fired by the then City Council, and replaced by Brad Hudson, with the help of Ed Adkison and Frank Schiavone?  His discretionary spending cap without having the item go to City Council was $25,000.00.  A cascade of events then occurred and City Manager George Carvahlos was fired by City Council, incidently Mayoral Candidate Ed Adkison was one of those council members.  Once Hudson took over, the Council and Mayor  upgraded the spending to $50,000.00, an increase of a 100%, without the item having to go to Council for approval.  This in essence gave more discretionary power in spending to the City Manager with little oversight or transperancy.  Our position was that this new spending limit was set up for abuse.  Especially Hudson who had a felony credit card fraud violation on record.  There was no cap on the amount Hudson could spend.  He could spend $49,000 one day, and spend $49,000 the next, all well under the $50,000 per item expense. We believe that Charter Section 419 gave to much authority to a non-elected official  without transparency.  Charter Section  1109 states that if a project exceeds the discretionary spending limit of 50K it must go to City Council or the Public Utility Board.  The following demonstrates 12 payouts (highlighted in yellow) in one day, in 2008 Webb Engineering, totaling $55,000.00.  Obviously over the $55,000.00 without City Council approval.

Or in 2006, the City of Riverside paid 8 individual payments on 05/04/2006 totaling $57.500.00 to Webb Engineering.  Again over the $50,000.00 discretionary cap that needed to be brought to city council again.  What are we to believe?

Or in 2007 for Ironwood Construction, 6 payouts on 08/03/2007 totaling $54,005.18, again exceeding the $50,000.00 cap.

Nothing in Scott’s blog addresses the excessiveness of this spending.  But I also question the expenditures in the sense of how many were proper and necessary expenditures that had a real benefit to the constituents of the City?  Further, did the Council ever review Hudson’s discretionary spending?  To many residents in the City  of Riverside, the answer is no!

The discretionary spending for one thing gives extreme authority for a non elected position which would be the city manager.  Fifty thousand dollars is a lot of money.  The vague language of the spending gave way to questions of bid splitting.  What is bid splitting?  A fraudulent scheme in which a large project is split into several component projects so that each sectional contract falls below the mandatory bidding level, thereby avoiding the competitive bidding process.  I’m not saying this actually occurred, but an explanation of 12 expenditures in one day needs answering and these expenditures totaling $55,000.00 in one day needs answering.  These payouts were over and above the $50,000.00 cap, according to city charter, pay out without City Council approval.

Bid splitting occurs when a public agency takes a project, service, or goods and breaks the procurement up into smaller dollar amounts.  Some public agencies, when faced with various bid limits that require them to seek competition above a certain dollar amount, will break up the work into smaller procurements in order to stay under the competitive requirements.  They then make a selection based on less formal bidding requirements or award a contract without any competition, depending on the thresholds.  Auditors frequently criticize public agencies for splitting bids in order to come in less than the competitive bidding dollar amounts, since such practices subvert the intent of competitive bidding. While this type of bid splitting may be expedient, it does not ensure that the public is obtaining the best prices for the work.   Not to say this occurred with the City of Riverside, but an explanation is certainly in order.  The mayor expects us to follow rules, but how are we to respect those rules when he doesn’t follow his own rules?

UPDATE: 05/06/2012: PRESS ENTERPRISE ENDORSES FORMER COUNCILMAN ED ADKISON..

“THE ONE WHO DOES NOT REMEMBER HISTORY IS BOUND TO LIVE THROUGH IT AGAIN”..  – GEORGE SANTAYANA

TMC ENDORSES DVONNE PITRUZZELLO FOR CITY OF RIVERSIDE MAYOR

STEVE CLUTE ASK FOR YOUR VOTE ON JUNE 5TH FOR THE OFFICE OF STATE SENATE! 

BOB BUSTER ASK FOR YOUR VOTE FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERVISOR ON JUNE 5TH

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED ONE TWO STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!  WE REALIZE IT’S TOUGH, SO HANG IN THERE.. COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

If you think the City of Bell had serious taxation problems and mis-appropriation of funds, grab your socks!

Riverside levies hidden taxes on your utility bill.  They are simply and stealthily included in the utility rates the city charges residential customers.  Your minimum tax rate on electric utility services to your property is 11.5%.   It expands upward from there depending on how much utility service you use each month that is subject to punitive tiered pricing.

Let us look at your bill for electricity and the city’s residential winter electric rate schedule.  The first tier or the base metered rate for electric service is $0.1035 per kwh (this is the metered unit of measure for electric service).   The base rate is charged to the consumption of each of the first 350 kwh of electric service each month.   On a per kwh basis $0.0119 of the first tier rate per kwh is tax revenue paid to the general fund.  That is a tax rate of 11.5%.

Should you exceed first tier usage as most homeowners do, then you are charged at the second tier price of $0.1646 per kwh from the 351th thru the 750th kwh of service.   The difference — of $0.0611 per kwh in the second tier electric rate — is an additional tax for using more electric service than the city thinks you should use.  It is a punitive tax to economically force you the consumer to conserve electricity.   You are being taxed even though you are using electricity for beneficial purposes and not wasting it.   Looking at just the $0.0611 price difference per kwh of first tier and second tier prices/kwh the effective tax rate is 37%!

Should you use more than 750 kwh of electric service per month you are billed at the 3rd tier rate of $0.1867 per kwh for those units consumed over 750 kwh.   The third tier tax is $0.0951 per kwh.  This is an effective tax rate of 51%!

Now, that’s a punitive tax!

To help put this into perspective with how our electricity is delivered to your property, please review the following facts:

  • A municipal electric utility provides property owners with the “service” of transporting the power to your property via government-owned infrastructure.  The electricity is virtually worthless at the point of generation or acquisition.  It is the city’s infrastructure of power transmission lines that imparts value to electricity.  If they could not deliver it to your property you would not buy it and they could not give it away!
  • On average it costs the city $0.0500 to generate or acquire power and transport electricity to its residential customers.
  • Some power is purchased on long-term contracts and may cost as little as $o.o4 per kwh delivered to you.  To be fair, other sources of electricity cost more.  So in the end it all averages out to a range of $0.04-$0.06.
  • What the city has done to you is this: it has stopped putting ballot measures forward for a vote to approve electric bonds.  Basically, it has improperly hidden the tremendous cost of borrowing money (and the burden to pay it back for thirty years) in your electric rates, fees and charges.
  • By law the cost of borrowed money used to build infrastructure must be approved in an election as a property assessment tax or a special tax.  In this way you would be able to see the level of debt, the cost to you, the years left on each contract to continue paying and have the voter knowledge to understand what this means to you.
  • Since 2007 the City Council has approved instruments of borrowing that were created specifically to evade state constitutional restrictions that restrict the amount of borrowing or require voter approval.  The city discloses that it knows how and why the contracts were created (specifically to avoid complying with the state constitution) but, since no one in Riverside has filed a lawsuit to stop the practice, it will continue to offer these contractual forms of debt at will.  This results in electric rate schemes that have ever increasing hidden taxes in them; however the cost of debt to build infrastructure is not an annual variable operating cost to be included in the rate calculation.  It is a fixed cost that should be collected via other means on your bill or property tax.  It should not be included in the rate structure.  The rate should always be determined from the variable costs of operating the infrastructure.
  • A vote to approve a constitutional form of municipal bond requires the city to account for the cost of debt service separately from the annual cost of operating the utility.  In this way they cannot hide the cost of debt service in the rate calculation and charge you $0.1035 and up for each kwh.
  • A municipal utility is not allowed to make money.  It is a government-owned monopoly and may not charge more than the actual cost of providing the service to you at your property.  Municipal utilities are budgeted to break even.  They have reserve funds in case of a bad year and the city can always make a loan or spend tax revenue to cover an annual loss.
  • In recent times the city has taken no steps to reduce costs of operating the utilities.  They have taken every opportunity to expand the cost to residential consumers and buried it in the utility rate structure.
  • The electric utility has a huge fixed annual cost (mostly debt payments) averaged over the calculated electric rates and total annual production.  It must sell all of its planned annual production to recoup the funds needed to pay the debt service.  If you are forced to conserve electricity via tiered pricing, the city has to automatically raise the price.  It is “Catch-22″ Math!  The more you conserve the more it will cost you.  Also,the city makes more money by transferring more utility (hidden tax) revenues to the general fund with every rate increase.  This meets the definition of a special tax in the constitution!  You have a constitutional right to vote yes or no on a special tax measure (remember the library special tax).
  • The city wants you to think it is running a business. A municipal utility provides services to the ownership of property.  It is a government-owned and operated monopoly.  You have to contract with the city for electric service to your property and pay the hidden tax rate of up to 57%!

Now that is some profit margin!  Where is your money going?  Can you live on 350 kwh of electric service per month!!

The city by approving 50% increases in electric rates over the last six years and instituting punitive tiered pricing, is forcing you to conserve electricity (remember in October 2006, city council approved electricity rate hikes to fund the “$1.5 billion Renaissance”) but,  you don’t need more electricity.  Most if not all of the $650 million dollars spent for electric infrastructure improvements has been for future growth of the city population, housing, downtown office space and re-development.  It was never planned to help you but, you will pay and pay and pay.  This burden of hidden taxation falls most harshly on fixed income (retirees) and low income families in the city.  The city would prefer you to move to Mo-Val.

Keep connected with TMC, Hidden Taxes in Water Rates coming next!

TMC ENDORSES DVONNE PITRUZZELLO FOR CITY OF RIVERSIDE MAYOR

STEVE CLUTE ASK FOR YOUR VOTE ON JUNE 5TH FOR THE OFFICE OF STATE SENATE!

BOB BUSTER ASK FOR YOUR VOTE FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERVISOR ON JUNE 5TH

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED ONE TWO STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!  WE REALIZE IT’S TOUGH, SO HANG IN THERE.. COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM