ATTHETOPCELERY

THIS IS THE BASE CELERY AND THEN WE HAVE THE BASE CELERY WITH SOMETHING EXTRA, AS IN THIS CASE A LITTLE CREAM CHEESE ON TOP..

We brought this issue to the forefront as a result of an article we wrote regarding the Councilman Mike Soubirous investigations.  We stumbled upon the interview by KFI’s John and Ken’s Interview with Costa Mesa Councilman Jim Righeimer, in which he openly talked about public employee salaries.  He stated that the base pay of public employees is not the actual pay.  What is not reported is that their are 75 additional pay scales for that base pay.  For example, a police officer base pay will show as $65K, but when you factor in the additional pay, such as overtime, and incidental salary charges, such as putting on your uniform, taking home the police dog, the actual pay can be in excess of $135K, and may not even include health care benefits!  So TMC investigated, and this what we found.

(CLICK IMAGES BELOW TO ENLARGE)

salone     saltwo     salthree     salfour     salfive

ON TRANSPARENT CALIFORNIA YOU CAN REVIEW EVERY RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S BASE PAY PLUS AND THEN THE ACTUAL PAY FOR 2012 (CLICK THIS LINK)

City Manager’s Scott Barber’s base pay in 2012 was $280,634.96.  With other pay and benefits his total pay package is actually $377,775.04

Chief Sergio Diaz’s base pay in 2012 was $235,860.55.  With other pay and benefits his total pay package is actually $348,134.25

Former City Attorney Gregory Priamos’s base pay in 2012 was $212,946.  With other pay and benefits his total pay package is actually $309,671.10

But how does Tina English, AKA: Christina Marie English who previously worked for RDA, and all of a sudden is qualified for Deputy Public Works Director/ Engineering NC2E!  She only has a “Dancing Degree!”  How is that possible?  Was it because of the legacy of former City Manager Brad Hudson?  Is she the “God Daughter” of Brad Hudson?  TMC staff is investigating.

Tina English’s base pay in 2012 was $156,879.39.  With other pay and benefits her total pay package is actually $214,367.43!  Not bad for someone with a dance degree and no public works or engineering experience.  We asked that question.  Did she get the job because she maybe the goddaughter of former City Manager Brad Hudson?  How does one receive a position as this without an engineering degree and believe this is in the best interest of the taxpayer?  Her position is Deputy Public Works Director/ Engineering NC2E.  Before that she was Assistant Redevelopment Chief, under Hudson.  How does one believe there would not be some liability and technical problems for the City?

tina english

Tina English, Ms. Jack of All Trades

What makes City Manager Scott Barber qualified to manage a City such as ours, Riverside, with a population of 300,000 with what we are being told is a “Thespian Degree?”

sb

City Manager Scott Barber

This is an individual who doesn’t care about our City, but what he can get out of it.  You can bet you bottom dollar, as Chief Diaz, that they will sue the City, the taxpayer, for imagery issues.  Thank-you former City Manager Brad Hudson, and Thank-you County of Riverside!  That’s a whole different story that will give you the dry heaves! and we will get to the throw-up issues soon..

When you look at Police and Fire, that becomes a different story.  Maybe there is good reason for overtime or is it a perk?  In the private sector that is a no-no.  Overtime sinks deep into your bottom line, and there is a lot of it.  In the private sector, even physicians who work 70 to 80 hrs our under professional status and work a base celery or base hourly pay.  Let’s look at a few employee salaries from Riverside’s Fire and Police.  As indicated, Costa Mesa Councilman Jim Righeimer stated that the base celery salary is not the actual celery salary.  Righeimer states that “other pay” is part of the 75 different other ways to get pay: in the Costa Mesa Police Department it would mean getting paid for putting your uniform on or getting paid to take care of the police dog, etc. etc.  Of course, we ask RPOA President Brian Smith to chime in on this, in order to clear the air!

It’s a common assumption that salaries workers can be asked to work overtime without being compensated extra. That assumption is not always true.  It’s not whether you’re salaried but whether you meet the test for exempt status as defined by federal and state laws. An employee that is exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act is not entitled to overtime.  There are many administrators, executives and professionals who are exempt from overtime, this can be done and would help municipalities and the bottom line help the taxpayer.

Fire Captain Terry L. Miller’s base pay in 2012 was $86,545.09.  Factoring in OT at $10,641.41, plus other pay $139,060.72 and benefits $63,658.03, his total pay package comes out to $299,905.25

Fire Battalion Chief Mitchell D. Wesche base pay in 2012 was $12,192.76.  Factoring in OT at $56.040.52, plus other pay $23.545.65 and benefits $68,655.83, his total pay package comes to $273.434.76

Police Lieutenant Boyd L. Phillips base pay in 2012 was $118,430.23.  Factoring in OT at $7,111.66, plus other pay $39,757.80 and benefits $60,908.03, his total pay package comes to $226,207.72

Police Sergeant Daniel C. Reeves base pay in 2012 was $102,481.22.  Factoring in OT at $28,180.79, plus other pay $30,325.60 and benefits $63,169.00, his total pay package comes to $224,156.61

Police Detective Matthew L. Lackey’s base pay in 2012 was $88,500.05.  Factoring in OT at $33,398.97, plus other pay $38,132.06 and benefits $56,680.51, his total pay package come to $216,711.59

Detective Aurelio Melendrez base pay in 2012 was $88,500.06.  Factoring in OT at $14,695.08, plus other pay $15,148.36 and benefits $51,630.53, his total package comes out to $169,974.03

Sergeant Brian Smith base pay in 2012 was $99,316.86.  Factoring in OT at $14,772.58, plus other pay $30,493.76 and benefits $61,343.59, his total package comes out to $205,926.79

I come from a corporate background, and what I see in reference to overtime, does not make sense..  The overtime is excessive, why not hire more police or fire if we need them?  As a corporate person looking in, this is unacceptable and a reflection of inefficiency in the management of adepartment.  Sorry, that is the reality!  This is not “union busting” or any such scenario as that, it’s simply business!  The business of the people should take preference, and should not be subjugated to soft extortion or a political shake down in references to community services.  This becomes a health and safety issue that needs to be addressed, and the taxpayer should take preference, not the union!

weloveourcelery      morecelery

WOULD AURELIO BE ASKING HIS DADDY FOR MORE CELERY?  OR WOULD BRIAN BE HANDING OVER A LITTLE MORE CELERY FOR HIS TROOPS?

THE TEXT THAT SHOULDN’T BEEN: WAS MAYOR BAILEY SOLICITING FOR A NEW CITY COUNCIL REPLACEMENT DURING A CITY COUNCIL MEETING?  IT APPEARS SO!  The text was sent by President/Chief Operating Officer for Riverside Medical Clinic Judy Carpenter.  So why was Carpenter so concerned with the vote to approve Care Ambulance, granting them a non-exclusive medical transport franchise?

0

The initial text sent by Carpenter to Mayor Bailey during the June 17th City Council meeting and the vote that took place on this item,  “Very disapointing on the councils vote on ambulance service!!” (double exclamation points emphasized).  This was in reference to Council’s vote not to approve the franchise application for Care Ambulance.

votejune17

In response, Mayor Bailey unbeknownst sent his response as a group text (OOPS!) during a City Council meeting on Tuesday, June 17, 2014.  The group text included Councilman Mike Soubirous.  King Bailey responded, “Tell me about it. Embarrassing.  We need some new council members.  You ready to run?”  It appears that Bailey was also disappointed on how the council vote went, then he solicits Carpenter to run for City Council.  Has he solicited other members of the community to run against some current Council members?  Were they disappointed on the No votes by Davis, Mac Arthur, Perry and Adams?  Why is he texting during City Council, shouldn’t he be giving his full undivided attention to the work of the people?

photo

As a result of alleged Brown Act violations with this City Council meeting, Care Ambulance is requesting a second hearing to be heard.  Specifically, the concern was over City Councilman Paul Davis’s alleged violation of the state’s open meeting laws two months earlier!

Yeah, good luck with that, TMC. You need 2800 signatures to get the recall on the ballot, and there weren’t even 2800 votes in the last Ward 6 election. Have fun!

I find it hilarious that you all give Paul Davis the benefit of the doubt on his “accidentally” cc’ing Mike Soubirous on his e-mail about Care Ambulance. C’mon! Would you accept that explanation from anyone else on the dais? Later on, Davis said in the P-E article that he would not participate in the vote to rescind the earlier decision (you can look it up) and yet there he was, being petty and vindictive and demanding that Rusty Bailey recuse himself from the future vote.

Davis made the case over alleged bias on the part of Bailey, but since everyone up there has already voted, then they have all shown their bias on the issue, so why not recuse everyone?

The fact is, the only member to be reprimanded for ethics violations is Davis, and he admitted guilt and apologized to the Fire Department official that he interfered with.

Fact: the recent investigation concludes that Davis may have violated the charter in directing city employees to look at a March JPA land deal.

Fact: Davis’ actions caused the City to rescind its earlier decision on Care ambulance in order to avoid a lawsuit – and if he ends up voting on September 9, we may end up with a lawsuit anyway. Way to protect the taxpayers, Paul!

Davis has shown to be nothing but a bunch of hot air, a bull in a china shop, arrogant and bombastic. We’ve now learned that he’s petty and vindictive too.  -Kaptalizm, commenter on TMC

CITY OF RIVERSIDE INVITES THE PUBLIC TO CODE OF ETHICS AND CONDUCT MEETING WHICH WILL BE ADDRESSING THE PROCESS:

info092014

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW NEWS RELEASE

THE CONTINUAL SAGA OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S FAUX DROUGHT.  We explained in earlier posting that the City decided to inadvertently comply and adopt the State mandated conservation measures, even though we were no required to do so.  Since the City had to go through the process of adopting the measures, meant that we as a City were exempt!  Exempt because we own our own water, or I should say the public, that’s why they call it “Public Utilities.”  So why would your representatives attempt to terrorize the citizens with these measure when not required?  After all you own it!  They even had to amend (change) portions of Riverside’s Municipal Code, specifically Chapter 14.22, “Water Conservation”, just to comply with the State of California’s mandated conservation measures!  How insane is that?  The second thing they did is they picked and choose what they wanted to enforce, for example pools.  You can’t water your lawn or your fruit trees, but you can certainly have a pool!  Why?  Because it is exempt! I guess you can say it’s true of the moniker, “Do not let a good tragedy go to waste!”  But the clincher is, Riverside is not experiencing the tragedy first hand, we decided to create one first hand in order to benefit from it.

bulletin

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

The bulletin sent to residents (above) states that RPU will be able to serve all of it’s customers needs.  It also states that most of the water come from the Bunker Hill Basin in San Bernardino and as a result of this drought the basin is at it’s lowest point in recorded history.  Interesting yet, a possible manipulation of the data.  At one point the city first mentioned that ground water levels have dropped due to increased use/demand from consumers but, they mention ground water available in acre feet.  The information they should have used was depth to ground water in wells.  The San Bernardino Water Basin holds about 5 Million acre feet of water. Only about a million acre feet are available to the existing wells.  So about 4 millions acre feet remains to be tapped by deeper wells.  So why the faux drought excuses?  Another conspiracy hatched by Council and Staff?  It also states that code will not be patrolling for violators, but it certainly appears that the City is encouraging neighbors to snitch on other neighbors!

            BRQ&Aone

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

The above is from Blue Riverside, in their Q&A portion the question arises as to what if I have a pool?  It pretty much states not to worry about it.  This site also encourages neighbors to snitch on neighbors.

 

RAC-header

POOLS ARE EXEMPT!

na48ea-b88161983z.120140810170640000gdn45igm.10

THE PAN AMERICAN SYNCHRONIZED SWIMMING CHAMPIONSHIP ARE OKAY UNDER MANDATORY DROUGHT!

Of course they didn’t tell you that, how can you respond to a contradiction?  The other thing they did is exempt educational institutions!  Cal Baptist College, RCC & UCR to name a few.  Of course with mandated water conservation there should be no new development according to the law!  I would imagine this is also exempt…after all this is Riverside.  Thank-you Council for being transparent and telling us the truth!  The following was sent out to all residents in Riverside telling us to conserve.  Since schools are exempt, I saw the water sprinklers in the middle of the day going like gang busters!  But we as residents are only allowed to water between the hours between 6 pm and 10 am, otherwise expect to be cited!

img192

WHAT WAS RECENTLY SENT TO THE RESIDENTS (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

 ORIGMEMO

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL REVISED MEMO REPORT

ORIGORDINANCE

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL ORDINANCE AND REVISIONS

The truth of the matter is why did council pass this ordinance against the stock holders of the water rights, the residents?  Most of these violations will lye on the residents who are just attempting to make a living and pay their bills. I can only see that it was profit driven, maybe to help pay for the City’s increasing debt service.  Also, remember, approximately 20% of our water is sold to Western Municipal.  So our we conserving water so that we may be able to sell more off to other communities for a higher profit?  Then cite the citizens on water violations to increase profits?  Then we will be asked to use less water, then they will raise water rates to increase profits. You will use less and pay more.  Then they will manipulate the tier pricing seasonally or at will to increase even more profits. People in the City of Riverside, you need to start going to city council!  Why would Ward 1 Councilman Mike Gardner, who worked as an executive for Edison, vote for this uneccesary mandatory conservation?  The question is, “Why did Council decide to breach the residents ownership of water rights in order to make a profit?  This simply appears to nurture another law suit against the City of Riverside for failing in their duty to protect the taxpayer.

 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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

Untitled-1

I been thinking about this investigation quite a bit, and continue with the thought of just what were they thinking?  Was this a conspired smear campaign, a power play to remove a colleague who may have become a political advisery?  Their plan, it appeared, simply begain to unraveled at the seams unveiling a vile, putrid decay of the very fabric of our democratic system.  Mayor Bailey and Councilman Adams relayed to Soubirous on April 1, 2014, that four City of Riverside employees filed under the Whistleblower’s Protection Act with complaints against him that he violated Riverside City Charter Chapter 407, thereby creating a Hostile Work Environment, what was said to him never occurred.  At the July 22nd Councilman Soubirous hearing, Councilman Paul Davis admitted Brown Act violations in which are council were involved.

In the Hostile Work Environment Guide, whats important to note is that the conduct or behavior must be pervasive and constitute a pattern rather than consist of one or two isolated incidents.  This pattern must include discrimination in the work place based on race, ethnicity, religion, disability, age, sex or color.  I didn’t see incompetence listed here. Whats also interesting is that this specialized high priced Law firm of  Gumport Mastan, either didn’t know what the legal definition of “Hostile Work Environment” was, or they knew and were going to take advantage of City Manager Scott Barber, Chief Sergio Diaz, Mayor Rusty Bailey and Councilmember Steve Adams and RIP-OFF the City of Riverside for approx $100,000.00.   How embarrasing that Barber,Diaz, Bailey and Adams thought this investigation would be in the best interest of the public.  Who was advising these people!  Oh yea I forgot Greg Priamos. Did Greg know the legal definition of Hostile Work Environment?  Well I guess it was a good thing that Priamos left for new job with the County, he is that much closer to the County Jail.  In retrospect, are they all really that DUMB, INCOMPETENT, and/or CORRUPT?

According to Seattle Business Magazine, misapplying “hostile” increases unfounded legal claims and tension and strained relationships between employers and employees and/or between coworkers, while misunderstanding “hostile” causes management to mishandle such allegations.

Section 407. Interference in administrative service.  Neither the Mayor nor the City Council nor any of its members shall interfere with the execution by the City Manager of his/her powers and duties, or order, directly or indirectly, the appointment by the City Manager or by any of the department heads in the administrative service of the City, of any person to an office or employment or their removal therefrom. Except for purpose of inquiry, the Mayor, the City Council and its members shall deal with the administrative service under the City Manager solely through the City Manager and neither the Mayor nor the City Council nor any member thereof shall give orders to any subordinates of the City Manager, either publicly or  privately. (Effective 12/27/1995).

Since they are “Whistleblower’s”, I would have imagined Federal Complaints would be in order.  No such Federal filing according to records ever occurred.  The four employees would have been RPOA President Brian Smith, RPOA Vice President Aurelio Melendrez, Chief of Police Sergio Diaz and City Manager Scott Barber.  It would appear that the conspirators whittled the four filers to two since the true investigation only reveals two employees; Barber and Diaz, with Smith and Melendrez as “witnesses.”  Barber made an indirect claim of a hostile work environment based on the witness testimony of third party information which, came directly from his meeting with Union President Brian Smith.  He then crafted his letter and sent it to Mayor Bailey and Councilman Adams, of course, CC’d (Carbon Copy) City Attorney Gregory Priamos (AKA: The Architect).  Remarkably, his letter stated that what was said between Smith and Soubirous created a hostile work environment for himself, he even admits what he has written is derived “third hand”, or AKA third party information.  I guess you can always count on third party information to make a tight case.

 ComplaintBarber1     ComplaintBarber22

BARBER’S COMPLAINT (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

Not once, did our City Manager Scott Barber find it necessary to contact Councilman Soubirous to corroborate RPOA President (and RPD Sergeant-hoping to be Lieutenant) Brian Smith’s side of the story.  This I find quite extraordinary!  Isn’t Barber a conflict manager specialist?  Or was this class just not offered in a Thespian Major?  They didn’t even file their complaint according to the rules they evidently uphold (Charter Chapter 202-Code of Ethics and Conduct).

section202 warrow

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW CODE OF ETHICS AND CONDUCT SECTION 202

Did they perceive themselves as entitled, for the rules of law?  Did they think the rules of law didn’t apply to them?  They certainly apply to everyone else!  Section 202 describes that a complaint form should be used and filed with the City Clerk!  That certainly didn’t happen.

In a secondary act of incredible noteworthy importance, the Chief of Police in his letter did the exact same thing as City Manager Scott Barber.  He based his complaint on RPOA Union President and RPD Sergeant’s Brian Smith’s personal account of his meeting with Councilman Mike Soubirous, that fateful Valentine’s Day of 2014.

ComplaintDiaz1          ComplaintDiaz2

DIAZ’S COMPLAINT (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

Again, an indirect claim of a hostile work environment was made, this time by the Chief.  We have to ask the question if Soubirous was being set up as part of orchestrated smear campaign?  We know there was growing tension between Soubirous and his relationship with City Manager Scott Barber and the Chief of Police Sergio Diaz.  Diaz in fact, threatened Soubirous political career.  Diaz stating in an email that it is “politically unwise to declare war on your cops.”   This is a guy who Soubirous loaned his truck out to on several occasions!  Also  Council Candidate John Brandriff, had filed a complaint against the chief  in  which his complaint was “founded”Diaz had told Brandriff at a West Side Story showing at the Fox Theater said the following:  “If you have anymore political aspirations don’t make an enemy out of me”.  This is a Chief who makes more than a half a million a year, $247 from his LAPD pension and $307 from his current salary as RPD Chief. Thinking he can manipulate the political fabric of our city.

INVEST267

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE REST OF THE LEFT OVER INTERVIEWS ELIMINATED FROM THE FIRST INVESTIGATIONAL RELEASE, THEY JUST DIDN’T SEEM TO FIT INTO THE LAW FIRM OF GUMPORT MASTAN’S $100K STORY

RPOA President Brian Smith emailed me to tell me how I may have spun the actual fact, that I need to investigate before making a statement on the blog. So when RPOA Brian Smith sent TMC this email:

emailbriansmith

We asked RPOA President Brian Smith to clear up some questions simply because of his tag line, that he felt our post was a “interesting spin.” (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE).

tmcresponsetwo

With that we asked our email to respond to the original Cop Play Book. (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE).  I did attempt to clarify through Seargent Smith himself but he never emailed me back.  So I did take his advice and did a little investigation of my own.  What I also found quite peculiar was RPD Sergeant and RPOA President Brian Smith’s interrelationships and affiliations with reference to CorporateWiki.Com   The connection between Cliff Mason and Chris (Christopher) Lanzillo.

wikicorplanzillio

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Now, former RPOA President Sgt. Cliff Mason was implicated in illegal sale of revolvers to former City Manager Brad Hudson and Assistant City Manager Thomas DeSantis while a RPD officer with the City of Riverside.  At the time Lanzillo was president, Brian Smith was Vice President, and Aurelio Melendrez (Councilman Andy Melendrez’s son) was Secretary.  According to Chief Sergio Diaz, Lanzillo was fired for doing some “pretty bad things.”   Those bad things were never elaborated upon.  We are still attempting to find what these really “bad things” are.  But he did come back to sue the taxpayers with the law firm he later worked for, Lackie, Dammeier & McGill.  His job was reinstated with RPD and shortly thereafter retired on a medical disability.  Shortly thereafter, started his own investigation company in Orange County and did some investigatory work for this law firm.  We asked the question is Lanzillo committed insurance fraud as a result of his miracle recovery?  The law firm was later the brunt of a DA investigation, which ultimately led to their dissolution.

When Chris Lanzillo was President of the RPOA, Brian Smith was Vice President and Aurelio Melendrez was Secretary, was the cop play book in effect back then?  The Police Union have in the past employed a law firm, Lackie,Dammeier & McGill, and a member of that law firm- former RPD Officer and RPOA Union President Chris Lanzillo who, according to numerous reports chronicled in the Orange County Register, tailed Cost Mesa Councilman Jim Righeimer falsely claiming he was drunk.  He had a receipt for consuming his diet cokes at a meeting at a local bar in his possession.  We now must look at the person behind the incident, former RPOA President and former RPD Detective Chris Lanzillo, and if he still is in contact with current RPOA President Brian Smith?

Former RPOA President & former RPD Detective Chris Lanzillo

The Cop Play Book was a list of strategic tactics designed and crafted by the law firm of  Lackie, Dammeier, McGill & Ethir, for cops and their unions in order to get what they want on the negotiating table.  The full play book is listed below with some excerpts.  The Playbook was quickly removed from the law firms web site when the cow pies began fly; not to mention Chris Lanzillo’s name was also removed from their web site as a working associate when the press exposed their underbelly.

            copplaybook1    copplaybook2   copplaybook3    copplaybook4

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL COP PLAY BOOK

Accordingly, with reference to the first page above, “associations leaders know, association leaders should be selective in their battles.” We also know that Aurelio Melendrez, Vice President of the Riverside Police Officer’s Association has referred to their RPOA as an “Organization.”

Always keep this in mind.  The public could care less about your pay, medical coverage and pension plan (really?), All they want to know is “what is in it for them?”  Again, how arrogant, deceiving and elitist of a statement this is, of course the taxpayer cares of the cost, they are paying for it!

The Association should be like a quiet giant in the position of, “do as I ask and don’t piss me off.”  Again I ask RPOA President Brian Smith, is this a formula to create better politics, or “piss poor politics?”

“You should be in very close contact with your associations attorney, during these times to ensure you are not going to get yourself or any of your members in trouble.”   I would say they are referring to the law firm of Lackie, Dammeier, McGill & Ethir.  The demise of this law firm and their criminal activity can be read in the article by OC Watchdog, “Bare-knuckle police defense gets knocked out.”    Further, part of the law firms criminal activity was that they used GPS, in the form of attaching electronic devices illegally in order to track city officials!

No City Council or Governing Board should take place where members of your association and the public aren’t present publicly chastasing them for their lack of concern for public safety.  Do we not see this in the City of Riverside because they deal and prevent this issue from being public in closed sessions?  Every City Council meeting Riverside has in closed sessions deals with negotiating  with Union Representatives!

Blunders by the City Manager, Mayor, or City Council members of wasteful spending should be highlighted and pointed out to the public at every opportunity.

…as a pressure tactic, tactic seeking petition to file a referendum on eliminating the City Manager’s position for a full time elected Mayor may cause the City Manager to rethink his or hers position.

Focus on a City Manager, Councilperson, Mayor or Chief of Police and keep the pressure up until that person assures you his loyalty and then move on to the next victim.  Sounds familiar?

Of course, other ideas that cops come up with a very imaginative.  Just keep in mind, the idea is to show the decision makers that the public favors public safety and it will only harm their public support by not prioritizing you and almost equally important, to let them know that next time that they should agree with you much sooner.  Sounds familiar?  Sound to me as another strong-arm tactic possibly utilized to attain an objective.  Is this in the best interest of the taxpayer?  Or is the taxpayer being shaked down?

“Are Police Unions crossing the line while bullying public officials?” as in this news story.  How effective was play book for former Upland Law Firm Lackie, Dammeier & McGill as in this news story “How Police Play Hardball At The Bargaining Table”.   Was the play book a soft illegal tool implemented in order to creatively “shake-down” or “strong-arm” political targets, in order to make them a bit more pliable?

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE (RIGHEIMER CALLS THEM “THUGS” & “A CRIMINAL OPERATION.” ON KFI RADIO)

On the KFI 640, radio host John and Ken interview Councilman Jim Righeimer about the incident, the original 911 call by Chris Lanzillo is also played on this show.  It’s worth listening to.  Righeimer is being set up by police officer and Chris Lanzillo.  Lanzillo is driving a white Kia with no license plates while following Righeimer.  Also noted was that he was illegally on the phone while driving, while making a false 911 call.

KFI

CLICK THIS LINK TO HEAR THE 08/27/2012 AUDIO INTERVIEW BETWEEN JOHN & KEN AND COUNCILMAN RIGHEIMER AND AUDIO OF LANZILLO’S 911 CALL REPORTING AN ALLEGED DUI WHILE TAILING RIGHEIMER

Councilman Jim Righeimer claims that the base pay that is indicated for police officers as well as fire fighters within the city is not the actual pay.  For example if their base pay states $65K, it can actually be $135K, because their are actually 75 different ways to pay a public employee, not to mention pension, and may not even include healthcare!  What they are saying is that the actual average pay per officer is actually $135K, but what you see or talked about is the base pay of $65K.  Righeimer states that this was the main reason he was targeted, because he exposed to the taxpayer how much public employees really make.  TMC is investigating this aspect within the City of Riverside.

On September 9, 2012 the Orange County DA subpoenaed video from the Costa Mesa bar, where Lanzillo says Councilman Righeimer was drunk.  According to a KTLA report, Lanzillo stated that Councilman Righeimer stumbled out of the bar and was swirving all over the road in 911 call.  According to the video, it showed that he was not.  The police officer who went to Councilman Righeimer’s home, found he was not drunk, and found he had only drank two diet cokes.  Congressman Dana Rohrabacher became involved, and a Federal investigation ensued.  Currently, Righeimer is suing the Costa Mesa Police Union over the DUI sting fiasco.  In what was called a “very sophisticated conspiracy” by Righeimer’s attorney, Vince Finaldi, the use of GPS tracking devices utilized just takes this whole episode to the next level.  Bad enough, that the FBI is involved.

Councilman Jim Righeimer

 

A very similar incident occurred with Buena Park Councilman Fred Smith in this Orange County Register story.

Jack Wu of the Daily Pilot brought this coveted point, if Lanzillo was getting paid to investigate and watch someone else, then stop and waste precious time following Councilman Righeimer whom he thought was drunk.  Wouldn’t you want your money back and question if there was some sort of attention deficit associated with his medical disability? 

In an article by Lauren Williams of the Daily Pilot, The Los Angeles Police Protective League (LLPPL) issued a statement critical of Upland based law firm Lackie, Dammeier & McGill and criticized the Costa Mesa Police Association (A Police Union).  They said that “Hardball Tactics”, or what I would say “Intimidation Tactics” can erode the publics trust.  Residents in communities trust and the need the police to protect and serve.  When these types of incidents occurr, the citizens see the police as a seperate entity, whereby the residents health and safety become at risk, and they to become intimidated by uncertaintity of who’s benefit the police really serve.   The LLPPL have a long and proven  record of working with city officials to ensure that public safety comes first.  It’s now left to the Fed’s to investigate the activities of this law firm and respond to the public with their conclusions.

Is the power of the badge being used to “bully” and/or being used in “enforcer type tactics” for police unions against elected officials?  Have police unions and law firms taken their activities to a different level that will become a red flag for the Feds?  An article by Steven Frank of California News and Views has this to say about that subject.

What I’m getting from some of these reports is very disturbing.  Have Police Unions become so powerful that they are somehow controlling certain political scenarios?  This would definitely not benefit the taxpayer, but the very few in union membership.  And by doing so, becomes a public health and safety issue.  So now you have a police union, an attorney law firm with a police background, and possibly toss in some outside police officers working together in unison using the grey areas of the law to terrorize and shake down individuals in city government.  Then decisions and contracts are then negotiated under these “circumstances.”  Others in elected positions are also saying that the law firm harasses by threatening grand jury investigations.

Well if anybody knows, you can file a grand jury investigation against just about anything, you are harassed by the fact that you have to deal with it.  Sounds like a good tactic as others say in the business, a “client control” strategy.  Taking it a step further, is this part of the reason why California has unsustainable union contracts, is going bankrupt, and/or the reason why these contracts cannot be fulfilled or honored?  Then the question would be, were some of these contracts not negotiated in the best interest of the taxpayer due to ulterior motives?  Something to think about, this is what movies are made out of..  And this is one scenario I would like to see played out on the wide screen.

lanzillo

Let me see if I’ve got this straight…A Riverside detective named Chris Lanzillo gets fired…then is called back so that he can be retired early on a medical disability…which qualifies him to recieve his pay in large part tax free for the rest of his life.  BUT…he’s not so disabled that he can’t work as a private investigator for a law firm that represents cops and cop unions…and shall we say…suuplement his retirement pay……Is that absurd or what!  He’s a bad cop who’s now a crook…and we got to pay his freight for the rest of his life!  – John Bosch, Commenter on the Orange County Register

Chris Lanzillo made #15 of Orange County Weekly’s Scariest People of 2012!  According to OC Weekly, Lanzillo proved the adage that once an asshole cop, always an asshole cop.

s

But in this pic it appears he (Lanzillo, to the right) is drinking his ass off…

We also ask the question if City Hall elites have a play book, to get what they want?  Reviewing, could this have been a concerted avenue utilized by Adams (Ex-RPD), Bailey, Smith, Aurelio and Diaz to destroy a political opponent?  Could this have been a set-up, as Councilman Righeimer felt, as in his case?

According to a PE article you stated that the investigation on Soubirous was “incomplete” rather than “inconclusive.”, since Soubirous refused to let Gumport interview him.  But it seems that Smith has forgotten that Soubirous was told April 1, 2014 that he would never know the identities of those who complained against him, that there were four and accused him of interfering with employee duties and causing a hostile work environment.  According to the Fourteenth Amendment, was Soubirious being deprived of his right of “due process?”  With this in mind, the case lacks creadance, therefore having documentation of all correspondence would be in order.  Soubirous did just that, he declined to be interviewed, instead provided written answers to questions.  After all we found out later that the interview process contained no audio recording or corresponding notes.  This already appears as a set-up when you don’t know who the accusers are, and not allowed to respond appropriately by questioning them.  Incidently, Smith supported Soubirous when he ran for Supervisor and had close ties to the Soubirous family.  What made this campaign different for RPOA?  Did the order come from the City?

Smith said he would have nothing to gain by making up a story about what Soubirous said. “As a law enforcement officer, if I am proven to be less than credible, that’s potentially career-ending,” he said.  But does he?  Does the Cop Play Book tell a different story?

SEVEN

Are the actions of the seven responsible for this embarrassing political train wreck?

10274177_10202919843310306_2925018241049635978_n

The wife and I have lived at this address for 42 years…we have had outstanding council reps, Arden Anderson, Rosanna Scott, Frank Schiavone, Paul Davis and now Mike Soubirous.  The unfounded “complaints” lodged against Councilman Soubirous are a joke. Apparently our City Manager and Chief Diaz got their bowels in a uproar over statement{s} made by the police union president or whatever title he hold/held. What a waste of tax payers money for lawyer fees. The approx. $98.000.00 would have bought alot of books for the libraries.  We support Councilman Soubirous 110% against these complaints or whatever you want to call them. Same goes for the investigation of Paul Davis too…Suck it Up Boys…get over it and save the City of Riverside taxpayers money for good causes not mickey-mouse charges.  -  Gordon Williams, Commenter on the PE 
 
Smith met with Soubirous one time alone and Soubirious met with one time with Aurelio Melendrez. You would think that if Smith felt there was any inclination of inappropriateness by Soubirous, he would attempt to record the moment or bring along a second party (which he claims are in RPOA’s “policy”).   He did not.  In fact he supported Soubirous for County Supervisor, even then giving him a campaign check.

RPOASUPPORTMIKESUPERVISOR

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Chief Sergio Diaz also supported Soubirious by giving him a $500.00 personal check.  Smith, Diaz and Soubirous were friends.  Soubirous even loaned his truck out (several times) to Chief Diaz.  So what happened?  Was it that he couldn’t be bought?  He asked the questions he shouldn’t have asked?

Does Melendrez appears to conceive that RPD is an independent “organization” as stated at City Council?  An organization (or organisation) is an entity, such as an institution or an association, that has a collective goal and is linked to an external environment.  Has Riverside’s finest lost there way?  Concerned citizens and local community groups in Riverside agree that changes need to be made.  The Riverside Police Department cannot be part of as an independent external entity, it cannot be effective distancing themselves from the community, they must be part of the community.

Aurelio made it very clear that there “organization” should be autonomous..  I don’t know what world he is living in, but the residents of Riverside pay his salary and all of those in RPD. If he would like to be in control of his own organization, he should try to privatize it and start up his own armed security company, otherwise it gives the impression of a rogue organization.  A police force which has no transparency or accountability!  Why would someone think this was anything but open, honest and transparent?  The residents, the taxpayers, pay a lot of money for their salaries and pensions, and they come back and treat us in a condescending manner?  That’s unacceptable! It’s apparent that RPOA only cares about their members, the members of their “organization,”  as opposed to the taxpayer who pays their salaries, who they are there to protect and serve..or are they really self serving?  I ask this because the question arises as to where their loyalty lies?  Is it an attempt to separate law enforcement from their responsibilities and loyalties to the community residents? We may attempt to say yes, only by their actions.. Actions speak louder than words.

Mr. Smith, do the majority of RPD officers believe in what you are doing? If so, the taxpayers best interest is not at heart and we have a conflict and a question of loyalty. Your oath should state that.  To breach that would cause a health and safety issue with the taxpayers, that you’ve taken an oath to protect and serve.  Would you hold the taxpayer hostage to the wishes of your organization?  This would be a cause of breaching your contract with the taxpayer.  We as taxpayers asked RPOA to replace the cost of this kangaroo investigation.  We asked the amount to be replaced to the General Fund.  We ask that you resign as well as Aurelio Melendrez, or be fired.  This the community of Riverside ask, in the hopes they will not be retaliated against, we know we will.

Regardless, I would like RPOA President Brian Smith to chime in on this.. especially placing his Chief as a “deity” or “god like”.  That statement just seemed off the beaten track.  It is also easy to use big words and threats on the taxpayer, with the taxpayers own money.  Should this be acceptable to the tax payer or criminal? I say this because we then attempt to arise to a different level of reasoning. Those who work for us and take an oath to protect and serve, those who pay for their services, can actually take a different route..a route that doesn’t include the taxpayer.  Therefore what do we have as a police force?  We have a double dipping Chief of Police who was approximately two years late with his Strategic Plan… Again I say it, he was not qualified!   And as a citizen and taxpayer, I should’t be threatened by the Chief of Police nor any citizen/resident in Riverside.  Why does he do this?  What is necessary and hasn’t been done is to investigate Chief Diaz’s background.  If we would have investigated former City Manager Brad Hudson’s background, we would find that he had a criminal background…credit card fraud.  While Mayor Bailey stated that Hudson was a “moral compass” we dispute that..   He did have a criminal past!   The Hudson legacy gave us City Manager Scott Barber and Chief Sergio Diaz.  Two of the four instigators of this Valentines Day Blunder.  Not to mention, Hudson gave us his greatest gift to the residents, $4 billion in unpaid debt. Ask why you are seeing increases in sewer rates and mandatory water conservation, where we own our own water.  We see that this was one issue all can agree on even Smith regarding former City Manager Brad Hudson.  Smith states, “I think Scott’s done a great job for the city considering the bucket of shit he was left with Brad (Hudson) and Tom (DeSantis) and half the City Council that there’s now left him with it.” (pg.20 Smith Investigation, pg. 46 Investigative Report).

bucketsh

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

When Smith commented on this investigation at City Council on June 17th, he hadn’t known that Soubirous actually responded in writing to questions.  The current investigation as it stands was not good enough for Smith at the Jully 22nd, who calls the investigation “incomplete” and would like the DA to get involved.  When a group of conspirators decide that the accused, should not know who is accusing him, or have and information of what the detail charges are. Why would anyone agree to a oral interview?   The law firm didn’t even tape the interviews or had written notes!  Good thing Soubirous didn’t agree to that, and rightfully so.  The law firm could not be trusted, where’s the due process?  The Chief and RPOA should know better, especially the Fourteenth Amendment.  Maybe they don’t know, or maybe they don’t care about the people’s rights?

But it didn’t stop there, Smith claimed in his unsworn testimony that Soubirous wanted a meeting via his phone text. This was unverifiable by Smith, since he states he doesn’t keep his text messages, he deletes all of them.  Unknowingly, Soubirous kept his, and those text contradicted Smith’s testimony. The truth of the matter is that Smith called for a meeting. (pg.7 Smith Interview, pg. 33 of investigational report).

TEXTBRIAN     textone     texttwo     textthree    textfour     textfive

Smith in the interview states Soubirous texted him to set up a meeting, Soubirous personal text show contradicts Smith’s statement. (CLICK ABOVE IMAGES TO ENLARGE).

Why didn’t Smith file a complaint on Soubirous, and was only a witness?  This investigation seems quite remarkable, after all, he created the allegations. In fact,  it was all about Sergeant Brian Smith.  Was he up for a promotion to lieutenant?  What hat was he wearing?  RPOA President or RPD Officer Sergeant Brian Smith?  He was definitely wearing RPOA President hat, and this was not the first time.  The question is what made this meeting different?

We also ask the question of why the suggestion of armed security guards were in order for La Sierra Park? Soubirous originally asked Chief Sergio Diaz about the issue of utilizing RPD officers to patrol at the February 11th, City Council meeting.  Diaz never responded to the question, but instead disrespected Councilman Soubirous and even tried (actually succeeded) to get the audience to laugh at the question at Soubirious expense.  Scott Barber seemed to have to come up with a plan if in fact Diaz refused to comply.  Was armed security the alternative as a result of Diaz’s ego?  RPOA President Brian Smith was in favor of 3 million bucks in overtime money for his “troops.”  Of course this would never happen in the private sector, overtime that is, that is a no-no.  Why couldn’t we utilize that money for hiring new officers at the base salaries? It therefore must be a perk.  But with Diaz claiming there was not enough officers to handle the panhandlers, this seem to be the only viable option left for Soubirous to suggest as a way to fix the problem.

Was Valerie Hill recruited as Ward 3 candidate to run against Soubirous because of her commitment to RPD issues over the taxpayer?  Was Soubirous not chosen because of his position on (he was against) Measure A?  Cindy Roth, of the Greater Riverside Chamber thought so.  Now that we have Measure A, we still apparently have a problem with a shortage of RPD officers, hum… Roth still needed to receive her city taxpayer handouts for her non-profit “laundering” activity.  When will these welfare groups ever do the right thing?  The bottom line is that Soubirous rubbed two RPD officers egos the wrong way, and a conspiratorial retaliation ensued. We saw it first hand, some residents have seen this first hand but have remained intimidated and or quiet.

Smith accuses Soubirous of calling his guys “lazy” when it was Soubirous constituents who made that call. That would be Smith’s real employer, the taxpayer. (pg. 11 Smith Interview, pg.37 Investigative Report). Smith then wanted those emails and names, was he thinking of retaliation of those constituents?  It seems like Smith is parroting his boss, Sergio Diaz, who in his email to Soubirious stated to him that he (Soubirous) referred to RPD as “Lazy.”  Did Diaz make this up and his little boy Brian follows Daddy’s lead?  We need to ask the question of why the community does not contact RPD with their concerns.  I also don’t believe there is a direct contact number anymore, except for 911.

copslazy

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Why did Diaz avoid the issue of mental health training suggestions to help avoid officer-involved shootings when dealing with mentally disturbed or violent persons, when brought up by John Brandriff at a CPRC meeting?   Then he retaliated against him.. What kind of person with a badge and gun does a thing as this; without a badge, gun and power would someone actually attempt to do this?

According to Smith account in reference to Chief Diaz’s job being in jeopardy, he states that “Sergio Diaz is a “deity” in this City.”  “Other than the elected Sheriff of Riverside County, you are not going to remove Sergio Diaz without an uprising from the city and the citizens here and the employees that work for him.”  This according to his Smith’s interview.  Now remember non of these interviewees were legally sworn in to tell the truth, according to law.

DEITY:
1. a god or goddess
2. the state of being divine; godhead
3. the rank, status, or position of a god
4. the nature or character of God

I’m not sure where he gets this, but most of the community of Riverside sees otherwise.  Why Smith would support Diaz, against community feelings is a misnomer.  We ask the question to what is Smith’s MO?  Again, the taxpayers of Riverside would like to be reimbursed for the amount of $49K times 4, by RPOA, City Manager Scott Barber and Chief of Police Sergio Diaz for this conspiratorial debacle and attempting to trump are Democratic process!  Who are the real criminal masterminds?

Untitled-1                        sb                           DIAZ

character                                        whiner                                                      god

Just the fact that at one time Chris Lanzillo was President of RPOA running the show, makes we wonder as to their MO’s when it comes to taxpayer’s monies, and what they will do to ensure that they get it.

Another promotional piece by the PE. Not going to work Press Enterprise. RPD Chief Sergio Diaz is a liability to the city of Riverside. He has already been found guilty of using inappropriate and vulgar language toward Riverside resident John Brandriff. Where do I start. Diaz has had numerous unprovoked angry outbursts toward several residents with whom he disagrees. RPD Chief Sergio Diaz is a bad role model for the Riverside Police Department. Among the things that he has said to residents: grow some balls – it is politically unwise to get me upset – if you have any political ambitions in this town, you do not cross me – residents who live in their mothers basement, sitting in their underwear, eating cheeto’s – you should not be able to say anything – you are a disgrace …    Sergio Diaz refuses to attend RCPA Riverside Coalition for Police Accountability community meetings. Sergio Diaz refuses to accept any proposals from the city’s CPRC recommendations police commission. Sergio Diaz supports out-dated police policies that have cost Riverside taxpayers into the six digits due to lawsuits from residents who have been injured or killed by the Riverside police department.  Is this the kind of behavior that Riverside should have as a police chief ?  Let’s get a REAL police chief, preferably someone from within our own department.  No more LAPD transfers !!!    -Don Gallegos, commenter on the PE

 FORBES DECLARES RIVERSIDE A “COOL CITY”… 
The City of Riverside is rated #8 on their 2014 list of Cool Cities (CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FORBES ARTICLE)
 
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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

Untitled-1

…continually yelling in a crowded restaurant, while on City business, in a foreign country, stating, “I’m the Mayor!!!” and continuously exclaiming that he is the Mayor and how dare I (Davis) question him on this matter.

Who would have known with seven council you get egg roll?  The Mayor that is… Mayor Bailey that is…in Jiahang, China that is….in a Chinese restaurant that is….that he stated in the most stately way that he is the the Mayor,  to Councilman Paul Davis that is….  Got your attention?   The following is a Code of Ethics and Conduct Complaint issued and filed August 1, 2014 by Councilman Paul Davis against Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey for an incident which occurred in the country of China.

baileycomplaintfiled   papertwo   paperthree   paperfour   paperfive

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE THE FULL 88 PAGE DOCUMENT

Mayor Bailey is being charged with violating Riverside City Charter Section 201, Government Code 6252.5 & 6252.7 and will full & intentional interfering with a lawful public records request.  Not done yet, Riverside City Charter Section 300, 406, 407, 600 and 701.  Lastly, City of Riverside Resolution No. 22546.

The main gust is that Mayor Bailey directly interfered with a lawful public records request by Councilman Davis, by directly requesting City Manager Scott Barber not to give him those records!  Davis made a public records request a list of all employees who have left the city in the last 180 days, and who will be leaving.  During email exchanges with Davis, the City states the information does not exist, in a later email the information does exist.

employee

THIS CITY DOCUMENT STATES WHAT CAN, AND WHAT CANNOT BE REQUESTED REGARDING CITY EMPLOYEES (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

The complaint states that Bailey admits he interfered with the Public Request Act by making this statement in the crowded restaurant: “I will not allow the City Manager (Barber) to provide you with the requested report, as you are only going to use it against Scott!!!”

In the complaint Davis states that Bailey failed to maintain order, decorum and civility in a public place:  “When asked why he (Bailey) was yelling, he had no response, yet continued to act unprofessionally, yelling again, and acting quite childish and in a visibly offensive posture.”

But this does not stop there, regarding the Soubirious and Davis Investigation done by the City, the actions that occurred as a result of the recent Soubirous hearing, July 22nd, will be  submitted to the Riverside Grand Jury for review.  Below is a statement to the Riverside Grand Jury by Councilman Davis.

GJDavis

DAVIS STATEMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE GRAND JURY (CLICK TO ENLARGE)

For more than two decades I was involved in responding to request for public information from a California City and State Agency. In all those years not a single request for public information was deemed to be an ethical violation, a criminal act or a violation of the Brown Act. I expect an elected official to make inquiries when they observe something out of the ordinary. It is called a fiduciary obligation!  - Monrow A. Mabon · Commissioner at City of Riverside, CA – City Government, Commenter on the PE

WE ARE STILL WAITING TO HEAR THE STATUS OF THE FEDERAL LAWSUIT FILE AGAINST MAYOR BAILEY BY ATTORNEY LETITIA PEPPER REGARDING THE CLAPPING INCIDENT, AND THE VIOLATION OF HER FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, NOT TO MENTION THE QUESTIONABLE ARREST!

pepper

JUST FOR LAUGHS, PIC WAS PHOTOSHOPED, BAILEY HOLDING ARTIST DON GALLEGOS RENDITION OF THE PEPPER INCIDENT. (CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE).

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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

Pu1T0UfvSGJyBBMf-r3kE2dJ-d6fbR2ktzstZ2nkWjkh1QUhkDIc0xkOsbm-1VNCfVrccqA5V7pcE74BVoRrQo

PDone     PDtwo     PDthree

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL LETTER SENT TO ATTORNEY MARK MAYERHOFF, OF LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE

MARKMEYEROFF

MARK MAYERHOFF (CLICK TO ENLARGE)

What should be brought to the forefront is that Liebert Cassidy Whitmore is actually representing Councilman Paul Davis in the current case of Raychele Sterling vs. City of Riverside et al.  Liebert Cassidy Whitemore is also the law firm that is doing the investigation for the City of Riverside against, of course, Councilman Paul Davis.  So the firm is defending him but at the same time crucifying him and sticking the knife into him!  Those in Riverside who keep up with the politics see this time and time again.  Those in Riverside who are sleep, need to wake up and see what is happening in your City.

Additionally, I will be filing a bar complaint against you and your firm for violations of conflicts of interest rules, since your firm is my direct representation in the active case Sterling v City of Riverside et al. I have never waived my conflict rights in this case and neither can the council. Regards,
Paul Davis
Council Member -

This according to Councilman Paul Davis’s personal statement as indicated below, under “Full Davis Personal Statement on this Investigation”.

The letter is directed toward Mark Mayerhoff, which Davis states he is “shocked” that his firm has released an incomplete investigation, as a result of the following:

Meyerhoffletterredactionsone copy     Meyerhoffletterredactionstwo

In the letter Attorney Mark Mayerhoff states the Investigation that will be release to Press Enterprise reporter Alicia Robinson will be redacted (to obscure or remove from a document prior to publication or release).  Of course we asked the question of Why?  Especially in the name of transparency.  Mayerhoff also states that he attached an unredacted copy of the investigation to Councilman Davis.  We have the unredacted investigation as follows, all 417 pages.  Alicia, if you need the full unredacted copy just download from our site!

invest417

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL UNREDACTED INVESTIGATION AGAINST COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS

The following is a personal statement made by Councilman Paul Davis in reference to his investigation and submitted to Thirty Miles.

PSDAVISone     PSDAVIStwo     PSDAVISthree

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL DAVIS PERSONAL STATEMENT ON THIS INVESTIGATION

Some telling excerpts are as follows:

These issues that Soubirous and I have been charged with is misappropriations of Public Funds for Political Gain and it is about exacting retaliation for our not being the “Go along to get along” guys, like many of the rest. The funds issue will be handled in another venue, as Adams and Bailey appropriated the funds without authority of the council. Evidence will be produced to prove this up. What happened is Barber files the complaint then funds the investigation under his 50K expense authority and they split up the contracts into four separate ones to equate to $200k authorization.
Interestingly enough the hired gun law firm and investigator failed to insert my interview “Eratta”, correction sheet into the investigation materials and even failed to incorporate the right statements in to Gumpart’s statements, where I said “Surely Not” and the stenographer records “Sure”.  Gumport does this so that he can make a point in his opinion on his questions as to the effect of my statements on CM Barber being able to do his job. However, I have attached is separately.
More to come.
Paul Davis
Councilmember – Ward 4
City of Riverside

And of course it is not over yet!  There is “MORE TO COME” according to Councilman Paul Davis!  We will sit back and wait because it will be sooner than you think.  Paul Davis’s Interview “Eratta” is as follows:

erratta

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL PAUL DAVIS TRANSCRIPT WITH ERRATA SHEET

We did a story on Ol’Scotty back when he intended to “Ferret” out a problem

We asked the question if Scott Barber should have been fired a long time ago.  First is he qualified for the job of City Manager?  Having a Thespian Degree?   Just back in September of 2012, City Manager Scott Barber decided to take his City Manager hat off and play Council by authorizing a change order of $2.5 million without council authority for the Fox Performance Plaza.

06clapper-articleInline           sb

      CM Scott Barber                              Sorry, CM Scott Barber

He brought the issue to Council and basically appeared they would rubber stamp the idea, after-the-fact.  Had this type of shenanigans been done before by the prior City Manager?  The City Manager’s discretionary spending cap is at $50,000.00, anything over that amount must go to council.  Certainly violated the Charter Amendment.  What made Barber think that he had the authority to act as an elect and ferret it out without them?  A complaint should have been filed against him with Human Resources, and Council should have fired him immediately.

What is now remarkable is the fact that Scotty is creating more liability as what appears to be personality problems at the expense of the taxpayer! It is now becoming evident he doesn’t care about the residents of Riverside, if not, only for himself.  Will Scotty sue the City of Riverside?  Or I should say, the taxpayer because of his perception of in house politics?  Remember Scotty is a remnant of the Hudson legacy; he, Brad Hudson was convicted of credit card fraud.  But our current Mayor Rusty Bailey considers him a moral compass, go figure..

Some things never change as this is common in Riverside. Brad Hudson ran the city and the Council as the Mayor was just a figure head madding back room deals, traveling, giving speeches and breaking a tie vote. Well a city attorney made the law up as he went but talked his way out. As the Mayor left and the hopes of an honest Mayor we saw a candidate who had powerful friends of the former Mayor. yes false fliers were sent out but the candidate got caught and apologized, using illegal Fed agent license plates and more corruption, as he was the choice of the people. To start his term he made national news by having a citizen arrested for speaking over 3 minutes, a lawyer arrested for clapping and big money was made with the help of the city Attorney in red lining homes for illegal foreclosure. People were in place to defend and protect the criminal acts. Brad Hudson skipped out along with the Deputy Attorney after illegally buying Glock Hand guns as the Feds closed in but the council did nothing. A replacement who would follow orders was needed and the Code Enforcement Director was picked. Things went for bad to worse as all violations by the council insiders were ignored but the firing of a Deputy attorney who reported illegal action was done as Mrs. Sterling was out. HR answered to Hudson and that was well known. Loveridge was funny as his old time lies did not work on a new generation. Just think Adams history of assaulting his girl friend, messing in a police promotion and as a veteran police officer taking illegal plates still got elected to council again and now running for Congress. Wow we have enough corrupt Congressmen in DC but at lease Riverside has an Honest Congressman in Mark. Well Davis and Mike know their honesty and loyalty to their Wards is not what the Bailey team wants. Most people know a misdemeanor is a violation that gets you jail time and a fine. But it seems Priamos missed that class in law school. Mike charged with hear say that failed even paying to LA lawyers 200,000 dollars which a law student would know. Then Davis with documents as evidence and wow the filing of complaints done wrong but no problem as even the Brown Act was violated twice and no due process in either case. Conflict of interest even paid Attorneys were clue less. The Mayor is spending allot to get two council out in the next election and put Bailey team members in their seats. What is clear is Riverside no longer wants citizens to elect their representatives but will let the Mayor do it. The way things are going Bailey wont need an election to continue as Mayor he will appoint himself. Scott Barber is a good worker and did a great job giving out tickets in Code Enforcement rather legal or illegal and really wanted the city managers job to do as he was told. Anyone who lives in the city of Riverside knows how things are done and employees/appointees take orders and follow them. I remember when we were asked for bond for the Library to help the children well after the money was given oops the council and mayor used it for something else only to come back again to ask for money for the Library. Using citizens and wasting money while making back room deals will continue until the voters clean out the corrupt elected officials and the Bailey Team. The Feds and the State are likely to come in and then the blame game but it will be great to see Brad Hudson and Greg Priamos finally answer to their crimes over the years.  - AirJackie, Commenter to TMC

CODE OF ETHICS AND CONDUCT COMPLAINT HEARING BETWEEN FORMER EMPLOYEE JASON HUNTER AND JUSTIN SCOTT COE CANCELED FOR FRIDAY JULY 25TH, 2014 FOR FLAWS IN THE PROCESS!  MORE TO COME.  DOES THIS MEAN ALL PRIOR COMPLAINTS NEED TO BE REHEARD?  TMC THINKS SO!

337062249

JUSTIN SCOTT COE

WAS THIS CANCELATION ALL BECAUSE OF WHAT KEITH NELSON HAD TO SAY? AND CALLING THE HIRED ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY A LIAR?

letterone

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE LETTER FROM KEITH J. NELSON TO SOUBIROIUS

Board Member, Keith J. Nelson, Ph.D., Inland Regional Board of Trustees, who also served a member of the City’s Adjudicating Body whenever an alleged violation of the City’s Code of Ethics, responded in this letter to Councilman Mike Soubirous regarding his concerns with the behavior and involvement of City Attorney Greg Priamos and outside legal, hired by the city, local Riverside attorney Doug Smith.  In fact, Doctor Keith J. Nelson calls Attorney Douglas Smith a “Liar” in the above letter.  This is the kind of corruption we have come to in the underbelly of the City of Riverside, and it is being taking notice locally, but world wide.  Thirty Miles of Corruption has being receiving hits from all over the world as you can see from it’s data banks.

1493020-327972687

RIVERSIDE ATTORNEY HIRED BY CITY OF RIVERSIDE, DOUGLAS  SMITH

WATER CONSERVATION: THE FAUX DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.  We don’t have a drought in the City of Riverside, but it seems the City will create one in order take advantage of fines and maintain the current water rates.  The clincher is that the City passed an ordinance to comply with State Law.  They didn’t have to because we are exempt because we own our water supply.  We as a City are also under a court order, if we don’t use the water we lose it!  Since we own our own water in no position to declare a water shortage!  Large educational institutions such as RCC and UCR are exempt.

memo                     ordinan

   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM                            WATER RESTRICTION ORDINANCE

This is how contradictary this ordinance is, if you are a recipient of Gage Canal water, there are no restrictions, you can use as much as appropriated yearly to you depending on your shares.  That means you can run the water into the street if you want.  Of course, I’m not advocating that, but the point is that we have a unfair application of the laws, maybe because the City can always depend on squeezing a little more from the residents.  The City didn’t have to pass the ordinance, but they did, they did because there is a monetary MO behind it. Education institutions such as UCR and RCC are exempt. One of the absolute benefits of living in Riverside is ownership of water.  You can maintain you pool and jacuzzi as long as you don’t “overfill.”  Did you get that one?  Who overfills their pool?   The San Bernardino Water Basin holds about 5 Million acre feet of water. Only about a million acre feet are available to the existing wells. So about 4 millions acre feet remains to be tapped by deeper wells. There is plenty of water. This is focused on an income source, and that income source is us.  This political move also seems another way that the City can put one neighbor against the other by the snitch call to code enforcement, the other police force.  It’s time to see what is occurring in the City of Riverside and remove your Councilperson.  In my ward it is Councilman Mike Gardner.

Remember, approximately 20% of our water is sold to Western Municipal.   Are we to conserve more water so that the City can sell more off to other communities for a higher profit.  Cite the citizens on water violations to increase profits.  Then they will then ask us to use less water then they will raise water rates to increase profits. You will use less and pay more. Then they will manipulate the tier pricing seasonally or at will to increase even more profits.  The more money in the water fund, the more that 11.5% water transfer to the General Fund will have.

The Faux Drought continues with more City propaganda regarding  water usage!  New article by Alicia Robinson in the Press Enterprise addressing the city’s position regarding water conservation.

FROM THE DESK OF SCOTT SIMPSON: SCOTT RESPONDS TO RIVERSIDE’S FAUX DROUGHT AND THE DATA AND ARTICLE IN THE PRESS ENTERPRISE: REFERRING TO PE ARTICLE: DROUGHT GROUNDWATER AT RECORD LOW:

waterSplash

Scott Simpson was former Chief of Enforcement for the California EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control, and also worked for the Department of Food and Agriculture in their Environmental Hazards Assessment Program specializing in ground water contamination:

Interesting yet, manipulating the data. They first mentioned that ground water levels have dropped due to increased use/demand from consumers but, the graph displays only gw available in acre feet. The data that should have been shown in the graph in order to keep consistent with the written conversation is depth to ground water in the wells (1934-today). They have the data. The graph displays how much water was available every 2 yrs from 1934 on. This is the amount legally available to harvest annually. It is close to displaying how much water(rainfall) went into the basin each season. 1960-64 was the driest period on record but historical references are available of other dry and wet periods back to the early 1800’s. What the graph really shows is that Riverside takes about 10% of the annual harvest of water supplied by normal rainfall. The other water agencies share in the other 90%. The San Bernardino Water Basin holds about 5 Million acre feet of water. Only about a million acre feet are available to the existing wells. So about 4 millions acre feet remains to be tapped by deeper wells.

Of course in the current dry spell (notice there were several dry and wet periods 10 yrs apart) the available gw has decreased some due to demand but mostly due to low rainfall in the local mountains. Look at the wet years; almost instant recharge of the gw basin occurs as soon as we get the first normal or above normal rainfall. This shows the amount available to the various water harvesters is the amount of water that recharges the basin each year or about 500,000 acre feet on average. (this is detailed in the Court settlement order of 1980 settling the big water rights lawsuit filed in 1964.) There is plenty of water available in the gw basin. The Court has limited access to most of it.

Currently, Riverside uses about 84,000 acre feet of gw per year. Half or 44,000 acre feet is harvested from the San Bernardino Basin. The other 40,000 comes mostly from the North Riverside Basin from a well field near the soccer complex and old dead golf course. The North Riverside Basin is geologically and hydraulically connected to the San Bernardino Basin. Ground water flows from the San Bernardino Basin into the North Riverside Basin continuously via a narrow under ground channel beneath the Santa Ana River in Colton.

Now, lets get back to water rights. A Water Right is a legal claim to a fixed amount of water harvested annually from a defined source such as, a river. Your claim can be legally challenged at any time by another water harvester from the same water source. There are pre-1914 water rights and post-1914 water rights. The difference is the date of first lawful claim to the water. Post-1914 water rights claims are granted, processed, regulated and disputed through or by the Calif. Dept. of Water Resources. This legal status encompasses all of the state’s water resources unused or in its natural state post-1914 water law. This is about 62% of the states total water resources during average rainfall periods. The UlS. Constitution prohibits congress from passing retroactive law so, we get old law still in effect for many and the new law applying only to those engaging in the regulated activity as of the date of new law. Two systems of legal claims to water co-existing at the same time.

The other pre-1914 water sources comprising 38% of the states water resources pre-existed the 1914 change in state law toward state regulation of water harvesting and the creation of the Dept. of Water Resources. So if you held a legal water right prior to 1914 it was formed under old law dating back to the founding of the state circa 1849 and before John North et al started up the land development scheme (the Southern California Colony Assn) that became the city of Riverside circa 1885.

From 1850-1914 the primary concern of Californians and incoming settlers was the availability of water and the price! People were experiencing the tyranny of corporate monopolies with the railroad. Railroads arbitrarily raised freight prices after settlers moved in. Cheep rates to draw in settlers and raise them later to extract profits from them when they financially can’t leave. The basic lack of competition in a natural monopoly like a railroad sucked the money out of the local farmers. It was feared that the same monopolistic behavior would (and was) occur with water providers. The state legislature of 1850-1905 was very serious about curbing monopolistic water providers. 1852 saw the first laws regulating the formation of water companies and pricing. Our state Senator of the day, John Satterwaite, authored several laws including one passed in 1862, the Satterwaite Act or Civil Code 552. John North incorporated the So. Calif. Colony Assn. under this law to make profits from the sale of land with a guarantee of water delivery in perpetuity. In part it says, “The corporation is formed to build a water distribution (canal) system to make the land livable and profitable. The corporation making its’ profits from the sale of the land and the water sold at cost.”
This is further elaborated on in Superior Court, Appellate Court and Supreme Court decisions leading to Cal. Supreme, Price v. the Riverside Land & Irrigation Co., 1880. Where the law and lower court rulings were placed in context justifying the Supreme Courts decision. In part saying, ” The corporation having formed under the law of 1862 (civil code 552) may not make profits from the sale and delivery of water. The water belongs to the land and is fixed to it permenently. The price set for delivery of water is based only upon the cost of operating and maintaining the canal, pipes, pumps or other infrastructure annually, Water is not sold as a comodity the lawful price to only recover the cost of providing water to the land.” Including that this was a contractual obligation of the original sale of Colony land(s) to settlers. So, the So. Calif. Colony Assn. contractually sold parcels of land with the advertised and promissed guarantee of water delivery in perpetuity to the land, a contractual obligation that continues forever to pass with the land ownership and successive owners of the water company including a future municipality. This is published case law stating that state water law of the time is still in effect and contractural obligation both pass to successive owners. The water right is fixed to the land receiving water permanently and cannot be altered. State constitutional law upholding and the U.S. Constitution, fourteenth amendment protection of lawful contracts upholding. Land owners served by the city of Riverside water dept. as successor owner of the Riverside land &Irrigation Co. cannot be denied the water they have always received in the same amount and quality as originally delivered to the land and in perpetuity at not more than the cost to deliver the water.

So we are in a period of drought. The law and the Cal. Sup. 1880 says, “The (city of Riverside) water company must declare a water supply emergency to deviate from it otherwise lawful supplying of water to the land, in order to initiate any form of reducing water supply or consumption during the emergency period. It must also stop connecting new land/customers to the distribution system until the emergency is canceled.”

Hence, Riverside cannot charge us fees for conservation programs because that is not a cost of operating and maintaining the infrastructure/service. Riverside cannot do anything other than request Volunteer water conservation. Riverside cannot raise prices to force consumers to use less water. Riverside cannot use tiered punitive pricing to force less water consumption. You have a lawful right to water in the same amount as was originally delivered to your land. My parcel was originally planted in citrus pre-1890 and irrigated with about 8 acre feet of water per acre, the water also being of drinking water quality and used to supply the house. So my water allotment for our .84 acre parcel is about 6 acre feet of water per year. After that, Riverside can require conservation and maybe raise prices.

RUSTY’S RED TROLLEY! DOES HE THINK IT CAN?  MEETING PLANNED FOR JULY 30ST, 2014 TO EXAMIN THE FEASABILITY STUDY!  The City of Riverside received a Cal Trans Grant of $237,000.00 to do a feasibility study, and you better believe with this money the focus is on a reason to have it!

Train_around_the_Christmas_tree FOUR          streetcar5 copy6

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

TMC will have a rebuttle of the pro’s and con’s of a trolley system in the City of Riverside, and will be able to do it for no cost to the taxpayer!

meetingtrollyjuly2014

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DETAILS OF THE MEETING

TROLLEY UPDATE:  TMC WAS TOLD THAT AT THE MEETING, THE TABLES HAD NAME CARDS OF ALL THE COUNCIL AND MAYOR WITH THE TROLLEY STUDY PACKETS.  NOT ONE MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL SHOWED, EVEN THE MAYOR DIDN’T SHOW AND IT’S HIS PROJECT!  IT APPEARS ANOTHER $237K IN STATE GRANT MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN..

THE RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE WILL TAKE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ON THE UPCOMING SPECIAL AUDIT OF THE SEWER FUNDS.  THIS WILL BE THIS TUESDAY JULY 29TH AT 6:00PM IN THE MAYOR’S CEREMONIAL ROOM ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL.  

photo

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY NEIL OKAZAKI LEAVES CITY OF RIVERSIDE.  Sources have said that Neil Okazaki would be leaving his position, possible going to the County.  This occurred the day of the Soubirious hearing.  Was this hearing the turning point for Okazaki?  Weeks before, City Attorney Greg Priamos said he was leaving for a position with the County as well.  What seems evident is that no one wants to go down with the ship!

 FUROR ENGULFS CHICAGO’S RED LIGHT SCAMERA CAMERA SYSTEM!  You’ll thank those that voted to remove our cameras here in Riversider sooner or later.

SORRY EVERYBODY! WE STILL HAVE MORE ON COUNCILMAN SOUBIROUS’S INVESTIGATION THAT WILL BE A COMPLETE SHOCKER! STAY TUNED FOR MORE AS RIVER CITY TURNS!

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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

music1-2oneJULY42014 copy

So it got a little heated at this point. Because I said I want to know what the fuck you’re talking about, Mike.  Are you saying my guys aren’t doing the job?   – Brian Smith, RPOA President.

The question everyone in town is asking, is what just happened?  Did we just payout close to $100,000.00 in taxpayer monies because of “ego” or “politics” or just both?  With this in mind, the Press Enterprise is reporting that the findings on the investigation of Councilman Mike Soubirous are “inconclusive.”  Meriam-Webster Dictionary defines “inconclusive” as leading to no definite result or conclusion, not showing that something is certainly true.  Based on these findings can we argue that Councilman Soubirous is cleared of all allegations?  I would think yes.  Well, the actual PE paper delivered to peoples homes states, “Inquiry clears Councilman.”  The online version states “Probe of councilman inconclusive.”  Now folks, this is the same article, but different title.

Untitled-2                         10487333_255289837999520_4823712600361219295_n

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

Why would the PE act so indifferent, this I find quite remarkable, this leads my inquiring mind to ask the question of how many prior Press Enterprise employees now work for the City of Riverside?  Such as Phil Pitchford, former PE reporter, who is now Chief Information Officer with the City of Riverside making six figures, also part of the so called elitist group, the Raincross Group in Riverside.  The Raincross Group was in support of Measure A.  Ron Redfern, former PE editor, is now the Chairman of the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce.  Many our calling the Chamber a laundering group by the monies that have been given to them by the City of Riverside.  You only have to look at the interconnections of the cast of characters.  Some have seen Pitchford being very chummy with City Manager Scott Barber at City Council.  Now folks, this scenerio also interplays with the County of Riverside.  You decide, does the PE really represent Truth, Justice and the American Way, Oh I forgot, and the Fourth Branch of Government?  Or just a tool for the few in the whole picture of politics?  Whatever it is, TMC has now been blocked from commenting on the Press Enterprise.

                   571RIV       redfern112513

                                             Phil Pitchford                           Ron Redfern

A public hearing will be held July 22, 2014, but it isn’t clear how the City will proceed with this hearing in the form of an opinion or action.  What’s clear is that a misguided few who attempted to play a game of chance with ego and politics, and the cost to the tax payer was a pretty penny.  It becomes evident that the City didn’t expect the blow back to occur and may not have been prepared for the resulting repercussions of their malfeasance.  First they didn’t follow proper procedure according to Section 202 of the Code of Ethics and Conduct, specifically Mayor Pro Tem Steve Adams should have filed the complaint using the form from the City Clerks office;  Mayor Bailey should have completely recused himself and had no business getting himself involved, regardless, the section is as follows:

section202 warrow

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

With this initial assessment in mind, let’s take an analytical look at all the facts, and decipher some potential thoughts.  The Valentines Day Massacre, or what now has become a “Valentines Day Blunder”: The players at hand were seven, due to blow back of this publicly exposed investigation which revealed the true nature of this conspired deceit, which leads to why the taxpaying residents continue to mistrust our City, and will not come out publicly to state this, for fear of retaliation, such as code etc.

SEVEN

The seven are as follows: Chief of Police Sergio Diaz, City Manager Scott Barber, RPOA (Riverside Police Officers Association) President Brian Smith, RPOA Vice President Aurelio Melendrez, Councilman and Mayor Pro Tem at the time Steve Adams, Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey and City Attorney Greg Priamos, of whom seemed to have left Dodge City so quickly before the exposure hit the fan.   What is evident in this investigation is that Diaz and Barber were the employees who filed the complaint.  Barber specifically made claims that Councilman Soubirous created a “hostile work environment” for him.  I would imagine Diaz would have said the same, his complaint as Barber’s was crafted and designed based on third party information.  Is this a Chief one can trust?  He was certainly not happy with what he felt Soubirous said about RPD officers.  Later we find that these comments were from unsubstantiated third party statements or what is known as “hearsay.”  But Soubirous relayed that these comments came from his constituents, as entered into evidence in the investigation.  Let it be known that Diaz also threatened Soubirous political career.  He also threatened candidate for city council John Brandriff’s political career.  He’s threatened Karen Wright, Christina Duran, Dvonne Pitruzzello, Mary Shelton and many more residents.  You cannot treat people in America as if it’s some third world country.  This type of behavior in a police force may be acceptable in a third world country, but not in America.  So again Diaz missed the boat.  Thanks again Mr. Hudson for a bang up job..

exhibitOTletter copy

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

The witness in this complaint was RPOA President Brian Smith.  Smith and Vice President Aurelio Melendrez (son of Councilman Andy Melendrez) were the two that instigated the complaint.  Were these the other two employees Mayor Bailey and Councilman/Mayor Pro Tem Adams  were referring to in the above document?  It appears there were only two complainants according to the above letter fired back to City Manager Barber by Soubirous’s Attorney Danuta Tusynska.  Also, as a side note, Danuta Tusynska was sending all legal documents to City Manager Scott Barber, not knowing that Barber was one of Soubirous’s accusers.  According to this letter Mayor Pro Tem/Councilman Steve Adams and Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey told Councilman Mike Soubirous that there were four complainants on April 1, 2014, April Fools Day.   Were  the two trying to be facetious?  Further, both Adams and Bailey stated that the four filed under the “whistleblowers” act and would not be identified.  Again, this was found to be innaccurate, no filing was ever done.  The two actually decieved the councilman with a premeditated untruth…they lied.

Soubirous has said he believes the investigation is politically motivated because of the election, and because he has questioned Police Department actions and policies since taking office.  “I am an elected official and if I want to propose policy for (the Police Department), for building and planning, for parks and recreation, that’s my job,” he said. “They don’t want to see any rocking of the boat.”  It’s very clear that the City of Riverside has optioned, by it’s familial ties to curb the true aspirations of the taxpayers.  We have to ask the question of why they would do this?  I believe, undoubtedly, with respect to their (the City’s) position with old familial ties, that the web of  connected political repercussions we unfortunately see occurring today,  in the political forefront, can be directly tied to the actions of a certain composition of those in City Council and their employees.

Again, we at TMC have tried to tell the community and residents of Riverside for years that the very people we believe we trust, we cannot.  We are told by Adams and Bailey that four city employees have filed a complaint against Soubirous.  Later, we find that RPOA Brian Smith and Aurelio Melendrez may have been the other two, but accordingly, they are only witnesses…   The whole investigation was based on these two witnesses, while the Diaz and Barber interviews were left out of the investigation.  Diaz and Barber did not file formally as indicated, but sent letters with their complaint.  The others that were interviewed and not part of the investigative process was the Mayor, each of the City Council members, City Manager Scott Barber, Chief Sergio Diaz, City Attorney Greg Priamos, Community Services Superintendent Patricia Solano, Assistant Chief Chris Vicino and Community Development Director Al Zelinka.  Really, Al Zelinka?  What was that all about?  TMC has ordered these transcripts.  Why these taxpayer paid interviews were not used, we don’t know.  What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!

In retrospect, Smith and Melendrez’s  initial contact person, was Chief of Police Sergio Diaz, then City Manager Scott Barber.  The two (Barber & Diaz) went to file their complaints against Councilman Mike Soubirous.  We must remind you, not formally as required.

ComplaintBarber1  ComplaintBarber2

CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER’S COMPLAINT (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

Interesting enough, is that Barbers personal complaint against Soubirous is solely based on third party information, hearsay, and not a direct encounter with Soubirous.

ComplaintDiaz1  ComplaintDiaz2

POLICE CHIEF SERGIO DIAZ’S COMPLAINT (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

 

The secondary contact people were Councilman and Mayor Pro Tem at the time Steve Adams, and the Mayor himself, William “Rusty” Bailey.  Was this a conspiracy?  Of course, we have to ask this question.  But as you know, you as the public must decide based on the facts.  The evidence and facts are uncanny.  The full investigative report is as follows:

Investpgone

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL SOUBIRIUOS INVESTIGATIONAL REPORT

The allegation made by Smith were by most, quite remarkable.  Initially, there was a meeting between Councilman Mike Soubirous and Smith on  February 14, 2014, St. Valentines Day, the premeditation date of the conspired political massacre.

contract1  contract2  contract3  contract4  contract5

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE (THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT SIGNED BY COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS AND THE LAW FIRM OF GUMPORT MASTAN)

The meeting with Soubirous led to some concerns by Smith.  He then went to his superior, we are not sure, as an employee or as the President of RPOA.  Regardless, he first spoke to Chief Diaz; he then took his concerns to City Manager Scott Barber,  in turn went to Adams and Bailey, with the resultant initiation of this investigation signed by Adams.

hillmailer

According to Campaign Form 497, RPOA really didn’t like Mike Soubirous at a contribution of $45,984.40 of association money to the Valerie Hill Campaign.  What was this all about?  What kind of beef did RPOA have with a candidate with a 29 year, pristine career as Acting Commander with the California Highway Patrol?  Well it may have been quite a bit if he didn’t rumble to the expected tune of the RPOA.  Would this mean he disagreed with some of their postions or their obligatory demands to sustain their “organization”, as Melendrez puts it?  It seemed according to the investigating report that Aurelio Melendrez had trouble understanding how these 497 forms were attained by other officers.

Untitled-4  Untitled-6  Untitled-8   Untitled-10  Untitled-12

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Well, these are public, and easily found on the City of Riverside web site.  It also seems your officers were concerned with how their association dues were spent, and why so much was spent when they themselves felt Soubirous would be the winning candidate.  This according to Melendrez’s testimony in the interview process.  According to page 10, RPOA President Sergent Brian Smith stated in the interview process, “What pissed me off was that he [Soubirous] was meddling in my business by going to members and poking them, saying, you know, you spent $40,000.00 on a loser.”  Let me get this straight, the taxpayer pays RPD salaries, the Councilman is the representative liaison for the taxpayer, but what Smith appears to be saying is that if you have anything to say to his members, you are “meddling” in his business.  I don’t believe Smith pays the salaries of his members, or are they employees of Smith.  I believe the members pay dues to his association, union or organization, so why would he meddle with the legitimate business of the taxpayer?

Smith said that, at the meeting, Soubirous “tried to big league me by letting me know he was the councilman and he was calling the shots, that it was a 7-0 vote to remove Scott if he didn’t do what they deemed he needed to do, and that maybe if Sergio doesn’t come in line, maybe it’s time to see if Sergio Diaz can be replaced as chief of police,” according to a transcript of his interview with Gumport.  According to the investigation, page 5, [G], It does not appear that council ever voted to remove City Manager Barber or Chief Diaz.

interviewprocessdebunked

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

In addition, it does not appear that the council or its members informally or secretly voted to remove City Manager Barber or Chief Diaz.  What’s evident, is that Smith’s contention or allegation was inaccurate. Was it by perception that the allegation or statement was made?  Or was there simply an ulterior motive?  We can only ask the question otherwise it would be sheer speculation.

One criticism of the law firm Gumport Mastan is their following statement in the investigation: “The February 14, 2014 meeting and it’s fallout, including the time and expense of Gumport Mastan investigation, demonstrate the cost and disruption that can occur when Councilmembers deal directly with subordinates of the City Manager instead of dealing with them through the city manager.”  Again, this was out of the scope of proper practice of the firm to even attempt to suggest this opinion (page 5), after they stated, according to the PE, an investigation into complaints against Riverside Councilman Mike Soubirous was inconclusive, finding that “it would be speculation” to say whether Soubirous did anything wrong.  Gumport Mastan is contradicting its own finding.  Was Gumport Mastan attempting to give the city a slight bone in their favor at taxpayer expense?

Again we must ask the question, was this a bumbling attempt by a few rogue City of Riverside elects, officials and employees a conspiracy to slander a councilman for political reasons at the expense of the taxpayer?  Residents are overwhelmingly telling TMC, Yes!  Why are residents afraid to come out, they fear retaliation by the City of Riverside.

I believe the Charter is flawed, and Council should be able to go to three Department heads to discuss policy which directly effects the taxpayer; the City Attorney, the City Manager and the Chief of Police.  In addition, they should be elected positions.  I believe RPOA is responsible for this and they should reimburse $100K back to the taxpayer for this debacle.  With that said we have a $100K that could go to our Library.  In the City of Arts and Innovation we sadly realize no one really cares about the knowledge of books and our library system.  As much as the City spends on nonsense items, we cannot get $100K?  We cannot even get a measly $100K donated from the Greater Riverside Chamber or the Raincross Group.

The question I really have for Brian, is why did you really do this?  Did you really believe a Brown Act violation was occurring?  Did you sincerely expect to receive any ground based on your suspicions?  The right thing to do is to give it back to the taxpayer, if you can dish out over $45K for a campaign, you can certainly make good on $24K  for the Library.  As an “organization” or “association” or whatever you want to call yourselves these days, people understand unions, of which you are.

Lastly, these remaining six should resign or be fired…  TMC ask for the resignation of Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey, Councilman and Mayor Pro Tem Steve Adams, City Manager Scott Barber, Chief of Police Sergio Diaz.  We City Manager Scott Barber to fire RPD Sergeant Brian Smith and RPD Detective Aurelio Melendrez.  The Greater Riverside Chamber and the Raincross Group should be asking for their resignations and firings, as well as other community advocates such as The Group, The Latino Network and the NAACP.  This my friends is what the community is asking TMC to ask for.  We want our City back..

The Second Part of this story is coming up shortly..

City Manager Scott Barber and his police chief crony Sergio Diaz have got to go. These two individuals are corrupt. Wasting taxpayer money. Filing false reports to suit their agenda. Sergio Diaz is a phony, a coward, and a little angry man who we need to send back to Los Angeles.  It has been revealed during this scandal that city officials have partnered with the RPOA Brian Smith to smear Councilman Mike Soubirous because he won the Ward 3 election. Anyone who knows Mike and Linda Soubirous know that they have only served in the best interests of law enforcement and Ward 3 residents. This is politically motivated, and the losers are the taxpayers. Who is to blame ? Mayor Bailey, Councilman Adams, , City Manager Scott Barber, RPOA president Brian Smith. These men have cost you the residents of Riverside thousands of taxpayer money in an attempt to slander Councilman Mike Soubirous because he beat Valerie Hill in the Ward 3 election… These individuals endorsed Valerie Hill. Mike Soubirous is actually doing the job that residents hired him to do… which is to ask real questions and make city officials give account for your taxes. Please support Mike Soubirous on July 22, 2014. These same individuals are also trying to slander Ward 4 Councilman Paul Davis because Davis pulls no punches when it comes to making the city accountable for your tax dollars. No more wasteful spending at City Hall. RPOA President Brian Smith you are a liar. Aurelio Melendrez… you are a spoiled brat. Just because your daddy got you a job with the RPD, and now you are vice president of the RPOA, you think you are hot stuff and that you can slander your fathers (Andy Melendrez) colleague (Mike Soubirous) ? Brian Smith and Aurelio Melendrez need to focus on police work and not politics at city hall. $100,000,000 that could have been spent on the downtown library. What a waste of taxes. Need to get rid of Scott Barber and Sergio Diaz !!!  – Isaac Mendoza, Commenter on the PE

Chief Sergio Diaz talks about men’s balls quite a bit, locker talk or obsession, I just don’t get it, or this pic…  a man with a badge and gun, what he does on his own time is his business.. Is that an RPD arm patch on his crotch? What was the Chief thinking?  Chief Diaz, don’t get pissed at the picture, we know you have balls. They may not be “balls of Kryptonite” as Soubirous, but standard “Softballs” to say the least…

diaztoutou

 The Brockton Bike Lane, The Magnolia Avenue Trolley…What’s next for the City of Riverside, on Mayor Baileys To Do List?

wonderful20bailey20park-thumb

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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

FOJULY

George Orwell  “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” ― George Orwell
Benjamin Franklin  “Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.” ― Benjamin Franklin, Silence Dogood, The Busy-Body, and Early Writings

There is a cost to freedom, freedom is not free, it’s an ongoing continual effort to maintain the rights that we have from those who would prefer containment and status quo..  We may not agree with everyone, but we can be assured that everyone has a right to their opinion.  In our politically correct world today, if we looked upon the actions of which the first Americans invoked upon the Kingdom of Great Britain today.  Our Declaration of Independence would be no less, an act of domestic terrorism by today’s political correct community.  At this moment, we celebrate the actions of those domestic terrorist who have given us the rights and freedoms we celebrate this July 4th.  Today, Americans continue to fight against government efforts to increase taxes, curb out of control spending and control the very freedoms endowed upon us.
The following are interesting facts about our forefathers and the Fourth of July.  In a remarkable coincidence, both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, the only signers of the Declaration of Independence later to serve as Presidents of the United States, died on the same day: July 4, 1826, which was the 50th anniversary of the Declaration. Although not a signer of the Declaration of Independence, but another Founding Father who became a President, James Monroe, died on July 4, 1831, thus becoming the third President in a row who died on this memorable day. Calvin Coolidge, the 30th President, was born on July 4, 1872, and, so far, is the only President to have been born on Independence Day.

 aerialB-housing-developmenta

WE WERE TOLD THEY ONLY GLOW AT NIGHT..

Now That six families in a two block area of the contamination have cancer will you admit you lied to us All you better than us city and government of Riverside. Have talked till I am blue but it didn’t make the cancer go away or the contamination of the soil we eat everyday while they build Jurupa Ave. When the people who move the dirt get cancer or breathing problems then will you do something more  - Marilyn Whitney, commenter to TMC

Toxic Trails Estates…A great place to raise your family?  What would you do if you paid $500,000.00 for a new home, and later found that it sits on a major toxic spill?  Would you drink the water, well evidently Council drank the Koolaid, and bobbled right behind their infamous leader City Attorney Gregory Priamos to a potential unlawful emergency close session meeting.  It is TMC’s opinion that Priamos called the unlawful meeting so he could reprimand the council for postponing the vote on the AG Park housing development.  Whether TMC is right or wrong, it sure does sound good!  The housing project couldn’t even get bonded.  Why is developer Chuck Cox allowed to do a project as this without any bond insurance?  Cox is asking the City to take a deed of trust in lieu of a bond.  Really?  Why is he so special?  Is it because he couldn’t get bond insurance because it was a toxic spill site?  The meeting even became dramatic when Attorney Letitia Pepper POUNDED on the closed session door, demanding they all come out, and she wasn’t kidding either!  Of course she was met by two of Riverside’s finest and that handsome devil himself Assistant Chief of Police Chris Vicino, who attempted to diffuse the whole situation.  Isn’t Vicino married, he should know that you shouldn’t argue with a woman, especially if she is smarter.  You have to believe that Chief of Police Sergio Diaz knew better this time around, to stay far away from these legal vixens..

It all started in 2003, whereby developer Chuck Cox gave the city a parcel of land next to the golf course by Riverside Municipal Airport in exchange for a piece of land called simply the Old Agricultural Park.  The Old Agricultural Park had evidently been contaminated from and old city sewer plant on or adjacent to the parcel.

The following is a 2003 Interoffice Memo from Public Works Director Tom Boyd, then deputy public works director, to former City Manager George Caravalho, reporting the breakage of a digester tank which spilled its contents, and the intended clean up plans.  Later, lab analysis determined the spilled contents to contain high amounts of PCB’s (Polychlorinated Biphenyls) as well as other dangerous contaminants, as indicated below:

memoone     memotwo     memothree

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL MEMO WITH ANALYTICAL CONTAMINANT RESULTS

Compare the Result with the DLR (Detection Limit for purpose of Reporting)-below the DLR is acceptable, over is unacceptable.  The below December 2005 Fact Sheet Cleanup Proposal states that as a result of the contaminant findings, that there are no health risk to current residents, however, they can pose a risk to future residents living in homes built on the site…  You be the judge, we’ve had City workers who have died working on the cleanup, we’ve had resident reports surrounding the untouched properties who claimed illness.

factsheet

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL FACT SHEET

In the below youtube video, Attorney Letitia Pepper had just pounded on a closed session door to attempt to notifying Council that they are violating the brown act.  The council was inadvertently called into session by City Attorney Gregory Priamos to discuss a non agendized matter.  By Council following the City Attorney’s lead, they unknowingly violated the Brown Act.

Untitled-4     Untitled-2
CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW YOUTUBE VIDEO

Two Police Officers, Assistant Chief of Police Chris Vicino, Attorney Letitia Pepper and Attorney Raychele Sterling continued to discuss and ferret out legal aspects if pounding on a door is illegal, or just discourteous, as what they said about Chief Diaz.  The finer points of the discourteous pounding discussion continued even after council found a different mode of exit, known as sneaking out the back door.  Councilman Soubirous was the only council member that used the front door.

poundingx

Arrow points to the X Marks the spot where Pepper pounded closed session door…

UPDATE: 1:00PM: JUST IN: ANONYMOUS SOURCES ARE TELLING TMC THAT THE CLOSED SESSION MEETING WAS LEGAL BECAUSE IT DEALT WITH A PERSONNEL ISSUE, NOT A NON AGENDIZED ISSUE!  IS SOMEONE LEAVING?

UPDATE:2:00PM: IT TRUE, ALL THE HOOPLAH LAST NIGHT IF YOU PUT TWO AND TWO TOGETHER, WAS ALL ABOUT CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS LEAVING THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE FOR NEW JOB WITH THE BIG TOP, THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, AS INDICATED IN THE PRESS ENTERPRISE.  Priamos evidently had an interview with the County Supervisors yesterday morning, which was not on the agenda as well.  He will be named the County’s Chief Council.  As of 2012 salary statistics Priamo’s total salary package with the City of Riverside came out to $309,671.10, and will more than likely go up with as he double dips with the County.  Should he have to explain how he was clowning around with taxpayer monies when it came to utilizing outside legal help with no contract?  When it come to inside office parties, is Priamos the king of the clowns?

clownpriamos

WHAT ARE PEOPLE IN RIVERSIDE ARE SAYING, BESIDES GOOD RIDDANCE?

UPDATE: 06.24.2014: RIVERSIDE COUNTY GET’S OUR CROOK, NOW THEIR CROOK!  PRIAMOS OFFICIALLY NAMED COUNTY COUNSEL..

post-28556-Heath-Ledger-Joker-Clapping-gi-fKX9     clapping-animated-240x180     Barack-Obama-Clapping-in-Front-of-American-Flags    LaughingMonkey1

UPDATE: 06.23.2014: FROM THE DESK OF LETITIA PEPPER: COMPLAINT REGARDING VIOLATIONS OF THE BROWN ACT.

To: Rusty Bailey, Mike Gardner, Andy Melendrez, Steve Adams, Chris MacArthur, Jim City Council Ward6 Perry, Paul Davis, soubirous@riversideca.gov
Cc: Colleen, Greg Priamos, Scott Barber

To Riverside’s City Council and Mayor:
In addition to ongoing violations of people’s free speech rights, the City officials have also engaged in violations of the Brown Act.  Most recently, the City Attorney called an illegal, unscheduled, un-noticed, and un-described closed session on June 17, 2014, as evidenced by the video of the City Council meeting at 05:07:03- 24.
This illegal closed session was further compounded by the Mayor’s adjourning the public meeting before the illegal closed session took place, as evidenced by the same video at 05:09:12. After closed sessions, there must be a report on such session. By adjourning the meeting, this step was side-stepped.
I demand that the Mayor and City Attorney publicly acknowledge that what occurred was a violation of the Brown Act, and that they publicly pledge not to engage in future violations.

Letitia Pepper

cc City Attorney, City Clerk, City Manager   bcc concerned citizens

UPDATE: 06.23.2014:9:00PM: ACCORDING TO THE BROWN ACT PRIMER, CITY COUNCIL VIOLATED THE BROWN ACT LAST WEEK!

 
 
   

Brown Act Primer: Closed Sessions

Part 5 of FAC’s Brown Act Primer discusses closed sessions rules for when the public may be excluded from public meetings
 
Preview by Yahoo

If you look at the limited situations in which a closed session is legal, you’ll see that closed sessions can be used for personnel matters, but not for an announcement by an employee saying he’s leaving!  Closed sessions for personnel matters can only be used to discuss the appointment, employment, evaluation of performance, discipline, or dismissal of a public employee or to hear complaints or charges brought against the employee by another person or employee.  (Gov. Code section 54957, subd. (b).)  Furthermore, such sessions still need to be listed on the written agenda before hand, unless they involve an emergency,  the Council holds a vote and decides that it is an emergency, and then publicly states before going into closed session the code section that authorizes an emergency closed session.
Items not listed on a posted agenda may not be discussed in closed sessions except in three circumstances: an emergency, a need for immediate action and an item that was posted on a previous agenda.  (Govt. Code section 54954.2, subd. (b).)  None of those situations applied at the June 17 City Council meeting.
A City Council cannot decide that there’s an emergency or need for immediate action without discussing this during an open meeting, and then having 2/3ds of them vote to hold a closed session for this reason.  (Govt. Code section 54954.2, subd. (b)(2).)  Then there must be an oral, public announcement of the basis for the session before they go into a closed session.  Obviously, none of these things happened at the council meeting in question.
Any other (non-emergency) items for a closed session MUST be on the agenda.  Period.  It’s a basic part of the Brown Act.

WHAT WAS RIVERSIDE’S POLICE OFFICER ASSOCIATION/UNION (RPOA) PRESIDENT BRIAN SMITH AND VICE PRESIDENT AURELIO MELENDREZ TRYING TO SAY?  WERE THEY THE PERPETRATORS BEHIND THE EXPENSIVE TAXPAYER PAID COMPLAINT AGAINST ONE COUNCILMAN?  WAS THIS AN ATTEMPT TO MUSCLE A MOVE WITH THE HELP OF TAXPAYER MONEY AGAINST ONE COUNCILMAN?  THEREFORE WHAT WAS THE MO?

IS DOING THE WORK OF THE CITIZENS OF RIVERSIDE AGAINST CITY POLICY?

brian smith         aureliomelendrez

             BIAN SMITH, PRESIDENT OF RPOA                       AURELIO MELENDREZ, VICE PRESIDENT OF RPOA

June 17, 2014 City Council: Public

Brian Smith, RPOA President

What was the RPOA talking about? Mike Soubirous? They appear to admit they were involved with this complaint, it couldn’t be more obvious.

Brian Smith, President of the Riverside Officers Association at City Council June 17, 2014:

Several months ago I had a conversation with a council member, ahh, which brought me some concern. Ahh, I brought that information back to some members within the City. The Department head and City Manager, ahh, it was then brought to the then Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem, and a decision was made to conduct an investigation. You authorized an investigation to be done, and I’m here to address a couple things that I believe are rumors, so, I’m not a huge fan of rumors, innuendo and supposition, so I’m going to ask you to do a couple things.

An investigation was conducted. To my understanding, the party of that investigation aside from myself as a witness, has not yet participated in the investigation, whether it be in writing or otherwise. And I think that should be done.

Secondly, my understanding is that some members want to see a summary of the investigation. And I don’t think that’s fair.  Not only to me, but it’s also not fair to you as a council and it’s not fair to the citizens as a whole. I would ask that you look into that, completely and thoroughly, don’t just take a summary. A lot of time and effort was put into that investigation. There’s an actual transcription of everyone’s interview, and I think that it is important that you get that interview, and that you read through each and every one of those, and make that decision.

I also think that if you as a council decide, after reviewing that, that it’s a matter of public record and public comment, I think it should be done. I think that publicly they should be able to.. the public should know what you’ve decided to do and what things, allegations have been made.

I also think that councilmember deserves the right to answer, to what I said, happened. I think he is entitled to that, and he should… And I think that he wants the opportunity to do that, and I think that it is the best thing, for all of us concerned, both myself, the city as a whole, the public, and those of you that are seated here.

You are the centuries at the gate, it is your responsibility to police yourselves, and conduct yourself in a manner that is appropriate. If somebody has brought forth an allegation of inappropriate behavior, it needs to be investigated, it needs to be looked into, and ultimately a decision made. And that’s.. I’m here to answer any questions that you may have, I doubt there will be any, but you all know how to get a hold of me, if need be.

Aurelio Melendrez

Aurelio Melendrez, Vice President of the Riverside Officers Association at City Council June 17, 2014:

Good evening, I’m Brian’s vice president with the Riverside Police Officers Association. My Biggest concern, that’s come out of this, is that, for any of you that have been for any longer than four years. You remember what it was like when we had city government that over reached their bounds, stuck there hands in department heads business that didn’t belong there. I want to make sure for the sake of transparency, just like this councilman has asked for, that we put it out there for everybody to see.  Brian, me, all of us at the association want to make sure our organization is protected.. we don’t want to go backwards, we’re trying to go forward.

Sergio Diaz recently had an incident, first thing he did was sign away his right to privacy, and he shared his complaint openly, he took ownership of what he did, and I want to make sure this person does the same.. Thank-you.

Does Melendrez appears to conceive that RPD is an independent “organization” as stated at City Council?  An organization (or organisation) is an entity, such as an institution or an association, that has a collective goal and is linked to an external environment.  Has Riverside’s finest lost there way?  Concerned citizens and local community groups in Riverside say Yes!  RPD needs to be more community orientated and needs to stop thinking they are an independent external entity.

What is it between Council and RPD?  According to Melendrez, there was a time that city government “overreached there bounds”, and stuck there hands in department heads business that didn’t belong there.   What was meant by that?  Were they talking about Councilman Adams interfering with the promotion process?  Or was it our City Attorney Greg Priamos, with his embroidered bullet proof vest, which states “City Attorney,”  involved with the raid on the Vibe club in Riverside?   Or is it simply by Chiefs Diaz’s standard, that people should simply stay out of police business and stay at home eating cheetos in their underwear?  Is he saying they should be independent?  Is Riverside a dicktatorship? Sorry, a dictatorship as many in our residential communities are expressing?  Who would then in the City be authorized to ask questions regarding police business?  Incidentally, Aurelio Melendrez is the son of current Ward 2 Councilman Andy Melendrez..

melendrez1A

Is the focus of Smith’s and Melendrez’s complaint directed possibly toward Councilman Mike Soubirous, the only independent voice on the Council?  A complaint against Soubirous is a complaint against Ward 3 constituents who we are told respect their hard working Councilman.  Since Aurelio is the son of Councilman Andy Melendrez, can we believe there may be some conflict of interest at hand due to his familial connection?

MS

What those two officers need to know is that Councilman Soubirous is their boss.

hillmailer

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

We asked the question if this whole investigation is politically motivated because the City supported Valerie Hill rather than Soubirous.  Another interesting point regarding this mailer is that it was paid for by the Riverside Police Officer’s Association  as indicated by the red arrow.  According to a new article in the Press Enterprise, Soubirous continues to say he believes the investigation is politically motivated because the police union backed his opponent in the election, and because he has questioned police department actions and policies since taking office.  Is this becoming a issue of Piss Poor Politics?

Why did City Manager Scott Barber walk out right before Riverside Police Officers Association/ Union President Brian Smith came to the podium?  Was he disturbed that Smith made public, something that shouldn’t have been public?

BARBER

Second Councilman Paul Davis, is also up against a Human Resource Complaint for a similar presmise… Doing the work of the people has it drawbacks..it certainly seems you will get political blowback for asking question.

Pu1T0UfvSGJyBBMf-r3kE2dJ-d6fbR2ktzstZ2nkWjkh1QUhkDIc0xkOsbm-1VNCfVrccqA5V7pcE74BVoRrQo

When did that become so bad, is it only in Riverside?  The ultimate question they should be asking and concerned about is what is really going to happen to Police Officer Pensions in 2016?  That should be of concern.  Maybe Brian and Aurelio should realize that the way the City of Riverside has done business, will impact their jobs.  For one thing they should understand where pension monies have gone, there will be n money t sue the city if need be.  They need to do a little bit of investigative work themselves, in order to uncover how their pension monies have been used. The following is a response by Riverside Police Officers Association President Brian Smith to Thirty Miles of Corruption.

6/20/14: To: THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

Interesting to read your take on what the rpoa was “saying” at the council meeting.  Perhaps a little investigating on your part you’d find a councilman likely violated the Brown Act…intimated that the city manager and chief of police jobs were in jeopardy. ..and a myriad of other things..

You may also uncover during your investigation that the complaint was actually filed by city employees and not the union.  In fact, the union was interviewed as a witness only.

The fact of the matter is this particular councilman needs to stop campaigning and start governing!  

Feel free to contact me, after you have done a little investigation on your own. 

Brian C Smith

TMC’s response to Brian Smith’s email response..

6/20/14: To: BRIAN SMITH, PRESIDENT OF RPOA

Hi Brian,

I do appreciate your email response regarding the one councilman who allegedly violated the Brown Act.  With all due respect, myself and the citizens of Riverside have a great appreciation for our Police force and the excellent work they do for our community.  For some reason, many find it difficult to forward constructive criticism regarding The Riverside Police Force, because it seems when we are responded to, we are disregarded and not taken seriously.

I’d like more than anything to clean this possible misconception up.  I will definitely make it right with regards to your conception of spin.  Spin is not good, it only makes us dizzy about the reality of true events. I’d like to ask you some questions to clear this up.  Regarding this one councilman,  “What part of the Brown Act did he specifically violate?”

As taxpayers we spent approximately 100K to ask a question (50K for the investigation and 50K for the law firm), we are still waiting for the 100K question to be answered.  Wouldn’t it have been frugal for city employees to file an ethics complaint?  Which would be free.

In your email to me you stated that, “You may also uncover during your investigation that the complaint was actually filed by city employees and not the union.”  I realize that only employees of the City of Riverside can initiate this complaint.  Were you one of the employees at the time that initiated this complaint?  Were the employees City Manager Scott Barber and Police Chief Diaz?

Could you clear up the statements made at City Council June 17, 2014, whereby you stated that “Several months ago I had a conversation with a council member, which brought me some concern.  I brought that information back to some members within the City.  Department head and City Manager, it was then brought to Mayor Pro Temp and Mayor.”  Could you clarify this statement.

Also, you stated, “I also think that councilmember should have a right to answer to what I said, happen.  I think he is entitled to that.”  Could you clarify this statement.

At one time you were under Chris Lanzillo, who was president of RPOA, could you express any premonition yet to come regarding his behavior with reference to his alleged alliances with Lackie, Dammeier & McGill?

At some point in time did you feel that some in RPD were entitled to personal use of city vehicles?  Could you give us some insight regarding allegation of Councilman Steve Adams and interfering with the promotional process?  When you were Vice President and Chris Lanzillo was President of the RPOA, could you give us some insight in reference to the Cop Playbook?  Lastly, is this a concerted effort on part of the City to remove certain council people due to politics?

Again, thank-you for contacting us.

All the best,  Javier Moreno

UPDATE: JUNE,22,2014: FROM THE DESK OF ATTORNEY LETITIA PEPPER: NEW RULES WHEREBY SPEAKER CARDS MUST BE TURNED IN ADVANCE.

To: K Wright, Colleen, Sherry Morton-Ellis, asmelendrez@riversideca.gov, msoubirous@riversideca.gov, Chris MacArthur, Mike Gardner, Paul Davis, Rusty Bailey, Steve Adams, sbarber@riversideca.gov, Greg Priamos
Cc: Kevin Dawson, Gurumantra Khalsa
Re: The Recent Rule that All Speaker Cards Must Be Turned in Advance of the Public Comment Period Appears to Be Unconstitutional.

Honorable Mayor, City Council Members, City Attorney Priamos and City Manager Scott Barber:
I was present, as was Kevin Dawson and a few other people, when, as Karen Wright walked to turn in a speaker card during the on-going public comment period, she was specifically singled out by Mayor Bailey by name, and told that her card would not be accepted because it was turned in too late.
I had already intended to send you a letter about this event, but since Karen Wright copied me with her e-mail, I’ll provide my comments instead by e-mail.
Free speech is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed to us by both the stet and federal constitutions. Any time the government takes action that impairs a fundamental right, it must have a compelling reason to do so, and it must use the least intrusive means possible to accomplish its alleged goal.
Here, the right at stake is the First Amendment (and concomitant but more protective state constitutional article) right of political speech. This right includes the right to comment on the government’s actions in a specifically forum designed for such purpose, the public comment section, as well as the period for public comment after each agenda item. This relatively new rule requires that all speaker cards for each such period all be turned in before the agenda item has been called.
As explained below, this rule appears to be unconstitutional, and I ask that the City Council promptly rescind such rule and return to the original method of letting people turn in speaker cards up until the final comment for each period has concluded.
The background for my conclusion that the new rule is unconstitutional follows. If the City Attorney advises you to the contrary, please remember that this is the same attorney who told you that “moratoriums are illegal” (as you know, we currently have a moratorium on the issuance of building permits) and the same attorney who advised Mayor Bailey that arresting me for applauding was a perfectly good solution to — what? What problem was the applause causing? But I digress.
In the past, the citizens of Riverside were able to comment on various items simply by lining up along the walls and waiting their turn as each agenda item was called. They did not need to fill out speaker cards. The citizens, not the government, decided on the order in which they would speak. The citizens could listen to their fellow citizens speak, and then decide that they, too, wanted to comment — and then get up and join the line to add their comments, too. Legally, no one was required, as a condition of being allowed to speak, to give an name or an address, or any other information, including whether they favored or disfavored an item.
But under Ronald Loveridge, that clever political scientist, this was changed. Speaker cards were required, as well as the speakers supposed stand on an item. This changed the balance of power. The government could control the order of speakers. It could group those in favor or opposed together, and let one group or the other speaker first or last. The government could make sure that a strong speaker that supported the position of the government would be the final speaker. I personally saw these things happen over the years.
Although legally the government cannot require people to give a name, address or other information as a condition of speaking, the average person does not know this. So some people choose not to speak up because they do not want to share such information. I have seen this happen, too, when people, like me, who have used medial marijuana with great success, could share how much it has helped them, but are afraid to do so because of the potential ramifications such use could have on them because of the irrationnal laws that still exist making such use illegal or grounds for losing employment.
I have personally witnessed all these uses of the speaker card system to give the government an “edge” over public speech. This new rule is simply another attempt to let the government have unnecessary control over free speech.
Now, the rationale is that letting people turn in speaker cards during the meeting is somehow “disruptive.” It is not disruptive. It was never disruptive in the past for people to turn in cards during the meeting. I, and others, saw this happen for many years, with no problems.
Even court rooms function in this way, with people able to approach to bailiff or court room clerk, while court is in session and the judge is listening to other people, in order to quietly conduct other business unrelated to the event then taking place before the judge.

     So walking up to the front corner of the room to slip a speaker card into the receptacle, while someone else is at the podium speaking, is simply not so disruptive as to justify depriving anyone (even Karen Wright, who it’s clear is one of the City’s “disfavored” speakers) of the fundamental right of free political speech.
Requiring anyone who wishes to speak to turn in a speaker card at any time before the very end of the period for such speech is not the least intrusive way of solving the alleged problem of “disruption.” There was no disruption caused by handling things in the prior way.
Again, I ask that the City Council take a stand and represent its constituents by protecting their right to engage in the fundametnal constitutional right of political speech without unwarranted intrusion and interference by their government.

Letitia E. Pepper

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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

brandrifffinding2

CLICK IMAGE OF LETTER TO ENLARGE

According to the letter signed off by Assistant City Manager Deanna Lorson, John Brandriff’s complaint was valid.  Chief of Police Sergio Diaz was found to be guilty of “Discourtesy”.  Well yes, we thought it was more of being a “Threat.”  Remember, Diaz was threatening Brandriff’s political career, and for good measure, he went on to question Brandriff’s manhood!   Which these actions seem to be very different from the terms “misconduct” or “poor service.”   The actual finding states, that the department member committed all or part of the alleged acts of misconduct or poor service.  Sorry this just doesn’t seem to describe the threat to end one’s political career or the justification to tell Brandriff that he should grow some balls and talk to him.  Should we add professionalism to this?  It just goes on to sound as a simple man, with a badge, a gun, power, ego and a preoccupation with men’s balls.  Is this just another L.A. West Side story?  The next question is how CM Scott Barber will handle this case.  Remember, the Chief does not take criticism well, according to many in the community that have dealt with him.  Will this be a slap on the wrist, a write up or a course in Anger management?

diaz

Did I get that right Serge…What? Was that a thumbs up?

REMEMBERING THOSE THIS JUNE 6 WHO FOUGHT ON THE SHORES OF NORMANDY, FRANCE IN 1944:

021DDAY_468x309

AMERICAN CEMETERY NORMANDY, FRANCE

american-cemetery-normandy

CITY RIVERSIDE SUES REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO BLOCK LEGAL MARIJUANA BALLOT MEASURE!  AS IF THE CITY HAS THE MONEY TO DO SO…

According to the Press Enterprise, of which I believe TMC is blocked from the PE for some reason from commenting…  At the direction of the Riverside City Council a lawsuit was filed to block the Registrar of Voters office from placing a legal marijuana initiative on the ballot!  But is this really legal, the basis of the City’s argument is that it is illegal.  Okay I give you that, according to Federal Law Marijuana is in a CI classification under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) (21 U.S.C. § 811), therefore marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug, which means that the federal government views marijuana as highly addictive and having no medical value.  Yes Marijuana is illegal according to Federal Law, but so is Illegal Immigration, where are they on that stand?  Doctors may not “prescribe” marijuana for medical use under federal law, though they can “recommend” its use under the First Amendment.  But why does are little ol City Attorney Greg Priamos feel he can go out of his jurisdiction to pull a legal block, which in essence is a Federal issue?  Yes, this is a federal issue and Priamos should know that, and call the Feds to take over.  The Feds in general are currently taking a back seat on the marijuana issue.  Just the fact that Priamos thinks that he can put an end to the legal voting process, is at least, goes against everything in which this country was built on.  Blocking the will of the people is a very dangerous position to take regarding those in City Council to take.  This leads to the question of what other voting issues have the City gone against in favor of their own agenda.  One comes to mind, the use of taxpayer monies for Yes on Measure A campaign.  Was that a Federal issue also?  Now we are getting somewhere.  Greg, you don’t own this City, State or Country, quit spending taxpayer monies on frivolous law suits when the City is having difficulty paying their debt service.

untitled

City Attorney, Gregory Priamos

Priamos should also have know that it is illegal to enter into outside legal help without contracts, also for illegal water monies transferred in violation of Proposition 218, for bond fraud, for redevelopment money improprieties, for faulty legal advice to counsel, for the code rehab property scam, for using taxpayer monies to pay for parties etc. etc.

In a time when the City of Riverside is having difficulty paying it’s debt service, thanks to former City Manager Brad Hudson, this initiative would tax and regulate a small number of dispensaries within the City.  Tax money gained from the sale can help the city with it’s debt service, instead of attempting to increase the residents utility rates again, and again.  This certainly is a reflection of how our City views it’s voting constituents.

HYATT OWNER METRO RIVERSIDE FILES CHAPTER 11 TO CIRCUMVENT THE CITY’S FORECLOSURE PROCESS!  The City of Riverside filed foreclosure proceeding on the newly constructed Hyatt Hotel.  Originally the hotel was built by money loaned to Sivash Barmand, who owned the San Francisco based company, Metro Pacific properties, to the tune of approximately $20 million. Barmand, who does business in the City of Riverside as MetroRiverside, defaulted on their agreement by allowing their reserve fund fall below the required balance.  This is just the beginning, as a cascade of surprises unveils itself as a result of Mayor Bailey’s moral compass, former City Manager Brad Hudson.  Not long ago the Hyatt was in court claiming the City was attempting to “extort” them!  What now Councilman Mike Gardner, this was on your watch!  This was our story back in October of 2012.

UPDATE: 10/26/2012:  THE DEVELOPER OF THE HILTON TO SUE THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE..  WITHIN THE CONTRACT, IF THE DEVELOPER DEFAULTS, THE CITY IS NOW IN THE “HOTEL BUSINESS.”  FOR THIS TRANSACTION, TWO FIRESTATIONS AND TWO LIBRARIES ARE USED AS COLLATERAL.. 

(HYATT PIC COURTESY OF TRIP ADVISOR)

IS THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE INVOLVED IN “EXTORTION” AS CLAIMED BY HYATT DEVELOPER?

According to the Press Enterprise, a story broke by City Council Gadlflies almost a year ago, no one listened, because they may have thought they were simply “crazy” made mention to the contract between the City of Riverside and the Developer Siavash Barmand.  The other claim states that the city “extorted” money from MetroRiverside by improperly changing the obligations to build public improvements, and by delaying approval of designs for the improvements. The claims say the developer lost money because of the design approval delay and the convention center closure.

I’m surprised the City didn’t code it to death, then rehab it at a profit.

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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

HS

Riverside Councilman Mike Soubirous seen speaking to the newly elected District Attorney, Mike Hestrin at the election night party.

According to the current posting on the Riverside Registrar of Voters, out of 139,978 total votes, Hestrin holds 54.73% of the vote compared to incumbent Paul Zellerbach at 45.27% of the total vote.  While the Zellerbach campaign sent flyers out touting Hestrin as being a “Deadbeat Dad.”   Voters I’ve talked to, felt their intelligence was being insulted, by this type of grammar school pranks, especially by an incumbent that has represented the County of Riverside.

hestridbd

One dirty campaign?  Well it seems karma finally played it’s role.

zellerbach

Sorry, just couldn’t help myself!

Zellerbach now has own worries, of his own making, caught with sign tampering and the use of taxpayer property for other than the work of the people; Zellerbach could face 2 felonies and 4 misdemeanors.  A hacking of Hestrin’s wifes computer and access to her personal photos also led suspicion to suspect the Zellerbach campaign.

bailey

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

What’s not so difficult to believe, is those in the City of Riverside which we would call “status quo”, which are current Mayor Bailey vehemently was against…supported the “Z”.  We are finding contradiction and hypocrisy at the curtails of the truth.  Even the City of Riverside’s City Attorney Gregory Priamos is a supporter of the “Z”.  Well, not a surprise, as some are saying “One crook to another!”  They have to…they know where all the bodies are buried.  Again, TMC is continuing to receive email of Zellerbach stalking his ex-wife.  Yes! folks, but we cannot corroborate this, though the emails keep coming in.

ZMAY2014          ZMAY2014TWO

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Residents in the community have been asking for more trust, fairness and integrity in government, desperately wishing for leadership who would ask the hard questions, and do their job of representing needs and aspirations of the community, instead of the status quo.  One of the foremost newly elected grassroots leaders in the City of Riverside, is Ward 3 Councilman Mike Soubirous.   With Hestrin winning this District Attorney seat, people are ecstatic at best, proclaiming the two to be some of the  best in coming grassroots candidates Riverside has ever had.   This, which spells new leadership, not only for the City of Riverside, but for the County of Riverside, law enforcement and those working in the D.A.’s office.

zellerback

Constituents were just finding difficulty trusting someone in a tou tou…

But in hindsite, according to the words of Rodney King, “can’t we just get along?”  But I guess not, because the community must continually let leadership know who is in charge.. in taking appropriate action.

UPDATE: NEWLY ELECTED COUNCILMAN JIM PERRY TO BE RECALLED?  DID HE TURN TO STATUS QUO AND AGAINST THE CONSTITUENTS SO QUICKLY?  CONSTITUENTS ARE SAYING A RESOUNDING “YES!”  WHY DID HE REALLY TAKE THE POSITION?  MORE TO COME..

RECALL

RIVERSIDE POLICE OFFICER HITS BLIND MAN?  Another incident of a RPD officer colliding his vehicle into a pedestrian.  What is not reported by the PE is that the vehicular impact with this pedestrian was such that he went over the hood into the windshield!  Lt. Val Graham states there is an investigation, but no word if the officer was drug tested, or if he was distracted why’ll on his in car computer or cell.  We had a similar incident in the Casa Blanca area where a pedestrian Isabel Pablo was hit by RPD officer Boulerice, where she died soon after of her injuries.  They did try to do the “Diaz Spin” by stating she was drunk and jaywalking, but the officer admitted going to fast and was on the in car computer.  This officer was not drug tested, but if this accident involved a non-officer, this subject would have been drug tested and possible charged with manslaughter or a more serious charge.  As a community we all know that our Riverside Police Officers have a difficult job, and we appreciate what they do for our community, but we should have the finances, through initiatives such as Measure A, that an officer does not go out in a vehicle alone.  I find this problematic, an officer should not be sent in a vehicle alone, there should be a secondary partner for immediate back-up and to take over the task of technilogical communications, which would allow the driver not to be distracted.  We saw this with fallen officer Ryan Bonaminio, who single-handedly attempted to subdue a criminal episode, which resulted in his untimely death.

blind-person-walking-using-cane

As TMC said before in a December 2012 posting, the crosswalk where Pablo was killed, is quite confusing, infact, the crosswalks throughout the length of the street is inconsistent.  But after a policy change in reference to on-board RPD vehicle computers, are they, RPD, abiding by these rules?

policyone  policytwo   policythree

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

The following PE article states that the fatal crash which resulted in the death of Pablo, influenced new police computer policy.

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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

 

CODE

FROM THE DESK OF LOUIS J. JEAN-LOUIS:
By: *Louis J. Jean-Louis, a freelance writer

The City of Riverside, along with its elected officials and attorneys Gregory Priamos, James E. Brown and Rahman N. Gerren — much like other cities across the US and their attorneys — has devolved its governance into a quasi-criminal operation, thereby perpetrating a scheme on thousands of its homeowners since the mortgage meltdown of 2008.

The fraudulent scheme clusters around the use of its Code Enforcement Department to target homeowners whose houses are in foreclosure, a segment of the population that happens to be disproportionately African-American, Minority, Elderly, Residents who lack proficiency in the English language and are unable to afford the high cost of litigation.

Through its Code Enforcement Department Officers, the City tags the target property owners’ homes with recurring citations, retroactive fines and excessive administrative fees amounting to $1,000.00 a day and a maximum of $100,000.00 per occurrence for minor violations.

These minor violations, which include, “dry grass, overgrown vegetation, outdoor storage, unpermitted home use and parking vehicles in their driveways,” are prima facie unconstitutional because of their vagueness, overreaching nature and their selective prosecution to the herein enumerated property owners.

The Code Enforcement Department further uses other purported administrative remedies, such as citing the target homeowners for nuisance abatement, conducting warrantless searches to gain access to their homes to drum up additional charges and ostensibly build a claim against their homes and invoking its illegal receivership power, which amounts to illegal takings of personal and real property without due process and procedural due process.

The City further establishes a kangaroo court system in which its employees serve as prosecutor, judge, and jury in violation of the separation of powers doctrine, to extort millions of dollars from its residents pursuant to a criminal enterprise that may be the subject of federal prosecution under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations, known as the Federal RICO statutes of the United States of America.

Some of the City’s victims, who are elderly, foreign residents and therefore lack proficiency in the English language, are unaware that anything is wrong until the sheriff shows up at their door with an eviction notice. And, under this scenario, their belongings end up on the city sidewalks while their elderly parents and young children are forced into the homeless shelters of the city that are already overcrowded. Although not reported in the main-stream media, some of the victims of this criminal scheme have chosen suicide over the loss of the greatest investment of their lifetime: their piece of the American Dream.

The City’s bureaucracy then turns its recurring citations, retroactive fines and excessive administrative fees into a lien on the target properties. And the lien, in turn, gives the city a significant ownership interest in the target property owners’ homes, thus clouding the title of the said homes.

That cloud or slander of title then causes the homeowners’ respective banks to raise their monthly mortgage payments exponentially, and in one particular case to $14,000.00 a month, making it impossible for those struggling homeowners, either to afford their mortgages, sell their properties, refinance their loans or negotiate modification or short-sale options with their respective banks, leaving them with only one alternative: foreclosure.

After foreclosure, which in effect removes the target property owners from the chain of title, the City of Riverside negotiates with the respective property owners’ banks to buy those foreclosed homes for a fraction of their value. The City then renovates and resells those homes to other co-conspirators of the scheme at a substantial profit. Or, alternatively, the City, in concert with the County of Riverside, attaches to, and collects its outstanding liens from, the target property owners’ tax bill or from the proceeds of the foreclosure sales.

Listed on the Code Enforcement website is a file, entitled “Open Cases”, that contains approximately 2,500 similarly-situated property owners who are being targeted by the City of Riverside’s ongoing criminal scheme.

Moreover, I have obtained other documents that prove rather inclusively that the primary purpose of the City of Riverside’s criminal scheme is to use fiat code ordinances, which are trumped or preempted by the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitutional, The California Constitution and other State laws and statutes, to extort millions of dollars from some of the most indigent and financially-strapped citizens of the community.

Even more frightening, in the view of some, the selective prosecution of these unconstitutional municipal ordinances predominantly against African-Americans, citizens of Hispanic descent and other Minorities under color of law and official right is tantamount to a form of modern-day ethnic cleansing.

I, an investigative reporter, am one of tens of thousands present and past similarly-situated victims of this rampant corruption by Riverside elected officials and public servants. One such case against Riverside for civil rights violation, styled Louis J. Jean-Louis v. City Of Riverside, et al, Case No. ED CV 13-01059-MMM (ASx), has been filed in federal court on my behalf.

As its financial woes worsen, the City of Riverside, aided by its attorney Priamos, assistant attorneys Brown and Gerren, and complicit network law firms … who are aiding and abetting the municipal bureaucracy in its criminal scheme, is even more determined than ever to continue perpetrating their fraud under the guise of enforcing fiat municipal ordinances: a criminal fraud that has thus far netted the City and its accomplices millions of dollars in ill-gotten wealth. The unfair, deceptive and illegal activities of Riverside, its attorneys, elected officials and public officials and network law firms have been carried out heretofore with impunity.

If you are a class action attorney or a firm that is interested in pursuing a class action lawsuit against the City of Riverside, please contact me at your earliest convenience. Or if you are a victim of a similar fraud by Riverside or any other US city and would like to start a support group to combat this public corruption, please contact me either by telephone @ (951) 897-1691 or via email @ jl4jc2@aol.com

You may also file a complaint against Riverside City attorneys Gregory Priamos, James E. Brown and Rahman N. Gerren with the State Bar of California, which is located at 845 S. Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, CA, 90017-2515 (213) 765-1000; or against the city officials themselves with the following agencies: The US Attorney General Eric H. Holder, US Department of Justice, Criminal Division, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C., 20530-0001; State Attorney General Ms. Kamala D. Harris, California Department of Justice, Attn.: Public Inquiry Unit, P.O. Box 944255, Sacramento, CA 94244-2550; Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr., c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173, Sacramento, CA 95814; Chair of the United States Commission on Civil Rights Martin R. Castro, 624 Ninth Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20425; and the Local Office of the FBI, Los Angeles, Suite 1700, FOB, 11000 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90024-3672.

In times of public corruption, the greatest threat to liberty is for the majority of the citizenry to remain silent in the face of tyranny: when others’ constitutional rights are being systematically violated. Therefore, let’s continue to speak up and expose this systemic fraud by elected officials and public servants. And let the chips fall wherever they may!

*Louis J. Jean-Louis has a BS Degree in Journalism, with emphasis in Reporting and Editing.

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 ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER, 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!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 170 other followers