Posts Tagged ‘arrest’

wrightpepper3

DA FILES NO CHARGES DAY AFTER APRIL FOOLS, BUT IT’S NO PISSING CONTEST EITHER!

Karen Wright, Was her actions Illegal or Just Bad Business? Or just an April Fools day prank by the D.A.’s Office?  The Day after April Fool’s Day Community Activist, Karen Wright received this letter from the Office of the District Attorney, Paul Zellerbach.  What’s foolish about the whole thing is that April Fools Day was the 160th day without the DA filing charges.  The day Ms. Wright showed up to court in December 2012 could have been the first April Fools experience!  The DA never showed because they never filed charges.  Many in the community are asking if this is why scrutiny is now being placed on D.A Zellerbach’s office after a series of questionable actions.  In Ms. Wright’s case, she even had to call to find out what the DA’s plans were, since they didn’t have the common courtesy to call her and postone the court day.  Now according to the below letter, she appears to be tried and convicted by the DA’s office.  The DA states, “You are advised that your actions on that occasion were criminal, and are punishable by a fine of up to the amount of $1,000.00 and /six months in the county jail.”  It certainly seems a bit wreckless to create that assumption, being the very actions could have been challenged in the court of law, of course, her civil rights being infringed.  If this ever happened or was the case, I’d suggest anyone to take case out of Riverside.  But the bottom line if this was criminal and punishable, why no charges?

KWDALetter

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW ZELLERBACH’S LETTER TO KAREN WRIGHT

Now, we know according to Zellerbach letter, talking 16.8 seconds after the bell, it is a crime.  So why wasn’t Mike Fine arrested when he past the bell beyond the 16 second rule?  It’s quite possible that maybe it’s just important to cover your bases with campaign contributions.  Possibly according to public records Zellerbach has.  But I guess when citizens have true concerns they all appear to be dismissed as not applicable, or in Zellerbach’s famous words, “Is it illegal, or just bad business?” when it comes to the antics of elected officials.

Citizens participating in government are not called patriots; they are called gadflies. Newspapers perpetuate this idea that involved citizens are pests of the public process. This is a government of, by and for the elite — not we, the people!  -Commenter Paul Jacobs from Temecula

More information continues to come out regarding Zellerbach office, according to The Rusted Bell (No relation to the Mayor), there’s a Federal Complaint to filed against his office.  This in a case involving a Temecula Sheriff’s Deputy intentionally and deliberately leaving drugs in home where a 14 year child resided.  The victims of a home based laptop business alleged they were searched in a series of three occasions, robbed at gun point.  Allegedly Temecula Sheriff’s Department even used Walmart loss prevention agents to storm house.   A complaint issued to the DA’s office by the small business has fallen on deaf ears by the D.A.’s office.  Family alleges that the DA’S office handled by Paul Zellerbach is deliberately and intentionally stalling time to allow for limitations to run out on these Officers and Civilians (Walmart Loss Prevention Agents..) Victims intend to have ALL past Search Warrants involving this Team of Officers Reviewed.

Something which is interesting, word is coming down the pipeline from an anonymous source that Zellerbach in his younger days may have crossed the line.  Did Zellerbach have a stalking issue with a former girlfriend years ago?  What would this mean now if anything, about Zellerbach’s current disposition?

zellerbach

WHAT DID YOU EXPECT ME TO DO?

In response to the accusations that there may be a strained relaltions between his DA’s office and Riverside Police Department, Zellerbach fired back according to statement from the City News Service, “This shouldn’t be a pissing contest where one calls out the other for not doing something,” he said, “We work hand-in-hand.”  Ahh.. the visual on that last statement by Paul just didn’t sit right..  Who uses phrases as this in a news conference?  This news conference was in reference to the allegation that some domestic violence cases take a back seat in Riverside County.  Well whatever the case may be, Zellerbach may be up for the competition.  “Any takers?”

A question for City News, “Are you on file with the DA’s Office for this reporting, as TMC is?”

In an incident that made national news, Public Speaker Karen Wright appeared at her December 27th court date regarding her charge of disrupting a public meeting.  Later found through a public request act of the police report, City Attorney Gregory Priamos had given instruction to RPD Officer Sahagun to stop Wright from going past the three minute allotted time by sixteen seconds.

Staff Photographer                           zellerbach22

Riverside City Attorney Greg Priamos               Riverside DA Paul Zellerbach

It also appears that City Attorney Greg Primos made an important journal, the American Bar Association Journal, which states, “City Attorney Blaimed for Arrest of Woman, 60, Who Exceeded the 3 minute Speech Limit at Council Meeting.”  One commenter on the journal stated, Nothing says: “We really do value citizens’ opinions on Council business!” like armed police ready to cuff speakers for exceeding the three-minute limit.

The fun simply never seems to stop with the Priamos’s, it must be it the blood.  Take a gander at this L.A. Times Article where no one seems to know who paid the sports players at USC, but Greg’s name keeps coming up!  First, the wife then the twins… sound like a skit of “Who’s on first!”

The situation became increasingly incomprehensible when Priamos would not comment do to “attorney-client privilege.”  Attorney client privilege?  That’s what we said…  In lieu things continued to take a strange turn when the filing by the Paul Zellerbach’s District Attorney’s office was never issued.  Karen was told by the court to call the DA’s office to find out if the DA intends to file or not.  Attorney Letitia Pepper attempted to request the issue be addressed in court so she could ask for a dismissal.  The court would not allow this.  The waiting game continues, since the DA did not have the courtesy to follow through, the justice system leaves Ms. Wright in the dark at this point, and she herself must make the effort to contact and find out their intentions.  How many DA departments be connected to and placed on hold to ask the question, “Mr. DA, do you plan to file charges against me?”  Could this inaction by the DA’s office be construed as a continued form of harassment toward Ms. Wright?  Or to continue the confusion so a warrant for her arrest is issued?  That’s so Riverside.  Most Riversidian’s agree, the Council and Mayor should have dropped the charges rather than enduring more city embarrassment, but currently the DA appears to be dancing around the issue..  So what is DA Paul Zellerbach’s relationship with the City of Riverside?  Possibly with BB&K?  The Riverside Grand Jury?  Local Superior Court Judges?  The Attorney General Office of the State of California?  and of course local cronies?  Well…

zellerback

Outdance the DA on the current issues?  Tough competition, any takers?

One of the first items for new Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey would have been to drop charges.  Currently, Chief Sergio Diaz has yet to publicly apologize to Ms. Wright for his behavior and unrestrained verbality toward her earlier this year at a City Council Meeting.  No complaints were issued against Chief Diaz by Wright.  Chief Diaz was not arrested at this incident for his disturbance at Council Chambers.  So it appears that there may two sets of rules, one for officials and one for residents, which seems to go against the very fabric of what this nation was built on.

So the citation issued by the police lists a court date. You check the docket the day before and can’t find your name, you call the DA and they say they are still consulting. You are then in a position where you still have to go to court because you don’t want to have the DA file at the last minute, you not show and the judge issue a bench warrant. You also don’t want to appear in court without an attorney, so you have that exspence. I’m sorry but it looks like they are unfairly jerking Ms. Wright around. This case should have been dismissed. Shame on the city of Riverside and shame on the DA. – Kevin Dawson, Commenter on the PE

Just wait until the trial and CA Greg Priamos takes the stand under oath and has to testify who ordered him to order the officer to “stop” her. I don’t think his “apology” will quite cut it here.  – Mary Shelton, Commenter on the PE

Acording to the Press Enterprise, John Hall, Spokesman for the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office, state they didn’t have enough time to investigate.

Judge_Hall

John Hall, Spokeshole Spokesperson for the Riverside City DA’s Office

Okay John! this can expressly be construed as the DA does not have a case.  Hall went on to say, “There’s nothing that we have to do by law to notify anyone that nothing’s going to be done on that particular day.”  Okay John, I get it, you have the power but you had over 8 weeks to figure this out!  What goes?  By the way do you take dance lessons, because it appears you are dancing around the issue as well as the Big Kahuna, Zellerbach.  He further stated according to the Press Enterprise, that in the past six years, only one other case has come in under penal code section § 403 — disturbing a public meeting — and the district attorney ended up filing different charges against the suspect.  Penal Code § 403 states every person who, without authority of law, willfully disturbs or breaks up any assembly or meeting that is not unlawful in its character, other than an assembly or meeting referred to in Section 302 of the Penal Code or Section 18340 of the Elections Code, is guilty of a misdemeanor.  So they couldn’t charge someone with the original arrest charge of penal code § 403 and had to concoct subsequent charge or unlterior trumped up charge?  So why would the DA have to do this? Would it be because of the embarrassment of the whole charge to begin with?  As of January 4, 2013, Wright’s case remains “under review” and remains unlisted on the courts databases.  “Under review?”  Is this code word for “no case?”  It’s only common courtesy that the DA’s office show on a court date, it’s only common courtesy that the DA’s office collaborate with the defendent, otherwise can this be construed by the DA’s office of a pronounce expression of arrogance?  Information for the DA’s Office only.. we have included a printable icon for ease of printability in order for the DA’s office to file TMC articles..

According to a Press Release, Councilman Paul Davis says that City Attorney Gregory Priamos was soley responsible for the directive to arrest Public Speaker Karen Wright if she spoke beyond the three minute rule, completely disregarding the authority of the Council and Mayor.  Again a secondary example was seen when City Attorney Scott Barber spent $2 million dollars without Council approval.  The question many are asking is “Who’s running the store?”, “Who’s in charge?”  According to Columist Dan Bernstein of the Press Enterprise, it really appears that Riverside’s City Attorney Greg Priamos is running the show.  Probably not without the help of the infamous Best, Best & Krieger, which have been siphoning hundred’s of thousands of dollars in legal fees without a contract!  How should we explain this to the taxpayer?  Possibly “attorney client privelidge?”

What about our concerns with Connie Leach, former wife of Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach.  The Grand Jury report was thrown out without a thorough interview process, therefore and incomplete investigation.

Why did Paul Zellerbach’s office not jump on and investigate the illegal transfer of money from the citizens water fund to the General Fund?  You must understand why we had to go to outside Federal agencies.  We couldn’t have him ponder if it was “illegal or just bad business?”

THE CLAPPING GAME, THE MAYOR  AND LETITIA PEPPER…

James Roberts, reporter for the News Caller, covering the High Desert News, gives his play by play analysis of the events that fateful day when a citizen decided to approval clap.  Roberts analyzes the First Amendment, the proper role of government and the nanny state; whereby no ones feeling can be hurt.  Roberts also mentions that there were others clapping while Letitia was clapping.   The question then arises is to why was Ms. Pepper targeted by Mayor Bailey?  According to a statement given to the Press Enterprise, Mayor Bailey stated, ” I felt like she came down there with a purpose to get arrested and to provoke me into that response and she gave me no choice.”

00330 004

CLICK THIS LINK TO GO TO JAMES ROBERTS POSTING AND VIEW VIDEO

PepperExclusive

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW & HEAR AUDIO OF AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW BETWEEN JAMES ROBERTS & LETITIA PEPPER

Letitia Pepper, Esq. sent this letter in a form of an email to the Council and Mayor, July 2, 2013 to reiterate her position on clapping.  Currently the City of Riverside has no rule on clapping, according to Ms. Pepper if would illegal to adopt a clapping rule after the fact.  Mayor Rusty Bailey carries a Political Science Degree from West Point and was also a government teacher at Poly High.

LETLET1          LETLET2

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THIS LETTER IN PDF FORMAT

Currently, according to the Letitia Pepper, Esq., she has attained an actual copy of the citizen arrest complaint against her by Mayor Rusty Bailey.  It appears that Mr. Independent Voice himself, Mayor Rusty Bailey, crossed out the section where it discloses it’s a misdemeanor to make a false arrest.  Who is able to do that?  Again, this appears to always come up time and time again, are there two sets of rules?  One for City Officials and one for the Citizens?  With the city’s track record it certainly appears so.  Regardless, Ms. Letitia Pepper went back to the RPD Station and filed a false arrest complaint against the Mayor Rusty Bailey.  What will happen now, will his pop, Judge Bailey gather his network of friends together to help his son?  Will Councilman Mike Gardner state again this time that she deserved it, as in Karen Wright’s case?

BF

WONDER HOW MANY TIME MAYOR BAILEY PASSES THIS STATEMENT NEXT TO CITY HALL?

OOPS, THE GRAND JURY JUST RELEASED THERE FINDINGS BUT PRESS ENTERPRISE FORGOT TO MENTION THIS LITTLE TIDBIT OF INFO ABOUT CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS!

b901c3c063264c9045316fe74af81136

According to the Grand Jury report below and the full document to follow, they found that Priamos spilled the beans after he was admonished by the Grand Jury not to discuss any of the details of the Dunbar case.  The City Attorney appears to have thumbed his nose at them and decided to do whatever he pleased, thus violating PC 939.22.  Further,  when Priamos asked for a postponement of the initial interview, the Grand Jury asked an alternate in his office could take his place.  He answered he was the only ‘qualified’ person..  That’s has to be a slap in the face to those who work under him.

The Grand Jury found that the City of Riverside, Office of the City Attorney, did not recognize the responsibilities of the Grand Jury and did not honor the secrecy of the Grand Jury.  On April 12, 16, and 18, 2013, the Grand Jury received correspondence signed by the City Attorney with the subject line “Civil Grand Jury Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, File No. CA 13-0765.”  According to sworn and recorded testimony, the City Attorney stated that after speaking with the Riverside Police Department, he “surmised” the Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, was the subject matter being investigated by the Grand Jury. Had the Grand Jury been investigating this subject matter, all confidentiality on
the part of the Grand Jury would have been compromised, as this document was copied to the following:
The Hon. Mark Cope, Presiding Judge Creg G. Datig, Assistant District Attorney Pamela Wall County Counsel
Scott C. Barber, City Manager
Belinda J. Graham, Assistant City Manager
James E. Brown, Supervising Deputy City Attorney
Frank Hauptmann, Community Police Review Manager4
When asked why he copied these individuals, his response was, “to make them aware of what the Grand Jury was doing”. After being admonished regarding secrecy, on April 22, 2013, the City Attorney filed a Motion and Motion to Modify with the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside that contained Exhibits B and C with the subject, “Civil Grand Jury Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, File No. CA 13-0765,” which is in violation of Penal Code §939.22. On May 20, 2013, the Office of the Riverside County Counsel sent a letter
of admonishment to the City Attorney on behalf of the Grand Jury.
gjpriamos

EMAIL REGARDING MARY SHELTON IN REFERENCE TO THE GRAND JURY FINDINGS AGAINST THE CITY ATTORNEY.

Thank you for your quick response! I do sincerely hope you’re correct and that his interpretation of the grand jury process and its findings is more accurate than his interpretation of Prop 218 and the issue of utility money transfers proved to be.  I’m not the only city resident who’s been watching his performance over time and not become very concerned by a trend rather than an isolated incident.
All my best,

From: “Gardner, Mike” <MGardner@riversideca.gov> To: Mary Shelton Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 6:11 PM Subject: Re: Riverside County GJ reports

I appreciate your concern Mary. However the mere fact a Grand Jury makes findings and recommendations does not make their conclusions accurate. Please read the newspaper story when it runs. I think you will find the findings to be in error in this case. Best regards, Mike Sent from my iPhone On Jul 3, 2013, at 6:07 PM, “mary shelton” wrote: Greetings, I was perusing the Riverside County GJ site the past several days and found reports issued on both the RPD and the Riverside City Attorney’s office.  I am very concerned about the findings issued by the Grand Jury in connection with City Attorney Greg Priamos and his office. I’m especially concerned by the following excerpt which alleges that a violation of PC 939.22 was committed: The Grand Jury found that the City of Riverside, Office of the City Attorney, did not recognize the responsibilities of the Grand Jury and did not honor the secrecy of the Grand Jury. On April 12, 16, and 18, 2013, the Grand Jury received correspondence signed by the City Attorney with the subject line “Civil Grand Jury Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, File No. CA 13-0765.” According to sworn and recorded testimony, the City Attorney stated that after speaking with the Riverside Police Department, he “surmised” the Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, was the subject matter being investigated by the Grand Jury. Had the Grand Jury been investigating this subject matter, all confidentiality on the part of the Grand Jury would have been compromised, as this document was copied to the following: The Hon. Mark Cope, Presiding Judge Creg G. Datig, Assistant District Attorney Pamela Wall County Counsel Scott C. Barber, City Manager Belinda J. Graham, Assistant City Manager James E. Brown, Supervising Deputy City Attorney Frank Hauptmann, Community Police Review Manager4 When asked why he copied these individuals, his response was, “to make them aware of what the Grand Jury was doing”. After being admonished regarding secrecy, on April 22, 2013, the City Attorney filed a Motion and Motion to Modify with the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside that contained Exhibits B and C with the subject, “Civil Grand Jury Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, File No. CA 13-0765,” which is in violation of Penal Code §939.22. On May 20, 2013, the Office of the Riverside County Counsel sent a letter of admonishment to the City Attorney on behalf of the Grand Jury. He admitted that he was disseminating information about the GJ doing an investigation in connection with the RPD which is doubly clear by the individuals carbon copied.  Even though as an experienced municipal attorney who’s a sworn officer of the court he should be well aware of the legalities of GJ proceedings including secrecy. After all, he’s witnessed at least several GJ reports involving the City of Riverside. The fact that he may or may have erred in what the GJ was actually investigating and the RPD GJ report doesn’t make that clear in the area of audio recording devices, the intent was still the same or he did it ‘surmising” that he was divulging information he was privy to about a civil GJ investigation. We the public including those who the CA has enforced laws and code violations against are expected to know and obey the law but the CA doesn’t have that same expectation being in a more educated position?  This is just hard to fathom or would be if I was completely in the dark about other related problems in this same area. I can’t believe that an environment exists at City Hall where a city attorney would behave in such a fashion under the belief that it was appropriate. I asked the PE if they were writing about it. Apparently a story’s being done for publication. Best regards,
THE NEW BOOK THAT’S ON THE NUMBER ONE SPOT IN RIVERSIDE…

Why’ll a new book is becoming the rage in Riverside, called the “Shyster’s Daughter”, written by Paula Priamos, a relation to our City Attorney Gregory Priamos, which takes an intricate view of the family environment in which she grew up in.

Does Greg Priamos have a family history of unscrupulous legal work?  Cousin Paula Priamos wrote a book the Shyster’s Daughter which give insight to the family dysfunctionality and immoral legal dealings.  When contacted by Dvonne Pritruzzello, Paula Priamos assertained to remain distanced from cousin City Attorney Gregory Priamos..

Excerpts:  “Your lucky he didn’t kill you,” I say.  If death didn’t get him in the form of an actual bullet, it could’ve gotten him from shock.  Primos men are known for strong minds and weak hearts.

“I see my father’s body doubled over the wheel.  I see his chest and arms spilling out of the car, his head dangling, blood seeping out of the wet hole in his scalp.”

shystersdaughter

CLICK THIS LINK TO PURCHASE THE BOOK ON AMAZON

sexsalon23_priamos_3002                             7099642-L

Riverside City Attorney Gregory Priamos               Cousin and Writer Paula Priamos

WHAT’S GOING ON WITH HIGHGROVE?

Highgrove residents having been paying into the 11.5% general fund transfer through their utility bill, but the clincher is that they do not recieve City services in return.  They are now questioning the legal application of Measure A toward their water rates.  The folowing article was taken from the June 2013 issue of the Highgrove Happenings Newspaper which also appears on-line at: www.highgrovehappenings.net   CLICK THIS LINK TO READ THE EXTENDED VERSION BY R.A. “BARNEY” BARNETT OF THE ARTICLE IN THE JULY 2013 SIXTEEN PAGE RELEASE, INCLUDED IS A WATER HISTORY BY LOCAL RESIDENT SCOTT SIMPSON

Highgrove Happenings Newspaper

Riverside’s Measure A and how it relates to Highgrove resident’s water bill payments

From the desk of R.A. “Barney” Barnett

If you pay your water bill to the city of Riverside do you know that a portion of your water bill is not going for water related services?

I learned recently via a phone call from the Press Enterprise that residents of Highgrove who pay their water bill to the City of Riverside have 11.5 % of their water bill going to the City of Riverside’s General Fund that can be used for Riverside City Police protection, Riverside Library, or Riverside City Street repairs and other expenses not related to water service.

As you know, Highgrove receives protection from the Riverside County Sheriff Department, not the City of Riverside Police Department and we have our own library in Highgrove. And the streets are maintained by Riverside County since we are in the un-incorporated part of Riverside County.

Some Highgrove residents receive water service from the Riverside/Highland Water Co. that has offices in Grand Terrace. The newer homes in Highgrove have Riverside/Highland water service whereas most of the homes west of the Union Pacific Railroad track and portions of the older neighborhoods north of Center St. by Michigan Ave. have City of Riverside water service.

Alicia Robinson, the Press Enterprise reporter, said that since Highgrove is outside the city limits of Riverside, Highgrove residents do not get to vote on whether or not 11.5 % of their water bill payments should go to the City of Riverside’s General Fund. But these funds can be used for city services other than water related expenses. To make matters worse, some residents within the city limits of Riverside have Municipal Water and do not pay their water bill to the City of Riverside but these residents will get to vote on Measure A because they reside within the city limit boundaries of Riverside.

This all may seem a little confusing but when you add it up, it amounts to $6.7 million dollars per year that is being transferred from revenues received for water bill payments to the City of Riverside’s General Fund for purposes other than water related issues.

Here are the facts as I understand them:

If Measure A passes, this amendment will allow the City of Riverside to continue taking 11.5 % of Highgrove resident’s water bill payments and putting the money directly into Riverside’s General Fund. A lawsuit has been filed based on the transfer being an illegal maneuver.

I recently received a mail-out addressed to: “Postal Customer” which appears to be a sample of the ballot that has the City of Riverside’s logo as the return address. It states: “Official Measure A Ballot Question” which is a 4 page mailer that lists some of the services that would be cut if Measure
A fails. This list includes cutting 9 police officers and 12 firefighters and other city programs. Critics of Measure A say the city is pointing to public safety and youth program cuts as a scare tactic to get public support to help pass Measure A.

Also, in a half page Advertisement in the Press Enterprise of May 26, 2013, the supporters of Measure A (Riverside Public Utilities) stated the following in the second paragraph of their advertisement:

“But for Riverside Public Utilities (RPU), our role is also defined by what is in our name-“Public Utilities”. That means that we are owned by the community that we serve, and that each and every user who is expecting those energy and water services to be there at the flip of a switch or the turn of a tap is a shareholder in our company”. 

So if Highgrove residents are “shareholders” in this public utility, the Highgrove residents who pay the City of Riverside for their water should get to vote. Aren’t we part of the “each and every user” who is expecting water to come out of the tap if we pay our water bill?

If we do not get a vote on Measure A, then our water bills should be reduced by 11.5 % so we are not paying for services that we do not receive. The money diverted into the general fund is totally unrelated to paying our water bill and opponents say it is a violation of proposition 218 which was approved back in 1996.

Measure A is on the June 4, 2013 ballot. If you received a 4 page flyer addressed to “Postal Customer” and you live outside the city limits, you will not get to vote about your 11.5 % of your payment going to other uses in the City of Riverside. But if you do not pay the entire amount of your water bill, you will be considered delinquent and subject to having your water shut off. Even if Measure A passes you may see more lawsuits about the legality of this vote and how revenue is being collected for water service and used for other purposes.

ETHIC’S COMPLAINT: JUST A FORMALITY? COUNCIL NO SHOW, BUT LAWYERED UP FOR ETHICS SHOWDOWN: PANEL FINDS NO ETHICS VIOLATIONS BY COUNCIL..SHOULD WE BE SURPRISED?

I guess the question becomes what is the purpose of a ethics panel but a visual formality designed to fail for the residents, and each time based on criteria, fall in favor of the complainnant by an orchestrated series of line items.

Holley Whatley, a outside Prop 218 attorney, hired by council in care of you the taxpayer to represent them, stated it is not up to the council to decide whether the language in Measure A was improper, it is up to the courts to decide.

Originally Measure A language was criticized, because it remained a violation of Prop. 218, the very reason the City was sued in the first place.  The Measure was sold to the public as a charter amendment, rather than a tax.  This was brought to council attention early on.  Later during the campaign the City and its staff were changing their tune and had to admit it was a general tax.  Certainly the ballot Measure states one thing, but it

Justin Scott Coe, “I feel people fully understood what they were voting on.”

Norman Powel,  Chair, “I have some problem with the wording, but I’m not a constitutional attorney.”

But does the council have a duty to research and investigate the correctness of an issue before a decision is made in the best interest of the taxpayer?  Does the same apply to the Ethics Panel?  If so why does the criteria to elude to a finding contradict it’s design?  Is it simply constructed to always resolve in an appropriate and desired conclusion?  So far there has never been a conclusive finding when a complaint has been filed.  Why is that, well when you look at the overally construction, it appears that the criteria in order to reach a finding, is orchestrated and designed to reach a conclusion of a favorable resolve for the City, not for the residents.  Each and every time, therefore, is the Ethics Panel only a formality? A distraction? A concerted formula designed by a legal eagle to resolve in a favorable conclusion each and every time?  Well, to many in the community it appears so.

THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE CONTINUES TO REFER TO MEASURE-A AS A  “GENERAL TAX!”
measurea             MeasureAPriamos
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
In both these documents the City of Riverside initially referred to Measure A as a ‘Charter Amendment.”  Even City Attorney Gregory Priamos in his impartial analysis as indicated in this ballot insert, he states this is a ‘Charter Amendment.’  It was a different story on June 4, 2013 at City Council whereby City Attorney Priamos made the following public statement:

On June 4, 2013 a General Municipal Election was held for the purpose of submitting a “general tax” to the qualified electors pursuant to Article 13C of the California Constitution.

This General tax was submitted to the qualified electors and Designated as Measure A on the ballot,  The Riverside Local Services and Clean Water Measure proposed to add 1201.4 to the city charter, to authorize a “general tax” pursuant to Article 13 c of the California Constitution.

The No on Measure A committee has repeatedly stated that Measure A violates Prop 218 and that voters cannot approve a charge on a water bill which will be used for anything other than water purposes.  This is inaccurate.

Article 13 c expressly provides that the voters can approve a general purpose tax, such as Measure A.

Article 13 d applies to property related fees, and is not, or has ever been at issue here.

To hold that voters cannot vote to decide upon Measure A, would take away the power of the voters under the CA Constitution to vote on taxes. The city manager and I have repeatedly responded to this inaccurate assertion on an almost weekly basis at City Council Meetings in April, May and June, leading up to the election.

Moreover, the City Manager specifically noted during his presentation on May 7 discussion calendar, that Measure A is a “general purpose tax”.  The City Manager detailed the financial support that Measure A would provide to the General Fund.

Deputy District Attorney Susan Wilson further reinterated during City Council Discussion on May 7, 2013 that this was a “general purpose tax” under Article 13 c of the California Constitution.

Most importantly the city met its legal obligation under the expressed terms of the settlement agreement, that the revenue transfer, which is how it is defined in the settlement, be submitted to the voters for approval at the June election.  On June 4, 2013 the voters approved this general tax by an overwhelming majority in accord with Proposition 218.  The voters have now spoken and the city will act in accord with the will of the voters.

What Priamos forgot to mention was that the majority of voters read it as a Charter Amendment; except Justin Scott Coe of the Ethics Panel who saw general tax somewhere in there… Initially the City was parading around the City Council Members, City Manager Scott Barber, Chief of Police Sergion Diaz and Fire Chief Steve Earley on a City wide Measure A informational tour.  Chief Earley at the Goeske Center was pinned by one resident, who he then admitted to the public that Measure A was a general tax.  City Manager Scott Barber had to follow shortly and admit the same.  In the following document, the city is already working, it states that they are ‘not increasing water rates’ but are planning to ‘consider modifications’ to it’s water rates… Okay does anybody smell something fishy, or is it just me?  Further it states they want to ‘amend water rate schedules.’

waterrateschedules

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE COMPLETE DOCUMENT

Don’t forget to show to question these activities on Friday July 19, 2013, Public Utilities Board Room at 8:30 am, 3901 Orange Street, Riverside, CA

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

imagesCARBGDII

UPDATE: 06.27.2013:  SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS, SEVEN ETHICS COMPLAINTS, BE THERE TODAY AT 3:00PM MAYOR’S CHAMBERS.. THIS IN REGARDS TO THE COUNCIL INADVERTAINLY PASSING THE MEASURE A  INITIATIVE WHICH ACCORDING TO THE CALIFORNIA STATE CONSTITUTION IS ILLEGAL.  DID THE COUNCIL WILLFULLY MISINFORM AND MISLEAD THE VOTERS ON THE VERY NATURE OF THIS MEASURE A ISSUE!  OR DID THEY JUST PASS THIS RESOLUTION 7-0 BASED ON WHAT THEIR CITY ATTORNEY HAD TO SAY?

UPDATE:06/27/2013: SLAM DUNK FOR THE COUNCIL WHO WERE A NO SHOW BUT HAD THE REPRESENTATION OF TWO ATTORNEY’S.  CONTINUING THE LONG STREAK, THE ETHICS COMMITTEE PANEL FOUND NO ETHICS VIOLATIONS COMMITTED BY THE COUNCIL..

Clapping is our 1st Amendment justification for existing when we feel there is a need to express a sign of approval.  But will this change at City Council?  Whereby have we become forgetful that one of the most important reasons for  this country existing is our first amendment right of expression in a public forum.  Will this cease to exist?  With the Fourth of July just around the corner, will a government teacher attempt to change that?  Have we become so politically correct as a society that we become afraid that a simple clap of approval may cause a divisive action to others, result in someone’s feeling being hurt or as Rusty would say as to not allow others to be included?

Or have we just become complacent and it is easier to sit and watch the world go by?

                       imagesCAB1LI95

Or would we rather just bow our head in frustration as if we are carrying the whole financial world on are shoulders. How bout it Berny?

picture-23065

Or would it be easier to hope someone else would do the clapping for us?  Even if it can’t think for itself?

imagesCAPRMMYZ

Or would a thumbs up do the same?  I’d clap just for double dipping…isn’t that now construed as a crime?

diaz

We can certainly clap if we approve of an event which is entertaining.

imagesCAZP229T

Or could we slap our own head wishing we would have clapped?

imagesCA0JY81T

Clapping for approval is simply better than the sound of one hand clapping, or even better than receiving the clap.

one-hand-clapping

Or could we just have an Orwellian software choice on Rusty’s computer which he can control the quantity of claps, and to pick and choose when a clap is allowed?

mzl.dwlhimtc.480x480-75

But can we just simply clap behind the scenes?

imagesCAMSTY7Q

Or can we clap with complete surprise that we are clapping at all?

 imagesCAM6DFX2

clapping can be for joy, and clapping for the joy of clapping…

applause

Or clapping can be just for the hell of it, just because it appears that it is expected.

imagesCA1TX32O

Or clapping can be elusive without focus…but it certainly better to clap than getting the clap..

321362382158439961

Clapping could be for when you think you have a good thing going.

06

Or can clapping just simply get down, dirty and diabolical?

tumblr_ltsli8lFG11r5qrimo1_250

Or you can anticipate the clap? or just waited out since you are not sure when to clap.. Regardless, clapping feels good..

imagesCA3NRX4N

Or can one be to studious to clap?

imagesCAMB07NL

do we sometimes forget what we are clapping for?

Kim-Jong-un-clapping

Or could we clap in hope that two holes of a donut actually fit somewhere?

donut-cop

Even if you are an authority figure?

imagesCAGEK1XT

Clapping can be in a line..

imagesCAE8MK8X

or it can be in unison..

imagesCAAGAYVO

or clapping can certainly be overwhelmingly…

imagesCAMINQFJ

you can certainly be king and clap

imagesCAUTXDGQ

or simply a taxi driver..

taxi-drive-clap

Whatever the activity is it certainly cannot be done in Riverside.  Especially during City Council..  because again and again you will hear the following ” We don’t applaud during public comment or otherwise, so we can include others with other opinions at the dais, so no applaud at the proceedings”.

Rusty-Biker-200x121

But we could certainly clap at a bike rally, I think…I need to check..it depends on the country and the leader.

i_love_clappers_t_shirt-rb9fc68106d9440ccbcc66bec3cf2d9fd_804gy_512

Or should we attempt to meet with clappers and find out what they are really all about?

Should we’d be told we cannot do this in the arena of the peoples arena of expression and free speech?  Or should we just be happy to be just where we are?  This is definitely an item to think about..  Clapping is a universal language that reaches far beyond our perception of our humanness.   So why would we not want to do it?  Because we are told not too?

But in any event, we look toward our human nature, we look at our provocativity, we look at the future in Riverside,  has it gone bananas?   Or just simply become a Banana Republic?

LaughingMonkey1

So shouldn’t authority just try to get along with clappers?

that-clappers-a-keeper

Well, of course there are exceptions, unless your General Clapper.. (Doesn’t he look a bit like City Manager Scott Barber?)

harry-s-truman-via-abcnews-go-com

Words of Wisdom for a new Mayor,”If you can’t stand the heat stay out of the kitchen..  – Harry S. Truman, 33rd President of the United States

UPDATE: 06.26.2013: MAYOR WILLIAM RUSTY BAILEY DEFENDS ARREST OF FORMER BB&K ATTORNEY LETITIA PEPPER..

     danielwerfel                                  RUSTY

City of Riverside Mayor Rusty Bailey                         Sorry, Mayor Rusty Bailey

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

UPDATE: 11/03/2012: KAREN WRIGHT MAKES THE UK DAILY MAIL.. “Woman, 60, gets handcuffed at California city council meeting for speaking over time limit.”

YOUTUBE ON HANDCUFFED WOMAN BY INTERACTIVE HEALING (CLICK THIS LINK).

UPDATE: 11/02/2012:  ACCORDING TO CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS RESPONSE STATEMENT REGARDING THE ARREST OF PUBLIC SPEAKER KAREN WRIGHT WHEN ASKED TO RESPOND.  HIS RESPONSE, WAS “ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILIGE”, MEANING THAT IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY, HE IS REPRESENTING SOMEONE OTHER THATN HIMSELF.  TECHNICALLY THIS WOULD BE THE MAYOR AND/OR COUNCIL.  THE COUNCIL DENIES KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEREFORE, DID PRIAMOS’S ORDERS OR DIRECTIVES THEN CAME FROM THE MAYOR?  WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE WHEN WE FIRST PRACTICE TO DECEIVE..

UPDATE: 11/01/2012:  OFFICER SAHAGUN’S POLICE REPORT SUGGEST THAT WRIGHT WAS SINGLED OUT BY CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS IF HE IN FACT ACTED ALONE.  PRIAMOS’S PERFORMANCE EVALUATION UP ON NOVEMBER 13, 2012..  In this article, Councilman Gardner continues to amaze the intelligent community by standing by his rendition of events in the course of Ms. Wright.  The officer took her elbow as if to guide her away from the lectern; he didn’t grab her or throw her to the floor, Gardner said. It appeared she sat down on the floor or lost her balance and fell.  When will the lying end, is this what the constiuents “have to put up with?”  Ooops, I believe I’ve heard this comment before..

Yes, Coucilman Gardner, that’s exactly what we saw, gently taking her elbow as to guide her away, possibly to help her find her way back to her seat, afterall she is disabled…then suddenly, she decided to sit on the floor, possibly just to relax a minute… Incidently, Gardner had front seats on the dais for this grand event, and he called it as seen it.  In another statement in the PE, Gardner emphatically seems to say that Priamos would not over step his authority without the go ahead from the mayor or council.  I could certainly interpret this statement as meaning, no move can be made by the City Attorney without the Council or Mayor.  Could we now say that Primos was the messenger, and therefore council and/or mayor knew about it?   What ever the truth may be, Gardner has either lost touch, or is truly telling the truth regarding what actually happened.  In telling the truth, Council and/or Mayor knew….Is a recall in order for those involved?

         

UPDATE: 10/31/2012: EVENING: THE QUESTION OF GOING ROGUE..

In the Press Enterprise, Loveridge said he did not know whether Priamos had a conversation with the Officer Nick Sahagun.  Maintaining decorum is the call of elected officials, not city staff!  He evidently went on to say that “I need to talk to Greg to find out what was said or not said.”  Is Mayor Luv stating Priamos made this decision on his own.  After all, according to former employees, Priamos has been known to call Council members “idiot’s” within his circle.  So how do they expect anyone to follow the rules of decorum when they do not follow the rules themselves, further, even the laws of the State of California.  Four weeks ago, City Attorney Gregory Priamos conducted a two hour ethics training course to the Council.  But was this really a “Bonehead Course”, as Dan Berstein coined.  Maybe there is an emphasis in “How not to get caught”.  At any rate it is quite a surprise to the community knowing Priamos’s track record.

Councilman Andy Melendrez said Tuesday that the officer’s statement surprised him. “I think it’s important that we as council members have clarity on who’s in charge, and my understanding has been that the mayor is in charge,” Melendrez said. “For the city attorney to play an active role on his own raises some concerns.”

This is quite disturbing because we currently have a City Attorney who has decided to give a directive of enforcement upon a citizen via a police officer.  If in fact, the directive was solely his decision, and not one to involve the Mayor, would he be consider “rogue?”

A month ago we also had an incident whereby the City Manager Scott Barber made a decision to spend $2.5 million without counsel consent.  Can we consider this “rogue?”  In any case, we could certainly consider these two highly influential employees not following the set rule to the extent of violating them.  If they in fact wish that constituents follow rules, they themselves should lead by example, of which is non-existent.

UPDATE: 10/31/2012: CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS HIDING BEHIND ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE…IS HE CALLING OFFICER SAHAGUN A LIAR?

Well the City continues to overload it’s dirty laundry on the spin cycle.  It started with the City’s response to the arrest, whereby they said that Ms. Karen Wright was cuffed and arrested for failing to obey the officer (Sahagun), not for going over the time limit, but Wright said the citation she got is for disrupting the meeting and that’s also what is stated in the police report by Officer Sahagun.  One Concilman went on to state that this was a decision by the police officer, and no council member has the authority to interfere with a police officer, otherwise one could be severely punished.  Well, the Press Enterprise states that according to Officer Sahagun’s police report, “Priamos requested that during future meetings, I should stop Subject 1 (Wright) from going too long past the three minute allotted time.”    Did Priamos’s directive come from Mayor Loveridge?  Or did it come solely from Priamos himself?  It certainly wasn’t a decision Officer Nick Sahagun made.  In the past, directives came from the Chair, or Mayor Pro Tem or Mayor.  So why the move to question the integrity of a police officer?  Why the move of the Council and Mayor to place the decision making authority upon the officer?  Are we beginning to see a pattern of transparency in regards to how the Council and Mayor deal with issues?  The real heat of this matter is now focused on the City Attorney, and all he can do is insult the community by hiding behind a questionable and remarkable claim of “attorney-client privilege” and become non-responsive.  If he receives a salary paid for by taxpayer monies, he must know, we the taxpayer are his employer’s, and we are demanding answers.  Has Priamos become a liability to the taxpayer?  If it is founded that Priamos gave the directive, solely a decision made by himself, should he be fired?  Ms. Wright believes the arrest was in retaliation against her in reference to criticizm made toward Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey, a candidate whom Mayor Loveridge endorses for the November 6, 2012 election.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL POLICE REPORT

According to the PE, City Attorney Gregory Priamos appreared surprised that the police report was had been made public.  Though he had yet to read the report, he stated that Officer Sahagun’s description of the conversation was inaccurate.  He declined to elaborate further, and cited attorney-client privilege.  Attorney-Client Privilege?  We understand he is Privileged, but who’s the Attorney and who’s the Client Gregory?  Technically, the taxpayer is the client and he, Priamos, the attorney on record to protect us.

Maybe just a another nervous search for syllables, or it could have been a little gas from a bad burrito..  But is City Attorney Greg Priamos basically calling Officer Nick Sahagun a “liar?”  Again, while the Council and Mayor were stating that Ms. Wright was arrested for not obeying an officer, according to Officer Sahagun, that was not so.

Did the directive come from the Mayor?  Two days after the arrest, a new so called protocol was implemented.  This would now give authority to the meeting chair, being either the Mayor Pro Tem or the Mayor himself to give the order to remove someone from the podium.  But these rules have already been in place, was this a scuffle to spin?  Back in 2006, an 89 year old woman, Marjorie Von Pohle, was removed from the podium by the directive of a Mayor Pro Tem to an RPD Officer for exceeding the 3 minute rule.  Ms. Wright is scheduled to appear in Superior Court on December 27, 2012.  Some rumors down the information pipeline is “Allred.”

CHANNEL 11 NEWS: “SHE MUST HAVE GOTTEN UNDER SOMEBODY’S SKIN!”

HERE IT IS CHANNEL 11 NEWS..

LOS ANGELES TIMES STORY

CBS CHANNEL 2 NEWS

LA LATE STATES LOCALS ARE CALLING FOR THE RESIGNATION OF MAYOR RON LOVERIDGE.

It comes as a shock to TMC to see public speaking come to this.  Other’s are telling me that I’m just naive, “this is Riverside”..  What a night, one disabled elderly female public speaker down and arrested, a second disabled elderly female skirted with the possibility of second taken down, then one Councilman’s Aide is seen by another female speaker with his middle finger across his face.  This public speaker had just commented on the inappropriate behavior of this aide, especially toward females.  Karen Wright, a 60 year old disabled public speaker icon, went over the three minute mark, approximately 16.8 seconds.  Returning to her seat, she was met with one of Ronnie’s Bouncer’s.  Midway from her seat, when she turned toward the council, she was pushed by the officer.  When she arrived at her seat, she was getting some of her things, the officer inadvertently came from the right side, it appeared he wasn’t finished with her, and then grabbed her arm, turned it clockwise, whereby she could not nothing other than fall and and take her down to the floor, she fell seated, she then took her two hands to try to get up as she indicated, but was pushed by her right hand taken, then handcuffed.  Not one, not two but three RPD officers surrounded her when she was on the floor.  “Officer, you are making me naked.” she stated. A disgusting act of use of force, but Riverside has a track record of this, and a double standard when it comes to arrest.   You might think this is Afghanistan or Iraq, unfortunately this is Riverside, specifically, regarding these current state of affairs, I must say, the City of  Riverside..  So, if you live here,  you msut exactly know what this blogger is talking about..

The first quickly came out of nowhere, as she turned after finishing her point after the three minute mark, she was met with officer, not regularly seen, who grabbed her and threw her to the floor as seen in the images.  While the council just sat there stonefaced, as good leaders do.  While one retired police officer, later stated to TMC who saw the video from home, “there was no reason for this officer to touch this person.”  So again, why would this Mayor, this Mayor known as Mayor Ron Loveridge allow this?  Later in City Council, Mayor Loveridge stated, “this is outrageous behavior”, when Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Council Aide, Chuck Condur, used a derrogatory finger symbol toward public speaker Dvonne Pitruzzello during council sessions.  Why didn’t the Mayor have the gumption to say the same?  Did he enjoy this?  Did he allow this for personal reasons against Wright, being approximately his last appearance as Mayor on the dais?  If there is a story, let’s hear it, this is not the normal standard behavior of a RPD officer at City Council..  Give us your side anonymously at thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

 

During this disgusting act of force, Councilwoman Nancy Hart, Councilman Steve Adams (also a former police officer), and Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey left their council seats and exited the dais.  It appeared they themselve could not handle or stomach the scene.  But non of these great leaders said, enough! This has to stop!  A reflection of the leadership in Riverside.  Well anyway, this is what happens if you talk a good 25 seconds after the 3 minute mark.  You may find a couple of RPD on your back..  Being disabled that’s gotta hurt.. After this disruption by Ronnie’s Bouncers, she was later taken outside, released and issued a citation for “disruption of a public event.”  The witnesses who were there were stating, “she was already returning to her seat!”  RPD Officer you shouldn’t have done it, you’ve watched over the security of Council meetings before.  This is behavior unlike you, were you briefed by Council, Mayor, City Execs, City Attorney or your superiors to do this, and target this specific public speaker?  More information coming down the pipeline..

 

Months ago, Ms. Wright was accosted by non other than the Chief of Police, Sergio Diaz, for her opinion on naming El Tequesquite Park after a fallen officer, Ryan Bonamino.  The chief confronting Ms. Wright, saying she had no right to say what she said…

The Chief then called Ms. Wright a “a horrible person”, “your disrespectful” and “You hate the police!”  At the time he also turned to then Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello and stated, “I don’t like her!”  This all occurred in a public arena.  Chief Diaz has yet to publicly apologize for, as Mayor Loveridger would say, “this is outrageous behavior!”  Though Karen had the right to file an ethics complaint on this very issue, she chose at the time not do so.  Chief Diaz should be thankful of this.  Many are saying should we disband RPD? And just go with Riverside County Sheriff, would this make a difference?

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL RPD USE OF FORCE DOCUMENT IMPLEMENTED BY THE CHIEF

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH YOUTUBE FROM ALICIA ROBINSON OF THE PRESS ENTERPRISE

Notice the empty seat behind above the left officer, Councilman and Mayoral Candidate Rusty Bailey left the dais, out of sight.. Some commenters on the Press Enterprise have begin coin Councilman and Mayoral Candidate… “Runaway Rusty.”

NEW NEWS ARTICLE FROM THE PE BY ALICIA ROBINSON: RIVERSIDE: SHOULD COUNCIL CRITIC HAVE BEEN HANDCUFFED?

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE

CLICK ON THIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE OF MS. WRIGHT PICKING HERSELF IN FRONT OF THE THREE OFFICERS.

CLICKTHIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE OF MS. KAREN WRIGHT BEING ESCORTED OUT OF RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL

According to a description of events cited from the Truth Publication Online, Councilman Paul Davis stated the following: “During that time the officer applied handcuffs to Ms. Wright and later took them off, after assisting Ms. Wright to her feet.” 

Wrong Councilman Davis, she picked her own self up according to the above video.  Let’s not begin to spin the chain of events in order to defend you and the council bullies, that night, for not doing the right thing and stopping what occurred.  You stated that the decision for this is defined by the RPD officer, and by “law” you cannot interfere with that.  But now, new rules?  “Police Officers will now be directed by the Mayor?” according to the the Press Enterprise.  Now, elected officials can interfere with the actions of the Police Officers?  But some Council members are saying, again, as an authority figures, and I disagree with that, that they cannot interfere with the judgement of a an RPD officer?  You work for us, and we expect some aggregious behavior to be stopped by a police officer, but you are telling them you have no power.  Our we living in a microcosm of a police state?

Again, Davis went on., “The officer again told her that she needs to be calm, take her seat and she ignored him. At that time, the officer directed her to return to her seat and Ms. Wright turned and began to advance towards where she had been sitting. Ms. Wright then uttered some choice words to the officer, which may have been directed towards the council. He then told her to step outside, since she was clearly isrupting the meeting and she chose to continue to ignore him. The officer then took her right arm at the elbow and told her that she needs to accompany him outside. Ms. Wright then jerked her arm away from the officer, stating something to the effect that she needed to get her things and for him not to touch her.” (Courtesy of The Truth Publication Online).  Mr. Davis, you are different person this day, this is not what happened, I was sitting in the second rowe, and didn’t hear any of this.  Are you saying you have better ears than me? Especially from the distance of the dais?

To the elected individuals on the dais, we’ve have not declared war..we only want transparency…


At that time she also decided to sit down, on the floor, just outside the Dais entrance door and near her seat, with her hands not visible from my vantage point.” 

Councilman Davis, you are wrong again, let me show how she ended up on the floor.  You call us “crazy”, but at least we are not “liars.”  This is how Ms. Wright decided to to sit down..of course, according to Councilman Paul Davis’s innacturate rendition of the Council events..

Now the twist to be handcuffed..RPD style..

“Many have asked why the members of the Mayor, Council, or city Staff, did not take any actions to stop the officer from his actions. As a matter of law, no person has the authority to interfere with the lawful order or actions of a Police Officer performing his duties. By doing so, you would be in violation and you will be held for Obstruction of Justice, and be subject to severe penalty.” (Courtesy of The Truth Publication Online).  Let me see Mr. Davis, “Police Officers at City Council Meetings will be directed by the Mayor.”

Nope, sorry Davis, no one believes that.  Many believe the mayor has always had that power, and this incident was allegedly and directly orchestrated by Mayor Ron Loveridge himself.

CLICK ON THIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE OF KAREN WRIGHT BEING CITED BY RPD OFFICER.

So what happens next, the Officer says we are done.  So what happens with the legal process for Ms. Wright next?  When the interrelationdships and interconnections with the City, City Attorney, the Riverside Judges, the District Attorney Paul Zellerbach, the Riverside Grand Jury, even unfortunately to the extent of the State of California Attorney General’s interrelationship?  What will happen to this poor disabled 60 year old elderly woman?  Well it’s already been decided if you live in Riverside.  Some call it politics, some just have to accept it..

According to the PE, the City stated that she was not arrested for going over the 3 minute time limit but for “not obeying the officer,” but the actual citation she received was for “disrupting a meeting.”  This is indicated by the above YouTube video, a video the City did not know existed till know.  Well, the spinning continues, with ring leader, our Mayor, Mr. Spin Cycle himself..  Officer indicates to Ms. Wright in the video that once the three minutes are up she needed to bring her comments to a close, therefore it was all about disrupting the meeting after the 3 minute mark… Again, how will the City spin this next, or is their now planned retaliation by the City in more ways than none, for those who speak freely?

“All I was told was that you are given a certain amount of time to make statements to the council and she went over her time,” Lt. Guy Toussaint said. “She was asked to leave and she refused to do so.”  Again wrong, Ms. Wright closed her comments and was on her way to her seat.  But what the L.A. Times has right, is that this was all about the 3 minute time limit, which the City denies was a factor in her arrest.  Many of the Councilpeople on the dais, who did nothing, and maintained they could not interfere with a police officer.  So who’s in charge?  Some on the dais, even said in some ways, that “she’d had it coming.”  Other’s on the dais, who were criticized, said, “how come those citizens in the audience do nothing?”  This is what we have, and you now begin to see the picture unfold before your eyes in relation to political conundrums withing the politics of the City of Riverside.

Again it didn’t stop there, another disabled individual on crutches …What is it with the City of Riverside and disabled females?  What is it with leadership that doesn’t have the guts to lead and come out to say this is wrong.  Is it easier say that the individuals are just “crazy?”  Well Dvonne Pitruzzello said it best when she said, “I rather be called crazy, then to be a crook.”  Well anyway this person below was on crutches and the same RPD officer started to walk down toward the podium again… Ren Holmstrum on crutches was subjected to a possible throwdown, regarding her issue of Riverside hospice, when she went over the three minute mark.. One of RPD officers was again on alert, walking down the isle again to take care of muni mafia business…

   

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey seen with his head down in the video.  Last week Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey, came to the TMC site to inadvertently download photos of his Mayoral opponent and former Riverside Councilman, Ed Adkison, of course without TMC’s permission.  These were then sent city wide in a campaign mailer.  Now RPD wants TMC’s photos of the Council Debacle…Many in the community, seeing this display of police are now afraid, who can we depend on when we cannot trust our own community police force?  Who do we call when we cannot call our own police force for help?  Questions some community constituents are asking.  This is the same behavior community constituents have been talking about to their city leaders for years…

Other’s are asking the question if this was a set up.. Most often, RPD or Ronnie’s Bouncers are cordial, escorting the “3 minute violator” back to their seat.  This time, the Mayor meant business, it was a throw down… Was this orchestrated and planned by the mayor, the puller of strings?  As one reporter stated on Channel 11 News on 10/25/2012 “She must have gotten under somebody’s skin.”  This because Ms. Wright goes to each and every council meeting to comment on issues, and is therefore well known..

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

It didn’t stop there, after Public Speaker Dvonne Pitruzzello spoke regarding Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s legislative aide, the allegation of Chuck Condor holding a knife to the throat of Bailey’s Council Aide, Mark Earley.

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

From the current contact in the mainstream media, much is being said, many questions asked, pieces of the puzzle that just don’t make sense, but the questions of why none of the City Council leadership said nothing, allowed the activity to happen, and simply found it acceptable.. again actions speak louder than words..

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

“We do this for our neighborhood, we take our time do this…you have spent us into the poorhouse..” -Self Appointed Citizen Auditor Vivian Moreno.

Responsibility? You are looking at them….Now Main Stream Media will know….Stossel what do you think about this?  Thank you for asking…

ETHIC’S COMPLAINTS ARE NOW GOING VIRAL..  I’VE GOTTA SAY THIS IS EXHAUSTING, BUT JUST ANOTHER NORMAL DAY IN RIVER CITY..

UPDATE: 10/24/2012:  JUST IN, TMC SOURCES ARE STATING THAT COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER ALLEGEDELY STATED, “KAREN WRIGHT DESERVED IT.”  IF THIS IS TRUE, THIS MAY BE PART OF MIKE THAT MAY NOT BE LIKED..

According to the PE, Councilman Mike Gardner, who was on the dais with the council a few yards from the incident, said he doesn’t think the force was excessive.  But if you like Mike, you would agree.  Further Mike has also said, “Resisting arrest doesn’t end well..”  Of course, none of this is true, but what is true are the feeling of Ward 1 Councilman Mike Gardner.

LOVERIDGE GET’S IT ALL WRONG.. Loveridge said that Wright started showing up at council meetings a few years ago and became an active civic participant with “eclectic” interests who spends a lot of time preparing for her remarks.  This according to a LA Times article.  Ms. Wright has been coming to City Council for over 10 years, why the spin Mayor to discredit her?

COUNCILMAN CHRIS MAC ARTHUR’S LEGISLATIVE AIDE CHUCK CONDOR SHOCKS COUNCIL MEETING!

The question to the council by Pitruzzello was, ” Why Condor wasn’t arrested, or a police report created by Bailey’s Aide, Mark Earley? We just don’t know..”Was this a concerted effort by City Hall to cover up the alleged altercation back in April 2012?”  Regardless, it still didn’t stop there!   As Former Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello walked toward the back of Council Chambers she was met from a distance, Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Aide, Chuck Condor, placing the “middle finger” in front of his face toward Pitruzzello.  Mrs. Pitruzzello interrupted the City Council to let them know just what happened.  The following pics below taken at the time of the interruption.  The shock was written all over Councilwoman Nancy Hart’s face.  Officer Nick, again, one of Ronnie”s Bouncer’s pounced on the situation and begin to walk over toward Pitruzzello.  She let Officer Nick know, “that’s who you need to arrest!”  Referring to Mac Arthur’s Council Aide Chuck Condur.  This is the one time TMC agrees with Mayor Luv when he stated, “this is outrageous behavior.”  When a Council Aide can continually get away with derrogatory remarks and alleged actions, this is outrageous behavior..  This Public Council Meeting could not have been hotter…

      

Again, one of TMC’s crack minimum wage photoshop experts created what Mrs. Pitruzzello saw.. Another act of defiance against women?

But let’s not forget this is Riverside, Chuck Condor, may just get a monetary raise and become an elected official one day..  But many are asking the question, why does Councilman Chris Mac Arthur allow a person such as Chuck, who appears to be a loose cannnon, on his team?  Another liability?  Could revealers of Condur’s behavior now be in danger of retaliation by the City of Riverside Power House?  Will have to ask Councilman Chris Mac Arthur who has protected his aide through thick and thin regardless of his derrogatory behavior. The question is, does the Community concur with this type of legislative aid behavior?

ON A DIFFERENT NOTE, THIS FEMALE GADFLY, AS SHE WAS NOTED, WAS ARRESTED FOR DISRUPTING A SANTA BARBARA CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 2, 2012 FOR VERY DIFFERENT REASON.  HERE FOR YOU’RE REVIEW AS A POINT OF REFERENCE.

OR THIS PUBLIC SPEAKER JENNIFER JONES ARRESTED AT CITY COUNCIL IN QUARTZSITE, ARIZONA FOR AIRING THE CITY COUNCIL’S DIRTY LAUNDRY BACK IN JULY 5, 2011..

EVEN THE FOLLOWING YOUTUBE NEWS REPORT CAME OUT OF JONES ADDRESSING THE CITY EXPOSING CORRUPTION THEN BEING ARRESTED.

ANOTHER ARTICLE CAME OUT REGARDING THE FACT THAT JENNIFER JONES MAY BE IN IMMINENT DANGER OF EXPOSING POLITICAL CORRUPTION 

UPDATE:10/25/2012: YESTERDAY,  LOCAL CITIZEN TELLS OFF MAYOR LOVERIDGE AT DOWNTOWN “COFFEE BEAN” IN FRONT OF ONLOOKERS!

TMC PROUD TO INVITE 16 SMARTEST PEOPLE ON EARTH, TO FIND THEIR HOME IN THE MOST INTELLIGENT CITY, THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE..  NO CURRENT EMAIL RESPONSES AS OF YET!

COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS RESPONDS TO THE WRIGHT INCIDENT ON THE TRUTH PUBLICATION BLOG SITE.  TMC WISHES EDITOR SALVADOR SANTANA OF THE TRUTH PUBLICATION GOOD HEALTH AND A SPEEDY RECOVERY.  WE NEED YOU BACK AT THE PODIUM!

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.

UPDATE:10/29/2012: A MONTAGE OF COMMENTERS COMMENTING ON THIS ISSUE REGARDING MS. KAREN WRIGHT FROM THE PE BEFORE THEY ARE DELETED…POSSIBLY BY SOME DIRECTIVE BY A CITY ELECT OR THE CHIEF OF POLICE HIMSELF…

Remember folks, you have to be in a bad mood as a citizen when you come to City Council Meetings when you know that you the taxpayer, are $4 billion in debt, and that you the taxpayer are responsible for it as a result of the elected officials who voted on these issues.

This is ridiculous. Going over the time limit is not a crime. I’m not a fan of Karen’s, but she had finished talking and was walking away from the podium. Someone has it in for her, and that’s not right. Terrible, terrible showing by the police, the mayor, and the council.  -Kaptalism, commenter on the PE

This makes me SICK! Sooooo unjustified! This isn’t the last we have heard of this, believe it! A lawsuit will be forthcoming for SURE! So shameful!  -Nettie Nettie Bobettie, commenter on the PE

Unbelievable~!!! They should be ashamed of themselves~!!!!  – Alice Wersky Naranjo, commenter on the PE

AND THIS MORNINGWE ARE ON FOX NEWS. AREN’T WE GREAT?  -Ron Rose, commenter on the PE

This is how it works at Casa Loveridge. You get three minutes to speak. If you’re kissing his butt, make it four and you can bring about 20 other people up to keep the love flowing longer.
If you’re a guy criticizing, he starts to cut in and the hand goes up at about 2:45 into your comment and its purpose is to try to distract you into disagreeing with him over your time is up until it’s up and you don’t talk about your original topic.
If you’re a woman, alas the infamous hand goes up at about 2:30. Bring a timer and time the speakers and the Loveridge hand wave yourself a couple times. I’ve done it myself. Very illuminating. The county board of supervisors have used the same tactics for years and rumor has it he wants Tavaglione’s seat if that guy wins the congressional race. So maybe he’s practicing for the bigger stage? If he doesn’t like what you’re saying, apparently…well there’s that too.  – Mary Shelton, commenter on the PE.

The cop was not timing her I would bet. He was instructed to do as he did when the time-up signal was given. Minor petty politicians begin to think they are Lords.  -James Overturf, commenter on the PE.

Too bad we don’t limit politicians to three minutes of speaking.  – BJ Clinton, commenter on the PE.

Although I haven’t lived in Riverside since my Divorce in 2003, I still follow the news. Here are my thoughts:Everyone has a right to voice their  opinion in a Public Forum.  Time limits are made to provide equal time for all  and show some dignity and respect for the Counsel and “Elected Officials” of the  Counsel during such meetings. Three (3) minutes may not be enough for some  however, if you come prepared to make your point clear and brief, three (3) is  “normally” plenty of time. Handcuffing anyone with a strong opinion should  not be the norm. This lady was no threat to the counsel or anyone  else. The lady only spoke too long. Handcuffs would not have been my first  choice to resolve the issue.  BAD CALL… Counsel BAD CALL… Riverside  Cops   -Roy Robinson, commenter on the PE.

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