Posts Tagged ‘city attorney greg priamos’

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..

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 you Councilperson.  In my ward it is Councilman Mike Gardner.

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

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

 

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

MS         Pu1T0UfvSGJyBBMf-r3kE2dJ-d6fbR2ktzstZ2nkWjkh1QUhkDIc0xkOsbm-1VNCfVrccqA5V7pcE74BVoRrQo

COUNCILMAN MIKE SOUBIROUS, WARD 3                           COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS, WARD 4

Tonight’s explosive Council meeting regarding the rate increases to residents, ended with questions regarding bonds, loans, advances and debt service to the taxpayer.   The new rate hikes were passed by Council, to replace the old.  According to Councilman Davis, this rate hike will be a 302% increase since the year 2008.  Councilman Davis also made a motion to bring  California State Controller John Chiang do to a forensic audit of the sewer.  Councilman Soubirous asked for same, but to include water and electric.  If we are to increase the rates we need to bring trust back to the community by having a independent entity evaluate the taxpayer’s books over the years.  Davis questioned CFO Brent Mason regarding posting dates and why some entries were backdated. The rest of Council and Mayor Bailey were visually disturbed and shaken by this call.  TMC was right, the ones who went for the rate increase were, Councilman Mike Gardner, Chris Mac Arthur, Steve Adams and Jim Perry.  When Councilman Jim Perry asked for a seperation of the issues, between the rate increases and forensic audit, the audience asked for a recall!  The audience was shocked at Perry’s position not to support the issue of a forensic audit, but he called for a workshop on it.  Councilman Soubirous and Davis can call the State Controller directly requesting an audit without the approval of council or a workshop!  Councilman Andy Melendrez was absent from council, was he glad he was?  What does this mean for the City of Riverside?  The end of corruption?  What is the Council afraid of finding?  A Swiss Bank Account?  It is evident that Davis and Soubirous find the atmosphere in the City of Riverside necessary to ask the State Controller to come in and bring closure for the taxpayer.  What is the nervousness of those council people who are against this.  Colusion?  Why wouldn’t they see this as a win, win situation for the taxpayer? Especially newcomer, Councilman Jim Perry?  Why would he attempt to divert attention to a prominent and relative issue somewhere else?  Did they get to him?  Coucilman Chris Mac Arthur asked the question to the City Attorney if it was proper to request the services of John Chiang’s office.  It was obvious that City Attorney Greg Priamos did not want an audit, when he told council that they should take CFO Mason’s word that the books are in order, but left to their discretion if an outside auditing should be requested.  This in lieu of a letter by an Code of Ethics Adjudicating Body Member, Keith Nelson, Ph.D, calling a local City of Riverside hired attorney Doug Smith a liar, and questioning the unscrupulous behavior of City Attorney Greg Priamos!  Why would anybody rely on the word of our City Attorney Greg Priamos, he has a track record of misinforming council.

johnchiang copy

STATE CONTROLLER, JOHN CHIANG

FROM THE DESK OF SCOTT SIMPSON: SCOTT RESPONDS TO RIVERSIDE’S SEWER RATE HIKES:

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:

Some times what the city does not tell you is most important to the decision to raise the sewer rates.
1. Hudson changed the financing stategy for sewer capital improvements away from voter approval of municipal bonds or property assessments or special taxes. These would show up on your property tax billing. We are still paying off capital improvement bonds from pre-Hudson era on our property tax bill. Bonds in general are a 30 year repayment obligation. Hudson took away your right to vote No on ever increasing debt which is what is driving these outrageous sewer rate increases.
2. Remember last night, staff kept saying the sixteen year period of no rate increases was pre-Hudson and bonds were financed differently. The truth is the operation and maintenance of the waste water facillity doesn’t out pace the cost of living. Especiallysince we experienced a recession that left 25% of our homes and businesses empty and thus not Flushing. This is the real reason they kept saying they have less waste water to treat along with less customer revenue.
3. California courts have ruled that rates fees and charges for sewer sevices supplied to the land are only for the purpose of recovering the annual cost of operation and maintenance. The rates are to be set annually utilizing the accounting records of the prior fiscal year. The courts said, this is the true Variable cost of the sewer service.
4. California courts also say that Fixed costs and Capital improvement cost and infrastructure replacement costs are not to be included in the sewer rates, fees and charges. They (fixed costs) must be a separate charge on the bill. They have also emphasized that capital costs are only lawfully recovered by voter approved municipal bonds, voter approved property assessments and/or voter approved special taxes. All of which will be collected on your property tax bill. The court specifically prohibited the inclusion of debt service in rates, fees and charges.
5. The courts also said that all customers pay the same rate for the same service to their property. This includes tax-exempt educational customers and all governmental agencies recieving the service.
6. The courts have also ruled that You as the indiviual property owner/renter recieving sewer services provided by a municipality can only be charged rates, fees and charges that do not exceed the actual (variable) cost of providing the service to your property. This means the city must individually determine the (variable) cost of the service you impose upon them.
7. Finally, our courts have ruled that when a municipality enters into a new instrument of debt of any kind, this act automatically creates a new demand for new tax revenue which must be approved by the voters before the debt is entered into.

- Scott Simpson

WAS FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON TO BLAME FOR THE SEWER WOES?

It is appearing that much of the problems that the City of Riverside is experiencing may be due to former City Manager Brad Hudson.  When Brad was City Manager for the City of Riverside TMC asked for a forensic audit of the taxpayer utility books, but he just would hide behind the computer, as our City Attorney Greg Priamos currently does.

AuditRiv2

FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON

All this activity was in lieu of both Councilman Davis and Councilman Soubirous being investigated for complaints, of which we are not really sure of.  We don’t know who the accusers are and why the complaints were filed.  We know that Councilman and Congressional Candidate Steve Adams signed both contracts with the same law first to initiate the investigation.  Incidently,  these contracts were signed at the the City Manager’s cap of $49,000.00, anything over $50,000.00 must go to council for approval.  Are we looking at the origins of a conspiracy?

We do know that there has been friction with these two council members with the Chief of Police Sergio Diaz, City Manager Scott Barber, City Attorney Greg Priamos and possibly some of the Council members, when pertinent questions were asked and not answered to the desires of the council.

Former City Manager Brad Hudson hired City Manager Scott Barber and Chief of Police Sergio Diaz.  Councilman Steve Adams and Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey were supporters of Hudson.

TMC did a story on Christina Cortez, Whistleblower, back in December 2011, regarding bringing in the State Controller to look into the books of Montebello, California, which ended up being investigated by the FBI.

HERE’S ONE FOR RIVERSIDE POLICE CHIEF SERGIO DIAZ, WHO WE FIND THREATENING LOCAL ELECTS AND POLITICAL CANDIDATES!  There are many instances of outburst and threats by this individual who formerly worked for the Los Angeles Police Department.  Questions abound on his qualification, not only by TMC but by the residents of the City of Riverside which have not been addressed by those at City Hall.

TMC did a story back in June 2011 regarding Costa Mesa Police Chief Steven Stavely with his impressions of City Council.

Over the years, I have had city councils I thought were smart and thoughtful and ones who were less skilled. In every case, I know they were trying to do the right thing – I did not always agree, but clearly they were trying hard to improve the communities we all served. I have never, however, seen a council such as this one. They lack skill, training, education, knowledge, they fail to study (or at least learn). The majority either lies or are so lacking in the necessary skills that they actually believe the junk they say. They act as if they are owners of the business that is the municipal government of the City of Costa Mesa, but they are not, they are merely trustees of these public assets both human and physical and they fail in that role completely. They are in my opinion incompetent, unskilled and unethical.

UPDATE: MAY 21, 2014: NEW PE STORY BY ALICIA ROBINSON: INVESTIGATIONS OF COUNCIL CLOUDED BY UNKNOWNS:  New article ask the question regarding the Soubirous and Davis investigation, as to what policies or procedure is guiding city officials.  The City has been vague and secretive of the inquisition regarding the complaint and who are behind the filing.

    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 ZELLERBACH’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                                               

CREW

Now a second complaint alleging violation of City Charter 407 came in, this time it’s against Councilman Paul Davis.  Less than a week ago, a complaint came against Councilman Mike Soubirous.  It seems that the powers that be continue in their attempt to get back to a 7-0 team player vote.  We are assuming that the $16,000.00 Team Motivator/Psychologist isn’t working.  It’s clear by the information provided, that Davis was targeted at least on two facts, the work performance of the City Manager Scott Barber and what Davis said in testimony in the Raychele Sterling Case, which may not have made the City Attorney Greg Priamos look so good.

Pu1T0UfvSGJyBBMf-r3kE2dJ-d6fbR2ktzstZ2nkWjkh1QUhkDIc0xkOsbm-1VNCfVrccqA5V7pcE74BVoRrQo

COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS

When you view the overall pictorial of both Councilman, you cannot rule out a conspiratorial aspect by some of the usual suspects.  Just weeks ago Chief Financial Officer Brent Mason presented to City Council and spoke on how we will have a budget shortfall.  They continue to frivously spend tax payer monies in an effort to support their enormous egos and defend there inadvertent liabilities.  We must also ask the question, who are the players and what could they have to lose.

Just 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.  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.

 Ferret (Mustela putorius furo) on white background

Do we have a rogue staff?  City Attorney Greg Priamos gives the order to Officer Sahagun to arrest public speaker Karen Wright for going over the 3 minute mark, then lies about having any part of it, until exposed by Sahagun’s police report.  He calls the report inaccurate, then rescinds his comment when he receives a letter from the Police Officers Association resulting in an appology to the public at City Council.  But I regress, there’s a double standard regarding the 3 minute rule?  While former Mayor Ron Loveridge is allowed to go over the 3 minute mark and the buzzard turned off, and no arrest, why are others at a whim being arrested?  Even RUSD Mike Fine went over the 3 minute rule and it was simply okay.  So we target, retaliate and financially shake down those who practice their 1st amendment right of free speech in a public forum.  This is as off beaten as City Attorney Greg Priamos writing a book on ethics and giving a course in ethics to council.  Isn’t that “the pot calling the kettle black?”  Therefore, Priamos must have taken a course in governmental ethics somewhere in order to have the knowledge to provide it.  Where did Priamos take his course?  The laughs are never ending in the on going reality melodrama “As River City Turns.”

Responsible legal advice by our City Attorney is pertinent to decrease the liabilities of the taxpayer.  But we have seen, it may have been the case as in the Moreno Law Suite which addressed violations of Proposition 218 by the City of Riverside.  Further, the city’s approach to the campaign as in conflict of interest mailers in the Measure A campaign as well as the Measure V campaign, whereby taxpayer monies from the general fund are utilized, for what the city states are “informational purposes.”

measureajpg                                              MeasureV

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Though the Supreme Court stated that “a special edition created and sent to would-be voters, specifically because of the upcoming election,” is improper campaign activity.  I guess Priamos does what is necessary for the greater good of those who feed off city revenues.

Councilman Steve Adams recently spoke of witnessing undo influence within the RFP (Request For Proposal) process, which in turn a formal Ethics Complaint was made, which resulted in complaint being unfounded.  But when you look at the Ethics Complaint process, one can see that process is set up to result in a favorable finding for the defendant, just by default.  Was a city paid investigator hired to investigate this?  Do we pick and choose opportunistically when such activity becomes politically advisable.  Who would play the role of the consigliere, possibly someone with a law degree?  Will these complaints lead new Councilman Jim Perry taking this as a message to not divert course?

In both the Davis and Soubirous case, the PE reports that all emails have been requested in which referenced Barbers “employment status.”  This is telling; what happened between these two council people and the City Manager?  Another question, could it have been the connection between families which include Councilman Mac Arthur, Mayor Bailey and Albert Webb, of Webb Engineering?  Webb contracts were brought in the Raychele Sterling Case.

We certainly would now have to consider if these city employees filed they’re complaints on the they’re own volition, or did they have encouragement, or were they promised promotion?  Plausible denial by some of the usual suspects may give us more thought to a theoretical conspiracy in this matter.

The fact that Councilmen Soubirous and Davis called for a forensic audit for transparency and accountability, IS exactly why these two councilmen are being investigated. These two men ask the tough questions on our behalf. City Hall status-quo do not want a forensic audit. Councilmen MacArthur and Perry do not want a forensic audit. Councilmen Gardner and Adams appear to not want a forensic audit. Councilman Melendrez is undetermined. A forensic audit is what is needed at Riverside City Hall.  - Donald Herman Gallegos, Commenter on the PE

UPDATE: 05.05.2014: CALIFORNIA FRIENDS OF THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN CAUCUS OUTRAGED!

The Riverside African-American Community and Law Enforcement are outraged with Riverside NAACP President, Woody Rucker-Hughess over Riverside District Attorney Paul Zellerbach to receive the prestiges Drum Major Award May 14, 2014.  The California Friends of the African-American Caucus are asking Ms. Rucker-Hughes to rescind the award to Paul Zellerbach after he was caught twice removing campaign signs of his opponent Mike Hestrin last month.  President William Hutchinson of the Palm Springs Police Officer’s Association read a statement to the press which describes Zellerbach taking down signs, using a County vehicle and the assistance of a county employee, his retaliation after getting caught of the veteran law enforcement officer and his family.

08TUTUS_1117_G_dwb     Untitled-2     zellerback

Is it because Woody and Paul sing the same tune and dance the same steps? DA Mr. “Z” obviously is enjoying himself! Maybe we have something here folks, the dance styling”s of Woody & Paul…

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 ZELLERBACH’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

 

How do we not cry about the abuse of taxpayer monies… Even our forefathers would find this unacceptable..

In regards to the $35,000 to former Police Chief Russ Leach’s wife Connie Leach’s Multi Cultural Youth Festival, in an email Assistant Finance Director for the City of Riverside tried to explain it to Dvonne Pitruzzello regarding the expenditure of the $35,000.00 from Police Assett Forfeiture to the General Fund, but again we must reiterate, the DOJ has precise criteria for the use of asset forfeiture funds.

catlettemail

AFTWO    AFONE

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DONATIONS TO THE MULTI CULTURAL YOUTH ORGANIZATION FROM FORMER CHIEF RUSS LEACH TO HIS WIFE, CONNIE LEACH.

THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE GRAND JURY IS AS FOLLOWS.  IT WAS BEING INVESTIGATED, PEOPLE INTERVIEWED, AND THE GRAND JURY SUBMITTED REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS, The Coup d’état, Vivian Moreno was the person focused for the indept informational interview.  The investigation was stopped suddenly, that interview never happened.  A letter to Mary Figueroa, Board of Trustees, stated that the investigation was unfounded.

frontcomplainGJ

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE CONNIE LEACH RIVERSIDE GRAND JURY COMPLAINT

UPDATE

The Police Asset Forfeiture Fund (Equitable Sharing) is a restricted fund and has very clear guidelines on its intended purpose.  Losing this fund couild be devastating to the Riverside Police Department.  I question Ms. Aquino’s motives.  Are you protecting the taxpayer? or is this personal?

In June of 2010 Dvonne P., Mary S. and Irma F. went to visit Ms. Aquino to question the use or misuse of the Police Asset Forfeiture (PAF) Fund.  Her comment at the time was there is not any abuse in this department.  Ms. Aquino directed them to look at Public Utilities.

On or about July 2010 we received the PAF Fund detailed accounting and audits from 2006 to 2009; 2010 was not available at the time, we now have 2010.  The misuse of the PAF Fund has been ongoing in the City of Riverside since I’ve began studying Equitable Sharing.  I took my concerns to the City Council, the District Attorney Paul Zellerbach, the Grand Jury and Councilman Paul Davis.  All of which disregarded our complaint.

AF

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW POLICE ASSET FORFEITURE EXPENDITURES

Here are some of the questionable items we found that were paid from the fund:

1. Running gear for officers to compete in the Baker to Vegas run (tennis shoes)

2. Payments to Connie Leach, the then Police Chief’s wife

3. Payments to the Multi-Cultural Youth Festival- Connie Leach’s youth program.

4. Al Johnson Florist

5. A birthday cake

6. Canyon Crest Cleaners- Russell Leach had his uniform cleaned, couldn’t he pay his own $8.00?

7. Hotel visits to the Ritz Carlton, $400 a night for Leach and Gonzales.

8. Office furniture which totaled $100, 000.00

9. Dell Computers for the Magnolia Police Station, $200,000.00

10.  Lunch, lunch and more lunch for Leach and his friendemies.

Ms. Aquino knew over 3 years ago RPD management was misusing PAF Funds.  The incident with John De La Rosa, the Baker to Vegas Run, happened November 2009.  Why didn’t she alert the media then?  Why now?

When Russ Leach wanted to pay his wife, go out to lunch, get his uniform cleaned, buy a birthday cake and stay at the Ritz Carlton, this was acceptable.  When Vicino wants to go out to lunch and golfing it’s not acceptable.  When your job is safe and secure it’s acceptable to turn your head at the misuse of Police Assett Forfeiture Fund and say or do nothing.  When you’re placed on adminstrative leave it’s not acceptable to misuse these funds.  You cannot have it both ways Ms. Aquino.  Were you a willing partcipant or a victim?

I’m going to speculate what will be coming next from Ms. Aquino.  There will probably be a tort claim filed, including all the malfeasance in RPD.  It will surely contain all the bells and whistles which we’ve been saying for years.  There probably will be a multi-million dollar law suit against the taxpayers of the City of Riverside.  I will say this again, are you protecting the taxpayer or is this personal.

To be continued….

HUSH MONEY PART 2

WE FIRST BROUGHT THIS STORY TO THE FOREFRONT MAY 18, 2011 IN HU$H MONEY PART ONE..

Telling the story of how this all began is an important one in order to understand why I have made the very important decision to run for the position of Mayor, Dvonne Pitruzzello, for the City of Riverside.  Approximately two years ago I attended a city council meeting and a friend told me about the city manager and his $50,000.00 discretionary spending.  It seems that the City of Riverside’s then city manager Bradley J. Hudson had an open checkbook to spend our money with no council approval.  For those of you who know me, you also know that this would be something that I would find unacceptable. So I requested that the city council put a mechanism in place to not only track his spending but to have it reported and approved by the city council.  A quarterly reporting would suffice.  Alas, my curiosity got to me.  I wondered just how much Mr. Hudson had spent and even more, what had Mr. Hudson spent our money on.  Now the journey begins.

After sifting thorough thousands of pages of documents I kept finding reoccurring expenses.  Connie Leach, Ironwood Construction, Provider Food Service, etc., etc.,  Thus began my relationship with the California Public Records Act.  You see all documents, except attorney client privilege documents are public records and must be given to those who request these documents, for a fee or course.  I’ll save the details of the power of the public records request act for another posting.  My first public records request act was for several items that kept revealing themselves in Brad Hudson’s discretionary spending.  Over 200 million dollars in less than five years. WOW!  And our city council current and former gave Mr. Hudson a blank check to spend our money.  So how did this all happen, was Hudson qualified? or was he as rumored, just a shoe in by the Tavaglione family?

But onward, I was not able to conquer all of this information single handedly, no, I had help, a few  close friends that had been victims of the cities oppressive policies.  Many meals around the table and later it was decided that the Connie Leach expenditures were extremely suspicious.  Also take note that the amount of spending that had occurred was so disturbing I could not walk away.  Approximately 200 million dollars in less than 5 years, what kind of city council would allow this?  Now that’s a lot of tax money. We wanted to find out exactly why this, “Blank check of trust” was given to a man who had a criminal record, but was hired by the city council and mayor regardless.

Our quest had deepened and we began to get our feet wet investigating the expenditures of Connie Leach.  Our lead investigator on the case Vivian Moreno worked tirelessly for months to help us understand why the then police chief’s wife Connie Leach had been paid in excess of $600,00.00, as a consultant to the Mayor’s Youth Advisory Council.  You see, when I, Dvonne Pitruzzello, was employed with the city and worked under Mayor Loveridge I did the same job for free.  As a part-time employee I assumed the duties associated with the Youth Advisory Council.  During my departure Connie Leach had approached the Mayor and stated that she would like to volunteer with children.  I thought, what a great opportunity for the youth council to have a high profile person giving credibility to their council.  It was to my dismay to find out less than a year after I left, Connie Leach began to receive payment(s) for her volunteer work.  Doubly dismayed because we already had in place a Youth Action Office where these duties should have been assumed by the director, not Mrs. Leach, to pay someone else to do the job was again, unacceptable.

On to what we found.  Contracts for over $300,000.00 and the remaining $300,000.00 were for various items paid for on behalf of the Youth Multicultural Festival, for which Mrs. Leach was a consultant also.  Connie Leach did have a business license on file with the City of Riverside, Impact Consulting, both she and her then husband Chief of Police Russell Leach signed the business tax license.  The question was, if Mrs. Leach collected donations from the community then why were these funds deposited into the general fund and not in a separate fund for specific expenditures for the Youth Multicultural Festival?  By the way Mrs. Leach’s contracts were paid from the Parks and Recreation budget, the Economic Development budget, Development Department, etc.  Depositing these funds properly would have been as simple as depositing them into the International Relations Council’s, non-profit account, Youth Multi-Cultural Festival, a perfect place for these donations.  Of course everything would have been on the up and up if this had occurred……Nevertheless, it did not happen.  When Mrs. Leach got paid for every taco she ever ate, and every cola she ever drank from Jack-in-the-Box, our suspicions grew ever greater.  We asked for every check and/or wire transfer that was distributed to Connie Leach from the City of Riverside, and here is what we found.

Connie Leach had been paid $35,000.00 from police asset forfeiture funds, these are extremely restricted federal funds and can only be used for the sole purpose of gang or drug intervention programs.  These funds under the supervision of her then police chief husband had been distributed to Connie Leach for her consulting fee as the advisor for the Youth Multicultural Festival.  A grand jury report had been filed, but funny it seems that the person most likely to be interviewed, Ms. Moreno who did all of the investigation was never interviewed.  Approximately two weeks after the grand jury served a subpoena on the City of Riverside for five years of police asset forfeiture records the complaint was dismissed, no reason given.  Wow, how did the grand jury read all of of those documents in such a short time frame?

Let’s move on.  Connie Leach was reimbursed for party hats from the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas, we know how much students love these hats.  She also had several parties at her house to reward the students for their hard work with all kinds of fancy cheeses and appetizers, students can’t resist the delicious Danish havarti cheese, these were receipts from Ralph’s grocery store.  $300,00.00 dollars later, even though she only collected $100,00.00 in donations, our former CFO/Treasurer Paul Sundeen stated in a finance committee meeting that Connie Leach had done a great job and deserved every penny that we paid her.  Shortly thereafter, his bound contract to the City of Riverside was found to be illegal, and he then faded away into the darkness of the Riverside sunset.

CONTRACT 1: AGREEMENT DATE AUGUST 30, 2004: FOR PRO CONSULT SERVICES RIVERSIDE YOUTH COUNCIL: AUGUST 30, 2004 TO APRIL 1, 2005 HOURLY RATE $50/HR NOT TO EXCEED 20K

CONTRACT ONE

CONTRACT AMENDMENT 1: AGREEMENT DATE JULY 22, 2005 (AMENDMENT OF JULY 1,2004 TO APRIL 1, 2005/ WITH EXTENTION TO JUNE 30,2005 CONTRACT ) AMEND TO JULY 1, 2005 TO DECEMBER 31, 2005: INCREASE BY 5K TO TOTAL 25K (PAY $25/HR)

CONTRACT ONE AMENDMENT

CONTRACT 2:  AGREEMENT DATE JANUARY 9, 2006: FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES APRIL 23, 2006 MULTI CULTURAL YOUTH FESTIVAL JANUARY 9, 2006 TO MAY 1, 2006  (NOT TO EXCEED 15K)

CONTRACT TWO

CONTRACT AMENDMENT 2: AGREEMENT DATE FEBRUARY 8, 2006  (AMENDMENT OF JULY 1,2004 TO APRIL 1, 2005/ WITH EXTENTION TO DECEMBER 30,2005 CONTRACT ) AMEND FROM DECEMBER 31, 2005 TO JUNE30, 2006 INCREASE BY 25K TO A TOTAL OF 50K

CONTRACT TWO AMENDMENT

CONTRACT 3:  AGREEMENT DATE JUNE 30, 2006: FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES AS YOUTH COUNCIL ADVISOR JUNE 30, 2006 TO JUNE 30, 2007 NOT TO EXCEED  50K (PAYMENT MADE BASED ON RECEIPT OF INVOICE)

CONTRACT THREE

CONTRACT 4: AGREEMENT DATE JUNE 30, 2006:  CONSULTANT FOR APRIL 29, 2007 MULTICULTURAL YOUTH FESTIVAL : NOT TO EXCEED 35K (PAYMENTS MADE BASED ON RECEIPT OF INVOICE)

CONTRACT FOUR

CONTRACT 5: AGREEMENT DATE JUNE 30, 2007: FOR PRO CONSULT SERVICES FOR APRIL 27, 2008 MULTI CULTURAL YOUTH FESTIVAL: NOT TO EXCEED 42.5K (PAYMENTS MADE BASED ON RECEIPT OF INVOICE)

CONTRACT FIVE 

CONTRACT 6: AGREEMENT DATE JUNE 30, 2007: FOR PRO CONSULT SERVICES FOR YOUTH COUNCIL PROJECT: JULY 1, 2007 TO JUNE 30, 2008  HOURLY RATE $75/HR  NOT TO EXCEED 50K

 CONTRACT SIX

CONTRACT 7: AGREEMENT DATE MAY 5, 2008: FOR CONSULTANT SERVICE FOR RIVERSIDE YOUTH COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16, 2008 TO MAY 16, 2008 HOURLY RATE $75/HR NOT TO EXCEEDD $9,750

CONTRACT SEVEN

In 2008, a PE news release on 05/07 stated she was resigning 05/16.  Connie Leach receives a contract for $9,750.00 on 05/08, in lieu that knowingly, the event would be canceled.  Regardless if the Council or Mayor knew, they are responsible legally and managerably, regardless of the actions of the City Attorney Gregory Priamos and Former City Manager Brad Hudson.    Well, regarding the DA, we get it he is a very busy man.. The Riverside Grand Jury…found no basis, during an incomplete investigation, while awaiting public records on asset forfeiture documents.  The City, the judges, the grand jury and the DA’s office simply found nothing responsive to the documents.  Zellerbach simply told us, “Is it illegal, or just bad business?”  Well we were hoping you know Mr. Zellerbach…afterall you are the Big Kahuna..  This leaves many questions of why was a blog site targeted as opposed to the questions, documents and facts brought forward to your office.  Questions of your association with the Grand Jury, City of Riverside officials, Judges etc.  Why Mr. Zellerbach was it important to your office that a file on Thirty Miles of Corruption was created?  Were you worried that your decision on the Karen Wright arrest could possibly change how the Riverside Police Officer’s Association would view you?

                               

CONNIE LEACH TIMELINE                       CONNIE LEACH PE ARTICLE

The bottom line is, in an article in the San Diego North County Times, San Diego Police said there was sufficient evidence to charge then City of Riverside Chief of Police Russ Leach with battery and they then fowarded the this case to the San Diego City Attorney’s Office for further investigation.

CONNIE SUES CITY OF SAN DIEGO

After all is said an done we find that Connie Leach now resides in the Carribean.   What secrets does Carribean Connie know regarding RPD, Police Asset Forfeiture and her prior employment with the City of Riverside and the activities of her Ex-Husband Chief Russell Leach?  How much did prior Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge know about all this?  Possibly plenty?

When brought to the attention of the Grand Jury, the item in question was squashed.  When brought to Big Kahuna himself, Paul Zellerbach, his assistant was more focused on who was behind the infamous blog site, Thirty Miles of Corruption.  They themselve had a file of copies of each and every article written.  When asked with the evidence brought forward to Paul, he only stated, “Is this bad business? Needless to say, our Grand Jury complaint was dismissed with out completely interviewing all the complainants under the watchful eye of Paul Zellerbach.

NEW PE ARTICLE REGARDING POLICE ASSET FORFEITURE AND RPD.  MORE COMING UP ON KAREN AQUINO AND NEW ACCUSATIONS REGARDING RPD.  POSSIBLY A LITTLE LATE MS. AQUINO? EVEN WHEN WE ASKED YOU FOR YOUR HELP?  DIDN’T YOU KNOW ALL ALONG?  YOU KEPT IT UNDER WRAPS SO LONG…WHY BRING IT OUT NOW MS. AQUINO?  TMC KNEW ALL ALONG…  GOOD LUCK ON THIS ONE DANUTA, WE WILL BE THERE EVERY STEP OF THE WAY.

AQUINO

Karen Aquino, Police Administrative Service Manager for RPD

…Aquino has always been a strong advocate for following the established rules and procedures for asset forfeitures, knowing that they have very specific purposes and that she would be the first person blamed if any findings were made in an audit…  – Attorney Danuta W. Tuszynska

danuta

Attorney Danuta W. Tuszynska

danutaletterfrontpage

CLICK LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE TUSZYNKA LETTER IN CARE OF AQUINO

These were Federal Funds and should have also been sent to the DOJ..  Okay Danuta, what now? How does this protect the taxpayer when your client may have possibly known all along the rules and law of Federal Asset Forfeiture?   Again is this Personal or in the Best Interest of the Taxpayer?  Or in the Best Interest of an Opportunity?  Again, contact TMC with your dirt at THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

TOUGH CALL FOR ONE LOCAL BUSINESS ON WARD 3 COUNCIL POSITION….

Realizing it is difficult decision to take a position on a Ward 3 Candidate, what’s a business to do when both candidates may have asked for support, we find this local business may have the answer…

IMG_0429

WHO SEEMS TO BE AGGRAVATED WITH EACH OTHER AND WOULD LIKE TO SEE EACH GONE…COMING SOON!  KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC.

Is Parks Director Ralph Nuñez really retiring at 54 years of age?  STAY TOONED TO TMC.

What is going on with the new Riverside Community College Culinary School on University and Market Street?

JUST FOR LAUGHS!

How important is golf in RPD culture?

vicino-diaz

Mr. D. could you wrap it up, I’ll be late for tee time..

vinciogolg

Yippee…made it!

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.  PROUDLY RATED ONE STAR (POSSIBLY DOWN TO ZERO FROM OUR LAST ACCOUNTS) 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 FOR GOOD REASON, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST, FOR GOOD REASON… 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 SPHALL SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR CONTACT US BY THE FOLLOWING EMAIL ADDRESS!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

Stop Elder Abuse Sign

UPDATE:06.03.2013: IT WASN’T ENOUGH THAT BB&K ATTORNEY JACK CLARK ATTEMPTED TO PUSH THROUGH THE NAMING OF CITY HALL IN RECOGNITION OF RON LOVERIDGE..  NOW WE FIND JAMES ERICKSON, VICE CHANCELLOR EMERITUS, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE, ATTEMPTING TO PUSH THROUGH THE NAMING OF MAIN STREET UNDER THE NAME OF RON LOVERIDGE.  IN WHAT CAPACITY WE DO NOT KNOW.. LOVERIDGE LANE, RONNY’S STREET OR EVEN RONALD BOULEVARD.. 

Untitled-2 copy                       Untitled-3

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

STRONG-ARMING SENIORS FOR A YES VOTE:  ISN’T THAT ELDER ABUSE?

There is nothing more despicable than taking advantage and misinforming seniors.  Where is Ofelia Yeager on this issue, the Chairperson on the Yes on Measure A Campaign?  Why was she chosen to spearhead this issue?  Why was Mathew Webb of Webb Engineering, the Co-Chairperson christen to participate in this elusive endeavor?  Why would Webb Engineering have a master engineering contract with Municipal Water?  How does this affect Mathew Webb’s relationship with Councilman Chris Mac Arthur, are they cousins or just doing the Hanky Panky?    Or Mathew Webb’s association with now Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey, stating he has known him for decades.  Is this all about keeping it in the family?  Does it dispute the fact that Webb Engineering recieved 13 Checks on the same day under former City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary account?  Where is the Council on this one, the Mayor and especially Steve Adams who has asspirations aspirations of being a Congressman?  This is only a reflection of how our City operates.  Every month the amount transferred goes up, it was $6.1 million now it is $6.7 million, probably because they are not allowed to transfer just yet.   But, what now appears to be covered by this transfer is everything that property taxes are suppose to cover.  In City Manager Scott Barber’s analysis of possible cuts if Measure A doesn’t pass could very well be considered a scheme, artiface or fabrication since it was simply based on projections.  Was this orchestrated and designed to attempt to mislead the voters?  The projections have no basis because they never had any accounting track record of expenditures to refer to, they don’t exist.  If no prior allocation records exist how does one extrapolate a true analytical projection?  According to the City’s October General Fund Forecast, the Mayor Bailey’s Office is overbudgeted by $116,100.00.  Instead of cutting his budget, he would rather cut Police and Fire?  Further, as indicate City Manager Scott Barber used the number of the adopted budget for the Mayor’s office to apply his 3.0% cut, which comes out to $22,000.00, therefore this amount would be cost applied to the 11.5% transfer.  The funny thing is that the number cannot be legitimatel verified because no accounting records of that number exist!  Every account that Barber utilizes applies the 3.0% in the same manner.  This is an example of how they are misinforming the public.

mayorsbudget             mayors budget

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

The question to be asking the City, and many are asking the question by the way, “why do they appear to be strong arming the community into a Yes vote on Measure A?”  From candidates, community groups, community services, city employees etc.  Is it that the City is threatening funding to these programs if a Yes vote is not supported?  Money always seems to talk, especially when it is not your own money to spend.

This is a flyer that was dispersed at the Janet Goeske Center which states what will happen to senior funding if they do not vote Yes on Measure A.  Is the City of Riverside strong arming residents with an iron fist of reason?  Or is it extorsion?  Afterall isn’t the Hyatt suing the City of Riverside on this issue?  Yes they are.  Demand answers!  Demand Transperancy! Demand Leadership!  Well…at least the first two, and the only way to do this is to show up at City Council and voice your opinions.

JGFLYER

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FLYER DISPERSED AT THE JANET GOESKE CENTER

In the last two utility bills you received;  you as a taxpayer have paid for the few rogue City Officials who felt it was necessary to spend your tax money to misinform you, further, to deny your constitutional right of reaching a balanced voting decision.  City Tax money was used to favor a “Yes” vote on Measure A.  This flyer states to go to the City of Riverside’s web site for more information. If you go the City of Riverside’s web site, what we have can be construed as a Yes on Measure A bonanza!    Another FPPC (Fair Political Practices Commission) violation?

PUMEASUREAOFUTILITYBILL

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW WHAT YOU PAID FOR, EVEN IF YOU DON’T AGREE!

According to Letitia Pepper, Riverside Attorney, the City is using city funds to promote Measure A, and to promote it with lies and propaganda — propaganda is “half-truths.”  She says to look at your May Riverside Public Utility bill, on the back ( the above image).  There’s a full page promoting the passage of Measure A.  This page includes the biggest of all lies:  “By re-affirming these previous voter actions, Measure A continues this funding [allegedly and impliedly only for for clean water programs], WITHOUT RAISING TAXES.” The real reason this issue MUST be submitted to the voters is not the self-serving settlement into which the City entered with the Moreno’s that required the City to submit the issue of the excess charges to the voters. The REAL reason the City is doing this is that since 1996, it has been illegal, under Prop. 218, for cities, incuding charter cities like Riverside, to charge more for water than the actual cost of providing it. To make such chares, cities had two years after Prop. 218 passed to submit them for a vote as taxes — and the City never did that until it got caught last year.

Another aspect of this measure is that it appears to be paying for alot of services!  The amount the City has indicated has gone from $6.1 million to $6.7 million.  If you are a taxpayer as I am, this transfer appears to be doing a better job of covering all expenses of city services than our property taxes.  Potholes, Storm Drains (we doubled the tax in 2012), Police, Fire, 911 dispatch, Childrens Lunch Programs, Clean Water (Covered by your water rates), Gang Control (Covered by Federal Police Asset Forfeiture Funds), Library, Crossing Guards, Tree Triming, Disabled Services, Senior Services, SRO’s (School Resource Officers), Maintaining Fairmont Park Lake, Low Income Lunch Programs, Powerwashing Downtown Streets, Installing Curbs and Gutters, Summer Camp Programs, Dealing with Abandoned Vehicles, Using Code Enforcement if your Landscaping doesn’t conform to the Politically Correct criteria of the City, Code Enforcement citations if you Overwater your landscaping, Code Enforcement citations if you have Trash exposed, Code Enforcement citations if it appears that you have Outdoor Storage, Code Enforcement citations if it appears that your property is contributing to storm drain contaminants and it goes on and on.  The storm drain fees don’t really help Riverside residents, but it contributes to Orange County Clean Water.  Property Taxes pay for City Services, the User Utility Tax on your utility bill pays for services and Proposition 172 allocates 1/2 cent from the sales tax to city services.  Government should live within their means, afterall you and I have to.  The new advertisement on Measure A on your utility bill states cleaning storm drain catch basins and storm drains.  But what! We had an increase from $2.83 to $5.22?  Yes folks, last year we had an increase in our Storm Drain Tax ( also know as Storm Sewer System), documents as follows:

STORMDRAIN           PAGE4

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE DOCUMENT

Is the City contemplating a triple tax by this above action?  Is the truth of the matter that the City is in need of paying upcoming bond obligations?  Would this be the real issue?

As indicated by Dan Berstein’s of the Press Enterprise new article, is this another Sleazy Campaign Mailer?  Rather than making cuts in their own back yard, the City of Riverside would like to punish residents that already have made cuts in their household with the fear of higher taxes, as indicated a couple of weeks ago by Councilman Steve Adams where he stated, “if Measure-A doesn’t pass, we have a change in the status quo, and we will have to raise your rates (referring to water) and increase your taxes.”

flash_1886

WELL LET’S DO A DRUM ROLL TO INCREASE TAXES; SHALL WE COUNCILMAN ADAMS?

The mailers that the Yes on Measure A campaign have been distributing have been reflective of their talking points, but this new mailer just received is from the City of Riverside, and it has the City of Riverside star of approval with endorsing names such as our Chief of Police Sergio Diaz, Fire Chief Steve Earley and City Manager Scott Barber.  It cannot get any more blatant than this.  Legally the City of Riverside has had to take a position of neutrality, while over the past few months the City has stated it was on a Measure A informational tour.  This four page City mailer shows that the language can be ultimately construed as a campaign publication endorsing a Yes vote on Measure A.  This can be seen by the language and pictorial used, the tone, tenor and timing is there. Further this mailer was paid for by you and me the “Taxpayer.”  Therefore is the City of Riverside on the verge of violating FPPC (Fair Political Practices Commission) rules and regulations and misappropriation of taxpayer funds?  Elections Code § 8314(d) and Gov’t Code § 8314(d).

Gov’t Code § 8314 (a) It is unlawful for any elected state or local officer, including any state or local appointee, employee, or consultant, to use or permit others to use public resources for a campaign activity, or personal or other purposes which are not authorized by law.

Gov’t Code § 8314(d) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the use of public resources for providing information to the public about the possible effects of any bond issue or other ballot measure on state activities, operations, or policies, provided that (1) the informational activities are otherwise authorized by the constitution or laws of this state, and (2) the information provided constitutes a fair and impartial presentation of relevant facts to aid the electorate in reaching an informed judgment regarding the bond issue or ballot measure.

mailer

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL MAILER

According to a new article by Dan Berstein of the Press Enterprise, the Council knew of this piece, according to Councilman Mike Gardner, but didn’t discuss the content.  So who were the individuals or individual that approved and designed this mailer?  Well it appears it was within the City Attorney’s Office.  So, who approved the $23,777.00 for the cost of printing and mailing at taxpayer expense?  You would think if there was any inkling or sugestion of misappropriation of taxpayer funds that the council would have the descency to ask those obvious tough questions. This I say in lieu of City Attorney Gregory Priamos not returning Berstein’s calls. If it was approved by Priamos, it must be legal, right Greg?

Another editorial in the Press Enterprise, “Don’t use taxpayers’ monies for election fliers.”   Is the City of Riverside really a “Muni Mafia?”  How do they compare to San Bernardino? Or Moreno Valley?

The City continues to claim that these transfer monies are used for everything under the sun, and every week we have something new that it covers.  The reality is the City has no bonafide track record of accounting of any of these fund at anytime, this we see as Bernstein undercovered in reference to “library books.”  Remember folks, only tax money can be deposited into the General Fund.

I guess in the real realm of things why won’t District Attorney Paul Zellerbach act on this? Possibly, because of this rhetorical question: “Is it illegal or just bad business?”  Possibly all the above, but we won’t expect this office to react in reference to the oath of office you sworn to uphold….regardless, your track record indicates clearly, your answers and responses to local community inquiries.  What kind of message does this send to the community when the City itself doesn’t follow the letter of the law?  Our we a Banana Republic or an American City based on constitutional rights?

zellerbach

SO WHAT IS A D.A. TO DO?

As of May 28, 2013 as indicated in the Press Enterprise, the “Yes on Measure A” campaign has contribution commitments which are in the neigborhood of $46,000.00, and the “No on Measure A” campaign has continues to maintain steady monetary commitments of $0.00

Vote No on Measure A,  www.noonmeasureariverside.com

For more information on this June 4th, 2013 Measure A, contact us noonmeasureariverside@hotmail.com

WETTWOPSD233

GOVERNMENT SHOULD LIVE WITHIN THEIR MEANS, AFTERALL, WE THE TAXPAYER HAVE TO..

JUST FOR LAUGHS…

539110_506054042765037_303798518_n

COUNCILMAN ADAMS BRINGS HIS CITY VEHICLE IN FOR THE USUAL REPAIRS…

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

KarenWright-380x253

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

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?  Possibley BB&K?  The Riveriside Grand Jury?  Local Superior Court Judges?  The Attorney General Office of the State of California?  and of course local cronies?

zellerback

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 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

UPDATE: 01/04/2013: 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..

THE TWEET OF THE CONDER

So far this year, it’s okay to utilize public emails for campaign purposes by violating CA Code 8314 (a), it’s okay to give the finger to someone at City Council.  Talking about fingers, according to Press Enterprise’s Alicia Robinson’s tweets, it appears that Councilman’ s Chris Mac Arthur’s legislative aide Chuck Conder issued a petition in lieu of a filing fee for the upcoming June 2013 election for Ward 4.

tweetchuck

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Let’s see, by golly isn’t that Councilman Paul Davis’s current Ward?  Wasn’t that the same Chuck Conder who was canvassing the Ward 4 neighborhoods for petition signatures against changing wards due to redistricting?  Incidently, Chuck resides in Ward 4 and did not want that changed.  The final accepted version of the district map coincidently cut the area in question directly in half.  His residence remaining in Ward 4, while the other half went to Ward 2.

CHUCKLAND2

Isn’t Councilman’s Paul Davis up for reelection in June 2013?  Will the real Chuck Conder please step up!

reimer1          reimer2           chuckie

                                              Nope!                      Still Not Right!            Ahhh Yes, this is the one!

JUST FOR LAUGHS!

 wizard-of-oz-illusionist copy

and who was really the Wizard of Emerald City?

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…

SANTAANABRIDGE

View of the Santa Ana Bridge dedication ceremony, 1932, Riverside, California

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW AND HEAR THE ACTUAL TAPE ON YOUTUBE

THE TRANSCRIPT:

Greg Priamos 8:17 am

Hi Susan, this is Greg, uhmm, this is confidential, ahh what I’d like you to do today, please don’t share this with anybody.  I’d like you to prepare a Deputy City Attorney contract for Kathy Gonzales, ahh it would be a monthly salary of $10,111.00, an annual salary of $121,332.00, that works out  to $4,666.61 per pay period, Could you please put that together, uhmm.

Kathy has called me this morning and told me she is willing to, ugh, to accept that, and become a Deputy, and a she’s going to try and come back and work part time, supplemented by her vacation, sick leave, so she can get a year in order to get the higher retirement and death benefits for her family.

So, I told her I would move this forward as quickly as I could and get her reclassified.  So if you could please get that contract with duplicate originals together and I’d like to…I’ll make arrangements to get it over to the hospital so she can sign those.  Bye-bye.

end of transcript—-

Susan Allen is City Attorney Gregory Priamos’s secretary.  Was she also the one who went to his home on taxpayer time to decorate his home for Christmas.  Was she even given extra paid days off after the good job she did.  What else does Susan Allen do for Mr. “P”?

Kathleen Gonzales was a superior attorney in Priamos’s department and excellent employee.  She dedicated much of her time to community and was an asset to us all.  She had been sick and was in the hospital when this recording was made.  We understand weeks after this taped conversation she had passed away around March 2004.  She was allegedly promoted from a salary of around $80,000.00 to $122,332.00.  There is the fact that Priamos knew she was terminally ill by her being admitted to the hospital days before, but promoted her (as per his comment on the tape) to pad her retirement and death benefits to her family.  The promotion was for the full time position of Deputy City Attorney.  Can this be construed as a ‘gift of public funds’ by our City Attorney?   According to Priamos, Kathleen indicated to him that she would try to come back and work part time, supplemented by her vacation pay and sick leave, though days earlier she was admitted to the hospital under a terminal condition.  The question TMC is asking, “Is this insurance fraud”?  “Isn’t this pension spiking”?

According to the tape, Priamos has his secretary Susan Allen draw up the contract, rather than a qualified contract attorney on staff or even luxury girl, Rhonda Strout, of the Human Resources department who could properly handle promotion paper work.  The action was also done in secrecy and confidentiality between Priamos and his secretary.  Why would a promotion be confidential and secret?  The position Gonzales was at, she would have received 1.5 times her annual salary if she passed, the new position would entitle her to 5 times her annual salary.  Priamos distinctly indicated on tape this was to be done for her to receive a higher retirement and death benefits for her family.

The following document indicates that secretary Susan Allen is the tenth highest paid employee in the City Attorney’s office, even being paid a higher salary then three staff attorney’s.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DOCUMENT

Did Gregory Priamos know that his secretary took confidential work messages home for safe keeping?  And why would she do that?  What were the details of the scandal that hit his office which involved his secretary some years back?  Was there a reason she continued to remain on staff?  How many more tapes did Susan Allen take home, and for what underlying reason or purpose?  How many other employees are keeping official records at home?  Why was this the story the Press Enterprise would not print?

We know this is really sensitive material but TMC is showing how city business is done even in the most sensitive of issues.  Is this irresponsible, outrageous, possibly illegal and with the probability of some legal liability to the taxpayer?  We indicate other examples whereby city employees were ordered to clean up contaminated soils at AG (Agricultural) Park before Hazmat came in.  Some employees fell ill.  Were they compensated equally?  Or were they treated differently to protect against the allegations they made toward the City.  As of Tuesday, August 28, 2012 there were 13 lawsuits pending in close sessions at 1:00pm.  Former City of Riverside Raychelle Sterling stated that NBC has accepted to do a series of stories of the contaminated PCB site known as AG (Agricultural) Park regarding the alleged false information that was submitted by the City to such Departments as the EPA, and the City’s use of non protected employees to clean up the site. 

THE PRIAMOS EXPENSE ACCOUNT: A PARTY THE TAXPAYER WASN’T INVITED TO!

Usually in the private sector when there is a going away party everybody chips in.  It could be money, pot luck contributions etc.  But if you worked at City Attorney’s Greg Priamos’s office, your going away party was TAXPAYER PAID.

The following are receipts acquired through the public records request act, which shows you the taxpayer paid for former Deputy City Attorney Eddie Diaz’s Farewell Party for $154.19 including ingredients for homemade cake from Ralph’s.

                                       

CLICK ON IMAGES TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT

THE LANZILLO INCIDENT

UPDATE: 08/29/2012: FORMER AND FIRED RIVERSIDE POLICE OFFICER, CHRIS LANZILLO MAKES THE NEWS..  WHAT GOES? FIRED RPD OFFICER CHRIS LANZILLO IS REINSTATED WITH RPD THEN SIGNS OFF ON A DISABILITY RETIREMENT, AND IS THEN FOUND TO BE WORKING WITH AN INVESTIGATION COMPANY HE STARTED.  IS THIS INSURANCE FRAUD? 

“Are Police Unions crossing the line while bullying public officials?” as in this news story.  Does the Upland Law Firm Lackie, Dammeier & McGill have a play book? as in this news story “How Police Play Hardball At The Bargaining Table”.   The following is the Playbook created by Lackie, Dammeier & McGill, pretty disturbing stuff, appears even to the level of the “Shake Down”, “Strong Arm” or a “Piracy Operation” as some of main stream news sources are elusively indicating (Click This Link).  The Playbook was quickly removed from their web site when the cow pies began fly.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Former RPD Officer and now Private Investigator, Chris Lanzillo, had done work for this Upland Law Firm.

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

UPDATE: 09/01/2012: DA SUBPOENAED VIDEO FROM 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, now a Federal investigation will ensue.  According to Police Chief Sergio Diaz in a 2010 Press Enterprise story,  Lanzillo was fired “not because he was a member of the leadership of the [police union], but because he did some really bad things.”   The specifics of “the really bad things” was not elaborated on by the chief.  Incidently, former Detective Lanzillo was President of the Riverside Police Officers’ Association, in other words, a ‘Police Union’.

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 disturbing.  Have Police become so powerful that they are somehow controlling certain political scenarios?  This would definitely not benefit the taxpayer, but the very few, and therefore become a public health and safety issue.  So now you have a police union, an attorney law firm with a police background, possibly with 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 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..

UPDATE:08/30/2012: AFTER BEING PASSED OVER 35 TIMES, AND YEARS AFTER COUNCILMAN “RUSTY” BAILEY’S TEMPER TANTRUM OF FEELING DISRESPECTED AT A COMMUNITY MEETING, SERGEANT VALMONT GRAHAM IS FINALLY PROMOTED TO LIEUTENANT.  TMC CONGRATULATE’S LIEUTENANT VALMONT GRAHAM.

JUST FOR LAUGHS….THE SECOND TIME THIS MONTH THEY SHUT THE LIGHTS OFF….WHICH ONE OF YOU RELEASED THAT STORY ON THE MAYOR?  BERNSTEIN!  ROBINSON!

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…RIVERSIDE PUBLIC LIBRARY, CIRCA 1963

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.  PROUDLY RATED ONE STAR (POSSIBLY DOWN TO ZERO FROM OUR LAST ACCOUNTS) 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 FOR GOOD REASON, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST, FOR GOOD REASON… 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 SPHALL SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR CONTACT US BY THE FOLLOWING EMAIL ADDRESS! CONTRIBUTORS WILL ALWAYS BE PROTECTED… YES, WE EXPECT THE JAIL TIME FOR THAT ONE…  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

Tuesday’s City Council begain with the rattle, then the strike and finally the discharge of venom by City Attorney Gregory Priamos by reading a complaint laid out against Councilman Paul Davis by a Fire Inspector.  Was this premature?  It wasn’t to long ago that a deposition by former Chief Russell Leach was release prematurely by Priamos, and the case was still active and ongoing, and in this case Bailey came out looking disfigured.   Today, Priamos released a bombshell against City Councilman Paul Davis regarding a complaint issued by a female fire inspector.  This stemmed from a June 12th, 2012 incident at the food truck festival regarding fire hydrants.  Davis and his wife were organizers of this event.  According to Councilman Davis a female fire inspector percieved that he was ‘loud’ and ‘disruptive’, therefore the complaint, and according to the Press Enterprise, felt she was ‘disrespected’.  Disrespected possibly because Councilman Davis called Chief Earley in front of her?  Now, anyone who has worked in the private sector knows, if you reach a wall with one person, you ask for the next person in charge.  This isn’t ‘disrespectful’, this is ‘expected’ and ‘acceptable’.  She also made mention that he was ‘rude’ and ‘interfered with her work’.  Then this incident evolved into a ‘discrimination’ and ‘harassment’ complaint.  According to Priamos the ‘discrimination’ and ‘harassment’ complaint was investigated by the City and it was determined to be ‘founded’ against Davis.  Therefore, it happened as indicated.  ‘Discrimination’ and ‘harassment’ accusations are serious.  So, could the perception of the chain events be a misunderstanding which now became a ‘harassment’ and ‘discrimination’ complaint?  Now, we all know about ‘harassment’ and ‘discrimination’ complaints because we have seen enough of these lawsuits filed against the City by employees.  The City, it appears forgot one thing, according to Davis he was never ‘interviewed’.  So how did this get by the good city attorney many are asking?  Well, were not sure.  But Priamos did hire a friend, former RPD Lt. Jeff Collopy, Internal Affairs Bureau, to do the “independent investigative work” on this complaint, except he forgot to ‘interview’ Councilman Davis regarding his side of the story.  “Independent”, we as you can see, Collopy was far from that.  According to a posting by Alicia Robinson of the Press Enterprise, former Lt. Jeff Collopy charged the City/ taxpayer $85/ hour for 10 hours of investigative work for a total of $850.00.

Sidenote: Is this really about Councilman Davis forcing Priamos to be transparent?  Two weeks ago, Tueseday August 14, 2012, at city council closed session, Priamos was asked to produce his personal reimbursement schedule for public record, and was given 72 hours.

This carried forward to Councilman Bailey acting as Mayor Pro-Tem, also known as “Independent voice of Riverside”.  “The City Council does not condone the actions of Councilman Davis, founded through a complaint and interview by a city employee and investigated by a private detective,” Bailey said.  “The City Council will continue to call out for behavior expected of a public official serving the residents of Riverside.”

Well okay, but we know Bailey has a few skeletons in his closet that can be called out for behavior expected of a public official serving the residents of Riverside.  Let’s not forget Councilman Steve Adam’s sliding by complaints, or the citizens complaint against Adams files by six members of the La Sierra/ Arlanza Neighborhood Aliance that was dismissed by former City Manager Brad Hudson.  Again, did Bailey know Davis never gave his side of the story in what is called an ‘interview’?

Davis went on to say.  However, I do want to add something to this, this unfounded or finding of the complaint now that it has been read out of my arrangement has not been completed.  And I’m hoping that we can.  I have not been ‘interviewed’ officially, for them to say that it was ‘founded’, I do have ‘cause on that’.  But to that person I’m very sorry, and that should be a public statement to her.  What was just read was not what I’m comfortable with.

We know the Councilman Davis and Councilman Adams have had their spirited disagreements, but for some reason it seemed that Councilman Steve Adams was egging Councilman Davis on by the following statement.  “Are you feeling that you weren’t handled appropriately?”  …….Nope, we can handled it now, you just made the statement, Adams said.  Would you like to call for an independent investigation? So that you make sure that your rights are upheld, Adams continued.  “Steve!”, Davis answered, “the information that we discussed was that it was in position that it should have been handle.  Now a statement comes out that says that in fact it was ‘founded.’”  “That is the report that was given”, Steve said…  Davis then said, “that my understanding is that one piece of this is not ‘founded’.”  The mayor then intervened as stated that the conclusion of the report was that it was ‘founded.’

Davis went on to say that “I have great difficulty with what was just read by city attorney’s office that was not discussed.”

Even Councilman Mike Gardner layed in his two cents with all the trivial remaining sense he had, and said, “as far as the council is concerned, it’s now done”.

It appears that there were parts that complaint that were ambiguously discussed behind closed doors, then an occurrence unbeknownst to him happened.  The complaint was ‘founded’.  Not a simple complaint now, it now evolved to a ‘harassment’ and ‘discrimination’ complaint.  In TMC’s opinion the lines of separation are evident, and the damage of an unaligned railroad apparent.

“The damage is done,” Davis said.

As a kids game, when you are no longer wanted as part of the pack, the bullying happens and is becomes apparent.. for whatever reason..the munimob has spoken..you can’t question it, it just is…

It appears that there were parts that complaint that were ambiguously discussed behind closed doors by ‘the City’, then an occurrence unbeknownst to him happened.  The complaint was ‘founded’.  Not a simple complaint now, it now evolved to a ‘harassment’ and ‘discrimination’ complaint.

We understand now that not even an interview of the incident was given to Councilman Davis, it appears to be a complete violation of procedure, as many are weighing in.  It’s no secret to many of Councilman’s Davis’s relationship with Priamos, and even with other councilman, such Steve Adam’s, who also put his two cents worth on the issue.  Now it’s also not uncommon to see Priamos with Adams at a local watering hole such as Mazz at the Riverside Plaza.  But others are asking now is this retaliation toward a tape of Priamos released last week at City Council, which of course the tape had nothing to do with Councilman Davis, but simply a breach within his own office.  At City Council, former Deputy Attorney Raychelle Sterling weighed in toward Councilman Mike Gardner that Priamos would call him an ‘idiot’ at staff meetings. “ I don’t know why you support the city attorney.”  We found he also called Councilman Bailey an ‘idiot’, as well.  She went further to state that Councilman Adams is a liability to the city.

So why is Priamos acting this way?  We go back in time and ask the questions on certain incidents.  The episode and complaint against former Councilman Dom Betro yelling inappropriatly and making threatening comments on Main Street at Kevin Dawson and his daughter, what did Priamos say then? Nothing..  What about the Valmont Graham discrimination case? Where Councilman Bailey may have had a part in Officer Graham not getting promoted, due to a percieved perception.  Now costing the taxpayer extrodinary litigation expenses because of a misunderstanding?  It’s been perceived that Priamos protects those he has relationships with, and others he doesn’t.  Even though he says he serves at the pleasure of the council, a different turn of event occurs behind the close doors of the Priamos office.  Many at this time are beginning to think, doesn’t the City Attorney represents and protects the needs of the community against liabilities?  Well think again, there is a whole other set of dynamics that don’t include the taxpayer, the employer.  Possibly as some have said, a whole other culture has developed at City Hall.  Viewing the incident, we know that Councilman Davis has been the sole person to vote for another ambulance company entering the boundaries of the City, such as Mission Ambulance. Could we say that the complaint by the fire inspector suspicious?  It was filed solely based on perception? Perception than now became harassment and discrimination.  Perception sure has exploded.  Let’s also not forget Priamos friendship with Peter Hubbard who runs AMR (American Medical Response).  The following is a transcribed letter of the original,  written by Priamos to the law firm representing Mission Ambulance, and telling them they cannot send a representative to City Council in order to lobby for them.

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW LETTER

Let’s take it a step further, his friendship with Councilman Steve Adams.  We have witnesses who seen them together at one of their favorite watering holes, the Salted Pig.  Okay, now I’m beginning to think is this whole episode politically motivated?  We forgot to say that Councilman Davis also spoke with Fire Chief Steve Earley, who state he could not comment on the complaint.

Fire Chief Earley is also a friend of AMR’s Peter Hubbard.  There has been some talk around town that Peter Hubbard (AMR) hosted Tim Stack (President of the Riverside City Firefighter Union) and Wendy Stack’s wedding reception at Peter Hubbard’s home.  We shouldn’t be surprised, after all, this is River City and screwing is king…

Of course, you know there is more to come… stayed tuned for another episode of “As Riverside Turns Your Stomach”.

“Elected officials aren’t typically involved in such investigations”… yes, that’s right. The difference here is that the staff is completely out of  control, and have repeatedly demonstrated a complete disregard for the citizens they serve. When people complain about “out of control government” this is what they’re complaining about. The staff does what they want, when they want without regard to their elected officials. Totally unacceptable. We need stronger and  better oversight on the council.   -Jim Stewart, Commenter on the PE

Yes, let’s have the city pay to block off some streets for a food truck festival and then not allow the food trucks we invited to the city to sell their food. Good for Davis for getting upset at that kind of nonsense. I was at a separate event with food trucks and the county inspectors were waiting at the gates of the event like rabid dogs. Using selective enforcement to single out and shut down businesses is one of the reasons why this state is in the mess it is in.  -John Rockwell, Commenter on the PE

Let’s start a forum of stories about fire inspectors being rude.  – Sharon Marshall, Commenter on the PE

So the city hires private investigators to handle complaints involving elected officials. Good! Now perhaps they can investigate the ones who allegedly  violated the city charter by interfering in the police department’s promotional process.   – Mary Shelton, Commenter on the PE

But this complaint is politically motivated, plain and simple – Paul questions the kickback given by AMR to the fire chief, and then this happens. It’s ridiculous.  – Jim Stewart, Commenter on the PE

If I were mayor pro tem, and was running for that very office, I might have used the “Face Time” for more strategic issues facing our city, and not bickering over an issue which has yet to be resolved.  – Ron Woodbury, Commenter on the PE

UPDATE: 08/29/2012: A REPORT FROM THE PRESS ENTERPRISE IS STATING THAT COUNCILMAN DAVIS’S COMPLAINT HAS BEEN RESOLVED.  NOW THAT THE DUST HAS SEEMED TO SETTLE, WHAT CAN WE EXPECT FROM CITY ATTORNEY PRIAMOS’S NEXT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION?

JUST FOR LAUGHS PERSPECTIVE..

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…RIVERSIDE MAIN STREET MALL, CIRCA 1966

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.  PROUDLY RATED ONE STAR (POSSIBLY DOWN TO ZERO FROM OUR LAST ACCOUNTS) 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 FOR GOOD REASON, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST, FOR GOOD REASON… 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 SPHALL SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR CONTACT US BY THE FOLLOWING EMAIL ADDRESS! CONTRIBUTORS WILL ALWAYS BE PROTECTED… YES, WE EXPECT THE JAIL TIME FOR THAT ONE…  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

At the June 26th City Council Meeting former deputy city attorney Raychele Sterling gave kudos to Councilman Paul Davis for calling City Attorney Gregory Priamos “out on his lies”  the prior week…it was nice to see that somebody would actually do that.

She went on to say that I’m here to talk about Employee issues, which appear to be on going.  People seem to be completely out of their minds, creating so much liability for you (referring to city management).  As I have said, over and over again, this stems not from personnel issue, but is a policy issue.  You continue to have employees sue you, you continue to have employees file claims, then your management comes back and says, geee.. maybe we should continue to retaliate against them because this will be great for our law suit and I’m sure the jury would really appreciate that. Well you might as well just add a couple more zeros to the check we have to pay out!  Well it not changing..and you have to change because the law suits will continue to come..

She went on to say, that if Tom Boyd, Public Works Director, calls any special meetings, or you believe he is harassing you, or retaliating against you, or if he writes a work performance evaluation that you don’t agree with..I want you to give me call, my number is 951-203-9952.  I will be happy to represent you pro bono, no charge!  Because this is going to stop!  TMC learned that a city employee who filed a civil lawsuit against the city a little more than a month ago was being set up for an administrative hearing with one day notice.  This was with Public Works Director Tom Boyd along with the usual suspects.  When Sterling contacted them, and said she would be representing this employee, the administrative hearing was called off, and business as usual was stopped for the moment.

She went on to talk about her grandparents who are absolutely disgusted with the council, with respect to her 87 year old grandmother who she said, “I never heard a cuss word come out of her mouth”.  Her grandmother said, ” you go there (to city council meetings) and they might as well give you the finger”.

“We have no government here”, Sterling said,  “you give all your power to Scott, your city manager, and you don’t monitor anything that he is doing, and he makes you end up looking like asses a lot of the times, and that’s really unfortunate, especially for people running for mayor.  You don’t want to be associated with that Rusty.  You said Jesus Christ is your inspiration.  I can’t ever think of an situation where Jesus Christ would ever under any circumstances permit employees to be just tortured the way that they are here at the City, and you have an obligation, not only as a Councilman and a Christian to make sure that stops immediately”

Public speaker Paul Chavez spoke prior to Sterling regarding an issue that occurred the prior week concerning workshop highlighting redistricting.  Mr. Chavez was surprised and disappointed in what the council did.  He said, “usually when you have a workshop, you don’t take a vote, because it is a workshop……you don’t make that type of a decision, you can have a concept of which way you want to go, or a direction of where you want to go, but you don’t make a decision”.  He went on to say that a vote was taken.. “I don’t know if it is legal or not… that’s why you have a city attorney”, (referencing City Attorney Gregory Priamos).   “The point that was very disturbing, was that the chamber (referencing the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce presided by CEO/ President Cindy Roth), came in and made a proposal.  I attended some of the other meetings for redistricting and nothing was mentioned.  Up to the last minute it was a ‘workshop’, you were all here (referencing the council), and you heard everybody talking about different things of what they like and disliked.”

“The chamber came in and told you that they wanted the ‘Market Place’”, (a district located in Councilman Andy Melendrez’s Ward).  And you said (the present council without Concilman Andy Melendrez present) “that’s a good idea, let’s all take it”!  Chavez said “the one that wasn’t spoken to was Mr. Melendrez (Councilman Melendrez), he was taken off guard.  That was very good planning for the chamber, and you guys all went for it.  It makes me very disappointed in all of you.  Also, it shows that those who are running for mayor, what kind of person are you? (I’d imagine Chavez was referring to Councilman “Rusty” Bailey who claims to be an independent voice for Riverside).   Is that what we want as citizens,  you don’t listen to us.. that’s the way I say.  I had a friend that was there and I asked him if you were going to the city council, he said no , what for?  They just look at you,  they let you talk but they don’t really hear you or acknowledge what you saying . So if this continues on you may have a lawsuit on your bench again, just as it has happened before and they have won, and we as taxpayer have to pay for that.  I wish you would reconsider when this comes up again, and stand for the people, not for the chamber, or our you guys bought out”?

While others in the community are calling this a “land grab” or “underhanded”, Dan Berstein explained this bit of shenanigans in the following blog posting, Eastside to Riverside: We Wuz Robbed!  Even PE’s Alicia Robinson had something to say in her blog posting Redistricting Riverside: Carving Up The Eastside.  TMC has spoken about this time and time again about what appears to be an incestuous relationship between the Chamber and the City of Riverside.  Cindy Roth who is president/CEO of the Greater Riverside Chamber, incidently her husband Richard Roth who has a position on the chamber, who also does work legal work for the City of Riverside and is runnig for State Senate and has the endorsement of the Mayor Ron Loveridge..  The residents and constituents of Riverside are disgusted and apathetic, and feel they have no recourse to make change as should appropriately be done by elected officials who flip flop on issues and do not listen to the real needs of the community.  Some have even used religion as a backdrop, and throwing citizen concerns through the back door..

I guess the question is for Councilpeople, anything Cindy wants, Cindy gets?  What would give Cindy Roth that much prominence?  Is it such a big deal to take the Marketplace and integrate it with the Downtown?  Why would they consider doing this in the first place?  Is it because it’s technically part of the East Side, and that has a negative connotation with many?  If we christened the East Side Marketplace as now part of Downtown, would the perceived visual perceptions change and now not be associated with the current perceptions of that nasty East Side?  Will the “East Side” now be just known as “the other side of the tracks”?  But Riverside Chamber’s, President/CEO, Cindy Roth wanted it that way, and the council thought it was a good idea.  Anything Cindy wants, Cindy gets?  For whatever reason it was done, what can I say, even independent voice of the people Rusty Bailey thought it was a good idea.  But Roth’s connections with the cities who’s who are appearing to be very clear.

Even her husband Richard Roth currently running for State Senate has clear ties with the City of Riverside by doing legal work for them.  Not to mention, he is part of the Board of Directors for the Riverside Chamber.  But now presented as the new improved and patriotic General Richard Roth for Senate.  Roth in conjunction with former Riverside Councilman Dom Betro had at a luncheon meeting with Democratic Senate Candidate Steve Clute, who was asked to step down from his running position….something for the community to think about regarding the generalisimo hardballing the Senate position…

Voilà, Now a Marketable Item for the Political Marketplace…

Richard Roth’s endorsements for senate are compelling, beginning with our Mayor Ron Loveridge and Jack Clark of Best,Best & Krieger, (doesn’t the City just hand over treasure chests of money for overpriced legal work to the Krieger)?   The Press Enterprise endorses Richard Roth!  Now let’s look at Cindy Roth’s Riverside Chamber Board of Directors.  Ahh, Peter Hubbard of American Medical Response, this is getting interesting…and it also appears that The Press Enterprise’s very own Ron Redfern is on Cindy’s Board of Directors for the Greater Riverside Chamber.   Richard Roth who had his ties to Republicans, now running as a Democrat, is all of sudden the next best thing to sliced smoked ham.  But can the smoke flavor of this latest innovation lose its taste over time?  Any way you slice it everyone appears to be incestuously connected in more ways than one?

But what is the big deal?  there only businesses?  Well, you already know how business friendly the City of Riverside can be, just take a stroll down the Main Street Mall.

TMC ARTIST RENDERING OF WHAT THE NEW MARKETPLACE MAY LOOK LIKE.

UPDATE: 07/10/2012: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION.  HOW WILL THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S FINANCIAL ISSUES PLAY OUT?  MAMMOTH LAKES, CA JUST FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY LAST WEEK BECAUSE IT COULD NOT AFFORD TO PAY OUT $43 MILLION DOLLAR JUDGEMENT WON BY A DEVELOPER.  IS THE CITY OF  CUDAHY NEXT?

THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE NAMED THE ‘MOST INTELLIGENT CITY’, PRIMARILY DUE TO TECHNOLOGY.  HIGH TECH SURADO SOFTWARE COMPANY NOW DEFUNCT, AFTER RECEIVING $350,000.00 OF PUBLIC FUNDS (THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE GAVE $300,000.00 AND THE COUNTY’S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY GAVE THEM $50,000.00), BUT OWING EMPLOYEES IN EXCESS OF $250,000.00.   CITY OF RIVERSIDE NOT SO INTELLIGENT? WILL THIS BE THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S SOLYNDRA?

IT WAS TO LATE FOR SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STAFF TO HIT THE TOWN DRINKING AT THE USUAL WATERING HOLES AS THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WENT ON BEYOND THE 12 MIDNIGHT HOUR.

THE REDISTRICTING ISSUE VOTED BY CITY COUNCIL 6-0 TO TAKE THIS ISSUE TO GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS.  CRITICISM OF THE COUNCIL CAME UNDERFIRE WEEKS AGO WHEN RIVERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CEO/PRESIDENT CINDY ROTH MADE THE SUGGESTION THAT ‘THE MARKETPLACE’ (PART OF COUNCILMAN ANDY MELENDREZ’S WARD 2) BE PART OF DOWNTOWN (WARD 1 COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER’S DISTRICT).  WHILE A PACKED HOUSE OF RESIDENT AND BUSINESS OWNERS FILLED COUNCIL CHAMBER, THE MAJORITY SPOKE AGAINST THE MOVE.  PUBLIC SPEAKER, CHRISTINA DURAN EVEN SUBMITTED AND PLACED COUNCIL ON NOTICE WITH AN OBJECTION LETTER.  THOSE IN FAVOR WERE THE DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP AND OF COURSE, THE GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, BOTH WHO RECEIVE CITY TAXPAYER MONIES FOR THEIR ENDEAVORS.  COUNCILMAN MELENDREZ COMMENTED ON THE TRUE PURPOSE OF RESDRICTING.  REDISTRICTING IS ABOUT POPULATION, AND NOWHERE IT IS TO BE USED TO FAVOR BUSINESSES.  FOR THE MOMENT, ‘THE CINDY LAND’ DEBACLE REMAINS ON HOLD.

THE ISSUE OF FUNDING FOR THE PURPLE PIPE REMAINS IN LIMBO FOR THE MOMENT, WHILE A PACKED HOUSE SPOKE AGAINST IT.  PUBLIC SPEAKER SCOTT SIMPSON PROVIDED AND PLACED THE CITY ON NOTICE WITH AN OBJECTION LETTER.  SIMPSON WENT BEYOND THE 3 MINUTES WHICH TRIGGERED RONNY’S BOUNCERS (RPD) TO ESCORT HIM FROM THE PODIUM.  AS SIMPSON MOVED AWAY FROM THE PODIUM AND BACK TO HIS SEAT, HE CONTINUED TO READ HIS OBJECTION.  THAT WAS A SIGHT TO SEE.. FOR THAT, TMC SHOUTS OUT, A ‘THAT A BOY’!  THE CITIZENS ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE…

TMC HAS OBTAINED SCOTT SIMPSON’S OBJECTION LETTER TO THE PURPLE PIPE WHICH WAS PRESENTED AT CITY COUNCIL.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL OBJECTION LETTER

QUESTIONS AROSE IF RECLAIMED WATER IS SAFE FOR PLANTS, AND IF PEOPLE AND CHILDREN ARE SAFE ON THE GROUNDS WHERE IT IS USED.  RIVERSIDE CITRUS GROWERS ALREADY MADE THEIR CASE THAT IT CANNOT BE USED FOR CITRUS.  ON SAFETY AND CEQA GUIDELINES (CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT), THE CITY SAID THEY WERE ABLE TO ‘BY PASS’ CEQA.  LEAVING QUESTIONS OF HOW CAN THE ISSUE OF THE SAFETY OF RECLAIMED WATER BYPASS CEQA?

THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE RED LIGHT CAMERA STAY, AFTER MAYOR BREAKS 3-3 COUNCIL TIE (COUNCILMAN MELENDREZ, MAC ARTHUR AND DAVIS VOTE AGAINST THEIR CONTINUED USE) WITH MAYOR LOVERIDGE BRINGING IN THE DECIDING VOTE TO FURTHER STUDY THE ISSUE OF MAKING IT COST EFFECTIVE.  COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS LOBBIES IN FAVOR OF CAMERAS, AND USES EXAMPLES OF SAFETY AND DEATHS, AND AS ADAMS SAYS..’BODIES’.  MANY CITIES ALTOGETHER HAVE DISMANTLED RED LIGHT CAMERAS DUE TO COST, SAFETY  ISSUES AND THE USE OF COMPANY PSUEDO STATISTICS DEMONSTRATING THAT THEY MAKE A DIFFERENCE.  COUNCILMAN ADAMS HAS BEEN AT THE BRUNT OF CRITICISM REGARDING ISSUES OF NEPOTISM DUE HIS BROTHER RON ADAMS HIRED AS A RED LIGHT CAMERA PHOTO EXPERT.

WATER RESPONSES FROM CITY COUNCIL COMING SOON!

UPDATE: 07/13/2012: CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION LAUNCHED AGAINST THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF FALSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS.  OUR THE RAINCROSS BELLS RINGING? THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT AND THE DA’S OFFICE ARE INVESTIGATING THE ALLEGATIONS OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.  SAN BERNARDINO CITY ATTORNEY JAME PENMAN SAID HE HAD BEEN PRESENTED DOCUMENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN ALLEGEDLY BEEN FALSIFIED WHICH MASKED THE CITY’S DEFICIT FOR 13 (LUCKY NUMBER) OF THE PAST 16 YEARS.

FACEBOOK ONLY? THE PRESS ENTERPRISE HAS EXPRESSED THEIR DESIRE TO THE COMMENT SECTION TO PRIMARILY USE FACEBOOK.  WORKING TO CURVE UNDESIRABLE COMMENTS AND PREVENT ANONYMOUS COMMENTERS SPEAKING  WHILE EATING CHEETOS IN THEIR UNDERWEAR, WELL, AGAIN, AS MANY HAVE SAID, THIS IS RIVERSIDE..  BUT MANY ARE ASKING, IS THIS A PLOY FROM THE DOUBLE DIPPING CHIEF OF POLICE?  ARE WE TO NOW EXPECT PERFECTLY EXPRESSED OPINIONS AS EXPECTED IN A PERFECTLY POLITICALLY CORRECT NEWSPAPER?  BUT NOW THE CHIEF CAN MONITOR AND PERFECTLY SEE THE FACES..  BUT I GUESS FOR POLICE WORK, ‘WE TIP’ ANONYMOUS HOTLINE IS ACCEPTABLE?

“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

THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO: BID RIGGING?  POLICE INVESTIGATE..  WEREN’T CLAIMS OF BID FAVORITISM BROUGHT UP IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE?

UPDATE: 07/17/2012:  WILL RON BRING THE LOVE ON HOME TO BILL BAILEY?  THE MAYOR’S ENDORSEMENT FOR THE MAYOR’S CANDIDANCY..WHO WILL IT BE?  THE GIGGLES OF EXCITEMENT ARE APPEARING TO OCCUR ON MAYOR CANDIDATE’S BAILEY’S FACEBOOK PAGE, AS HE EXPRESSES A SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT TO BE RELEASED IN THE NEXT 48 HOURS REGARDING A SIGNIFICANT ENDORSEMENT…

UPDATE: 07/17/2012: 12 NOON: MAYOR RON SENDS THE LOVE HOME BY ENDORSING WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY FOR MAYOR…

UPDATE: 07/19/2012: WHAT ISSUE WILL MAYORAL CANDIDATE ED ADKISON CALL  HIS OPPONENT WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY ON?  ADKISON PLANS TO PRESENT THESE ISSUES IN A PRESS CONFERENCE THURSDAY 07/19/2012 AT 11:00AM IN FRONT OF CITY HALL.

     

AT TODAYS PRESS CONFERENCE, ADKISON PRESENTED HIS BANCRUPTCY PREVENTION PLAN AND SIGNED A PLEDGE TO DO SO.  HE CHALLENGED RUSTY TO DO THE SAME.  THIS PLAN IS NEEDED, WITH A REJECTIONS FROM THE STATE FINANCE DEPARTMENT IN EXCESS OF $90 MILLION AND A NEW 218 LAW SUIT, THE GENERAL FUND WILL BE HIT HARD, CUTS NEED TO BE MADE STARTING WITH THE MAYOR’S OFFICE!  IS THERE MORE SALICIOUS INFORMATION COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE WITH REGARDS TO OPPONENT WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY?

WAS ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND GENERALISIMO RICHARD ROTH’S OFFER TO SERGENT VALMONT GRAHAM OF A PROMOTION TO LIEUTENANT AND $25,000.00 TURNED DOWN?  LOW BALLING IS A COMMON PRACTICE THE CITY TAKES ON TO MESS WITH THE OTHER ATTORNEY. 

THE GAMES ARE ON AND THE NEGOTIATIONS HAVE YET TO BE SETTLED.

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…MAIN STREET, LOOKING FROM CURRENT CITY HALL (CIRCA 1930)

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.  PROUDLY RATED ONE STAR (POSSIBLY DOWN TO ZERO FROM OUR LAST ACCOUNTS) 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 FOR GOOD REASON, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST, FOR GOOD REASON… 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 SPHALL SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR CONTACT US BY THE FOLLOWING EMAIL ADDRESS! CONTRIBUTORS WILL ALWAYS BE PROTECTED… YES, WE EXPECT THE JAIL TIME FOR THAT ONE…  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DENIAL LETTER

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

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

CLICK LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW WHOLE DOCUMENT

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE VIDEO

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

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

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

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DOCUMENT

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL COMPLAINT

EXCERPTS FROM THE COMPLAINT

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

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

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

     

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

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

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

LETTER WRITTEN BY STERLING TO THE SECURTIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

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

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW

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

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

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

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

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

Related Links to Stories in this TMC Blog:

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

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

Fired Employee Alleges City Officials Awarded Millions in Contracts Without Bid

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

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

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

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

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

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

 CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE YOUTUBE INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL DOCUMENT

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

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

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

                                 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A contradiction in terms?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

          

WILL THE REAL JUDGE RIEMER PLEASE STAND UP?

WAS THE RIEMER FAMILY TRUCKSTER PACKED AND READY TO GO?

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

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

    

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL DOCUMENT

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

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

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

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

4. The City provides all janitorial services.

5. The City will pay all utilities.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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