Posts Tagged ‘city councilman steve adams’

Pu1T0UfvSGJyBBMf-r3kE2dJ-d6fbR2ktzstZ2nkWjkh1QUhkDIc0xkOsbm-1VNCfVrccqA5V7pcE74BVoRrQo

PDone     PDtwo     PDthree

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

MARKMEYEROFF

MARK MAYERHOFF (CLICK TO ENLARGE)

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

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

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

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

Meyerhoffletterredactionsone copy     Meyerhoffletterredactionstwo

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

invest417

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

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

PSDAVISone     PSDAVIStwo     PSDAVISthree

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

Some telling excerpts are as follows:

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

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

erratta

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

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

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

06clapper-articleInline           sb

      CM Scott Barber                              Sorry, CM Scott Barber

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

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

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

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

337062249

JUSTIN SCOTT COE

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

letterone

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

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

1493020-327972687

RIVERSIDE ATTORNEY HIRED BY CITY OF RIVERSIDE, DOUGLAS  SMITH

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

memo                     ordinan

   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM                            WATER RESTRICTION ORDINANCE

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

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

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

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

waterSplash

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Train_around_the_Christmas_tree FOUR          streetcar5 copy6

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

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

meetingtrollyjuly2014

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DETAILS OF THE MEETING

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

photo

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

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

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

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

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT, WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

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

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

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

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

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

         

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL POLICE REPORT

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

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

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

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

HERE IT IS CHANNEL 11 NEWS..

LOS ANGELES TIMES STORY

CBS CHANNEL 2 NEWS

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

   

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

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

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

      

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(HYATT PIC COURTESY OF TRIP ADVISOR)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I came across this settlement case when looking into the Lanzillo Incident few weeks ago, and it was quite enlightening.  How many times has a settlement lawsuit occurred whereby a councilman such as Steve Adam’s has allegedly had a part in interfering with a process such as police promotions, in which of course, he should not be interefering with.  The question is, why would he feel a need to be part of the process to begin with?  At the last City Council meeting, former City of Riverside Deputy Attorney Raychele Sterling stated that City Attorney Greg Priamos expressed that Councilman Steve Adams was a “huge liability”.  It certainly appears that Councilman Steve Adams in the following law suit has costed the taxpayer not $1.00, not $500,000.00, but $750,000.00 and more in incidental court cost according to the law firm of Lackie, Dammeier & McGill.

POLICE ASSOCIATION LEADERS SETTLE RETALIATION LAWSUIT

By: Russell Perry & Michael McGill

On the eve of trial, the City of Riverside settled a contentious lawsuit brought by two of its lieutenants–Darryl Hurt and Tim Bacon–brought against the City, its now retired Chief of Police, a City Manager, an Assistant City Manager, and two City Council members.  The lawsuit alleged retaliation based on the lieutenants’ political activities on behalf of the Riverside Police Administrators Association [“RPAA”], the union for police management employees.

In 2006, Lieutenant Hurt became President of the RPAA and was vocal about the City violating numerous provisions of the union contract, including the City’s surreptitious attempt to convert various positions to “at will” status.  Hurt was responsible for coordinating litigation against the City challenging its actions and spoke out in opposition at various City Council meetings.  Of course, Lieutenant Hurt did not stand alone in his opposition to the various issues that confronted the RPAA.  In 2006, Lieutenant Tim Bacon was a vocal and active member of the RPAA.  He gathered a wide range of community support at City Council meetings to oppose the implementation of the “at will” employment contracts.  Furthermore, Lieutenant Bacon was Chairman of the Political Action Committee [“PAC”] for the RPAA and endorsed a candidate for City Council that eventually lost an election against a current City Councilman.

In addition to their union activities, Lieutenants Hurt and Bacon also reported what they believed to be unlawful activities of Police Chief Russ Leach, City Manager Brad Hudson, and Assistant City Manager Tom Desantis to the California Attorney General related to the issuance of concealed weapons to the city managers, as well as unauthorized cold platting of city vehicles.  Lieutenants Hurt and Bacon believed that their outspoken criticism of City Hall, City Council, and the reporting of the alleged illegal activity angered the city managers and city councilman. Unfortunately, these protected activities ended up coming back to haunt Lieutenant Hurt and Bacon when they later tested for Captain.

In November 2007, both lieutenants participated in the promotional process for Captain. Naturally, their combined extensive training and fifty six plus years of collective law enforcement experience led to a high ranking following the oral interview. Despite their excellent qualifications as senior lieutenants, they were passed up for promotion allegedly based on their political activities.

During the discovery phase, numerous depositions were taken and provided startling insight into the manner in which promotions occur within the City of Riverside.  A former Deputy Chief testified that Chief Russ Leach was told by City Manager Brad Hudson and Assistant City Manager Tom Desantis that Lieutenants Hurt and Bacon would never be considered for promotion because of their union activities. In fact, the candidate that was ultimately selected for promotion over Hurt and Bacon by Chief Leach was specifically approved by the city managers after an unusual vetting process.

Before the official announcement of the captain promotion was released, Councilman Steve Adams met with the promotional candidate at a restaurant, intentionally selected outside the city limits to avoid the appearance of impropriety [presumably due to the timing of the gathering]. This meeting was allegedly needed to resolved personal differences between Councilman Steve Adams and the candidate. Amazingly the only apparent issue that has to be resolved is whether or not the candidate actually campaigned against Steve Adams during a prior election—like Hurt and Bacon did.  Once Steve Adams accepted the candidate’s plea that he did not campaign against him, all the personal differences were resolved. City Councilman Adams told City Manager Hudson the next day that the meeting went well and coincidentally, the official announcement of the promotion of that candidate followed shortly thereafter. By the terms of the City Charter, members of the City Council are not supposed to be involved in the promotional process.

After they were passed over for promotion, Lieutenants Hurt and Bacon notified the Chief of Police of their intent to file a lawsuit. This act had immediate consequences as they were both suddenly transferred to an undesirable assignment for seasoned lieutenants, specifically the watch commander position.

The City’s assertion that the Lieutenants Hurt and Bacon were not promoted because they never made it to the top three choices for captain was going to be exposed as a sham at trial. They had compelling evidence that they were not going to be promoted because they previously engaged in protected activities. The circumstances surrounding the promotion of the other lieutenant only after the secret meeting outside the city limits, the testimony of Deputy Chief that both candidates were not going to be considered for promotion to captain, and the total lack of credibility of the former Chief of Police were going to show otherwise.

A few weeks before the case was set to go to trial in April 2010, the City came to its senses and met the plaintiffs’ settlement demand.  The terms of the settlement were released to the public by the City Attorney’s Office and include the following: In exchange for dismissal of both lawsuits against all defendants, Lieutenants Hurt and Bacon agreed to be placed on administrative leave until they were eligible for retirement [July 2010 for Lieutenant Bacon and January 2011 for Lieutenant Hurt]. Both lieutenants will receive back pay at the captain rate from the date they were passed up for promotion in January 2008 until their retirement. The City will ensure that both lieutenants will receive top step captain pay for the twelve months prior to retirement. Furthermore, the City agreed to purchase additional PERS service time so that both lieutenants could retire at the maximum, thirty years of service. Finally, Lieutenant Bacon will receive payment of $300,000 and Lieutenant Bacon will receive payment of $250,000.  The City further agreed to pay the Lieutenants’ legal fees and costs.  In total, the Lieutenants will receive a combined cash settlement totaling approximately $750,000, not to mention retirement at top step captain—positions they would have had absent the retaliation by the Defendants.  We did not even consider the cost the City spent to defend this case, which I’m sure goes well into the six digit range.

Mr. Warmth he is not, Mr. Sensitivity he is not, so why should we even give him the benefit of doubt when it comes to leadership?  When in essence his leadership is not for the benefit of his constituents.  What about the damage to City vehicles and cold plates?  What about the story of Lt. Meredyth Meredith and the alleged interference with her promotional process to Captain?  According to a deposition of former Chief of Police Russell Leach, he was preparing to promote then Lt. Meredith to captain when former Assistant Manager Tom DeSantis called him and put a stop to it.  Leach then stated, “And I found out Steve Adams marched into the meeting with…Hudson and Desantis and told them emphatically she shouldn’t be promoted.”  So what would be the reasoning behind Adams not wanting Lt. Meredith to be promoted?  Why would it matter at all what he says to begin with, wouldn’t he be violating Section 407 of City Charter, Intereference in Administrative Service, by that behavior?  So the big question we at TMC are asking, are certain people in leadership positions within the City of Riverside setting the taxpayer up for more costly liability?  We know “Mr. Liability” is..

UPDATE: 09/17/2012: EXCESSIVE WATER RATES?  WE TOLD YOU SO….ARE THEIR PROPOSITION 218 AN PROPOSITION 26 VIOLATIONS NOT BEING ADDRESSED?  A NEW REPORT IN THE PRESS ENTERPRISE ON THE HIGH COST OF WATER DUE TO THE TIERED SCAM…WE’RE SAYING IT BUT THEY ARE NOT.  OTHER TMC LINKS ON WATER: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: EXCESSIVE WATER TAXATION? AND CITY OF RIVERSIDE: UNDERWATER AND SHOCKED BY HIDDEN UTILITY TAXES? AND OF COURSE: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: THREE TIERS FOR WATER! I’LL DRINK TO….SECOND THOUGHT CAN’T AFFORD TO…   AND IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN ELECTRICITY RATES: HIDDEN TAXES ON YOUR ELECTRIC UTILITY RATE$!

UPDATE: 09/18/2012: CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY! The redistricting issue was debated and voted at Tuesday’s City Council Meeting on September 24, 2012.  The map that was accepted was as follows:

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s legislative aid Charles Condor who was canvassing the his neighborhood for signatures to remain within his Ward 4, appeared to get his request.  The “deciders” cut “Chuckie Land” right down the middle, with Chuckie’s home address remaining in Councilman’s Paul Davis Ward 4, and the other half going to Councilman’s Andy Melendrez’s Ward 2.  Others rumored that Condor wanted to remain in Ward 4 in order to run against Davis next election cycle.  Now Condor has been quoted as saying he has no intention to run Ward 4 Council in the next election.  Chuckie Land in the first image should be all pink because it is actually in Councilman’s Paul Davis’s Ward 4.  It’s green in the photo because one of the redistricting map choices was that it would be redistricted to Councilman Andy Melendrez’s Ward 2, hence the second image which was accepted by council.

                                 

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Now the “Chamber Queen”, Cindy Roth, with all the controversy, did not get that piece of Ward 2, the Market Place of which TMC coined “Cindy Land”, to be moved to Councilman’s Mike Gardner’s Ward 1.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Again, I must emphasize, that redistricting is not about ’business’ it’s about ‘population’.  If there is any inference of ‘gerrymandering’ that will be left for the state to investigate.  Redistricting, again, is based on a strict criteria, formulated to prevent political favoritism and gerrymandering.

Another change, was that Ward 1 was moved from Blaine to the Streets of Linden and University within the Andy Melendrez’s Ward 2.  Proponents, such as Christina Duran were not happy with that change.  Though, we must remember, what appeared to be of greater concern to the community of Ward 2 was the Market Place, which was of course, retained within Councilman’s Andy Melendrez’s Ward 2.  Regardless, public speaker Christina Duran made it known to Council that she would file a letter of objection to this change.  A letter of objection allows the decision in question to legally be brought up at a later time if deemed necessary due to inconsistencies, otherwise the decision could be considered final.

Again the act of redistricting is based on a set criteria which independently produces several redistricting map choices for council to vote on.  Changing those boundaries for the benefit of a few, known as gerrymandering, would be violating this set criteria, therefore would be left for investigation by the state.  The points made above were many of the ones which were seemed to be brought to the forefront of importance, otherwise movement and slight district changes overall were left unchallenged.

UPDATE: 09/20/2012: GANGNAM STYLE MEETS “RIVER CITY STYLE”? OR EVEN “THE LOVERIDGE STYLE” AS COINED BY ALICIA ROBINSON OF THE PE?  WOULD THIS HELP OUR SISTER CITY?  CAN IT HELP RIVERSIDE WITH NOTORIETY?  NEW POSTING ON THE PE BY ALICIA ROBINSON..

    

UPDATE: 09/26/2012: QUESTIONS ARISE ON THE FATALITY OF ISABEL PABLO STRUCK BY AN RPD VEHICLE.  Police Officer Boulerice’s initial statement was that he was looking at his computer before the collision.. but Greg Matthews, (paid by the City of Riverside to assess the actual circumstances of the fatality, in favor of the city, I would imagine), said the short amount of time Boulerice needed to stop indicated that he was not distracted… Well alrighty, I heard that one by the common people, or should I say the taxypayer.

    

Matthews said Pablo was not visible to Boulerice long enough for him to stop in time, even if he had not been driving 5 mph over the posted 35 mph speed limit.  We all know the dangers of going 40 mph and taking a second or two not looking at the road.  It only takes a second of distraction.  We’ve been told this time and time again, but now, is there a double standard now involved?

Trained police officers can text, use their cell, utilize their computer and the City can effectively argue that the officer was not distracted?  I know a thousand local taxpaying civilians that would like to hire that guy..  BUMP, Oppps, O’my god…what did I do??  Laws? What laws? What are they there for?  According to RPD, there Press Release suggest that Isabel Pablo was jaywalking.. by walking outside the crosswalk.  She was even given a toxicology test, the results have yet to be reported by the Chief.  In one instance to mitigate going over the speed limit, Chief Diaz states that Boulerice would not have been able to stop even if he were driving the posted 35 mph, police said at the meeting.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Accordingly the following image from the PE shows where Pablo was when she was hit (red tear drop).  Also in the image are the lines of visual compromise to the police officer driving (red lines) which made it difficult to see Pablo.  Also notice that where Pablo was hit (second image), was the area or distance between one vehicle lane.  It is also important to notice the layout of the blocks in relation to the streets.

         

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

The next series of images begins with image 1, approximately one block away from where Pablo was hit.  Image 2, is approximately at half the distance, with noticeable pedestrian crossing clearly painted on the street.  Image 3, is approxiamately a quarter of the distance.  In all images you can judge for yourself it their was any visual impairment.  Also consider the speed of the vehicle in excess of the speed limit, and driving while on the vehicle lap top.  The police officer also mentions a vehicle parked to the right curb also causing visual impairment (Image four).  Click images to enlarge.  According to the PE a southbound motorist who saw Pablo on the curb, nodded to Pablo that she could cross, but then honked his horn when he saw the police car approach at a speed that indicated Boulerice did not see Pablo.  I’m assuming that what he meant by honking the horn was that he was traveling in a speed in excess of what appeared to normal.  You the citizen be the judge..

        

IMAGE ONE                            IMAGE TWO                         IMAGE THREE                       IMAGE FOUR

Three other views beginning approximately one quarter of the way to impact.  Keep in mind the view especially in image three.  Also consider as indicated by the PE, the landscaping, medians and planters were installed in a $1.1 million project in 1999 that was designed to slow vehicle traffic and make Madison more pedestrian friendly.  Image four is of Image Two with a parked truck.

        

IMAGE ONE                            IMAGE TWO                       IMAGE THREE                        IMAGE FOUR

Could speed and distraction been a factor?

To make his point, Chief Sergio Diaz said there have been 23 fatal vehicle vs. pedestrian collisions in Riverside since 2007. In 15 cases, the pedestrian was at fault; in five cases, the driver was at fault but was not charged; in three cases, the driver was at fault — two charged with felony DUI and one charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter.  I’m not sure what Chief Sergio’s Diaz’s point was, but maybe it was to mitigate the collision somehow, but regardless, violations occurred.  If you wanted transperancy, one would want to look at the video dash cam for the purpose of seeing the police officer’s view from the police vehicle.  Chief Diaz doesn’t see it that way, he stated at a community meeting that he would attempt to prevent the police car’s dashboard video from going public, that he had no interest in satisfying anyone’s “macabre curiosity.”  “Macabre Curiosity”?  First Riversidian’s who asked questions regarding police procedures, were labeled as those who are “eating cheetos in their underwear”.  Now the question arises again, whereby the community would like to view all the evidence, especially the dash video.  Those who would like to see the dash video are now labeled as deviant, with a “macabre curiosity”.  Again many in the community are questioning the decisions and remarks of the Chief, especially now that he appears to be interfering with public records and how he skews issues of importance.

TMC INVESTIGATES WITH THEIR OWN VERSION AS SEEN ABOVE, WITH NO COST TO THE TAXPAYER.  WITHOUT THE COMMUNITY WORKING WITH POLICE HAND IN HAND, WE CANNOT HAVE A SAFE COMMUNITY.  TRUST NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT BACK, EVEN IF IT MEANS A NEW CHIEF.   WHAT! ANOTHER CHANGE ORDER FOR THE FOX PERFORMANCE PLAZA FOR $2.5 MILLION.  BUT GET THIS! STAFF ALREADY SPENT IT WITHOUT CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL.  OF COURSE THIS HAS CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER’S NAME ALL OVER THIS.  AT ONE POINT DURING COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS, COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS ASKED IF THE MONEY HAD ALREADY BEEN SPENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION ALREADY DONE?  CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER ANSWERED “YES’… THIS WAS ITEM #15 ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FOR TUESDAY 09.25.2012.  TAXPAYERS ARE ASKING WHO’S IN CHARGE?  BUT DID COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS, CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY GREG PRIAMOS ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THIS BEFORE HAND?  THE REASON WE ASK THIS AS WELL AS OTHER IN THE COMMUNITY IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT UNCOMMON TO SEE COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS WITH CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER AT SUCH LOCAL HANGOUTS AS MAZZ.  ALSO SEEN WITH ADAMS IS CITY ATTORNEY GREG PRIAMOS.  THREE PEAS IN A POD?  WAS THIS WHOLE EVENT POSSIBLY EVEN ORCHESTRATED?  WHAT ARE THE LEGAL REPERCUSSIONS BEHIND THIS DECISION?  KNOWING THE RULES OF CONDUCT, WHY WOULD CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER VIOLATE THEM?

                   

    SCOTT BARBER                        STEVE ADAMS                    GREG PRIAMOS

    

SHOULD THE CHIEF OF POLICE, CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER POSITIONS BE ELECTED POSITIONS?  WE WELCOME YOUR COMMENTS..  AND YOU KNOW BY NOW HOW MUCH TMC LOVE’S THE DIRT, EMAIL YOU DIRT!  NOT LITERALLY… INCIDENTALLY, IF YOU HAVE EXTRA DIRT..MAIL IT TO CITY HALL!   CITY HALL NEEDS YOUR DIRT IN ORDER TO COMPLETE TEQUESQUITE PARK..AT THE RATE OF 1,800 TRUCKLOADS…  THIS WITH A COST OF $200,000.00 TO THE TAXPAYER.  $200K DIVIDED BY OUR POPULATION OF 300,000.00 COMES OUT TO $0.666 PER RESIDENT.  WE  WILL LET YOU KNOW OF ANOTHER INCIDENT WHERE THE 666 NUMBER COMES UP REGARDING EL TEQUESQUITE PARK, OF COURSE, RESERVED ONLY FOR THOSE 666 ENTHUSIAST..

Self Appointed Citizen Auditor Vivian Moreno question the documentation for Tequesquite Park which states that the six fire stations are equal to the $4 million.  “That can’t possibly be right, these six stations have to be worth over $50 million”!  ”If you divide $4 million by the 6 fire stations you get $666,666.66.  Your telling me that a fire station is only worth $666,666.66″?

UPDATE: 10/01/2012: ITEM # 19 ON CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FOR 10/02/2012: GINA AIREY CONSULTING TO BE CONTRACTED FOR “SEIZING OUR DESTINTY TWO”? AT A COST TO THE TAXPAYER OF $210,365.00?   Yes Folks, there is a Method in the Magic in order to initiatate Seizing Our Destiny Two..

    

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Methods & Magic: How to  Jumpstart a Focused Plan that Delivers Results… and Saves You Time! –This is a  day-long workshop to prepare for self-directed strategic planning, designed for  volunteers and smaller organizations. “Methods and Magic” is also available as a  workbook for all those City Council who need a helping hand with vision.

CLICK LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT

The last time we had anything with the term “Magic”, was when Former City Manager Brad Hudson requested an outside investigation to the allegations of favoritism of himself, so he hired Rancho Cucamonga-based law firm Cihigoyenetche Grossberg Clouse  at a cost to the taxpayer of $150,000.00 to do the investigation which ultimately took a month.  Of course, in this investigative process they forgot to interview the other party which originally made the claims of impropriaties.  This is the same in Councilman Paul Davis’s case, whereby former RPD Lt. Jeff Callopy also forgot to take a statement, from non other than, Councilman Paul Davis, and was still able to determine wrong doing by the councilman.  Well, go figure.  But it gets stranger, one of the partners of the law firm Brad Hudson retained to investigate the email claims, specifically, Scott J Grossberg Esq.,  is also a motivational speaker who specializes in magic,  and is the author of three critically acclaimed and bestselling books, “The Vitruvian Square: A Handbook of Divination Discoveries,” “The Masks of Tarot,” and “Bauta: Betraying the Face of Illusion,” in addition to his oracle/divination cards, “The Deck of Shadows.”

This partner specializes in magic, thought-reading, and divination (Tarot, oracle cards, palmistry, astrology, and numerology).  I guess my question to the City of Riverside is, why do continue to focus on “magic” for the answers to the City of Riverside’s future?  What is their obsession with “magic”?  In their eyes, would “magic” be what is necessary to take the City that one step beyond?

UPDATE: 10/02/2012: CITY COUNCIL VOTES TO CONTINUE REDLIGHT CAMERAS, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE PUBLIC AT LARGE HAD TO SAY…AND WHAT THEY SAID WAS TAKE THEM OUT!  THE VOTE:  ADAMS-YEA, HART-YEA, GARDNER-YEA, DAVIS-NAY, MAC ARTHUR-NAY, MELENDREZ-NAY, MAYOR PRO TEMP AND MAYORAL CANDIDATE, AKA “INDEPENDENT VOICE”  MADE THE DECIDING VOTE WITH AND ASTOUNDING YEA..  WHAT DOES AUSTRALIAN BASE REDLFLEX HAVE ON THESE INDIVIDUAL WHO VOTED IN FAVOR OF IT?

I heard 18 people speak against the cameras tonight and two in favor of keeping them. All agreed the fines are unreasonable, even Steve Adams. Outwardly he says he supports community opinion and supported alternative methods to improve traffic safety. An excess of 11,000 tickets at Arlington and Indiana shouts loud and clear that public works is not doing an effective job of improving traffic safety here. Warren Buffet recently invested in red light cameras as reported by some council members (Mac Arther and Davis).   - Mark Porter, Commenter on the PE

The proverbial saying: put your money where your mouth is, comes to mind. If the city’s position is that the red light cameras result in safer intersections then where are the substantiating facts? if a case cannot be made that the red light cameras are producing a safer traffic environment (presumably the reason for their existence, according to the city) then we must ask: Why are they there?  -dontsurfsaltcreekmiddles, Commenter on the PE

UPDATE: 10/04/2012: CITY COUNCIL WEEK SEPTEMBER 26, 2012.  CITY MANAGER’S SCOTT BARBERS EXPLANATION TO THE  SPENDING OF $2.5 MILLION WITHOUT CITY COUNCIL KNOWLEDGE OR APPROVAL.

First of all let me say that, if we didn’t proceed with the MOU, (Memorandum Of Understanding is a document describing a bilateral or multilateral agreement between parties),  this change order would be another $500,000.00 or $600,000.00 on top of what you are seeing right now cause that would have been the cost to rebuild the building that had no purpose or no use, (The Press Bindery).  Which seems to me to be would be a waste of money.  So I appreciate  and recognize that we would be writing a wrong, and we are going to do something really good with the money.

Second of all, there was some management decisions made during the course of construction, that should have been discussed with the council.  I fully understand and appreciate the depth and weight of those decisions that were made.  And you have my guarantee as your city manager …uggh, that we have a big convention center construction under way….  You have staff’s commitment that we will bring to you items as they come up, because when their’s construction, there are unforeseen things that happen, it just always happens with construction..   and there were some additional cost that were management decisions, and….that’s not the kind of thing that is going to happen again…  So, I appreciate your thoughtful consideration of this,  and you have my guarantee as your city manager that we will not be making management decisions to make changes on projects without discussing them with you…

City Councilman Paul Davis: Final question, has this work already been done?  And it’s kind of asking permission after the fact?

Barber: Most of the work been completed…(therefore the $2.5 million has been spent without City Council approval)..

Upcoming, another alleged hired retaliatory investigative hit job by former RPD Lt. Jeff Callopy against a Public Works employee?

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN….MAIN STREET, CIRCA 1900

JUST FOR LAUGHS….EL TEQUESQUITE PARK: MIDNIGHT DIRT REMOVAL:  WE JUST RAN OVER THAT PURPLE PIPE, WAS THAT ANYTHING IMPORTANT?

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