Posts Tagged ‘riverside’

Riveriside City Councilman Mike Gardner said he disagrees with the characterization of the lease as a backroom deal, but for some people, “I don’t think anything anyone will say will change that perception.”

THIS WEEKS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WAS THE GIFT THAT KEPT GIVING, AND ONE OF THOSE GIFTS WAS ITEM 40 OF THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA.   THE “ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION” OF A LEASE BETWEEN PUBLIC UTILITIES AND BEST, BEST & KRIEGER.  THIS MEANS THAT THE CITY WILL TAKE OVER BB&K’S VERY EXPENSIVE LEASE, SO THEY CAN GO TO A NEW LOCATION THAT IS CURRENTLY IN CONSTRUCTION.  SOUNDS LIKE DEVELOPER MARK RUBIN’S PROJECT, THE CITRUS TOWER BUILDING.  QUESTION IS WHY DOESN’T PUBLIC UTILITIES JUST GO THERE, WITHOUT ASSUMING A BAD DEAL SUCH AS AN EXPENSIVE LEASE? PRIVATE SECTOR PEOPLE WILL TELL YOU IT MAKES NO BUSINESS SENSE!  THEN IT VERY WELL MUST BE POLITICAL.  MARK RUBIN’S RAINCROSS PROMENADE HAS NOT PANNED OUT AS THE CITY EXPECTED EITHER, WITH THE MAJORITY OF UNITS REMAINING EMPTY.  COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER STATES,”IT’S A GOOD OPPORTUNITY THAT FELL IN OUR LAPS, SO WE TOOK IT.”  LET’S SEE HOW GOOD OF OPPORTUNITY THIS IS.   FIRST, IT APPEARS THAT BB&K’S LANDLORD STILL HAS BB&K’S SECURITY DEPOSIT, SO IT LOOKS AS RPU/CITY WILL GIVE THEIR SECURITY DEPOSITY DIRECTLY TO BB&K IN THE AMOUNT OF $151,104.00.   THEN BB&K CAN LEAVE AND RPU/CITY MOVE IN AT LOAN SHARK PRICES REGARDING SQ. FOOTAGE.  YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THE MARKET IS DROPPING, BUT THE COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING PAYING $1.00/ SQ.FT. OVER THE CITY AVERAGE AND RIVERSIDE MARKET TRENDS, WHICH BEGINS AT $2.49/SQ.FT. IN 2012 AND ENDS WITH  $2.75/SQ.FT. BY YEAR 2016!  MONTHLY RENT IN 2012 WOULD BE $175,234.00.  IF YOU GO AROUND TOWN THERE ARE MANY SPACES AVAILABLE AT HALF THAT RATE WITH A BOTTOM LINE SAVINGS TO THE TAXPAYER.  MIKE GARDNER STATES, “WE HAVE TO FIND SOMEPLACE TO PUT RPD”.  SOUNDS LIKE RPD WILL BE HOMELESS AND ELGIBLE FOR FOOD STAMPS SOON!   BUT THE CURRENT BUILDING RPD RESIDES IN IS CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, AND LEASES THE SPACE AT A LOWER THAN REASONABLE RATES, AS IN $1.00/ YEAR.  WHY MOVE AT ALL?  BUT NEWLY ELECTED SECOND TERM COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER, WHO INCIDENTLY  CHANGED HIS MIND MONTHS LATER TO RUN FOR MAYOR,  DOESN’T THINK THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG OR SINISTER IN THIS CHANGE.   I CAN GET A WAREHOUSE FOR $0.65/ SQ.FT TO HOUSE RPD OR PUBLIC UTILITIES IN THESE TIMES, WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL?  SWEET DEAL FOR BB&K, I’M SURE THERE IS NOTHING MORE THAN THAT OR EVEN A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE USING THEM FOR DIFFICULT CASES SUCH AS UNLAWFUL DETAINERS TO CLEANSE MAIN STREET OF MERCHANTS…. AND IT MUST BE WORKING BECAUSE ACCORDING TO ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER DEANNA LORSON WHAT THE CITY SEEMS TO OWN THE MOST, STOREFRONTS ON DOWNTOWN MAINSTREET.   AND I GUESS IT DOESN’T HURT TO GREASE THE GLUTEOUS MAXIMUS OF THE LIKES OF DEVELOPER MARK RUBIN.   WHY DID RDA UNDERWRITE CITRUS TOWERS IF IT COULDN’T MEET IT’S OCCUPANCY GOALS?  WHY WOULD ANYONE GIVE UP A $1.00/YEAR IN A RECESSION?  BUT IT MAKES YOU WONDER WHY THE CITY CONTINUES TO TERRORIZE THE TAX PAYER, AND THE MORE REASON THAT REDEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE ABOLISHED. 

It’s possible Ex Costa Mesa Chief Steven Stavely said it best regarding his city- 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: 08/03/2011: Back in June 18, 2008 City Council approved the purchase to the Gateway Building at a cost to the tax payer of 3 million.  Public Utilities was then housed within the Gateway Building  and the Orange Square Building.  Once Public Utilities moves to take possession of the current building BB&K resides, the Gateway Building will become empty.  Even though the city mentions the Federal Courts have expressed interest, there is still no current commitment.  This musical chairs  of alleged favoritism will cost and continue to terrorize the taxpayer in higher taxes, waisted money and more wasted unoccupied city owned buildings.

If you haven’t received your  Brad Hudson Farewell Invitation, here it is.  It appears that the City’s restaurant, The Grier Pavillion will be providing the food in order to support Rodney Couch, and at what cost to the taxpayer? Is this even legal in this public arena?  In the past, employee’s would contribute food and drink to such events.  Currently the Community and City of Riverside has yet to receive City Manager Brad Hudson’s official resignation letter.  Does this mean that the taxpayer is obligated to pay the remaining two years of his contract, especially with days left before he leaves?

UPDATE: THE PARTY HARDY WITH BRADLEY PARTY BRINGS ABOUT SOME DISTURBING REVELATIONS WITH REGARDS TO CITY BUSINESS. THE JOKES OR THE ROASTING JOKES ARE A  CLEAR  PROCLAMATION OR A REVELATION OF THE DYSFUNCTIONAL CULTURE OF CITY HALL AND THEIR ABILITY TO CONTINUE  TO CREATE AN ECONOMIC SUBTERFUGE OF DISCEPTION, WHICH IN TURN REFLECTS ON THEIR ABILITIES TO PERFORM AS EXPECTED BY THE COMMUNITY WHICH HAS ENDOWED  THEM WITH THE POWERS  TO GO FORWARD AS INDICATED….

UPDATE: 08/22/2011: Councilman Paul Davis asked that the issue be revisited after questions were raised about the total cost of the move, which entails relocating owntown police and public utilities workers.

UPDATE: 08/23/2011: 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.  There is no doubt as to brazen display of conflict of interest displayed perpetrated by the City of Riverside in approving this deal between Best, Best & Krieger, Developer Mark Rubin and the City of Riverside.  “Three peas in a pod.”  How long will the City of Riverside continue to terrorize the taxpayer with shear imcompetance and their breach of fiduciary duty to protect the coffers of hard earned taxpayer monies?  It is not a secret of the contractual agreements between BB&K and the City of Riverside;  even though hard copies don’t exist.  Our we to believe that as taxpayers that we should expect anything less than a written contract?  While the city implies to the community that “we don’t need no stinkin contracts”?  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 should we try to request a rational answer from our Chief Financial Officer, Paul Sundeen, which would be the same.  Is Best Best & Krieger therefore dictating carte blanche on their legal fees to the taxpayer?   Then there is developer Mark Rubin’s connected liason with the City of Riverside and the City’s alter ego, the Redevelopment Agency.  Is is at all possible that BB&K deal was orchestrated and designed to provide a lease revenue stream for the bonds held on the Citrus Tower project?  Paul Chiang are you hearing the Raincross Bells?

UPDATE: 08/25/2011: One source of criticism has been the $20 million loan the city provided the Hyatt through a special federal bond program; the deal leaves the city on the hook if the developer defaults on debt payments.  The timing of the hotel, as far as the expansion of our convention center, is good. Having the hotel is a key to being able to do the expansion,” Gardner said Wednesday. But has Gardner asked the Marriott and Mission Inn of their current already dismal occupancy statistics?

THIS COULDN’T GET BETTER, RICHARD D. ROTH, CONTRACT ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, FILES A DECLARATION FOR THE ASSIGNED JUDGE TO THE VALMONT GRAHAM’S CASE TO BE RECUSED FROM THIS CASE.  THE ASSIGNED JUDGE, JACQUELINE JACKSON IS A FORMER PROSECUTOR FOR LA AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES, AND RECENTLY WAS APPOINTED AS JUDGE BY GOVERNOR ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER.  THIS DECLARATION STATES THAT JUDGE JACQUELINE JACKSON IS PREDJUDICE AGAINST THE PARTY (CITY) OR THE INTEREST OF SAID PARTY (CITY) SO THAT THE PARTY (CITY) CANNOT HAVE A FAIR OR IMPARTIAL TRIAL.  NOW, JUDGE JACQUELINE JACKSON IS AFRICAN AMERICAN AND  RPD SERGEANT VALMONT GRAHAM IS AFRICAN AMERICAN.  GET THE PICTURE?  SORRY WE HAD TO GO TO THE CITY’S LEVEL TO MAKE THIS CLEAR.  DOES IT APPEAR THAT THE CITY BELIEVES A BLACK JUDGE WILL FAVOR A BLACK PLAINTIFF, JUST BECAUSE THEY BOTH HAVE THE SAME SKIN COLOR?  THERE IS NO SPECIFIC REASON IN THE DECLARATION INDICATING OTHERWISE, WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S SPECIFIC ARGUMENTS ARE.  THE QUESTION IS, WILL THIS CASE EVER WALK THROUGH THE MARBLE CARPETS OF THE SUPERIOR COURT THEATRE AND BE PLAYED OUT?  PROBABLY NOT.  THE RIGHTS TO THIS SCRIPT WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE BOUGHT WITH THE POTENTIAL DRAMA NEVER TO BE SEEN.

Richard Roth, Attorney for the City of Riverside and California Senate Candidate.  Using the Generalisimo schpeel, of course which he earned, but using it as an adjunct for his campaign.  Well done!  Of course we thank you as American’s for your service, but then again, this is ridiculous…

SO, IS IT QUITE POSSIBLE THAT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE JUST INCRIMINATED THEMSELVES BY INDICATING RACISM IN A DECLARATION?     AFTERALL, ISN’T RPD SERGEANT VALMONT GRAHAM INDICATING RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN HIS COMPLAINT, AND THE CITY DOES HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF CASES INDICATING RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, WHICH HAVE BEEN SETTLED OUT OF COURT.  THIS AS IN THE CASE OF BLACK RPD OFFICER ROGER SUTTON TO THE AMOUNT OF 1.64 MILLION.  OR IN THE CASE OF RETIRED LAPD OFFICER  WAYNE K. GUILLIARY?  THE CITIES LITIGATION FUND NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB, THAT IS WHERE ENORMOUS WAIST HAS OCCURRED OVER THE YEARS, WITH IT’S SUBSEQUENT BURDEN TO THE TAXPAYER.  THE CITY ALWAYS DENIES IT BUT OOPS! DID WE INADVERTANTLY MAKE A BOO BOO WITH THIS DECLARATION?

RIVERSIDE POLICE OFFICER SERGEANT VALMONT GRAHAM’S COMPLAINT AGAINST THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CLICK FOLLOWING LINK TO VIEW FULL COMPLAINT: COMPLAINT OF 07-19-2011  

NAMED IN THE COMPLAINT WAS NEWLY APPOINTED CHIEF OF POLICE SERGIO DIAZ, FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON, FORMER ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER TOM DESANTIS, FORMER ACTING CHIEF JOHN DE LA ROSA AND CAPTAIN MICHAEL BLAKELY.

UPDATE: 01/13/2012:  HEARING DATE MOVED TO 02/22/2012 IN THE CASE OF SERGENT VALMONT GRAHAM AGAINST THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. 

UPDATE:01/17/2012: ATTORNEY RICHARD D. ROTH ANNOUNCES CANDACY FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY 31ST DISTRICT SENATE SEAT.  RIVERSIDE’S MAYOR RON LOVERIDGE ANNOUNCES HIS ENDORSEMENT.

UNKNOWINGLY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!   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…  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!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM  BY THE WAY, COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED!

CLICK  ON THE PIC TO WATCH BRAD HIDE!

WHO WILL BE HIDING BEHIND THE COMPUTER NEXT WHEN THE AUDITOR COMES ASKING QUESTIONS? CHECK BACK WEEKLY…THAT IS, EVERY CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY! WE’LL EVEN PROVIDE THE DIRECT LINK SO YOU CAN CHECK THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. CALL YOUR LOCAL ELECTED COUNCIL PERSON AND THE MAYOR AND REQUEST THAT A FORENSIC AUDIT BE DONE BY STATE CONTROLLER JOHN CHIANG OF THE CITY HALL BOOKS.  IF THERE IS NOTHING TO HIDE, THE NUMBERS WILL ALWAYS COME UP RIGHT! 

MAKE SURE YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THIS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA, AS REQUESTING A 100K INCREASE FROM 50K FOR A PAYOUT TO THE LAW FIRM CIHIGOYENETCH, GROSSBERG & CLOUSE THAT BRAD HIRED TO INVESTIGATE HIMSELF. “ABSOLUTELY SILLY!” AS ONE CITY MANAGER STATED ABOUT THE CLAIMS OF AN ASSISTANT DEPUTY ATTORNEY, THOUGH I DO AGREE WITH THE CITY MANAGER THIS TIME ON THE FOLLOWING ISSUE, (ITEM 41).   NOT TO FORGET THE REISSUANCE OF THE MEASURE C BALLOT (LIBRARY SERVICE TAX) INITIATIVE FOR A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE (ITEM 17).  THEN THERE IS RIVERSIDE CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION AND RENOVATION PROJECTED COST OF 36 MILLION.  AGAIN, THEY HAVE THE CREATIVE FINANCING THAT WE ARE SEEING WITH THE FOX THEATRE/PARKING GARAGE EXPANSION.  TAKE A LOOK AT FISCAL IMPACT.  YOU KNEW BRAD WAS GOING TO GET THIS ONE OUT BEFORE HE LEAVES (ITEM 12, 3:00PM SESSION).  

NOT TO FORGET THE “ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION” OF LEASE BETWEEN PUBLIC UTILITIES AND BEST, BEST & KRIEGER.  THIS MEANS THAT THE CITY WILL TAKE OVER BB&K’S VERY EXPENSIVE LEASE, SO THEY CAN GO TO A NEW LOCATION THAT IS CURRENTLY IN CONSTRUCTION. (ITEM 40).  

The leasing schemes only represent smoke from a small brush fire. The really, really big wildfire is in  redevelopment. The Council just dumped another 56 million gallons of gasoline on  the wildfire last night. And the taxpayer is locked into a burning house…with  no way out. -Nomo Taxes, Commenter from the PE

RIVERSIDE CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION AND RENOVATION PROJECT APPROVED AT THE COST OF $36 MILLION. (ITEM 12).  THE 6 MILLION OF THAT COST WILL IS COMING FROM REDEVELOPMENT FUNDS DUE TO THE CREATIVE MERGING OF DOWNTOWN/AIRPORT-HUNTER PARK/NORTHSIDE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA.  THE $30 MILLION WILL BE RAISED BY THE ISSUANCE OF DEBT BY THE GENERAL FUND.  THIS WILL BE DONE IN EITER OF TWO WAYS, 1. THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION (COP) OR,  2. A BANK LOAN SIMILAR TO THE ONE UTILIZED TO FINANCE THE FOX ENTERTAINMENT PLAZA.

ON JUNE 29, 2011 GOVERNOR BROWN SUSPENDED ALL REDEVELOPMENT ACITIVITIES IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.  THE OPTIONS TO THIS SUSPENSION FOR CITIES AFTER THAT DATE IS TO DISSOLVE IT OR CONTINUE IT.  BECAUSE OF THE ABUSES OF REDEVELOPMENT AND YOU CHOOSE TO CONTINUE, THE PAPERWORK THE STATE EXPECTS TO FILL OUT IS TEDIOUS, AND HAS UPSET MOST CITY GOVERNMENTS AS OURS.  SO YOU HAVE BEHAVIOR SUCH AS THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE CALLING THE “OBLIGATION PAYMENT” A FORM A RANSOM.  THE CITY ISSUED AN ORDINANCE TO CONTINUE THE VOLUNTARY REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. THE CHOICE OF A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM IS MORE OF A STRUCTURED PROGRAM TO MAKE THE CITY BECOME MORE RESPONSIBLE, WITH THE STATE’S  VIEW THAT IT WILL MITIGATE ABUSE OF FUNDS.  THE PARTY WAS OVER IN RIVERCITY.  BUT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE DID NOT TAKE THIS SUSPENSION WELL, CALLING IT “RANSOM”, KICKING AND SCREAMING TO THE EXTENT THAT THE LEAGUE OF CITIES (MAYOR IS PART OF) AND THE REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE STATE.  THE SUSPENSION WAS IN LIEU OF REDEVELOPMENT FAILING TO DO WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED FOR, TACKLING URBAN BLIGHT.(ITEM 13).

SO COME ONE, COME ALL! THE USUAL SUSPECTS WILL ALL BE IN ATTENDANCE! 

UPDATE: 07/26/2011: RIVERSIDE POLICE OFFICER SERGENT VALMONT GRAHAM’S COMPLAINT AGAINST THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE IS AS FOLLOWS: Complaint+07-19-11   “PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING THAT I DON’T THINK EXIST, I THINK PEOPLE ARE READING PERFECTLY INNOCENT THINGS AS SOMETHING SINISTER.”  WELL, YOU MAY BE RIGHT MIKE, BUT WOULDN’T THIS BE A GREAT VENUE FOR SUPERIOR COURT THEATRE?  THAT’S WHERE THE LIGHTS SHOULD BE, NOT THE FOX THEATRE!   SERGENT VALMONT GRAHAM VS. THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, NO HOLDS BARRED!   I’LL PAY $60.00 A SEAT FOR THAT ONE, ESPECIALLY WITH THE GREAT CITY CAST OF CHARACTERS, DESANTIS, HUDSON AND CHIEF DIAZ! MAYBE WE COULD EVEN GET EX-CHIEF LEACH TO ROLL IN ON RIMS TO MAKE A SURPRISE CAMEO APPEARANCE!  BUT YOU KNOW THE CITY WILL MAKE IT RAIN ON THIS MUSICAL, AND SEE IT IN THERE BEST INTEREST, NOT THE TAX PAYERS, TO PAYOUT A GILLION DOLLARS JUST TO MAKE IT GO AWAY.

UPDATE:THIS IS WILKIPEDIA’S CURRENT ARTICLE OR DESCRIPTION OF THE RIVERSIDE POLICE DEPARTMENT.  BEFORE IT WAS REWRITTEN, EARLIER TODAY THE ARTICLE APPEARED AS THIS RPD ARTICLE.  THE TOP PART SHOWS HOW IT WAS DISPLAYED ON WILKIPEDIA, THE LOWER PORTION SHOWS THAT SOMEONE CHANGED THE ARTICLE TO THE ABOVE, IT EVEN DISPLAYS THEIR ISP ADDRESS!

UPDATE: 07/26/2011: CITY COUNCIL HAS JUST NAMED RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SCOTT BARBER AS INTERIM CITY MANAGER, UNTIL THE CITY COUNCIL HIRES A SEARCH FIRM TO FIND A PERMANENT REPLACEMENT.  THIS QUESTIONS THE LEADERSHIP SKILLS OF THE COUNCIL AND MAYOR WHO HAVE TO HIRE A FIRM TO FIND A CITY MANAGER THAT IS BEST FOR THE CITY.  DIDN’T THEY RUN FOR OFFICE BECAUSE THEY KNOW OUR CITY AND NEIGHBORHOODS?   AS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, SCOTT OVERSEES THREE DEPARTMENTS: PLANNING , BUILDING  & SAFETY AND THE INFAMOUS CODE ENFORCEMENT.  AS OF NOW,  WE’VE YET TO RECEIVE A RESIGNATION LETTER FROM CURRENT CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON WHO WILL BE LEAVING AUGUST 11, 2011 TO TAKE ON THE POSITION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF SACRAMENTO COUNTY.  AND A LOOK BACK ON THE FUTURE OF RIVERSIDE IN 2006 WHEREBY THE RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A $780 MILLION PLAN TO PAY FOR PROJECTS, INCLUDING LIBRARIES, SENIOR CENTERS, PARKS AND UNDERPASSES AT CONGESTED RAILROAD CROSSINGS. THE CLINCHER THEN, THE CITY DOES NOT INTEND TO RAISE TAXES TO COMPLETE 30 YEARS WORTH OF PROJECTS IN FIVE YEARS! 

UPDATE:07/28/2011: ALABAMA’S JEFFERSON COUNTY’S BANCRUPTCY WOULD TOP 4.1 BILLION.  THIS IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE 3.14 BILLION OF THAT HAS BEEN CONNECTED TO SEWER DEBT,  A DEBT THAT THE COUNTY CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO PAY!  IT WAS FOUND THAT THE SEWER UPGRADES WERE FINANCED WITH RISKY TRANSACTIONS SHOWN LATER TO BE LACED WITH BRIBES AND INFLUENCE-PEDDLING.

AND PLACENTIA POLICE OFFICERS SUE OVER RAISES!

UPDATE: 08/01/2011: CITY OF CENTRAL FALLS RHODE ISLAND FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY!

In times when the community are losing trust in government, losing their homes, having difficulty maintaining the stability of their families, losing their jobs and even having difficulty placing food on the table, Police Chief Steven Stavely is a refreshing force of hope for those who have lost trust in public servants. He is what leaders are made of, one of integrity and one in which the community of the City of Riverside should direly seek out.

Excerpts from his letter to police personnell: Read The Complete Letter.

Here is why. It’s very clear to me that there is no fiscal crisis in the City of Costa Mesa. The majority of the council has created budget gaps in order to affect or create the appearance of a fiscal crisis. They have pushed finance and the budget process around to get the kind of numbers that benefit their position. They have in essence lied as theycreate the appearance of crisis in order to appear as the white knight to a narrow band of political followers. They have done this, I believe, because they have a political need to layoff police officers. This is completely unethical and immoral behavior and I will have no part in it.

Don’t blame a bird because it chirps and fly’s and don’t blame a union because it represents the needs of the employees. If you give those unions more authority over management rights, and let them engage in anything beyond pay and benefits then that is the hallmark of leadership failure. If your arguments are so weak that you cannot achieve success in that engagement then the shame is yours not the unions. That is the case here in Costa Mesa in my view and the council is covering itself with lots of shame.

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.

I say that they (council majority) are destroying this police department with their incompetence and that means only one thing. The community building efforts that this department has invested in for many years will stop and the community will begin to deteriorate.

I will say that in the end, this period of turmoil will subside and be replaced with opportunity. If there is not too much damage the department and community can, with time, effort and energy, survive and grow its services again. I caution that each of you should keep your eyes open. When that happens I know for a fact that you will handle yourselves professionally, as you always do. While such circumstance will be hard to take, there is a positive side it – will prevent Costa Mesa from following straight to Bell which is exactly where it is currently headed.

In my opinion it’s always been the nature of government to propose the proposition if there is no trail to an incident or event,  it didn’t occur.  In a free society we expect accountability and transparency, not some semantical play on words leading us further from the truth.  What is really disturbing is the fruition of a culture which has become unrepresentative of the needs of the community and has  become increasingly detached from mainstream economic theory, that its interference with the free market takes precedence.  What is best for the community is simply to do the right thing.   If that was done at all, we would not have so many employees fired at will.  But in retrospect, couldn’t this in essence,  be construed as a reflection of leadership?  And leadership can inadvertently distort the truth as a mechanism of defense.  Whereby an initial account of truth once disseminated, is followed by a transfiguration there of,  eventually becoming a subterfuge leading the community with a distorted perception of the truth.  For these reasons people are angry, people are frustrated, economically stressed and foremost, people are now asking questions.  Having questions is one thing, asking them is another.  People are feeling intimidated and afraid of government, and for good reason for which it has been quietly expressed in the community.  What has happened to our government, our protector and fervent leader?  What has propagated an entitled culture to developed independently of  the needs of surrounding community?  We have seen this within cities such as Bell.  People shouldn’t  have to feel that they are wrong  or be  intimidated by asking questions of public servants, or to feel they may be retaliated against.  Remember, elected and appointed officials are there to work at the pleasure of the people.

“Fear is the foundation of most Governments…”       

- John Adams, 2nd President of the United States of America,  January 1776

City Attorney Greg Priamos states he is there to protect the mayor and the council.  Is this an aberration of duty?  Or a momentary lapse of clarity?  …such as when an inquiry is initiated, and the assertion of attorney-client privilege is spawned.   Attorney-client privilege?…. lets analytically conceptualize the relationship.  In our tangible world it simply means the relationship between attorney and client, whereby the client hires the attorney for a fee.  Elected and appointed officials work at the pleasure of the people, taxpayers, and the community etc.,  therefore are we not their employers?  In essence, is the City Attorney present to protect the people and serve at the pleasure there of?  Therefore, would we not be his client?   An employee is still considered to be an employee, and we the people are technically their employer.  Such as the case of Best, Best & Krieger representing the Chief of Police via the tax payer,  we the employer/the CEO, do we not have the right to know what he may have done wrong and how it damages us as the employer?   Furthermore, is it the taxpayer/employer which must then hire a third party entity such as BB&K to actually tell us, again the taxpayer/employer, not the truth?  Led of course, by former Riverside DA Grover Trask, now with BB&K.  The City Manager, serves at the pleasure of the Mayor and the Council,  and therefore the responsibility of his actions reflects upon the mayor and council, it would be considered a breach of trust and of their fiduciary duty to the community  if they did otherwise.  It should also be assumed that the city council and mayor if necessary, could conduct themselves as city manager.  This would imply, a mastery of the appointed position, and this should be a requirement to becoming mayor or a member of the city council.  Understanding the work of the City manager is not only necessary but pertinent to the understanding the intricacies of the general fund.  Therefore there would be no justification to an aberrational abuse as seen with City Manager Robert Rizzo of the city of Bell.

Those that have been there longest have attained institutional memory, of which could be detrimental to a leaders agenda.  Ridding the work force of this intangible phenomenon insures the likelihood of implementing ones agenda without question, regardless if it is right or wrong.   Of course, those with institutional memory know right from wrong.  Is it a benefit to leadership to control and to rid their immediate arena of institutional memory?  And when expelled from the work arena,  does it have a corresponding price?  Duck taping a mouth always has a price within a city gone rogue. (Note: This Original Link Dissapeared From The Press Enterprise Site).  Without integrity there ultimately would be no need to question the actions of representative leadership.  Say what you don’t mean and mean what you don’t say.  Thank-you Sean Gill and Raychele Sterling for doing the rightful work of the people and with the integrity, and thank-you for asking the questions which help us, the taxpaying community,  to protect us from the abuse of public funds.  You have not been forgotten….

On March 22, 2011 Riverside City Council unanimously transferred $100,000.00 from the public general fund to the Sendai Relief Fund.  The queston now became, can a public entity contribute a gift of public funds to another, even if it is for a good cause?  As a general rule,  you can only give away to others what you own, which includes cities.  But by definition funds owned by the city are public, and elected and appointed officials are stewards of those funds.  Therefore, according to Article XVI, section 6 of the California Constitution  undeniably prohibits gifts of public funds, therefore the City of Riverside gifting $100,000.00 of public funds to Sendai is not only illegal but a violation.  Individual contributions by elected and appointed officials and personal would have been the legal way of raising appropriate relief funds to gift to Sendai.   Rules and regulations have been developed for a reason, to prevent taxpayer fund abuse.  The State constitution is very clear, there must be direct or primary public purpose and benefit to the public at large when general funds are used to avoid being a gift.

UPDATE: 05/24/2011: NOTED AT CITY COUNCIL, $100,000.00 WITHDRAWN FROM GENERAL FUND AS A GIFT TO SENDAI.  HOW MANY MORE GIFTS OF CONTRIBUTION FROM THE GENERAL FUND HAVE OCCURRED FOR OTHER NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS? 

UPDATE: 05/29/2011: RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES DONATES $2000.00 TOWARDS A DINNER HONORING MAYOR RON LOVERIDGE AND WIFE.  A SILVER SPONSORSHIP INCLUDES A TABLE WITH A SEATING FOR FOUR AND AN AD ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.   IF THE DONATION WAS WITH PUBLIC FUNDS AS INDICATED BY THE SPONSORSHIP LISTING, THIS WOULD BE ILLEGAL AND A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE XVI, SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTUION.   THIS WOULD ALSO BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST SINCE RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES IS A PUBLIC ENTITY.  TMC INVESTIGATES, STAY CONNECTED.