Posts Tagged ‘siobhan foster’

AR-150529388one

According to the San Gabriel Tribune former fired Public Works Director from Pasadena, and former Public Works Director from the City of Riverside was hired by the City of Covina as Public Works Director! Once again are we seeing a pattern of hiring not conducive to the benefit of the taxpayers?  Foster according to the California Licensing Board for Engineers carries no Engineering license.  This all after the $6.4 million embezzlement scandal in Pasadena, which was under the scrutiny of her department.  In the City of Riverside, we had AG Park, which as Public Works Director was not dealt with appropriately.  Therefore city workers and surrounding residents of AG Park have fallen ill to her alleged ineptness.  Some have allegedly died as a result of her lack of educational background.  We have always asked this question, how did this happen?  In many city’s as Riverside we have attained people who have no degrees or licensing, who make critical decisions which we believe could have resulted in such.  If an engineering license is required for the job, how come she doesn’t have one?  In Riverside, we have one such person who currently is employed in the Public Works Department who has a Dance Degree.  It just so happens she was allegedly the goddaughter of our former City Manager.  Employees who do not have the educational background, the on job experience and the licensing hurt cities by their incompetence due to their lack of educational background.  This lack of educational background and credentials cause high risk legal liabilities for the taxpayers, which can have repercussions, such as higher taxes.

2013__01__Travis-Miller

Foster was appointed to the position Public Works Director by Covina City Manager Angela Miller, who incidentally, was City Manager of San Bernardino!  Is this to close for comfort?  In Riverside, questions arose regarding Foster’s handling of the AG Park clean up.  Was she a hands on Public Works Director?  The following document explains what workers have been saying for years, she only did her work from a distance.

exposurekentwo

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE.

When the AG Park contamination story broke, was Foster competently able and educationally qualified to take on such a problematic task whereby peoples lives were at stake?  It is our opinion that we think not.  While workers and staff were on the contaminated site, witnesses stated she was there on site,  “but did not get out of vehicle.”  What did she know, or didn’t know?  Why didn’t she depart from her vehicle to investigate first hand and take charge?

OTHER TMC STORIES CONCERNING SIOBHAN FOSTER..

02.01.2015: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CAT FIGHT IN THE MAYOR’S OFFICE?

01.23.2015: PASADENA INDEPENDENT: TWO PART SERIES OF ARTICLES REGARDING FORMER CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEES, RAISING QUESTIONS OF TOXIC POLITICS!

01.20.2015: CITY OF PASADENA: PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: SIOBHAN FOSTER FIRED!

01.13.2015: CITY OF PASADENA/RIVERSIDE: CITY EXECUTIVES ARE RECYCLED…MUCH LIKE YOUR TRASH.

10.26.2011: TMC NEWS FLASH: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: FORMER RIVERSIDE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SIOBHAN FOSTER: “IF THIS GETS OUT, I’M OUT!”

06.13.2011: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: FUZZY MATH AND THE BID PROCESS IN THE SEWER, BUBBLES UP THE USUAL SUSPECTS

06.25.2011: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PUBLIC WORKS FOSTER’S & BOYD’S THE BID PROCESS!

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST, “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “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… 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

Cat-Fight

CAT FIGHT OR JUST A MISUNDERSTANDING?

According to the letter written by local Attorney Danuta W. Tusynska, Darlene Trujillo Elliot, Assistant to the Mayor, claims Ms. Kane made some disparaging remarks about race.  Both Elliot and Kane work for Mayor William Rusty Bailey.  The letter states that Ms. Elliott has potential causes of action against the City of Riverside for race and national origin discrimination and failure for the City to provide a discrimination-free environment.  Chief of Staff to the Mayor, Maureen Kane was specifically targeted.

1148873_10200154997868443_1963417654_n           Maureen-Kane

Darlene Trujillo Elliot                  Maureen Kane

Tuzynska stated that the examples indicated of the discrimination was a sampling, as if to indicated that there are more claims to come.  She also threw in that harassment was involved.  Some of the complaints were as follows:  Ms Kane routinely used the phrase “your people” to Ms. Elliot.  Ms. Kane stated to Darlene that her daughter was having a “Mexican” party and everyone was dressing up like Mexicans.  What is quite remarkable is the “Mexican” party that Ms. Kane was referring to was actually a Quinceañera, held for her own daughter, which is a Hispanic/Mexican traditional ceremony with reference to coming of age.  What people don’t know or is not indicated, does Ms. Kane come from a Hispanic background?  Or was this a mere cat fight between two Latina co-workers?

cat-fight-definition

Mr. Elliot also indicated that Ms. Kane told her that she would be transferred to Parks and Recreation department, against her wishes.  When she fell to the pressure, she asked for her prior position as Principle Management Analyst in Public Utilites, but was denied that.  Elliot also claimed that Ms. Kane falsely described the involuntary transfer as a “promotion.”

elliotcase                      cityrespons

Complaint Letter from Law Offices of Danuta Tuszynska       Findings Letter from Robert Hansen

Of course, the City responded with Ms. Kane’s story and you can see the full disclosures by the City and by Elliot’s Attorney by clicking the links above.  Incidentally, the letter was written by Robert Hansen, Deputy City Attorney for the City of Riverside and former City Attorney for Moreno Valley.

index

Deputy City Attorney Robert L. Hansen

The rumor through the grapevine is that the City of Moreno Valley wants him back, but on the same token Hansen has also applied for the job of Riverside City Attorney.  Well, the Attorney denies that Ms. Kane made those references to “your people” and “Mexican” party, which if it did happen, I believe you are given that free card especially if you are both from Hispanic backgrounds, therefore no discrimination, especially when it indicates that Ms. Kane’s daughters first language was Spanish.  You can read the details of the response by Hansen, but he denies that Ms. Kane ever told Ms. Elliot that she was being transferred.  The bottom line is that Ms. Elliot continues to be employed and working in the Office of the Mayor in her official capacity or position.

IN PASADENA, FIRING “WITHOUT CAUSE” GET’S YOU THE LOTTERY, THANKS TO CITY MANAGER MICHAEL BECK!  According to the Pasadena Star News the two fired employees City of Pasadena’s Public Works Director Siobhan Foster and Finance Directory Andrew Green will cost the taxpayers $275,000.00 to make them go away.  In what world does a “fired” employee get a lottery win with reference to a payout?  Only in the “public sector,” this my friends, would never happen in the “private sector.”  Then what usually seems to happen, is that these two people will be picked up or recycled by other cities to implement the same schemes until they are outed once again.  Remember City of Pasadena, you lost $6.4 million in taxpayer monies that may never be recovered due to the oversight of Siobhan Foster, Andrew Green and City Manager Michael Beck.

NONE

These Two Taxpayer Incompetent Turds will get the following:  Foster will receive six months salary and healthcare benefits totalling $109,425.39. Green’s severance pay totaled $105,840.93.  In addition, Foster will receive a $33,198.21 check for hours worked, car and phone allowances, cash-outs for vacation, management time off and floating holiday hours afforded in her contract. Green will receive a $27,876.65 check. Remember folks, Pasadena’s City Manager Michael Beck was former Assistant City Manager of the City of Riverside, while Pasadena’s Director of Public Works (with no engineering degree) Siobhan Foster, was former City of Riverside’s Public Works Director who made some really bad decisions that not only impacted employees health with the AG Park allegations but created astronomical liabilities for Riverside taxpayers.  Should have our former city attorney take some blame who at the time was former City Attorney Gregory Priamos.

STATE OF THE CITY UPDATE: SPONSORED BY THE GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE:  We brought this issue up again because we thought it was important for the public taxpayer to note how a private non-profit the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce has hijacked a public event such as the City of Riverside’s State of the City.  The following shows how public taxpayer monies are spent by purchasing tables that the public can’s sit in, only the department employees of the City, while the public sat in the back.  Gold sponsors paid $1,000 per table.  The monies which are contributed to the Chamber, are not known if they come back to the City as campaign donations or paid plane tickets etc.  The sad part about this activity was that this has been going on for 38 years.

img048   img049   img050   img051   img052

CLICK IMAGES ABOVE TO ENLARGE

At the Mega Mixer and Trade Show held January 29th we found that Public Utilities was handing out sponsorship monies for this event!  The ring leaders again are the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce!

img055

CLICK ABOVE IMAGE TON ENLARGE

PUBLIC UTILITIES UPDATE: THE “I OWN IT” PROGRAM, IS IT A BIT TO MUCH?  WE FIND THAT OUR PUBLIC UTILITIES MUST HAVE SO MUCH MONEY TO PASS AROUND TOWN TO FOR BUSINESSES TO ADVERTISE.  If this is the case and “We Own It,” referring to me the public, I want a $1,000.00 to be returned to all 100,000 rate payers of the City of Riverside.

IMG_0837   IMG_1538   IMG_3416   IMG_6008   IMG_9366

CLICK IMAGES ABOVE TO ENLARGE

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 6, 2015 AT THE MISSION INN SETS RUMORS ABLAZE!  A noted Special City Council Meeting set to be Friday February 6th at the Mission Inn has set off a blaze of resident concerns.  Why the Mission Inn when we have City Hall?  Why are we paying taxpayer dollars for the San Diego room when we already have a Council Chamber?  Will there be food served?  What’s so important that Council decided to utilize the Mission Inn for a one hour special city council meeting between the hour of 9:00am and 10:00am?  According to a Memorandum from Mayor Pro Tem (second figure below) council will be considering candidates for the City Manager position.   This closed session meeting is also not open to the public, except for public comment at the beginning.  There was a Michael Beck sighting some weeks ago at Riverside City Hall, with all the turmoil in Pasadena, is Beck looking for a way out before possibly being fired?  Is he one of the candidates to be considered for Riverside City Manager?

speccc    memo

CLICK ABOVE IMAGES TO ENLARGE

spec

Special February 6th Closed Session Agenda

TMC MAKES THE COLORADO BOULEVARD. NET ON OUR STORY REFERENCING “RECYCLED CITY EXECUTIVES.”

CBN

CLICK TO ENLARGE

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “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… 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

PasadenaIndependent_WEBMastHead

COLLAGE

A two part series of articles has been written regarding Pasadena’s Public Works Director Siobhan Foster and City Manager Michael Beck with relation to their part with the City of Riverside featuring former fired Resource Principle Analyst Jason Hunter, former City of Riverside Business Owner who was retaliated by a City of Riverside Executive and Taxpayer Advocate Vivian Moreno, former fired Riverside Contracts Administer for Public Works Sean Gill, former fired Deputy City Attorney Raychele Sterling and retired 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 Scott Simpson.

PART ONE:

SHAKEUP AT PASADENA CITY HALL-TWO KEY DIRECTORS “FIRED WITHOUT CAUSE” FROM CITY FALLOUT FROM EMBEZZLEMENT SCANDAL RAISES MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT MICHAEL BECK’S MANAGEMENT.

PART TWO:

PART TWO: MICHAEL BECK AND TOXIC POLITICS

RIVERSIDER’S COMMENT ON THE PASADENA INDEPENDENT:

The people of Pasadena are lucky they have a newspaper that is covering this information. The owner of the Riverside paper, the Press Enterprise, retired, and it was sold to a Texas corporation that then gutted its staff’s ability to do this kind of investigative reporting. It has since then changed hands again.
Meanwhile, Michael Beck was hired as City Manager by the City of Riverside WITHOUT ANY SEARCH FOR, OR INTERVIEW OF OTHER CANDIDATES. I know; I was there objecting to this hire.
Why was Beck hired without any search for candidates? I think it’s because our then-Mayor, Ron Loveridge, knew Beck would participate in covering up what already had been taking place for years, under the “leadership’ of the previous City Manager, Brad Hudson, who, with Loveridge, had concocted a redevelopment scheme, the so-called “Riverside Renaissance,” that has left local citizens forced to overpay utility bills, sewer charges, and more, and stripped local services so that, for example, the annual expenditure on public libraries is only 25 cents per citizen per year. (I think Pasadena was spending at least $4 a year on library services).
Beck had worked at the University of California at Riverside, where our multi-term Mayor, Ron Loveridge, was continuing to accrue pension credits while on repeated annual leaves to serve six four-year terms as the City’s Mayor. (This means Loveridge is getting pensions from both the UC system AND from the City of Riverside; a recent salary poll showed that some unnamed associate professor at UCR is making $680,000 annually, and I bet that it’s Loveridge.)
So Loveridge knew Beck before extolling his virtues as a City Manager — an accolade Beck received despite his lack of ANY experience as a city manager.
I hope this newspaper continues to dig deep into this story!  LETITIA PEPPER, former Attorney for Best, Best & Krieger.

Beck started out without the proper credentials to be a city manager, but Mayor Loveridge brought him from UCR to pull off the Renaissance scheme. Although Beck is not smart enough to pull this scheme off himself he had help. We also fired good management so the scheme could be pulled off. Check with the purchasing manager, did they replace him/her. Did someone alert management and get fired? This is a trick Beck learned in Riverside. Fire Beck!!! Check not only your interfund/interagency loans but also your bond proceeds.  City council need to call the state controller to do an audit. Do not rely on outside auditors they can be bought and sold. Beck is no good, he will only try to hide the larger problems.  Someone needs to ask Beck why he was in the City of Riverside, city hall about 3 months ago, saw him in the elevator.  – DVONNE PITRUZZELLO, former candidate for Riverside Mayor & Council

And why, people should ask, did Beck fire Green and Foster “without cause”? Why weren’t they fired FOR cause — for failing to institute, and then follow, procedures designed to prevent the theft of at least $6.4 million? It looks like Beck is actually TRYING to protect them. He’s probably hoping that the average person will think that by firing them without cause, at least Beck is punishing them.
Under these circumstances, describing their departure as being “without cause” is actually a reward, compared to what should be happening.
So who REALLY knew WHAT was going on with that embezzlement — and WHERE did the money go, and WHO got a share of it? Will BECK’s name figure as an answer to any of these questions? Let’s hope there is an in-depth investigation and prosecution in the works.

I can’t believe the incredible timing of this article. Toward the end of the article, Jason Hunter, a former City of Riverside employee fired for knowing too much and not keeping quiet, talks about how the City of Riverside’s top officials worked to silence public discussion.

One of the ways to do that was that the City Council voted to take away the public’s right to take things off the Consent Calendar so that they were available for public discussion, and how then a small group — the Mayor, Mayor Pro tem, City Manager, City Attorney, and City Clerk — would decide what items went on the Consent Calendar.
In fact, individual Council members were denied the right to put anything on the Discussion or Consent Calendar at all, thus depriving their constituents of any voice as to issues that needed to be discussed.
I just recently stumbled onto the fact that this method of controlling public discussion is a violation of the Ralph M Brown Act. On January 16, 2015, I sent the Riverside Mayor and City Council a letter demanding that they stop violating the Ralph M. Brown Act and return to the former — and legal — method by which members of the public may object at any City Council meeting to any item being placed on the consent calendar, which then puts in on the Discussion Calendar for a full, public discussion and debate about its merits.
I am still awaiting a response, but if the City fails to correct this glaring, and meaningfully timed violation of law, there is a group of citizens ready to retain my legal services to sue the it.
Notably, the motion to take away this public right was made by Riverside City Council Member Dom Betro and seconded by Council Member Steve Adams as the “Riverside Renaissance” shell game was about to heat up. Steve Adams has been a HUGE proponent of developing the Ag Park land (mentioned in the second article in this series)and has continued to insist that there are no toxic chemicals there. I believe that Steve Adams was a primary a proponent of using sewer funds to build the infamous “road to nowhere” — a road built with city money leading directly to land that Cox, the developer mentioned in part two of this story, was planning to develop.  – LETITIA PEPPER, former Attorney for Best, Best & Krieger.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “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… 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

 

 

SF

Just in…Former City of Riverside Public Works Director who left to take the job of Public Works Director in Pasadena was fired today, as well as Finance Director Andrew Green, according to the Pasadena Independent.  Pasadena’s City Manager Michael Beck, formally City of Riverside’s Assistant Manager, continues to deal with the repercussions of the $6.4 million loss from the Public Works Department.  The question is were they qualified for the positions they hold, or was it just a political favor at the expense of the taxpayer?  We later found that Foster does not hold an Engineering License with the State of California, for being the head of the department overlooking other Public Work Engineers.

Back in 2010 Foster was the brunt of a law suit filed against her by a whistle blower Sean Gill, City of Riverside Contracts Administrator, which included “bid rigging” and falsification of documents.  Gill stated that “they made me do a lot of things that were unethical and illegal.  Gill described the City of Riverside as a city tainted with corruption, but the City of Pasadena didn’t listen when he contacted them.

Citizens of the City of Riverside are wondering who will be next?  Tina English, Deanna Lorsen, Reiko Kerr, Brent Mason, Michael Beck?

OTHER TMC STORIES RELATED TO SIOBHAN FOSTER:

TMC NEWS FLASH: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: FORMER RIVERSIDE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SIOBHAN FOSTER: “IF THIS GETS OUT, I’M OUT!”

CITY OF RIVERSIDE:PUBLIC WORKS: THE CHECKS IN THE DESK

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PUBLIC WORKS FOSTER’S & BOYD’S THE BID PROCESS

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: FUZZY MATH AND THE BID PROCESS IN THE SEWER, BUBBLES UP THE USUAL SUSPECTS

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: THE BID PROCESS IN THE SEWER!  THE STINK KEEPS BREWING, THE GROUND KEEPS A SHAKING..

We believe that the same type of accounting process seen in Pasadena may be occurring with how our City Attorney’s Office was operated under former City Attorney Gregory Priamos.  Priamos suddenly left his office in the summer 2014 to take a position with the County of Riverside.  We have found that Priamos has been hiring outside legal services, especially BB&K, with no contracts.  When residents ask for an accounting of the total spending they are dissuaded from going further by the office calling the files privileged.  Again, TMC request a forensic audit of the Riverside City Attorney’s Office by the State Controllers Office.  Not a hired gun as seen with the Sewer Funds.

TMC RECEIVES KUDOS FROM DANIEL BLACKBURN OF CAL COAST NEWS:

Untitled-2

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE EMAIL

“Fear is the foundation of most Governments…”       

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

 TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “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… 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

CLICK ABOVE IMAGE TO ENLARGE

In reference to the current audit, what the PE failed to report was that the scope of the audit was to not only include a forensic audit of the sewer, but the electric and water.  In addition, community advocates emphasized that the scope of the audit must address inter-agency transactions, not inter-fund transactions (of which we knew the majority of those were fine).  Inter-agency loans are those made between to agencies such as the City of Riverside Sewer Department and the State with reference to Redevelopment.  Inter-fund transaction happen all day long!  From one department to another within that single agency, such as the City.  So our question is, who got to the council?  We don’t know?  Did the best advocate for a resolution of this issue flip-flop?  We say, yes!

Let’s take a look at the above transaction.  Originally, the City Council approved the $5.4 million as a short term 120 day loan from the Sewer Fund to Redevelopment.  What Council voted on was different than what actually occurred behind the scenes under former CFO Paul Sundeen.  Council voted for a short term inter-agency loan (not inter-fund) from the Sewer Fund to Redevelopment which is a State Agency.  What happened was instead of paying from the Sewer Fund, they drew the $5.4 million from the Workers Comp Fund as indicated.  Then what happen next was the Electric Fund paid the Workmans Comp Fund.  Then the Sewer Fund paid the Electric Fund.  Why did all this happen?  We call it money laundering.  When the issue was brought forward, the City called it an “oversight,”  we called it the “Sundeen Shuffle” (in reference to former CFO Paul Sundeen).  The lingering question is how many instances of oversight does it take, to consider the actions fraudulent?

Barber and Sundeen have no concerns about how the City will make payments on debt because : a) they are part of the team that created the enormous mountain of debt, and b) the payments on the debt are the responsibility of City taxpayers/ratepayers. Success has many fathers. Failure is an orphan.  -whosincharg, Commenter on the PE

CCI08112014_00015millutilityplazapurchase

CLICK THIS IMAGE TO ENLARGE

How bout this one!  Another oversight, as the City is labeling them.  The original transaction was to be a $5 million dollar loan from the City Sewer Fund to the State Agency of Redevelopment.  What actually happened was the $5 million was drawn from the Electric Fund as an inter-agency loan to RDA, instead of the Sewer Fund.  What happened next was that the Workers Compensation Fund payed the Electric Fund.  Then the Sewer Fund payed backed the Workers Compensation Fund.  Again why was this done?  We call this the “Sundeen Shuffle.”  No it’s not a dance, as we know it, but a dance in perception.  Why did the funds take this turn of event again?  Was it nothing more than an attempt to “launder” taxpayer monies?

We noticed in 2011 that City of Riverside was commingling Redevelopment monies with our General Fund, and actually believed the city did this because to give the appearance of a healthy General Fund.  This would be important for those such as investors, who would be looking at the financial healthy of our general fund. We asked the question if the City of Riverside was doing what the City of Miami was?  In this Press Release by the Securities and Exchange Commission, it states that the City of Miami was transferring monies to their General Fund in order to mask increasing deficits in the General Fund.  The City of Miami was actively marketing bonds to the investment public while their primary operating fund was boosted to give the appearance of strength.  According to the SEC Press Release, Miami did not disclose to bondholders that the transferred funds included legally restricted dollars which, under city code, may not be commingled with any other funds or revenues of the city.

june2011wrda  june2011woutrda   MFNOV2011    generalfundSept2011

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

As you can see in the first thumbnail listed as June 2011, we have a commingling of State Funds with the General Fund.  When we brought this to the attention the following month we saw a visual decrease by approximately 77% in the General Fund, this is thumbnail July 2011.  By November 2011, thumbnail three, we noticed the General Fund contains just about $2,000.00.  How would this look to an investor?  In September 2012, thumbnail four, we find our General Fund was negative $73,412.00, again does not look appealing to investors.  We have to remember, that it takes approximately 13 to 16 million a month to run the City of Riverside.

This is an example, of what former CFO Paul Sundeen did in order to give the impression that the General Fund was healthy.  A no no in accounting practices, since those assets are from a State Agency, Redevelopment.

THE CITY OF PASADENA’S $6.4 MILLION EMBEZZLEMENT WOES POINTS TO ONE CITY EMPLOYEE, WHILE THE COMMUNITY POINTS THE BLAME AT CITY MANAGER MICHAEL BECK FOR HIS LACK OF OVERSIGHT AND ASK FOR HIS FIRING!  Former Assistant Riverside City Manager Michael Beck, now City Manager of the City of Pasadena, is on the hot seat for a lack of oversight which the community resulted in the embezzlement of $6.4 million which lead to the arrest of three people, including a city employee, and the suspension of four other city hall employees.

AR-150109730.jpg&maxh=400&maxw=667

Michael Beck

Danny Ray Wooten was a management analyst with the City of Pasadena’s Public Works Department who is now accused of embezzlement, and is being charged in a 60 part felony complaint, according to the DA’s office.

AR-150109768.jpg&maxh=400&maxw=667

Pastor Wooten

The clincher here is that Mr. Wooten is also known as Pastor Wooten of the New Covenant Church in Pomona.  Even that church is scrambling to check and audit their finances to see if they have been scammed by pastor Wooten in any way.  But don’t sit down yet folks, it gets better, what the press has yet to mention is that former Public Works Director for the City of Riverside was Siobhan Foster… she is currently now the Public Works Director for the City of Pasadena, under the direction, of course, of Michael Beck.  So what was Ms. Foster’s excuse for her inability to catch this criminal act?  Possibly because she is not qualified?  While Director of Public Works in Riverside, employees mentioned that she would asked the question of what a “pot hole” was..  Foster also had her bout with fuzzy math and the bid process which were the brunt of employee complaints.

siobhan-fostertw

Siobhan Foster

Both Michael Beck and Siobhan Foster when they both worked for the City of Riverside, were under the direction of disgraced City Manager Brad Hudson, who’s decisions that were made will cause our City to confront treacherous financial waters as the years pass.  But what many in the community are asking, is why did she resign in order to go to the City of Pasadena?

Incidentally, former interim City Attorney Christina Talley was the former City Attorney for the City of Pasadena during the years of 1994-1996, cities do recycle their employees!  She came here to Riverside, while we sent former Public Works Director Siobhan Foster and former Assistant City Manager Michael Beck to Pasadena.  Kiss that $6.4 million good bye Pasadena, it will cost another $6.4 million in legal fees to attempt to recover it!  Beck and Foster need to go down for this one.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY PAUL ZELLERBACH’S WIFE, PAIGE ZELLERBACH, ARRESTED FOR DUI!  On the morning of December 16th, around 10:30am, Paige drove from her home in Riverside on Overlook Parkway, where she evidently loss control on the wet street, went up on the center divider into a tree.  We believe the injuries sustained by the tree appear not to be life threatening, therefore the tree will survive.  A witness described her behavior as being under the influence.

zellerbach   ngp3nr-pewcrash1217adwbx   l
Paige Zellerbach is a Dentist who has her office on Indiana and Mary St. in Riverside, it is unclear if she was on her way to work at the time of the incident, and many people are asking if she works under the influence or had clients waiting that day?  She was cited and released to family.  Do to the conflict of interest with Paul Zellerbach’s office, how the case will proceed will be left to the State Attorney’s office.  People are asking if Zelly Baby lectured his wifey pooh regarding the “buzz driving, is drunk driving” campaign?  Who knows!  Zelly Baby is up for a whole different slew of charges by the State Attorney’s office as well:
· Vandalism Under $400 (594(2)(a) California Penal Code)
· Trespassing to Place Unauthorized Signs (602(f) California Penal Code)
· Trespassing with Intent to Cause Damage (602(k) California Penal Code)
· Embezzlement (504 California Penal Code)
· Theft of Public Funds (424(a)(1) California Penal Code)
Paige Zellerbach comments on her experience in the Press Enterprise, and criticizes Bishop Ron Gibson on his ulterior motives.  No comment yet regarding what the alleged prescription medications she ingested.  What is also coming into TMC is that others in the community have seen her at community events with the alleged appearance of being under the influence.
Paige’s own comment on the situation in the PE is as follows:
What this article fails to mention is that the man in the photo Ron Gibson, I believe his name is, offered me no assistance, when he found out who I was he began videotaping the entire incident and was “demanding this not be another Ferguson” he also demanded that I be arrested. Then after that he took it upon himself to go to my place of business and tell my staff and patients that I was driving around town drunk and that he smelled alcohol on my breath. Why would he do that?? I 100 % guarantee, I did not have ANY alcohol in my system. For those of you who believe I was given priority, REALLY?? How many people to whom this occurs get splashed all over the news and drug through the mud?
UPDATE: JANUARY 9, 2015: PAUL ZELLERBACH PLEADS “NO CONTEST” IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT:  Of which many in the community are just considering a favor by Riverside County Superior Judge Beck Dugan, according to the Press Enterprise, Zellerbach pleaded no contest to following:
· Vandalism Under $400 (594(2)(a) California Penal Code)
· Trespassing to Place Unauthorized Signs (602(f) California Penal Code)
· Trespassing with Intent to Cause Damage (602(k) California Penal Code)
· Embezzlement (504 California Penal Code)
· Theft of Public Funds (424(a)(1) California Penal Code)
In lieu of the seriousness of the charges, Judgy Duggy didn’t throw the book at Zelly Baby but gave him a cushy ruling!  1.) pay various fines totaling $1,070.00, 2.) Take part in 60 hours of community service and 3.) One year of probation, (and this is cushy probation, not the hardball probation everyone else must take).  There you are folks…
And of course, as is good practice with the PE, besides blocking commenters, is to bring the story out, and quickly bury it into the anal of internet ink..  Corruption runs deep from this trash we call Paul Zellerbach, to the Judges, Grand Jury, County Sups, Sheriff’s Unions etc. etc.
SHOULD SKIN COLOR BECOME AN ISSUE IN RIVERSIDE?  LEE MCDOUGAL, FORMER RETIRED CITY MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF MONTCLAIR HIRED TO BE INTERIM RIVERSIDE CITY MANAGER.  It is unfortunate that we must make race an issue regarding these announcement, as if this has any bearing on ones job position.  According to the PE City Spokeshole Phil Pitcford said that McDougal would be the first African American to lead Riverside.  Shouldn’t ethnicity not matter, and shouldn’t we be choosing people by their experience, qualification and the content of their character, and not bring skin color into the mix?  We did this again when our first black Fire Chief for the City was hired, Michael D. Moore, the PE notated his skin color.  Are we attempting to describe as a City, something about our future and something about our past?  Have we arrived as municipality that has no restrictions?  Shouldn’t skin color never be an issue to began with?  I think so.  Now that I placed skin color to the way side, why do we have so many public servant retirees coming back for a second round of benefits?  That is the question which needs to be answered.  Both McDougal and Moore are retirees, who continue to work.  Is the age for public retirement just to low?  Of course it is, who are we fooling?  Why is the public sector now the best gig in town?  Because you as voters and residents allowed this to happen.  You must be part of a Democracy or Republic in order for this exercise to occur.  It is not free, you must be part of it in order for true Democracy to exist.  This dysfunction seems relevant to the public sector.  This seems to be a phenomenon relative to the public sector as opposed to the private sector, and gives individuals a second opportunity to feed at the taxpayer trough?  That is of course, being able to retire at 55 years of age, and get a second attempt to repeat the process within a lifetime is just a misappropriation of taxpayer funds.
It is again unfortunate that we need to look at the outside for individuals to guide our City forward.  We all know for example, that Interim Chief Mike Esparza should have been the Fire Chief.  But did they all leave in order to solidify their pensions before the flow of money becomes less within the City in the coming years?
OUTSIDE LEGAL HELP PROBLEMATIC? DID WE HAVE A ROGUE FORMER CITY ATTORNEY WHO BY PASSED THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE OUTSIDE LEGAL HELP WITHOUT COUNCIL AUTHORITY?  ABSOLUTELY YES!  With the new article in the PE regarding the hiring of outside legal help, which has been a common practice in the City of Riverside to do it without any sort of binding agreement or contract.  Not only was the contract issue a concern for many in the community, because no one knew what was really being spent by former City Attorney Greg Priamos’s office.  In many cases we felt that he used the taxpayers monies for his own legal agenda and agenda’s of the very few which in the long run, did not benefit the taxpayer, only cost them more.  One good example of Gregory’s contempt, was violating the will of the voters by blocking a ballot measure to be voted on, and of course, at taxpayer expense, as in the following PE article.One good example of Gregory’s contempt, was violating the will of the voters by blocking a ballot measure to be voted on, and of course, at taxpayer expense, as in the following PE article.
sexsalon23_priamos_3002
Former City Attorney Gregory Priamos
According to the PE in a December 9th article, stated that in a December 3rd decision, San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge Brian S. McCarville ruled against the city, writing that the state’s initiative process “is a right that should be jealously guarded,” and that “the better reasoned approach is to allow this type of challenge to be resolved after the voters have spoken to the issue.”  Therefore, the City of Riverside violated the voters right to place an initiative on the ballot, as is acceptable under the Democratic process.  Again people ask if the City of Riverside is a Dictatorship?  But what becomes more evident is that taxpayer monies were spent to block the Democratic process.  Further, more taxpayer monies will more than likely be spent to appeal the decision.  But that’s Riverside..  and of course, Priamos never protected the sanctity of taxpayer monies..he used the budget as if it was his own money, and of course never benefiting the best interest of the taxpayer.
talleybw
How would Christin Talley respond to this?  I would imagine “No Comment.”  Of course, Talley has had her own set of problems with competency with other cities whom hired her through Best, Best & Krieger Law Firms.

In any case, we don’t know how this one fell through the roof, but we did manage to receive one arrangement between BB&K and the City of Riverside to represent Former Chief of Police Russ Leach.  What a surprise, it’s signed by former City Attorney Greg Priamos and Grover Trask, former Riverside County District Attorney now in the employment of BB&K.  Oh lets’ just call it a “contract”, or correctly a “retainer agreement”.  Tomato, tomahto, oh let’s just call the whole thing off…  Wish we could, but it gets better.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW WHOLE DOCUMENT

This was an article we posted back in May of 2012 when we requested all contracts for outside legal help by the City Attorney’s office.  There were no documents responsive!  This was recently brought to the forefront with a new article by Dan Bernstein from the Press Enterprise, “Riverside: The (Hidden) Cost of Business.”   Bernstein refers to all the non contractual outside legal services which are not documented, a hidden cost as he calls it, but not hidden to taxpayer monies.  One of the most striking documents we at TMC found a couple of years ago was one which Best, Best & Krieger had their own charge card, to charge the City of Riverside as they needed to for legal work rendered.  Charges to the tune in excess of six figures?

CorpCard    CCTWO    CCTHREE    CCFOUR    CCFIVE

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENTS OF CORPORATE CARD

 The writers of the below public records request were trying to determine by what authority did the City Attorney’s Office claim their right to hire outside legal without City Council approval.  The following first two documents are the letter of request to the City Attorney’s Office asking them to answer the question of no contracts.  The last letter is a response by City Attorney Greg Priamos stating there are no documents responsive.

4-14-09 PRR 1 of 2 001                      4-14-09 PRR 2 of 2 001                     4-27-09 City response 001

CLICK ON ABOVE DOCUMENT IMAGES TO ENLARGE

sec702

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE REFERENCING SECTION 702

The question then arose was because of Section 702 Eligilbility, powers and duties of the City Attorney, from the City of Riverside City Charter.   This section of the charter stated, “The City Council shall have control over all legal business and proceedings and may employ other attorneys to take charge of any litigation or to assist the City Attorney therein.”  We were also told that state bar requires a lawyer to provide a contract for any work done for a client.  We ascertain that Section 702 makes all outside legal services require approval by the majority of the City Council.

With this in mind, an new issue arose, this was of the City Manager, Scott Barber.  The PE reported that the city has hired, with two contracts of $49K each, a law firm to conduct an investigation of two councilman, Davis and Soubirous.  The $49K is significant because it is just below the $50K cap that the city manager can spend without seeking council approval.  We don’t contest that the City Manager has the right to spend this money without council approval, but we don’t believe that Section 701 of the City Charter gives the City Manager the authority to hire outside legal without City Council approval.

Section 703 of the City Charter says: “The city clerk shall have the power and be required to: (c) maintain separate books, in which a record shall be made of all written contracts and official bonds.”  We believe the intent of this charter requirement is for there to be a publicly accessible record of how public funds are being spent.  The practice of hiring outside legal services circumvents the intent of this section.

 Section 1401 of the city charter states: “the violations of any provision of this charter shall be deemed a misdemeanor and be punishable upon conviction by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars or by imprisonment of a period not exceeding six months or by both such fine and imprisonment.”  We can therefore ask the question, “Is it per incident?”  If it is, it certainly can add up for some individuals.  When we are talking about millions of dollars, as indicated in the Press Enterprise, we have to ask the question, “Does it become a felony?”  How then can one account for such mismanagement of taxpayer monies without a legal rationale for the beneficial purposes of those monies?  What is the real truth here that appears to have been circumvented by City Attorney and City Managers by a document called a City Charter?  A document which appears not to be abided by when it should.

We say this because of the circumstances.  We bring the incident which involved our current City Manager Scott Barber. Just in September of 2012, City Manager Scott Barber decided to take his City Manager hat off and play Council by authorizing a change order of $2.5 million without council authority for the Fox Performance Plaza.  He brought the issue to Council and basically appeared they would rubber stamp the idea, after-the-fact.  Had this type of shenanigans been done before by the prior City Manager?  The City Manager’s discretionary spending cap is at $50,000.00, anything over that amount must go to council.  Certainly violated the Charter Amendment.  What made Barber think that he had the authority to act as an elect and ferret it out without them?  A complaint should have been filed against him with Human Resources, and Council should have fired him immediately.

Or the time, which involved City Attorney Greg Priamos denying that he had anything to do with the command for the arrest of public speaker, Karen Wright.  Officer Sahagun was commanded by the City Attorney to arrest public speaker Karen Wright.  Then Priamos calls the police report “inaccurate”, this then implies that officer Sahagun is s liar.  Brian Smith, RPOA President states, “we call that a lie in the profession, and the State of California calls it lying in a police report a crime.”  So if it is in fact a lie, will Priamos prosecute Officer Sahagun for falsifying a police report?  To this day it remains unclear what Priamos meant by referring to the report as “inaccurate.”  In addition, has yet to give an explanation of what was actually said between himself and Officer Sahagun.  Again is City Attorney Greg Priamos a liar?

The question is, “Why should the taxpayer put up with what appears to be “rogue” activity?  What should be done about it?  Why isn’t anything being done about it now?”  It is appearing that by default we are experiencing the “two sets of rules syndrome.”  So why does the house always win, when the taxpayer should be in charge? When will Council take the reigns of power they were given to them by the taxpayer and defend them?

MAY 2012 ORIGINAL TMC ARTICLE: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY: “WE DON’T NEED NO STINKING CONTRACTS!”

may2014twoIt has been apparent to the community of the close working relationship between the law firm Best, Best & Krieger and the City of Riverside.  What’s quite evident in fact is that the working relationship between the two entities involves oral contracts.  According to City Attorney Gregory Priamos no hard contracts exist not even a retainer agreement, when a public request act is initiated.   When it comes to a public accounting of the expenditures of the City Attorney, as requested by Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello, a rejection letter below, for the request was sent.  According to the letter Gregory sent, there is no such accounting that has been prepared, and according to law, the law does not impose any duty to create such a record.  Therefore, non is required.  Since when has the taxpayer not be allowed to know what their money is being spent on?  This should be disturbing to many people, because it states that they treading waters they should not be treading.  And according to the law, the City Attorney’s office is not required to disclose the spending of taxpayer monies.  You have to know there is something very wrong with this picture.  Common sense would tell you there is something to hide behind the dark glasses of City Attorney Gregory Priamos.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DENIAL LETTER

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

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

CLICK LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT

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

Such a cozy arrangement between certain ex-city of riverside employees as well as BB&K employees who are strategically now on city committees.  Conflict of interest?   The cast of BB&K characters interlaced with City of Riverside, who previously worked with the city, or on their boards and committees are numerous.  Former Grover Trask (former Riverside County District Attorney), Michelle Quellette (City of Riverside’s Charter Review Committee), Jack Clark (Committee to name City Hall after Mayor Ron Loveridge) or Charity Schiller (Vice Chair of Riverside Downtown Partnership), now of course, our interim City Attorney Christina Talley.  BB&K has also been in the media with the City of Bell, whereby the city is now suing BB&K attorney Edward Lee for faulty legal advice.  Even Governor Jerry Brown subpoenaed BB&K records regarding pay packages in Bell, California.

Measure A… The City of Riverside used taxpayer monies to bankroll their campaign against citizen advocate groups!  The scam that continues to continues to give, masterminded by former City Attorney Gregory Priamos!

OUR NEW INTERIM LAWTINA CITY ATTORNEY CHRISTINA TALLEY NOW SUING HER FORMER EMPLOYER THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.  According to OC Weekly Talley states that she is victim of council majority’s war on Latinos.  In this suit she is using the race card by claiming discrimination, retaliation and hostile work environment.  The majority of the lawsuit is aimed at Council member Kris Murray, who incidentally, is a white female, which Talley says was “extremely rude, condescending and sarcastic” in personal dealings.  Talley has a hearing set for January 5th, 2015, but in a prior hearing in November 2014, District Judge David O. Carter ordered both parties to try to resolve the dispute through mediation.

Christina-Talley_9150

One blog site defends Talley regarding her advice to Council members, and states that her advice on the issue of the Gardenwalk project was sound.  But one commenter on the Orange Juice Blog made this comment.

Michelle Rodriguez

IS GENERAL MANAGER GIRISH BALACHANDRAN OF THE RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES IN CONFLICT BY BEING A BOARD MEMBER OF THE GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE?  What has been brought to the attention to TMC is that the newly christened General Manager of our Riverside Public Utilities is also a board member with the Greater Riverside Chamber Commerce.  We find this a conflict of interest in that it directly impacts the public he represents without our input.  Checks written to the Chamber by Public Utilities for what ever supportive reason is not in the best interest of the public and the rate payers, especially if they are approved under the General Manager Mr. Balachandran.

Girish-Balachandran        RCCGirish

WHAT STAYS IN VEGAS DIDN’T STAY VERY LONG?  FORMER RIVERSIDE GENERAL MANAGER DAVE WRIGHT TAKES JOB WITH LOS ANGELES DWP.  Wright retired from the City of Riverside Public Utilities as the political heat got to him their General Manager in July 2013 to take a job in Las Vegas, Nevada.  Who retires to take another job?  If you say you are going to retire don’t you just retire?  Who retires at 53years of age? The common phenomenon with public workers is that you are set to retire early to take a pension, then you can go on to double and even triple dip into public taxpayer monies even more.  Then you are set to buy that mansion in Bel Air.  Now, Mr. Wright will begin work with the LADWP this coming February, 2015 as their Senior Assistant General Manager.  Good Luck Dave! you’ll probably fit in with all the scandal with LADWP, god knows what you did in Riverside.  The scandal of course involved inaccurate customer rates and $40 million in revenues that were mysteriously spent by then General Manager Ron Nicols and the head of DWP’s biggest union.  Brian D’Arcy, union head continued to skew the issue of how public monies were spent in the form of non-profit trust.

n22i3k-wwright0712binary1098362dw2014LV

IS IT A TAX OR FEE? THE QUESTION DEFINED BY THE WASHINGTON POLICY CENTER.  The question arises many times the definition of a tax and the term “fee”, and is a fee a tool utilized by Cities to create revenue.  But are they doing this illegally or getting around the law by calling a tax a fee?

NEXT UP: ONE OF RPD’S AND RPOA’S  FINEST…AND WE HAVE TO THANK SERGIO FOR THIS ONE!

chris-lanzillo

 TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “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… 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

PHOTOWARROWPOINTINGTODIGESTERS

ARROW POINTS AT THE DIGESTERS CONTAINING PCB’S, HEAVY METALS AND VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS.  WAS THIS THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S DUMPING GROUNDS?

Untitled-2

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE REPORT BY KTLA CHANNEL FIVE

digester    sludge

WAS THIS THE SECRET DUMPING GROUND FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE?

img036     img037

(CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE) MORE PICS OF THE SLUDGE IN THE DIGESTER FROM JULY 2003

When the incident initially occurred, why was not Hazmat or the Fire Department called?  Why wasn’t above worker in a hazmat outfit?  According to a letter by Debbie Anderson, Associate Engineer, the Developer Chuck Cox, contacted approximately 7 days after the digester was breached, on City owned property.  He attempted, to single handedly take care of a problem that even a hired pumping company refused to take on.  Cox according to former Assistant City Manager Michael Beck, was on the property doing the grading work without a legal city permit!  The land was still City owned.  Who gets this treatment in the real world without knowing someone?  When then Assistant Public Works Director Tom Boyd first was told of the spill, he immediately directed Water Quality Control and Street Services staff to clean up the sludge spill.  Where was Public Works Director Siobhan Foster?  She was directly responsible for the Public Works Department.  The  City didn’t even know what they were dealing with and they called for staff employees not trained to clean up an unknown.  When an unknown is discovered, why wasn’t Haz Mat or the Fire Department called in?  In Debbie’s hand written notes, she states that Public Works told them (Cox) that they could do the work.  In addition she mentions that the locks on the property were changed, but they broke them.  When checking for an engineering license in the State of California, Siobhan Foster does not show she holds a license, but Boyd’s license does come up.  This answers a lot of questions.

letterdebbie                                     DEBBIES PERSON NOTES

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DOC                       CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW PERSONAL NOTES

Note to mention the threatening letter by Chuck Cox’s Lawyer toward KTLA Channel 5’s Kacey Montoya.

COXLAWYERLETTER

LETTER_TO_KTLA CHANNEL 5’S KACEY_MONTOYA_RE_FORMER_RIVERSIDE_AGRICULTURAL_PARK (CLICK THIS LINK)

The problem with this law firm of Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP they didn’t give any supporting evidence as to their position.  This is just the tip of the ice berg folks there is still more to come that implicates the City of Riverside with a cover up!  According to the below document PCB-1248 was 98.6 times the acceptable rate.

img034

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT OF SLUDGE RESULTS

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

KTLA

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE KTLA REPORT ON THE AG PARK DEVELOPMENT

What is different between this KTLA news story and the one in the Press Enterprise, can you tell the difference?  The following story came out September 6th in the PE under the title Riverside: Contaminated Site Could See Homes in 2014.

cancerclusterpic

CLICK THIS LINK FOR INFO ON CANCER CLUSTERS FROM THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE

Untitled-2

THE AG PARK ALSO KNOWN AS THE AGRICULTURAL PARK (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

agPARKTWO

THE SIGN STATES IF YOU SEE DUST CALL BRAD VERNACI, IF NO RESPONSE IS RECIEVED, CALL THE AQMD (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE).

IMG_0586TWO      IMG_0587TWO

MANY OF THE SIGNS ARE PAINTED OVER, WE FOUND ONE WHICH WAS CLEAR OF ANY DEFECT, BUT WAS FROM A FENCING AREA HUNCHED OVER ON CREST AVENUE.  THE SIGN STATES “THIS AREA CONTAINS CHEMICALS KNOWN TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO CAUSE CANCER, BIRTH DEFECTS, OR OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HARM.”  CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SEC. 25249.12 (CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE).

AGPARKTHREE

AG PARK PHOTO (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE).

Some people will do anything for a profit. Chuck Cox is one of them. The people who already live there are sick and getting cancer. The people moving onto this toxic dump site need to be informed before they buy. The Press Enterprise who is aligned with city officials on this project continue to misinform the public, and continue to refuse to report actual residential stories of the residents who live there and are getting sick and dying of cancer.  – Donald Herman Collins Gallegos, Commenter on the PE

When the incident initially occurred, why was not Hazmat or the Fire Department called?  Why wasn’t the clean up crew suited properly as required by hazmat?  According to a letter by Debbie Anderson, Associate Engineer, the Developer Chuck Cox, contacted approximately 7 days after the digester was breached, on City owned property.  He attempted, to single handedly take care of a problem that even a hired pumping company refused to take on.  Cox according to former Assistant City Manager Michael Beck, was on the property doing the grading work without a legal city permit!  The land was still City owned.  Who gets this treatment in the real world without knowing someone?  When then Assistant Public Works Director Tom Boyd first was told of the spill, he immediately directed Water Quality Control and Street Services staff to clean up the sludge spill.  Where was Public Works Director Siobhan Foster?  She was directly responsible for the Public Works Department.  The  City didn’t even know what they were dealing with and they called for staff employees not trained to clean up an unknown.  When an unknown is discovered, why wasn’t Hazmat or the Fire Department called in?  In Debbie’s hand written notes, she states that Public Works told them (Cox) that they could do the work.  In addition she mentions that the locks on the property were changed, but they broke them.  When checking for an engineering license in the State of California, Siobhan Foster does not show she holds a license, but Boyd’s license does come up.  This answers a lot of questions.

letterdebbie                                     DEBBIES PERSON NOTES

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DOC                       CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW PERSONAL NOTES

CITY MANAGER SPENDING CAPS:  Back in 2004 it use to be a maximum of $25,000 that the City Manager could spend per item without City Council approval.  When City Manager Brad Hudson was hired, things changed, the maximum increased to $50,000.  With that in mind, this City Manager, Hudson, with a criminal record in credit card fraud at a young age, spent in the neighborhood of $27 million per year!  The abuse was seen recently with one of Hudson’s hires from the County of Riverside, Scott Barber when he spent in excess of $200K of taxpayer monies to ensure financial leverage for himself within the politics of Riverside.  We continue to ask that Barber was unable to “ferret” out the financial complexities necessary that would not burden the residents of the City of Riverside and their children in the next 30 years. But in turn, he attempted to “strong arm” the taxpayer for his own financial gain, by a claim against the taxpayer.  His time as City Manager was nothing more than an attempt for financial gain at the expense of the taxpayer.

SBlg

CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER, ATTEMPTING TO ‘FERRET’ OUT COMPLEXITIES WITHIN RIVERSIDE POLITICS…

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 BELIEVE THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN NOW, SINCE GREG SKIPPED TOWN TO THE COUNTY)… 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 TOXIC DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

 aerialB-housing-developmenta

WE WERE TOLD THEY ONLY GLOW AT NIGHT..

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

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

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

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

memoone     memotwo     memothree

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL MEMO WITH ANALYTICAL CONTAMINANT RESULTS

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

factsheet

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL FACT SHEET

When the incident initially occurred, why was not Hazmat or the Fire Department called?  Why wasn’t the clean up crew suited properly as required by hazmat?  According to a letter by Debbie Anderson, Associate Engineer, the Developer Chuck Cox, contacted approximately 7 days after the digester was breached, on City owned property.  He attempted, to single handedly take care of a problem that even a hired pumping company refused to take on.  Cox according to former Assistant City Manager Michael Beck, was on the property doing the grading work without a legal city permit!  The land was still City owned.  Who gets this treatment in the real world without knowing someone?  When then Assistant Public Works Director Tom Boyd first was told of the spill, he immediately directed Water Quality Control and Street Services staff to clean up the sludge spill.  Where was Public Works Director Siobhan Foster?  She was directly responsible for the Public Works Department.  The  City didn’t even know what they were dealing with and they called for staff employees not trained to clean up an unknown.  When an unknown is discovered, why wasn’t Hazmat or the Fire Department called in?  In Debbie’s hand written notes, she states that Public Works told them (Cox) that they could do the grading work without a permit!  In addition she mentions that the locks on the property were changed, but they broke them.  When checking for an engineering license in the State of California, Siobhan Foster does not show she holds a license, but Boyd’s license does come up.  This answers a lot of questions in the sense if Foster and of course Beck really knew what they were doing.

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

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

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

poundingx

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

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

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

clownpriamos

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

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

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

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

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

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

Letitia Pepper

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

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

Brown Act Primer: Closed Sessions

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

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

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

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

brian smith         aureliomelendrez

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

June 17, 2014 City Council: Public

Brian Smith, RPOA President

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Aurelio Melendrez

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

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

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

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

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

melendrez1A

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

MS

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

hillmailer

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

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

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

BARBER

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

Pu1T0UfvSGJyBBMf-r3kE2dJ-d6fbR2ktzstZ2nkWjkh1QUhkDIc0xkOsbm-1VNCfVrccqA5V7pcE74BVoRrQo

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brian C Smith

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

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

Hi Brian,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Again, thank-you for contacting us.

All the best,  Javier Moreno

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

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

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

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

Letitia E. Pepper

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DENIAL LETTER

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

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

CLICK LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW WHOLE DOCUMENT

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE VIDEO

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

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

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

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DOCUMENT

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL COMPLAINT

EXCERPTS FROM THE COMPLAINT

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

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

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

     

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

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

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

LETTER WRITTEN BY STERLING TO THE SECURTIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

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

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW

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

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

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

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

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

Related Links to Stories in this TMC Blog:

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

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

Fired Employee Alleges City Officials Awarded Millions in Contracts Without Bid

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

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

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

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

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

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

 CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE YOUTUBE INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL DOCUMENT

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

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

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

                                 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A contradiction in terms?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

          

WILL THE REAL JUDGE RIEMER PLEASE STAND UP?

WAS THE RIEMER FAMILY TRUCKSTER PACKED AND READY TO GO?

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

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

    

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL DOCUMENT

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

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

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

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

4. The City provides all janitorial services.

5. The City will pay all utilities.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No doubt, Interum Public Works Director Tom Boyd maybe the focus of the John Chiang’s auditing teams hard lined questions.  and no doubt, former Public Works Director Siobhan Foster is also looking from the sidelines after leaving her Riverside position in a rush for the same position for the City of Pasadena, a much furthercommute away from home.  Did she know anything of the second coming?

DON’T MISS CANDIDATE FOR MAYOR,  DVONNE PITRUZELLO AND SELF APPOINTED CITY AUDITOR VIVIAN MORENO WILL BE GIVING CITY COUNCIL A MATH LESSON!   FORMER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RAYCHELE STERLING WILL BE TALKING ABOUT HOW HUMAN RESOURCES TERRORIZES THEIR EMPLOYEES BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN PARANOIA.   TONIGHT AT 6:30 PM!

                                              

CLICK LINK TO VIEW FULL VERSION         CLICK LINK TO VIEW PAYMENT SCHEDULE

 Item #2 is a big concern with the taxpaying residents of the City of Riverside.  The city doesn’t have all the money for the park, it therefore will be encumbering our six of the taxpayer fire stations for collateral against a $4 million dollar loan.  The six are as follows: Fire Station 2- Arlington, Fire Station 3- Magnolia Center, Fire Station 4- University, Fire Station 8- La Sierra, Fire Station 11-Orange Crest , and Fire Station 12- La Sierra South.  The city not to long ago encumbered Fire Station 13- Sycamore Canyon, Fire Station 14- Canyon Crest and two libraries: Casa Blanca and Arlington to use as collateral for monies that found it’s way to the devlopers of the Hyatt Hotel.  Now regarding the six fire stations, the finance company, Pinnacle Public Finance, Inc., states that the aggregate value of the fire statios is valued slightly over $4 million, and that is the reason for the need of six stations.  I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but if you divide $4 million by 6 you get $666,666.66.  A possible sign or just a coincidence? Regardless, the median value of each fire station.  Pinnacle Public Finance must feel their is risk with this loan to the city, because sources state that the actual cost to build a fire station can run from $9 to $10 million.  The estimated cost to build the Downtown Fire Station #1,  is $11,246,872.00.   Fire Station #14-Canyon Crest which was completed in 2007 costed $4,812,684.00 for one fire station , which contradicts the assessment of 4 million for all six.  Is anybody out there experienceing a conniption fit just yet?

                                                     

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL DOCUMENT           CLICK THE LINK TO VIEW ORIGINAL SITE

So, are we placing approximately $24,000,000.00 to $50,000,000.00 in fire stations for a $4,000,000.00 loan?  More salt on the wound, the city’s finance team for this project includes Best, Best & Krieger.  Now when this is all over, we will probably have to encumber another 6 fire stations (if we have any left) to pay their bill, since it’s the cities practice not to use contracts with them.  Mad yet?  The cities annual payment or debt cost will be close to $468,000.00 per year from the General Fund for 10 years.  At the end of that 10 years the city will have paid out $671,150.40 in interest alone.  That means that could effect police or fire department payroll.  But it must not matter in lieu of the mayor’s staff receiving 15% raises.  Now nothing is free, so will the city make up the slack in higher taxes, or revenue enhancers such as service or violation fees?  Further, Chief Financial Officer Paul Sundeen’s name is not on any of these documents!  By the way where is Paul!

So far it is estimated that Tequesquite Park will cost $10.1 million.  The city already had $2 million to cover the design cost and environmental  and conservation fees, The other $4.1 million would come from municipal debt  that the city issued in 2008.  Therefore, $4 million is needed to complete the project, which will be paid back over a term of 10 years.  In terms of the next 10 years, the total cost from the City’s General Fund each year will be $804,000.00   That’s the cost of park maintenance $336,000 plus the loan payment including interest of $468,000.00

ITEM #20, ITEMS #21 and ITEM #22, the initiations of  Landscape Maintenance Districts, where by an annual process of leyving special assessments pertaining to landscape maintenance.  This cost of maintaining landscaping will assessed to property owners, as if you don’t have enough taxes to worry about.  Dear City of Riveside, don’t we already pay for landscape maintenance in the form of property taxes?  Another example of over taxation or double taxation without representation..  But this whole process brings back an old city favorite Albert Webb.  Back in 2008, the Albert Webb company was paid 12 seperate payouts all in one day.  Question abound, regarding this event.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

HOLDING TRUE TO HIS MISSION STATEMENT: The mission of the City Attorney’s Office is to provide excellent and ethical legal advice, effective legal representation, and other quality legal services for the City Council, City officers, and City employees in order that they may lawfully attain the City Council’s goals and other department program outcomes without undue risk to the City?  DO YOU SEE TAXPAYER OR CITIZEN OF THE RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY MENTIONED? AFTERALL, IF YOU ARE PAYING THE BILL SHOULDN’T YOU, THE TAXPAYER,  BE PROTECTED?

WHO WILL BE HIDING BEHIND THE COMPUTER NEXT WHEN JOHN CHIANG’S AUDITING?  CLICK ON THIS LINK FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS.   CALL YOUR LOCAL ELECTED COUNCIL PERSON AND THE MAYOR AND REQUEST THAT THEY COMPLY FULLY WITH THE CONTROLLERS WISHES.  THIS CITY OF RIVERSIDE NEEDS TRANSPARENCY IN THE BOOKS, AND WITH A NEW CITY MANAGER, SCOTT BARBER THS CAN BE ATTAINED.

“OK, ONE MORE TIME, YOU SAY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE DID WHAT”?

 TWO WEEKS AGO AT CITY COUNCIL MARCH 6, 2012:

Evening session was attended by Tom Boyd Interium Public Works Director, no sign of Paul Sundeen since he was last seen leaving mid day from city hall. Councilman Steve Adams was not seen either. TMC had their protest signs with sticks attached to them, some of them pointed.  A plains clothes officer was called in by City Attorney Gregory Priamos. When the officer approached Gregory, Gregory said  “over there”!  The plain clothes officer looked over to us and went to the back of City Council Hall.  As the group was leaving and exiting the hall, he later told our group that he was told by Gregory to come in an remove the protesters, because some of the signs had points. That would be considered a “weapon”. In this officers opinion he was just not going to do that. Possibly because it’s appearance was “frivolous”, much as some of Gregory’s law suits.  In particular, Ms. Doreen Johnson. Evidently, the Johnson’s own a commercial building and leased property to someone who opened a marijuana dispensary and was then closed and a law suit ensued with their name on it.

  

It appears if anyone is doing drug business on a property you own, they the feds can take it away from you under asset forfeiture.  Others our stating that Ms. Johnson’s property is coincidently across the street from a developers property that has done many projects for the city.  But these projects have been in questioned regarding their public benefit.  Originally, the true intentions of ‘asset forfeiture laws’ were to hit drug dealers by taking their expensive homes, pimped out vehicles, jewelry and luxury items attained and purchased with drug monies etc.  This would occur after their arrest.  It currently appears the City Attorney is stretching it to include innocent property owners.  Whats really egregious is that they are using three BB&K attorney’s at taxpayer expense, with a cost of $300 to $400 an hour each to go against this business owner.  According to Johnson, she was voted on by Priamos and the City as a public nuisance, violating zoning codes, and as she states has been slandered as ‘drug dealer’.  Even though the City Attorney serves at the pleasure of the City Council and the Mayor, nothing is said.  Does our leadership care or even know the laws?  Or our just banking that the advice given by city attorney Gregory Primos is solid and true?  Does our leadership even have the background to contradict him?   So under Federal asset forfeiture law,even if you loan your car to a friend, and that friend makes a drug deal with the use of your vehicle, they can take your vehicle. It’s a true stretch from the original intentions but something the Johnson’s should inquire with the State Attorney General or Federal Department of Justice. Where was Gregory when some of the City Council and Management were driving illegal cold plate vehicles, or where illegal gun sales were occurring, or when concealed weapons permits were being fraudulently being applied for with a city hall address?  Did Gregory call the Feds?  Or where by the attempted cover up of the Chief Russell Leach case.  Where many at City Hall used their personal cell phones for communication whereby could not be subpoenaed, therefore did not exist.  The question everyone is asking is why does Gregory want to beat everybody up?

Afternoon session, not in attendance was Tom Boyd, and again Councilman Steve Adams and Chief Financial Officer Paul Sundeen.  The second day of the two month audit must be tumultuous. The Council Arena didn’t really get heated until the Chief of Police Sergio Diaz stepped in and began pointing fingers and speaking out at those those he didn’t like.  Pointing and looking at Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzello he exclaimed, “I don’ t like her”, and pointed to others with signs, “and any of them”.  Looked back at Pitruzello, “you said I wasn’t qualified”.  Ok, it is a public forum, but we weren’t sure if the good ol chief was acting in police mode or in private citizen mode.  Then he faced off with Activist Karen Wright, not once but twice, he left and then came back and he wouldn’t stop. “You’re a horrible person”, “Your disrespectful” and the coup de ta “You hate the police”!  Ooops..  Assistant Chief Chris Vicino even appeared to be trying to get the chiefs attention for the unchiefly behavior, “Hey Chief”! “Chief”!    Many around were asking who the man in the suit was. “He’s the chief of police”… “What, you’re kidding”?   Well when I came up to Karen, she was visually shaken as many in the room were at this display. She of course did not know how to respond to the Chief, and she said she didn’t ever meant any disrespect to fallen officer Ryan Bonaminio or his family, as she indicated.  Besides the chief, there were others who verbally attacked her. Have we forgotten what this country is all about?  Is Riverside a microcosm of beliefs predating 2012?  Have we forgotten what our forefathers warned us about?  Afterall they were considered Kooks and Traitors. Questions many are secretly asking about our Chief, if he has the ability or is he truly qualified with the skills to create a unifying and cohesive support and alliance between the police and the community?  Will the chief receive a letter from Gregory regarding his behavior at City Council Meetings as many others have for less of the behavior seen?  A Strategic Plan submitted to the council two years to late and nothing said regarding the lateness from the mayor or city council?  Do any of them care when the whole community is watching?  What message does this send to our community from our leaders?

In Public comment, Kevin Dawson stated that the comments the Chief made were not in line with the preamble of the city charter.  We want people to participate in city government. I’ve heard of other incidents where similar comments were made and I think they were inappropriate, and not in line with a leadership role.  People look at the Chief for guidance.. Kevin also mentioned since the chief is in a leadership role, that maybe the City Manager should have a conversation with him, and I think he owes Karen Wright an apology.  Both current City Manager Scott Barber and Chief of Police were brought in by Former City Manager Brad Hudson, whereby much of his activities have been in question.

NOT SURE WHERE THE CHIEF GETS HIS POLITICS ON SPEECH, BUT NEEDS TO READ THIS, I’M SURE HE PASSES IT DAILY..

Self appointed auditor, Vivian Moreno stated that one of things that the chief discussed in his description of his strategic plan was the enthusiasm and professionalism of the police department, there was nothing professional about the way he accosted Karen Wright when she was exercising her right to free speech.  You have a monument on City Hall and there is a quote of Benjamin Franklin that talks about free speech.  I’m sure that everyone would agree that everyone has the right to free speech.  Our we all civilized in this room except the Chief?  He also said that they (police) were a force of good.  I don’t think what he had to say was good for her,(Karen Wright).  He also stated something really interesting, he stated that the police don’t lie, cheat or steal..  There was $35,000.00 that was given to Connie Leach (former wife of chief Russ Leach) for the Multi Cultural Youth Festival from Police Asset Forfeiture, what about that? There was the receipts from the the Baker to Las Vegas Run for hotels, shoes, luches, dinners, what about that? …and Gregory Priamos, police asset forfeiture will now collect money from a poor woman (Ms. Doreen Johnson), you are now going to take her property because she rented it to someone undesirable..  I think there is no leadership in management, and I think there are a lot of problems with this city council and you better wake up!

CURRENTLY IN THE NEWS IS HOW PENSIONS RULES ARE NOW DISQUALIFYING SOME RETIRED WORKERS IN THIS NEW PE STORY.  IN OTHER WORDS THE PRACTICE OF DOUBLE DIPPING.  IN THIS PUBLIC DOCUMENT THEIR ARE WHO WERE PAID $31,875.00 FOR REDLIGHT CAMERA REVIEW, ONE OF THEM IS CITY COUNCILMAN’S STEVE ADAMS BROTHER, RON ADAMS.

 OTHERS SUCH AS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PAUL SUNDEEN, WHO WAS BROUGHT OUT FROM RETIREMENT, TO BE EMPLOYED ON A PART TIME BASIS WITH THE CITY OF RIVERIDE, ACCORDING TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS IS CONSIDERED NULL AND VOID.  CURRENTLY, SUNDEEN WAS PLACED ON CONTRACT.  THE QUESTION PERCOLATING IS CAN HE EVEN BE PLACED ON CONTRACT TO CONTINUE WORKING FOR THE CITY?

DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP WEBSITE A THREAT? VIRAL INFESTED?  CAME ACROSS THE FOLLOWING:  “WEB SITES RATED “CAUTION” MAY HAVE A SMALL NUMBER OF THREATS AND ANNOYANCES, BUT ARE NOT CONSIDERED DANGEROUS ENOUGH TO WARRANT A RED “WARNING”.  PROCEED WITH CAUTION”.  IS THIS A MESSAGE TO COMMUNITY BUSINESS’S REGARDING THE LEGACY OF DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP?

 

UPDATE: 3:00 PM CITY COUNCIL:  PUBLIC SPEAKER REBECCA LUDWIG PASSESS 3 MINUTE MARK, ALMOST GETS A POLICE ESCORT OUT OF COUNCIL CHAMBERS.  THE CALL, POSSIBLY CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS.  IT APPEARS THAT MAYOR PRO TEMPT PAUL DAVIS LOOKED AT PRIAMOS, THEN TWO POLICE OFFICERS WALKED DOWN THE HALL WAY.  DOES PRIAMOS HAVE A POLICE BUTTON UNDER HIS TABLE?

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… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREG ABOUT THAT ONE… 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 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 731 other followers