Archive for October, 2011

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: WAS THAT BRAD? OR WAS IT JUST MY IMAGINATION?

Posted: October 9, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,
2

CLICK ON THE PIC FOR THE HD EFFECT!

Just recently Riverside has had a rash of Brad Hudson sightings around town. Did he actually leave, or is he visiting or is he commuting?  The question appears if he has left his local residences in Riverside and the desert, to move to Sacramento.   Or is he doing an Arnold Schwarzenegger and commuting by plane?  The question now becomes did he really leave his residence in the City of Riverside or did he not?  If he didn’t, why was is in a hurry to leave his high paying position with the City of Riverside, to receive a lesser paying one 450 miles north?  Was it his discretionary spending allowance of $50K a pop that ended with him spending approxiamtely $29 million several years?  When brought to the council attention it  dropped to $1 million.  Did the council know he was spending $29 million a year?  Was it the deals he made? Are there skeletons and bodies of information buried in the halls, walls and basement of the city yet to be discovered?  He left the City of Riverside, that’s for sure, but didn’t quite leave town yet? That leaves a serious question mark!  At this point, it still needs further investigating, otherwise will have to place it with the file of Elvis sightings.  We can only guess that he is adjusting and assimilating well to his surroundings in good ol’ Sac Town….

KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!   TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND THAT’S ALL WE’RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!

SEND YOUR BRAD HUDSON SIGHTINGS TO THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM    COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED!

TMC HERO’S OF THE MONTH: OCTOBER 2011: WE SALUTE PULITZER PRIZE WRITER’S RUBEN VIVES & JEFF GOTTLIEB!

Posted: October 9, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

The reporting team  and Pulitzer Prize Winners for Public Service, led by Ruben Vives and Jeff Gottlieb, was hailed for “Breach of Faith,” which exposed the deep seated  municipal corruption in the city of Bell, California, and displayed the  excessive compensation packages received by city officials.  In the Los Angeles suburb of 36,000, city manager Robert Rizzo had received annual compensation of $1.5 million in salary and benefits, the reports showed, with similar pay packages going to the police chief and other city administrators.  The Times reporters uncovered the malfeasance while investigating a separate story in the neighboring city of Maywood.  Vives and Gottlieb described the story behind the coverage in an August event at USC Annenberg. (Watch the video here).  In the official award citation, the panel of judges called the team’s work “the finest tradition of shoe-leather investigative reporting,” and hailed the group for their service to the public.  Eight former and current city officials have been arrested in the aftermath of the scandal, and the state controller’s office has ordered municipalities around California to post the salaries of officials on the Internet.  On a side note Jeff Gottleib was a reporter for the Riverside Press Enterprise for about thirty years. We can sure use him now.

KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” BLOG SITE!   TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND THAT’S ALL WE’RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE FOR YOUR SUPPORT!  COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED!

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: IT MAY BE RATS FOR THE MAYOR, BUT IT’S A DOG’S DAY IN RIVERSIDE WHEN NAMING CITY HALL!

Posted: October 5, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
7

CLICK ON THE PICK FOR THE HD EXPERIENCE!

The story gets better all the time.  It appears as if there was a private committee headed by the ring leader, Jack Clark, a partner in litigation for BB&K, a firm which receives millions in taxpayer money for their legal advice to the city and not to forget the recently signed assumption of their lease with the city.  This self appointed private committee included recognizable names with long titles, as Ex-City of Riverside Manager Brad Hudson, Private Developer Mark Rubin, Yeager Construction Companies Jack Yeager, Senior VP of The Entrepreneurial Corporate Group which owns the Mission Inn Ted Weggeland , City of Riverside Chief of Staff Kristin Tillquist, Riverside County Fair Housing Executive Director Rose Mayes, President/CEO Riverside Chamber of Commerce Cindy Roth, Roth Carney Law Firm Partner Jane Carney, Riverside County Superior Court Judge Roger Luebs, Director of Center for Philanthropy La Sierra University Dr. Jim Erickson, Retired Superintendent Alford Unified School District Dr. Damon Castillo, RUSD School Board Kathy Allavie.  The majority of these people in one way or another have benefited from City Hall and/or have had their palms financially greased by the taxpayer.   If you look at the names they all have some connection with the mayor in terms of contracts, associations, employment by the city etc.  Councilman Paul Davis didn’t know this committee existed till just recently, and asked for an extension to hear out his constituents of which he has received 15 email concerns.  Nancy Hart also had reservations as to the appropriateness of city hall being named by the current mayor.  Usually this is an honor attributed to someone who passed on.  But more egregious, the community was not invited to be part of this process.  Again a culture of arrogance and narcissism.  Councilmen Mike Gardner and Andy Melendrez had no reservations in voting for the naming of City Hall after the mayor.  Steve Adams couldn’t contain himself, he had no problem voting for him right that instant and just push the proclamation through.  Though, he consider Councilman Paul Davis and Councilwomen Nancy Hart’s reservations on the vote and the need for 2 weeks as “confusion”.  But again felt this decision as deserving of nothing more that than a unanimous vote by the whole council when they returned back in two weeks, and this he believed the mayor wouldn’t have wanted it any other way.   Councilman Andy Melendrez Asked Councilman Paul Davis and Councilwoman Nancy Hart what exactly they would be looking at in the next two weeks from their constituents.  This struck me  as an oxymoron and quite obvious, City Hall is owned by the community of Riverside, not by the few councilpeople and a private committee. Have we all forgotten this simple premise?  Let’s not forget that BB&K receives millions of dollars from Riverside taxpayers for legal advice to the city and city attorney’s office.  Conflict of interest?  A gift back to the mayor for his BB&K support?   A private committee was formed without imput from the community at large on the issue of City Hall being named, “The Ron Loveridge Riverside City Hall.”   Or should we call it the “Best Best & Krieger Riverside City Hall”?  Since we do so much business with them, I’m surprise Council hasn’t voted to give them a floor at City Hall.   But it all appears the initiation of the naming was more than likely instigated by Councilmen Chris Mac Carthur and William “Rusty” Bailey, both of whose families have been in existence in Riverside for generations and have been part of the fabric of Riverside politics.  Speakers on this issue were vehemently concerned.  Some speakers suggested other names should be considered, names which embody Riverside, such as Eliza Tibbets, John Wesley North or even Frank Miller.  Others stated that Ron is getting paid to do the work of the people.  As our forefathers of this country stated, no one should be elevated to level of king for doing the work of the people.  Now, if Ron did the work of the people and didn’t get paid for doing it for his 30 plus years, I would have no problem voting for Ron today either. This would reflect a sacrifice and a deep passion for the community he served, and it should be that way getting paid. But people in the community also work 30 or 40 years in a job without anyone naming a building after them, and there job is just as important as the mayor’s.  Names are for extraordinary circumstances.  My opinion is that Rin Tin Tin personifies a historical facet of the City of Riverside.  The dog was loyal, honorable, ardent, trustworthy, trust worthy and true.  Something that simply does not personify Mayor Ron Loveridge as someone who was honorable, the ugly truth of the matter he wasn’t.  The establishment kept his behavior under wraps.   It appears this has all gone to the dogs, but the entity I believe embodies Riverside and the name I would use on the walls of city hall would be an icon Riverside keeps close to their heart, therefore, “The Rin Tin Tin Riverside City Hall”.

UPDATE: 10/17/2011: COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS CHANGING HIS TUNE? “IT’S NOT THE TIME TO CONSIDER CHANGE”.  IN REFERENCE TO THE CITY HALL BEING NAMED AFTER MAYOR RON LOVERIDGE.  ADAMS NOW BELIEVES THE NAMING OF CITY HALL NEEDS TO GO TO THE PEOPLE, AND A PRIVATE INDEPENDENT COMMITTEE DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THAT CALL.  PLAYING POLITICS DURING ELECTION TIME?

UPDATE:10/23/2011: PRESS ENTERPRISE REPORTS CITY HALL NAME CHANGE ON HOLD!

KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” BLOG SITE!   TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND THAT’S ALL WE’RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE…  AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: TMC CONTINUES TO REQUEST A FORENSIC AUDIT OF THE CURRENT CITY HALL BOOKS!

Posted: October 4, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,
1

Councilmen Chris Mac Carthur and William R. Bailey III, recommending Riverside City Hall be named “The Ronald O. Loveridge Riverside City Hall”?  Many are asking, “What’s in it for those two”?  “The Ronald O. Loveridge Riverside City Hall”, a lot of words to go on one wall, or should it be named our “Riverside City Hall of Debt”?  Less words, better description.  Debt, the true unfortunate legacy which will remain for many unprecedented years on the backs of local Riversidian’s.  (Item #8).

In closed session at 3:00pm, (Item #5).  This is all about fringe benefits, salaries and the unions. This is a good reason that the City Charter needs to be modified, and whereby items as this should be in open session to be scrutinized by the public.  It’s no secret that 70% to 80% of a cities budget goes to payroll, and these closed door sessions leave an open door to abuse, at taxpayer expense.

(Item #30).  An agreement was made with Riverside City College District and the City of Riverside for the purchase of #100 parking stalls within The Fox Entertainment Plaza.  The one problem with this, The Fox Entertainment Plaza is a redevelopment project.  According to the state order on the suspension of redevelopment, cities are forbidden to enter into any new redevelopment contracts, otherwise, we have a violation.

WHO WILL BE HIDING BEHIND THE COMPUTER NEXT WHEN THE AUDITOR COMES ASKING QUESTIONS? CHECK BACK WEEKLY…THAT IS, EVERY CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY! WE’LL EVEN PROVIDE THE DIRECT LINK SO YOU CAN CHECK THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. CALL YOUR LOCAL ELECTED COUNCIL PERSON AND THE MAYOR AND REQUEST THAT A FORENSIC AUDIT BE DONE BY STATE CONTROLLER JOHN CHIANG OF THE CITY HALL BOOKS.   WITH A NEW INTERIM CITY MANAGER, SCOTT BARBER, THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE NEEDS BASELINE NUMBER AS DONE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN ORDER TO ASSURE BALANCED NUMBERS AND TO CLEAR POSSIBLE DISCREPANCIES OF THE GENERAL LEDGER BOOKS. IF THERE IS NOTHING TO HIDE, THE NUMBERS WILL ALWAYS COME UP RIGHT! 

THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT, NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND THAT’S ALL TMC HAS TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE FOR NOW…

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE ROLE PLAY?

Posted: October 3, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,
2

The City of Riverside Charter requires that it’s charter be reviewed every eight years in order to evaluate and make to changes to the current charter.   The Charter was originally enacted and filed with the Secretary of State January 5, 2007.   Several Community meeting are held which allows community to apply imput and recommendations.  If they actually will, it is up to the Charter Review Committee to bring it to the Council, whereby they will decide.  Charter Review Committee are made up of 15 members. As the Charter currently exist, the language and constructs remain vague.  Is it effective? Or just mass of motionless moves which has no effectiveness at all.  Afterall, the city council make the final decisions.  City Council choose the specific participants of the committee, even it appears to cross the lines of favoritism.  Would you choose a merchant whom leases a city own building, would that be conflict  of interest, would you choose an independent contractor whom is contracted with the city for services, would you choose a member of the local paper to be part of a committee, would you choose a member of a prestigious local law firm evidently being paid for services by the city with no contract?  Could we call these activities conflict of interest.  I found it quite remarkable that the City would, from a multitude of applicants, choose Michelle Ouellette, a member of the Best Best & Krieger where millions of taxpayer dollars are spent for outside legal advise to the city.  Conflict of Interest, I would have to say yes.  The Charter Committee use to be made up of real people, real residents of the community.  What happened City of Riverside?  Your Citizen’s would like to know…

The following are issues with the charter which have been brought up by the community as changes necessary in order that the language will not be so vague, and to bring clarity and preciseness to the City Charter.

  1. Contracts an Leases: Guidelines on to how the City of Riverside should enforce signed agreements.
  2. Decrease in the City Manager’s discretionary spending from $50K to $25K, where it was before Brad Hudson came on board. In one year 28 million was spent, in another year 29 million was spent, this without the oversight of the city council.  Once the citizen request was made for an accounting of the discretionary fund, it suddeenly went down to 1 million.
  3. Citizens shall have the right to remove an item form the consent calendar at City Council meetings.
  4. Section 405, Mayor Pro Temp, guidelines to to this position as it stands, appears to be abused.
  5. Part time to Full time positions of the council. The Council needs to be full time in order to be effective.  The thought behind this is that there would be more time to attend the chicken house.
    This specifically to reduce the power of the City Manager, because full responsibility for actions are ultimately that of the Council.
  6. Nepotism, Section 709.  Again, self explanatory, and yes, part of the culture of City Hall. Clarification on personal relationships between employee’s, and to revisit the personal relationships of representatives and those who receive contracts.  For example, why is Councilman Steve Adam’s brother employeed in Public Works?
  7. Contradiction of State Statutes.  The city charter directly contradicts the state for general government services by tax.
  8. Citizen Audit Committee- an oversight committee which prepares a separate, independent and non-biased review of City expenditures.
  9. Enforcing violations of the charter.  Over the years Council, Mayor and others have allegedley violated the charter with no repercussions.  The need for defining language to enforce violations.  Has the defining language been purposely overlooked?
  10. The Finance Department to be a separate and independent department from the City Manager Department.  There is no reason that the two should be intermingled.
  11. Check Warrants, the city check book, common practice to bring the books of current expenditures to city council meeting for viewing by the public.  Further, what is the criteria for approving an expenditure?
  12. Hiring outside council, such as BB&K, should not be common practice.  The City Attorney’s office should be able to handle the load, if not, the city attorney and the department should be reviewed.
  13. Code of Ethics Complaints.  The issue of how complain dealt with.  The criticism is that complaints are circumvented by the City Attorney’s office, and in doing so, never reach the council for review. Therefore the denial of due process come into play.
  14. Best, Best & Krieger contracts.  It appears that all contracts are oral contracts and no hard contracts with this particular firm exist.  Though an excess in millions of dollars have been paid out to this firm with no pertinent or rational explaination to the taxpayer.
  15. Environmental Protection clause-that the city continues its efforts toward being a Green City.
  16. Design and Review Committee.  The need to bring them back to the forefront, so that Downtown Main Street Riverside stops looking like Main Street Moreno Valley.
  17. Budget and Review Committee- a committee to review expenditures.
  18. Measure C Committee- a committee of oversight and to prevent abuse.
  19. Company Restrictions- such as unions and contractor limitations in order to prevent the inference of preferential treatment as in contracts etc.
  20. Closed Door City Council Sessions- defining language as to what constitutes a discussion item to be in a closed door session without public imput.

In an atmosphere of government distrust, the question that many in the community of Riverside our asking, will there imput make any difference? Is the whole process a formality by government to give the community an illusionary appearance of community imput an transperancy? Or is it just simply a role play? Do we agree to disagree that no new changes are necessary will be made?  Is the committee a real reflection of the community, or for the selective few?

CITY CHARTER REVIEW MEETINGS: JANET GOESKE COMMUNITY CENTER, 5:30PM, TODAY OCTOBER 3, 2011.

THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT!  KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” BLOG SITE!   TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, YEP, WE SHOULD HAVE EXPECTED THAT, AND THAT’S ALL WE’RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE…

UPDATE: OCTOBER 3, 2011 CHARTER REVIEW MEETING, APPROXIMATELY HALF OF THE 15 MEMBER BECOME A NO SHOW? INCLUDING CONGRESSMAN CANDIDATE JOSE MEDINA, DAVID ST. PIERRE, DIANE MEDINA, PETER BENAVIDEZ ETC.  THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE IS A REVIEW COMMITTEE NOT A REFORM COMMITTEE AS STATED BY THOMAS P. EVANS CHAIR.  THE QUESTION IS, DOES THE COMMITTEE ACTUALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR CHANGE, OR IS ONLY A PERFORMANCE OF ACTION, WITH NO REAL ACTION?  INCESTUOUS? TELL US WHAT YOU THINK LEAVE US YOUR COMMENTS!

Newer Entries