CITY OF RIVERSIDE: SCANDALOUS: SEX AND THE CITY: CODE ENFORCEMENT: THE CULTURE OF SEXUAL FAVORS IN THE WORK PLACE.

Posted: January 12, 2016 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

SEXINTHECITY

CODE ENFORCEMENT: CLOSED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.. 5 CODE EMPLOYEES GONE!……………………………………………………………….By Vivian Moreno

In a Press Enterprise story written January 7, 2016, A Sexual Harassment lawsuit filed against the City of Riverside, Gary Merk, Paul Hooper, Chris Pullen, Caleb Enriquez, and Matthew Ramos. Hold onto your wallets people, this is a really, really big one.

(If they treated their co-workers with contempt, how do you think they treated the public dealing with the code enforcement claims they executed?  That could be a whole other issue for the City).

Sexual Harassment has been a constant problem through out the City of Riverside.  A Multi-Million Dollar Sexual Harassment Lawsuit has been filed against the City of Riverside, Merk, Hooper, Pullen, Enriquez, and Ramos.  The Payee…… The Taxpayer

I have been warning the leadership of Riverside for years and no one was listening…..

This was investigated (if you want to call it that), by the City three times.  All the problems reported by these women continued even after the investigations.  I have to ask, “Who was this investigated by?”  Was it Brenda Dietrich?  Rhonda Strout ( we all know about Rhonda aka Luxury Girl)? or was it Greg Priamos’ office?  Maybe it was Priamos’ favorite investigator, former Riverside Police Officer and golfing buddy Jeff Colopy?  What a joke!  We all know Colopy was told well before he spoke with anyone how these investigation needed to turn out.  I think Priamos’ standard line was “We need a favorable outcome.”  They were never serious about taking care of staff.  They were only serious about harassing and retaliating against anyone who dared to complain.

Code enforcement Manager, Gary Merk, supervisors Paul Hooper and Curtis Pullen, and code Officers Caleb Enriquez and Matthew Ramos, mysteriously “no longer work for the City.”  They all probably received a Tom DeSantis special – Collect a fat check for months on administrative leave and jump over to the next unsuspecting City.  Just more recycled City trash.

So, you might be asking yourself, “Who knew this was going on and who continued to let it happen?” EVERYONE!!!!  Including: Ron Loveridge, Brad Hudson, Belinda Graham, Deanna Larson, Tom Desantis, Scott Barber, Lee MacDougal, The Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, Cindy Roth, Mike Gardner, Andy Melendrez, Mike Soubrious, Paul Davis, Rusty Bailey, Chris MacArthur, Steve Adams, Nancy Hart, and Jim Perry just to name a few.  The Council knew that certain City Management was just a bunch of sexual predators.  You see, the culture of our alleged “leaders” is about covering up the problem instead of exposing it and correcting it so that it doesn’t happen again.  The leadership allows all these problems to fester and then blows up in their faces.  So, now we have yet another scandal.  A multi-million dollar one.

Who has to pay this multi-million dollar settlement?  You guessed it, the taxpayer!  So, open up your pockets and pay for all at City Hall to… GET OFF…. scott free… you voted for it!

You wonder why our streets and trees are unkempt and our main library looks like a dilapidated shack? Here’s why:  The GOOD OLE BOY FRAT CLUB located at your City Hall.  The culture welcomes sexual harassment and intimidation – retaliation of victims who attempt to follow the City’s own reporting protocol.  Who participated and who didn’t?  Just take a look at all the men and women that were promoted and not qualified for their jobs.  Everyone knows who really got screwed here – THE TAXPAYER.

The total cost of this claim to the TAX PAYER is probably about $4 to $5 million dollars.  The actual settlement will be about $2.5 to $3 million, PLUS all the outside legal costs.  Who know how high the cost is if you include the loss of productivity in the department.  Five Million dollars could have built a really nice library, probably fix all the potholes in the entire City and appropriately trim our neighborhood trees.  Kiss the money goodbye folks…..

Code Enforcement and the Police Department for years has been plagued with sexual harassment claims and settlements.  No one wanted to talk about this “TOUCHY” subject (pardon the pun) but me.  These problems in Code Enforcement were happening while former City Manager Scott Barber was the department head.  Scott Barber had his own indiscretions, if you know what I mean.  So, of course the then City Council rewarded him and promoted him to City Manager and we all know how that ended up.  In fact, many City Managers and Assistant City Managers participated in the GOOD OLE BOY FRAT CLUB.  They would take all the willing participants to conferences and then turn City business into “play dates” on the taxpayer’s dime.  Tom Desantis was always taking Bruni Macardo out to breakfast, lunch, and dinner DAILY.  Reiko Kerr and Gary Nolf (Riverside Public Utilities management staff) were always conveniently traveling at the same time.  What position do these women have now?  How fast did Belinda Graham climb the ladder of success and what has she cost the taxpayer for her incompetence and lack of qualifications?

I have been bringing the issue of sexual harassment up to the City Council for years.  All they did was try to discredit me. Again no one will be held accountable and it will all fall on the taxpayer’s back.  Well, I was right AGAIN.  That is what happens when you tell the TRUTH boys.  You should try it some time.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “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” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” 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
  1. Kevin B says:

    I am a male but have felt the dishonesty of Merk, Hopper, Davies and the City Attorney for not doing there job. Not following Code and holding back door meetings giving free passes to those who are part of the Riverside Illuminati. I hope they all go to jail. What are the chances ha

    • Traci Paynter says:

      Gary Merk and his department as well as other city government offices are all guilty of fraud, corruption, prejudice, discrimination, and misrepresentation of an being city elects. For 5 years I have sent in complaints to code enforcement, chris MacArthur, the mayor, and other city departments, as well as county and state about city and county ordinancs, civil and municipal codes not being enforced by gary merk and his department. We knew we were being ignored and still are due to we will not stop complaining and voicing our right to have these issues resolved. I did however get a hand delivered letter signed by gary merk, al zelinka, chris MacArthur threating jail time and or being sued due to my constant complaints-a scare tactic, DIDN’T WORK. The issue: the house across the street ftom my home, 9067 cleveland ave, riverside, 92503, code enforcement allowed/allows the property owners to live in an RV in a storage building, allows their family members to do so as well, allowed them to build a 2nd dwelling that is not up to code according to ricerside municipal code (2nd dwellings MUST MATCH primary house, it clearly does not, muni code 19.525.030 “O”) allows primary house to be rented out with owners living in RV, as well as allows the land on the property to be leased out to a menace farmer and his family horde (castellanos farms) who have caused traffic and noise disturbances 7am to 10pm sometimes 50 hours a week, disturbing our peace daily for over 5 years, in which ordinance 625 applies that the city of riverside is to enforce and has not done so even after 5 years of complaints with proof (photos, logs, and videos-all not good enough for enforcement so says merk, but he felt I sent enough for a threat). On top of all the activity, these farmers smoke while handling food while farming-city was informed about that as well with photo proof, and yet no enforcement. According to muni code for 2nd dwelling, if it doesn’t match it has to be removed or updated to match. According to the ordinance for farming, if noise/disturbances have been reported in the first 3 years operstions will be permanently stopped-I reported it over 5 years. My opinion, more corruption, MONEY. There must be money or even some kind or favor exchanged because the city muni code and ordinance are very clear, and for 5 yars of wending merk and the city of riverside no enforcement but a threat to me because I challenged them. Drive by, take a look, 9067 Cleveland ave, riverside, ca, 92503, 2nd dwelling down drive long driveway, farmers in field. Ask merk or the city why the laws, muni codes, and ordinances stated don’t apply to this property but does to everyone else.
      OH, this housebis for sale, but on loopnet, the city is allowing home oners, the heberts to try to sell it as commercial farming/commercial purpose property, not as a residential home as it is zoned as.

  2. […] CITY OF RIVERSIDE: SCANDALOUS: SEX AND THE CITY: […]

  3. Jeff Rice says:

    Why use “sexual favors” rather than “sexual harassment” in the title of the article? Was this to suggest there was a quid pro quo arrangement and not a problem with alleged sexist remarks made by male city employees in the code enforcement division ?

    • Jeff, Don’t know if there was in fact a quid pro quo arrangment in the big pot of soup of accusations. Some have suggested that, in our anonymous emails whom said to have first hand knowledge of the behavior going on in code, and in other city departments. I don’t believe we will ever hear the dirty detail, since it will never go to trial. Javier Moreno

  4. JoeM says:

    What are the names of the attorney’s that are representing those that are filing the lawsuit?

  5. airjackie says:

    Definition of Sexual Harassment

    The Fair Employment and Housing Act defines harassment because of sex as including sexual harassment, gender harassment, and harassment based on pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.

    The Fair Employment and Housing Commission regulations define sexual harassment as unwanted sexual advances, or visual, verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. This definition includes many forms of offensive behavior and includes gender-based harassment of a person of the same sex as the harasser. The following is a partial list of violations:

    Unwanted sexual advances
    Offering employment benefits in exchange for sexual favors
    Making or threatening reprisals after a negative response to sexual advances
    Visual conduct: leering, making sexual gestures, displaying of suggestive objects or pictures, cartoon or posters
    Verbal conduct: making or using derogatory comments, epithets, slurs, and jokes
    Verbal sexual advances or propositions
    Verbal abuse of a sexual nature, graphic verbal commentaries about an individual’s body, sexually degrading words used to describe an individual, suggestive or obscene letters, notes or invitations
    Physical conduct: touching, assault, impeding or blocking movements
    Employer Liability

    All employers are prohibited from harassing employees in the workplace. If harassment occurs, an employer may be liable even if management was not aware of the harassment. An employer might avoid liability if the harasser is a non-management employee, the employer had no knowledge of the harassment, and there was a program to prevent harassment. If the harasser is a non-management employee, the employer may avoid liability if the employer takes immediate and appropriate corrective action to stop the harassment once the employer learns about it. Employers are strictly liable for harassment by their supervisors or agents. The harasser can be held personally liable for damages. Additionally, Government Code section 12940, subdivision (k), requires an entity to take “all reasonable steps to prevent harassment from occurring.” If an employer has failed to take such preventative measures, that employer can be held liable for the harassment. A victim may be entitled to monetary damages even though no employment opportunity has been denied and there is no actual loss of pay or benefits.

    Employer Obligations

    All employers have a legal obligation to prevent sexual harassment.

    Employers must take all reasonable steps to prevent discrimination and harassment from occurring.
    Employers must help ensure a workplace free from sexual harassment by posting in the workplace a poster made available by the Department of Fair Employment and Housing.
    Employers must help ensure a workplace free from sexual harassment by distributing to employees information on sexual harassment. An employer may either distribute a brochure that may be obtained from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing or develop an equivalent document, which must meet the following requirements:
    The illegality of sexual harassment
    The definition of sexual harassment under state and federal laws
    A description of sexual harassment, utilizing examples
    The internal complaint process of the employer available to the employee
    The legal remedies and complaint process available through the Department and the Fair Employment and Housing Commission
    Directions on how to contact the Department and the Fair Employment and Housing Commission
    The protection against retaliation for opposing the practices prohibited by law or for filing a complaint with, or otherwise participating in investigative activities conducted by, the Department or the Commission
    # Employers with 50 or more employees must provide at least two hours of classroom or other effective interactive training and education regarding sexual harassment to all supervisory employees who are employed as of July 1, 2005, and to all new supervisory employees within six months of assuming a supervisory position. There after, covered employers must provide sexual harassment training and education to each supervisory employee once every two years.

    Now it is a clear violation of the State Law and sorry folks the taxpayers will have to pay this one too. Most people who have or ever been employed Keep in mind the State will find Riverside for violating the State Sexual Harassment law.

  6. And unfortunately the 5 code enforcement employees never bother to read the City of Riverside Human Resource handbook when they were hired. And there is absolutely no excuse for the code enforcement managers and supervisors involved in the lawsuit to not read the handbook for sexual harassment. All managers and supervisors have to take sexual harassment course which is required by the state. Here is the City of Riverside human resource manual:

    http://www.riversideca.gov/human/PnP/PDF/III-1-Discipline.pdf

    Memo to councilmen: Where was the disciplinary process for the 5 code enforcement employees?

  7. JoAnne Weber says:

    They still work for the city, Gary Merk is still the supervisor. Paul Hooper still takes complaint calls, and well, ignores them, and when I pushed Gary Merk on the fact that his complaint officer had not called nor visited after more than 3 weeks since I tried to follow up on a complaint about them closing my original complaint despite it still being ongoing, he said it was out of his hands. Doesn’t bother him that I may be out of my home because of their inaction and ineptitude, and that the officers Patricia Roberts and Lori Price had been VERY helpful in the past with similar issues.

    • Traci Paynter says:

      Hi JoAnne – its so frustrating isn’t? Their salaries are paid BY US – and they are sworn to uphold codes, laws and ordinances EQUALLY FOR ALL – not just whom they please.
      So Lori Price and Patricia Roberts have been helpful? I’ll have to try to contact them – because it appears the farming busineSs shave been removed (knock on wood) AFTER 7 YEARS – but the 2nd dwelling still is not up to code – does not match the primary house (and they say case is closed but I bring ti back up because it most certainly is not up to code) and now we have 9-12 numerous renters renting rooms in both houses while the owners live in RV in storage building.
      Then they both (Hal and Shuhua Hebert) pull almost into my driveway screaming and yelling due to being caught by Fire/EPA of violations of storing barrels and barrels of used oil and gas on their property – AS IF ITS MY FAULT.
      Hates a big ugly word – but ya know – I HATE THEM. They yelled at me that I’m interfering with their livelihood, that our home and safety means nothing but God forbid they lose any money. That is why they are renting rooms in both dwellings to possibly make up for the loss of farming.

      What we wish, pray, beg, plead for is NEW NEIGHBORS – because these lowlifes will keep on violating all laws, codes, and ordinances – drain the property dry of its beauty and assets – all for making money. Its so sad…

      HEAR YE HEAR YE – we’re looking for neighbors who want to be neighbors and make this house a home sweet home!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s