COOKIE MONSTER: “Let me get this straight, you had the opportunity to vote on lower trash rates, but instead voted for higher rates; and now you are hiding, wondering why the ratepayers are out with their pitchforks and torches?”
Yep folks, Cookie Monster couldn’t have said it better. Back at a City Council Meeting on January 14, 2020, Taxpayers were presented a Consulting Report which suggested that outsourcing may actually lower cost to the ratepayers and should be considered. What was also said during the meeting was that any displaced city employees as a result of any transitional changes would be guaranteed employment!
UPDATE BY ANONYMOUS COMMENTER REGARDING THE TRASH ISSUE: CAN ANYONE CONFIRM THE TRUTH OF THIS STATEMENT? SIDOTI IF YOU OUR ARE OUT THEIR THERE CAN YOU COMMENT ON THIS?
“One of the problems with the solid waste department is that they are on a incentive program. If they get done with there route early they get to go home! Meanwhile trash cans are laying all over the street and extra trash not being picked up. They run there routes differently each time to finish quickly and go home early and get paid for a full days work. Instead of them going back out there and help on other routes and pick up the palm branches that are littered throughout the city. Going back to helping out how is it that I’ve seen trucks out late while the team leaders that are making 5% more than a regular driver, isn’t out there helping to finish the route? That’s a total waste of taxpayers money. Solid waste management should be held accountable. There’s no reason why this departments over time is through the roof. You should look into the dump feed to they’ve gone up and the recycling is joke there’s no one being held accountable why is it that 40% of the recycling goes to the trash increasing the city’s dumping fees.”
While the taxpayer is asking for a logical and reasonable answer from their newly elected council for their vote of no consideration, instead it appears they listened to their handlers, possibly the unions, and of course, made an unsustainable economic decision, which will in essence cost the taxpayers more!
With the City of Riverside facing ‘insolvency’ in the next couple of years, a term that may not be familiar to the new Democratically owned local council if you look at their 460’s. But seriously folks, we are serious. We at TMC have been talking about this since 2012.
While this nonsense was going on, Councilman Chuck Condor gave credence to the position that the City of Riverside, in fact, can save money by outsourcing to privately controlled companies. Again folks, this isn’t personal, it is just plain business! But others may think differently.
As with former Councilman Chris MacArthur who literally stated how to vote on an important financial issue. You need to think of issues that concern the city ’emotionally’ as opposed to ‘logically!’ This in regarding to solving City issues, go figure! But thanks to Councilman Chuck Condor, who brought logic to the forefront to tell us simply, this was a bad deal for the taxpayer! I guess this leaves former Councilman Chris MacArthur possibly eating his words?
Incredibly, a union leader that represents the trash collectors pleaded to the council, that their employees live here and spend money within the city, as if the same employees hired by a private sector company would not? So Private Sector Employed don’t care about their families as much as Union Sector Employed?
Michael Sidoti, Senior Solid Waste Operator for the City of Riverside, states an Public Comment, “Privatization is not the answer!” Again his salary is paid by the taxpayers, but his loyalties appear otherwise. The City of Riverside is on that very same road as the City of San Bernardino. What will become of his salary when the City reaches insolvency? He states, “we have always had a constant battle with competitors,” I’m assuming those in the private sector are seemingly a problem? I believe it is known in economics as “competition” in a free market.
(click image above to enlarge the three weeks worth of garbage on Magnolia next to RCC)
Ward 1 Resident Response: “Right here on Magnolia the street sweepers came again for the third time and the leaves just get shoved up on my curb and the branches scattered. There is a huge gully of water and leaves that stink terribly. Nobody has picked up all the palm branches on this end of Magnolia. I do not want to get hit by a car by going out and getting all of this picked up. Who do I call? Frustrated.”
Well, some in the community are wondering where are you Mr. Sidoti when it comes to your back yard? Mr. Sidoti, what you preached at public comment that day, is not accurate. I went to check on this issue, the problem still remains after three weeks! I don’t get it, I’ve seen the City of Riverside Code Enforcement viciously cite tax paying residents for ridiculous property violations, but they allow homeless to go wild on Massachusetts Avenue within the City of Riverside. What gives?
But what should we consider, a partisan Democratic Huddled Of Four That Stick Together? Do they commune for a common agenda? I believe they should all have the opportunity to explain their current positions. If the constituents were misinformed, those elects, should tell the constituents their true affiliation, their party agenda and their true positions on current issues. We have the right to know! Because many in our community didn’t know this. TMC attempts to be balanced, but we must bring out the facts which are brought forward to us. We always welcome counter responses and comments. But the following doesn’t optically look good when you view the following.
(click image above to enlarge)
These are the New Faces of the Highly Campaigned Riverside City Council, which were financed heavily by the Democratic Party and Union Representatives. Was this a false representation of the what are non-partisan representative government was to embody? Regardless, did the Fav Four vote in unison? Without the actual real money cost to the taxpayer in mind? Further, this included Veteran Councilman Jim Perry, who failed to investigate the trash financials. Maybe if looked into, their could have been cost overruns within refuse that could have been directly dealt with.
Currently, what we do know is that 60% of residential trash collection is conducted in-house by the City’s Public Works Department. The remaining 40% of residential trash collection is privately outsourced. Of commercial or business trash collection, 100% is currently privately outsourced.
In 2019, the City realized that to continue their standard trash collection operations, a large capital investment would soon be needed. Subsequently, Council hired this Consultant Group to study the pros and cons for the City and its residents/ businesses, if trash service was to be privately out-sourced completely. The following is the full City Council Meeting on this Trash Issue.
On Tuesday, January 14, 2020, that Consultant Report came before Council (below). Although the report recommended issuing a non-binding RFP (Request For Proposal) to determine whether the private market would be a better alternative to consider going forward, the Council decided (5-2 Conder and Melendrez dissenting) to instead study the cost of bringing all trash service in-house. Meaning, the City of Riverside will be responsible for all trash pick up within the City. With insolvency around the corner, this means the City or ratepayers must now pick up the tab for 20 new trash trucks, 20 new drivers, cost of maintaining those trucks, proper maintenance of a dumping ground, new responsibility for employee pensions etc. This is a new cost the City cannot afford. Even the City of San Bernardino was smart enough to consider privately sourced trash pick up.
Just recap, rates were last raised by 9.5% for residential curb-side pick up back in January 2019. The consultant made a point to note that another 20% rate increase would be needed soon, if additional out-sourcing was not considered. It was not considered. During Council discussion on this issue, various Council members made comment that the primary consideration should be City Union jobs, the rate increases were secondary. If not inconsequential to the discussion, despite oral commitments from the private haulers to offer jobs to all displaced City workers.
This current increase would mean an additional $3.12 to $5.37 to each household on a monthly basis. This is what your Democratic Pro-Union Council voted on. Local government was never meant to be partisan, it hurts the tax payer. There votes will always have the Party and the Union in mind. What we have is a Union and DNC bought for council, who will give the illusion that they represent the greater good of the community, but in essence, represent the greater good of those who financially supported them.
TMC has known since 2012 according to City documents, that the City of Riverside would be staring into the abyss of a massive budget deficit in 2016, the City ignored us. In the next five months we will begin to see this shortfall come to fruition. While council is obsessed with union bugs and removing campaign opponents, their focus should by on escalating debt which will very well lead our City to insolvency in the coming years. Question is do our newly elected council have the skills necessary and understanding of municipal economics in order resolve complicated financial issues? For example, the consultant noted that Riverside’s refuse rates are not high enough to meet expenses. Councilman Ronaldo Fierro stated if they are not high enough, then we need to charge more, that will take care of the deficit. That’s the ticket, charge more! Fierro didn’t even conceive of why trash refuse rates were escalating to begin with, go figure.
The same is true for our gargantuan unfunded pension liability. We have no financial leeway because the previous City Council maxed out our credit cards (debt) during the Great Recession and made no attempt to pay any of it back. It is becoming clearer by the week that the Council as a body nor the Mayor have no appetite to take on the most powerful special interest in town, who just happens to be their largest campaign contributors, our public employees and their unions. These are the same people who already have put 40% of Measure Z in their pockets. If the trend continues to play out as this example of increased trash rates, expect higher fees and rates with perhaps another tax (or even the sale of our publicly owned utility) on the ballot in the near future, while receiving fewer and degrading City services. Expect inappropriate development and City takeover of other non-traditional industries (Fox Theater, Food Lab, fiber optics, etc.) to satisfy a never-ending thirst for more dollars.
Expect exotic financial instruments like pension obligation bonds to steal from Riverside’s future in order to guarantee benefits to our employees that there is simply no comparison for in the private sector. While many of us were asleep, the City turned into an employment agency in lieu of a service agency, with this vote. If you don’t like what you’re reading, I urge you to call your elected representative to let your positions known!
The City of Riverside is now headed down the path of Detroit and San Bernardino, bankruptcy!
The relationship between politicians and unions helps explain why nearly every city and county in California faces daunting unfunded pension obligations. According to Roger Ruvolo of the Press Enterprise, “At the moment, that obligation in Riverside comes to well more than $500 million. And it’s growing. (Riverside also has run up well more than $1 billion in bonded indebtedness to finance the Renaissance projects of a decade ago.)”
Even after insolvency, San Bernardino outsourced their refuse collection to save money. There’s no doubt that Trash is Cash, but asking the Taxpayer to pay more Cash for their Trash is evidently questionable!
VOTE NO ON MEASURE A: NEW COMMUNITY COLLEGE BOND SCAM: WILL INCREASE YOUR TAXES APPROXIMATELY $50.00 PER 100K OF YOUR HOME VALUE! If your home has a value of $400K, you will have an additional property tax of $200.00 on your tax bill! Of course, the “YES ON MEASURE A” crowd would be embarrassed to tell you this. Remember the other school bond scam Measure O? It was all about needed school repairs. Now they diverted funds by a so called stacked community oversight committee to build new schools. Again, here is another propaganda message fitted to hit your emotions. Again fake and misleading information. Prior propaganda messages was about educating the children, well they are college adults! Now it’s about Vets! What will they think of next? Little do they know that Vet’s are already covered by the GI Bill!
(CLICK TO ENLARGE THE MEASURE A PROPAGANDA!)
PUBLIC SECTOR EXCESSES CONTRIBUTING TO WASTEFUL AND EXCESSIVE SALARIES BAND INSANE PENSION PAYOUTS?
Let’s take a look at City salary abuses, which would never occur in the Private Sector, because it is there money. But if it is not your money, well that may be a different story as in the case of Police Lieutenant Gary Leach who receives a total pay and benefits package of $450,895.70, in the real world this is unsustainable, good reason why the City of Riverside is heading toward insolvency. Lt. Leach base pay is $142, 031.10, how does it escalate to almost a half a million dollars? Folks, just to let you know this is not an isolated incident! He received $6,946.70 in Over Time (Just for the record, my Private Sector Boss would kill me if he saw this), he then receives $224, 467.70 in Other Pay? What the hell is this? Then an insane Benefit Package of $76, 895.30. Food for thought. I simply don’t know anyone who gets this amount in the private sector, without at least bringing double the cost savings in that salary to the company. Is Lt. Leach bring the taxpayer close to a half a million dollars in saving to the taxpayer? I don’t think so.
(click image above to enlarge)
The people of Riverside have the right to go to sleep at night, knowing their representatives have their best interest at heart, not of those who may have supported them financially with special interest at heart.
THE LAST TIME WE HAD THE TRASH ISSUE COME FORWARD, WITH FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON CONTROLLING OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT VIA THE COUNCIL AND STAFF BACK IN 2014!
(click image above to enlarge)
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” 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 STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
IG
Javier Moreno
TMC: Thirty Miles of Corruption 
I always enjoy reading your articles. This kind of corruption has been going on for decades and it never seems to go away. I’ve lived in the city of Riverside for over 33 years and finally had enough. We even considered leaving California due the corruption that’s even higher up but decided to fight. We left Riverside in 2017 and currently reside in San Jacinto. We will fight for our state until it’s gets so bad that there’s no way out and then pack it up for a more people friendly less corrupt state. ☝️
One of the problems with the solid waste department is that they are on a incentive program. If they get done with there route early they get to go home! Meanwhile trash cans are laying all over the street and extra trash not being picked up. They run there routes differently each time to finish quickly and go home early and get paid for a full days work. Instead of them going back out there and help on other routes and pick up the palm branches that are littered throughout the city. Going back to helping out how is it that I’ve seen trucks out late while the team leaders that are making 5% more than a regular driver, isn’t out there helping to finish the route? That’s a total waste of taxpayers money. Solid waste management should be held accountable. There’s no reason why this departments over time is through the roof. You should look into the dump feed to they’ve gone up and the recycling is joke there’s no one being held accountable why is it that 40% of the recycling goes to the trash increasing the city’s dumping fees.
Study presented to the council recommend removing antiquated Incentive off policy at 1:49:18 in the council meeting video. “It does not promote good customer service or safe operations. It’s been eliminated in most jurisdictions. You can’t run a safe and effective operation with an incentive off system and we strongly recommend, as part of future negotiations, that you seek to eliminate that as an option.” It would be interesting to see how early workers are clocking out. I found it interesting that removal of incent off policy was recommended but it was also recommended in presentation to add more routes because they are understaffed. If your understaffed, how is it that you are getting off early unless your cutting corners and doing a crappy job.
SIDOTI IF YOU OUR OUT THEIR CAN YOU COMMENT ON THIS?
Typo
Change our to are
Ooops, thank you Riverside Resident, just noticed also noticed typo on ‘their,’ should be ‘there.’