Uncategorized | TMC: Thirty Miles of Corruption

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

IN MEMORY OF THOSE WHO FOUGHT IN THE PACIFIC..

Posted: December 7, 2012 in Uncategorized

A U.S. Marine on Guadalcanal plays taps during a service for the dead before leaving the island to the Army, 1942.

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: LAST DAY ON THE DAIS: GOING OUT GANGAM STYLE FROM THIRTY MILES OF CORRUPTION..

Posted: December 4, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: city of riverside, mayor ron o. loveridge

mayor25 (OVER HERE FOLKS!) PLACE YOUR CURSOR ON THIS LINK AND CLICK TO VIEW FULL VIDEO ON YOUTUBE!

WOULD MAYOR LUV LEAVE THE DAIS IN ANY OTHER WAY BUT POSSIBLY GANGAM STYLE? WILL THIS BE HIS LEGACY TO HIS YOUNG UCR STUDENTS? WHAT WILL OUR SISTER CITY GANGAM, KOREA SAY ABOUT THIS? WHAT WOULD PSY SAY ABOUT THIS? WILL PSY AND MAYOR LUV NOW MAKE A VIDEO TOGETHER?

Submitted on 2012/12/04 at 7:17 pm

Dear friends of 30 Miles of Corruption, I am happy to inform all of you that my son Pfc. Brian came back from Afghanistan on November 26, 2012 at 10:00 pm. The welcome he received from the American soldiers he helped in the field was overwhelming. There were a lit of hugs and a lot of “I love you Brian” from these kids. My son refuses to talk about what he did for them and I understand him. Because by doing it he feels like he’s taking the spotlight from those who really deserve it. The ones that gave life and limb for our precious country. Please remember them and their families in your prayers. The need them as much as when they were in the line of fire. Thank you all for your support. Maria Lamping Brian’s Mom.

Thanks Maria for your heart felt message..

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~~ ~~TWO~~ 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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: MANO Y MANO, MAYOR Y MAYOR…

Posted: November 28, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: city of riverside, mayor luv, mayor ron o. loveridge, mayor william rusty bailey, mayor's night out, terry frizzel, ucr

Former Mayor of Riverside, Terry Frizzel, had much to say about about Mayor Ron Loveridge on the November 13, 2012 City Council Meeting. Mayor Loveridge’s final days as Mayor will end next month and be replaced by Mayor elect, Councilman William “Rusty” Bailey. When Terry Frizzel was Mayor, Loveridge served as a councilman. Her concerns is that the Mayor is not quite the person many see him to be. Will Rusty follow in his footsteps? Ms. Frizzel made it known she will be there to correct him each time. She stated he was associating with young students; noticeable to the extent that it caught the attention of his wife and others. Was this how Mayor Loveridge was coined Mayor Luv? Frizzel’s heated speech at City Council, noon session, was as follows:

———————————–

The thing that really, really, really, disappoints me.. is our mayor tells us that we have to make our city a better place to live, he preached that on his nights out (Mayor’s Night Out Event)…and then for him to do what he did was unfounded (the arrest of public speaker Karen Wright). You should never ever take away the liberty and freedom of speech. And you were a political science professor?

How would you have liked it when your wife went up to UCR and complained about your running around with some of the students up there. Would you like it if the police had carried her out of there. No you wouldn’t have! .. and I was right there and saw that you had young students in your car driving around that campus when I was first got elected here.

You have no purity, you have no conscious, you are there just to be a big shot… and that’s all you ever try to be. You don’t care about the people of this community or you would never had said the things that you’ve said. I’m totally disgusted there was no reason for what you did to Karen. I wish I would have been here, because you would have never had let you get away with this..

And you Mr. Davis, I stuck up for you when you were being put on the carpet, because you had every right to be heard and they tried to shut you up.

What’s the matter with you people, what’s the matter with you, and he (Mayor), he makes the word that you can’t be like Terry Frizzel and veto stuff. He (Mayor) didn’t like the manner of my operation. But I can tell you one thing. (gasp from mayor).

Mayor, when Ab Brown came up to this podium, you sent me notes, shut em up, shut em up.. and I would send you notes, no, he has the right to speak.

When Karen Renfroe came up here, you said shut her up, shut her up, no..she has a right to speak

That’s your mode of operating your City Hall. Be proud of yourself because you are leading a very, very bad, bad imitation of what the City of Riverside Mayor should be. I hope he (mayor elect Rusty) does not follow in your footsteps, because if he does I will be right and correct him every time.

—————————————————————–

This has to be another side of the mayor people have not yet seen, only if you had worked with him…Will the real mayor please stand up? Hope there are no unforseen skeletons in Rusty’s toolshed, maybe just a red dress? Again, regarding the above photo, one of TMC’s crack minimum wage photoshop experts recreated what former Mayor Terry Frizzel probably saw that shocking day at UCR when then Councilman and younger future Mayor passed on by with young students in the cruze mobile.

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CITY ATTORNEY: I APOLOGIZE, SORT OF…

Posted: November 13, 2012 in Uncategorized

We couldn’t help but wonder what may have occurred behind the closed doors of the Mayor’s chamber..did Priamos apologize profusely for his actions to the Mayor? or was the Mayor angry and lectured Priamos? We couldn’t help but imagine…

or does the mayor have a special “apology” key on his laptop in which he command one to apologize when politically necessary?

The following is the play by play apology given publicly, not for the public, but to the Council and the Mayor:

Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council.

First I’d like to take this opportunity to express my sincere apologies for the issues and distractions that my actions may have caused over the last several weeks. Second, I would like to address the letter from the RPOA to the mayor and council. Unfortunately Brian Smith, the president of RPOA, did not speak before he wrote and sent that letter. Brian and I spoke last evening and we discussed the call I received from the Press Enterprise. I advised him that it was never my intention nor would I ever want to create an issue from this incident. I also advised him that I made a brief comment to the officer on the way out of the chambers that afternoon. I advised him that my first notice that anything was in the police report was the call from the press enterprise. I also advised him that I was not suggesting nor would I suggest that the officer did not have cause to act.

He apologized for not calling me before sending that letter. He stated that he did not believe for a moment that I directed the officer to arrest Ms. Wright. I apologized for this unfortunate situation. And I advised him that I would not want to harm the relationship with the officers of my client department of which I worked so hard to develop over these past 20 years. I also advised him that I very much valued my relationship with the RPD and it’s officers. At the end of our discussion, he said that he considered this matter closed as far as the RPOA is concerned. And He and I agreed to speak in the future, if there was ever a problem or an issue. Third, I would like to clarify that any City Manager, senior city staff or any elected official directed me to speak with the officer following the afternoon meeting on October 23rd regarding Ms. Wright. Finally it was never my intention to cause any complications or problems, and for that, I sincerely apology.

——————————-

First, what I found quite discerning was Priamos’s continued use of the term “advised.” He was always “advising”, now let’s not forget this is an apology, and he is now “advising” the president of RPOA, Brian Smith, of how it is. I found it condenscending. The term “advised” in Webster’s can have a number of different conatations such as: admonish, advocate, caution, charge, commend, counsel, direct, dissuade, encourage, enjoin, exhort, forewarn, give a pointer, give a tip, guide, instruct, kibitz, level with, move, opine, point out, preach, prepare, prescribe, prompt, put bug in ear, put in two cents, recommend, steer, suggest, tout, update, urge, and warn. So if you are now buddies with Smith, wouldn’t the conversation be on equal and amical terms?

Second, this apology was made toward the Mayor and Council…why wasn’t there an apology to Officer Sahagun? Or the RPOA? Or Ms. Karen Wright? Or to the community of Riverside for another nation wide City Hall public relations debacle? So now will the charges be dropped against Ms. Wright? After all it just appears now to be just a big misunderstanding… but again, was this only an apology to the mayor and council for publicly embarrassing them? Or should they all on the daiz apologize to each other, since they all had something to say which was quite inaccurate to begin with. Shouldn’t the mayor, council and city attorney simply take responsibility? Taking responsibility would be an action that would heal the community, and that we would never see. An apology would be an action of admitting guilt, and that certainly would not be tolerated by the City Hall moguls. Transparency takes a back seat for now, at least for the City Attorney, the Mayor and some Council members.

Thirdly, I find it quite remarkable that in this apology, the community still doesn’t have a transparent answer as to what really happened. You would think after this “rant”, oops that’s a term used for gadflys. Let’s try it again. You would think after his sincere apology, he would find it appropriate to drop the charges against Ms. Wright.

Fourthly, if the City Manager nor any of the elected officials was responsible for giving Priamos the directive, than why hide under “attorney-client” privilege? Who was the client if you were solely responsible for the directive given to Officer Sahagun? You certainly cannot be both the “attorney” and “client” at the same time. But if you are not completely forthcoming with your response, we must certainly ascertain that your “client”, is the Mayor and and those on the council. Regardless, the community is still not buying it.

Now, this was not Officer’s Nick Sahagun’s first time lending police security to Council Meetings, he was a familiar figure to all, and by all considered a nice guy, even the gadfly’s like him. So you must understand that his behavior that day was considerably unusual and out of the ordinary. Priamos again continues to skew this issue and has yet, in the name of transparency, has refused to give an explanation what he exactly said to Officer Sahagun. But to call Officer Sahagun’s police report “inaccurate” is not only wreckless, but states that the officer was lying. Lying on a police report is a criminal act. If that is true, why haven’t charges been brought up against Officer Sahagun?

I must say that every time an elected or staff official speaks the greater the mystery becomes, more holes than what you find in block of swiss cheese.

RPOA Brian Smith responded to the city’s accusation of inaccuracy in a police report by spewing off a fiery response letter, now the City Attorney and RPOA President are best friends. What is it? Does Priamos want to keep his police radio, emergency police lights and siren in his vehicle? What political prowess entered into the equation between City Hall moguls and RPOA President in order to drastically change the perception?

Brian you have nothing to apologize for, the city was throwing one of your officers under the bus and responded as you should have. We are not even sure if Priamos is telling us the truth about you apologizing, since he never really tells the truth to begin with. From our perspective he was only “advising” you. With that said, I’ll leave it at that.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL LETTER

First, when Priamos calls the police report “inaccurate”, he is calling that officer a 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 for Officer Sahagun 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.

Secondly, Smith calls Priamos on his reckless use of invoking “attorney-client” privilege, when the press asked for a response. Smith also assumes by Priamos hiding under “attorney-client” privilege, the client must be Officer Sahagun or one if not all of the elected on the dais. Each time Priamos opens his mouth or doesn’t open his mouth, the questions of his “inaccuracies” become evident.

Thirdly, as Smith states, “the new protocol established empowering the official holding the gavel (mayor or mayor pro temp) being the determinate factor in where there will be police involvement is not good business.” But Chief Sergio Diaz will be at the next City Council November 13 presenting and explaining the new protocol in decorum, and after all that has happened , Diaz appears not to find what he will present odd..

Now, I’ll tell you, how Priamos and Smith became buddies after these choice words is quite remarkable, after all the letter was quite to the point, and gave some insight to past City Hall antics. A damaging letter? Of course, we must mitigate a public relations nightmare by a surgical dose of damage control. Did Priamos decide it would be in the best interest of his clients, the council and mayor, that he’d take care of this issue before it reaches an uncontrollable level? Or did the mayor and some council members just simply told him to take care of it?

If Priamos took it personally upon himself to tell the officer to take care of it. Shouldn’t Priamos be fired? But on the other hand, it’s quite possible that the mayor may have had something do with this, because the mayor is solely responsible, and always have been, for directives regarding the control of city council meetings. The chief of police bringing in new rules now appears to be ludicrous. Rules have always been in place. Another diversion tactic by the mayor to spin blame and deviate from responsibility?

Questions arise and continue to arise because of the City’s problematic acceptance of transparency, creating an inundation of possible scenarios of what actually happened. But for most of us who have simply read the writing on the wall, the chain of events appear quite evident. But for now, I guess we should just say thank-you Priamos for that sort of heart felt apology, but again, if this was some sort of great misunderstanding, shouldn’t you have included in your apology, an apology to Ms. Karen Wright and then drop the charges?

Dan Berstein of the Press Enterprise makes this whole debacle a game show, “To tell the truth!” We now ask, “Will the real mayor please stand up!”

UPDATE: 11/13/2012: THE CROSS WAS BOSS AT TONIGHTS CITY COUNCIL With over 300 people in attendance, council doors were closed early. The City made room outside the council chambers with chairs and a flat screen television, even the cafeteria area of City Hall was utilized with more flat screen t.v.’s to accomadate the issue of the cross on Mt. Rubidoux.

It appears a group from Washington D.C. questioned Riverside’s cross on Mt. Rubidoux as a religious symbol, and states that it violates the first ammendment by crossing the line between the issue of seperation of church and state. The question is should we litigate it in court, donate it to a foundation or sell it to a private entity who will maintain the property. The issue is not over, the council Voted to discuss this issue more in depth with community imput. Litigation would be a costly choice. The question of what benefit does this group filing this law suit get if won, is unknown.

UPDATE: 11/14/2012: WHAT! MAYOR LUV AND YOUNG UCR CAMPUS GIRLS? STAY TUNED..

UPDATE: 11/19/2012: WHAT! CITY ATTORNEY GREG PRIAMOS CONFERS WITH THE ETHICS BOARD MEMBERS FOR A FAVORABLE OUTCOME?

VETERANS DAY: FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE OUR COUNTRY WAS WORTH FIGHTING FOR…

Posted: November 10, 2012 in Uncategorized

On the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918, an armistice, or temporary cessation of hostilities, was declared between the Allied nations and Germany in the First World War, then known as “the Great War.”

Commemorated as Armistice Day beginning the following year, November 11, 1919: President Wilson proclaims the first Armistice Day with the following words: “To us in America, the reflections of armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country’s service and with gratitude for the victory, both because of the thing from which it has freed us and because of the opportunity it has given America to show her sympathy with peace and justice in the councils of the nations.”

November 11th became a legal federal holiday in the United States in 1938. In the aftermath of World War II and the Korean War, Armistice Day became Veterans Day, a holiday dedicated to American veterans of all wars.

The original concept for the celebration was for the suspension of business for a two minute period beginning at 11 A.M., with the day also marked by parades and public mettings.

Don’t interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties. – Abraham Lincoln

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: TEAM SAHAGUN?

Posted: November 5, 2012 in Uncategorized

UPDATE:11/07/2012: BAILEY ELECTED MAYOR OVER ADKISION!

UPDATE: 11/06/2012: CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY: CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS APOLOGIZES FOR THE EVENTS THAT TOOK PLACE. PRIAMO STATES, NO ONE PERSON GAVE HIS INSTRUCTIONS TO GIVE THE DIRECTIVE TO THE POLICE OFFICER, CONTRADICTING HIS CLAIM OF “ATTORNEY-CLIENT” PRIVIVLEGE, WHICH WOULD INDICATE SOMEONE ELSE IS INVOLVED! IN LIEU OF THE APOLOGY, PRIAMOS MADE NO CORRESPONDING STATEMENTMORE TO INDICATE THAT CHARGES WOULD BE DROPPED AGAINST MS. KAREN WRIGHT…

What’s next in line for City Council, Mayor and City Attorney at tomorrows City Council Meeting, when the growing community support for RPD Officer Nick Sahagun is multiplying? It didn’t take long after the arrest of public speaker Karen Wright that City Hall begin to wash their hands of the event, by stating it was the officer’s call. City Attorney Greg Priamos became stonefaced when he was caught off guard with the question that the actual directive came from him. He laid claim to “attorney-client” privilege, meaning he’s protecting the mayor or some members of city council. Well many in the community are flustered with City Hall’s response. Even the Riverside Police Officer’s Association fired off an incendiary letter claiming the city was basically trying to throw officer Sahagun under the bus by the following letter. Further, as in TMC’s opinion, was the City of Riverside eluding that Officer Sahagun was lying on the police report? The spin on this dirty laundry has placed the machine on over drive and an attempt to make it go away with a double rinse cycle. According to the Press Enterprise, RPOA’s President Brian Smith stated, “You either have an officer that’s lying in a police report or you have an employee that’s not telling you the whole truth.” Inadvertainly making claims against a police office can destroy their careers, especially if they decide to work elsewhere. Councilman Paul Davis stated, “this officer has to be completely and totally exonerated … otherwise it could seriously hurt his career. An officer has to tell the truth all the time and I believe this officer is.”

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL LETTER

Now the members of the community have rallied around Officer Sahagun, and created “Team Sahagun.” Appearing at a city council near you, in this case tomorrow council meeting beginning with an early start at 3:00pm due to the elections. With this don’t forget to go out and vote and make a difference!

A LETTER TO THE COUNCIL AND MAYOR FROM MARY SHELTON:

From: mary shelton <chicalocaside@yahoo.com> To: Mike Gardner <mgardner@riversideca.gov>; “asmelendrez@riversideca.gov” <asmelendrez@riversideca.gov>; “rbailey@riversideca.gov” <rbailey@riversideca.gov>; Paul Davis <pdavis@riversideca.gov>; “cmacarthur@riversideca.gov” <cmacarthur@riversideca.gov>; “nhart@riversideca.gov” <nhart@riversideca.gov>; “sadams@riversideca.gov” <sadams@riversideca.gov>; “rloveridge@riversideca.gov” <rloveridge@riversideca.gov> Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:58 AM Subject:Doing the Right Thing

Hi,
I was going to write you all another letter about this situation but I caught the letter written by Brian Smith, RPOA president and I can say that what he wrote put you all to shame. He said it better than I could say it. I’m not surprised that Smith did that, he’s an intelligent, nuts and bolts kind of guy. He gets to the point pretty quickly.

He’s absolutely right. You are throwing Officer Nick Sahagun under the bus by allowing City Attorney Greg Priamos’ comments go unanswered. I told you from the start that I didn’t believe that the officer acted on his own volition and I did so fully knowing I was right. Even when criticized for it, I stuck to that because it’s the truth and I think on some level most or all of you know it. Even if you lack the moral courage and integrity to do something about it, at least so far but it’s not too late. One of you at least needs to step up, to man (or woman) up and do the right thing. I think if that happens, the rest of you will have to follow to exchange one form of potential embarrassment for another.

Herd mentality and all that.

I’ve observed this officer along with the others over the past two years he’s worked CC. He’s friendly, helps people who ask questions and is very professional. He’d never done anything close to this before so it was kind of surprising to see his behavior change. Then I received information that something happened in the afternoon session where there was some change of protocol made and then I found out that Sahagun actually worked both afternoon and evening shifts which isn’t the norm for officers who man these shifts. Whatever happened with Sahagun clearly happened at some point during the afternoon session which backs up what’s in his police report.

That part is crystal clear and the beauty is, you don’t have to be an Einstein or have a PhD to understand it. You just have to have common sense mixed in with a healthy dose of institutional memory.
Then before I even had to request the copy of Sahagun’s report under the CPRA, the PE posted it online after it somehow slipped past the city attorney’s office that likely would have squashed it. After all what was Priamos’ first comment? He didn’t know it was public. I believe he’s speaking the truth as what Priamos told him to do. I’m glad he included it in his report. It shows that he pays attention to detail and he’s a good listener. It’s too bad that the officers who are there primarily for public safety apparently have very little trust in the people on the dais to not do things like what’s been done. But at least they apparently understand that the life that they are to save even at the sacrifice of their own can’t even sit the attorney down and interrogate him on this “client”. The “client” and I know there is at least one or more among you who’s being silent on this doesn’t have the integrity to step forward and clear up this matter rather quickly so that Officer Sahagun can get out of the spotlight and go back to focusing on what he’s hired to do which to protect and serve the public.

I believe that the city council should have put a greater priority on scheduling a closed session with your city attorney than the election night celebration or defeat parties. I guess election party night clearly matters more. In fact, it would have shown tremendous leadership from Mr. Bailey (and he’s Mayor Pro Tem so he can set the meeting agenda) to choose to settle this issue and perhaps be late to his own election party because a great wrong has been done here. And the tragedy of it is that except for Councilman Davis, none of you seem to really get it or you just don’t care. You say, “resisting arrest can’t end well” even though the report doesn’t really mention resisting (nor did the initial oral version of it) and there’s been no PC 148(a)(1) charges recommended by the RPD. You say you stand by Sahagun (in the same breath as you said you couldn’t stop him once he started) but through your actions you’ve shown the opposite. Smith mentions in his letter that he doesn’t believe he’ll get a response from you based on your past history. Unfortunately as I told him he’s probably right.

But this is still all better than avoiding dealing with the pressing issue of your city attorney making comments that indicate that he said the officer lied on his report. He then cited “attorney/client” privilege likely to protect one or more of you from accountability for it which instead you view as embarrassment. Your comfort level has trumped the integrity of a police officer that perhaps you know nothing about. Maybe if you did, it might at least give you food for thought.

Here’s a little bio information on Officer Sahagun. He has been a police officer with the RPD since 2007. He was born and raised in the Eastside in our own city, the ward that Melendrez represents. He worked at a restaurant in Riverside for a period of time and started working for the RPD as a custodian in 1990. He saw what officers did and wanted to become one himself so in his late 30s, he enrolled and pulled himself through the part-time peace officer’s academy at Ben Clark Training Academy. He was hired by the RPD at the age of 39 after graduating from the Academy with top honors. Second highest in his class in physical skills and at the top academically which I imagine is quite a bit better than Adams did in his own training.
He has worked in patrol in the NPC West which I believe falls within the wards of Hart and Adams.

His comments on becoming an officer were the following: “I wish I’d done this a long time ago. I didn’t think it would really happen, until it happened.”
So this is an officer who wanted to serve the public and reached that point later than most of them to get where he wanted to be. This is an officer, whose primary responsibility is public safety, meaning that if someone tries to harm anyone in the chambers then he’s to stop them even if it costs him his life. This is also an individual who wasn’t even worth holding a closed session today to get to the bottom as to why your city attorney ordered him to discriminate against a particular speaker (mentioning her by name) which is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Likely trumped by a greater desire to hit the party circuit.

Something that Officer Sahagun and all of you took oaths to uphold and protect when you raised your right hand to be sworn into your respective positions. Then one or more of you hid behind the city attorney and ordered Sahagun to go against his own sworn oath because one or more of you couldn’t uphold your own promises that you made when you raised those hands before the city clerk.
This is also the guy you threw under the bus and before you all protest, I think it’d be more prudent at this point to undo the damage which has been done. This “client” needs to just stand up publicly and admit what he or they did. That’s what being an elected leader is all about yet it seems to be the lesson you have the most difficult time grasping. Everything that happened in 2010 obviously didn’t teach you anything. But then let’s see, city council is totally silent, city attorney cites “attorney/client” privilege to investigators and a police lieutenant gets thrown under the bus. We all know that if Lt. Leon Phillips hadn’t spent his time in the “penalty box” at Orange Street Station preparing a defense he would ultimately win, he’d be in a lot worse shape today than the police chief who broke the law, the assistant chief who covered it up and those in City Hall who were probably more involved in what was going on with mishandling of the police department by City Hall (in violation of the city charter) than they ever let on.

There’s not much more to say except the city council and mayor has once again deeply embarrassed our city putting it on the international map because coverage of this incident reached Europe over the weekend. I wish one or more of you would do the right thing but that requires stepping out of your comfort zone and frankly which among you has the courage and moral integrity to do so? I’d truly have to see it to believe it because I and other people are tired of just hearing about it. We’ll see if anyone truly has the guts. Adversity has a way of bringing out the best and worst in individuals.
Until then, stop saying how much you stand behind an officer who’s integrity was challenged by one of your own employees who’s currently protected by your mostly blanket silence. Mr. Adams, when you shake the hands of officers like Sahagun and thank them, are those just words or are you going to back that up with action? Why don’t you lead the movement to get to the bottom of this matter?
Mayor Loveridge, I’d like to commend you on your legacy as mayor. This is a hell of a way to end it isn’t it? Yes, you’ve done some good things, the Mayor’s Use of Force Panel was your most important act but when I think of you, I think of something former CBS reporter Mike Wallace once said during the scandal rocking 60 Minutes when it refused to air a controversial interview with a Big Tobacco whistle blower. “But history only remembers most what you did last.”

Something to think about when you consider what your last action as the city’s mayor is going to be. It’d be a great legacy if you could be the leader in getting the city council or yourself to come clean about why you’re hiding the city attorney who hid behind a police officer who found himself an unwitting participant in your latest embarrassing scandal. Whether or not he’ll be a casualty of it is entirely up to all of you.

Remember actions speak louder than words.
Best regards,

A LETTER TO THE COUNCIL AND MAYOR FROM KEVIN DAWSON:

To: sadams@riversideca.gov, rbaily@riversideca.gov, mgardner@riversideca.gov, nhart@riversideca.gov, rloveridge@riversideca.gov, cmacarthur@riversideca.gov, asmelendrez@riversideca.gov, pdavis@riversideca.gov

Cc: sbarber@riversideca.gov, dbernstein@PE.com, arobinson@pe.com, ghammons@pe.com, njensen@pe.com, kchaffee@pe.com, egreenhouse@pe.com

Subject: Shame on you, and you know who you are.

Date: Nov 6, 2012 11:46 AM

November 5, 2012

Dear Council members and Mayor,

I am very upset with the events of the council meeting on Oct. 23 and the arrest of Karen Wright. I’ve watched the meeting several times and I don’t believe Ms. Wright deserved being treated the way she was.

I attended the council meeting the week before and saw how the Poly High Baseball team was afforded substantially more than three minutes during the public comment period. I’d also bet that each of the speakers for the Poly team failed to submit a speaking card.

I’m sorry, but you can not be arbitrary and show favoritism to those you like, and punish the speakers who are your critics. The actions that night violated the preamble of the city charter, the code of ethics, and quite possibly Federal constitutional rights.

In the council meetings leading up to that night, it was standard practice for the speaker to be allowed by the Mayor to finish one’s thoughts or paragraph. Ms. Wright was often allowed to exceed the 3 min. speaking time. If this policy was going to be changed, a announcement or notice should have been given to either the public or to Ms. Wright. To have a sudden policy change, especially involving PD with citations, amounts to a form of entrapment.

All of you volunteered to be on the council or serve as Mayor. No one is forcing you to be there. You have an obligation to listen to the public during the comment period. If you don’t like what you are hearing, grow a thicker hide or resign. Listening to criticism is part of the program, as no one is going to agree with everything you do.

I am upset that blame was being laid upon the PD officers from that night, when it is now public that the city attorney instructed them to take action on Ms. Wright. The city attorney is now claiming attorney/client privilege. Just who is he claiming to be the client? I think we need to know who is the political coward that would instruct the city attorney to sic the police on an elderly, native American, disabled woman, and then hide behind the legal shield of attorney privilege. Worse than that, the coward tries to shift the blame to the poor police officers ordered to do the dirty work.

I know Officer Sahagun. He is a good person.

There were plenty of other actions that could have been taken that night short of arresting the speaker. An announcement could have been made at the beginning of comment period that a new policy was being initiated to bring stricter enforcement of the 3 min. speaking time rule. The microphone could have been turned off. A ten minute break declared, during which, a calm effort could have been made to restore decorum. The city attorney could have sent a warning letter after the meeting as he has done before.

Requesting Police action should be a last resort and reserved for emergency situations or after all other remedies have been exhausted. Police action always carries the risk of unintended consequences and we are very lucky that no one suffered any serious injuries that night.

We deserve to know the truth about what happened that night. Someone gave the orders and needs to take responsibility. We deserve to know who really gave the instructions. Unless we hear otherwise, I am assuming it was the Mayor.

Shame on you Ron, and anyone else who goes along with this cover up. The Police are not your personal chamber bouncers.

There needs to be an apologize made to Karen Wright, the police officers, and the public. Why should we have to pay to defend a possible lawsuit, so you can save face or political embarrassment? You want to take credit when things go well, but you also need to accept responsibility when things go bad.

Kevin Dawson

A LETTER TO THE COUNCIL, MAYOR AND PRESS ENTERPRISE FROM LETICIA PEPPER:

From: letitiapepper@yahoo.com To: letters@pe.com, letters@pe.net CC: sadams@riversideca.gov, rbailey@riversideca.gov, dbernstein@pe.com, bhudson@riversideca.gov, city_clerk@riversideca.gov, mgardner@riversideca.gov, nhart@riversideca.gov, rloveridge@riversideca.gov, cmacarthur@riversideca.gov, asmelendrez@riversideca.gov, pdavis@riversideca.gov Sent: 11/7/2012 8:32:30 P.M. Pacific Standard Time Subj: Corrected Letter to the Editor re Op Ed Piece on the Karen Wright Incident

Dear Editorial Board: Your recent editorial about the City’s use of police and handcuffs to silence a critic states that “The only facts that do not seem to be in dispute: At the Oct. 23 council meeting, frequent critic Karen Wright spoke past her allotted time and refused to sit down.” I believe you are wrong about this “fact” not being in dispute. First, the editorial makes it sound like Ms. Wright had been ordered to sit down and had refused to do so. That is not true, according to the video, Ms. Wright herself, and others who were present nearby. She was not refusing to sit down, but was about to do so when she was stopped by the police officer. That police officer, however, because he was acting on the prior order of the City Attorney — as opposed to acting on his own judgement — was right behind her as she turned away from the podium, still commenting, preparatory to going back to her seat. She was about to pick up items she’s left there so that she could sit down. She was startled to find the police officer immediately behind her and asked him to get out of her “space” because he was so close. Instead of moving out of her way, he touched her arm or shoulder preparatory to caring out his order to “stop her.” She was already in the process of turning to walk away when this happened, and, no doubt not thinking she’d done anything wrong — since speakers other than she have also spoken past the three minutes a bit with no effect other than the Mayor telling them their time is up and to bring their comments to a close — turned to the council to say “Stop the police harassment.” Why would she say this? Because it was harassment to send a police officer to treat only her, and no other speaker who went over the three minutes, in this way. She was not planning on standing there to protest anything; she was in the process of returning to her seat when this all happened. So making her sound like she was being disruptive by not returning to her seat is a low blow, and bad reporting. While the editorial focuses on the political fall-out, please keep in mind the very real personal fallout for the victim of this misconduct by whoever was behind the City Attorney’s order to “stop her” (my vote is for the Mayor, since it was his chosen candidates, Bailey and Miller, that she regularly spoke against while urging the audience to vote for their opponents). She is charged with a crime she did not commit — speaking 16 seconds over a three-minute limit is NOT a violation of Penal Code section 403, as I’m sure any neutral, intelligent attorney would tell you. She is therefore wrongfully facing a potential sentence of up to six months in jail, and the cost and worry of being involved in a criminal proceeding with potentially serious and expensive consequences. The City Council, Mayor and City Attorney all owe her an apology and they need to make every effort — both individually and as a group — to get this charge dropped as soon as possible. Let’s see which of our elected officials will step up to the plate and right this egregious wrong against freedom of political speech.
Letitia Pepper P. O. Box 55560 Riverside, CA 92517 (951) 781-8883

COMMENTERS ON THE PE:

It’s fairly obvious that when Mr. Priamos invokes his catch phrase of “attorney/client privilege” where none exists he is being less than forthcoming with the truth. This is not unusual since the truth is very elusive to our City Attorney. For him to state one of our officers is untruthful is a serious accusation since an officers credibility is the foundation of his career. Mr.Priamos should “man up” and tell the truth instead of trying to defame a member of our Police Department. I support Officer Sahagun and I am wondering when our ex-RPD councilmember from Ward 7 is going to come out of hiding and support the membership that supported him. – John Brandiff, Commenter on the PE

Yeah…the city council and mayor need to just man and woman up and the “client” needs to step forward and just admit what he or they did. But Smith is right in that the history of them doing that is not the best including prior incidents when police were directed to remove people from the podium by mayor pro tems including elderly women. The people that order these removals need to be very upfront about who’s doing it but somehow they just can’t do that. Isn’t that what elected leadership is all about? To take that role of being responsible?
I’m glad Davis is figuring it out but there’s six city council members and one mayor left to figure out that throwing people under the bus for their own actions is just not acceptable behavior. The mayor and CC have had two direct employees supposedly go “rogue” if you really believe that…in less than a month. They need to rein them in and hold them accountable. But not hide behind them either. If you want to call your mayor and CC people about this issue, the phone number for the CC is 951-826-5991 and the emails are: rloveridge@riversideca.gov , mgardner@riversideca.gov , asmelendrez@riversideca.gov , rbailey@riversideca.gov , pdavis@riversideca.gov , cmacarthur@riversideca.gov , nhart@riversideca.gov and sadams@riversideca.gov -Mary Shelton, Commenter on the PE

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: IS THIS MAYOR LUV’S FINAL PUSH FOR POWER? THE MUNI MAFIA SENDS A MESSAGE ABOUT SPEAKING TO DISABLED SPEAKERS…THE CITY SPIN CONTINUES…

Posted: October 29, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: arrest, city council, city councilman andy melendrez, city councilman chris mac arthur, city councilman mike gardner, city councilman paul davis, city councilman steve adams, city councilman william "rusty" bailey, city councilwoman nancy hart, city of riverside, council aide chuck condur, ethics complaints, karen wright, mayor ron loveridge, muni mafia, police chief sergio diaz, public speaking, riverside police department

UPDATE: 11/03/2012: KAREN WRIGHT MAKES THE UK DAILY MAIL.. “Woman, 60, gets handcuffed at California city council meeting for speaking over time limit.”

YOUTUBE ON HANDCUFFED WOMAN BY INTERACTIVE HEALING (CLICK THIS LINK).

UPDATE: 11/02/2012: ACCORDING TO CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS RESPONSE STATEMENT REGARDING THE ARREST OF PUBLIC SPEAKER KAREN WRIGHT WHEN ASKED TO RESPOND. HIS RESPONSE, WAS “ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILIGE”, MEANING THAT IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY, HE IS REPRESENTING SOMEONE OTHER THATN HIMSELF. TECHNICALLY THIS WOULD BE THE MAYOR AND/OR COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL DENIES KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEREFORE, DID PRIAMOS’S ORDERS OR DIRECTIVES THEN CAME FROM THE MAYOR? WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE WHEN WE FIRST PRACTICE TO DECEIVE..

UPDATE: 11/01/2012: OFFICER SAHAGUN’S POLICE REPORT SUGGEST THAT WRIGHT WAS SINGLED OUT BY CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS IF HE IN FACT ACTED ALONE. PRIAMOS’S PERFORMANCE EVALUATION UP ON NOVEMBER 13, 2012.. In this article, Councilman Gardner continues to amaze the intelligent community by standing by his rendition of events in the course of Ms. Wright. The officer took her elbow as if to guide her away from the lectern; he didn’t grab her or throw her to the floor, Gardner said. It appeared she sat down on the floor or lost her balance and fell. When will the lying end, is this what the constiuents “have to put up with?” Ooops, I believe I’ve heard this comment before..

Yes, Coucilman Gardner, that’s exactly what we saw, gently taking her elbow as to guide her away, possibly to help her find her way back to her seat, afterall she is disabled…then suddenly, she decided to sit on the floor, possibly just to relax a minute… Incidently, Gardner had front seats on the dais for this grand event, and he called it as seen it. In another statement in the PE, Gardner emphatically seems to say that Priamos would not over step his authority without the go ahead from the mayor or council. I could certainly interpret this statement as meaning, no move can be made by the City Attorney without the Council or Mayor. Could we now say that Primos was the messenger, and therefore council and/or mayor knew about it? What ever the truth may be, Gardner has either lost touch, or is truly telling the truth regarding what actually happened. In telling the truth, Council and/or Mayor knew….Is a recall in order for those involved?

UPDATE: 10/31/2012: EVENING: THE QUESTION OF GOING ROGUE..

In the Press Enterprise, Loveridge said he did not know whether Priamos had a conversation with the Officer Nick Sahagun. Maintaining decorum is the call of elected officials, not city staff! He evidently went on to say that “I need to talk to Greg to find out what was said or not said.” Is Mayor Luv stating Priamos made this decision on his own. After all, according to former employees, Priamos has been known to call Council members “idiot’s” within his circle. So how do they expect anyone to follow the rules of decorum when they do not follow the rules themselves, further, even the laws of the State of California. Four weeks ago, City Attorney Gregory Priamos conducted a two hour ethics training course to the Council. But was this really a “Bonehead Course”, as Dan Berstein coined. Maybe there is an emphasis in “How not to get caught”. At any rate it is quite a surprise to the community knowing Priamos’s track record.

Councilman Andy Melendrez said Tuesday that the officer’s statement surprised him. “I think it’s important that we as council members have clarity on who’s in charge, and my understanding has been that the mayor is in charge,” Melendrez said. “For the city attorney to play an active role on his own raises some concerns.”

This is quite disturbing because we currently have a City Attorney who has decided to give a directive of enforcement upon a citizen via a police officer. If in fact, the directive was solely his decision, and not one to involve the Mayor, would he be consider “rogue?”

A month ago we also had an incident whereby the City Manager Scott Barber made a decision to spend $2.5 million without counsel consent. Can we consider this “rogue?” In any case, we could certainly consider these two highly influential employees not following the set rule to the extent of violating them. If they in fact wish that constituents follow rules, they themselves should lead by example, of which is non-existent.

UPDATE: 10/31/2012: CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS HIDING BEHIND ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE…IS HE CALLING OFFICER SAHAGUN A LIAR?

Well the City continues to overload it’s dirty laundry on the spin cycle. It started with the City’s response to the arrest, whereby they said that Ms. Karen Wright was cuffed and arrested for failing to obey the officer (Sahagun), not for going over the time limit, but Wright said the citation she got is for disrupting the meeting and that’s also what is stated in the police report by Officer Sahagun. One Concilman went on to state that this was a decision by the police officer, and no council member has the authority to interfere with a police officer, otherwise one could be severely punished. Well, the Press Enterprise states that according to Officer Sahagun’s police report, “Priamos requested that during future meetings, I should stop Subject 1 (Wright) from going too long past the three minute allotted time.” Did Priamos’s directive come from Mayor Loveridge? Or did it come solely from Priamos himself? It certainly wasn’t a decision Officer Nick Sahagun made. In the past, directives came from the Chair, or Mayor Pro Tem or Mayor. So why the move to question the integrity of a police officer? Why the move of the Council and Mayor to place the decision making authority upon the officer? Are we beginning to see a pattern of transparency in regards to how the Council and Mayor deal with issues? The real heat of this matter is now focused on the City Attorney, and all he can do is insult the community by hiding behind a questionable and remarkable claim of “attorney-client privilege” and become non-responsive. If he receives a salary paid for by taxpayer monies, he must know, we the taxpayer are his employer’s, and we are demanding answers. Has Priamos become a liability to the taxpayer? If it is founded that Priamos gave the directive, solely a decision made by himself, should he be fired? Ms. Wright believes the arrest was in retaliation against her in reference to criticizm made toward Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey, a candidate whom Mayor Loveridge endorses for the November 6, 2012 election.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL POLICE REPORT

According to the PE, City Attorney Gregory Priamos appreared surprised that the police report was had been made public. Though he had yet to read the report, he stated that Officer Sahagun’s description of the conversation was inaccurate. He declined to elaborate further, and cited attorney-client privilege. Attorney-Client Privilege? We understand he is Privileged, but who’s the Attorney and who’s the Client Gregory? Technically, the taxpayer is the client and he, Priamos, the attorney on record to protect us.

Maybe just a another nervous search for syllables, or it could have been a little gas from a bad burrito.. But is City Attorney Greg Priamos basically calling Officer Nick Sahagun a “liar?” Again, while the Council and Mayor were stating that Ms. Wright was arrested for not obeying an officer, according to Officer Sahagun, that was not so.

Did the directive come from the Mayor? Two days after the arrest, a new so called protocol was implemented. This would now give authority to the meeting chair, being either the Mayor Pro Tem or the Mayor himself to give the order to remove someone from the podium. But these rules have already been in place, was this a scuffle to spin? Back in 2006, an 89 year old woman, Marjorie Von Pohle, was removed from the podium by the directive of a Mayor Pro Tem to an RPD Officer for exceeding the 3 minute rule. Ms. Wright is scheduled to appear in Superior Court on December 27, 2012. Some rumors down the information pipeline is “Allred.”

CHANNEL 11 NEWS: “SHE MUST HAVE GOTTEN UNDER SOMEBODY’S SKIN!”

HERE IT IS CHANNEL 11 NEWS..

LOS ANGELES TIMES STORY

CBS CHANNEL 2 NEWS

LA LATE STATES LOCALS ARE CALLING FOR THE RESIGNATION OF MAYOR RON LOVERIDGE.

It comes as a shock to TMC to see public speaking come to this. Other’s are telling me that I’m just naive, “this is Riverside”.. What a night, one disabled elderly female public speaker down and arrested, a second disabled elderly female skirted with the possibility of second taken down, then one Councilman’s Aide is seen by another female speaker with his middle finger across his face. This public speaker had just commented on the inappropriate behavior of this aide, especially toward females. Karen Wright, a 60 year old disabled public speaker icon, went over the three minute mark, approximately 16.8 seconds. Returning to her seat, she was met with one of Ronnie’s Bouncer’s. Midway from her seat, when she turned toward the council, she was pushed by the officer. When she arrived at her seat, she was getting some of her things, the officer inadvertently came from the right side, it appeared he wasn’t finished with her, and then grabbed her arm, turned it clockwise, whereby she could not nothing other than fall and and take her down to the floor, she fell seated, she then took her two hands to try to get up as she indicated, but was pushed by her right hand taken, then handcuffed. Not one, not two but three RPD officers surrounded her when she was on the floor. “Officer, you are making me naked.” she stated. A disgusting act of use of force, but Riverside has a track record of this, and a double standard when it comes to arrest. You might think this is Afghanistan or Iraq, unfortunately this is Riverside, specifically, regarding these current state of affairs, I must say, the City of Riverside.. So, if you live here, you msut exactly know what this blogger is talking about..

The first quickly came out of nowhere, as she turned after finishing her point after the three minute mark, she was met with officer, not regularly seen, who grabbed her and threw her to the floor as seen in the images. While the council just sat there stonefaced, as good leaders do. While one retired police officer, later stated to TMC who saw the video from home, “there was no reason for this officer to touch this person.” So again, why would this Mayor, this Mayor known as Mayor Ron Loveridge allow this? Later in City Council, Mayor Loveridge stated, “this is outrageous behavior”, when Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Council Aide, Chuck Condur, used a derrogatory finger symbol toward public speaker Dvonne Pitruzzello during council sessions. Why didn’t the Mayor have the gumption to say the same? Did he enjoy this? Did he allow this for personal reasons against Wright, being approximately his last appearance as Mayor on the dais? If there is a story, let’s hear it, this is not the normal standard behavior of a RPD officer at City Council.. Give us your side anonymously at thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

During this disgusting act of force, Councilwoman Nancy Hart, Councilman Steve Adams (also a former police officer), and Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey left their council seats and exited the dais. It appeared they themselve could not handle or stomach the scene. But non of these great leaders said, enough! This has to stop! A reflection of the leadership in Riverside. Well anyway, this is what happens if you talk a good 25 seconds after the 3 minute mark. You may find a couple of RPD on your back.. Being disabled that’s gotta hurt.. After this disruption by Ronnie’s Bouncers, she was later taken outside, released and issued a citation for “disruption of a public event.” The witnesses who were there were stating, “she was already returning to her seat!” RPD Officer you shouldn’t have done it, you’ve watched over the security of Council meetings before. This is behavior unlike you, were you briefed by Council, Mayor, City Execs, City Attorney or your superiors to do this, and target this specific public speaker? More information coming down the pipeline..

Months ago, Ms. Wright was accosted by non other than the Chief of Police, Sergio Diaz, for her opinion on naming El Tequesquite Park after a fallen officer, Ryan Bonamino. The chief confronting Ms. Wright, saying she had no right to say what she said…

The Chief then called Ms. Wright a “a horrible person”, “your disrespectful” and “You hate the police!” At the time he also turned to then Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello and stated, “I don’t like her!” This all occurred in a public arena. Chief Diaz has yet to publicly apologize for, as Mayor Loveridger would say, “this is outrageous behavior!” Though Karen had the right to file an ethics complaint on this very issue, she chose at the time not do so. Chief Diaz should be thankful of this. Many are saying should we disband RPD? And just go with Riverside County Sheriff, would this make a difference?

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL RPD USE OF FORCE DOCUMENT IMPLEMENTED BY THE CHIEF

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH YOUTUBE FROM ALICIA ROBINSON OF THE PRESS ENTERPRISE

Notice the empty seat behind above the left officer, Councilman and Mayoral Candidate Rusty Bailey left the dais, out of sight.. Some commenters on the Press Enterprise have begin coin Councilman and Mayoral Candidate… “Runaway Rusty.”

NEW NEWS ARTICLE FROM THE PE BY ALICIA ROBINSON: RIVERSIDE: SHOULD COUNCIL CRITIC HAVE BEEN HANDCUFFED?

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE

CLICK ON THIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE OF MS. WRIGHT PICKING HERSELF IN FRONT OF THE THREE OFFICERS.

CLICKTHIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE OF MS. KAREN WRIGHT BEING ESCORTED OUT OF RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL

According to a description of events cited from the Truth Publication Online, Councilman Paul Davis stated the following: “During that time the officer applied handcuffs to Ms. Wright and later took them off, after assisting Ms. Wright to her feet.”

Wrong Councilman Davis, she picked her own self up according to the above video. Let’s not begin to spin the chain of events in order to defend you and the council bullies, that night, for not doing the right thing and stopping what occurred. You stated that the decision for this is defined by the RPD officer, and by “law” you cannot interfere with that. But now, new rules? “Police Officers will now be directed by the Mayor?” according to the the Press Enterprise. Now, elected officials can interfere with the actions of the Police Officers? But some Council members are saying, again, as an authority figures, and I disagree with that, that they cannot interfere with the judgement of a an RPD officer? You work for us, and we expect some aggregious behavior to be stopped by a police officer, but you are telling them you have no power. Our we living in a microcosm of a police state?

Again, Davis went on., “The officer again told her that she needs to be calm, take her seat and she ignored him. At that time, the officer directed her to return to her seat and Ms. Wright turned and began to advance towards where she had been sitting. Ms. Wright then uttered some choice words to the officer, which may have been directed towards the council. He then told her to step outside, since she was clearly isrupting the meeting and she chose to continue to ignore him. The officer then took her right arm at the elbow and told her that she needs to accompany him outside. Ms. Wright then jerked her arm away from the officer, stating something to the effect that she needed to get her things and for him not to touch her.” (Courtesy of The Truth Publication Online). Mr. Davis, you are different person this day, this is not what happened, I was sitting in the second rowe, and didn’t hear any of this. Are you saying you have better ears than me? Especially from the distance of the dais?

To the elected individuals on the dais, we’ve have not declared war..we only want transparency…

“At that time she also decided to sit down, on the floor, just outside the Dais entrance door and near her seat, with her hands not visible from my vantage point.”

Councilman Davis, you are wrong again, let me show how she ended up on the floor. You call us “crazy”, but at least we are not “liars.” This is how Ms. Wright decided to to sit down..of course, according to Councilman Paul Davis’s innacturate rendition of the Council events..

Now the twist to be handcuffed..RPD style..

“Many have asked why the members of the Mayor, Council, or city Staff, did not take any actions to stop the officer from his actions. As a matter of law, no person has the authority to interfere with the lawful order or actions of a Police Officer performing his duties. By doing so, you would be in violation and you will be held for Obstruction of Justice, and be subject to severe penalty.” (Courtesy of The Truth Publication Online). Let me see Mr. Davis, “Police Officers at City Council Meetings will be directed by the Mayor.”

Nope, sorry Davis, no one believes that. Many believe the mayor has always had that power, and this incident was allegedly and directly orchestrated by Mayor Ron Loveridge himself.

CLICK ON THIS LINK TO WATCH ABOVE YOUTUBE OF KAREN WRIGHT BEING CITED BY RPD OFFICER.

So what happens next, the Officer says we are done. So what happens with the legal process for Ms. Wright next? When the interrelationdships and interconnections with the City, City Attorney, the Riverside Judges, the District Attorney Paul Zellerbach, the Riverside Grand Jury, even unfortunately to the extent of the State of California Attorney General’s interrelationship? What will happen to this poor disabled 60 year old elderly woman? Well it’s already been decided if you live in Riverside. Some call it politics, some just have to accept it..

According to the PE, the City stated that she was not arrested for going over the 3 minute time limit but for “not obeying the officer,” but the actual citation she received was for “disrupting a meeting.” This is indicated by the above YouTube video, a video the City did not know existed till know. Well, the spinning continues, with ring leader, our Mayor, Mr. Spin Cycle himself.. Officer indicates to Ms. Wright in the video that once the three minutes are up she needed to bring her comments to a close, therefore it was all about disrupting the meeting after the 3 minute mark… Again, how will the City spin this next, or is their now planned retaliation by the City in more ways than none, for those who speak freely?

“All I was told was that you are given a certain amount of time to make statements to the council and she went over her time,” Lt. Guy Toussaint said. “She was asked to leave and she refused to do so.” Again wrong, Ms. Wright closed her comments and was on her way to her seat. But what the L.A. Times has right, is that this was all about the 3 minute time limit, which the City denies was a factor in her arrest. Many of the Councilpeople on the dais, who did nothing, and maintained they could not interfere with a police officer. So who’s in charge? Some on the dais, even said in some ways, that “she’d had it coming.” Other’s on the dais, who were criticized, said, “how come those citizens in the audience do nothing?” This is what we have, and you now begin to see the picture unfold before your eyes in relation to political conundrums withing the politics of the City of Riverside.

Again it didn’t stop there, another disabled individual on crutches …What is it with the City of Riverside and disabled females? What is it with leadership that doesn’t have the guts to lead and come out to say this is wrong. Is it easier say that the individuals are just “crazy?” Well Dvonne Pitruzzello said it best when she said, “I rather be called crazy, then to be a crook.” Well anyway this person below was on crutches and the same RPD officer started to walk down toward the podium again… Ren Holmstrum on crutches was subjected to a possible throwdown, regarding her issue of Riverside hospice, when she went over the three minute mark.. One of RPD officers was again on alert, walking down the isle again to take care of muni mafia business…

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey seen with his head down in the video. Last week Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey, came to the TMC site to inadvertently download photos of his Mayoral opponent and former Riverside Councilman, Ed Adkison, of course without TMC’s permission. These were then sent city wide in a campaign mailer. Now RPD wants TMC’s photos of the Council Debacle…Many in the community, seeing this display of police are now afraid, who can we depend on when we cannot trust our own community police force? Who do we call when we cannot call our own police force for help? Questions some community constituents are asking. This is the same behavior community constituents have been talking about to their city leaders for years…

Other’s are asking the question if this was a set up.. Most often, RPD or Ronnie’s Bouncers are cordial, escorting the “3 minute violator” back to their seat. This time, the Mayor meant business, it was a throw down… Was this orchestrated and planned by the mayor, the puller of strings? As one reporter stated on Channel 11 News on 10/25/2012 “She must have gotten under somebody’s skin.” This because Ms. Wright goes to each and every council meeting to comment on issues, and is therefore well known..

“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

It didn’t stop there, after Public Speaker Dvonne Pitruzzello spoke regarding Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s legislative aide, the allegation of Chuck Condor holding a knife to the throat of Bailey’s Council Aide, Mark Earley.

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

From the current contact in the mainstream media, much is being said, many questions asked, pieces of the puzzle that just don’t make sense, but the questions of why none of the City Council leadership said nothing, allowed the activity to happen, and simply found it acceptable.. again actions speak louder than words..

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE ABOVE YOUTUBE

“We do this for our neighborhood, we take our time do this…you have spent us into the poorhouse..” -Self Appointed Citizen Auditor Vivian Moreno.

Responsibility? You are looking at them….Now Main Stream Media will know….Stossel what do you think about this? Thank you for asking…

ETHIC’S COMPLAINTS ARE NOW GOING VIRAL.. I’VE GOTTA SAY THIS IS EXHAUSTING, BUT JUST ANOTHER NORMAL DAY IN RIVER CITY..

UPDATE: 10/24/2012: JUST IN, TMC SOURCES ARE STATING THAT COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER ALLEGEDELY STATED, “KAREN WRIGHT DESERVED IT.” IF THIS IS TRUE, THIS MAY BE PART OF MIKE THAT MAY NOT BE LIKED..

According to the PE, Councilman Mike Gardner, who was on the dais with the council a few yards from the incident, said he doesn’t think the force was excessive. But if you like Mike, you would agree. Further Mike has also said, “Resisting arrest doesn’t end well..” Of course, none of this is true, but what is true are the feeling of Ward 1 Councilman Mike Gardner.

LOVERIDGE GET’S IT ALL WRONG.. Loveridge said that Wright started showing up at council meetings a few years ago and became an active civic participant with “eclectic” interests who spends a lot of time preparing for her remarks. This according to a LA Times article. Ms. Wright has been coming to City Council for over 10 years, why the spin Mayor to discredit her?

COUNCILMAN CHRIS MAC ARTHUR’S LEGISLATIVE AIDE CHUCK CONDOR SHOCKS COUNCIL MEETING!

The question to the council by Pitruzzello was, ” Why Condor wasn’t arrested, or a police report created by Bailey’s Aide, Mark Earley? We just don’t know..”Was this a concerted effort by City Hall to cover up the alleged altercation back in April 2012?” Regardless, it still didn’t stop there! As Former Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello walked toward the back of Council Chambers she was met from a distance, Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Aide, Chuck Condor, placing the “middle finger” in front of his face toward Pitruzzello. Mrs. Pitruzzello interrupted the City Council to let them know just what happened. The following pics below taken at the time of the interruption. The shock was written all over Councilwoman Nancy Hart’s face. Officer Nick, again, one of Ronnie”s Bouncer’s pounced on the situation and begin to walk over toward Pitruzzello. She let Officer Nick know, “that’s who you need to arrest!” Referring to Mac Arthur’s Council Aide Chuck Condur. This is the one time TMC agrees with Mayor Luv when he stated, “this is outrageous behavior.” When a Council Aide can continually get away with derrogatory remarks and alleged actions, this is outrageous behavior.. This Public Council Meeting could not have been hotter…

Again, one of TMC’s crack minimum wage photoshop experts created what Mrs. Pitruzzello saw.. Another act of defiance against women?

But let’s not forget this is Riverside, Chuck Condor, may just get a monetary raise and become an elected official one day.. But many are asking the question, why does Councilman Chris Mac Arthur allow a person such as Chuck, who appears to be a loose cannnon, on his team? Another liability? Could revealers of Condur’s behavior now be in danger of retaliation by the City of Riverside Power House? Will have to ask Councilman Chris Mac Arthur who has protected his aide through thick and thin regardless of his derrogatory behavior. The question is, does the Community concur with this type of legislative aid behavior?

ON A DIFFERENT NOTE, THIS FEMALE GADFLY, AS SHE WAS NOTED, WAS ARRESTED FOR DISRUPTING A SANTA BARBARA CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 2, 2012 FOR VERY DIFFERENT REASON. HERE FOR YOU’RE REVIEW AS A POINT OF REFERENCE.

OR THIS PUBLIC SPEAKER JENNIFER JONES ARRESTED AT CITY COUNCIL IN QUARTZSITE, ARIZONA FOR AIRING THE CITY COUNCIL’S DIRTY LAUNDRY BACK IN JULY 5, 2011..

EVEN THE FOLLOWING YOUTUBE NEWS REPORT CAME OUT OF JONES ADDRESSING THE CITY EXPOSING CORRUPTION THEN BEING ARRESTED.

ANOTHER ARTICLE CAME OUT REGARDING THE FACT THAT JENNIFER JONES MAY BE IN IMMINENT DANGER OF EXPOSING POLITICAL CORRUPTION

UPDATE:10/25/2012: YESTERDAY, LOCAL CITIZEN TELLS OFF MAYOR LOVERIDGE AT DOWNTOWN “COFFEE BEAN” IN FRONT OF ONLOOKERS!

TMC PROUD TO INVITE 16 SMARTEST PEOPLE ON EARTH, TO FIND THEIR HOME IN THE MOST INTELLIGENT CITY, THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.. NO CURRENT EMAIL RESPONSES AS OF YET!

COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS RESPONDS TO THE WRIGHT INCIDENT ON THE TRUTH PUBLICATION BLOG SITE. TMC WISHES EDITOR SALVADOR SANTANA OF THE TRUTH PUBLICATION GOOD HEALTH AND A SPEEDY RECOVERY. WE NEED YOU BACK AT THE PODIUM!

UPDATE: 10/26/2012: THE DEVELOPER OF THE HILTON TO SUE THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.. WITHIN THE CONTRACT, IF THE DEVELOPER DEFAULTS, THE CITY IS NOW IN THE “HOTEL BUSINESS.” FOR THIS TRANSACTION, TWO FIRESTATIONS AND TWO LIBRARIES ARE USED AS COLLATERAL..

(HYATT PIC COURTESY OF TRIP ADVISOR)

IS THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE INVOLVED IN “EXTORTION” AS CLAIMED BY HYATT DEVELOPER?

According to the Press Enterprise, a story broke by City Council Gadlflies almost a year ago, no one listened, because they may have thought they were simply “crazy” made mention to the contract between the City of Riverside and the Developer Siavash Barmand. The other claim states that the city “extorted” money from MetroRiverside by improperly changing the obligations to build public improvements, and by delaying approval of designs for the improvements. The claims say the developer lost money because of the design approval delay and the convention center closure.

UPDATE:10/29/2012: A MONTAGE OF COMMENTERS COMMENTING ON THIS ISSUE REGARDING MS. KAREN WRIGHT FROM THE PE BEFORE THEY ARE DELETED…POSSIBLY BY SOME DIRECTIVE BY A CITY ELECT OR THE CHIEF OF POLICE HIMSELF…

Remember folks, you have to be in a bad mood as a citizen when you come to City Council Meetings when you know that you the taxpayer, are $4 billion in debt, and that you the taxpayer are responsible for it as a result of the elected officials who voted on these issues.

This is ridiculous. Going over the time limit is not a crime. I’m not a fan of Karen’s, but she had finished talking and was walking away from the podium. Someone has it in for her, and that’s not right. Terrible, terrible showing by the police, the mayor, and the council. -Kaptalism, commenter on the PE

This makes me SICK! Sooooo unjustified! This isn’t the last we have heard of this, believe it! A lawsuit will be forthcoming for SURE! So shameful! -Nettie Nettie Bobettie, commenter on the PE

Unbelievable~!!! They should be ashamed of themselves~!!!! – Alice Wersky Naranjo, commenter on the PE

AND THIS MORNINGWE ARE ON FOX NEWS. AREN’T WE GREAT? –Ron Rose, commenter on the PE

This is how it works at Casa Loveridge. You get three minutes to speak. If you’re kissing his butt, make it four and you can bring about 20 other people up to keep the love flowing longer.
If you’re a guy criticizing, he starts to cut in and the hand goes up at about 2:45 into your comment and its purpose is to try to distract you into disagreeing with him over your time is up until it’s up and you don’t talk about your original topic.
If you’re a woman, alas the infamous hand goes up at about 2:30. Bring a timer and time the speakers and the Loveridge hand wave yourself a couple times. I’ve done it myself. Very illuminating. The county board of supervisors have used the same tactics for years and rumor has it he wants Tavaglione’s seat if that guy wins the congressional race. So maybe he’s practicing for the bigger stage? If he doesn’t like what you’re saying, apparently…well there’s that too. – Mary Shelton, commenter on the PE.

The cop was not timing her I would bet. He was instructed to do as he did when the time-up signal was given. Minor petty politicians begin to think they are Lords. -James Overturf, commenter on the PE.

Too bad we don’t limit politicians to three minutes of speaking. – BJ Clinton, commenter on the PE.

Although I haven’t lived in Riverside since my Divorce in 2003, I still follow the news. Here are my thoughts:Everyone has a right to voice their opinion in a Public Forum. Time limits are made to provide equal time for all and show some dignity and respect for the Counsel and “Elected Officials” of the Counsel during such meetings. Three (3) minutes may not be enough for some however, if you come prepared to make your point clear and brief, three (3) is “normally” plenty of time. Handcuffing anyone with a strong opinion should not be the norm. This lady was no threat to the counsel or anyone else. The lady only spoke too long. Handcuffs would not have been my first choice to resolve the issue. BAD CALL… Counsel BAD CALL… Riverside Cops -Roy Robinson, commenter on the PE.

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: LOVE LETTER TO MAYOR LUV..SHELTON STYLE..

Posted: October 27, 2012 in Uncategorized

From: mary shelton <chicalocaside@yahoo.com> To: “rloveridge@riversideca.gov” <rloveridge@riversideca.gov>; Mike Gardner <mgardner@riversideca.gov>; “asmelendrez@riversideca.gov” <asmelendrez@riversideca.gov>; “rbailey@riversideca.gov” <rbailey@riversideca.gov>; Paul Davis <pdavis@riversideca.gov>; “cmacarthur@riversideca.gov” <cmacarthur@riversideca.gov>; “nhart@riversideca.gov” <nhart@riversideca.gov> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 7:30 AM Subject:City Council meeting

Dear City Council and mayor:

First of all I have a confession to make. During one of my most recent public comments, I spoke over the three minute time limit. I think I spoke about 20 seconds over but that’s only because I had to remind the mayor that when he interrupted me at the 2:40 mark (according to the recording of the meeting) that I still had time left to speak, that ate a bit into my allotted time. I would love to express my sincere gratitude from the bottom of my heart that I wasn’t grabbed by a police officer the moment I had finished and was heading to my seat, pushed to the ground by him and his partner and forced to lie on my stomach while being handcuffed and then on my knees pleading with them that I couldn’t stand up. I have bad knees too and I can fully understand how it might be nearly impossible to rise on one’s feet without my hands to help me.

I also violated the three minute rule at the CPRC meeting (this time probably around 15 seconds) and I thanked Chair Dale Roberts for not scolding me but allowing me to complete my thought (as I hate ending sentences with dangling participles) and for not having me forcibly removed as well. The only thing I’d ask if it does happen to me, is please have them handcuff me in the front and maybe if I could have the fuzzy handcuffs instead of the metal ones. Thanks, I mean if some of you have enough pull to influence police promotions (of two captains and a lieutenant so far) and where officers are assigned during your city council elections (aka election emergency detail which three of you allegedly did during your last election cycle) or get people hired by the city (aka political emergency hire without background checks which happened at least once) then I would think if you would insist on more comfortable handcuffs that this could be done in a flash.

You can just bill it to Scott Barber’s discretionary fund (since apparently he’s spending money without your approval anyway on the Fox Plaza) since there’s probably no money left in the sewer fund. The police budget’s too strapped too but at least they don’t have to pay more than $1 million in “rent” and renovations just so two private enterprises can benefit from the city’s dealings like RPU does now.

Now that this is out of the way, I did not attend the meeting. I had responsibilities as an elected representative to fulfill which led to a time conflict. I was talking to one of my critics as I often do because I enjoy it and because sometimes that’s where the best ideas come from too as well as the truth. Lest you don’t understand this, I’ll refer you back to Hans Christian Anderson’s tale about the poor wardrobe challenged emperor. I’ll take a good critic even a vocal one over a herd of people just trying to tell you what you want to hear any time but then when you put public servant in front of politician, it’s not difficult to think that way.

Okay, so I’m not quite as privileged as the many individuals which Mayor Loveridge has allowed to speak over the three minute limit while those of us who get cut off beginning at the 2:45 mark (2:30 if we’re female according to video recordings) just sit and watch the blinking red lights on the dais. Of course we don’t see any police officers because they’re still standing in the back of the room while these people speak beyond the time limit. That’s when the mayor’s not encouraging these time violators to get their friends out of their chairs to also speak and without filling out a speaker card! Okay, maybe I should have been attending all these fundraisers I’ve been invited to attend but I’m not really into the whole political scene.

Plus I also know that even with “time, place and manner” restrictions to free speech, they can’t be enforced in a content-discriminatory way. That means you can’t sit and smile as someone talks longer than three minutes telling you how great you are and then turn around and have another speaker who’s criticizing you, I’d say forcibly removed from the podium but she’d already finished speaking and had been leaving at the podium by that point. Most of us mere mortals can’t even be Chief Diaz and rant during a break about how much I hate someone (in this case, Karen and other women) and then have to be escorted out by my assistant chief rattling the doors as I go. Talk about disturbing the peace but unlike the more ordinary people, he gets a pass. But then screaming at the top of one’s lungs is a means of communication among upper management in the RPD since he’s been here so his behavior’s hardly surprising. So no, I don’t think I’ll take lessons in decorum from Diaz.

I saw the videos and heard different accounts from different sides of it and I was appalled but then a lot of people are, not that it matters to you because you don’t seem to know much of what’s going on outside your immediate circles. Some of you more than others. But as painful as it is to watch a 60 year old woman in pain trying to keep her dignity because her bare skin is showing while she’s being handcuffed for the world to see, it was more so watching the actions of those on the dais in the videos. I heard that Mike Gardner told someone that she got what she deserved and found that disappointing but it’s easier to say that without being responsible for it in public than to answer questions about a troublesome land swap that took place in his ward. I saw Councilman Melendrez just sit and stare and Paul Davis bury his head in his hands then later give a version that confused people who contacted me saying it didn’t match the videos. His statement about not being able to interfere in a police action without being prosecuted for it falls in the face of the later decision to take that discretionary power from the police and give it to the mayor or mayor pro tem.

Chris MacArthur I believe also just stared expressionless (though probably not so much when the allegation was made about his aide pulling a knife on someone else’s aide, during public comment). As for the rest of the city council, they fled like they were fleeing a bar brawl out the side door into the conference room including our mayoral candidate who I suppose was putting his leadership skills on display. Except that Adams might not have been leaving because of that, he just tends to leave his seat during public comments anyway so I think people were confused about what he was actually doing.

What I saw was a city council and mayor who were showing how ill equipped they are at connecting with constituents in their wards (and I believe Karen lives in Bailey’s ward) and then when the police were signaled to do the handcuffing, half of those on the dais didn’t even have the integrity to sit and watch what was allegedly being done on its behalf. I don’t believe, it was the officer’s choice to do this and I have information that indicates otherwise already and that this situation had been brewing for weeks. He and his partner had worked at other meetings and while other officers had approached the podium while people were speaking too long, I think the reason why most people didn’t recognize him is because he’s never done anything like that, in fact he’s never left the back right corner where he most often stands at meetings until the other night.

Besides, police expelled another individual, a man, last week who was just sitting there (but had an earlier incident with the city council) even though there was no way to visually know who he was so someone clearly told them to do it. I’m still sifting information about what happened and who really directed it.

One thing about the truth is that it usually comes out (and very rarely from the mouths of politicians) and I believe in this case with the armed bar takedown of Karen in city council that it will as well. Just like it did when it turned out that the expulsion of four gadflies including Marjorie Von Poule was ordered by the city council and wasn’t a policeman’s call. In fact, one of our former deputy chiefs, Dave Dominguez just said no to the city council trying to get detectives to open investigations into the incident and paid for it by his somewhat early retirement. Four brave police officers refused to arrest the four gadflies, made the call to handle it their way and defused a situation created by inadequate leadership on the dais. By the way, all four of them have commendations in their jackets courtesy of me for what they did. So Loveridge when you told all the media out there that it never happened before, that was not true and I believe you know that.

Police were also ordered by a mayor pro tem to “escort” an 82 year old woman from the podium several years ago. Her crime was that she exceeded the three minute rule to talk about a city water pipe that broke and flooded her house. Her house was on the Riverside/Woodcrest boundary so she hadn’t been to a city council meeting before and likely didn’t know the time limit. Still, she had to be pulled away from the podium. That incident was caught on video and I believe it might still be on YouTube somewhere because unlike Loveridge the mayor pro tem didn’t have the cameras turned off, an odd action to take on a righteous police initiated action don’t you think? A couple of you were actually on the dais when that happened and even though that was clearly not a police initiated activity, none of you said anything. That’s just puzzling to me, that the first action the mayor would take when something like that happens the other night is to make sure there’s no recording of it taken. Wouldn’t you want a video camera to serve as an objective witness to a righteous arrest? One would think so certainly.

Three minutes might seem like an eternity for elected officials to suffer through on the dais but hey, most people who come to speak have never been inside of city council offices their taxes have paid for (because even when lower income people run for office, they buy all their campaign materials from Riverside not Orange County). Most don’t have the money to attend and hob nob or network at the Mayor’s Ball (held at the Citrus Towers, epicenter of the four way land swap). Most of those who speak including the woman on crutches who also faced possible expulsion or arrest for exceeding the three minute rule don’t have access to back rooms to iron out the issues that impact them before they even get to the city council to be referred to a subcommittee to go back to the city council again. Most have to pay to go to restaurants, go attend the pricy ticket items at the failing Fox and most of the people that only have the three minutes to speak during are actually the people who most “Shop Riverside”. Many use a public transportation system that provides inadequate service, has no transfer system and requires seniors, elderly and young people to find other means of transportation after they shut down at 8pm at night. Taxies, because of regulations voted on by the city council it costs in Riverside to go four miles what it costs to go ten miles in Los Angeles.

I’ve got quite a few phone calls and emails on what happened the other night. Because of today’s social technology including Face book, I’ve had women’s organizations and those for the disabled asking about it.. What’s up with Riverside and a city government that is so undone by one gadfly? Wait a minute, two because that other woman at the podium on crutches upset the city council too and the officers came down the aisles but didn’t touch her.

But then I think it’s how the various elected officials acted which is shown on videos now on YouTube and everywhere else that speaks for itself.

It’s been disheartening and baffling to me to see otherwise intelligent people who appeared to have cared about lowly city residents once, I mean at least to get our votes (because most movers and shakers don’t actually live in their wards or the city) just act the way that I’ve seen on the dais and make the decisions that have been made. Like forcing more costs on two city departments just to help out a campaign donor so he can pay off his state bonds, and not even answering simple questions about it when asked. We pay so much of our tax dollars for PR to make us look good yet it’s clear the reason that’s done is because our leadership’s more natural tendency is to do something that gives us a black eye on a national scale. You are your own worst enemies.

This is for Bailey. I’m extremely disappointed at being labeled a “crazy woman” by you for speaking my mind, rather than I guess staying home and baking cookies and cleaning house which are worthy activities but women have always been doing more than that. I’m not worried about it because I know that most high school students reject “lessons” like that taught by their teachers and can differentiate between them and a thinly veiled personal attack. But I also know they don’t confront teachers about it due to power differentials in that relationship and concerns about retaliation for speaking up.. By the way, I’m not even stupid either. I have a college degree, an IQ of 145 (though I have two siblings with IQs over 190) and audio/visual photographic memory. I can also run a 17:30 5k (and represented Riverside in Sendai as a runner) when I’m in shape and can look at anything that’s broken, and pick out what’s wrong with it and possible solutions no matter what, whether it’s an internet network or a flawed management system without knowing much else about it. I certainly know what’s broken here and how to fix it but it’ll take a few election cycles to do that beginning with next year.

I would have liked to have equal time with your students to explain why it’s important to participate in public speaking as a person who’s done it and how it’s important to keep speaking up even when it’s not popular. How to respond when their elected leaders treat them like they’re stupid or crazy or make jokes about them, and remind them of a guy named Gandhi who had to deal with all of that including being laughed at. I’m thinking of approaching Riverside Poly and asking if us “crazy ladies” can have an opportunity to address the students exposed to hearing us called crazy including the female students who were pushed to internalize a lesson on sexism since no male references were made.

That’s one of the most critical lessons to teach your young people as part of helping them become better thinkers, listeners and doers. I’d hoped a teacher like you with a West Point education (and I have three relatives who went there) would have learned that by now but it appears not.

As for the rest of you, now it turns out that the mayor’s decided to take the role of city council bouncer from the police and give it to the “chair” of the meeting.. I guess that speaks volumes about how you really feel about this incident. You’re so horrified particularly Loveridge (whose legacy is on the line) about the media coverage once again painting Riverside in a negative way that now you’re throwing two officers there to protect you under the bus. Dang, that happened fast, faster than you’d expect if what happened again was righteous.

Because why change the policy that you claim’s in place (when reality is different) if it’s not broken and if those two officers behaved so appropriately that night, why are you taking their powers of discretion away from them and the department? I was not surprised to see the blame so quickly placed on the officers and individuals saying I don’t condone their actions in blog postings which is a rather disingenuous way of throwing them under the bridge too. Clearly you don’t condone their actions because you’re changing the policy but in reality it’s because that’s your reaction not to what they’ve done but to media reaction to what they’ve done. Damage control is in full mode because I fully know that none of you care a damn about Karen. I think everyone pretty much knows what’s going on with this recent decision to change the rules which were always that the elected officials made the call of who gets to stay in a meeting and who gets escorted out.

I guess these changes had to be done behind closed doors instead of a public forum or through a subcommittee like Governmental Affairs Committee because there’s not enough time to do that before the mayoral election. Not that I believe that’s the primary reason, it’s just that your pattern and practice of dealing with controversial situations that blow up in your face behind closed doors instead of in a public forum no matter how you stump for transparency and accountability during your respective campaigns.

In closing, I’m so inspired by your poor actions on the dais that I’m thinking of running for political office myself. I’m not well connected, not much of a backroom dealer, not into speaking out of both sides of my mouth, don’t like freebies at tax payers’ expense and I’m clearly not as brilliantly strategic so maybe I’m not really qualified to be a city council person.

I do have more respect for democracy and public participation and my approach to critics is to take that passion and put it to work for me. Put critics on my task forces rather than “yes” men and women and campaign donors or managers. I’ll start with Karen because she’s actually a really gifted leader, has many good ideas and presides over meetings including handling civil discord much better than you do. I’d definitely put her to work, not put her in handcuffs. If Bailey was really smart, he’d had done that himself.

I’ll save the arrests, armed bar takedowns and handcuffs (not to mention the expense of prosecution on Riverside County) to the real criminals. And the moment I preside over what happened the other night, I would take full responsibility for it (not throwing people under the bus to make myself look better in the spotlight) and submit my resignation because I would have failed as a leader. If I use videos of public meetings for any educational purpose I will let the viewers express what they think about it, rather than use it as a platform how awful it is to listen to public comment. In fact, I think when I get elected I’ll hold forums on public comment and how to expand it using various social media for my constituents including at the schools. That’ll be one of my first acts while I’m in office.

I certainly won’t hire a legislative aide who calls women “idiots”, “bitches” and carries a knife around for sure. I’ll promise my constituents that during my swearing in ceremony. Thank you for your time.

Oops I think I exceeded the three minute rule for communicating with elected officials. Please don’t arrest me or have me arrested. Best regards.. Mary Shelton

Mary Shelton’s Blog if “Five Before Midnight”, the following link… http://rivercitycopwatch.blogspot.com/

JUST FOR LAUGHS…

HOW MANY CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITORS WILL IT TAKE TO REVIEW THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S FINANCIALS?

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: THE MAYOR’S RACE: IRRESPONSIBLE OR JUST TO IRRESISTABLE WHEN IT COMES TO TMC PHOTOS?

Posted: October 19, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: albert webb, city councilman william "rusty" bailey, city of riverside, ed adkison, matthew webb, mayor ron loveridge, press enterprise, the mayor's race, webb engineering

We’re not sure who was first? Ed or TMC…But TMC would also like to place it’s entry in asking for an apology from Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey for approving a campaign mailer that went out last weekend which contained photographs taken by TMC’s crack photographer without permission. Now above, TMC’s crack senior minimum wage photoshop designer created a comparison photo montage of Bailey’s mailer and TMC’s….absolutely uncanny, the photo that is. The question is, what was Bailey’s intentions in inadvertently using TMC’s photo’s to begin with? Was TMC’s photographs just exceptional? Should TMC recieve a “royalty” for this display of “stolen” property? Or are we to accept, as it is in Riverside, this is business as usual. Of course, “business as usual,” usually means the taxpayer is usually being taken.. That may be because no community members care. The taxpayer, needs to rise from their knees and let their representatives know that this is unacceptable.

ORIGINAL TMC PHOTOGRAPHS USED BY BAILEY CAMPAIGN, CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE..

THE BACK SIDE OF BAILEY’S CAMPAIGN MAILER, CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Well you received our attention, you should know by now we love numbers, so we did our own investagation, guess what? The numbers don’t match up. According to city records Adkan Engineering did receive $585,285.28 during the years between 2008-20012, and we have the city records to prove it, and not the $3.84 million the Bailey campaign stated he actually recieved. Bailey was given an opportunity to retract his statement, but currently continues to maintain it’s legitimacy, regardless of public records which reference otherwise.

The mailer is misleading, it states that Adkison received $3.84 million in city funds, the actual dollar amount is $3,845,412.45. TMC wanted to see those payouts that Bailey stated matched up to $3.84 million, well according to our public records, not even close. Former Councilman Ed Adkison was correct, Councilman William “Rusty” Bailey was wrong. According to the City of Riverside Vendor Payout list Adkan Engineering received a total $585,285.28 during 2008-20012. Now, even though Bailey was given an opportunity to revise his assessment of that mailer, according to his campaign site, “Bailey Stands By Discussion of Adkison Record of Dealings with the City.”

CLICK ON THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL PAYOUT DOCUMENTS

The following our contract job which need City Council approval in order to proceed, that Bailey failed to mention that he voted on, or did he actually understand at all what he was voting on? Feb. 17, 2009: Council approves professional services agreement with Adkan for $202,602. Bailey votes yes. April 5, 2011: Council approves an additional $164,341.60. Bailey votes yes.
Jan. 10, 2012: Council approves an additional $178,477.55. Bailey votes yes. Total: $545,421.15

From mayoral candidate and small business owner Ed Adkison’s Mayoral Web Site, Adkison states, “I find it completely repugnant that a mayoral candidate, and sitting City Councilmember would lie and exaggerate the truth to get attention.” “Our city needs honest leadership that will lead the City of Riverside into a thriving and vibrant community. True leadership is a no-nonsense, honest business that Rusty is clearly incapable of understanding.”

“The fact is Riverside just can’t afford Rusty Bailey. Unemployment has tripled since Rusty was elected. Furthermore, Rusty complains about Ed giving the council a 60% pay increase, yet he still continues to accept his Council salary and has not asked for his pay to be reduced. In addition, Rusty fails to mention Ed did not take a salary or benefits the last 18 months he was in office when the economy crashed,” said spokesman Jeff Corless. “Rusty should act like a true public servant and follow Ed’s lead by making that same fiscally responsible decision. Of course, you’d think he’d follow Ed’s lead on this matter since all he does is steal Ed’s ideas like taking credit for the Riverside Renaissance led by Adkison,” continued Corless.

Adkan Engineering is on an approved City list of firms elgible to enter into contracts for a specified amount. Now getting a contract ofNow entering into a contract for an agreed maximum amount is one thing, how much you were actually paid is another. For example, you can enter into a contract for $600,000.00 to perform certain duties for the City. The $600,000 is the maximum amount that the City will pay out. There may be 10 jobs at a cost of $10,000 over the course of the contract equaling $100,000, with a remaining $500,000 left on the contract. If the contract expires the contract will have to be renegotiated. So therefore, these particular contracts say Adkan Engineering could make up to $600,000.00, if selected for various Public Works Projects, but it is not guaranteed. In addition there is a Conflict of Interest clause in the contracts. Now, there are specific contracts with Adkan Engineering for specific jobs.

According to Bailey’s web site, it appears he is changing his tune when he states, “Whatever the amount, 3.8 million dollars or 380 dollars, taxpayers have a right to know where there money may be spent…and particularly if some or all of that money is going to a candidate’s business.” Well alrighty now, I believe we do get the point.

In another campaign mailer sent to voters homes, Mayor Ron Loveridge stated of Bailey, “Rusty Bailey has the highest possible commitment to public service, reinforced by his years at West Point. Values are important in being Mayor. He is not wedded to any special interest.” “Now lets talk reality. According to the California 460 form Webb engineering has contributed to the Bailey campaign.

Further, according to a Press Enterprise article regarding favoritism Matthew Webb, stated that he is a Riverside native with ties to local officials. He has known council members William “Rusty” Bailey and Chris Mac Arthur for decades and is friends with Hudson. Webb Engineering has also contributed to the Bailey campaign.

Albert Webb Engineering from January 2011 to December 2011 received totals of $1,042,080.42

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE DOCUMENTS

But to be fair, let’s do a breakdown of what other Engineering companies received from January 2011 to December 2011, and see how they pan out against Adkan Engineering, who is not the only engineering company on record with the City of ~~Riveride~~ Riverside. There are many more engineering companies who have escalated beyond the $200K mark for 2011. So what could possibly be Bailey’s analytical assessment of these accounting numbers?

ADKAN ENGINEERING $192,755.10

ADECCO ENGINEERING $804,520.57

AEI-CASC ENGINEERING $600.00

AM ORTEGA GEN ENG $15,363.00

EBS GEN ENGINEERING $3,381,449.18

FALCON ENGINEERING $1,375,313.81

POWER ENGINEERS $3,749,143.18

WEBB ENGINEERS $1,042,080.42

We kind of find it complimentary, but using our photos of Ed without permission…wouldn’t you say this is taking this just a bit to far Mr. Bailey? What are most people thinking of this so far?

UPDATE: ACCORDING TO A NEW PE ARTICLE BY ALICIA ROBINSON, IN ORDER TO BE COINED THE ‘MOST INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY”, MOST OF THE $27,181.27 SPENT ON THE APPLICATION PROCESS WAS TAXPAYER PAID, THEREFORE, NOT A TRUE HONOR, BUT AN HONOR THAT WAS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR.

JUST FOR LAUGHS…..

Tough Campaigns, Pearce vs. Taylor

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…

The Mission Service Station, 1918-1929, occupied the site of the Fox Theatre, Riverside

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: NOT STUPID, BUT MAYBE JUST A LITTLE CRAZY?

Posted: October 12, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: city of riverside, councilman william "rusty" bailey, joel udayke, poly high school, rebecca ludwig, riverside unified school district, self appointed citizen auditor Vivian Moreno, supervisor john tavaglione

Tuesday night’s City Council issue on ethics and how complaints should be handled, became heated at public commented on this issue when Self Appointed Citizen Auditor revealed what a relative and Poly High student said about some of the female public speakers during a Government Class in which William “Rusty” Bailey is the instructor. Former Deputy City Attorney Raychele Sterling chimed in with reading a formal ethics complaint against Councilman and teacher Bailey, which was submitted to the City Clerk. Bailey took the microphone and lashed out the following response to the accusations made against him.

So, now the truth behind these accusation’s, occurred on Constitution Day when I was teaching my students about freedom of speech and the first amendment rights that they had. And giving them an opportunity to see public comment. And encouraging them to come down and comment on any item they’ve wanted to. Ahhh, including things that are put to them as skate parks. I’ve had student come down on several occasions to comment on items like ball fields, and skate parks, and school issues and I will continue to do that…

So if Constitution Day isn’t an appropriate time to show public comment, I don’t know what is. The next time I showed a video was before the Nights of Arts and Innovation to encourage my students to come down and participate in the long night Arts and Innovation which occurred last Thursday night which many of them did, many of them received community service credit for doing that.

Because I believe in getting them involved in City and exposing them to some of things that we are doing down here, such as the City Council meeting, and so they get community service hours for doing that, never did I disparage any single person or say “stupid” anytime during my class, thank you.

Now, Constitution Day that Councilman William “Rusty” Bailey is referring to, is September 17, 2012, and Arts and Innovation Night was Thursday, October 4, 2012. Councilman Bailey never did say “stupid” in his class, but what about the use of the term “crazy”?

Accordingly, news reached complainant, Vivian Moreno, via two students. One that attends Poly High School here in Riverside, and the other, the grandson, does not. After coming home that Thursday the 4th, after a presidential debate party, her grandson, Joseph (not a student at Poly High), who was doing his homework at the dining room table, told her that Bailey was talking about her in class today. In her inquiry for more information, found Joseph had spoken to his relative, who is a student at Poly High School. So what did she say, Joseph? She said that the ladies who spoke were “stupid”, and then noticed you were sitting behind one of the public speakers, and said, “that’s my grandma”. Bailey then shut the video off.

The following is the email dialogue of the following day, between the Poly High Student and Vivian Moreno to inquire as to more detailed information.

Moreno: Joseph told me last night that Rusty Bailey mentioned me in his class room. Would you mind letting me know what he said? Did he say we were Stupid? I will keep this very private.

Poly High Student: He just said, “this is what I have to put up with and some ladies are crazy”. It was the video with the lady with the long black hair and red shirt on. You were sitting and wearing white. I said “that’s my grandma” and he turned the videos off. Haha, but somehow now I failing his class. I don’t like him one bit!! and when he cut the lady off in the video and she was saying “this is why people shouldn’t vote for you….Rusty”. He was laughing at the lady in the video.

Moreno: How many times has he played these videos in his class? and why does he play these videos in his class? Does he offer extra credit to his students for walking for him?

Poly High Student: Two times, and I don’t know why he plays the videos, he just does it at the beginning of the period. And no extra credit that I have heard of.

Moreno: Were they both times he was Mayor Pro Tem? Does he say anything about him being Mayor?

Poly High Student: Yes, and he says he’s running for mayor, but that’s all.

Moreno: Were the two times on Wednesday’s these last two weeks? Did you have any kind of discussion of class assignment for viewing them? or are just viewing them because he is so full of himself? Those videos are long how much class time did he spend on them?

Poly High Student: Just the discussion when he was saying those people are crazy and I look what I have to deal with. He usually lets them run for about 5-10 minutes at the beginning of class. He fast forwards to certain parts.

Moreno: Thanks if I have other questions I will ask. On my way to L.A. see you soon. Thank-you.

Poly High Student: Okay, no problem.

Councilman Bailey made local headlines earlier this year for accessing Riverside Unified School District employee emails to solicit mayoral campaign information. Some considered this an inappropriate application of state public property for personal use, and unrelated to any school business. According to the California State Constitution Government Code 8314 (a) states, “It shall be unlawful for any state officer, appointee, employee or consultant to permit others to use state resources for campaign activity, or personal or other purpose not authorized by law”. Work emails are considered state property and not to be used for campaign activity.

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW

According to School Board Member Kathy Allavie, he was exercising his free speech right. Yes that is true, but utilizing the tools of public property for an unrelated use is a violation of the state contstitution. Regardless, Bailey still has his supporters, and accordingly, all the hooplah doesn’t really matter in the case of this one commenter in this Press Enterprise story by Dan Bernstein, Riverside: Should People Who Lodge Complaints Remain Anonymous? But I’m still taken back at the fact that Berstein still considers public commenters exercising their first amendment rights to free speech as “gadflys”. Sorry, Berstein, that’s quite belittleing and demeaning considering this is an essential part of the democratic process.

If this is the worst thing that can be said about Rusty, he still got my vote. – John McCombs, Elementary School Principal at Riverside Unified School District, Commenter on the PE.

I question the use of “got” for a Elementary School Principal, but that’s ~~jus~~, opps..just me…

Other’s are also asking the question, if the city’s famous P.I. will be taking up the investigation of the Bailey to investigate the usual one side? Of course, we are talking about former RPD Lt. Jeff Callopy. Friend of Whom?

The following is a code of ethics and conduct complaint that Self Appointed Citizen Auditor Vivian Moreno submitted to the city clerk.

DESCRIPTION OF EVENTS AND MANNER IN WHICH CODE OF ETHICS

VIOLATED BY COUNCILMAN WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY

On Wednesday, October 3, 2012, Councilman William “Rusty” Bailey (Bailey), while instructing a Government class in his capacity as a high school teacher at Poly High School, did make disparaging remarks about women who exercise their first amendment rights to political speech during public comment at Riverside City Council meetings. According to a relative of mine who is a student in Bailey’s Government class, and was present on the day in question, Bailey had presented a video of a City Council meeting so that his students could see him acting in his capacity as Mayor Pro Tem. When a student inquired of Bailey who the public speakers were at the meeting, Bailey replied: “This is what I have to put up with, these “crazy ladies.”” Thereafter, a female speaker, believed to be Karen Wright, was shown on the video, stating “Don’t vote for Rusty Bailey”. Bailey began laughing out loud at the speaker, mocking her. One of the students then replied: “Hey, that’s my Grandma.” Thereafter, Bailey commented “she’s weird” and immediately turned the video of the City Council Meeting off.

Bailey’s actions were disrespectful, offensive and sexist to both the speakers and the young women present in his class, in violation of paragraphs G and H of the Ethics Code. The impressionable young women in Bailey’s class should have been encouraged to exercise the most fundamental right guaranteed under the United States Constitution, “free speech”. Instead, they were discouraged and left with a feeling of inferiority, that if, as women, they were to exercise their first amendment rights and speak their mind; they would be labeled as “crazy”. Bailey made no reference to male speakers, nor did he use a sex neutral word, such as “people” or “individuals”. His intent was clearly to target the women speakers.

I’ve since learned that Bailey has shown at least two videos of city council meetings to his government class where he was acting as Mayor Pro Tem. According to my relative there was no discussion during or immediately after the video that related to the required curriculum or class plan. It appears Bailey was using the video of the council meeting not as an educational tool, but rather to seek favoritism from his students in his bid for Mayor. My relative also advised that Bailey had discussed a bid for mayor in the classroom before. This actions constitute a violation of paragraph F of the Ethics Code, as Bailey used his position as a Councilman and Mayor Pro Tem to further his campaign for Mayor of the City of Riverside.

“THE GOLDEN BOY”..RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERVISOR JOHN TAVIGLIONE.. ACCORDING TO PUBLIC SPEAKER REBECCA LUDWIG..

Even when you have a code of ethics, policy and procedures, you only apply them or use them when it’s convenient for you. If somebody like me, comes down here or anyone else, that is in opposition, holds you accountable, then they apply, and you guys don’t play fair…

I’m going to give you an example of what happen to me, not necessarily with you, but with your “Golden Boy”, Mr. Tavaglione, (Riverside Supervisor JohnTavaglione is incidently currently running for Congress). Now, remember here I’m protected by Civil Code Section 47,(Privileged Communicaitons in California). He baited me for a name, I gave it to him, I was then served with papers, was sued, taken to small claims court, the judge or the commissioner, whatever you want to call him, awarded him the judgment, he was a good friend of the “Golden Boy”…

I had to write up to the Attorney General saying there was a miscarriage of justice. Lucky for me, she saw it that way to. They brought in a judge, because I told her that if you get an attorney here, some judges, not all, they are in bed with all of you guys. The Board of Supervisors and the City of Riverside, you cannot get any justice. And they did reverse that judgment on my appeal. The judge also made a statement, made it very clear to everyone present, that he was brought in from out of the area. The two mediators were from Seattle, Washington.

So, when somebody comes up here and tries to hold you accountable, you take it as an attack. We are here because we care enough about this city to get involved. I was only talking about senior abuse and protecting our children and look what happen to me, and that’s only one incident. I also told you about my tire getting stabbed, being harassed at my front door four different occasions and threatened, twelve perpetrators, and I do have affidavits to prove this, and if you want to settle this going on, have them sign an affidavit. You take sign affidavit and take it to court and see what happens, see who is telling the truth. I’m all for justice, and you guys, not all of you, but most of you don’t play fair…

When we come up here and we address you, please don’t take it personal even though it may sound that way, and if it is, it’s because it is justifiable…

TMC knows that Mrs. Ludwig is not alone. There are many stories from the citizens of Riverside who have had similar experiences. They feel intimidated and are afraid to come out with their stories. Thank-you Mrs. Ludwig for you courage to come out with yours.

WHAT DID COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE CODE OF ETHICS? YOU GIVE UP THAT PRIVACY RIGHT WHEN YOU MAKE A COMPLAINT AGAINST A PUBLIC OFFICIAL! …..WE ARE PUBLIC OFFICIALS!

Councilman Paul Davis started out by statiing that he did have issues with some of things that City Attorney, Greg Priamos said. Some of the issues is that some of the language needs to be changed to “any person”. In otherwords, no public employee, whether it be it an employee of this city, has the authority or the idealism that if a complaint is made against a council member, an elected official, who is not a city employee, that can be handled by Human Resources; that employee who makes that complaint should have “no expectation of privacy”, and there is no law in the books that says that they do.

That’s like myself like myself making a complaint against Vivian Moreno (Self Appointed Citizen Auditor), the same thing abides here. If you have to make a complaint against a council member, that council member and that employee, a public employee can go to Human Resources. Staff has no authority at all to investigate a council member under any circumstances! You don’t have that authority, only the commissions have that authority. Therefore if a city employee does choose to file a complaint of any sort. It is a considered complaint on ethics on a councilmember, be it the mayor or anybody . We cannot abridge that process. We don’t have that authority. That is a violation of the charter. And you can’t tell me that there is any law in the books, anywhere, that says any different.

And the process is that we are public officials. Just like when President Clinton went through the process with his issue, there is no difference. We are no different that person is at all. And there is no expectation of privacy on anybody’s side. “You give up that privacy right when you make a complaint against a public official!” Unless it’s a criminal act that is so heinous that they are protected under certain laws. Just simply a disagreement, for example, is not a protected right. So I do say any person, or any entity, makes a complaint, be it the Human Resources as an employer or anywhere. It needs to go through that process. The public has the right for us to be before them, if you will, and be tried, if you will, before them. Not behind closed doors at anytime. It is a “public issue”, and that person be a public employee or otherwise has to understand that, that’s the way it works. You can’t have separate rules for seven things for separate people. “We are public officials!”

FORMER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RAYCHELE STERLING: AN ALLEGED KNIFE INVOLVED BETWEEN TWO COUCILMAN’S AIDE’S?

“Rusty, actually at the last council meeting, I thought you gave a really, really nice prayer… and you asked for blessings of your employees, and unfortunately I didn’t feel that prayer was heartfelt, and that was really saddening to me, because I feel like the actions that are taken really aren’t ever in the interest of your employees, or bringing blessings to them, but rather just bringing them heartache and hurt to them, so I really hope that you meant that prayer and you are going to try to make a difference of what’s going on in the City.”

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

I believe this was brought up because Councilman Bailey is on the Board of Leaders of Godly Character International.

“I did want to address some issues about privacy for employees, it depends on who you are whether you get those privacy rights. .. every city employee is entitled to them. But, I received a call, a while back, from a young lady named, Alicia Robinson (Riverside Press Enterprise), I didn’t even know who she was, I had no idea how she could have got my cell phone number, somebody from the City must have given it to her, and she had all three of my harassment discrimination complaints. So where was my privacy? This woman calls me, I don’t know who she even is, she’s from the press, and she has all my discrimination harassment complaints, it was very, very disturbing to me. So, it depends who you whether you are if you are entitled to that privacy. If you speak out against the city you’re probably not.”

“I talked about Maria Lamping last time I was here, and in the notice she received there was a confidential settlement brief, protected by the federal rules of civil procedure, and that was unlawfully released by the City Attorney’s Office, by the Public Works Office, by Tina English and I want to know, are those people being subject to administered interviews? Are they being subject to being on administer leave? Probably not, because they bobbled their heads accordingly.”

“The other thing that I heard, it’s just rumour, so I don’t know if it’s true, but I heard that Councilman’s Chris MacArthur’s Aide held a knife to the throat of your Aide, Rusty.. I don’t know if that is true. If that is true and you allow an employee who poses that kind of violent risk to other employees, and to your constituents, Chris, because he is going to their home’s, and you allow him to remain here? And yet you allow other employees to be fired for frivolous reasons. That’s a slam dunk that you are discriminating, harassing and retaliating against your employees who are whistleblowers, and that you are permitting it to occur from management and gratifying it.”

Councilman Chris MacArthur’s legislative aide is Chuck Condor..someone who has appeared to continue to slide by the City’s Code of Ethics..so is this Code of Ethics really a charades, as many are asking? A broadway show at our Fox Theatre that seemingly cost to much to see?

This allegation regarding this alleged altercation between Councilman Chris MacArthur’s Aide, Chuck Condor, and Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey’s Aide, Mark Earley, came through the pipelines in and about April 23, 2012. Currently, we still have not received any substantive information from City Hall to corroborate these allegations.

Sterling went on to say, “Steve, that is not a personal issue, that it is a policy issue, because that creates liability for each and everyone of you. At this point it may even creat punitive damages against you personally, I don’t know I will have to do the research on that..”

UPCOMING: WHAT DID JOEL UDAYKE, OWNER OF THE FLOWERLOFT, HAVE IN A VICTORIA SECRETS BAG FOR CITY COUNCIL DURING PUBLIC SPEAKING?

I’m going to talk about the state controller, I know everybody is tired of hearing about it, but we are worse than the City of Bell, we are in debt, 3 to 4 billion dollars.

So I felt kind of weird last City Council meeting, everybody brought props, so I brought some props, I brought this (and orange jumpsuit), does everybody recognize that? It even comes with jewelry (handcuffs).

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Is there any compelling reason why none of you elected officials have called the State Controller? If there’s nothing to hide, why hasn’t anybody called? I know it will be a public relations disaster, when they find all things that has happened in the city, when spending tax payers money and redevelopment money incorrectly. When is somebody going to call? When is somebody going to do the right thing? We have all the information..

Dvonne, Vivian, Raychele have the information for you, …City Council person call and get an audit, Brad Hudson (former City Manager) isn’t here anymore, you shouldn’t have any fears.

In closing, “It’s easier to tell the truth, than a lie”….”You never forget the truth, you always forget a lie”.

Call the State Controller. We’re here, to talk to you, and get this on the road, it’s going to be a public relations disaster, because of this city being this perfect entity, but have to know where are money went and the people who are responsible for it need to be wearing orange…

WHAT COUNCILMAN IS SEEN OUT AT A “DAIRY QUEEN” WITH A CONTROVERSIAL FIGURE? SOME OUR ASKING, “HOW MUCH CAN AN “ICE CREAM CONE” GET YOU IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE”? WELL IT APPEARS TO BE ALOT..

According to the last campaign mailer sent to voters homes, Mayor Ron Loveridge stated of Bailey, “Rusty Bailey has the highest possible commitment to public service, reinforced by his years at West Point. Values are important in being Mayor. He is not wedded to any special interest.”

The same evening that Bailey was to debate opponent Mayoral Candidate Ed Adkison at the the la Sierra/ De Anza Park Senior Center Debate, whereby he spoke in favor of Peter Hubbard’s AMR, and the rational of using one ambulance service in the City of Riverside. Councilman an Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey was seen at a local Dairy Queen, with non other than American Medical Response, Peter Hubbard on October 4, 2012, therefore contradicting Mayor Loveridges’s endorsement.

UPDATE: 11/06/2012: On good authority, Councilman Rusty Bailey bought AMR’s Peter Hubard the ice cream.. The question is how much can a cone of ice cream get you…

WHAT IS THE ISSUE WITH FIRE STATION NUMBER ONE, AND THE WORK STOPPAGE?

	Adam B on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: SCANDALOUS:…
	JF on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PHONEY FALC…
	MarkSr on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PHONEY FALC…
	Christopher on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PHONEY FALC…
	Christopher on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PHONEY FALC…
	Roy Bleckert on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PHONEY FALC…
	Nicholas Savala on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PHONEY FALC…
	MarkSr on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PHONEY FALC…
	Karol Wrotniak on TMC NEWS FLASH: SELF APPOINTED…
	J Samueles on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: SCANDALOUS:…

TMC: Thirty Miles of Corruption

Thanks For Visiting!

TMC Free Subscription

TMC Search

Recent Posts

Archives

Recent Comments

Twitter

Blogroll

TMC CLOUD ROLL

SCAN TMC QR CODE (VIEW MOBILE)

TMC

WHO’S VISITING?

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

IN MEMORY OF THOSE WHO FOUGHT IN THE PACIFIC..

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: LAST DAY ON THE DAIS: GOING OUT GANGAM STYLE FROM THIRTY MILES OF CORRUPTION..

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: MANO Y MANO, MAYOR Y MAYOR…

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CITY ATTORNEY: I APOLOGIZE, SORT OF…

VETERANS DAY: FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE OUR COUNTRY WAS WORTH FIGHTING FOR…

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: TEAM SAHAGUN?

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: IS THIS MAYOR LUV’S FINAL PUSH FOR POWER? THE MUNI MAFIA SENDS A MESSAGE ABOUT SPEAKING TO DISABLED SPEAKERS…THE CITY SPIN CONTINUES…

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: LOVE LETTER TO MAYOR LUV..SHELTON STYLE..

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: THE MAYOR’S RACE: IRRESPONSIBLE OR JUST TO IRRESISTABLE WHEN IT COMES TO TMC PHOTOS?

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: NOT STUPID, BUT MAYBE JUST A LITTLE CRAZY?

TMC SITEMETER

VOTER LOOKUP

Thanks For Visiting!

TMC Free Subscription

TMC Search

Recent Posts

Archives

Recent Comments

Blogroll

TMC CLOUD ROLL

SCAN TMC QR CODE (VIEW MOBILE)

WHO’S VISITING?

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this: