Posts Tagged ‘california league of cities’

County Counsel management has abused its power to wrongfully drive me from the job I successfully held for almost 30 years. I was not an at-will employee, I had a legal right to my job. County Counsel management intentionally and wrongfully took my job away from me.”  – former Deputy Riverside County Counsel Neal Kipnis, January 2018

In 2012, the Grand Jury stated that Priamos violated its secrecy during an investigation regarding police procedures.  Back in May of 2015, according to the PE, the Riverside Grand Jury has accused Riverside County’s internal law office of interfering with its review of the county’s information technology department.  In the report released in April 2015, the Grand Jury, which serves as a court-appointed watchdog of public agencies, said the Office of County Counsel directed IT staff to accept only written requests from the investigative panel, which had asked for a copy of IT’s (Information Technology) response to an audit.  According to California Penal Code “the grand jury is entitled to free access … of all public records within the county,” the report said. County counsel needs more training and must recognize the jury as an independent body, the report concluded.  Riverside County Counsel in headed by non other than the infamous Gregory Priamos, also was former Riverside’s City Attorney, who of course had plenty of baggage….. and I don’t mean travel baggage.  The question asked, “Is why this scumbag continually is protected?”  We know why, you only have to look at the supporters behind the scum bag, which in turn, is more scumbags such as former Supervisor’s John Tavaglione and Marion Ashley.

According to a current July 1, 2019 Grand Jury report and article in the Press Enterprise stated,  “Our investigation/interviews revealed that certain county managers have set personal ego, arrogance, power and personal control above their duty to serve the people. The highest honor is to serve the public, and along with that honor, is the responsibility to maintain ethical standards in employment actions. These county managers, the CEO and to some extent the prior County of Riverside Board Of Supervisors, have failed in their leadership to provide a positive, supportive environment.”  Well it seems as all hell broke loose at the County of Riverside, primarily because former County of Riverside Supervisor John Tavaglione was not their to protect his boy, Priamos, further not even Ashley.  The real Priamos is now seemingly being exposed now that he is all in the open.  Well this was no surprise to TMC, we’ve exposed him in the past, but no one cared!  The enablers kept enabling.  This same scenario happened in the City of Riverside with former City Manager Brad Hudson and Scott Barber.  Garbage in, garbage out.  Even then no one cared enough to come out to City Council and give their opinion.  Full Grand Jury Report below for your reading and viewing pleasure. (click link below).

 

Riverside County Human Resources Department and Office of Riverside County Counsel 07.01.2019

Former Riverside Deputy County Counsel Neal Kipnis expressed the following in a personal email, “I assure you that I am a totally honest person. What happened to me was totally wrong and dishonest.  He is a bad person and not worthy of being in such a public position.”

Neal Kipnis arrived at the Office of County Counsel from San Diego at the end of 1988.  Since then he has worked on many different issues related to contracts and construction projects, including drafting and negotiation of professional services and technology contracts, and resolution of complicated construction disputes. He has advised many County departments and special districts on various problem-solving and dispute resolution efforts.  Since 1988, a period during which he worked under four different County Counsels prior to the arrival of Greg Priamos. In all those years, Kipnis never had a bad performance review.  Why was he targeted?  We still don’t have a clue.  Was it simply because he did his work with honesty and integrity, and could not be molded to the Priamos machine?  Honesty and integrity is not in the vocabulary of the Priamos dictionary.

Mr. Kipnis received both his B.A. (Economics, Phi Beta Kappa) and J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles.  During law school, he clerked at the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Trade Representative, both in Washington D.C.  He was an associate with Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard and Smith for two years before coming to Riverside.

Mr. Kipnis stated, “I have had a successful career at County Counsel since 1988, a period during which four different County Counsels headed our office prior to the arrival of Greg Priamos. In all those years, I never had a bad performance review.”

Of course this wasn’t the first incident of complaints against Priamos, he had a slew of them going back to the days of being Riverside City Attorney.  We saw how this sociopathic sycophant destroyed good people.  We saw this with former City of Riverside Deputy Attorney Raychele Sterling.  Sterling alleged that City Officials awarded millions in contracts without bids!  We now see this with Riverside County Deputy County Counsel Neal Kipnis.  This was his original letter sent to me back in 2018 which was addressed to former Riverside County Supervisor John Tavaglione. (click on link).

THE LETTER TO FORMER SUPERVISOR JOHN TAVAGLIONE FROM FORMER DEPUTY COUNTY COUNSEL NEAL KIPNIS DATED JANUARY 1, 2018

According to Kipnis’s letter to former Supervisor John Tavaglione, there were false and misleading information made against him.  It was a failure of Human Resources (HR) to react in a proper and fair manner.  According to Kipnis letter to Tavaglione, “Sadly, Human Resources facilitated the improper actions taken against me by failing to ensure compliance with applicable County employee discipline procedures (Board Policy C-23 and corresponding HR policy). There was a significant failure to follow or enforce these important policies – intended to provide employees in my situation with fairness and protection. This failure by HR made it far more difficult for me to be able to defend myself leading up to the termination notice.”  Sadly, Kipnis’s letter was left on deaf ears and never responded to.

So what did the the Grand Jury report say?  Well it vehemently appeared to mirror Kipnis’s complaints of the process at hand.  So what actually received the attention of the Grand Jury?  It stated, “For several consecutive years, the Riverside County Civil Grand Jury (RCCGJ) has received numerous complaints regarding HR practices, and Riverside County Counsel (RCC), regarding the methods used for terminations and other related personnel matters that are initiated and processed.”  They went on to say, “The County of Riverside has a published Code of Ethics which states: “The principal function of County governmentis to serve the best interests of all the people.””

What did the Grand Jury see?  They noticed an inherent, “Prolonged mistrust due to harsh personnel practices as well as unscrupulous tactics by some managers has created a climate of fear, intimidation and anxiety among county employees. Employees know it is “go along to get along”, even if it is immoral, illegal, unethical or goes against policies and laws. One employee was told “you have to learn how to do things the county way.””

The Grand Jury found that employees had been denied and were deprived of the ability to examine materials and other documents kept in their personnel file, which is essential to the defense of an allegation against them.  Well okay…

But the following is the kicker folks, Retaliatory Behavior known as “Special Treatment” such as the “Freeway Therapy” Treatment!  “Employees who have displeased managers in the Office of County Counsel, as well as other departments, have found themselves the recipient of a number of “Special Treatments”.  Instead of being assisted, if performance issues are present, they are subjected to various stressors and “Special Treatment”.  Retaliatory transfers are prevalent. These occur when individuals are transferred to distant work place locations for punitive reasons.  Witnesses and those who have experience with this “Special Treatment” refer to these punitive transfers as “Freeway Therapy” and it is a known means of punishment for those who have displeased managers and directors in power.  In other instances of “Special Treatment”, attorneys who have been assigned to a specific department for many years are punitively reassigned to another unrelated department in which they have no expertise.”  I wonder what they coined that as?  “Job Reclassification Therapy”?  Oh no not that! anything but the Freeway Therapy Treatment!  Give me the Job Reclassification Therapy…  While I’m reading all this, it all sounds strangely sadistic with emphasis on Soviet Style Politics, of course, in America.

The Grand Jury report concluded that, “The current Board of Supervisors must address and stop all abuses of power in the Office of County Counsel. The record of culpability is long and convincing. The County of Riverside deserves a strong CGJ (County Grand Jury) to protect the taxpayers from fraud, corruption and abuse. A County Counsel who shares that vision is critical to that goal. The public must demand this.”  The Board of Supervisors are responsible for the actions of the County Counsel, it appears quite evident, his behavior was supported.  Due to a do nothing group of Supervisors.

So what did the Grand Jury report indicate and recommend be done?  According the Grand Jury report, “Testimony of high level manager in the Office of County Counsel indicate that any personnel actions which have taken place in that department have been initiated with the full knowledge and consent of the County Counsel.  The responsibility to control and stop the abuses therefore is the responsibility of the Board of Supervisors and CEO.  The Board of Supervisors and the CEO must hold the Riverside County Counsel accountable for all past and future behavior.”  Okay, so Priamos is the culprit, we all knew that, especially if you live in the City of Riverside… but remember it’s that ‘two sets of rules bug-a-boo’ that those within this so called local representative government can’t seem to get!

Well, the question is, should Riverside County Clownsel be behind bars and/or should have been behind bars when he was at the City of Riverside?  Many taxpaying residents within the City of Riverside are stating yes, and blame the City Council and Mayor for enabling this!  The County of Riverside has a published Code of Ethics which states: “The principal function of County government is to serve the best interests of all the people.”  Interesting enough, Priamos helped draft the Ethics Guide: Practicing Ethics: A Handbook for Municipal Lawyer for The League of California Cities, which Priamos was President of that entities Department.  But we believe that they, such as former Supervisor John Tavaglione never of course believed in any code of ethics.  Because of course, who would dare question him, unless your the type that enjoys a confrontational retaliation that could hurt you financially.  Well he is gone, but his legacy of corruption continues to effect the taxpayer at the pocket book.

Let’s look at some of Priamos’s other antics that no one did anything about within the City of Riverside!

Thought it was okay to transfer Riverside Public Utility monies to the General Fund without a vote of the people.

Thought it was okay to hire outside legal without contracts.

Thought it was okay to spend $19.4 million on outside legal, even the State Bar of California thought it was okay.

Thought it was okay to lie about who actually commanded that a public speaker be arrested for violating the three minute rule, which contradicted a bonafide police report.

The real laughable take away is that he wrote the Ethics Guide for the National League of Cities, being President.

Thought it was okay to settle legal cases which were not in the best interest of the taxpayers.

Thought it was okay to ride around in City Vehicle acting as a legitimate law enforcement representative of the City of Riverside.

Thought it was okay to support City Officials with Cold Plates.

Thought it was okay to support City Officials with Fraudulant Badges.

Thought it was okay to support Pension Spiking Practices within his Office.

Thought it was okay to utilize tax monies for office parties.

Thought it was okay to utilize tax monies for extravagant outside parties such as the Papadakis Restaurant Party.

Thought it was okay to allegedly commit insurance fraud?  The Priamos Tape.

Thought it was okay to support City Officials with Badges and Fire Arms .  Further Priamos thought it was okay that former City Manager Brad Hudson use the City Hall address as his Residence!

Thought it was okay to support former Chief Russel Leach after his DUI charge.

Thought it was okay to conspire to frame a sitting Councilman Mike Soubirous.

Thought it was okay to conspire on Councilman Mike Soubirous water usage, even there was no water shortage in the City of Riverside!

Thought it was okay to conspire to frame a sitting Councilman Paul Davis.

Thought it was okay to lie to Council regarding a complaint against the City of Riverside Human Resources Department.

Was he working numbers with his family during his U.S.C year back in 1991?

In 2010, after Riverside police Chief Russ Leach was charged with misdemeanor DUI for wrecking a city-owned vehicle while under the influence, allegations surfaced that Priamos was among those in city government aware of an attempted cover-up but did nothing about it.  A probe headed by former Riverside County District Attorney Grover Trask found no evidence of wrongdoing.

Even one family member was disgusted with the family antics that she wrote a book about it!  Greg Priamos’s cousin Paula Priamos!  She talks about the underworld of the Priamos Famiglia.

An excerpt from her book:  “I see my father’s body doubled over the wheel.  I see his chest and arms spilling out of the car, his head dangling, blood seeping out of the wet hole in his scalp.”

The warning signs were evident, even Community Taxpayer Advocate Jason Hunter chimed in back on June 24, 2014 about Priamos, take a listen:

The primary take away from all this is that there are two sets of rules, there’s Priamos Law and there is Priamos Law.  In other words, the ruling political class had one law, and the rest of us must endure the real law.  Will the following finally be Priamos’s new suite?  Well it should because the taxpayers are demanding justice.

The primary take away from all this was that there were two sets of rules, there was Priamos Law and there was the Priamos Law.  The ruling class had one law, the rest of us taxpayers endured beyond the spirit of any law.  Will the following finally be Priamos’s new home for his Soviet Style Law Practices?
HAS THIS CULTURE OF CORRUPTION IN WASHINGTON D.C. AND WITHIN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE LED US TO AN EVE OF DESTRUCTION?  Whereby it means nothing anymore to be a U.S. Citizen…  America has made strives since Selma, Alabama… We all know that, many won’t accept that.  The U.S. by far is the best country in the world, let’s not trash it.  I know, I’ve been to the ‘shithole’s’ of the world, and I always come back to America.  Therefore I say, God Bless America!  Hands down, America will never become a Socialist Country thanks to the 1st and 2nd Amendment!  Something a Dumb Ass County Counsel Sycophant Greg Priamos would not know or understand.  These are the people to be worried about folks, they are the ones who take advantage of the system without you in mind!
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

greggary

FRIENDS, BUDDIES, COMPAÑEROS, COLLEAGUES?  HE EVEN WANTS TO LOOK LIKE HIM..

I have to ask the question, “Is the reason the City of Riverside will not hold former City Attorney Greg Priamos accountable for past discrepancies because he is buddies with current City Attorney Gary Geuss?”  Was Geuss just hired to continue to cover up the blatant abuse of power that has plagued the Riverside City Attorney’s Office under the direction of Greg Priamos for the last decade? Is this more of the same recycled trash that rotates across the State of California on behalf of The Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, AKA Cindy Roth, or should I say Mrs. Senator Richard Roth and The California League of Cities?  Interesting enough, Senator Richard Roth’s law firm received $358,961.00 in outside legal payment in the last five years according to last years Performance Audit, which falls in line with it’s risk in procuring outside legal.  One, perception of favoritism, and two, potential conflicts of interest.  The Roth’s have made there living on the backs of the taxpayer.

I would not even be surprised if Gregory Priamos hand picked Gary Geuss to take his spot.

Here is my Argument, and you can all  decide for yourself.  When Geuss came to town April 13, 2015; I’m sure he needed some time to investigate, but it took almost 5 months til October 20th, 2105 for the council to have a candid discussion about Priamos from the dais.   The topic of conversation began with Soubirous robustly addressing the issue of the abuses of outside legal.  He then yields the discussion to the new City Attorney, Gary Geuss,  and asks if he can give an overview of how we got here.  Mike was obviously not paying attention but Mr. Geuss NEVER answered his question.  What he did or didn’t say was interesting.  He starts out by saying “I hesitate to comment upon what happened here before me, this has not been part of my job in the last 6 months.”  He also states in his candid discussion that when the council was selecting a new Attorney getting to the bottom of this very issue was a top priority.  The council was looking for someone who was ready, willing and able to look at the procedures that the city employed.  Obviously Mr. Geuss couldn’t make this his top priority, whats important to the council and the public is not important to him.  He’s ready, willing and able to take on the DA’s office (that’s a whole other story).  Mr Geuss goes on to compare the city of Riverside to LA in a similar policy and procurement issue: Geuss referred to the outside legal problems as a “lack of vigilance, lack of accountability, and lack of transparency.”  He makes reference to the outside law firms as “profit driven machines” that are motivated to make as much money as possible.  There is a trend that when these firms work for the public they are not held accountable as they should be.  He goes on to say in the future there will be 4 sets of eyes viewing all bills for outside legal.  Maybe he should have said 4 sets of honest eyes.  The old bills that need to be audited were viewed by 3 sets of eyes.  Greg Priamos, Scott Catlett and Brent Mason.  The fact that Mr. Geuss didn’t want to answer council member Soubirous question was obvious that he was intentionally dodging the real answer.

So I’ll answer it.  We had/have a very weak council that were all afraid of Greg Priamos, Brad Hudson, and Scott barber.  They allowed the legal department and Management to  run the city into the ground at an unsustainable cost to the taxpayer.  They ran a intimidation-retaliation form of government and they were all allowed to RAPE the taxpayer.  They all know the truth and they will continue to try to suppress the dialog. The citizens of Riverside have had it and we will continue to ask the very important sensitive and uncomfortable questions.

This only gets better………..

Then Councilman Paul Davis ask the question that no one could answer or everyone on the dais was afraid of.  “How much of the $11 million dollars that Greg Priamos spent on outside legal council was approved by City Council?”

The City Auditor replied, “That is not clear, I did ask that question to Kristy Smith, Deputy Assistant City Attorney, and she was not able to tell me.  She didn’t know.” The fact that Kristi Smith is still lying to the public goes to show nothing has changed.  She Knows!

Well, I can tell everyone that Priamos never went to Council for any approval.  Priamos ran the City of Riverside’s City Attorney’s Office fraudulently and illegally, with the help and support of the finance department Scott Catlett, Assistant Finance Director, and Brent Mason, Finance Director.  They also paid Greg’s bills without following any policy.  What a disgrace, they all should have all  been fired.  The new City Attorney Gary Geuss refers to this as a “lack of vigilance.”  New City Manager John Russo says, “No one will be held accountable.”  No! Mr. Russo, you and Mr. Geuss will hold the Citizens of Riverside accountable because we end up paying for all the padded bills and very bad behavior.  So who cheated the Taxpayers of Riverside, Greg Priamos, all the “profit machine” law firms that may have padded their bills like : Liebert-Cassidy-Whitmore, Best Best & Krieger, Burke Williams and Sorenson, the expert attorneys that we cannot live without, the Council, Mayor William Rusty Bailey,  John Russo and Gary Geuss.  This is a clear example of the leadership of Riverside putting themselves first and making the Taxpayer pay for all their FRIENDS, GREG PRIAMOS INCLUDED.

At the Council meeting of October 20th , it was as if the Council and new City Attorney wanted this all to go away quickly and be done with. But Davis and Soubrious were not going to let it die.  Councilmen Soubirous and Davis could not get a second on their motions for an outside legal firm to investigate further the problem which plagued the City Attorney’s Office, via a forensic audit.  Then Davis scolded everyone on the dais, he called them all hypocrites and gave Soubirous the second he needed.  The final vote was 6-1, to go forward and investigate this malfeasance of taxpayer monies.  John Burnard voted “NO.”  TMC is being told that the residents of John’s Ward 7 are just getting used his voting habits, he simply just not understanding what he is voting on, or if he is, is completely against his campaign platform.  In any case, what happen next, was the look on City Attorney’s Gary Geuss’s face when the motion passed, then he looked over to Russo.  A picture speaks a thousand words.

HUMMMMMMM………..What was going on?  Then I found this……….Let me set this up.  California League of Cities 2012 legal conference: Moderator Greg Priamos, Speaker Gary Geuss, Neil Okazaki another corrupt City of Riverside attorney, Liebert-Cassidy-Whitmore, Best Best & Krieger, and Burke Williams and Sorenson. All Friends, Buddies, Frenemies?  Nothing has changed.

locv   locvi   locvii

CLICK ON DOCUMENT IMAGE TO ENLARGE

After the 6-1 vote of the city council to move forward with the audit Councilmember Melendrez pressured Geuss to give them a time frame that his office would bring back names of possible auditors, Geuss said 30 days.  Thirty days has come and gone we are pushing 90 days. We have seen issues like this fester for months, even years. Our very weak council needs to step up and ask why it is taking so long to get back to the council and public? This is unacceptable. Mr Geuss need to be held accountable: Need I remind him of our new STRATEGIC PLAN 2.0, Accountability Policy: Government officials must always keep in mind they are working for the residence and businesses that pay the taxes that run this city. Every municipal employee should be expected to produce real value for the public and solve, rather than merely process the problems assigned to them. Employees who fail to add value, or worse, abuse the public’s trust, need to be retrained, or in extreme cases released from service (page 6).  Looks like Mr. Geuss needs a good talking to and possible retraining.

This is all about processing the problems instead of solving them.  This goes back to taking care of our friends and letting the illegal abuse that Greg Priamos and all the legal firms associated with him get away with possible theft of the taxpayer.   Is it possible that these California League of Cities, distinguished, trusted “profit machine law firms” (Geuss’s own words) padded their bills or screwed the taxpayer of Riverside?( that’s my use of words).  Maybe Mr. Geuss does not want to audit his friends?  Or Maybe everyone is afraid of the Distinguished, Trusted, Profit Machine law firms that may be exposed.  Only time will tell and the clock is ticking on your reputation!

Back in June 10, 2015 Press Enterprise article, Councilman Mike Soubirous stated, “If people did things that were illegal or they did things that were immoral or they did things that were outside policy, they need to be held accountable.

UPDATE: 01.08.2016: PRESS ENTERPRISE: ALICIA ROBINSON: RIVERSIDE: PROSECUTION DISCUSSION DELAYED:  Well accordingly, Riverside officials have postponed a discussion of whether to ask voters to give the city attorney the power to prosecute misdemeanor crimes.  Well it goes to show you our story made a difference!  What we find later, is that the Council were the people who wished for prosecutorial powers to be given to the City Attorney, for misdemeanors usually prosecuted by the District Attorney’s office.

UPDATE: 01.10.2016: PRESS ENTERPRISE: CASSIE MacDUFF: A RIVERSIDE CITY PROSECUTOR?  In this new article by Cassie MacDuff, continuing saga and questioning as to why the Riverside City Council are pushing forward to create a new job description for our City Attorney Gary Geuss.  When the City Attorney’s Office is in shambles regarding questionable spending without contracts, what is the true reason for taking away a job that is part of the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office?  Are they attempting to fill in space in the new $40 million Wells Fargo Building just newly purchased by the taxpayer?

Geuss believes he can do it without breaking the bank. His office expects to save at least $1 million by slashing wasteful spending on outside counsel, according to the PE.  But folks, we just had $19.4 million utilized by the City Attorney’s Office without Council approval, we still at this time do not know the extent of the monetary damage on the taxpayer.  Even subtracting $1 million from $19.4 million, even from $50 million is a drop in the bucket and an insult to the taxpayer.  We would still have tremendous waste.

Another laughable Geuss fact, is what he has to say about how the DA handles plea deals.  The following is a Geuss example: In one such case handled by the DA’s office, a masseuse who had traded sex for money was allowed to plead guilty to disturbing the peace.  This is untrue, the City Attorneys office has been known to plea deal all the time as a common practice.  Good try Geuss.

VIVIAN MORENO: RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL: 01.05.2016: SPEAKS ON PROSECUTORIAL POWERS!  Taxpayer Advocate Vivian Moreno speaks on the issue of the Riverside City Attorney’s Office desire to take over the misdemeanor category from the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office, Mike Hestrin duties. City of Riverside’s City Attorney Gary Geuss, with the direction of the City Council would like this implemented by a vote of the people. Presently the City Attorney’s Office is in shambles and in need of organization. It still has yet to account for $19.4 million or even more paid out with the authorization of the CFO Brent Mason.

JASON HUNTER: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: 01.05.2016: HUNTER SPEAKS ON PROSECUTORIAL POWERS AND RPU MONIES!

UPDATE: 01.15.2016: RECOMMENDING THE USE OF AN OUTSIDE AGENCY TO REVIEW LEGAL BILLS, CALLED “REVIEWBILLING.COM”  THIS AGENCY CAN REVIEW ALL LEGAL BILLINGS AND DETERMINE IF  THE LAW FIRM IS OVERCHARGING!

reviewbilling

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW REVIEW BILLING WEB SITE.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”.  WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT… AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!

CS3JPEGHogans copy

THANK-YOU RESIDENTS FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS…REMEMBER POLITICAL CORRECTNESS IS A DETRIMENT TO THE FREEDOMS WE BEHOLD TODAY.

Remember, no one for a second should think that this is okay.  To remove the power of the elected legislate, our council members, of placing issues on the agenda by a ceremonial Mayor, who has no power to legislate, and an appointed City Manager, who has no power to legislate, defines, simply, a political coup d’état, a sudden and illegal seizure of government.  It simply, a power grab by those who have no power.  What does this mean?  This means that issues such as the Red Light Cameras, the questioning of how monies are spent by the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, the Sewer Fund Audit (incidentally have found discrepancies) and the issue of a toxic waste spill known as AG Park, which has been reported twice by the news agency KTLA.  We are peeling the layers of the onion folks, and some of our elects don’t like it because it is raining on their parade of obligations.  Obligations which concern themselves to others, negating their obligation to the taxpayer.  Again, the issue of AG Park has yet to be placed on the agenda and now folks, we have this item #19 to contend with.  Again, I must refer to Joe Isuzu and ask for his opinion regarding Mayor Bailey’s position..

isuzu

Wow..I didn’t see that coming!

What needs to remembered is that the elected legislative body, the Council member, set’s policy, not staff or the mayor.

Sec. 405. Duties of Mayor; Mayor Pro Tempore; Council tie–Mayor’s vote.The Mayor shall be the presiding officer at all meetings of the City Council and shall have a voice in all its proceedings but shall not vote except to break a City Council tie-votewhich exists for any cause. The Mayor shall be the official head of the City for all ceremonial purposes.
Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins.  -Benjamin Franklin
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.  -Benjamin Franklin
DSCN4631
The contradiction of this statement is that it is outside of Riverside City Hall…

Will we be losing more of our Democracy as a City, and turn into a Hogan’s Heroes form of government, with the bumbling Colonel Klink and Sergeant Schultz running the camp?  Where’s transparency when Sergeant Schultz continues to insist he knows nothing?  Colonel Klink states everybody’s doing it, two council members are the only ones that seem to have a problem with it.  Will Sergeant Schultz take his excessive taxpayer pension check and cadillac health benefits and run for the hills?  “F-Troop” the taxpayer, right Barber!  Of course, you’ll be alright on the backs of the taxapayer!

ftroop

What did he say?

THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT CONCERNS OUR CITY AS A WHOLE, WE ASK ALL TO COME TO THIS TUESDAYS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO EXPRESS YOUR VOICE!  TUESDAY DECMEBER 9, 2014 AT 6:30PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL.

Persons Who May Place Matters on the Agenda (ORIGINAL AND CURRENT VERSION)
Except for matters pending before any committee, commission or other advisory body of the City or the City Council, matters pertinent to and within the jurisdiction of the City may be placed on the agenda by the Mayor, any Councilmember, the City Manager, any Department Director, or any other person, subject to the discretion of the City Manager.

As I understand this language, an item can be placed on the agenda by the Mayor, any Councilmember, the City Manager or any Department Director.  Any other person, such as the public, is subject to the discretion of the City Manager.  I say this, because it would be a contradiction for the City Manager to place an item on the agenda, and still be under the scrutiny and discretion of himself to remove it, hence, below it is not surprising to find that the City Manager is in complete control of items placed on the agenda.

Persons Who May Place Matters on the Agenda (NEW PROPOSED MODIFIED VERSION)
Except for matters pending before any committee, commission or other advisory body of the City or the City Council, matters pertinent to and within the jurisdiction of the City may be placed on the agenda by the Mayor, any Councilmember subject to the discretion of the City Manager or with a majority vote of the City Council during the “Future Items” for consideration section of the City Council agenda. Department Directors may have matters placed on the agenda subject to the discretion of the City Manager.

This new version will create a City which the Mayor and the City Manager control and new proposal or agenda items, which leaves it to their discretion only, if it goes to public City Council for discussion.  The power will be taken away from the elected Council members, thus leading us to a power less elected council.  Control will be place back to the status quo good ol boy complex, which means the Mayor, those Council members who play to get along, a City Manager who will ensure the complex agenda is directed forward, while those in the minority will never have a voice.  This is not about people folks, it’s about a power grab!  Cindy Roth and the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce won’t have to go to each council member and tell them to get along.

A conspiracy to take charge?  Another attempted power grab by the Mayor and City Manager?  Remember, the City Manager serves at the pleasure of the City Counsel, it’s not the other way around.  Or does the City Manager serve at the pleasure of the Mayor, a ceremonial position, not a legislative position.  Our City has already seen what an abuse of power can do within the City Manager position, and it has cost the taxpayer enormously.

Untitled-2                       Untitled-3

                         COMPLETE AGENDA                                   COMPLETE ITEM#19 REPORT

What we also need to recognize as a community, is that when the Mayor and those in status quo are telling the community that many cities are doing this, that should be a red flag, let not history repeat itself.  The of control of agenda issues are more than likely a result of the lobbying and teachings of the League of California Cities.  Who teach cities how to get around the law.  Then we have the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce whom receives taxpayers monies through the tactfulness of the President/CEO Cindy Roth.

croth           chair

Cindy Roth                      Ron Redfern

Further, what gets into the Riverside Press Enterprise and doesn’t get published, may be a result of former Publisher/CEO of the Press Enterprise, Ron Redfern.  Incidentally, Chairman of the Board for the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce.

THE PRESS ENTERPRISE JUST RELEASED THERE VERSION OF THIS ISSUE BY ALICIA ROBINSON. (CLICK THIS LINK)

WE’VE BEEN RECEIVING MANY EMAILS AS TO WHY TMC STAFF DIDN’T FILL THE HOGAN PIC.  LET US KNOW WHO YOU THINK IS QUALIFIED TO FIT THE PIC OF HOGAN! AND THE TMC CRACK PHOTOSHOP STAFF (WHICH IS MYSELF AND TWO OTHER GUYS) WILL REPLACE THE IMAGE WITH SOMEONE WHO DESERVES THAT POSITION!  LET US KNOW AT THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

THANK-YOU

P.S.  THANKS TO CLOSE TO A THOUSAND NEW READER’S THIS WEEKEND ON TMC!

LOCAL EMAIL IN REFERENCE TO CURRENT TMC POSTING CAUSES STIR IN AT CITY HALL LEADING TO APOLOGY!  You decide was their City Hall pressure to change their tune in the email below? The secondary and tertiary email were sent to City Council members.  A phone call was made by Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey, and he didn’t appear to like the Hogans Heroes bumbling Nazi pic and ask for a retraction from the writer.  Incidentally, Mayor Bailey is scheduled to speak at the Monday’s December 7, 2014 RRR (Residents for Responsible Representation) Meeting.  The antithesis is the apology, though the group title is Residents for Responsible Representation.  Before terms such as offensive, inappropriate, mis spirited, distasteful, embarrassing and horrific were used to describe TMC, we must view the last two emails, the writer states how “I don’t want to see our Councilmen “handcuffed” by City Staff.”  It was sent to over 200 residents because it was information that need to be disseminated.  One phone call changed the atmosphere.

apology
CLICK ABOVE IMAGE TO ENLARGE
Initial email sent (below), describing this Tuesday’s City Council Item #19 up for discussion.
firstletter
CLICK ABOVE IMAGE TO ENLARGE
arrow
and ANOTHER VERSION OF THE EMAIL (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE).
In this email Tom, states that “it absolutely eliminates the public involvement,” he goes on to say “This is not meant to affect the legislators, only the unwashed, undisciplined voting masses.”  Now who will decide who is unwashed and not washed?  The Colonel or the Sergeant?  Sounds a bit “Naziistic.”  Sounds a bit “Offensive,” don’t you think?  Again, the following: With this tweak of the city charter the public will not have to worry their pretty little heads about the self-important things the city government bureaucrats will do for us — or to us.  Therefore, should you as residents be concerned of this type of dictatorial mentality?  Should we be concerned with the ‘status quo’ mentality?  Mayor Bailey stated in his campaign that he would not be apart of this “status quo.”  IS HE LIAR?  You decide here is the evidence..
 bailey
IS HE ‘STATUS QUO?” THE VERY ELEMENT HE CAMPAIGNED AGAINST? HE CERTAINLY NOT CHALLENGING STATUS QUO AS HE INDICATED IN HIS CAMPAIGN FLYER! (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE).
 
Also post on Facebook:    

Councilman Mike Soubirous

I think anyone reading the quotes attributed to people commenting to the PE speak for themselves. One wants to limit who speaks to “maintain decorum.” Wow! Another does not tell you that Councilmember have been able to place items on the Council (key word – Council) Agenda up until a few weeks ago. I’ve placed items on the agenda by simply informing our City Clerk. Now, there are a few at City Hall who want to limit my ability to effect change that the residents of Riverside demand of me. Putting an end to Red Light Cameras, non-emergency ambulance competition, a plan to deal with aggressive panhandlers – all Items placed on the Council Agenda by Councilmembers. “City Hall” is getting tired of these changes. They like things the way they were – Councilmembers going-along to get-along, let the bureaucrats decide how to spend our tax dollars. PLEASE SHOW UP THIS TUESDAY AND TELL THE BUREAUCRATS THEY WORK FOR YOU AND TO STOP TRYING TO LEGISLATE – THAT’S THE COUNCIL’S JOB!
FORMER COUNCILMAN FRANK SCHIAVONE SENDS LETTER TO COUNCIL MEMBERS NOVEMBER 2014 REGARDING ITEMS BEING PLACED ON THE AGENDA AND HIS RECENT CONTACT WITH FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON:
To All Councilmembers:
Hope this finds you all well. Recently, I was asked if I was familiar with Section IX(C) of the Rules of Procedure and Order of Business for the City Council of the City of Riverside. My response was yes, and that I was directly involved in its modification and adoption while sitting as a Councilmember. I offer the following comments for any historical value you may find useful.
1) The entire essence is captured in its title. “Rules of Procedure and Order of Business for the City Council of the City of Riverside” (not the City Manager Rules)
2) Reference made “Subject to the discretion of the City Manager” only refers to persons other than the Mayor, any Councilmember, the City Manager, any Department Director. During my 8 years as a Councilmember with four different City Managers (2 Acting-2 permanent) is was never suggested otherwise.
3) Just for information, I recently contacted by phone former City Manager Brad Hudson and posed this question to him. “Did you ever think you had veto power over any Councilmember wanting to place an item on the Council Agenda?” His response to me was, and I quote, “No, never, but what a great idea if you can get away with it!” (He started laughing at the mere suggestion).
4) Any attempt of “Clarification” by any Administrator is nothing more than an attempt eliminate your authority as a Legislator and have you follow by example, rather than lead by example.
Kindly yours,Frank Schiavone
NEW STORY: In the Press Enterprise, Chief Diaz said. “You can be smart or less smart about it, and I’m satisfied our folks handled the situation very expertly, and the proof of that is that there were no injuries or property damage.”  The TMC Investigative team that news is all over the internet about a car plowing through a crowd of protestors, with injuries.  In fact, some major news agencies such as KTLA, ABC and NBC.  Is it time for Diaz to go?  Does he allow his troops to really sleep on the job?  The next story…
protestors
CLICK ABOVE IMAGE TO ENLARGE
WITH THE NEW CRITICISM, TMC UPDATED IT’S DESCRIPTION…

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

According to Moodys, the nations largest issuer of municipal bonds, they are asking the question, is bankruptcy becoming a popular strategic choice for municipalities in order to deal with debt?  Well they think so and and in response they will begin a wide-ranging review of municipal finances in the nation’s most populous state because as they see it, there is a growing threat of municipal insolvency.  It is there contention that it expects more municipal bankruptcies and bond defaults.  Recently, Stockton, San Bernardino, Mammoth Lakes have filed and now the possibility of Compton in the coming month.  According to Moodys there will be more to come.  The fact that their are more bankruptcy filings and bond defaults among California cities reflects an increased risk to bondholders as investors.  These risk become the red flags which brings Moody’s focus of attention and an obligation to investors.  As bankruptcy becomes a tool for cashed strapped cities, this requires Moody’s to reassess the financial position of all cities in California.  Within a year the City of Riverside’s bond rating has decreased from an average of AAA rating  to AA /A rating.  Mind you this is still considered good, but the fact remains, it visually appears to be of concern.

                                                                             

     CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW INVESTOR INFO           CLICK LINK TO VIEW CITY’S BOND RATING EXPLANATION

A decrease in bond rating to the investment community is a statement that there has been an appreciable increase in risk.  Therefore, in many ways it is of concern, because a lower bond rating can mean the difference of getting a better percentage rate on borrowing, especially in times when municipalities are struggling due to lower tax revenue streams.  Even if it was a 0.5% increase, it would cost more money to borrow.  The other concern is “How will the debt be paid off?”  Considering the fact that there will be lower tax revenues on the horizon.

If you look at the example of the US, losing its prestine AAA rating down to a not so prestine AA rating, it really matters.  It is a very loud statement that there has been an appreciable increase in the risk – which might still be tiny, but it exists – that the US might one day struggle to pay back all it owes.  In theory there will be a financial cost for the US government and US citizens, whose debt is priced off the interest rate paid by the government.  Perhaps an additional half of a percentage point on interest rates.  According to US Bank JP Morgan, over time, this could amount to an additional $100 billion of interest costs for the US economy.

As a result investors are beginning to wonder if cities are using bankruptcy as tool for their debt?  It was noted that some municipalities were considering bankruptcy as a new strategy to address budget deficits and avoid obligations to bondholders.  This in essence would be disastrous to the investment community.

According to Chris McKenzie, executive director of the League of California Cities, also considered a lobbying entity for cities, said, “Moody’s has an obligation to review changing circumstances, but we just suggest that their assessment of the framework and ground activities is perhaps exaggerated”.   Of course if you’re a paid lobbying group for cities, what else would you say?

If you take the City of Riverside for example, and look at their monthly financials.  May for example, and compare ratings in 2011 to 2012.  One will find a downgrade from AAA to AA / A.  Don’t get me wrong it’s still a good rating, but why the downgrade?  Are we borrowing more? Are we incurring more debt?  According to the City of Riverside’s Office of Economic Development we are continuing to do well in lieu of distressed economy.

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW

But can this be due to the fact that the City of Riverside has a continous revenue stream from our utilities, and the utilities we own?  Would we consider this a false sense of security for current ratings if utilities were accessed or used inappropriately?

                                         

MONTHYL FINANCIALS MAY 2011                MONTHLY FINANCIAL MAY 2012

In Moody’s report, more than 10 percent of California cities have declared fiscal crises, with most troubled areas lying inland in the middle of the state and east of the Los Angeles area.  The report also noted the potential for ratings downgrades to cities, counties, school districts throughout the state.  I would imagine a downgrade as I indicated in the City of Riverside’s may be of concern and therefore a red flag of interest.  Important to note, since January 2012, the City of Riverside is now using IDC Financial Publishing, Inc. for their Certificate of Deposit ratings, instead of the “A” rating system.  It’s based on their unique CAMEL system.

OOPS! NOPE…NOT THIS FOLKS, BUT THIS…CLICK THIS LINK

According to them these Certificates of Deposit are rated “superior”, but really the banking institutions issuing these CD”s are rated ‘superior’.  I may consider these a bit deceptive by the City.   In other words, as opposed to rating the certificates of deposit, securities or investments by such institutions such as Moody’s, Fitch or Standar & Poors, IDC Publishing rates the institution or bank.  IDC Financial Publishing, Inc. explanation of their rating system is as follows.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DOCUMENT

The Fitch rating system for banking institutes are explained on their site.

How did we get to the point of Cities filing for bankruptcy?  The state of the economy for one thing, uncontained government spending, unsustainable employee contracts, the loss of jobs, loss of industry, the cost of doing business.  No jobs paying their mortgage becomes an issue.  The loss of their homes.  Homes in terms of taxes don’t produce income for municipalities, in terms of property taxes, utility taxes; people don’t spend therefore less sales taxes.

One commenter on the Business Insider laid blame toward State Government, others have blamed foreign laborers, perhaps the truth of the matter that there is truth to both perspectives.

This has nothing to do with  foreign labor. It has to do with the abuse from government workers. Municipalities, counties and the State of California have made promises of  multi-million dollar pensions + benefits to its employees.  Partly because CA  lawmakers are in bed with the Unions or are too afraid of them. Either way, the  public sector union has forced the hand over the last 30 years and no one has  had the balls to say enough is enough. Almost 60 cents on the tax dollar  goes to pay for salaries + benefits + pensions. In any normal corporation, that  would have sent red flags to cut down on payroll expenses but not in the State  of CA. After all it’s other people’s money, right ?    -You reap what you sow, commenter on the Business Insider, August 17, 2012

UPDATE:08/25/2012:  IS CHUCK CONDER, ASSISTANT COUNCIL AIDE TO COUNCILMAN CHRIS MAC ARTHUR, THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S NEW JOE BIDEN?

Conder, an Airforce Veteran himself, responded to a City delegation headed in part by Councilman Paul Davis to explore a sister city relationship with Can Tho, Vietnam.  The Press Enterprise states it was unclear to whom Conder was referring to, but made the statement as a City Staff Member, “These socialist nuts”.  But of course, the obvious talk is about the people Vietnam.   Local Riversidian’s are just calling it another Biden moment for Chuck.  Councilman Chris Mac Arthur was quick to bring damage control to the situation by stating, “I think Chuck was speaking as a veteran to other veterans, certainly not in his role as a legislative field representative”.  The question is, was he on City payroll during the time in question.  Regardless, he is a public person and anything he does or says would over shadow the defense of being a private person.

Councilman Paul Davis responded to the comments as “completely innappropriate”.

Conder has had his behavior questioned over the year.  One was when he was canvassing his neigborhood in Councilman Paul Davis’s Ward 4 on a redistricting issue.  The rumour was that he wanted to remain in neighborhood to run against Davis in the next election.  Another incident was allegedly a physical altercation at City Hall.  Other’s have witnessed Conder referring to  women who spoke publicly at City Council as “idiots” and “bitches”.    Councilman Chris Mac Arthur certainly knew of this Biden moment.  Back in July 27, 2010 Chuck commented regarding the vendetta the Press Enterprise had against City Hall,  and the office of City Manager Brad Hudson.  We are all aware of the what the cost of his legacy will have on the taxpayer in the coming years.  The following is a small excerpt into the mind of Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Administrative Aide Chuck Conder.

Stop blasting city brass

The Press-Enterprise’s vendetta targeting Riverside City Hall, and especially the city manager’s office, has become an embarrassment to the newspaper and the city’s good name (“City manager up for review,” July 27). It is time for this to stop.

Have mistakes been made? Probably. Were corrective actions taken? Absolutely!

City Manager Brad Hudson and the city’s leadership team are doing a magnificent job leading Riverside through tough, nearly unprecedented, economic times. Our city is building and growing while maintaining a balanced budget and healthy financial reserve. Celebrate — don’t desecrate — their remarkable accomplishments.

Charles E. Conder III

08/25/2012: ONE DOG SHOT DEAD, ONE MURDERER WHO GOT AWAY..  CONFLICTING STORIES FROM RPD REGARDING THE KILLING OF A FAMILIES PET DOG.

According to Sharon Gonzales an officer told them that the dog was shot through a gate because officers needed to get into the yard to access a suspects house.  Well, ok… Whereby, Lt. Toussaint stated that the officer was actually in the backyard, and shot the charging dog to protect himself.   This is not the first time pets were shot dead by RPD, residents are asking the question, if a police officer needs to access homeowners yards our we to expect more of the same toward our pets?  A sort of mercy killing for the greater good?  What if there are small children in the back yard?  Regardless, a multitude of comments transpired on this topic in the Press Enterprise.  Currently no response from Chief Sergio Diaz, but as in the Bailey Laptop Caper, we are sure he is on it!

I’M ON IT, AGAIN! AFTER THIS ONE DRUMSTICK..

UPDATE:08/28/2012: MORE INVASIONS OF PRIVACY EXPECTED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.  According to Councilman Mike Gardner, on the City’s New Neighborhood Networking site, the City of Riverside has contracted with the Department of Animal Services to canvass neighborhoods, going door to door, investigating if residents are harboring unlicensed dogs or cats.  Gardner states that the vast majority of vicious and aggressive dog calls that occure in the City are for unlicensed and unaltered dogs.  Therefore, I would suspect that once they are licensed, that behavior should cease.  Questions? Call Coucilman Mike Gardner’s office  951-826-5242. 

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW LETTER

UPDATE: 08/29/2012: CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY: FORMER CITY OF RIVERSIDE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RAYCHELLE STERLING STATED THAT NBC HAS ACCEPTED TO DO A SERIES OF STORIES OF THE CONTAMINATED PCB SITE AG (AGRICULTURAL) PARK REGARDING THE FALSE INFORMATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE CITY TO SUCH DEPARTMENT AS THE EPA, AND THE CITY’S USE OF NON PROTECTED EMPLOYEES TO CLEAN THIS SITE.. MORE TO COME!

JUST FOR LAUGHS…

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…THE PEACE TOWER, MT. RUIDOUX, CIRCA 1935

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.  PROUDLY RATED ONE STAR (POSSIBLY DOWN TO ZERO FROM OUR LAST ACCOUNTS) 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 FOR GOOD REASON, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST, FOR GOOD REASON… 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 SPHALL SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR CONTACT US BY THE FOLLOWING EMAIL ADDRESS! CONTRIBUTORS WILL ALWAYS BE PROTECTED… YES, WE EXPECT THE JAIL TIME FOR THAT ONE…  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

As if they were testing their parents, as children do, the state said no more, enough is enough, and slammed it’s iron fist of authority over municipalities.  Cities cannot become rogue entities and become microcosms of self proclaimed commonwealths, they must still answer to a higher source, as the state has indicated.  California Supreme Court judge ruled this morning that Assembly Bill 1X 26 to abolish redevelopment angencies is legal!   Assembly Bill 1X 27, the measure conditioning further redevelopment agency operations on additional payments by an agency’s community sponsors to state funds benefiting schools and special districts, also abolished.   This is based on Proposition 22 (specifically Cal. Const., art. XIII, § 25.5,subd. (a)(7)) which expressly forbids the Legislature from requiring such payments.   According to the L.A. Times the state acted legally when it abolished more than 400 redevelopment agencies to close a budget gap.  The State acted legally.  Therfore, the state has the right to legislate and remove legislation as it sees beneficial to the citizens of the state.  Assemblyman Chris Norby, R-Fullerton, said the agencies long ago outlived their usefulness and should be shut down, particularly as the state confronts a $25.4 billion budget gap.  The cities lobbying groups, The California Redevelopment Association and The League of California Cities sought a writ relief arguing that each measure was unconstitutional.  Well ok..  You have to wonder why these city lobbying groups, who represent cities, are going to the costly legal expense of fighting so hard, for taxpayer monies for a city’s redevelopment plans.  Well, then, are they really looking at the best interest of the taxpayer in the long run?  ..or in reality, only for those they actually represent?  and in addition, do they actually contribute to the abuse by showing cities how to fully take advantage of redevelopment, against the best interest of the taxpayer?  In our opinion, these lobbying groups are in no way friends of the taxpayer.  According to the California Legislative Analyst Office back in February 16, 2011 came to the conclusion that there was significant policy shortcomings of the California Redevelopment Program.  They made mention that documents released by the California Redevelopment Association (CRA), a lobbying group for the cities, were seriously flawed.  This was in reference to claims made by the CRA that 304,000 jobs would be lost if redevelopment agencies were eliminated.

READ FULL VERSION OF THE SUPREME COURT RULING BY CLICKING THIS LINK!

According to the L.A. Times the state acted legally when it abolished more than 400 redevelopment agencies to close a budget gap.  The cities lobbying groups, The California Redevelopment Association and The League of California Cities sought a writ relief arguing that each measure was unconstitutional.  Dan Berstein’s of the Press Enterprise had much to say about Redevelopment in the City of Riverside.

But it has scarred and scraped communities. It has put people out of business by ripping down buildings and not replacing them, or evicting businesses — the “private sector” — and filling the void with nothing.

Redevelopment is a mixed bag, not a money bag. But that’s not how its champions see it. They see an entitlement program and they’re hooked on it.  Tax increment is their heroin. No wonder they went to court.    -Dan Berstein, Press Enterprise

Hopefully Dan won’t be warned with a SLAPP suit by unknown entities within the City as TMC, for stating an opinion.  But even the City of Riverside pushed the envelope of their contempt by calling the states actions a form of “ransom”, as indicated in their July 27, 2011 news release, or even as a form of “theft”, as indicated in this June 16, 2011 release.  I wonder if they are on the State’s list of potential SLAPP suit candidates?

     

CLICK THE IMAGES TO READ THE WHOLE NEWS RELEASE

All you have to do is walk Downtown Riverside and see what your $1.8 billion has attained for the taxpayer.  What does our city’s favorite son, former city manager Brad Hudson have to say about this?  What did he know? and did he leave town just in time?  Will the city now try to sneak a new ballot initiative for the citizens of riverside to pay the bill for their bad business decisions and indiscretions?  Get ready for higher property taxes.  Just by the fact of shutting 400 angencies throughout the State of California, state officials already estimated that the new laws would generate $1.7 billion this fiscal year, the City of Riverside has already spent $1.8 billion alone on redevelopment projects… in the middle of this, where are the obligatory affordable housing projects?  They weren’t found in the Raincross Promenade… What are ex and fired city employees saying about the cities redevelopment program?  Where does the City of Riverside go from here?

“For far too long, California taxpayers have financed obscure government agencies that use taxpayer dollars and their power of eminent domain to benefit politically connected developers,” said Marko Mlikotin, alliance president

Thursday morning Riverside City Officials converged for an emergency meeting regards to the effects of the new Supreme Court rulings.  I would have loved to be a “fly” on the wall on that one.  Keeping in mind, the redevelopment agency and the city are two different entities which are unrelated.  Mayor Ron Loveridge said the meeting was to discuss a potential $5 million shortfall, which the new ruling would place in the city’s general fund budget.  Therefore, some projects would not get done, such as the new shopping plaza in the Five Points area and a long-planned multi-modal transit center.  Some months back, TMC reported comingling of the general fund with redevelopment money, and a $5 million dollar oversight.  Questions were being raised regarding the movement of state monies to the city’s general fund, otherwise known as an inter-agency transfer.  As far as we understand, state agency monies cannot be transferred to the city’s general fund, monies are to remain in seperate accounts.  The question still remains unanswered.   Mayor Ron Loveridge called it “the worst possible outcome for cities.”  Which is true, since the taxpayer will be the one responsible for the bill.  

He went on to say, “Redevelopment’s been our primary way which we’ve created jobs and worked on economic development projects, and now that tool is taken away.”  Let me think about this, the primary way we create jobs, according to the mayor, is through taxpayer raised monies?  I always believed as many,  it is in the private sector.  And that the success of a business is dependent on what they produce in terms of products or services, or both.  This creates demand, demand then creates value. This in turn creates the encentive for the business to expand, hire more people, in turn, creating jobs.  Funding jobs through tax payer money does not constitute real jobs in a free market.  The idealism of Keynesian economics does not work in this instance, or has it worked in any instance in history.  In a capitalist form of government, what would give the impression and perception that government knows best, and this can be the “norm.”  It goes against all that this country was originally based on.  But the practice and its illusion continues.

UNKNOWINGLY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!   TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST…  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!  TMC WISHES ALL, EVEN CITY HALL, A MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR!  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM  BY THE WAY, COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED!

A long habit of not thinking a thing is wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right  –Thomas Paine

NEWS RELEASE: CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT DEAD ON ARRIVAL?  THE CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION AND LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES HAVE SUED CALIFORNIA STATE CONTROLLER JOHN CHIANG AND THE DIRECTOR OF THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ANA MATOSANTOS.  THE SUPREME COURT HAS MANDATED A STAY OR FREEZE ON ALL CITY REDEVELOPMENT, UNTIL THE ISSUE CAN BE RESOLVED APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS FROM NOW IN THE BEGINNING MONTHS OF 2012.  THIS MEANS THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS MANDATED EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES FROM INCURRING NEW INDEBTNESS, TRANSFERRING ASSETS, ACQUIRING REAL PROPERTY, ENTERING INTO NEW PARTNERSHIPS, ADOPTING OR AMENDING REDEVELOPMENT PLANS ETC.,  AND ESPECIALLY THE FOLLOWING:  ENTERING INTO NEW CONTRACTS OR EVEN MODIFYING EXISTING CONTRACTS.  EVEN THE NEW ORDINANCE ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL THIS WEEK IS NOW DOA.

ON JUNE 29, 2011 GOVERNOR BROWN SUSPENDED ALL REDEVELOPMENT ACITIVITIES IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WHILE CRITICIZING THE AGENCIES FOR DRAINING TAX DOLLARS AWAY FROM SCHOOLS AND PUBLIC SAFETY AT A TIME WHEN REVENUES ARE RUNNING THIN.   THE STATE GAVE CITIES TWO OPTIONS TO THIS SUSPENSION,  AS A RESULT OF THE ABUSES OF REDEVELOPMENT, DISSOLVE IT OR CONTINUE IT.  IF YOU CHOOSE TO CONTINUE, THE PAPERWORK THE STATE EXPECTS CITIES TO FILL OUT, IS TEDIOUS, AND THIS HAS UPSET MOST CITY GOVERNMENTS AS OURS. THEREFORE, OUR CITY ISSUED AN ORDINANCE TO CONTINUE THE VOLUNTARY REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.  THIS CHOICE TO CONTINUE BECOMES AS THE STATE CALLS IT “ VOLUNTARY CHOICE”. THEREFORE ENTERING INTO THIS CONVENANT CITIES ENTER A MORE STRUCTURED PROGRAM TO FORCE THE CITY TO BECOME MORE RESPONSIBLE, THIS IS WHAT THE STATE’S VIEW THAT IT WILL MITIGATE ABUSE OF FUNDS. 

THIS IS WITH CONSIDERATION OF THE MERE FACT THAT THE CITY WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR BONDS JULY, 1, 2012, AND WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PAY FOR IS A FACT, AND EX-RIVERSIDE CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS.  THE COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE WILL INADVERTANLY HAVE TO PAY FOR THIS THRU HIGHER UTILITIES SUCH AS ELECTRIC, WATER AND SEWER FEES.  IF YOU LOOK A OTHER CITIES, YOU WILL REALIZE WHAT 2 BILLION OF CONSTRUCTION REALLY LOOKS LIKE. REDEVELOPEMENT CRITICS SAY THAT, TOO OFTEN, THE MONEY BENEFITS PRIVATE BUSINESSES AND STEAMROLLS PROPERTY OWNERS.  ASSEMBLYMAN CHRIS NORBY, R-FULLERTON, SAID THE AGENCIES LONG AGO OUTLIVED THEIR USEFULNESS AND SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN, PARTICULARLY AS THE STATE CONFRONTS A $25.4 BILLION BUDGET GAP. BUT IN THEIR ARROGANCE, THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE DID NOT TAKE THIS SUSPENSION WELL, THEIR ENTITLEMENT WAS CLEAR, GOING AS FAR AS CALLING THE OBLIGATION PAYMENT  “RANSOM” AND A FORM OF “THEFT“.  AS INDICATED ON THEIR WEBSITE.  YOU WOULD THINK THAT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE WOULD BE ON THE TEAM EFFORT AGAINST SUPPORTING SUCH WASTE, BUT ARROGANCE IS DEEP SEATED AND IRREVERSIBLE AS A MALIGNANT CANCER THAT IT HAS LED THEM TO SUE THE STATE.  THE STATE IS YOU THE TAXPAYER.  THE CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION AND CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF CITIES, OF WHICH MAYOR LOVERIDGE IS PART OF, ARE TAXPAYER FUNDED LOBBYING INTEREST GROUPS WHICH ARE SUING YOU (TAXPAYER) TO GET THEIR SPENDING MONEY.  IT’S AS IF YOU GIVE A CHILD AN ALLOWANCE, WHICH THEY KEEP SPENDING AN IN TURN, THEY KEEP COMING BACK TO YOU FOR MORE.  THE REAL SAD CONTRADICTION IS THAT YOU (TAXPAYER) ARE ALSO PAYING THE LITIGATION FEES TO SUE YOURSELF FOR MORE OF YOUR MONEY.   THE CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION AND CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF CITIES FUNDED A CAMPAIGN THAT ULTIMATELY STOPPED SERIOUS EMINENT DOMAIN REFORM IN CALIFORNIA, LEAVING PROPERTY OWNERS VUNERABLE TO SEIZURE IF CITIES FIND A BETTER USE FOR THEIR LAND OR BUSINESS. 

BUT HOW MUCH DEBT SERVICE ANNUALLY IS THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE PAYING ON RENAISSANCE PROJECTS?  IF $1.58 BILLION IS THE TOTAL FOR DOING ALL RENAISSANCE PROJECTS, WHAT’S THE TOTAL COST WITH INTEREST OVER THE LIFE OF ALL THE BORROWED MONEY?  IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN IT’S ALL PAID OFF, WHAT WILL THE TOTAL COST BE?   THIS WOULD THEREFORE BE A PROJECTION, BECAUSE BONDS COULD BE REFINANCED OR PAID OFF EARLY DEPENDING ON THE ECONOMY ETC.  WE MUST ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT THE LONGEST TERM OF BORROWING FOR THE RENAISSANCE PROJECTS, SUCH AS 30 YEARS ETC.

SO, TOTAL NEW MONEY BONDS ISSUED DURING THE PERIOD AMOUNT TO $1,084,051,402, INCLUDING NON-CONSTRUCTION PROCEEDS, AS INDICATED IN TABLE 1.   THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF OTHER FUNDING SOURCES IN THE RENAISSANCE: 

1. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.

2.USER FEES.

3. STATE, FEDERAL AND REGIONAL GRANTS.

4. LAND SALE PROCEEDS.

5. PRIVATE FUNDING- SUCH AS RAILROADS, DONATIONS ETC.

6. GENERAL FUND CASH.

7. RDA TAX INCREMENT.

8. CERTAIN OLDER RDA BOND PROCEEDS ALLOCATED TO RENAISSANCE.

9. CERTAIN MEASURE-G PROCEEDS ALLOCATED TO RENNAISSANCE.

10. FUTURE PLANNED RIVERSIDE CONVENTION CENTER BOND ISSUE.

THE ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE AMOUNT VARIES BUT TYPICALLY IS IN THE MID $60 MILLLION RANGE FOR 2012 AND EVEN 2013, AS INDICATED IN THIS TABLE 2.  IN YEAR 2014 THERE IS A BALLOON PAYMENT THAT WILL LIKELY BE REFINANCED.  IT IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE DEBT IS UTILITY DEBT, WHICH THEY ROUTINELY CARRY AND WOULD HAVE REGARDLESS OF THE RENAISSANCE.  THE ACTUAL APPROXIMATE COST OVER THE LIFE OF DEBT WOULD HIT THE $2.0 BILLION MARK.  THEREFORE, BASED ON THE APPROXIMATE POPULATION COUNT IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN THE CITY WILL BE LEFT TO PAY FOR THE RIVERSIDE RENAISSANCE IN INCREASED SEWER, WATER, ELECTRIC, PARKING AND GENERAL FUND REPLACEMENT.  THE $2.0 BILLION BREAKDOWN IS AS FOLLOWS:  THE PRINICIPAL IS $1,084,051,402 AND THE INTEREST IS $979,022,581.  TODAY, THE COST TO EACH INDIVIDUAL WILL BE APPROXIMATELY $6,660.00, OR A FAMILY OF FOUR WILL HAVE TO PAY OUT $26,400.00. 

JOHN CHIANG, WHERE ART THOU? YOU CERTAINLY ARE NOT IN RIVERSIDE….

UPDATE:08/28/2011: OF COURSE, THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, A TAXPAYER LOBBYING GROUP, WON’T TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER ON THE SUPREME COURTS RULING OF PLACING A STAY ON ALL REDEVELOPMENT.  MOST HAVE SAID SINCE IT WAS LEGISLATED IN, IT CAN BE LEGISLATED OUT.  BUT THE CRA, WHO SUED THE STATE ON THE CITY’S BEHALF DID NOT LIKE THE RULING.  THE CRYSTAL CLEAR RULING PLACES A STAY ON ALL REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY UNTIL THE ISSUE CAN BE RESOLVED IN JANUARY 2012, THIS IS TO PREVENT FURTHER QUESTIONS OF FINANCIAL MOVEMENT.  BUT THE CRA HAS NOW ASKED THE SUPREME COURT FOR A CLARIFYING ORDER WHICH WOULD ALLOW LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES WHICH HAVE ADOPTED ORDINANCES TO THE NEW VOLUTARY STATE RULES, PAY THE ENFORCEMENT OBLIGATION PAYMENTS AND CONTINUE TO  DO LOCAL RDA BUSINESS AS USUAL.  BUT WHAT IS QUITE IRONIC IS THAT THE CRA AND THE CITY DID NOT LIKE THE VOLUNTEER PROGRAM TO BEGIN WITH, THAT’S WHY THEY ARE SUING.  SINCE SUING THE STATE PLACED A STAY ON ALL ACTIVITY, THE CRA AND THE CITY NOW WANT THE STATE TO NOW HONOR THE VOLUNTEER PROGRAM IN THE INTERIUM, THAT THEY ORIGINALLY SUED AGAINST.  GO FIGURE? 

KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS”  BLOG SITE! NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE…