Posts Tagged ‘city attorney gary geuss’

WILL THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE BE SNIFFING THE GREEN WITH THE SUCCESS OF “THE CHEECH”?

UPDATE: 03.27.2018: PRESS ENTERPRISE: RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL EYES BAN ON MARIJUANA BUSINESSES: The City’s hypocrisy has no end. You bring in the Cheech Project idea with open arms and completely discount what and who the person is known for all at the same time. ‘Reefer’ side could be the center of the ‘pot’ revolution! First you have the Cheech Project, then all you need now is the ‘grass’ for the city coffers to be ‘loaded’ with ‘green.’ The ‘grass’ is really greener on the other side this time. Another missed opportunity or too big a bag of an opportunity?  Interesting enough, the City of Riverside has enough money to launch a new Office of Homeless Solutions consisting of a team made up of Assistant City Manager Alex Nguyen and 12 other people.  Sorry guys when you come to ‘Reefer’ side you can only carry an ounce if the ordinance passes, not a bag you both can walk in.

Given the financial straits the City finds itself in these days, Riverside residents are appropriately beginning to ask, “How much is ‘the Cheech’ (short for Chicharrón) project going to cost us?”  Back in February 2017, the Discovery Cube project was scrapped, leaving options open again for the aged downtown Library.  Why did the Cube’s backers decide to leave?  According to a later staff report, it was, “economically not feasible at this time,” …we’d add, “without further public subsidies.”

And while the public continued to openly state their displeasure with a $30, $40 $43 million new Jetsons library concept, as opposed to more cost-consciously renovating the old one, our Council continued to push forward to rid the Mission Inn of unsightly homeless people with the aid of City Manager John Russo.  And the answer our resident rockstar came back with, after hashing through several other options supposedly, was the Cheech Marin Center for Chicano Art, Culture, and Industry, which would serve as a home for Marin’s private pussycat Chicano art collection and provide space for temporary exhibitions, classes and lectures.

But will we be seeing blurred lines if the Riverside Art Museum, leading the fundraiser efforts for “the Cheech,” project, doesn’t hit their extended deadline to raise a total of $3 million by May 2018 – a condition set by our City Council needed to continue progress towards making the Cheech a stoned-cold reality?  Problem is, even if they do, does the public really know what the final numbers are to rehabilitate the old library (a certifiable roach motel), or how much dough they’re committed to for the ongoing operation and maintenance of the joint?  Will those costs and others continue to chronically rise like has been the pattern with the new library?  Will the Cheech project eventually go ‘Up In Smoke’, and the idea of an avant-garde art center be just another one of Russo’s ‘Nice Dreams’ for the ole’ River City, made without any consideration that ‘Things Are Tough All Over’ for everyone who doesn’t have a government job?

Taking a “the grass is always greener,” perspective, the Cheech could also be an extension of the City of Riverside, and the center of the pot revolution.  Bringing untold millions in local taxes, the residents could finally see those buds trees trimmed, pot holes filled and homeless housed in gold-tiled apartments; and those pesky exorbitant public employee pensions would turn out to be just figments of our smoke-filled minds.  Oh, the irony!

According to “High Times” Cheech has been enlisted by the State of California to help register pot businesses.  Revenue for much needed services is what Riverside needs to keep this town ‘Still Smokin’ in the market place!

But what’s the straight dope?  We at TMC are committed to weeding through the real facts and figures for our readers.  Let’s start with the makeup of that initial $3 million startup money.  Well, $2 million will be raised by private pledges and contributions, while $1 million will come from the State in a form of a grant.  As many have pointed out, that $1 million from the State is still public money, even if it’s not money from the City general fund.  So yes, Riverside taxpayers are already on the hook alongside fellow Californians.

One thing Riverside taxpayers will be solely responsible for is the ongoing operations – cush jobs provided for Riverside Art Museum employees under contract from the City – and maintenance of the Cheech Project.  The total costs are estimated to come in between between $750,000 and $925,000 annually, to be partially recovered by a $1-2 admission fee.  Math never being our expertise we admit, we still figure “the Cheech” needs about 3,000 visitors daily to break even.  To be blunt: ain’t gonna happen.  Further, $100,000 was already approved out of our general fund last year by the Council for architectural services.

‘THE CHEECH’ MOU, MAY 16, 2017

Back to those pesky start-up capital costs.  A recent article in the Press Enterprise stated that the total cost of renovating and re-configuring the old library into the Cheech, which maxed out at  $7 million a year ago, now could reach as high as $10 million…hmmm, where have we seen this pattern before?  And it’s certainly evident that it’s been a long hard struggle to reach that $3 million mark to begin with.  And if that bogey is hit, where will the additional $7 million come from?  More I.O.U.’s?  Yes, the plan is to continue to raise that money (private, public, whomever still has a pot to piss in) and create an endowment for ongoing expenses on top of that.

CITY OF RIVERSIDE NEW FISCAL HAWK, MAYOR WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY

At City Council on February 23, 2018, Mayor Bailey grilled presenters of the Cheech regarding how much money they had in hand towards the $3 million goal. $80K was the answer, with the balance in pledges (I.O.U.’s), totaling $1.7 million plus the impending State grant of $1 million, most likely derived from Assemblyman Jose Medina’s support to pass Governor Jerry Brown’s new gas tax.  We remind folks that when the library was being looked at for renovation, the cost was in the neighborhood of $20 million.  Will Cheech, or any of his vast array of high-net-worth friends, consider investing in Riverside and his project?  Or might the plug be pulled on the Cheech due to the chance that taxpayers may be asked to foot the bill on an unpaid ‘two finger bag’?  And if that possibility remains, should we reconsider building a new library all-together?  Or, will the Council simply start extending deadlines and take the money from its residents and businesses find financially more creative ways of accommodating the Cheech rather than admit they are on ‘doobie’ us grounds?  It would seem that to continue on this road would only make the taxpayers see ‘acapulco red.’

Well according to Russo, even if the project does not transpire, the City of Riverside still has to spend the ganja to repair the 1960’s library’s roof, heating, air conditioning system and elevator, estimated at $1.5 million.  His hope is that others will pay for that instead of local taxpayers (as long as we’re willing to fork over $40 million for a new library and subsidize the ongoing operations and maintenance at the Cheech.)

DONATE: FOR THE RIVERSIDE ART MUSEUM PROPOSED CHEECH MARIN CENTER FOR CHICANO ART, CULTURE AND INDUSTRY. 

FILE UNDER “PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE”: One would think that it would be more appropriate to honor someone when a project has been completed, such as the ‘grand opening’ or ‘ribbon cutting,’ not while they haven’t even completed raising the first round of start-up funds!  And yet Riverside City Manager John Russo has been named “Public Partner of the Year” by the Inland Empire Economic Partnership for his leadership on the development of the Cheech Marin Center for Chicano Art, Culture and Industry in downtown Riverside.  Is the ‘Mutual Admiration Society of Riverside,’ (MASOR) in ‘high’ gear, or what?  Good job John Russo City of Riverside Minister of Propaganda Spokehole Phil Pitchford!

Riverside City Manager John Russo Honored for Nurturing Cheech Marin Center…wow

Cheech, you are absolutely driving okay, especially when you doling out a possible revenue stream for the City of Riverside.  You can be rest assured that the Riverside Police Department under Chief Sergio Diaz will be ‘highly’ motivated that you will reach your destination safely.  Why?  Because we do have two sets of rules in River City.

HOW DID THE WHOLE APPROACH TAKE PLACE BETWEEN CHEECH AND RUSSO WITH REFERENCE TO DISPLAYING HIS ART IN OUR MUSEUM?   Well according to O.C. Weekly, while in Riverside last year (2017) for the second iteration of “Papel Chicano Dos: Works on Paper From the Collection of Cheech Marin,” which featured 65 artworks by 24 established and early career artists, the actor/collector was randomly approached by John Russo, the city manager, with a proposition. “He told me how perfect it would be for Riverside, which is 51 percent Chicano, and the Inland Empire at-large, which is 52 percent Chicano, to open a museum for my art,” says Cheech. “At first, I had no idea what he was talking about. I was like, ‘What? You want me to buy a museum? I don’t know if I can do that.’ And [Russo] said, ‘No! We want to give you a museum to house your collection.’

AT THE MARCH 13, 2018 FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING: COUNCILMAN MIKE SOUBIROUS REFERENCED THE OLD DOWNTOWN LIBRARY AND IT’S REPAIR ISSUES, BUT HE ALSO STATES THAT THE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY IS A DANGER ZONE FOR CHILDREN AND EMPLOYEES, BECAUSE OF A PEDOPHILE PROBLEM.  Now that a serious public safety statement has been made, what will this retired Commander for the Highway Patrol request our local police department to do in order to combat this problem?

RIVERSIDE TOURISM BUREAU’S NEXT CREATIVE ADVERTISEMENT

IT SEEMS CHEECH ALSO HAS A FINE COLLECTION OF PUSSYCATS RIVERSIDERS MAY WANT TO INSPECT!  MAYBE WE CAN CONVERT THE OLD FIRESTATION FOR THIS NEW CHEECH VENUE!

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTY’S 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 “POLITICALLY INCORRECT.” 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

At the tail end of the March 7, 2018, Riverside City Council meeting, Ward 2 Councilman Andy Melendrez requested an investigation into Mayor Bailey’s Office to determine if confidential materials related to the Mayor’s right to veto a contract of a City officer (i.e. the City Manager) were released to the public without Council authorization.

QUIET, UNASSUMING, NICE GUY ANDY ABOUT TO SINK THE KNIFE INTO MAYOR BAILEY?

Skip forward to this week and we learn that item has been mysteriously removed from the upcoming City Council agenda.  Was it delayed because of the conflict-of-interest with Riverside City Attorney Gary Geuss, as identified in fine detail as part of Mayor Bailey’s writ of mandate filed just over a week ago?  Was there a scheduling conflict on behalf of one of the key parties?  Or, like the free-riding Press Enterprise as of late, is the City of Riverside simply waiting for TMC to publish the results of its investigation saving taxpayers gobs of money (if you believe the latter, we have a library to sell you)?  Well, we won’t disappoint then (i.e. keep reading)!

 

                          

INVESTIGATION ON AGENDA                                                  REVISED AGENDA

But first let’s take a look at the Bailey writ, and the fact that our City Attorney obtained a legal opinion from outside, supposedly-independent counsel, Michael Colantuono, in order to justify quashing the Mayor’s veto.  The writ states that the Colantuono opinion is beneficial to the City Attorney because the Charter provides that the City Manager, City Clerk and City Attorney, “serve at the pleasure of the Council.”  And if Mayor Bailey can’t veto City Manager Russo’s contract, then you can bet he wouldn’t be able to veto City Attorney Geuss’ either.  And since Geuss chose the outside counsel himself, he might’ve just chosen someone he knew beforehand might be sympathetic to his cause.  And hence the conflict.

And why might Mr. Colantuono’s judgment regarding this particular issue be perceived as just a tad bit biased?  Well, maybe it’s the fact that he serves as a contracted City Attorney himself up in the Bay Area!

CLICK TO ENLARGE: THE GOVERNMENT ATTORNEY’S CLUB

In the alternative, Geuss could’ve just provided the City Council with a list of attorneys capable of handling this work and said, “I’m out.  Have at it boys.”  But, stealing a line from Jason Hunter, “the unofficial slogan of the City of Riverside is that there’s no conflict-of-interest that’s too big that we can’t ignore,” instead he inserted himself right into the middle of controversial decision in which he has a financial interest…and that we predict ladies and gentlemen is going to lead to trouble down the line…right here in the ole’ River City.

MAYOR RUSTY BAILEY LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE

And whom exactly was Geuss going to pick as the investigator?  Well, well, well, if it wasn’t the Space Cowboy himself, Steve Miller, of Hanson Bridgett LLP, whom the City Council had previously flown down (like an eagle) from the Bay Area at the suggestion of Geuss to conduct an internal audit of the past practices for the payment of City legal expenses during the salad days of former City Attorney Greg Priamos.  If you remember correctly, The Joker was feathering the nests of his compatriots in the legal community to the tune of $19.4 million during his last 5 years in office, despite having a full-time staff of highly-paid attorneys in-house persecuting whistleblowers, providing bogus legal opinions, playing golf, ripping off ratepayersHanson Bridgett grabbed $75,000 off the taxpayers for informing us, well, the record-keeping could’ve been better, and best practices weren’t always followed, but there’s nothing to see here folks!   How about “The data is admittedly messy.”  And “Abracadabra!” Priamos was free to infest the County as current County Counsel unbesmirched by his dirty deeds at the City.  Did we mention Steve Miller is also a contracted City Attorney up in the Bay Area.  Hoo-hoo-hoo, go on, take the money and run!

CLICK TO ENLARGE: THE GOVERNMENT ATTORNEY’S CLUB

Once again, TMC will save the day (and $10-$25K of the taxpayers’ moola) on this one: THE MAYOR DID IT…in the new Library…by throwing a Wrench into Team Russo’s plans.  And below, we provide for everyone to see: the Mayor leaked the Attorney/Client-protected outside legal opinion of Michael Colantuono to anyone he thought could lend a revolver, lead pipe, rope, knife, candlestick, hand.

 

                

BAILEY VIOLATES ATT/CLIENT PRIVILEGE (1)                BAILEY VIOLATES ATT/CLIENT PRIVILEGE (2)

Did Mayor Bailey misrepresent his ability to hire Rutan and Tucker on behalf of the City?  Probably.  All one needs to do is read between the lines of this Press Enterprise story from February 20, 2018:

The statement also rejects the idea that anyone but the city attorney “be permitted to obtain counsel at taxpayers’ expense.”

Before announcing his veto of Russo’s contract, Bailey received a letter from attorney Philip Kohn of Rutan & Tucker to back his opinion that — despite City Attorney Gary Geuss’ position — the charter allows the mayor to veto a contract with the city manager.

Kohn wrote to Bailey on Feb. 9 that he had been told the city charter doesn’t allow the mayor to hire legal counsel without the City Council’s consent. To avoid any conflict, Kohn wrote, he would not charge the city for any of the services he provided or provide any further legal advice on the matter.

UPDATE 3/26/18: RUTAN & TUCKER USED AS A SUCKER?  BELOW IS THE LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 9, 2018, SENT TO MAYOR BAILEY AFTER REALIZING THEIR FIRM WAS PUT IN A PRECARIOUS POSITION POSITION BY THE MAYOR.  Lawyer Philip Kohn states that his firm will not be providing any further legal opinions or assistance on the veto matter since the Riverside City Charter does not authorize the Mayor to hire outside legal counsel without approval or consent from City Council.  After realizing that their firm had a conflict-of-interest with the City itself, for whom they provide lucrative outside counsel work, they indicate the Mayor’s legal advice was at ‘no charge’…so as to not muddle up their taxpayer gravy train.

RUTAN TUCKER FEBRUARY 9TH LETTER TO MAYOR

Did Mayor Bailey consider allowing a proxy to file a lawsuit on his behalf while he sat in closed session, and based upon his record, leaked out more confidential information in order to benefit himself politically?  You betcha.  Just look in the “Rusty Files.”

And you know what, Andy Melendrez?  Nobody cares.  Nobody cares because – intentionally or not, William “Beetle Bailey,” through his entirely selfish (John Russo is a meanie…wahhh!!!), unethical actions is going to end up cleaning the Riverside Swamp of profiteer-bureaucrats/wannabe-politicians, and we’re just fine with that.  We’ll deal with Beetle later.

NOTHING BUT CLEAR SKIES FOR MAYOR “BEETLE BAILEY” AHEAD

And in an ironic twist not lost on Riverside corruption historians, a central figure in the Soubirous-Davis witchhunt of just 3-1/2 years ago accused of leaking information to the Press Enterprise at the time, will be outed soon as the, “man behind the scenes,” organizing his own kangaroo court on our dime…but that story about that Councilman (codenamed: M.S.) is for another day.  In the meantime, enjoy the Peoples’ Councilman, good guy-turned bad guy-turned good guy again, Ward 4 Councilman Chuck Conder…and the circle of life continues.

VIDEO FROM THE INLAND EMPIRE NEWSWIRE: RIVERSIDE COUNCILMAN CHUCK CONDER GIVES SOME INSIGHT INTO THE GOING ON’S AT CITY HALL.  

Councilman Chuck Conder says it stinks at City Hall! Outlandish city contracts and ridiculous utility rate hikes are ripping off the citizenry!! It’s time for people to “let their voice be heard,” he says in a passionate speech last Monday.  The city manager lavish new contract comes on the heels of a proposed average 3% hike in electricity and 4.5% hike in water that will begin July 1, 2018, and continue for 5 years, with 1/5 of the hike consisting of new taxes, to cover budget shortfalls for infrastructure projects we are sold told.  Add to that the city’s $600 million pension liability debt, and ever-increasing taxes to pay for it, and it begs the question: should the city manager be paid 25% more from the public purse and businesses and residents feel the pinch of a higher-cost-of-living and less government services?  These financial decisions have one councilman, Chuck Conder, concerned.

When Moreno Valley activist and local radio host Roy Bleckert asked Conder what can be done, Conder delivered a passionate speech stating, “You need to take back your government…They’re laughing at us… They’re saying ‘got away with this one…with that one.’ We as a people have got to get our voice back! If you can give up three minutes in front of the city council, great. If you can’t, send an e-comment, write. Let your voice be heard.”

BLAST FROM THE PAST: 02.23.2016: Local community activist Kevin Dawson skewers City Council regarding the failure to address outside legal counsel without contracts and the budget deficit! Ignored by Council, ignored by the City Attorney Greg Priamos and ignored by head of the Finance Committee Councilwoman and current Budget Engagement Commissioner (sigh) Nancy Hart…. Dawson was right all along!

DEDICATED TO OUR CITY EMPLOYEES AND THE PARTNERSHIP COMPENSATION MODEL

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTY’S 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 “POLITICALLY INCORRECT.” 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

Love my enemies, bless those who curse me, pray for their salvation.  – Book of Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey, circa at exactly February 12, 2018, 8:27am

THE RUSTY FILES: [queue eerie music] We present a few of the personal notes reflecting on a cornucopia of thoughts the Mayor wrote to himself for future reference as he brooded over the Russo/Geuss/Soubirous/Melendrez/MacArthur-led coup just days before.  In others words, “Did anyone get the license plate of that truck?”

      

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE JUST A SMIDGEN OF THE RUSTY FILES

Well, the City of Riverside doesn’t have any trouble, someone once saidWell, we’ll just have to create some, another exclaimed!  See, we at TMC remember waaaaaaay back in 2016, shortly after City Attorney Gary Geuss came on board, back when the hotshot former L.A. litigator dreamt of a hostile takeover of the some of the elected Riverside County District Attorney’s duties.  Of course, it was all about efficiency in the court system.  “Hah!” we said, and thankfully, so did the voters.

A VIEW INTO THE ALTERNATE UNIVERSE IF MEASURE A, THE RIVERSIDE CITY PROSECUTOR MEASURES WOULD’VE PASSED

Well according to the Rusty Files, Russo manipulated Geuss to test the waters against D.A. Mike Hestrin and whatever other power structures there were in Riverside County at the time, including seventy-billion-time re-elected former D.A. Grover Trask.  He is a troublemaker.

Moreover, the Rusty Files reveal Russo loves to create controversy, then come in and save the day.  And he loves to get credit for easy wins…such as Measure-Z, the Library, Museum and the Budget.  Rusty asks the question, “Is there a pattern here?” He is a front-runner.

He refers to other city’s where Russo was in the middle of conflict, then left when the going got tough.  He goes on to say that John loves to fight, argue and purposely create opposition just for the sport of toying with them.  He is a manipulator.

Does Russo do what he says he will do?  It appears according to the Mayor, that Russo cannot be counted on.  He says one thing, and does another.  He cannot be trusted.

Then our sweet, beloved, squeaky clean homegrown Mayor drops the bombshell, “How many wives?”  Is it a metaphor for how Russo treats the cities and the public who have paid for his ever-expanding waistline, or should we take this at its literal meaning and infer more?  Does City Manager John Russo have commitment problems?  He is disloyal.

What else lurks in the depths of the Rusty Files?  As a teaser for future TMC posts we’ll leave this at the door: it turns out Cindy Roth, the Chamber Queen and long-time ally of Mayor Rusty Bailey is not a bit amused by being cut from the General Fund gravy train by City Manager John Russo.  Her husband, Senator Roth, who profited as well from the legal gravy train provided by our fair city for many a year, is rumored to have helped the Mayor with his veto defense arguments.  A real State Senator vs. a wannabe State Assemblyman: it’s on like Donkey Kong!

CLICK ABOVE TO ENLARGE PIC

MIKE FINE’S MESSAGE:

Rusty refers to Mike Fine’s message, and to print it out so that the Council will read it.  Mike Fine, former deputy superintendent for RUSD and member of the Riverside Budget Engagement Commission (quickly becoming our favorite citizen-led commission of all-time), apparently had a bit to say about Measure Z monies being spent to fill the pockets of Mr. Russo.  And we have those Facebook messages for your viewing pleasure, including a little tiff with Councilman Andy Melendrez, where Fine takes the Ward 2 Councilman to school.  Some excerpts:

I volunteered to sit on the city’s budget commission as a way to give back to my hometown. I recently spent eight hours over two nights listening to the departments express their plans and needs. There was no mention of a hefty raise and home loan for the city manager. It wasn’t listed as a need. How do I do the job the city has asked me to do as a volunteer who has expertise in governmental budgeting when not all the information was shared? While I can still make a recommendation to the council regarding budget matters, what’s the point when the council acts recklessly in the midst of the budget process? 

My point is simple. The city has many needs -many more than resources will cover. At a time when you will have to consider cuts in services and programs you sent the wrong message to the residents, employees and partners of the city. City vendors are being asked to reduce their prices by 10% at the same time the council is awarding senior management raises and an unwarranted home loan.

You will recall that the city sold voters on a sales tax increase to support police and fire. But now, under the city manager’s direction, they are proposing cuts – to budgets, not taxes!

This is an issue of leadership – more precisely, a lack of leadership.

According to Fine the City is full of contradictions and flouts the perception of transparency but in reality has none.  Sounds to us like Mr. Fine has been listening to longtime city critic advocate Jason Hunter, who coincidentally tells us something B-I-G is coming (we can’t wait).

                        

CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE THE FINE COMMENTARY

RUSTY FILES FOR TRIAL:  In a sign of the times Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey filed suit against the City of Riverside on Friday March 9, 2018, with reference to the veto issue , and the batshit, no self-serving contradictory legal opinion expressed by City Attorney Gary Geuss.  According to the City of Riverside’s Salary Regulations Section 2.32.030 the salary plan states, “The basic monthly compensation plan for City officers and employees shall be established by resolution of the City Council.

We believe there has been malfeasance playing out within the confines of City Hall by the fact that current contracts for both Geuss and Russo accompanied no such ‘resolution.’  For years dear readers, every new contract that included new & improved terms for fatcat bureaucrats included a resolution which authorized the spending on behalf of the City; then all of a sudden, poof, it disappeared.

Why?  Well, our lying eyes have seen the in-fighting that has recently taken place between the Mayor’s Office and the City Manager’s Office, with Council taking sides, and believe this to be the cause.  We therefore presuppose that this omittance was done to strategically counter Bailey’s impeding veto.  See folks, according to City Charter, Rusty can legally veto a ‘resolution.’  Without the ‘resolution’ in the contract, technically, Rusty’s veto might not be valid.  This was orchestrated by design.  But it appears our Mayor is not in the mood to take any prisoners this time.

          

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW BAILEY’S FULL LAW SUIT

UPDATE: 03.12.2018: PRESS ENTERPRISE: RIVERSIDE MAYOR SUES HIS OWN CITY IN BATTLE OVER ‘EXPENSIVE’ CITY MANAGER’S CONTRACT

UPDATE: 03.12.2018: LOS ANGELES DAILY NEWS: NEW RETIREES IN GARDENA, PASADENA AND RIVERSIDE MAKE OVER $200,000 PENSIONS

UPDATE: 03.12.2018: PRESS ENTERPRISE: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA’S AVERAGE PAY HIKE? $2 A WEEK

The Ides of February 2018 came and went.  The day of the veto, Rusty Bailey probably felt a bit like Caesar did when his Council Buddies were waiting for him at the Council Forum on that cold Tuesday afternoon…

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTY’S 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 “POLITICALLY INCORRECT.” 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

NOT-SO-FAST ON THOSE SHINY NEW CONTRACTS!

Local resident Jason Hunter exposes the truth about the newly-signed gold-plated contracts of both City Manager John Russo and City Attorney Gary Geuss.  Turns out the current contracts were not accompanied by an amendment to a resolution called the Master Fringe Benefits and Salary Plan, signed by the Mayor as required by City’s Municipal Code (local law).  That particular resolution grants authority to the Council to pay certain salaries and benefits to certain positions.  And the jury at TMC believes the omittance of this document to be intentional given other recent employee deals.  But what the heck do we know!?

When both Russo and Geuss were initially employed, this particular resolution was included within the agenda packet that contained their contracts.  Three years later it magically disappears.  Hunter states the two ramifications of what’s been perpetrated: 1) the contracts terms negotiated outside the authority of the resolution are invalid (and the monies need to be returned immediately to the City’s treasury) and 2) upon re-introduction of the resolution, the Mayor has the right to veto the terms, as he does all resolutions under Section 413 of the City Charter.

                       

Who would have known?  We could extrapolate that City Attorney Gary Geuss, City Manager John Russo and even Human Resources Director Stephanie Holloman would have known.  Incidentally, Holloman and Geuss we hear know each other from their employment with the City/Port of Los Angeles.  Perhaps even Councilman Chris MacArthur could have known given how he eagerly tried to override Mayor Bailey’s veto by signing Russo’s contract as Mayor Pro-Tem.  Maybe even Councilman Jim Perry, who signed Geuss’ deal, was in on the scheme.

        

Who also should have 100% with-out-doubt-known is City Clerk Colleen J. Nicol. Her 30% raise over the past 2-1/2 years must have affected her emotional decision-making not to alert Mayor Bailey. She is either afraid of Russo and Geuss, or she’s simply a master at playing the game (and consequently cruising into retirement at your expense). In our experience, Colleen doesn’t miss a piece of paper at City Hall…what we’d call a pro’s pro…so what’s up?  Whatever the reason, you can be sure TMC will find out!

                         

  JOHN RUSSO FULL MEMO/RESOLUTION                    GARY GEUSS FULL MEMO/RESOLUTION

 

 

                                   

CITY CHARTER                              FRINGE BENEFITS                     SALARY REGULATIONS

Let’s not forget this quote from City Manager John Russo, “…as a child of immigrants with a scholarship Yale degree, and a top ten law school that I have to beg you to do and preserve what we all busted our tails to do to make this city move.”  “But I assure you, I might be here in two years, and whether you extend my contract or not I’m not going to have any trouble getting a job.  But if we vote no tonight, I cannot make any assurances to you about keeping this team together, that’s the reality that’s your choice!”  More famous words for us Riverside Hillbilly’s is, “You can’t afford to have this team break up!”  So what did Russo really mean?  “I’m am so brilliant I’m going to screw Mayor Bailey and the taxpayer out of millions of dollars and they are so stupid they won’t even notice, and my cronies and I can live our much-deserved lavish lifestyles free of interference from the unwashed masses.  Let them eat cake!”  Our bet is the only cake we’ll be eating, John, will be at your going away party.

RIVERSIDE’S CONTRACT-GATE: ONE QUESTION REMAINS

UPDATE: REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION INTO MAYOR BAILEY’S OFFICE:  At the March 7, 2018, Riverside City Council meeting, Councilman Andy Melendrez requests an investigation into Mayor Bailey’s Office to determine if confidential materials related to the Mayor’s right to veto a contract of a City officer were released without Council authorization to the public.  Rumor has it this request involves the Mayor’s Office releasing the Colantuono Legal Opinion (and hence violating the City’s Attorney/Client privilege) prior to it becoming a public document a few weeks ago.  What? He’s requesting the formation of Special Counsel for this inquiry?  Does he think the City of Riverside river water is full of the same rats found in the swamps of Washington D.C.?  Shouldn’t have Andy requested Special Counsel to investigate the contract fraud Mr. Hunter speaks of instead?

As an aside we love how Andy is so nice and polite in this video right before he inserts the dagger of righteousness into the Mayor’s Office.  All of sudden, after all these years, Andy wants “transparency,” into the dirty deeds done dirt cheap within the confines of City Hall.  How marvelous!  Andy should have just called TMC: we’ve already done the investigation for free!  But alas, that’s for another day dear readers…

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTY’S 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 “POLITICALLY INCORRECT.” 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

Snakes on a Dais

UPDATE: 02.22.2018: At last night’s City Council meeting, a statement was read regarding Council support of City Attorney Gary Geuss’s legal opinion against the Mayor’s veto power of executive staff contracts, supported by Attorney Michael Colantuono’s original legal opinion.  Colantuono will prepare an additional written statement for the unwashed masses (us) stating something to that effect within 7 days.

STATEMENT FROM THE COUNCIL: 

“By Majority vote, The Council supports the City Attorney as the sole legal authority under the Charter and we reject any suggestion that any other charter officer or elected official be permitted to obtain counsel at taxpayer’s expense. The majority of the City Council, excluding Councilmember Conder and Councilmember Perry, (Councilmember Adams was absent) reaffirms the statements of the City Attorney, during the February 6, 2018 Council Meeting, that the sole remedy for the Mayor, is to file a writ with the Superior Court. The Charter is plain, that the three Charter Officers report to, work for and take direction from The Council, not the Mayor. No one can have two bosses and work efficiently. We have asked outside Counsel to prepare a written version of his advice, suitable to be shared with the public within 7 days.”

ATTORNEY MICHAEL COLANTUONO RETAINED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND WHO’S LEGAL OPINION OVER RODE MAYOR BAILEY’S VETO COMES INTO QUESTION.  We find in the following a monetary contribution to John Russo in 2006 when he was running for Assembly for $125.00 and a ‘payment in kind’ for $1,375.38.

Yep, I gave him a couple of bucks and some time, so what’s the big deal?  You have a problem with that?

What was that ‘non-monetary’ contribution of $1,374.38 to Russo’s Campaign?  Sandwiches? Legal Advice?  WE ALSO HAVE RIVERSIDE’S  LAW FIRM BEST, BEST & KRIEGER WHO APPARENTLY WERE CONTRIBUTORS OF $2,000.00 TO JOHN RUSSO’S 2006 ASSEMBLY CAMPAIGN!  MORE TO COME…

        

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

UPDATE: FEBRUARY 20, 2018: PRESS ENTERPRISE:  SPLIT RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL STANDS BY VIEW THAT MAYOR CAN’T VETO CITY MANAGER’S CONTRACT

Is TMC becoming relevant when it comes to sources for Press Enterprise articles?  That’s okay.. will you at least pay us the freelance rate?  Oop’s here it is in all it’s glory.. the Colantuono legal opinion on Mayor Bailey’s veto power. Colantuono cites City Charter Section 600 and Section 700.  His legal interpretation is that the Mayor cannot veto a Council decision on the employment of a charter officer.

                    

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE OR CLICK THIS LINK FOR THE PDF VERSION

Councilman Mike Gardner, Ward 1,  said during the meeting that the veto issue was distracting the city from important business.  Love when I hear this..it couldn’t be the important business of the taxpaying residents having to deal with pot holes, uncut trees, drug houses, prostitution, shoot outs, burglaries, threats to neighbors, mail theft, theft in general, car break in’s, home break in’s,  inundation of homeless into our neighborhoods, etc. etc..

Will Mike Gardner’s unpopular votes in favor of Russo’s contract and against the Mayor’s power to veto sink his chances at County Board of Supervisors?  Magic 8-ball says…definitely maybe.

The question remains, what happens if the courts uphold Mayor Bailey’s Veto?  Will the Russo’s contract be rescinded? If it is, how those who pushed against Bailey fare in the future?  Those such as the City Council, City Attorney Gary Geuss and those that are subcontracted with the taxpayer’s monies to support a ‘legal opinion,’ such as the ‘high priced’ lawyer Michael Colantuono…. which incidentally, an attorney the Moreno’s went against in care of the taxpayers and won.  Let’s give credit where credit’s due…

According to the Press Enterprise, When Council members responded with their thoughts and some additional questions at Tuesday’s City Council, Geuss said city officials should not reply because neither Russo’s contract nor the veto was on the agenda. The state’s public meeting law, the Brown Act, limits what topics the council may discuss without putting it on the agenda in advance.  Because the Council neeeeeeeeever violates the Brown Act….laughing out loud.  Really Geuss?

Our Mayor, the proverbial hero, fighting for truth, justice and Riversidian way, preparing to dive from the seventh floor of City Hall to fight evil and protect the wallets and pocketbooks his people.

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

                    

CLICK ON ABOVE IMAGES TO VIEW RUTAN & TUCKER LEGAL OPINION GIVEN TO RIVERSIDE MAYOR RUSTY BAILEY

The following has yet to be thoroughly studied by TMC, but we present it here for your viewing pleasure:  the full legal opinion giving Mayor William Rusty Bailey the authority to veto an executive employment contract extension, such as the one passed by our City Council on Feb. 6, 2018, involving current City Manager John Russo.  The opinion is from Rutan & Tucker, L.L.C., who incidentally is also retained as the City’s law firm in other matters.  Exhibits to this legal opinion are as follows:

                                                          

CLICK ABOVE DOCUMENT IMAGES TO VIEW EXHIBITS

As of today, TMC is the only media source offering this full opinion to the public: we’ll let you decide its merits.

Of course, TMC must remind our readers that the reeeeeeal issue here is that when hustling Brad Hudson was City Manager he gave then Mayor Loveridge everything he ever wanted, including full access to staff.  Ditto ex-City Manager Scott Barber. John Russo came along and cut that access off from the Mayor’s office cold turkey.

And that is why Mayor’s Chief of Staff Cheryl-Marie Hansberger was at a recent Budget Engagement Commission Meeting a couple of weeks ago complaining about a lack of resources, and just-so-happened (wink) to also mention Russo’s contract extension and request more funding for the Mayor’s office.  At which point Rusty’s former Riverside Unified School District buddy colleague and deputy Superintendent Mike Fine picked up the ball and ran with it, mentioning how he knew the Mayor would never cause dissention in the ranks – it just wasn’t his style.  Team Russo, led by Assistant City Manager Natasha Fatale Marianna Marysheva, countered with, “I haven’t seen it!” referring to a divide between the Mayor’s office and the City Manager’s office.  But the rift between Mayor Bailey and City Manager Russo is evident, and IS personal, and that is the real story despite all the public statements to the contrary.

But that is not the story for today.  For we at TMC do not much care if Bailey rumbled, bumbled, or stumbled into the cockfight, as long as he’s on the right side.  After the Mayor’s veto the power struggle for control of City Hall really began in earnest, with both sides firing off volleys in what will surely be a donnybrook with only one side standing at the end.  City Attorney Gary Guess offers a summary of his legal opinion in the video above and now we give you the Mayor’s full legal opinion.  Only one can be right.  The Press Enterprise has had both legal opinions for weeks and as yet, has not published them…we at TMC can only imagine why!

So let’s talk about the City’s case for a second.  In December, after Bailey checked with Geuss to “confirm” that he had the power to veto Russo’s contract, Geuss asked attorney Michael Colantuono of Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley to weigh in with an “independent” opinion.  Colantuono offered that the mayor does not have that power.  “If the mayor could veto a contract for a charter officer, that officer would have an obvious incentive to take direction from the mayor and to seek his approval,” Colantuono wrote in a four-page analysis.  “That incentive is in tension with, if not fully inconsistent with, the Charter’s statement that charter officers ‘serve at the pleasure of the City Council.’”

Michael Colantuono, Esq.

Riverside City Attorney Gary Geuss still has yet to release Attorney Michael Colantuono’s opinion publicly that the Mayor cannot veto a executive staff member contract.  Geuss claims a conflict with Bailey’s use of the firm Rutan & Tucker on retainer with the City of Riverside, for using them for his legal opinion.  But is there another, perhaps larger conflict?  TMC has learned that back in 2006 Michael Colantuono contributed to John Russo’s State Assembly campaign in Northern California in an amount of $1,500?  Reminds us of the old adage: what a twisted tale we weave, when at first we try to deceive.  Yep, we may have trouble in River City!

UPDATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2018: PRESS ENTERPRISE: YEARS BEFORE VETOING RIVERSIDE CITY MANAGER’S CONTRACT, MAYOR VOTED FOR SIMILAR DEAL.

Is it possible to be a hypocrite and still correct at the same time?

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “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 TWO 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

Last night’s February 6, 2018, City Council Meeting was a barn burner worthy of an episode of Game of Thrones. City Manager John Russo’s 7-year, $2+ million contract came up for review by our Council…2-1/2 years early we must add.  After a bit of faux deliberation, it was passed 5-2 by our doting Council. Mayor William Rusty Bailey then exercised the nuclear option and for the first time in 24 years, a Mayor’s veto was used to quash the passing of the contract.

The bees in the hive then became agitated, and the coup-detat was on. Wannabe Caesar Bailey was not going down without a fight and a royal rumble commenced.  Out of the ring he threw Councilman after Councilman, eventually even ousting et tu brute City Attorney Gary Geuss.

While the Council is in favor of the contract and touting the narrative of a bad political move for Rusty, we at TMC believe their fairy tale is untrue…like all fairy tales.  TMC is receiving responses that the public is overwhelmingly supporting Rusty (well maybe not Rusty per se, but defending sound fiscal policy and our City Charter).  We believe it is the four Councilmembers (sans recently-appointed Councilman Adams) that should be worried about their seats instead.

What is more amazing by the Council’s display of arrogance is that they never mention the taxpayers during their entire defense of Russo’s largess.  It was all about them, and that’s what the public is seeing.  And perception dear boys is sometimes reality.  And the perception is that City Manager Russo is simply greedy and out-of-touch with the members of the public he purportedly serves.  Good job Councilman Chuck Condor and Councilman Jim Perry.  Especially good job Mayor Bailey: you spoke for the unheard.

Without risk there is no reward!  TMC loves a good fight more than just about anything (short of a good sex scandal).  It’s on!  More to come soon…

TMC sends a call-out to the good folks of Alameda and Oakland!  Send us your Russo’s war stories and his history in dealing with authority figures elsewhere.  Tigers don’t change their stripes.  We want to hear from you!

 

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “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 TWO 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

frontpgWATER LAW SUIT AGAINST THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (CLICK LINK TO VIEW FULL LAW SUIT)

On June 4, 2015, the City of Riverside, under newly christened City Attorney Gary Geuss filed suit against the State of California with regards to the issue of having to comply with a 24% cut in usage.  The city asked the state in the suit to include it in a program that lets Northern California entities get away with just 4% cuts because they are taking their water from surface sources, like rivers that are going to dump their contents in the sea if not snatched. The State ignored the City’s request. Riverside gets its water from underground sources, not the surface, and that’s a critical difference to the state.  The problem stems from the Board’s definition of a “reliable water source;” namely, the designation refers only to surface water and not groundwater, or water located underneath the earth’s surface.  So the City filed the above lawsuit in Fresno County Superior Court to stop the State Water Resources Control Board from commanding our City to comply.

In its complaint, Riverside asked the state why a “groundwater-sufficient entity” couldn’t be inserted and was told, “It would simply be too difficult to include groundwater in the 4% tier, but provided no evidence why including groundwater suppliers would be any more difficult than including surface water suppliers. No other reason was giving for listening to one class of water suppliers, but ignoring the other class of water suppliers.”  KPCC said Riverside’s lawsuit was the largest objection registered to date against the state’s water policy. Water districts are just now beginning to implement government directives which aim to implement Governor Jerry Brown’s order that water usage be cut 25% among statewide nonagricultural users. The cuts range between 8% and 36%, compared to comparable time periods in 2013.  Riverside wants a temporary restraining order and injunction to avoid $10,000-a-day fines for noncompliance with an emergency order.

Scott Simpson was former Chief of Enforcement for the California EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control, and also worked for the Department of Food and Agriculture in their Environmental Hazards Assessment Program specializing in ground water contamination.  Simpson tells City Attorney Geuss that he forgot the “winning” argument against the State of California!  The residents have a “contractual right” to water in the City of Riverside, therefore the State of California has no right to impose water restrictions!  The right to water in the City of Riverside is tied to every resident who owns property, for perpetuity.  What is important to note in this law suit is that the City of Riverside admits owning water rights pre-1914, which releases us from the constraints of the Governor Moonbeams imaginary drought emergency.  What people need to realize we are in the year of “El Nino” and we will receive a boat load of water this year, more than we can handle.  Unfortunately, the State of California cannot run a business, how can we allow them to run the State?

SCOTTVIDEOTWOCLICK THIS LINK TO HEAR WHAT CITY ATTORNEY GARY GEUSS FORGOT TO PLACE IN THE LAW SUIT TO PROTECT RESIDENTS WATER RIGHTS, WHICH IS THE RESIDENTS “CONTRACTUAL RIGHT” TO THAT WATER.

Simpson states that water is protected for the use and benefit of all Californians according to the California State Water Resources Control Board. California’s waters cannot be owned by individuals, groups, businesses, or governmental agencies. But permits, licenses, and registrations give individuals and others the right to beneficially use reasonable amounts of water. That’s paraphrased from the California State Constitution. The precise language states that the people of the State of California own the water resources of the State for their use and enjoyment.

scottvideooneCLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW WATER EXPERT SCOTT SIMPSON TALK ABOUT RESIDENTS RIGHT TO WATER

Water Expert Scott Simpson then states that the State of California is the care taker of the water, in charge of improving the quality and making more water available for their use. You are not selling us water you are you provide us with the service of transportation for our use and enjoyment.  So why has the State of California unfortunately betrayed the taxpayers?  Some terms come to mind, “greed,” “incompetence,” “over construction,” and “ineptness.”  Where’s the accountability?  Well folks that will never transpire.

stateofcaqa     stateofcaqatwo

CLICK TO VIEW IMAGES OR CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD SITE WHICH SIMPSON WAS REFERRING TO

Riverside Public Utilities deputy general manager Kevin Milligan said the city wants the water board to include groundwater in its definition of a reliable water supply.  “The only difference is surface water you can see and groundwater you can’t,” Milligan told the paper.  “We have our own wells and our own water resources,” Riverside Public Utilities spokesperson Heather Raymond told the Los Angeles Times. “No matter how much we save it has zero effect on the state water supply.”  Riverside gets its water from groundwater basins it controls and has a four-year supply on hand. That’s the minimum necessary to be included in the 4% tier. Over the years, the city has drilled wells, captured storm water, invested in a water treatment plant and spent millions on a recycled water infrastructure, Riverside Public Utilities Deputy General Manager Kevin Milligan told the Riverside Press-Enterprise.

The question then became, the City of Riverside doesn’t really have to comply with the State Resources Control Board, since our water rights are pre-1914, and the Control Board was set up thereafter.  Further, the residents who own property in the City of Riverside have a “contractual right” to the that water, as a result of those water rights given to us by a court of law prior to 1914.  The city says it hasn’t imported water from the Colorado River or the State Water Project since 2008.  According to the Courthouse News Service, the city’s complaint says, “(A)ny water that Riverside does not extract will sit in the basin, and cannot be extracted or used by others. Riverside is truly ‘water independent.’ ”  This is something to remember folks, because the City of Riverside is mandated by law to harvest “x” amount of water.  Water cannot be conserved and sit in the ground.  If it does, it can go beyond the acceptable water table, and cause damage and weakness to surrounding infrastructure.

garyguessjokers

Riverside City Attorney Gary Geuss, with double indemnity prior clown behind him, a tough circus act to follow!

Has anybody seen the moniker around town stating “I Own It?”  What does that mean?  It means that if you are a homeowner in the City of Riverside you actually have a “contractual right” to water and you therefore own the “public utilities.”  You may ask, “Why does the City state we are “shareholders” as a result of owning property attached to a home, and then be treated as we are not?”  The straight answer is that the Riverside Water Board represents City interest, therefore not the best interest of the taxpayers is considered.  The only way to protect your rights, your right to water etc. is to form a “taxpayer advocacy” group which will lobby for our rights as homeowners and property owners.

We haven’t even addressed those residents who own rights to the Gage Canal water etc., they can pretty much run there water down the street if they want. There is no drought restriction for them! The point is that are city forefathers made sure there would not be a problem with the access of this important commodity, and this was insured years ago, and pre-1914.  Therefore, are rights to that groundwater should be fought for with a vengeance.  It is as the squirrel who prepared themselves for the winter and stored his food supply early.  Another squirrel comes about, who didn’t prepare, and wants to take it away.  That is what the State of California is attempting to do.

RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES ADMITS WE ARE PRE-1914 BY ADVERTISING PROMO.. CUSTOMER OWNED SINCE 1895.

img040two  enlarge1895ownership

What City of Riverside residents must know about the drought misinformation, is that the residents have a “contractual right” to water prior to 1914. Which means that we as a City do not have to comply with the laws regarding drought mandated by Governor Edmund G. Brown, also known as “Moonbeam.”  According to Riverside Public Utilities own advertisement, we have been publicly and customer owned since 1895!  You therefore are not receiving correct information.  Every homeowner in the City of Riverside has a contractual right to water from the publicly owned Bunker Hill Basin in San Bernardino.  The next big question Riversidian’s should be asking is why we as a publicly owned utility should have to advertise to ourselves?  The Riverside Public Utilities spends multitudes of money to promote, which is technically, a public monopoly with reference to utilities.  WHY IS THERE A NEED TO ADVERTISE?  Is it to divert monies to those special clients in the advertising business?  Can this be interpreted as a gift of public funds?  It’s all wrong and should not be done!  Further, the ratepayers demand the utility overages refunded back!  Don’t attempt to try to craft new language and use are reserves to purchase another $40 million dollar building.

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN….

1907-riv-randa-railway-002-600

RIVERSIDE & ARLINGTON RAILWAY CO. (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST, “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” 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

GJ072015    GJ072015two    GJ072015three     GJ072015four copy

CLICK TO ENLARGE TO VIEW JULY 2, 2015 GRAND JURY FINDINGS AGAINST COUNTY COUNSEL GREGORY PRIAMOS.

2014 2015 Grand Jury Report Riverside County Board of Supervisors Transparency Grand Jury Interference (CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW PDF VERSION)

untitled

COUNTY COUNSEL CONSIGLIERE GREGORY PRIAMOS

According to the latest report released by the Grand Jury on July 2, 2015, they believe they were retaliated against by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, when on April 8, 2014, the 2013-2014 Riverside County Grand Jury made public a report entitled, “Political Reform and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors”. This report focused on the use of Community Improvement Designation (CID) Funds and was critical of the way some of the funds were utilized.

Fifty-eight days later, they state, a new County of Riverside County Counsel with a “controversial reputation, a known history of Grand Jury interference, and over the objections of many concerned citizens, was unanimously appointed by the Board of Supervisors.”  According to the Grand Jury the following report is what started it all … or, in other words, HOW DARE THEY QUESTION OUR USE OF PUBLIC MONEY TO BOLSTER OUR CAMPAIGNS!?

gjreportcampaignreform

2013 2014 Grand Jury Report – Political Reform and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors (24 pages) CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL REPORT

Three main points were made in this newest release by the Riverside County Grand Jury with reference to County Counsel Gregory Priamos.

The first focused on the bid process.  An anonymous Supervisor’s Chief of Staff, during testimony, was asked how extensive the geographic area was when the ‘Supes recruited for the position of County Counsel.  His reply?  “Three blocks.”  Although not required, the Board of Supervisors chose not to use competitive procedures, and instead handed a $250,000/year position with lavish benefits over to a buddy of theirs.  Was this was not Supervisor Marion Ashley’s Chief of Staff, Jaime Hurtado, whom we hear is being groomed to take over Ashley’s position?

Second, the Grand Jury had issues with Priamos’ “interference,” in their investigation.  Priamos in an email, asked that all County Departments and Special Districts contact his office (specifically, Anita Willis and Jeb Brown – his main squeeze at the City of Riverside) immediately if contacted by the Grand Jury.  The Grand Jury wants transparency and the truth when they interview people.  The Grand Jury believes this message was sent to control County employees out of fear of retaliation should they not be able to speak privately with them.  Nothing new to us hear at Thirty Miles: just Gregory attempting to have control of the message as he did in the City of Riverside.

Third, Priamos’s contract with the County should immediately be “nullified!”  This means that the Grand Jury feels that the County Board of Supervisors did not execute best practices for the hiring of a qualified (cough, cough…ethical) County Counsel.  Therefore, the Grand Jury is requesting the Board of Supervisors to conduct an actual, advertised recruitment for the position of County Counsel so that the best candidate can be appointed as County Counsel to serve the people of the Inland Empire.  Opps..sorry Greg!  That means somebody who is “not you.”

Since in his letter to county employee, Priamos references the County Executive Officer, Jay Orr, as his co-conspirator, perhaps the Grand Jury ought to investigate that angle as well, and whether Orr needs to be replaced…

Orr2013

County of Riverside, Executive Fool Officer, Jay Orr

County Sups, Just a Chain of Fools?

RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES SAYS, “WE ARE IN THIS TOGETHER…”

puletter

What is not covered in the above memo is that if the State of California was really serious about the drought, they would place on moratorium on new development … of course that’s about as likely as the Gov Moonbeam’s bullet train coming in under budget.

So many issues with the current policies, we hardly know where to begin.  While some are tearing out their front yards, if you have a pool, that’s exempt!  What if you have a share of the Gage Canal water, which many homeowners do? …exempt!

Untitled-1   intro-4-lg

In the City of Riverside, Brown is not only Sexy, it’s beautiful!  Our front lawns may be brown but are back yard pools are bright blue full of water!  Why is that folks?  It could be that the City of Riverside has a Contractual Obligation to Riverside Property Owners to Provide Water!  The City of Riverside has Pre-1914 Water Rights to Ground Water from the Bunker Hill Basin.  Which means that we are not in control of the California State Water Resources Control Board, Why? Because we have our own Board, Why? Because we as a City own Our Water Rights!  The Leadership of the City of Riverside misguided you, the taxpayer, to believe otherwise.  Causing by their incompetence, that they, the Council, would like you to pay more to cover their illegitimate transgressions.  Not to mention the illegitimate transgressions of your Pretty Boy Mayor, William Rusty Bailey.  Vote No on Measure-Z 2016!  Again those you have placed in leadership positions have deceived you!  You will be paying more for the Heroes you thought were Heroes..Fire and Police.  They are not are Heroes when it comes to scamming the taxpayer for perceived increases in pension and salary increases.

swimmingpoolnotatthistime

click this image to enlarge (click this link to go to the city source)

Riverside is unique in that we own our water.  Twenty percent is sold to outside locals.  So why are we conserving, while the city is mandated by law to harvest “x’ amount of water from the Bunker Hill Basin or lose those rights!  New City Attorney Gary Geuss file a lawsuit on behalf of the public asking the State to reverse their requirements since we own our own water.  What he forgot to tell the State is that the City has a “contractual” association with the homeowners that requires them to provide water.  What this means is that it trumps the State Water Drought Declaration.  More on this to come.  What’s more egregious is that the city of Riverside is asking their residents to be “snitches” on their neighbors concerning the new restriction, which will of course cause further undo tension and discourse in the community…for absolutely no good reason.

BREAKING STORIES FROM THE PRESS ENTERPRISE REFERENCING RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES.

JULY 04, 2015: CITY FIELDS QUESTION ON UTILITY RESERVES  The question arises from community activists, based upon and city of Riverside public utility documents, whether its ratepayers, that’s you and me for the uninitiated, have over-charged for services over the past decade.  The reserves have grown beyond what City official policies state, thereby violating those rules.  The the city was caught with their pants down, so they’re crafting language for new policy, and spinning the criticism.  We ask why is RPU General Manager, Girish Balanchandran, rewriting policy, if it wasn’t followed to begin with?  Seems to us like a waste of time if the City’s just going to do whatever the heck it wants anyway.

There is no question in our minds that the new policy will be written specifically to bring into conformance the existing policy violations, so that no one ever has to take any accountability….same ‘ole, same ‘ole.  The right thing to do would be to return the excess funds back to the ratepayers.  But that will be a challenge: your public utilities (“We Own It!”) currently does not work in your best interests.  What the City has done to the ratepayers over the years is just plain wrong.

JULY 02, 2015: RIVERSIDE: RESIDENTS WANT TO AX UTILITY TAX  A common theme: residents are fed up with all the taxation.  TMC is asking for your support to be part of a Ratepayer Advocacy Group that would serve as a watchdog on utility practices, and hopefully prevent some of the abuses we’ve suffered under the Loveridge/Hudson/Priamos (and their cronies) years.  The Board of Public Utilities does not advocate for the taxpayer, but for the city.

Finance Director Brent Mason stated that the utility user tax brings in $30 million a year to the general fund to pay for police, fire, parks and other services …. we thought that was what the General Fund Transfer was for!?  Seems to us like double taxation.

More Information on the Utility User Tax (click this link).

The utility users tax is not a sales tax (the State administers those); it’s an excise tax. Riverside residents pay the City for the “luxury” of gas, water, electric, and phone service. I don’t know about you, but those don’t seem like luxuries to me. They should all be repealed. The City needs to stop abusing its residents through excessive taxation in the form of fees like the Utility Users Tax and General Fund Transfer at its public (aka, monopoly) utility or risk losing them both…and maybe even its entire utility…in the process. My belief is that the City is breaking the social compact to provide these services at “cost plus” and will pay a steep price if it doesn’t come to the table soon with those that want reform at RPU. Just my two cents. – Jason Hunter, commentor to the Press Enterprise

THANK YOU CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND SUPPORTERS OF TMC FOR REACHING 200,000 HITS!  

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST, “DISGUSTING,” “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,” “ABOMINABLE,” “APPALLING,” “DETESTABLE,” “SLEAZY,” “SLANDEROUS,” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  YES WE ARE ALL OF THIS, WE ADMIT IT, SO PLEASE…DO NOT READ IF OFFENDED!  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