Whoever would’ve thought it was a bad thing to ask our City to be fiscally responsible? Whoever would’ve thought your local government would label as “bad people” those who were curious as to where taxpayer monies were going – spread it around town through a whisper campaign design to destroy you? Our first lesson in rejection, we figure was about 2011, when we asked then-Councilman Paul Davis to look at some documents we assembled regarding city loans. He looked at the information our group brought forward and became very quiet. He said nothing and left without telling us whether he would or would not support our claims. He make no constructive criticism whatsoever. We had no idea what to make of it all.
We would learn soon enough about a different perspective on local “leadership;” how far folks would go to make a wrong a right; to justify what could simply be called “bad behavior”. Turns out there were more layers to this onion than we could even imagine back then. In the subsequent months we would also figure out that hoping the City would come to its senses and do the right thing just wasn’t going to happen. Not when there was an agenda that had to be fulfilled and pockets lined. We knew we had to change our strategy and attempt to become more effective.
We met weekly for two years in Fullerton at the Office of former California State Assemblyman Chris Norby starting in 2011. Norby was prominent at the time for his views on the abuses of Redevelopment, with emphasis on eminent domain. Our mentor, who taught us how to look at government documents was the CFO of one of the cities within his district, whom we would only know until recently as “Mr. Smith”. We’ll continue with the TMC backstory at a later date….but not before reminiscing about a trophy we collected along this journey:
RIVERSIDE STRONG: HOMELESSNESS ISSUE WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY: CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 17, 2019: MAYOR RUSTY BAILEY’S INSULTING RESPONSE TO DENIGRATE A LOCAL TAXPAYING COMMUNITY GROUP: This is a good example what happened to us, when we began to bring issues to City Council. We were insulted and belittled by both elected officials and their executive staff in an attempt to publicly embarrass us so perhaps we would never come back. In our case, it went to the level of slander…behind our backs of course. The whisper campaign spread steadily throughout our community, and the message was clear: if ever you may want to make a play for public office, do business with any government agency, or have public issues that you wish support/defeat, you better not to talk to the Moreno’s. Our words of wisdom to Riverside Strong: keep at it, you are onto something, and getting underneath their nerves.
ROY BLECKERT FROM THE IE NEWSWIRE INTERVIEWS LOCAL TAX ADVOCATE JASON HUNTER REGARDING TWO NEW BONDS: PROPOSITION 13 AND MEASURE A: “IT’S ALL ABOUT THE CHILDREN…” YEH RIGHT, HEARD THAT ONE TOO MANY TIMES SINCE THE CALIFORNIA STATE LOTTERY PROPOSITION 37 IN 1984, which was sold on the backs of solving all the issues with our underperfoming schools. 2.13.2020: Roy Bleckert from the IE Newswire and 1490AM interviews local taxpayer advocate and Riverside resident Jason Hunter regarding the two new bond issuances up for vote on March 3, 2020. The proceeds of these are guaranteed to be abused (as usual), and Hunter explains the why and how. The first is Measure A, Riverside Community College District’s $715 Million blank check. The second is Proposition 13: an attempt to reverse the brakes put on ever-escalating property taxes by the beloved Prop 13 passed in 1978.
ACCORDING TO THE CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S FISCAL HEALTH OF THE STATES OVER 470’S CITIES: THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE IS IN THE TOP 5TH PERCENTILE OF FISCALLY CHALLENGED CITIES: Residents should absolutely be concerned. The purpose of this online dashboard by the State of California is part of their high-risk local government agency audit program to identify cities that could be facing fiscal challenges by assessing their levels of risk using various financial indicators. Through this transparent interface, California residents, state and local policymakers, and interested parties will have a data driven view of each city’s risk assessment. Riverside is the 19th worst in the State…think about that the next time you get one of 14-year Councilman Andy Melendrez’s propaganda pieces for Mayor touting what a great job he’s done. Phooey!
OPEB Funding: This indicator measures the extent to which a city has set aside assets to pay for the other post-employment benefits (OPEB), such as health and dental benefits, earned by its employees. Debt Burden: This indicator measures the extent to which a city is burdened by debt by comparing its long term obligations (excluding retirement obligations) to the revenues the city collects. High amounts of debt can strain a city’s ability to provide essential services to its residents, especially if its revenues decline. Future Pension Costs: This indicator measures the future financial burden of a city’s pension costs by comparing its projected annual required contributions to its pension plan(s) to its present level of annual revenue.
JUST FOR LAUGHS THE INCOMPARABLE RODNEY DANGERFIELD:
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST EVERYTHING, A.K.A “THIRTY MILES OF CR-P,” “SITE IS A JOKE,” “CAN’T SPELL,””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,” “BAD GRAMMAR,””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
What’s left for the Local Riverside Taxpayers after Measure Z is passed by heavily funded Unions! What is left when the Riverside Council voted for higher Utility Rates for a Utilities that the Riverside Public Residents actually own! RPU is Riverside Public Utilities! Why did they do it? They increased your Utility rates, to pay for their bad decisions and contracts with the Unions. What they did was to increase the General Fund Transfer from the Utility fund to pay unsustainable pensions. A sanitation worker in Los Angeles is retiring with $280K per year. Are public workers the Nouveau Riche? What gives? My pension is $980.00 a month with the Vons Corporation as a Managing Pharmacist, What gives?
With the economy strong, Measure Z continues to beat forecasts for revenue taken in by the City and currently approaches $53 million/year. So what ACTUALLY happened to the money? And here’s where the story takes a predictable turn.
At the same time Measure Z was being put on the ballot, now-infamous former City Manager John Russo crafted a deal with the local unions (and non-represented) employees, which was passed by our crooked City Council (with no veto from the Mayor), called the Partnership Compensation Model (PCM). The PCM was structured to grant salary raises of 9-12% ABOVE AND BEYOND NORMAL MERIT RAISES spread over 2 years for all public employees ONLY IF Measure Z should pass.
In return for this lucre, the unions had to promote the heck out of Measure Z (click on image to enlarge below).
Tim Strack, president of the Riverside City Firefighter in center, raises his fist as the first results of Measure A came in, at the Orangecrest Club in Riverside, at left, Tom Hunt of the school board and writing in the totals is Dave Austin, on Tuesday, June 4, 2013.
This is what taxpayers hate! These Assholes enumerating themselves, but not creating any savings or a value to benefit the taxpayers. The reality has set in, these dirt bags have only thought, thought on how to screw you, that is us, the taxpayer. Take a good look at these individuals..they are not your friends or your supporters, they are working to take your money, by any means possible. Which it terms they are Socialist, that is the reality…
Now here’s what should make you take your pitchforks and torches down to City Hall at the next Tuesday City Council Meeting: according to City Finance’s own numbers (presented March 13th, 2019 to the Finance Committee), in return for that $100,000, by the end Fiscal Year 2021, those very same employees will make off with over $21,000,000 annually ($16,000,000 from Measure Z itself and the remaining from your recently-raised utility bills) as a result of PCM (Partnership Compensation Model) – see and click on image below to enlarge.
Simplified:
1) Your Mayor and Council (with an assist from former City Manager John Russo) made a deal with the devil unions to trade an annual annuity of over $20 million of your money in return for $100,000. The Net Present Value of that annuity over the next 20 years (the sunset on Measure Z)? NEARLY $300 MILLION.
2) Every one of your elected officials at the time (including Ward One Council member Mike Gardner) contributed monetarily to the “Yes on Z” campaign, as did City “leaders,” non-profit associations like the Riverside Chamber of Commerce and the Raincross Group did as well.
3) The 2021 Fiscal Year budget forecast shows a $15 million deficit, which means SERVICE CUTS are on the way just 5 years after the passage of Measure Z. You think we’ve got a homeless/pothole/you-name-it problem now? Give it a year! They’ll be sleeping in your front lawn and RPD will not be able do anything about it, as this occurrence recently in our cherished Wood Streets.
4) The numbers in Simplified #1 above do not reflect how the PCM will make our unfunded pension liability explode, as pensions are calculated off an employee’s highest salary. I’ll take a swag and guess that number will eventually be in the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS too.
5) The City runs for the benefit of the electeds, a few special interests, and the employees, with just enough thrown back at the general public to provide the illusion that all’s well and things are getting done. Behinds the scenes we have $2 billion in debt, a $535 million unfunded pension liability, and budget deficits as far as the eye can see (at the City alone, not counting the County, the School Districts, etc.).
6) Eventually, all the Measure Z money will go to employees as Simplified #4 kicks in. You have been screwed royally by those sworn to serve and protect you. The City’s proposed solutions to the problems they’ve created seem to center around selling your assets, cutting your services, and taking more money from you…the road San Bernadino took over 10 years ago. Sooooo, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? I will offer my suggestions at a later date. The below was a debate on the subject of Measure Z hosted by Ralph Torres of Hey Riverside. Councilman Paul Davis and Community Tax Activist Jason Hunter were on the hot seat! He gave a warning to the taxpayer residents as follows: And don’t say some of us didn’t warn y’all at the time (at 10 minute mark in particular):
Please, please share with your neighbors. It’s time folks woke up. There’s still time to mitigate this impending disaster.
I get a bit peeved, as you should, at the entitlement I see amongst the public sector workers who think there’s any equity between work in the public and private sector by allowing public sector folks to retire at (in some cases) 90% of their highest one-year career salary in their early 50s, especially with the amount of pension spiking that still goes on. That’s not a comfortable retirement: that’s a scam on the private sector taxpayers, many of whom at looking at $35K/year in Social Security at age 70.
According to the PE, 53,000 former public employees in California were pulling down 6-figures a year in 2016, many of whom NEVER PUT A PENNY OF THEIR OWN MONEY towards their retirements. If this was seen in the Private Sector this would lead to Bankruptcy. And no, I don’t feel sorry for one second about demanding that those pensions be modified (particularly the higher end ones), especially since reform of the problem has been postponed by our public employees continually buying our elections (like Measure Z) and politicians. The general public is the boss under our Constitution, so if enough of us say “no more,” guess what? That’s it … regardless of past promises, just like in the private sector. Google, “United Airlines bankruptcy,” for reference. And the whole argument that everyone who bitches is just jealous they can’t get a job in the public sector is preposterous on its face (the private sector pays for all ALL general fund employee compensation via taxes) and shows how little people know about how our economic system of capitalism works (while not perfect, I challenge someone to show me a better model that’s actually been implemented in a country this size).
Bottom line, the City of Riverside should consider Bankruptcy as an option, and then renegotiate those Union contracts or give the Unions an ultimatum, decrease salaries and increase the pension obligation or contribution to the fund. The City of Riverside should only negotiate contracts with Unions that we actually can afford. The Private Sector does it all the time, they would otherwise see bankruptcy!
The above was a news story that was published on Youtube in 2013 by Fox Business, it talks about the unsustainable pension cost crisis that California is being confronted with. When they looked further they found public city workers were retiring with high yearly fat payouts. They had a sanitation worker in Los Angeles retiring with $280K per year, a librarian in San Diego retiring with $234K per year, a retired life guard in New Port Beach retiring with $180K in pension and health care benefits per year and 94 public government workers in the Bankrupt City of Stockton, CA receive over a $100K plus per year in pensions. Why am I peeved? I receive a pension of $980 per month in my pension as a pharmacist. I worked with the private sector as a pharmacy manager with the Vons Corporation. My background, I have a Doctorate in Clinical Pharmacy from the University of California. What I’m telling you, and should be obvious, is their are elements within City Governments that do not care, and do not look upon the interest of their taxpaying constituents.
This reminds me of Riverside Public Utilities dispatcher Donald Dahle who received $257,719 in overtime in 2016, boosting his total earnings to $373,235! A dispatcher folks! According to Internal Audit Manager for the City of Riverside Cheryl Johannes stated, “In other words, they found no fraud, … Where (Public Utilities staff) were lacking was internal review. They had policies, but if people don’t follow policies, this is what happens.” Duh, are we talking about City of Riverside Employee who was in charge or who had supervisory role was derelict in their duties or who was clearly incompetent? This being said cost the taxpayers a heap of money!
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
John Russo, Zorro, champion of the underdog and defender of the common man; or low-down outlaw and notorious gang leader?
As we at TMC wax nostalgic over the passing of the largest tax increase in the history of the City of Riverside just over a year ago, we pass along these gems, proving once again: the more things change, the more they stay the same in the ole’ River City…
Exhibit A, Councilman Mike Soubirous, 11/30/2017, a year after the passage of Measure Z:
As a 2013 candidate for Council I was against the GFT (Measure A). Mostly out of principle because I thought that the City should not have to rely upon the GFT to make ends meet. At the time, being an outsider (not on the Council) not knowing our City’s true financial status, I believed that if we needed that transfer that much we must be in bad shape financially. After the former City management team left and newly hired City Manager John Russo and his staff came on board, it was discovered that the City was about $11.5 million in the hole (or $11-1/2 million less than what Council had been told we had). In order to balance the budget Council immediately implemented 4% across-the-board cuts to all departments/services (June, 2016). We also discovered additional bond debt that was kept somewhat quiet. We were headed down the path toward bankruptcy had we not taken the immediate budget cutting action!
The residents/voters saw the Council initiated reforms and pledges to pay down debts, raise our dwindling reserves (from 15% to 20% – actually at the time down to 13%) while balancing key infrastructure and public safety needs. So the residents voted to approve Measure Z. Since May, 2015,the City Council and Executive Management team has promoted an openness, transparency track and have been improving the City’s economic development/building & safety/planning business model (more business friendly) customer service oriented position. Things are headed in the right direction! Problem is, the economy is not growing very fast (tax revenue) and is staying somewhat flat. Flat is better than trending down, but means we will probably have to impose ANOTHER 4% across-the-board cuts this June (2018) to again balance the budget. This is good for taxpayers as our City is becoming financially leaner and leaner. Doing more with way less. But not so good for those who want City services right now or five minutes ago. So by cutting back on the GFT at this point would mean imposing more than the upcoming anticipated 4% across-the-board cuts to all departments and services. Most who voted for the Measure Z (1 cent per dollar sales tax) did so to keep or advance City owned tree trimming, road paving, hiring of more police and some infrastructure projects in place or actually (finally) catching-up.
Exhibit B, City Manager John Russo and sidekick Natasha Fatale Marianna Marysheva, 4/23/16, seven months or so before the vote on Measure Z:
The city’s new administration has spent several months working to institute the kind of fiscal discipline required to generate healthy and sustainable budgets well into the future. This process has been difficult at times for everyone involved. A $1 million surplus projected for fiscal year 2015-16 – built on the type of budgeting we should no longer allow – has morphed into a shortfall of about $8 million. This shortfall, if not corrected with sustainable ongoing measures, will result in a $10-12 million budget hole in fiscal year 2016-17.
Unfortunately, some perennial critics of the city have confused the cure (early diagnosis of future budget challenges) with the disease (a negative imbalance between ongoing expenses and ongoing revenue). These folks have been frightening some Riversiders by proclaiming loudly that the city faces imminent bankruptcy.
As Riverside moves through weeks of introducing, refining and, ultimately, approving a budget for fiscal years 2016-17 and 2017-18, there will be some bumps in the road. Residents and business owners may hear things that make them uncomfortable, and perhaps even a bit nervous about Riverside’s financial health. But as we work through this difficult process, please keep in mind that Riverside is in good financial condition overall, and that this process is only going to make that even stronger.
So who are we to believe regarding the financial condition of the City of Riverside in 2016? Staff prior to the passage of the Measure Z ballot measure, a $50+ million new annual sales tax; or an elected official afterwards? Well neither, of course! Butttttttttt, neither were technically (fingers crossed) lying either…the key word being “imminent” when it came to the timing of bankruptcy.
Staff and the Council knew back in early 2016 (and looooong before that for some of them) that the City had been hiding its true liabilities off-balance-sheet for years. Trouble was, the cows were soon to be returning to the barn, where they was no hay. We’ll even give you TMC’s version of proof of this knowledge: former Finance Director Brent Mason was scapegoated fired within months of Assistant City Manager Marysheva arrived on the scene. Given the tremendous leeway the City has traditionally afforded other overpaid, hack executive employees caught with their pants down hands in the cookie jar, so they could either “retire” or “seek better opportunities,” while staying on the City payroll for much greater time periods, we must conclude Mr. Mason did something fairly egregious to merit his ignoble departure. Marysheva described it at the time as, “The city has a history of unbalanced budgets, but those imbalances have been disguised,” while ex-City Councilman Paul Davis described it more in layman terms: “cooking the books”.
But the real truth would have to wait until 2017 because Harold HillJohn Russo had a tremendous idea at the time and just the right strategy to pull it off. And that hustle plan was theWells Fargo Wagon Measure Z good folks. And along the way he would seduce one spinster librarian loner Councilman and perhaps fool the whole town into believing his shipoopi. But that fine story is for another day…but with a twist we’ll bet you didn’t see coming! Then you may have been caught with your pants down in River City.
Long-time readers will remember how we and our band of, “perennial critics,” trudged over to council chambers week after week after week to warn of impending financial collapse, and our dear “leaders” (gulp) only response was to call us crazy or deranged. As the old adage goes: if you can’t attack the message, attack the messenger. And so who’s crazy now? With gargantuan unpaid pension liabilities, fully-leveraged assets with bonds that need to be paid, and skyrocketing taxes, fees and rates … yep, there’s still going to be plenty of trouble; right here in the ole’ River City. More to come.
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
According to the San Bernardino Sentinel, Colton City Attorney Christina Talley has been relieved of her position as of September 18,2014, or could we say “fired?” Christina Talley works for the infamous Best, Best & Krieger, and incidentally has been hired by the City of Riverside through BB&K to be interim City Attorney, after former City Attorney Greg Priamos skipped town when he couldn’t handle the heat in the kitchen to Riverside County. Of course, the County Boys embraced Priamos with open arms. Accordingly, Ms. Talley appears to have been passed around to cities like a bad can of sardines beyond there expiration date. Cities continued to employ her, regardless of the smell she left behind. According to the article there is more to the story then meets the eye, not only was City of Colon Colton concerned with her ineptness with Brown Act regulations, whereby she allowed non-agendized items to be discussed by council. But even more discerning, was what occurred at a June 3 Colton Council meeting , at which a decision was made to place City Manager Stephen Compton on administrated leave. This was as a result of Compton’s inquiry with reference to questionable financial practices, including “off-the-book” projects in public works department which led him very close to uncovering details of how certain projects were funded, including several unauthorized projects which were being run out of the public works department. This of course, brought scrutiny, according to the article, toward the actions of public works director Amer Jakher, who enjoyed a close relationship with a majority of the of the city council. As the focus pointed to Jakher, some council members were pushing Compton to examine the city’s contract with Best, Best & Krieger and Talley, and potentially put the contract for city legal services out to bid.
In July of 2014, a group of Colton residents filed a complaint with the city to investigate alleged irregularities in the city’s public works department alleging potential misappropriation of public funds, gift of public funds and misuse of public funds which benefitted two city council members. The citizens provided documentation indicating that the “off the books” activity, i.e., work that had not been considered or approved by the city council, had indeed taken place in the public works division. That request was moved forward by Police Chief Steve Ward, who was then acting in the capacity of city manager during Compton’s absence. Chief of Police/City Manager Ward initiated an investigation and personally forwarded the request to Talley. The investigation was handed over to another Best Best & Krieger attorney, Ronald Ball, who is “of counsel” with the firm. Several weeks later it was discovered that Talley, however, neglected to provide Ball with the background documentation that had been provided to the city by the group of residents requesting the investigation. Thus, the investigation failed to focus on the “off-the-books” activity in the public works department that was at the root of the concerns expressed by the citizens group, and the final report reflected an incorrect timeline of events which discredited its conclusion that two of the members of the council, Frank Gonzales and Susan Oliva, had not benefited from the misapplication of resources in the public works department. Manipulation of the facts? Read the whole story in the September 19th article in the San Bernardino Setinel.
Beginning in August 2014, according to the San Bernardino Sentinel, Talley became less and less visible in Colton. She was replaced in some venues by Marco Martinez, a partner with Best Best & Krieger. In fact, Talley’s mishandling of the Colton account appears to have impacted her standing with Best Best & Krieger, which now appears to be in danger of losing Colton as a client altogether. Talley, who formerly had an office in Best Best & Krieger’s Irvine office, where she was formerly listed as an “associate,” has been consistently unavailable at that location since August. She is no longer listed as an “associate,” but is now deemed to be “of counsel,” an indication Best Best & Krieger is seeking to disassociate itself from her.
But in my eyes what we see is a powerful law firm who has been allowed to be part of the very fabric which ultimately represents the interest of the taxpayers. It certainly appears that they are their to protect their taxpayer paycheck with bad legal advice.
Edward Lee
As in the instance whereby the City of Bell sues former City Attorney Edward Lee, a BB&K attorney, for let’s see, “Faulty Legal Advice!” So Riverside, you know have a little information of how the City of Riverside rolls in what is in it’s best interest…it may very well not be you. What appears to be allegedly evident is that Best Best & Krieger has been manipulating California City politics through their “fly-by-night” team of legal attorneys, which seem to cause more financial liability to the taxpayer, then financial protection to the taxpayer.
Well I would expect that the City of Riverside’s spokes hole and former PE reporter, Phil Pritchard may attempt to spin the story by just saying she left Colton to work for the City of Riverside… Watch Two Timing Talley’s antics unfold at today’s City Council Meeting, and you the taxpayer decide! Is she really inept, or really good at playing the field of City Politics? Should we allow uncontracted legal work to continue with BB&K? Should we allow BB&K Trash Attorneys to represent the taxpayers? I think not.
CITY OF RIVERSIDE: COUNCILMAN MELENDREZ: HUMANITARIAN RESOLUTION TRIGGERS ETHICS COMPLAINT.
Councilman Andy Melendrez’s attempt to create the City of Riverside as a “Sanctuary City” appeared to be hidden according to many in the community and not brought forward at a Tuesday’s City Council Meeting. As a result, a formal Code of Ethics and Conduct complaint was filed by Fontana Council candidate Tressy Capps, specifically against Melendrez’s assertion that their would be no “fiscal impact” in the adoption of this resolution, as stated in the City Council Memorandum. The following is the filed complaint by Tressy Capps.
The following is the City Council Memorandum stating that there would be no “fiscal impact” with the adoption of this humanitarian resolution. The meaning of a resolution is defined as a firm decision to do something, or not to do something.
What was more discerning was this item/resolution it was placed on the Consent Calender, as some have indicated, a way to pass and sneak a real issue from the community. Rather than just passed, it was brought out from the consent calender for discussion. This play on politics does not make Andy a proponent for what’s right and wrong, as indicated by many in his ward. The resolution states the following: “WHEREIS: The City of Riverside hereby stands in support of sanctuary and humanitarian efforts or assistance in the processing and treatment of all immigrants, including those recently arriving in the United States..” According to the Press Enterprise, Melendrez stated that “the resolution would not have actually required the city to do anything, nor would it have committed any city funds.” Even our interim City Attorney Christina Talley chimed in when asked for an opinion by stating the following, “Based upon the face of the resolution, I didn’t see anything in that resolution that conflicted with federal or state law.” But when you look at the resolution statement it appears rather vaguely written, possibly not to directly take issue with the real point, “illegal” immigration. His point of stating “including those recently arriving in the United States,” would actually imply helping immigrants “illegally” in the country. It also seems that the City of Riverside supports efforts of efforts and assistance in the processing of all immigrants. According the statement, this would imply both “legal” and “illegal” immigrants. If this is true, the City of Riverside would effectively stating in this resolution that it supports breaking the law by supporting efforts to process “illegal” immigrants. This I would say is a direct conflict with Federal Law, and out of the scope of a local municipality, such as our City. Further, the definition of a “child” is someone under the age of 18 year of age, in some in some instances it may very well be under 19 years of age. The full original resolution is as follows:
Capps states that this resolution directly violates specifically page 4, item #6 of the Code of Ethics and Conduct for Elected Officials. She cited the item, “they will seek to insure that information provided by the city government to the public is accurate and clear.” Where is City Attorney Greg Priamos when we need him? Hell, he would just make matters worse.
According to some in the community, this resolution advocatess breaking Federal law.. Not only is he advocating breaking Federal Law, he is stating it would be acceptable for the City of Riverside to assume acceptance of those who have entered the country illegally. Some in the community feel this was done without consideration of those in his community who are legal, and need help, such as are veterans, homeless, residents struggling financially to make ends meet etc. On the other hand, proponents state that we need to ensure that the security, protection and needs of illegal or undocumented children are addressed on a humanitarian level. Which appears to be acceptable since immigration is a Federal issue. Though the term “children” has yet to be defined in these resolutions. Many city’s have adopted similar resolutions, even some states, there is really no conflict as such which would interfere with Federal laws. But what does this mean when a resolution such as this, is adopted at a local level?
Again, what happens if the whole investigation is dropped, who is responsible for the bill? You got it, we are! Should an incompetent City Manager Scott Barber reimburse the taxpayer for his inexperience? Then again attempting to sue the taxpayer as a direct result of his own personal conflicts?
UPDATE: CINDY ROTH AND THE GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBER RECEIVES FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY, OVER A HALF A MILLION OVER THREE YEARS FOR “KEEP RIVERSIDE CLEAN AND BEAUTIFUL” PROGRAM, AS VOTED AT SEPTEMBER 23RD CITY COUNCIL, WITH THE ONLY NO VOTE BY COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS. INCIDENTALLY, COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS FOUND THIS QUITE PECULIAR ENOUGH THAT HE REQUESTED THIS ITEM BE REMOVED FROM THE “CONSENT CALENDER’ FOR DISCUSSION. The discussion led to questions regarding how Cindy Roth’s Greater Riverside Chamber is paid. First, the taxpayer must pay for this “Volunteer Program” in their “Trash Bill.” Five other cities in California wouldn’t think of doing this. Riverside does. Therefore, the issue of this item becomes an illegal charge or tax against the taxpayer! Since the charge comes from the Public Works Department, it must be brought forth for “bid.” Secondly, there must be a contractors contract, referencing item by item, how the taxpayer money is to be spent. Non of this has ever been done! With her attorney husband and now Senator, “Something seems to be Rotten in Denmark!” Question have arose over the disbursements of taxpayer monies, which appear to have never been reported to Council in the past. Taxpayers continue to argue that it is a “money laundering” scheme. Incidently, Cindy Roth, CEO/President, her husband is now Senator for the State of California, Richard Roth… In the past has done outside legal work for the City of Riverside, which has been allegedly been questionable with reference in how his work really benefited Riverside residents.
Cindy Roth and the Greater Riverside Chamber was also against Measure A, which was not in the best interest of the taxpayers, and evidently is why her behind the scenes political activities at City Hall have been seen as some, as a political powerhouse, which includes former CEO and Publisher of the Riverside Press Enterprise , Ron Redfern. Riverside, wouldn’t you think something is wrong in Denmark? At the cost of $574,754 over three years to the taxpayer in your Trash Bill? Now folks, this is a volunteer program… Technically according to City policy, since this money arrives from Public Works, this item must go out to bid, secondly, there must be a contractors contract initiated itemizing the cost of services provided. This was not done. Also, an expenditure report has never been given to the City to disclose a specific itemization of disbursements. So, where does the money go? With this in mind, questions arise to how the monies are actually spent. First of all, is there a specified account for this money? Or is this money just deposited in the Greater Riverside Chamber’s general fund? To possibly be used for Councilmember and Mayor special trips, campaigns etc.
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 THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO 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 (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN NOW, SINCE GREG SKIPPED TOWN TO THE COUNTY)… 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 TOXIC DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT: THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM
I been thinking about this investigation quite a bit, and continue with the thought of just what were they thinking? Was this a conspired smear campaign, a power play to remove a colleague who may have become a political advisery? Their plan, it appeared, simply begain to unraveled at the seams unveiling a vile, putrid decay of the very fabric of our democratic system. Mayor Bailey and Councilman Adams relayed to Soubirous on April 1, 2014, that four City of Riverside employees filed under the Whistleblower’s Protection Act with complaints against him that he violated Riverside City Charter Chapter 407, thereby creating a Hostile Work Environment, what was said to him never occurred. At the July 22nd Councilman Soubirous hearing, Councilman Paul Davis admitted Brown Act violations in which are council were involved.
Section 407.Interference in administrative service. Neither the Mayor nor the City Council nor any of its members shall interfere with the execution by the City Manager of his/her powers and duties, or order, directly or indirectly, the appointment by the City Manager or by any of the department heads in the administrative service of the City, of any person to an office or employment or their removal therefrom. Except for purpose of inquiry, the Mayor, the City Council and its members shall deal with the administrative service under the City Manager solely through the City Manager and neither the Mayor nor the City Council nor any member thereof shall give orders to any subordinates of the City Manager, either publicly or privately. (Effective 12/27/1995).
Since they are “Whistleblower’s”, I would have imagined Federal Complaints would be in order. No such Federal filing according to records ever occurred. The four employees would have been RPOA President Brian Smith, RPOA Vice President Aurelio Melendrez, Chief of Police Sergio Diaz and City Manager Scott Barber. It would appear that the conspirators whittled the four filers to two since the true investigation only reveals two employees; Barber and Diaz, with Smith and Melendrez as “witnesses.” Barber made an indirect claim of a hostile work environment based on the witness testimony of third party information which, came directly from his meeting with Union President Brian Smith. He then crafted his letter and sent it to Mayor Bailey and Councilman Adams, of course, CC’d (Carbon Copy) City Attorney Gregory Priamos (AKA: The Architect). Remarkably, his letter stated that what was said between Smith and Soubirous created a hostile work environment for himself, he even admits what he has written is derived “third hand”, or AKA third party information. I guess you can always count on third party information to make a tight case.
BARBER’S COMPLAINT (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)
Not once, did our City Manager Scott Barber find it necessary to contact Councilman Soubirous to corroborate RPOA President (and RPD Sergeant-hoping to be Lieutenant) Brian Smith’s side of the story. This I find quite extraordinary! Isn’t Barber a conflict manager specialist? Or was this class just not offered in a Thespian Major? They didn’t even file their complaint according to the rules they evidently uphold (Charter Chapter 202-Code of Ethics and Conduct).
Did they perceive themselves as entitled, for the rules of law? Did they think the rules of law didn’t apply to them? They certainly apply to everyone else! Section 202 describes that a complaint form should be used and filed with the City Clerk! That certainly didn’t happen.
In a secondary act of incredible noteworthy importance, the Chief of Police in his letter did the exact same thing as City Manager Scott Barber. He based his complaint on RPOA Union President and RPD Sergeant’s Brian Smith’s personal account of his meeting with Councilman Mike Soubirous, that fateful Valentine’s Day of 2014.
RPOA President Brian Smith emailed me to tell me how I may have spun the actual fact, that I need to investigate before making a statement on the blog. So when RPOA Brian Smith sent TMC this email:
We asked RPOA President Brian Smith to clear up some questions simply because of his tag line, that he felt our post was a “interesting spin.” (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE).
With that we asked our email to respond to the original Cop Play Book. (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE). I did attempt to clarify through Seargent Smith himself but he never emailed me back. So I did take his advice and did a little investigation of my own. What I also found quite peculiar was RPD Sergeant and RPOA President Brian Smith’s interrelationships and affiliations with reference to CorporateWiki.Com The connection between Cliff Mason and Chris (Christopher) Lanzillo.
Former RPOA President & former RPD Detective Chris Lanzillo
The Cop Play Book was a list of strategic tactics designed and crafted by the law firm of Lackie, Dammeier, McGill & Ethir, for cops and their unions in order to get what they want on the negotiating table. The full play book is listed below with some excerpts. The Playbook was quickly removed from the law firms web site when the cow pies began fly; not to mention Chris Lanzillo’s name was also removed from their web site as a working associate when the press exposed their underbelly.
Accordingly, with reference to the first page above, “associations leaders know, association leaders should be selective in their battles.” We also know that Aurelio Melendrez, Vice President of the Riverside Police Officer’s Association has referred to their RPOA as an “Organization.”
Always keep this in mind. The public could care less about your pay, medical coverage and pension plan (really?), All they want to know is “what is in it for them?” Again, how arrogant, deceiving and elitist of a statement this is, of course the taxpayer cares of the cost, they are paying for it! Isn’t this the reason for the majority of municipal bankruptcy’s? Unsustainable pensions?
The Association should be like a quiet giant in the position of, “do as I ask and don’t piss me off.” Again I ask RPOA President Brian Smith, is this a formula to create better politics, or “piss poor politics?”
No City Council or Governing Board should take place where members of your association and the public aren’t present publicly chastasing them for their lack of concern for public safety. Do we not see this in the City of Riverside because they deal and prevent this issue from being public in closed sessions? Every City Council meeting Riverside has in closed sessions deals with negotiating with Union Representatives!
Blunders by the City Manager, Mayor, or City Council members of wasteful spending should be highlighted and pointed out to the public at every opportunity.
…as a pressure tactic, tactic seeking petition to file a referendum on eliminating the City Manager’s position for a full time elected Mayor may cause the City Manager to rethink his or hers position.
Focus on a City Manager, Councilperson, Mayor or Chief of Police and keep the pressure up until that person assures you his loyalty and then move on to the next victim. Sounds familiar?
Of course, other ideas that cops come up with a very imaginative. Just keep in mind, the idea is to show the decision makers that the public favors public safety and it will only harm their public support by not prioritizing you and almost equally important, to let them know that next time that they should agree with you much sooner. Sounds familiar? Sound to me as another strong-arm tactic possibly utilized to attain an objective. Is this in the best interest of the taxpayer? Or is the taxpayer being shaked down?
CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE (RIGHEIMER CALLS THEM “THUGS” & “A CRIMINAL OPERATION.” ON KFI RADIO)
On the KFI 640, radio host John and Ken interview Councilman Jim Righeimer about the incident, the original 911 call by Chris Lanzillo is also played on this show. It’s worth listening to. Righeimer is being set up by police officer and Chris Lanzillo. Lanzillo is driving a white Kia with no license plates while following Righeimer. Also noted was that he was illegally on the phone while driving, while making a false 911 call.
Councilman Jim Righeimer claims that the base pay that is indicated for police officers as well as fire fighters within the city is not the actual pay. For example if their base pay states $65K, it can actually be $135K, because their are actually 75 different ways to pay a public employee, not to mention pension, and may not even include healthcare! What they are saying is that the actual average pay per officer is actually $135K, but what you see or talked about is the base pay of $65K. Righeimer states that this was the main reason he was targeted, because he exposed to the taxpayer how much public employees really make. TMC is investigating this aspect within the City of Riverside.
What I’m getting from some of these reports is very disturbing. Have Police Unions become so powerful that they are somehow controlling certain political scenarios? This would definitely not benefit the taxpayer, but the very few in union membership. And by doing so, becomes a public health and safety issue. So now you have a police union, an attorney law firm with a police background, and possibly toss in some outside police officers working together in unison using the grey areas of the law to terrorize and shake down individuals in city government. Then decisions and contracts are then negotiated under these “circumstances.” Others in elected positions are also saying that the law firm harasses by threatening grand jury investigations.
Well if anybody knows, you can file a grand jury investigation against just about anything, you are harassed by the fact that you have to deal with it. Sounds like a good tactic as others say in the business, a “client control” strategy. Taking it a step further, is this part of the reason why California has unsustainable union contracts, is going bankrupt, and/or the reason why these contracts cannot be fulfilled or honored? Then the question would be, were some of these contracts not negotiated in the best interest of the taxpayer due to ulterior motives? Something to think about, this is what movies are made out of.. And this is one scenario I would like to see played out on the wide screen.
Let me see if I’ve got this straight…A Riverside detective named Chris Lanzillo gets fired…then is called back so that he can be retired early on a medical disability…which qualifies him to recieve his pay in large part tax free for the rest of his life. BUT…he’s not so disabled that he can’t work as a private investigator for a law firm that represents cops and cop unions…and shall we say…suuplement his retirement pay……Is that absurd or what! He’s a bad cop who’s now a crook…and we got to pay his freight for the rest of his life! – John Bosch, Commenter on the Orange County Register
But in this pic it appears he (Lanzillo, to the right) is drinking his ass off…
We also ask the question if City Hall elites have a play book, to get what they want? Reviewing, could this have been a concerted avenue utilized by Adams (Ex-RPD), Bailey, Smith, Aurelio and Diaz to destroy a political opponent? Could this have been a set-up, as Councilman Righeimer felt, as in his case?
According to a PE article you stated that the investigation on Soubirous was “incomplete” rather than “inconclusive.”, since Soubirous refused to let Gumport interview him. But it seems that Smith has forgotten that Soubirous was told April 1, 2014 that he would never know the identities of those who complained against him, that there were four and accused him of interfering with employee duties and causing a hostile work environment. According to the Fourteenth Amendment, was Soubirious being deprived of his right of “due process?” With this in mind, the case lacks creadance, therefore having documentation of all correspondence would be in order. Soubirous did just that, he declined to be interviewed, instead provided written answers to questions. After all we found out later that the interview process contained no audio recording or corresponding notes. This already appears as a set-up when you don’t know who the accusers are, and not allowed to respond appropriately by questioning them. Incidently, Smith supported Soubirous when he ran for Supervisor and had close ties to the Soubirous family. What made this campaign different for RPOA? Did the order come from the City?
Smith said he would have nothing to gain by making up a story about what Soubirous said. “As a law enforcement officer, if I am proven to be less than credible, that’s potentially career-ending,” he said. But does he? Does the Cop Play Book tell a different story?
Are the actions of the seven responsible for this embarrassing political train wreck?
The wife and I have lived at this address for 42 years…we have had outstanding council reps, Arden Anderson, Rosanna Scott, Frank Schiavone, Paul Davis and now Mike Soubirous.The unfounded “complaints” lodged against Councilman Soubirous are a joke. Apparently our City Manager and Chief Diaz got their bowels in a uproar over statement{s} made by the police union president or whatever title he hold/held. What a waste of tax payers money for lawyer fees. The approx. $98.000.00 would have bought alot of books for the libraries. We support Councilman Soubirous 110% against these complaints or whatever you want to call them. Same goes for the investigation of Paul Davis too…Suck it Up Boys…get over it and save the City of Riverside taxpayers money for good causes not mickey-mouse charges. – Gordon Williams, Commenter on the PE
Smith met with Soubirous one time alone and Soubirious met with one time with Aurelio Melendrez. You would think that if Smith felt there was any inclination of inappropriateness by Soubirous, he would attempt to record the moment or bring along a second party (which he claims are in RPOA’s “policy”). He did not. In fact he supported Soubirous for County Supervisor, even then giving him a campaign check.
CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE
Chief Sergio Diaz also supported Soubirious by giving him a $500.00 personal check. Smith, Diaz and Soubirous were friends. Soubirous even loaned his truck out (several times) to Chief Diaz. So what happened? Was it that he couldn’t be bought? He asked the questions he shouldn’t have asked?
Does Melendrez appears to conceive that RPD is an independent “organization” as stated at City Council? An organization (or organisation) is an entity, such as an institution or an association, that has a collective goal and is linked to an external environment. Has Riverside’s finest lost there way? Concerned citizens and local community groups in Riverside agree that changes need to be made. The Riverside Police Department cannot be part of as an independent external entity, it cannot be effective distancing themselves from the community, they must be part of the community.
Aurelio made it very clear that there “organization” should be autonomous.. I don’t know what world he is living in, but the residents of Riverside pay his salary and all of those in RPD. If he would like to be in control of his own organization, he should try to privatize it and start up his own armed security company, otherwise it gives the impression of a rogue organization. A police force which has no transparency or accountability! Why would someone think this was anything but open, honest and transparent? The residents, the taxpayers, pay a lot of money for their salaries and pensions, and they come back and treat us in a condescending manner? That’s unacceptable! It’s apparent that RPOA only cares about their members, the members of their “organization,” as opposed to the taxpayer who pays their salaries, who they are there to protect and serve..or are they really self serving? I ask this because the question arises as to where their loyalty lies? Is it an attempt to separate law enforcement from their responsibilities and loyalties to the community residents? We may attempt to say yes, only by their actions.. Actions speak louder than words.
Mr. Smith, do the majority of RPD officers believe in what you are doing? If so, the taxpayers best interest is not at heart and we have a conflict and a question of loyalty. Your oath should state that. To breach that would cause a health and safety issue with the taxpayers, that you’ve taken an oath to protect and serve. Would you hold the taxpayer hostage to the wishes of your organization? This would be a cause of breaching your contract with the taxpayer. We as taxpayers asked RPOA to replace the cost of this kangaroo investigation. We asked the amount to be replaced to the General Fund. We ask that you resign as well as Aurelio Melendrez, or be fired. This the community of Riverside ask, in the hopes they will not be retaliated against, we know we will.
Regardless, I would like RPOA President Brian Smith to chime in on this.. especially placing his Chief as a “deity” or “god like”. That statement just seemed off the beaten track. It is also easy to use big words and threats on the taxpayer, with the taxpayers own money. Should this be acceptable to the tax payer or criminal? I say this because we then attempt to arise to a different level of reasoning. Those who work for us and take an oath to protect and serve, those who pay for their services, can actually take a different route..a route that doesn’t include the taxpayer. Therefore what do we have as a police force? We have a double dipping Chief of Police who was approximately two years late with his Strategic Plan… Again I say it, he was not qualified! And as a citizen and taxpayer, I should’t be threatened by the Chief of Police nor any citizen/resident in Riverside. Why does he do this? What is necessary and hasn’t been done is to investigate Chief Diaz’s background. If we would have investigated former City Manager Brad Hudson’s background, we would find that he had a criminal background…credit card fraud. While Mayor Bailey stated that Hudson was a “moral compass” we dispute that.. He did have a criminal past! The Hudson legacy gave us City Manager Scott Barber and Chief Sergio Diaz. Two of the four instigators of this Valentines Day Blunder. Not to mention, Hudson gave us his greatest gift to the residents, $4 billion in unpaid debt. Ask why you are seeing increases in sewer rates and mandatory water conservation, where we own our own water. We see that this was one issue all can agree on even Smith regarding former City Manager Brad Hudson. Smith states, “I think Scott’s done a great job for the city considering the bucket of shit he was left with Brad (Hudson) and Tom (DeSantis) and half the City Council that there’s now left him with it.” (pg.20 Smith Investigation, pg. 46 Investigative Report).
CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE
When Smith commented on this investigation at City Council on June 17th, he hadn’t known that Soubirous actually responded in writing to questions. The current investigation as it stands was not good enough for Smith at the Jully 22nd, who calls the investigation “incomplete” and would like the DA to get involved. When a group of conspirators decide that the accused, should not know who is accusing him, or have and information of what the detail charges are. Why would anyone agree to a oral interview? The law firm didn’t even tape the interviews or had written notes! Good thing Soubirous didn’t agree to that, and rightfully so. The law firm could not be trusted, where’s the due process? The Chief and RPOA should know better, especially the Fourteenth Amendment. Maybe they don’t know, or maybe they don’t care about the people’s rights?
But it didn’t stop there, Smith claimed in his unsworn testimony that Soubirous wanted a meeting via his phone text. This was unverifiable by Smith, since he states he doesn’t keep his text messages, he deletes all of them. Unknowingly, Soubirous kept his, and those text contradicted Smith’s testimony. The truth of the matter is that Smith called for a meeting. (pg.7 Smith Interview, pg. 33 of investigational report).
Smith in the interview states Soubirous texted him to set up a meeting, Soubirous personal text show contradicts Smith’s statement. (CLICK ABOVE IMAGES TO ENLARGE).
Why didn’t Smith file a complaint on Soubirous, and was only a witness? This investigation seems quite remarkable, after all, he created the allegations. In fact, it was all about Sergeant Brian Smith. Was he up for a promotion to lieutenant? What hat was he wearing? RPOA President or RPD Officer Sergeant Brian Smith? He was definitely wearing RPOA President hat, and this was not the first time. The question is what made this meeting different?
We also ask the question of why the suggestion of armed security guards were in order for La Sierra Park? Soubirous originally asked Chief Sergio Diaz about the issue of utilizing RPD officers to patrol at the February 11th, City Council meeting. Diaz never responded to the question, but instead disrespected Councilman Soubirous and even tried (actually succeeded) to get the audience to laugh at the question at Soubirious expense. Scott Barber seemed to have to come up with a plan if in fact Diaz refused to comply. Was armed security the alternative as a result of Diaz’s ego? RPOA President Brian Smith was in favor of 3 million bucks in overtime money for his “troops.” Of course this would never happen in the private sector, overtime that is, that is a no-no. Why couldn’t we utilize that money for hiring new officers at the base salaries? It therefore must be a perk. But with Diaz claiming there was not enough officers to handle the panhandlers, this seem to be the only viable option left for Soubirous to suggest as a way to fix the problem.
Was Valerie Hill recruited as Ward 3 candidate to run against Soubirous because of her commitment to RPD issues over the taxpayer? Was Soubirous not chosen because of his position on (he was against) Measure A? Cindy Roth, of the Greater Riverside Chamber thought so. Now that we have Measure A, we still apparently have a problem with a shortage of RPD officers, hum… Roth still needed to receive her city taxpayer handouts for her non-profit “laundering” activity. When will these welfare groups ever do the right thing? The bottom line is that Soubirous rubbed two RPD officers egos the wrong way, and a conspiratorial retaliation ensued. We saw it first hand, some residents have seen this first hand but have remained intimidated and or quiet.
Smith accuses Soubirous of calling his guys “lazy” when it was Soubirous constituents who made that call. That would be Smith’s real employer, the taxpayer. (pg. 11 Smith Interview, pg.37 Investigative Report). Smith then wanted those emails and names, was he thinking of retaliation of those constituents? It seems like Smith is parroting his boss, Sergio Diaz, who in his email to Soubirious stated to him that he (Soubirous) referred to RPD as “Lazy.” Did Diaz make this up and his little boy Brian follows Daddy’s lead? We need to ask the question of why the community does not contact RPD with their concerns. I also don’t believe there is a direct contact number anymore, except for 911.
CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE
Why did Diaz avoid the issue of mental health training suggestions to help avoid officer-involved shootings when dealing with mentally disturbed or violent persons, when brought up by John Brandriff at a CPRC meeting? Then he retaliated against him.. What kind of person with a badge and gun does a thing as this; without a badge, gun and power would someone actually attempt to do this?
According to Smith account in reference to Chief Diaz’s job being in jeopardy, he states that “Sergio Diaz is a “deity” in this City.” “Other than the elected Sheriff of Riverside County, you are not going to remove Sergio Diaz without an uprising from the city and the citizens here and the employees that work for him.” This according to his Smith’s interview. Now remember non of these interviewees were legally sworn in to tell the truth, according to law.
DEITY:
1. a god or goddess
2. the state of being divine; godhead
3. the rank, status, or position of a god
4. the nature or character of God
I’m not sure where he gets this, but most of the community of Riverside sees otherwise. Why Smith would support Diaz, against community feelings is a misnomer. We ask the question to what is Smith’s MO? Again, the taxpayers of Riverside would like to be reimbursed for the amount of $49K times 4, by RPOA, City Manager Scott Barber and Chief of Police Sergio Diaz for this conspiratorial debacle and attempting to trump are Democratic process! Who are the real criminal masterminds?
character whiner god
Just the fact that at one time Chris Lanzillo was President of RPOA running the show, makes we wonder as to their MO’s when it comes to taxpayer’s monies, and what they will do to ensure that they get it.
Another promotional piece by the PE. Not going to work Press Enterprise. RPD Chief Sergio Diaz is a liability to the city of Riverside. He has already been found guilty of using inappropriate and vulgar language toward Riverside resident John Brandriff.Where do I start. Diaz has had numerous unprovoked angry outbursts toward several residents with whom he disagrees.RPD Chief Sergio Diaz is a bad role model for the Riverside Police Department.Among the things that he has said to residents:grow some balls – it is politically unwise to get me upset – if you have any political ambitions in this town, you do not cross me – residents who live in their mothers basement, sitting in their underwear, eating cheeto’s – you should not be able to say anything – you are a disgrace … Sergio Diaz refuses to attend RCPA Riverside Coalition for Police Accountability community meetings. Sergio Diaz refuses to accept any proposals from the city’s CPRC recommendations police commission. Sergio Diaz supports out-dated police policies that have cost Riverside taxpayers into the six digits due to lawsuits from residents who have been injured or killed by the Riverside police department. Is this the kind of behavior that Riverside should have as a police chief ?Let’s get a REAL police chief, preferably someone from within our own department.No more LAPD transfers !!!-Don Gallegos, commenter on the PE
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 THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO 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, WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! WE JUST CAN’T SPELL! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT: THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM
…continually yelling in a crowded restaurant, while on City business, in a foreign country, stating, “I’m the Mayor!!!” and continuously exclaiming that he is the Mayor and how dare I (Davis) question him on this matter.
Who would have known with seven council you get egg roll? The Mayor that is… Mayor Bailey that is…in Jiahang, China that is….in a Chinese restaurant that is….that he stated in the most stately way that he is the the Mayor, to Councilman Paul Davis that is…. Got your attention? The following is a Code of Ethics and Conduct Complaint issued and filed August 1, 2014 by Councilman Paul Davis against Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey for an incident which occurred in the country of China.
Mayor Bailey is being charged with violating Riverside City Charter Section 201, Government Code 6252.5 & 6252.7 and will full & intentional interfering with a lawful public records request. Not done yet, Riverside City Charter Section 300, 406, 407, 600 and 701. Lastly, City of Riverside Resolution No. 22546.
The main gust is that Mayor Bailey directly interfered with a lawful public records request by Councilman Davis, by directly requesting City Manager Scott Barber not to give him those records! Davis made a public records request a list of all employees who have left the city in the last 180 days, and who will be leaving. During email exchanges with Davis, the City states the information does not exist, in a later email the information does exist.
THIS CITY DOCUMENT STATES WHAT CAN, AND WHAT CANNOT BE REQUESTED REGARDING CITY EMPLOYEES (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)
The complaint states that Bailey admits he interfered with the Public Request Act by making this statement in the crowded restaurant: “I will not allow the City Manager (Barber) to provide you with the requested report, as you are only going to use it against Scott!!!”
In the complaint Davis states that Bailey failed to maintain order, decorum and civility in a public place: “When asked why he (Bailey) was yelling, he had no response, yet continued to act unprofessionally, yelling again, and acting quite childish and in a visibly offensive posture.”
But this does not stop there, regarding the Soubirious and Davis Investigation done by the City, the actions that occurred as a result of the recent Soubirous hearing, July 22nd, will be submitted to the Riverside Grand Jury for review. Below is a statement to the Riverside Grand Jury by Councilman Davis.
DAVIS STATEMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE GRAND JURY (CLICK TO ENLARGE)
For more than two decades I was involved in responding to request for public information from a California City and State Agency. In all those years not a single request for public information was deemed to be an ethical violation, a criminal act or a violation of the Brown Act. I expect an elected official to make inquiries when they observe something out of the ordinary. It is called a fiduciary obligation! – Monrow A. Mabon · Commissioner at City of Riverside, CA – City Government, Commenter on the PE
WE ARE STILL WAITING TO HEAR THE STATUS OF THE FEDERAL LAWSUIT FILE AGAINST MAYOR BAILEY BY ATTORNEY LETITIA PEPPER REGARDING THE CLAPPING INCIDENT, AND THE VIOLATION OF HER FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, NOT TO MENTION THE QUESTIONABLE ARREST!
JUST FOR LAUGHS, PIC WAS PHOTOSHOPED, BAILEY HOLDING ARTIST DON GALLEGOS RENDITION OF THE PEPPER INCIDENT. (CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE).
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 THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO 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, WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! WE JUST CAN’T SPELL! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT: THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM
What should be brought to the forefront is that Liebert Cassidy Whitmore is actually representing Councilman Paul Davis in the current case of Raychele Sterling vs. City of Riverside et al. Liebert Cassidy Whitemore is also the law firm that is doing the investigation for the City of Riverside against, of course, Councilman Paul Davis. So the firm is defending him but at the same time crucifying him and sticking the knife into him! Those in Riverside who keep up with the politics see this time and time again. Those in Riverside who are sleep, need to wake up and see what is happening in your City.
Additionally, I will be filing a bar complaint against you and your firm for violations of conflicts of interest rules, since your firm is my direct representation in the active case Sterling v City of Riverside et al. I have never waived my conflict rights in this case and neither can the council. Regards,
Paul Davis
Council Member –
This according to Councilman Paul Davis’s personal statement as indicated below, under “Full Davis Personal Statement on this Investigation”.
The letter is directed toward Mark Mayerhoff, which Davis states he is “shocked” that his firm has released an incomplete investigation, as a result of the following:
In the letter Attorney Mark Mayerhoff states the Investigation that will be release to Press Enterprise reporter Alicia Robinson will be redacted (to obscure or remove from a document prior to publication or release). Of course we asked the question of Why? Especially in the name of transparency. Mayerhoff also states that he attached an unredacted copy of the investigation to Councilman Davis. We have the unredacted investigation as follows, all 417 pages. Alicia, if you need the full unredacted copy just download from our site!
These issues that Soubirous and I have been charged with is misappropriations of Public Funds for Political Gain and it is about exacting retaliation for our not being the “Go along to get along” guys, like many of the rest. The funds issue will be handled in another venue, as Adams and Bailey appropriated the funds without authority of the council. Evidence will be produced to prove this up. What happened is Barber files the complaint then funds the investigation under his 50K expense authority and they split up the contracts into four separate ones to equate to $200k authorization.
Interestingly enough the hired gun law firm and investigator failed to insert my interview “Eratta”, correction sheet into the investigation materials and even failed to incorporate the right statements in to Gumpart’s statements, where I said “Surely Not” and the stenographer records “Sure”. Gumport does this so that he can make a point in his opinion on his questions as to the effect of my statements on CM Barber being able to do his job. However, I have attached is separately.
More to come.
Paul Davis
Councilmember – Ward 4
City of Riverside
And of course it is not over yet! There is “MORE TO COME” according to Councilman Paul Davis! We will sit back and wait because it will be sooner than you think. Paul Davis’s Interview “Eratta” is as follows:
He brought the issue to Council and basically appeared they would rubber stamp the idea, after-the-fact. Had this type of shenanigans been done before by the prior City Manager? The City Manager’s discretionary spending cap is at $50,000.00, anything over that amount must go to council. Certainly violated the Charter Amendment. What made Barber think that he had the authority to act as an elect and ferret it out without them? A complaint should have been filed against him with Human Resources, and Council should have fired him immediately.
What is now remarkable is the fact that Scotty is creating more liability as what appears to be personality problems at the expense of the taxpayer! It is now becoming evident he doesn’t care about the residents of Riverside, if not, only for himself. Will Scotty sue the City of Riverside? Or I should say, the taxpayer because of his perception of in house politics? Remember Scotty is a remnant of the Hudson legacy; he, Brad Hudson was convicted of credit card fraud. But our current Mayor Rusty Bailey considers him a moral compass, go figure..
Some things never change as this is common in Riverside. Brad Hudson ran the city and the Council as the Mayor was just a figure head madding back room deals, traveling, giving speeches and breaking a tie vote. Well a city attorney made the law up as he went but talked his way out. As the Mayor left and the hopes of an honest Mayor we saw a candidate who had powerful friends of the former Mayor. yes false fliers were sent out but the candidate got caught and apologized, using illegal Fed agent license plates and more corruption, as he was the choice of the people. To start his term he made national news by having a citizen arrested for speaking over 3 minutes, a lawyer arrested for clapping and big money was made with the help of the city Attorney in red lining homes for illegal foreclosure. People were in place to defend and protect the criminal acts. Brad Hudson skipped out along with the Deputy Attorney after illegally buying Glock Hand guns as the Feds closed in but the council did nothing. A replacement who would follow orders was needed and the Code Enforcement Director was picked. Things went for bad to worse as all violations by the council insiders were ignored but the firing of a Deputy attorney who reported illegal action was done as Mrs. Sterling was out. HR answered to Hudson and that was well known. Loveridge was funny as his old time lies did not work on a new generation. Just think Adams history of assaulting his girl friend, messing in a police promotion and as a veteran police officer taking illegal plates still got elected to council again and now running for Congress. Wow we have enough corrupt Congressmen in DC but at lease Riverside has an Honest Congressman in Mark. Well Davis and Mike know their honesty and loyalty to their Wards is not what the Bailey team wants. Most people know a misdemeanor is a violation that gets you jail time and a fine. But it seems Priamos missed that class in law school. Mike charged with hear say that failed even paying to LA lawyers 200,000 dollars which a law student would know. Then Davis with documents as evidence and wow the filing of complaints done wrong but no problem as even the Brown Act was violated twice and no due process in either case. Conflict of interest even paid Attorneys were clue less. The Mayor is spending allot to get two council out in the next election and put Bailey team members in their seats. What is clear is Riverside no longer wants citizens to elect their representatives but will let the Mayor do it. The way things are going Bailey wont need an election to continue as Mayor he will appoint himself. Scott Barber is a good worker and did a great job giving out tickets in Code Enforcement rather legal or illegal and really wanted the city managers job to do as he was told. Anyone who lives in the city of Riverside knows how things are done and employees/appointees take orders and follow them. I remember when we were asked for bond for the Library to help the children well after the money was given oops the council and mayor used it for something else only to come back again to ask for money for the Library. Using citizens and wasting money while making back room deals will continue until the voters clean out the corrupt elected officials and the Bailey Team. The Feds and the State are likely to come in and then the blame game but it will be great to see Brad Hudson and Greg Priamos finally answer to their crimes over the years. – AirJackie, Commenter to TMC
WATER CONSERVATION: THE FAUX DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. We don’t have a drought in the City of Riverside, but it seems the City will create one in order take advantage of fines and maintain the current water rates. The clincher is that the City passed an ordinance to comply with State Law. They didn’t have to because we are exempt because we own our water supply. We as a City are also under a court order, if we don’t use the water we lose it! Since we own our own water in no position to declare a water shortage! Large educational institutions such as RCC and UCR are exempt.
This is how contradictary this ordinance is, if you are a recipient of Gage Canal water, there are no restrictions, you can use as much as appropriated yearly to you depending on your shares. That means you can run the water into the street if you want. Of course, I’m not advocating that, but the point is that we have a unfair application of the laws, maybe because the City can always depend on squeezing a little more from the residents. The City didn’t have to pass the ordinance, but they did, they did because there is a monetary MO behind it. Education institutions such as UCR and RCC are exempt. One of the absolute benefits of living in Riverside is ownership of water. You can maintain you pool and jacuzzi as long as you don’t “overfill.” Did you get that one? Who overfills their pool? The San Bernardino Water Basin holds about 5 Million acre feet of water. Only about a million acre feet are available to the existing wells. So about 4 millions acre feet remains to be tapped by deeper wells. There is plenty of water. This is focused on an income source, and that income source is us. This political move also seems another way that the City can put one neighbor against the other by the snitch call to code enforcement, the other police force. It’s time to see what is occurring in the City of Riverside and remove your Councilperson. In my ward it is Councilman Mike Gardner.
Remember, approximately 20% of our water is sold to Western Municipal. Are we to conserve more water so that the City can sell more off to other communities for a higher profit. Cite the citizens on water violations to increase profits. Then they will then ask us to use less water then they will raise water rates to increase profits. You will use less and pay more. Then they will manipulate the tier pricing seasonally or at will to increase even more profits. The more money in the water fund, the more that 11.5% water transfer to the General Fund will have.
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:
Interesting yet, manipulating the data. They first mentioned that ground water levels have dropped due to increased use/demand from consumers but, the graph displays only gw available in acre feet. The data that should have been shown in the graph in order to keep consistent with the written conversation is depth to ground water in the wells (1934-today). They have the data. The graph displays how much water was available every 2 yrs from 1934 on. This is the amount legally available to harvest annually. It is close to displaying how much water(rainfall) went into the basin each season. 1960-64 was the driest period on record but historical references are available of other dry and wet periods back to the early 1800’s. What the graph really shows is that Riverside takes about 10% of the annual harvest of water supplied by normal rainfall. The other water agencies share in the other 90%. The San Bernardino Water Basin holds about 5 Million acre feet of water. Only about a million acre feet are available to the existing wells. So about 4 millions acre feet remains to be tapped by deeper wells.
Of course in the current dry spell (notice there were several dry and wet periods 10 yrs apart) the available gw has decreased some due to demand but mostly due to low rainfall in the local mountains. Look at the wet years; almost instant recharge of the gw basin occurs as soon as we get the first normal or above normal rainfall. This shows the amount available to the various water harvesters is the amount of water that recharges the basin each year or about 500,000 acre feet on average. (this is detailed in the Court settlement order of 1980 settling the big water rights lawsuit filed in 1964.) There is plenty of water available in the gw basin. The Court has limited access to most of it.
Currently, Riverside uses about 84,000 acre feet of gw per year. Half or 44,000 acre feet is harvested from the San Bernardino Basin. The other 40,000 comes mostly from the North Riverside Basin from a well field near the soccer complex and old dead golf course. The North Riverside Basin is geologically and hydraulically connected to the San Bernardino Basin. Ground water flows from the San Bernardino Basin into the North Riverside Basin continuously via a narrow under ground channel beneath the Santa Ana River in Colton.
Now, lets get back to water rights. A Water Right is a legal claim to a fixed amount of water harvested annually from a defined source such as, a river. Your claim can be legally challenged at any time by another water harvester from the same water source. There are pre-1914 water rights and post-1914 water rights. The difference is the date of first lawful claim to the water. Post-1914 water rights claims are granted, processed, regulated and disputed through or by the Calif. Dept. of Water Resources. This legal status encompasses all of the state’s water resources unused or in its natural state post-1914 water law. This is about 62% of the states total water resources during average rainfall periods. The UlS. Constitution prohibits congress from passing retroactive law so, we get old law still in effect for many and the new law applying only to those engaging in the regulated activity as of the date of new law. Two systems of legal claims to water co-existing at the same time.
The other pre-1914 water sources comprising 38% of the states water resources pre-existed the 1914 change in state law toward state regulation of water harvesting and the creation of the Dept. of Water Resources. So if you held a legal water right prior to 1914 it was formed under old law dating back to the founding of the state circa 1849 and before John North et al started up the land development scheme (the Southern California Colony Assn) that became the city of Riverside circa 1885.
From 1850-1914 the primary concern of Californians and incoming settlers was the availability of water and the price! People were experiencing the tyranny of corporate monopolies with the railroad. Railroads arbitrarily raised freight prices after settlers moved in. Cheep rates to draw in settlers and raise them later to extract profits from them when they financially can’t leave. The basic lack of competition in a natural monopoly like a railroad sucked the money out of the local farmers. It was feared that the same monopolistic behavior would (and was) occur with water providers. The state legislature of 1850-1905 was very serious about curbing monopolistic water providers. 1852 saw the first laws regulating the formation of water companies and pricing. Our state Senator of the day, John Satterwaite, authored several laws including one passed in 1862, the Satterwaite Act or Civil Code 552. John North incorporated the So. Calif. Colony Assn. under this law to make profits from the sale of land with a guarantee of water delivery in perpetuity. In part it says, “The corporation is formed to build a water distribution (canal) system to make the land livable and profitable. The corporation making its’ profits from the sale of the land and the water sold at cost.”
This is further elaborated on in Superior Court, Appellate Court and Supreme Court decisions leading to Cal. Supreme, Price v. the Riverside Land & Irrigation Co., 1880. Where the law and lower court rulings were placed in context justifying the Supreme Courts decision. In part saying, ” The corporation having formed under the law of 1862 (civil code 552) may not make profits from the sale and delivery of water. The water belongs to the land and is fixed to it permenently. The price set for delivery of water is based only upon the cost of operating and maintaining the canal, pipes, pumps or other infrastructure annually, Water is not sold as a comodity the lawful price to only recover the cost of providing water to the land.” Including that this was a contractual obligation of the original sale of Colony land(s) to settlers. So, the So. Calif. Colony Assn. contractually sold parcels of land with the advertised and promissed guarantee of water delivery in perpetuity to the land, a contractual obligation that continues forever to pass with the land ownership and successive owners of the water company including a future municipality. This is published case law stating that state water law of the time is still in effect and contractural obligation both pass to successive owners. The water right is fixed to the land receiving water permanently and cannot be altered. State constitutional law upholding and the U.S. Constitution, fourteenth amendment protection of lawful contracts upholding. Land owners served by the city of Riverside water dept. as successor owner of the Riverside land &Irrigation Co. cannot be denied the water they have always received in the same amount and quality as originally delivered to the land and in perpetuity at not more than the cost to deliver the water.
So we are in a period of drought. The law and the Cal. Sup. 1880 says, “The (city of Riverside) water company must declare a water supply emergency to deviate from it otherwise lawful supplying of water to the land, in order to initiate any form of reducing water supply or consumption during the emergency period. It must also stop connecting new land/customers to the distribution system until the emergency is canceled.”
Hence, Riverside cannot charge us fees for conservation programs because that is not a cost of operating and maintaining the infrastructure/service. Riverside cannot do anything other than request Volunteer water conservation. Riverside cannot raise prices to force consumers to use less water. Riverside cannot use tiered punitive pricing to force less water consumption. You have a lawful right to water in the same amount as was originally delivered to your land. My parcel was originally planted in citrus pre-1890 and irrigated with about 8 acre feet of water per acre, the water also being of drinking water quality and used to supply the house. So my water allotment for our .84 acre parcel is about 6 acre feet of water per year. After that, Riverside can require conservation and maybe raise prices.
RUSTY’S RED TROLLEY! DOES HE THINK IT CAN? MEETING PLANNED FOR JULY 30ST, 2014 TO EXAMIN THE FEASABILITY STUDY! The City of Riverside received a Cal Trans Grant of $237,000.00 to do a feasibility study, and you better believe with this money the focus is on a reason to have it!
CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE
TMC will have a rebuttle of the pro’s and con’s of a trolley system in the City of Riverside, and will be able to do it for no cost to the taxpayer!
CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DETAILS OF THE MEETING
TROLLEY UPDATE: TMC WAS TOLD THAT AT THE MEETING, THE TABLES HAD NAME CARDS OF ALL THE COUNCIL AND MAYOR WITH THE TROLLEY STUDY PACKETS. NOT ONE MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL SHOWED, EVEN THE MAYOR DIDN’T SHOW AND IT’S HIS PROJECT! IT APPEARS ANOTHER $237K IN STATE GRANT MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN..
THE RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE WILL TAKE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ON THE UPCOMING SPECIAL AUDIT OF THE SEWER FUNDS. THIS WILL BE THIS TUESDAY JULY 29TH AT 6:00PM IN THE MAYOR’S CEREMONIAL ROOM ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL.
CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY NEIL OKAZAKI LEAVES CITY OF RIVERSIDE. Sources have said that Neil Okazaki would be leaving his position, possible going to the County. This occurred the day of the Soubirious hearing. Was this hearing the turning point for Okazaki? Weeks before, City Attorney Greg Priamos said he was leaving for a position with the County as well. What seems evident is that no one wants to go down with the ship!
SORRY EVERYBODY! WE STILL HAVE MORE ON COUNCILMAN SOUBIROUS’S INVESTIGATION THAT WILL BE A COMPLETE SHOCKER! STAY TUNED FOR MORE AS RIVER CITY TURNS!
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 THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO 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, WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! WE JUST CAN’T SPELL! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT: THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM
COUNCILMAN MIKE SOUBIROUS, WARD 3 COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS, WARD 4
Tonight’s explosive Council meeting regarding the rate increases to residents, ended with questions regarding bonds, loans, advances and debt service to the taxpayer. The new rate hikes were passed by Council, to replace the old. According to Councilman Davis, this rate hike will be a 302% increase since the year 2008. Councilman Davis also made a motion to bring California State Controller John Chiang do to a forensic audit of the sewer. Councilman Soubirous asked for same, but to include water and electric. If we are to increase the rates we need to bring trust back to the community by having a independent entity evaluate the taxpayer’s books over the years. Davis questioned CFO Brent Mason regarding posting dates and why some entries were backdated. The rest of Council and Mayor Bailey were visually disturbed and shaken by this call. TMC was right, the ones who went for the rate increase were, Councilman Mike Gardner, Chris Mac Arthur, Steve Adams and Jim Perry. When Councilman Jim Perry asked for a seperation of the issues, between the rate increases and forensic audit, the audience asked for a recall! The audience was shocked at Perry’s position not to support the issue of a forensic audit, but he called for a workshop on it. Councilman Soubirous and Davis can call the State Controller directly requesting an audit without the approval of council or a workshop! Councilman Andy Melendrez was absent from council, was he glad he was? What does this mean for the City of Riverside? The end of corruption? What is the Council afraid of finding? A Swiss Bank Account? It is evident that Davis and Soubirous find the atmosphere in the City of Riverside necessary to ask the State Controller to come in and bring closure for the taxpayer. What is the nervousness of those council people who are against this. Colusion? Why wouldn’t they see this as a win, win situation for the taxpayer? Especially newcomer, Councilman Jim Perry? Why would he attempt to divert attention to a prominent and relative issue somewhere else? Did they get to him? Coucilman Chris Mac Arthur asked the question to the City Attorney if it was proper to request the services of John Chiang’s office. It was obvious that City Attorney Greg Priamos did not want an audit, when he told council that they should take CFO Mason’s word that the books are in order, but left to their discretion if an outside auditing should be requested. This in lieu of a letter by an Code of Ethics Adjudicating Body Member, Keith Nelson, Ph.D, calling a local City of Riverside hired attorney Doug Smith a liar, and questioning the unscrupulous behavior of City Attorney Greg Priamos! Why would anybody rely on the word of our City Attorney Greg Priamos, he has a track record of misinforming council.
STATE CONTROLLER, JOHN CHIANG
FROM THE DESK OF SCOTT SIMPSON: SCOTT RESPONDS TO RIVERSIDE’S SEWER RATE HIKES:
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:
Some times what the city does not tell you is most important to the decision to raise the sewer rates.
1. Hudson changed the financing stategy for sewer capital improvements away from voter approval of municipal bonds or property assessments or special taxes. These would show up on your property tax billing. We are still paying off capital improvement bonds from pre-Hudson era on our property tax bill. Bonds in general are a 30 year repayment obligation. Hudson took away your right to vote No on ever increasing debt which is what is driving these outrageous sewer rate increases.
2. Remember last night, staff kept saying the sixteen year period of no rate increases was pre-Hudson and bonds were financed differently. The truth is the operation and maintenance of the waste water facillity doesn’t out pace the cost of living. Especiallysince we experienced a recession that left 25% of our homes and businesses empty and thus not Flushing. This is the real reason they kept saying they have less waste water to treat along with less customer revenue.
3. California courts have ruled that rates fees and charges for sewer sevices supplied to the land are only for the purpose of recovering the annual cost of operation and maintenance. The rates are to be set annually utilizing the accounting records of the prior fiscal year. The courts said, this is the true Variable cost of the sewer service.
4. California courts also say that Fixed costs and Capital improvement cost and infrastructure replacement costs are not to be included in the sewer rates, fees and charges. They (fixed costs) must be a separate charge on the bill. They have also emphasized that capital costs are only lawfully recovered by voter approved municipal bonds, voter approved property assessments and/or voter approved special taxes. All of which will be collected on your property tax bill. The court specifically prohibited the inclusion of debt service in rates, fees and charges.
5. The courts also said that all customers pay the same rate for the same service to their property. This includes tax-exempt educational customers and all governmental agencies recieving the service.
6. The courts have also ruled that You as the indiviual property owner/renter recieving sewer services provided by a municipality can only be charged rates, fees and charges that do not exceed the actual (variable) cost of providing the service to your property. This means the city must individually determine the (variable) cost of the service you impose upon them.
7. Finally, our courts have ruled that when a municipality enters into a new instrument of debt of any kind, this act automatically creates a new demand for new tax revenue which must be approved by the voters before the debt is entered into.
– Scott Simpson
WAS FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON TO BLAME FOR THE SEWER WOES?
It is appearing that much of the problems that the City of Riverside is experiencing may be due to former City Manager Brad Hudson. When Brad was City Manager for the City of Riverside TMC asked for a forensic audit of the taxpayer utility books, but he just would hide behind the computer, as our City Attorney Greg Priamos currently does.
All this activity was in lieu of both Councilman Davis and Councilman Soubirous being investigated for complaints, of which we are not really sure of. We don’t know who the accusers are and why the complaints were filed. We know that Councilman and Congressional Candidate Steve Adams signed both contracts with the same law first to initiate the investigation. Incidently, these contracts were signed at the the City Manager’s cap of $49,000.00, anything over $50,000.00 must go to council for approval. Are we looking at the origins of a conspiracy?
We do know that there has been friction with these two council members with the Chief of Police Sergio Diaz, City Manager Scott Barber, City Attorney Greg Priamos and possibly some of the Council members, when pertinent questions were asked and not answered to the desires of the council.
Former City Manager Brad Hudson hired City Manager Scott Barber and Chief of Police Sergio Diaz. Councilman Steve Adams and Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey were supporters of Hudson.
HERE’S ONE FOR RIVERSIDE POLICE CHIEF SERGIO DIAZ, WHO WE FIND THREATENING LOCAL ELECTS AND POLITICAL CANDIDATES! There are many instances of outburst and threats by this individual who formerly worked for the Los Angeles Police Department. Questions abound on his qualification, not only by TMC but by the residents of the City of Riverside which have not been addressed by those at City Hall.
TMC did a story back in June 2011 regarding Costa Mesa Police Chief Steven Stavely with his impressions of City Council.
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. NOW TAGGED LOCAL BLOGGERS OR LOCAL MEDIA? RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH ZELLERBACH’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM
Riverside City Attorney Greg Priamos Riverside DA Paul Zellerbach
The situation became increasingly incomprehensible when Priamos would not comment do to “attorney-client privilege.” Attorney client privilege? That’s what we said… In lieu things continued to take a strange turn when the filing by the Paul Zellerbach’s District Attorney’s office was never issued. Karen was told by the court to call the DA’s office to find out if the DA intends to file or not. Attorney Letitia Pepper attempted to request the issue be addressed in court so she could ask for a dismissal. The court would not allow this. The waiting game continues, since the DA did not have the courtesy to follow through, the justice system leaves Ms. Wright in the dark at this point, and she herself must make the effort to contact and find out their intentions. How many DA departments be connected to and placed on hold to ask the question, “Mr. DA, do you plan to file charges against me?” Could this inaction by the DA’s office be construed as a continued form of harassment toward Ms. Wright? Or to continue the confusion so a warrant for her arrest is issued? That’s so Riverside. Most Riversidian’s agree, the Council and Mayor should have dropped the charges rather than enduring more city embarrassment, but currently the DA appears to be dancing around the issue.. So what is DA Paul Zellerbach’s relationship with the City of Riverside? Possibley BB&K? The Riveriside Grand Jury? Local Superior Court Judges? The Attorney General Office of the State of California? and of course local cronies?
One of the first items for new Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey would have been to drop charges. Currently, Chief Sergio Diaz has yet to publicly apologize to Ms. Wright for his behavior and unrestrained verbality toward her earlier this year at a City Council Meeting. No complaints were issued against Chief Diaz by Wright. Chief Diaz was not arrested at this incident for his disturbance at Council Chambers.
Just wait until the trial and CA Greg Priamos takes the stand under oath and has to testify who ordered him to order the officer to “stop” her. I don’t think his “apology” will quite cut it here. – Mary Shelton, Commenter on the PE
John Hall, Spokeshole Spokesperson for the Riverside City DA’s Office
Okay John! this can expressly be construed as the DA does not have a case. Hall went on to say, “There’s nothing that we have to do by law to notify anyone that nothing’s going to be done on that particular day.” Okay John, I get it, you have the power but you had over 8 weeks to figure this out! What goes? By the way do you take dance lessons, because it appears you are dancing around the issue as well as the Big Kahuna, Zellerbach. He further stated according to the Press Enterprise, that in the past six years, only one other case has come in under penal code section § 403 — disturbing a public meeting — and the district attorney ended up filing different charges against the suspect. Penal Code § 403 states every person who, without authority of law, willfully disturbs or breaks up any assembly or meeting that is not unlawful in its character, other than an assembly or meeting referred to in Section 302 of the Penal Code or Section 18340 of the Elections Code, is guilty of a misdemeanor. So they couldn’t charge someone with the original arrest charge of penal code § 403 and had to concoct subsequent charge or unlterior trumped up charge? So why would the DA have to do this? Would it be because of the embarrassment of the whole charge to begin with? As of January 4, 2013, Wright’s case remains “under review” and remains unlisted on the courts databases. “Under review?” Is this code word for “no case?” It’s only common courtesy that the DA’s office show on a court date, it’s only common courtesy that the DA’s office collaborate with the defendent, otherwise can this be construed by the DA’s office of a pronounce expression of arrogance? Information for the DA’s Office only.. we have included a printable icon for ease of printability in order for the DA’s office to file TMC articles..
THE TWEET OF THE CONDER
So far this year, it’s okay to utilize public emails for campaign purposes by violating CA Code 8314 (a), it’s okay to give the finger to someone at City Council. Talking about fingers, according to Press Enterprise’s Alicia Robinson’s tweets, it appears that Councilman’ s Chris Mac Arthur’s legislative aide Chuck Conder issued a petition in lieu of a filing fee for the upcoming June 2013 election for Ward 4.
Isn’t Councilman’s Paul Davis up for reelection in June 2013? Will the real Chuck Conder please step up!
Nope! Still Not Right! Ahhh Yes, this is the one!
JUST FOR LAUGHS!
and who was really the Wizard of Emerald City?
RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…
View of the Santa Ana Bridge dedication ceremony, 1932, Riverside, California
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM
UPDATE: 11/02/2012: ACCORDING TO CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS RESPONSE STATEMENT REGARDING THE ARREST OF PUBLIC SPEAKER KAREN WRIGHT WHEN ASKED TO RESPOND. HIS RESPONSE, WAS “ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILIGE”, MEANING THAT IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY, HE IS REPRESENTING SOMEONE OTHER THATN HIMSELF. TECHNICALLY THIS WOULD BE THE MAYOR AND/OR COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL DENIES KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEREFORE, DID PRIAMOS’S ORDERS OR DIRECTIVES THEN CAME FROM THE MAYOR? WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE WHEN WE FIRST PRACTICE TO DECEIVE..
UPDATE: 11/01/2012: OFFICER SAHAGUN’S POLICE REPORT SUGGEST THAT WRIGHT WAS SINGLED OUT BY CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS IF HE IN FACT ACTED ALONE. PRIAMOS’S PERFORMANCE EVALUATION UP ON NOVEMBER 13, 2012.. In this article, Councilman Gardner continues to amaze the intelligent community by standing by his rendition of events in the course of Ms. Wright. The officer took her elbow as if to guide her away from the lectern; he didn’t grab her or throw her to the floor, Gardner said. It appeared she sat down on the floor or lost her balance and fell. When will the lying end, is this what the constiuents “have to put up with?” Ooops, I believe I’ve heard this comment before..
Yes, Coucilman Gardner, that’s exactly what we saw, gently taking her elbow as to guide her away, possibly to help her find her way back to her seat, afterall she is disabled…then suddenly, she decided to sit on the floor, possibly just to relax a minute… Incidently, Gardner had front seats on the dais for this grand event, and he called it as seen it. In another statement in the PE, Gardner emphatically seems to say that Priamos would not over step his authority without the go ahead from the mayor or council. I could certainly interpret this statement as meaning, no move can be made by the City Attorney without the Council or Mayor. Could we now say that Primos was the messenger, and therefore council and/or mayor knew about it? What ever the truth may be, Gardner has either lost touch, or is truly telling the truth regarding what actually happened. In telling the truth, Council and/or Mayor knew….Is a recall in order for those involved?
UPDATE: 10/31/2012: EVENING: THE QUESTION OF GOING ROGUE..
In the Press Enterprise, Loveridge said he did not know whether Priamos had a conversation with the Officer Nick Sahagun. Maintaining decorum is the call of elected officials, not city staff! He evidently went on to say that “I need to talk to Greg to find out what was said or not said.” Is Mayor Luv stating Priamos made this decision on his own. After all, according to former employees, Priamos has been known to call Council members “idiot’s” within his circle. So how do they expect anyone to follow the rules of decorum when they do not follow the rules themselves, further, even the laws of the State of California. Four weeks ago, City Attorney Gregory Priamos conducted a two hour ethics training course to the Council. But was this really a “Bonehead Course”, as Dan Berstein coined. Maybe there is an emphasis in “How not to get caught”. At any rate it is quite a surprise to the community knowing Priamos’s track record.
This is quite disturbing because we currently have a City Attorney who has decided to give a directive of enforcement upon a citizen via a police officer. If in fact, the directive was solely his decision, and not one to involve the Mayor, would he be consider “rogue?”
According to the PE, City Attorney Gregory Priamos appreared surprised that the police report was had been made public. Though he had yet to read the report, he stated that Officer Sahagun’s description of the conversation was inaccurate. He declined to elaborate further, and cited attorney-client privilege. Attorney-Client Privilege? We understand he is Privileged, but who’s the Attorney and who’s the Client Gregory? Technically, the taxpayer is the client and he, Priamos, the attorney on record to protect us.
Maybe just a another nervous search for syllables, or it could have been a little gas from a bad burrito.. But is City Attorney Greg Priamos basically calling Officer Nick Sahagun a “liar?” Again, while the Council and Mayor were stating that Ms. Wright was arrested for not obeying an officer, according to Officer Sahagun, that was not so.
Did the directive come from the Mayor? Two days after the arrest, a new so called protocol was implemented. This would now give authority to the meeting chair, being either the Mayor Pro Tem or the Mayor himself to give the order to remove someone from the podium. But these rules have already been in place, was this a scuffle to spin? Back in 2006, an 89 year old woman, Marjorie Von Pohle, was removed from the podium by the directive of a Mayor Pro Tem to an RPD Officer for exceeding the 3 minute rule. Ms. Wright is scheduled to appear in Superior Court on December 27, 2012. Some rumors down the information pipeline is “Allred.”
CHANNEL 11 NEWS: “SHE MUST HAVE GOTTEN UNDER SOMEBODY’S SKIN!”
It comes as a shock to TMC to see public speaking come to this. Other’s are telling me that I’m just naive, “this is Riverside”.. What a night, one disabled elderly female public speaker down and arrested, a second disabled elderly female skirted with the possibility of second taken down, then one Councilman’s Aide is seen by another female speaker with his middle finger across his face. This public speaker had just commented on the inappropriate behavior of this aide, especially toward females. Karen Wright, a 60 year old disabled public speaker icon, went over the three minute mark, approximately 16.8 seconds. Returning to her seat, she was met with one of Ronnie’s Bouncer’s. Midway from her seat, when she turned toward the council, she was pushed by the officer. When she arrived at her seat, she was getting some of her things, the officer inadvertently came from the right side, it appeared he wasn’t finished with her, and then grabbed her arm, turned it clockwise, whereby she could not nothing other than fall and and take her down to the floor, she fell seated, she then took her two hands to try to get up as she indicated, but was pushed by her right hand taken, then handcuffed. Not one, not two but three RPD officers surrounded her when she was on the floor. “Officer, you are making me naked.” she stated. A disgusting act of use of force, but Riverside has a track record of this, and a double standard when it comes to arrest. You might think this is Afghanistan or Iraq, unfortunately this is Riverside, specifically, regarding these current state of affairs, I must say, the City of Riverside.. So, if you live here, you msut exactly know what this blogger is talking about..
The first quickly came out of nowhere, as she turned after finishing her point after the three minute mark, she was met with officer, not regularly seen, who grabbed her and threw her to the floor as seen in the images. While the council just sat there stonefaced, as good leaders do. While one retired police officer, later stated to TMC who saw the video from home, “there was no reason for this officer to touch this person.” So again, why would this Mayor, this Mayor known as Mayor Ron Loveridge allow this? Later in City Council, Mayor Loveridge stated, “this is outrageous behavior”, when Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Council Aide, Chuck Condur, used a derrogatory finger symbol toward public speaker Dvonne Pitruzzello during council sessions. Why didn’t the Mayor have the gumption to say the same? Did he enjoy this? Did he allow this for personal reasons against Wright, being approximately his last appearance as Mayor on the dais? If there is a story, let’s hear it, this is not the normal standard behavior of a RPD officer at City Council.. Give us your side anonymously at thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
During this disgusting act of force, Councilwoman Nancy Hart, Councilman Steve Adams (also a former police officer), and Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey left their council seats and exited the dais. It appeared they themselve could not handle or stomach the scene. But non of these great leaders said, enough! This has to stop! A reflection of the leadership in Riverside. Well anyway, this is what happens if you talk a good 25 seconds after the 3 minute mark. You may find a couple of RPD on your back.. Being disabled that’s gotta hurt.. After this disruption by Ronnie’s Bouncers, she was later taken outside, released and issued a citation for “disruption of a public event.” The witnesses who were there were stating, “she was already returning to her seat!” RPD Officer you shouldn’t have done it, you’ve watched over the security of Council meetings before. This is behavior unlike you, were you briefed by Council, Mayor, City Execs, City Attorney or your superiors to do this, and target this specific public speaker? More information coming down the pipeline..
The Chief then called Ms. Wright a “a horrible person”, “your disrespectful” and “You hate the police!” At the time he also turned to then Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello and stated, “I don’t like her!” This all occurred in a public arena. Chief Diaz has yet to publicly apologize for, as Mayor Loveridger would say, “this is outrageous behavior!” Though Karen had the right to file an ethics complaint on this very issue, she chose at the time not do so. Chief Diaz should be thankful of this. Many are saying should we disband RPD? And just go with Riverside County Sheriff, would this make a difference?
Notice the empty seat behind above the left officer, Councilman and Mayoral Candidate Rusty Bailey left the dais, out of sight.. Some commenters on the Press Enterprise have begin coin Councilman and Mayoral Candidate… “Runaway Rusty.”
Wrong Councilman Davis, she picked her own self up according to the above video. Let’s not begin to spin the chain of events in order to defend you and the council bullies, that night, for not doing the right thing and stopping what occurred. You stated that the decision for this is defined by the RPD officer, and by “law” you cannot interfere with that. But now, new rules? “Police Officers will now be directed by the Mayor?” according to the the Press Enterprise. Now, elected officials can interfere with the actions of the Police Officers? But some Council members are saying, again, as an authority figures, and I disagree with that, that they cannot interfere with the judgement of a an RPD officer? You work for us, and we expect some aggregious behavior to be stopped by a police officer, but you are telling them you have no power. Our we living in a microcosm of a police state?
To the elected individuals on the dais, we’ve have not declared war..we only want transparency…
“At that time she also decided to sit down, on the floor, just outside the Dais entrance door and near her seat, with her hands not visible from my vantage point.”
Councilman Davis, you are wrong again, let me show how she ended up on the floor. You call us “crazy”, but at least we are not “liars.” This is how Ms. Wright decided to to sit down..of course, according to Councilman Paul Davis’s innacturate rendition of the Council events..
Now the twist to be handcuffed..RPD style..
“Many have asked why the members of the Mayor, Council, or city Staff, did not take any actions to stop the officer from his actions. As a matter of law, no person has the authority to interfere with the lawful order or actions of a Police Officer performing his duties. By doing so, you would be in violation and you will be held for Obstruction of Justice, and be subject to severe penalty.” (Courtesy of The Truth Publication Online). Let me see Mr. Davis, “Police Officers at City Council Meetings will be directed by the Mayor.”
Nope, sorry Davis, no one believes that. Many believe the mayor has always had that power, and this incident was allegedly and directly orchestrated by Mayor Ron Loveridge himself.
So what happens next, the Officer says we are done. So what happens with the legal process for Ms. Wright next? When the interrelationdships and interconnections with the City, City Attorney, the Riverside Judges, the District Attorney Paul Zellerbach, the Riverside Grand Jury, even unfortunately to the extent of the State of California Attorney General’s interrelationship? What will happen to this poor disabled 60 year old elderly woman? Well it’s already been decided if you live in Riverside. Some call it politics, some just have to accept it..
“All I was told was that you are given a certain amount of time to make statements to the council and she went over her time,” Lt. Guy Toussaint said. “She was asked to leave and she refused to do so.” Again wrong, Ms. Wright closed her comments and was on her way to her seat. But what the L.A. Times has right, is that this was all about the 3 minute time limit, which the City denies was a factor in her arrest. Many of the Councilpeople on the dais, who did nothing, and maintained they could not interfere with a police officer. So who’s in charge? Some on the dais, even said in some ways, that “she’d had it coming.” Other’s on the dais, who were criticized, said, “how come those citizens in the audience do nothing?” This is what we have, and you now begin to see the picture unfold before your eyes in relation to political conundrums withing the politics of the City of Riverside.
Again it didn’t stop there, another disabled individual on crutches …What is it with the City of Riverside and disabled females? What is it with leadership that doesn’t have the guts to lead and come out to say this is wrong. Is it easier say that the individuals are just “crazy?” Well Dvonne Pitruzzello said it best when she said, “I rather be called crazy, then to be a crook.” Well anyway this person below was on crutches and the same RPD officer started to walk down toward the podium again… Ren Holmstrum on crutches was subjected to a possible throwdown, regarding her issue of Riverside hospice, when she went over the three minute mark.. One of RPD officers was again on alert, walking down the isle again to take care of muni mafia business…
Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey seen with his head down in the video. Last week Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey, came to the TMC site to inadvertently download photos of his Mayoral opponent and former Riverside Councilman, Ed Adkison, of course without TMC’s permission. These were then sent city wide in a campaign mailer. Now RPD wants TMC’s photos of the Council Debacle…Many in the community, seeing this display of police are now afraid, who can we depend on when we cannot trust our own community police force? Who do we call when we cannot call our own police force for help? Questions some community constituents are asking. This is the same behavior community constituents have been talking about to their city leaders for years…
Other’s are asking the question if this was a set up.. Most often, RPD or Ronnie’s Bouncers are cordial, escorting the “3 minute violator” back to their seat. This time, the Mayor meant business, it was a throw down… Was this orchestrated and planned by the mayor, the puller of strings? As one reporter stated on Channel 11 News on 10/25/2012 “She must have gotten under somebody’s skin.” This because Ms. Wright goes to each and every council meeting to comment on issues, and is therefore well known..
“I want to live in a society that people can voice unpopular opinions because I know as result of that a society grows and matures,” – Hugh Hefner
It didn’t stop there, after Public Speaker Dvonne Pitruzzello spoke regarding Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s legislative aide, the allegation of Chuck Condor holding a knife to the throat of Bailey’s Council Aide, Mark Earley.
From the current contact in the mainstream media, much is being said, many questions asked, pieces of the puzzle that just don’t make sense, but the questions of why none of the City Council leadership said nothing, allowed the activity to happen, and simply found it acceptable.. again actions speak louder than words..
“We do this for our neighborhood, we take our time do this…you have spent us into the poorhouse..” -Self Appointed Citizen Auditor Vivian Moreno.
Responsibility? You are looking at them….Now Main Stream Media will know….Stossel what do you think about this? Thank you for asking…
ETHIC’S COMPLAINTS ARE NOW GOING VIRAL.. I’VE GOTTA SAY THIS IS EXHAUSTING, BUT JUST ANOTHER NORMAL DAY IN RIVER CITY..
UPDATE: 10/24/2012: JUST IN, TMC SOURCES ARE STATING THAT COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER ALLEGEDELY STATED, “KAREN WRIGHT DESERVED IT.” IF THIS IS TRUE, THIS MAY BE PART OF MIKE THAT MAY NOT BE LIKED..
COUNCILMAN CHRIS MAC ARTHUR’S LEGISLATIVE AIDE CHUCK CONDOR SHOCKS COUNCIL MEETING!
The question to the council by Pitruzzello was, ” Why Condor wasn’t arrested, or a police report created by Bailey’s Aide, Mark Earley? We just don’t know..”Was this a concerted effort by City Hall to cover up the alleged altercation back in April 2012?” Regardless, it still didn’t stop there! As Former Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello walked toward the back of Council Chambers she was met from a distance, Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Aide, Chuck Condor, placing the “middle finger” in front of his face toward Pitruzzello. Mrs. Pitruzzello interrupted the City Council to let them know just what happened. The following pics below taken at the time of the interruption. The shock was written all over Councilwoman Nancy Hart’s face. Officer Nick, again, one of Ronnie”s Bouncer’s pounced on the situation and begin to walk over toward Pitruzzello. She let Officer Nick know, “that’s who you need to arrest!” Referring to Mac Arthur’s Council Aide Chuck Condur. This is the one time TMC agrees with Mayor Luv when he stated, “this is outrageous behavior.” When a Council Aide can continually get away with derrogatory remarks and alleged actions, this is outrageous behavior.. This Public Council Meeting could not have been hotter…
But let’s not forget this is Riverside, Chuck Condor, may just get a monetary raise and become an elected official one day.. But many are asking the question, why does Councilman Chris Mac Arthur allow a person such as Chuck, who appears to be a loose cannnon, on his team? Another liability? Could revealers of Condur’s behavior now be in danger of retaliation by the City of Riverside Power House? Will have to ask Councilman Chris Mac Arthur who has protected his aide through thick and thin regardless of his derrogatory behavior. The question is, does the Community concur with this type of legislative aid behavior?
UPDATE: 10/26/2012: THE DEVELOPER OF THE HILTON TO SUE THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.. WITHIN THE CONTRACT, IF THE DEVELOPER DEFAULTS, THE CITY IS NOW IN THE “HOTEL BUSINESS.” FOR THIS TRANSACTION, TWO FIRESTATIONS AND TWO LIBRARIES ARE USED AS COLLATERAL..
UPDATE:10/29/2012: A MONTAGE OF COMMENTERS COMMENTING ON THIS ISSUE REGARDING MS. KAREN WRIGHT FROM THE PE BEFORE THEY ARE DELETED…POSSIBLY BY SOME DIRECTIVE BY A CITY ELECT OR THE CHIEF OF POLICE HIMSELF…
Remember folks, you have to be in a bad mood as a citizen when you come to City Council Meetings when you know that you the taxpayer, are $4 billion in debt, and that you the taxpayer are responsible for it as a result of the elected officials who voted on these issues.
This is ridiculous. Going over the time limit is not a crime. I’m not a fan of Karen’s, but she had finished talking and was walking away from the podium. Someone has it in for her, and that’s not right. Terrible, terrible showing by the police, the mayor, and the council. -Kaptalism, commenter on the PE
This makes me SICK! Sooooo unjustified! This isn’t the last we have heard of this, believe it! A lawsuit will be forthcoming for SURE! So shameful! -Nettie Nettie Bobettie, commenter on the PE
Unbelievable~!!! They should be ashamed of themselves~!!!! – Alice Wersky Naranjo, commenter on the PE
AND THIS MORNINGWE ARE ON FOX NEWS. AREN’T WE GREAT? –Ron Rose, commenter on the PE
This is how it works at Casa Loveridge. You get three minutes to speak. If you’re kissing his butt, make it four and you can bring about 20 other people up to keep the love flowing longer. If you’re a guy criticizing, he starts to cut in and the hand goes up at about 2:45 into your comment and its purpose is to try to distract you into disagreeing with him over your time is up until it’s up and you don’t talk about your original topic. If you’re a woman, alas the infamous hand goes up at about 2:30. Bring a timer and time the speakers and the Loveridge hand wave yourself a couple times. I’ve done it myself. Very illuminating. The county board of supervisors have used the same tactics for years and rumor has it he wants Tavaglione’s seat if that guy wins the congressional race. So maybe he’s practicing for the bigger stage? If he doesn’t like what you’re saying, apparently…well there’s that too. – Mary Shelton, commenter on the PE.
The cop was not timing her I would bet. He was instructed to do as he did when the time-up signal was given. Minor petty politicians begin to think they are Lords. -James Overturf, commenter on the PE.
Too bad we don’t limit politicians to three minutes of speaking. – BJ Clinton, commenter on the PE.
Although I haven’t lived in Riverside since my Divorce in 2003, I still follow the news. Here are my thoughts:Everyone has a right to voice their opinion in a Public Forum. Time limits are made to provide equal time for all and show some dignity and respect for the Counsel and “Elected Officials” of the Counsel during such meetings. Three (3) minutes may not be enough for some however, if you come prepared to make your point clear and brief, three (3) is “normally” plenty of time. Handcuffing anyone with a strong opinion should not be the norm. This lady was no threat to the counsel or anyone else. The lady only spoke too long. Handcuffs would not have been my first choice to resolve the issue. BAD CALL… Counsel BAD CALL… Riverside Cops -Roy Robinson, commenter on the PE.
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM
We met weekly for two years in Fullerton at the Office of former California State Assemblyman Chris Norby starting in 2011. Norby was prominent at the time for his views on the abuses of Redevelopment, with emphasis on eminent domain. Our mentor, who taught us how to look at government documents was the CFO of one of the cities within his district, whom we would only know until recently as “Mr. Smith”. We’ll continue with the TMC backstory at a later date….but not before reminiscing about a trophy we collected along this journey:
IG
Javier Moreno
TMC: Thirty Miles of Corruption 