Posts Tagged ‘city manager johh russo’

The pension problem in the City of Riverside was brought to the attention of the City Council and the Executive Management as early as 2014 by the very active public and TMC.  We want to make this very clear to our readers: all the political rhetoric that is currently being spun is bullshit.  Assistant City Manager Marianna Marysheva tries to spin the fact that her brilliant team has just discovered our current dire pension problem.  No Marianna, we found it, years before your arrival on the scene from Oakland Maywood Lynwood Mammoth Lakes…wherever (damn girl, you’ve been around!).  If you are claiming you just found it, we are going to claim you are a waste of money.

Not only did we find and report the break down in this system, we were ignored.  Now, no one will be held accountable for their lack of professionalism and enormous cost to the taxpayer.  So what do these ever-increasing pensions costs mean to the public?  You will no longer get your trees trimmed, potholes filled, parks maintained.   So, what does this mean to City Hall?  You will have your $200,000 salary for the rest of your life!  Make no mistake about it, we are going to get nothing, and they – the public employees – are going take everything.  These brilliant professional minds at City Hall are going to ask for more money, and you the stupid taxpayer are going to continue to pay it.  At least that’s the plan…

The pension problem was created in the 1990’s by Governor Davis when he increased the formula for payouts for State employees based upon his thoughts that the tech bubble would never pop. Every municipal agency soon followed.  Because our government is stacked with pro-labor sycophant’s who apparently don’t care about the future nor understand math, instead of adjusting these formulas back downwards, it became clear post-housing bubble we couldn’t afford them.  Hence, CalPERS began forcing larger and larger contributions from both municipalities and employees, while not addressing some of the outrageous pension-spiking abuses in a timely fashion.  And while the issue is now finally getting the attention it deserved 10 years ago, we at TMC believe the problems are now so large they are virtually unsolvable absent drastic measures or miracles, as baby boomers are retiring in droves.

Riverside CFO Adam Raymond at the last Budget Engagement Commission meeting on Thursday February 22, 2018 stated that shortfalls in the General Fund are simply due to CalPER’s increases in contributions.  City records indicate that forecasted City revenues will be inadequate to cover these expenses for the next decade!   As operational costs increase in the next five years in fact City reserves will disintegrate, if of course, we don’t do anything.  And what does that mean?  Will they come back to the taxpayers again, and again for their shortfalls?  But this hasn’t been a secret: unsustainable pension costs have been a popular topic for several years now.  But you know what is a secret until now?  Riverside has no plan to deal with the impending crunch…unless you count sticking it to the constituents as a plan.

As a consequence to escalating pension obligations, our reserves will continue to decrease, and therefore Mr. Raymond suggests to the commission the possibility of investing with slightly higher risk as a possibility (of course with an unpredictable economy, this investment platform may not be the most desirable option).  Measure Z revenues will not be enough.  Mr. Raymond suggests more cuts, after the City had promised that the passing of Measure Z would take care of everything. Just like the water transfer tax, the hotel tax, etc., etc., before it…wash, rinse, repeat.

Later Assistant City Manager Marianna Marysheva attempts to mitigate the perplexing faces of the Commission about the use of Measure Z monies for pension obligations, by using her well-known by now, “Ice Queen Spin,” which includes a variation of monotone nothing-speak, impossible-to-understand powerpoint slides, along with empty promises.  She tried to show the commission that the shortfall was revealed only after review of the numbers by her crack team, and ‘we are on it’, and ‘that is why we do these five year plans’.  But perception is reality, and the Commission knows it and the Council knows it: the budget crunches will continue ad infinitum due to increasing unsustainable pension obligations.  And we for two wouldn’t be surprises if the City, with the financial help of the unions (our heroes, right?), rams through another tax measure.

Advice for Ms. Marysheva: stop the drama – we know it’s an act, and a bad one at that.  Your boss John Russo is the ‘ultimate drama queen,’ and don’t even try to take that away from him.  There is only one diva allowed at a time.

The Ice Queen brings up her meeting with a bond rating agency. So why is this important? On one hand she says in three years we are going to have challenging financial problems, while on the other hand she is setting us up for borrowing more money. You see folks its never enough. She also mentions that the bond rating agency is impressed with the TEAM…. So who’s the TEAM?  The Mayor, City Council, executive staff, and Budget Engagement Commission.  You mean batting leadoff and on deck are the two principal players in getting us in this fiscal hellhole?  We have to laugh that, little does the bond rating agency know, the MAYOR is no longer part of the TEAM!

Case in point, according to September 23, 2016 Press Enterprise editorial,  “Regrettably for taxpayers, city officials are often reluctant to show fiscal discipline or search for innovative ways to deliver services until they’ve already dug a deep financial hole. Asking for more money is much easier. It’s something taxpayers need to be mindful of …. ”  And hence, taxpayers will be hit with more and more creative ways that cities can tax us in order to continue the gravy train for our so-called heroes.

According to a September 2016 Opinion piece by Sal Rodriguez in the Orange County Register,

Public employee unions exist to advocate for their members, often campaigning for policies at odds with the best interests of the general public.

The so-called public safety unions are in a unique position. Representing some of the most esteemed and highest paid of government employees, they have lots of money to dole out and are more than comfortable exaggerating threats to public safety if it helps their cause.

Cases in point: ballot initiatives in Hemet, Riverside and San Bernardino tainted by undue influence from public safety unions.

Hemet has been plagued by polarizing debates over public safety and taxes for the past several years. In 2014, soon before the November elections, the City Council voted to contract for fire services, deeming it the best available option.

This prompted a flood of money from firefighters unions across Riverside County to help elect candidates favorable to the city’s firefighters union, which opposed contracting.

It worked, and the newly elected council quickly reversed the decision to contract, and has focused on tax hikes ever since.

In June, voters rejected the union-backed Measure E sales tax increase. Rather than reconsider the decision to capitulate to union demands, the council instead decided to put another tax on the November ballot.

In Riverside, the city, which last year was boasting about a $1 million surplus and felt so good it decided to give police officers a $4 million raise the city hadn’t actually budgeted for, has put on the November ballot a one-percent sales tax.

Expected to raise about $50 million a year, Measure Z is touted as necessary for the future of Riverside.

With a name like “City of Riverside Public Safety and Vital City Services Measure,” it certainly sounds important. Of course, if passed Measure Z revenues can be spent however the council likes and there are no guarantees about how the money will be spent, with one notable exception.

On Tuesday, the City Council approved a contract with the city’s police union which, among other things, will give police officers a bigger raise if voters approve a tax increase. It’s quite the incentive.

According to recent filings, the police union has already contributed $12,500 to the Measure Z campaign. Firefighters union president Tim Strack told The Press-Enterprise that he already had $100,000 in commitments for the campaign.

Behind any talk of the need for more money for “public safety,” is really just a desire for bigger raises and budgets.

Note the blatant conflict of interest by our public safety unions.  They give big money to support a sales tax like Measure Z and they give big money to the campaigns of the individual Council members.  These Council members, hence, are responsible for ratifying their contracts.  Shouldn’t this be considered criminal behavior?  They pay to play, and they see us as nothing but feeble-minded simpletons, who will vote based on ’emotion rather than logic.’  They will mobilize and encourage their union members to vote for an initiative because it is good for them financially, even if the action is unsustainable and destabilizing socially in the long term.  They will then cry foul when we as a City cannot deliver.

Make no bones about it, if the public doesn’t take the business of the people seriously, neither will those who represent you.  We think the City should be run as a efficiently as a business, while understanding it is not trying to maximize profits at our expense, and we public salaries should be tied to the outcome of organic tax revenues, not new revenue schemes.  And what will they do next?  Sell our Public Utilities?  But what do we know, as Councilman Soubirous says, we’re just a bunch of hillbillies.  Well that’s what he says people in Los Angeles think of us anyway.

Above you’ll find a list of City of Riverside accomplishments that was recently presented to the Budget Engagement Commission.  In the Finance section of the citywide highlights it states, “For the 14th straight year, the City’s annual budget received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers’s Association.”  How inane, and insane, given how existing City management threw old city management under the bus just 2 years ago for cooking the books.  And it highlights how stupid all these trophies the City seems to lust for continually really are in reality.

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:

Snakes on a Dais

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

STATEMENT FROM THE COUNCIL: 

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

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

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

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

        

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

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

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

                    

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

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

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

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

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

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

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

It has been brought to the attention of TMC that there is an ongoing feud between Mayor Rusty Bailey and City Manager John Russo.  We took some excerpts from the last Budget Engagement Commission Meeting on February 1, 2018, depicting Mayor’s Chief of Staff Cheryl Hansberger airing the City of Riverside’s dirty laundry.  We can’t make this up; this is too good.

War by Proxy – Hansberger vs. Marysheva, Round 1: a study in openly vs. passively aggressive combat

We’d feel compassion for the Mayor, except he watched as member after member of the general public came to the podium over the years, under previous administrations, and turned a deaf ear to their similar complaints on missing/inaccurate information and bias within staff reports.  Why?  Because he was getting what he wanted.  The Mayor’s situational ethics leave him without high ground to stand upon, and in that way he continues to fail us now, as his legitimate concerns are ignored, and the public screwed again.

RIVERSIDE COUNCIL CONCEPTUALLY PASSES A UTILITY RATE

On January 18th, your Council voted to raise your electric rates 2.5% per annum for 5 years and water rates 5.5% per annum for five years beginning July 1, 2018.  The vote on the rate increase was 5 to 2, as 4 Councilmembers (Gardner, Soubirous, MacArthur, Perry) flipped their votes from a mere 7 weeks previous with no real justification offered for their change in attitude despite the EXACT SAME proposal being brought back by Riverside Public Utilities staff.

We at TMC have been taught to follow the bouncing ball and have noticed that just a few weeks ago your Riverside City Council passed 6 percent raises for union members of the Riverside Police Department, while simultaneously hinting at 4 percent across-the-board budget tightening forthcoming in the 2017-18 budget.  Riverside’s unfunded pension obligation stands at $600 million…and counting, and 19% of proposed rate increase will be transferred to the general fund to help pay for the above-mentioned unfunded pension obligation and salaries.  All Council flippers besides Soubirous (who ran unopposed in his re-election) are heavily financially supported by Riverside public employee unions.  Putting two plus two plus two together, we summarize that five Council members were lobbied hard by City staff so they could  continue to ride the gravy train, this time paid for by RPU ratepayers.  (We concede that TMC was never great at math.)

Fresh off a 5-year, $1.5+ million deal for City Attorney Gary Geuss, who carries on the tradition of former City Attorney Greg Priamos of providing legal cover for the City to rape its utility ratepayers, it now appears that City Manager John Russo wants his reward for covering up the Council’s past mistakes using our wallets, with a new 7-year contract with bells and whistles never-seen-before.

TOMORROW FEBRUARY 6TH CITY MANAGER JOHN RUSSO’S NEW CONTRACT IS UP FOR REVIEW BY CITY COUNCIL AT 2:00 PM, RIVERSIDE CITY HALL.  BE THERE OR BE SQUARE.  GRAB YOUR POPCORN!

 

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

 

Two weeks ago, we released our story of the Drug Dealers Next Door: Part I.  The following is the second part of Author David Silva’s response to the City of Riverside, approximately one year later, which was posted in the Inland Empire Weekly on September 24, 2008.  Nothing had been done by the City of Riverside to resolve the drug issue in his neighborhood, which leaves us pondering the question, “Did they really want to?” or “Did they really care?”

In this second Silva article, the author displayed his continued frustration with local law enforcement and local elected representatives.  Like the case of David Silva, no one within the City has contacted or given us any direction as to what to do about our problem neighbors.  At least you can rely on something in life – government inaction!

On September 19, 2017, Wood Streets resident and former Mayoral Candidate Vivian Moreno went to the City Council meeting to bring the lingering and current neighborhood issue of the Drug Dealer Next Door…with an added twist, prostitution!  Yep, the other night the Wood Street residents had the pleasure of hearing the annoyance of the Wood Streets King Pimp not being paid correctly by one of his employed working girls. Yep, right in the front yard without any fear of anyone knowing what they were talking about.

Keep in mind this issue had been brewing in our neighborhood for approximately 5 years and gets worse by the day, so I guess it was the natural progression we should’ve expected…and accepted?

Moreno came to Council to declare that she is required to have business license in order to do business in the City of Riverside, but a drug dealer or prostitution ring does not.  So why should she?  If the City allows an illegal business to operate, why should she continue to comply legally with a City that cannot protect legal businesses from the illegal ones?  She tore up her business license in front of them.  Much like Silva, it was an attempt to call attention to an unresolved issue by petitioning her government.

However, we conclude David Silva must be right: if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.  Besides having unsafe neighborhoods for our children, our seniors, our taxpayers, we still cannot get our trees appropriately cut, our pot holes filled.  It has been clearly evident for many years now that the City of Riverside cannot provide even the most basic services to our community, who are now paying through the roof (Utility Users Tax, General Fund Transfer, Measure Z, etc., etc.), and for what?  Certainly not safety.  Our neighborhoods continue to be put at risk by the inertness of our law enforcement and leadership.  It happened ten years ago; and it’s  happening now with no remedy in sight.  The same fools sit on the dais within the Art Pick Chambers; and Chief Sergio Diaz’s highly-paid, crack narcotic squad has done what? [crickets]

THE DRUG DEALERS NEXT DOOR: PART II: BY AUTHOR DAVID SILVA:

INLAND EMPIRE WEEKLY SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

It’s been nearly a year since I wrote about the drug dealers operating next door to my house [vol. 2, issue 25 cover], and if you’re wondering how the guys are doing, let me assure you they’re doing just fine. 

Franco (not his real name, but drug dealing is illegal, you know) recently installed a carport awning to protect his trade in bad weather. Brother Mario (another pseudonym) is on what appears to be his fourth new car since Christmas. Say what you want about these guys (and lord knows I’ve said a lot—to the Riverside police chief, the mayor, the city’s crack narcotics unit and the Weekly’s readers), they’re single-handedly keeping the local auto industry afloat. 

Yes, these boys have struck gold, and the rest of us are green with envy. While no less than seven “for sale” signs can be seen on front lawns up and down the block, the dealers next door are in home-improvement mode.  While the rest of us sleep in shifts in case some addled tweaker tries sneaking through the bathroom window, the dealers sleep the untroubled sleep of the dead, their persons and their stashes safe behind wrought-iron doors and the sign on the front that reads (I kid you not) “Do not ring after 10PM.” 

Of course, there’s always the remote possibility that the dealers really should be more worried that, at any minute, Riverside’s crack narcotics unit will come crashing through those reinforced doors. But who are we kidding? If the police were going to put a stop to all that illicit activity next door, they would have done so by now.  

As I wrote back in October, my non-dealing neighbors and I tried repeatedly to draw the city’s attention to the situation next door, going so far as to arrange a neighborhood meeting with one of Mayor Ron Loveridge’s deputies. The deputy listened wide-eyed to our story and jotted down notes into a little black notepad, which he then tossed into a briefcase where, I imagine, it remains gathering dust to this very day.  Nothing was done.   

By the time my column appeared, I had called the Riverside PD three separate times to complain about the dealing next door (not counting follow-up calls to check on the status of the complaints). Since October, I’ve called the police and City Hall three more times, each time being told that the department had no record of any previous complaints, and each time being assured that the department was now right on it. One of those calls resulted in a callback from Riverside Councilman Frank Schiavone, with Police Chief Russ Leach sitting by his side. Both Schiavone and Leach assured me that the city took such complaints seriously, and that they were right on it.  

Nothing happened.  

This has been going on for three years now, during which I often wondered why the Riverside PD would put up with an open-air drug bazaar operating in a residential neighborhood just three blocks from three public schools. Drug busts are great PR for the police, and right here was a major bust just begging for the cops to walk up and slap the cuffs on it. So why didn’t they?  

Early last month, I finally learned the answer to this nagging question: It wasn’t that the police didn’t want to bust up the drug house next door. They just couldn’t find it.   

“According to my computer,” said the officer who took my sixth (and, I swear to God, last) complaint, “the street address you gave me doesn’t exist in Riverside.” 

“Well, that’s odd,” I said. “I’m looking right out my front window and there it is.” 

“Are you sure?” 

“Oh yeah, it’s right there. Maybe you should check again.” 

He did, and again declared the address didn’t exist. Back and forth we went, with me insisting the street address of the drug house next door to me existed, and the officer insisting that it didn’t. Finally: 

“Found it!” he said, sounding well pleased. “OK, we’re on it. The Police Department takes these calls very seriously.” 

After three years, six complaints, a meeting with the mayor’s aide and a conference call with a councilman and the city’s top cop, the Riverside Police Department’s crack narcotics unit finally located my neighbor’s house on a map.  

More than a month later, the dealing next door has continued unabated, and if there are any cops snooping around, they’re wearing invisibility cloaks. The only thing that’s changed around here is my attitude toward the neighbors. 

“How’s it going, Franco?” I shout when I go out for the mail. “Yo Mario! Nice new Prius, buddy!”  

If this is how the city of Riverside wants to wage its war on drugs, I might as well be on friendly terms with the winning side.  

–David Silva, Author

FROM THE DESK OF LOCAL RIVERSIDE RESIDENT, ACTIVIST & COUNCIL CANDIDATE, KEVIN DAWSON, REGARDING NEW LIBRARY DESIGN:

“UGLY” THE COMMON TERM TO DESCRIBE THE MONSTROSITY TO BE KNOWN AS THE NEW RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY.

The $10 million over run is to elevate the building so people from the Fox will hopefully walk under it to get to the Culinary Institute. That’s $10 million for a walk way! Why don’t we just use $1 million to buy coupons to the Culinary, that we could hand out as incentives to Fox patrons to walk around a less exspensive library building on the ground? Of course I’m just joking. This is a ugly, over priced building, loaded with gimmicks that will become dated looking like the horse collar grill on a Ford Edsel. Unlike a car, we won’t be able to trade this lemon in a couple years after we realize we made a mistake. Also, the city has been cutting the library budget for years. They’ve let go all the professional staff that had library of science degrees and cut way back on programming. The current main library is denuded of books. The city is not going to restore funding with this new building. This project is based on lies and manipulations. The head librarian gave as reasons for needing a new building, that the current building was too big and that the pillars ruined the sight lines. They said it would cost almost as much to remodel the current building as building a new one, so why not build a new one. But then when they proposed the Discovery Cube would go in the old building, the remodel cost dropped to $10 million. When the Discovery Cube dropped out and the Cheech Art museum was proposed, they now say it will only cost $5 million to remodel the building. I say we should remodel the current building for the $5 million, and keep it as our main library, saving us $35 million! Measure Z was sold to the public as being needed for “needs” like public safety, and not wants like a new library. I want to support the library but not like this. If they have an idea for a great, inspiring new building, put it before the voters, and ask us to support the project based on its merits. Ask us to prove our support by our willingness to pay for it through a special acessment tax. That way, a crappy design will die the death it deserves, but an inspiring design will prevail and be supported by a proven majority. The people in San Francisco were so inspired by the Palace of Fine Arts, which had been built to only last a couple of years for the 1915 Panama exposition, that they voted to tear it down and rebuild it as a permanent structure. The Palace of Fine Arts is great example of inspirational artitecture and something that would compliment the mix of classic historic structures we have downtown, but an example of how to be bold, without being offensive to the surrounding neighborhoods. Our city is on the road to making a mistake but it’s not too late to change directions. We should not move forward with this design because people are tired, and just want to “get it done”. We should not move forward, just because we’ve already spent money on this design. Ugly needs to be called out for what it is, and this is an ugly building.

Let me also comment on councilman Gardner’s motion to approve, where he said he was making the motion to approve because he thought “the people of Riverside were ready, evidenced by the number of speakers who came to speak.” Really? The room was almost empty and hardly anyone was there to speak, unlike the night the council voted to move the library, and the room was packed. That night there were 80 speakers and a petition signed by almost 800 people saying don’t move the library. That meeting went until 1AM, but in the end, the council ignored the public, and approved an expensive project, without ANY discussion of how to pay for it. It was only later, they presented Measure Z. And while Measure Z was generously passed by voters, our city is still not out of financial danger. I believe our financial problems are what is driving the proposed utility rate increases. Our city has a electric and water fund transfer of 11.5%, that gets transferred straight into the city general fund, where it can be spent on anything. So, if the City Manager says the rate increase is not about more money for the General Fund, ask him if he would agree to not take a transfer from the rate increases, and see what he says.  – Kevin Dawson

NEW RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY (CLICK TO ENLARGE)

With $60 million in unfunded future pension liabilities, Council, with the help of City Manager John Russo, overrode the community dissent that night, over-allocating funds for a new library.  Proving the establishment elite have an agenda, and your dissent for the project in public comment was only a legal formality they had to bear before moving on to a pre-determined decision.

REMEMBERING TOM PETTY: “DOG ON THE RUN”: 1977:

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

 12510496_10207741708877187_9215059899072541863_n

CITY MANAGER RUSSO IS IN THE DRIVERS SEAT….HOW SAFE DO YOU FEEL?

jones_RUSSO-copy-620x465

Our Fugacious, City Manager Mr. Russo and Assistant City Manager Marianna wrote an editorial about the current state of  “Fiscal Reckoning”, in the City of Riverside. He was trying to defuse the message that the city is going down the path of bankruptcy.  I think Mr. Russo needs to leave the messaging to the professionals. His office is only making it worse and more obvious. You can read the full article on the Press Enterprise.

Who are the Perennial Critics or should I say who are the Truth Tellers. Me Vivian Moreno, Dvonne Pitruzzello, Raychelle Sterling, Jason Hunter, Kevin Dawson, Karen Wright, Marilyn Whitney, Aurora Chavez, Scott Simpson and my man Javier Moreno, we all work really hard and our motivation is to protect the underserved, disabled, elderly, and the  taxpayer/ ratepayer from bad decision making at city hall that will ultimately raise taxes and our utility bills.

Because I was referred to in this article I needed to answer or clarify the statements that were made. We took out all the fat or unnecessary verbiage and just left in the substance.

The city of Riverside has enjoyed financial success in the past decade, most notably through the on-time and on-budget delivery of the nearly $2 billion Riverside Renaissance capital improvement program. The city rode out the Great Recession with grace. By Borrowing or Stealing (depending who you ask) from Riverside Public Utilities, Water fund, Sewer fund, Electric fund, Workmans comp.fund, and the Rate Payer. Now, the city is in a “Fiscal Reckoning of this magnitude”, those are your words Mr. Russo not ours.

That success, however, was partially due to budgeting practices that are no longer sustainable. Whether it was borrowing from other funds to prop up the city’s General Fund. Why would the General fund have to be propped up? Our General fund cannot function without the propping up by Riverside Public Utilities…..REALLY BIG MISTAKE!

There is nothing ethically wrong with these practices, NO… IT”S JUST PLAIN STUPID, and they are certainly not illegal.  Depending on who you ask.  Indeed, many cities employ some variation of such budgeting practices, and Riverside could have continued doing so for many years without encountering serious financial difficulties.  Just like the city of Bell.

However, reliance on such practices is not sustainable over the long term, and goes against the principles of prudence and conservatism in municipal budgeting.  First you say we could have continued down this path for many years and now you say it’s unsustainable, WHAT? You sound like a crooked politician, maybe you should elaborate on (long term) and (many years).

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.

While the projected deficit numbers may seem scary, they are not surprising – the city has had an expenditure problem for years. The very smart Perennial Critics recognized a expenditure problem years ago. The Council, over the last 10 years voted yes to all the expenditures. No one was listening to the very smart citizens who saw the writing on the wall. BUMMER!

All city departments will recommend cuts to the council, and, while it is management’s intent to minimize service reductions, those impacts are probably unavoidable in the face of a fiscal reckoning of this magnitude. Why? Because the only effective budgeting tool available to the council is service cuts; in California, most revenue increases require voter approval.  Are you going to cut the contracts for Government Entertainment? I can answer that NO! So let’s get this perfectly clear the Citizens have their services cut but we the citizens continue to pay for Government Entertainment. Most of the citizens of Riverside will never have the opportunity to afford to go to the Fox Theatre but they will still have to pay for it! We lose Police and Fire but we keep Rusty’s buddy.. Live Nation….REALLY! Is this because your band, Mr. Russo will be the ongoing featured act headlining at the FOX..It usually is self serving isn’t it!

Moreover, Riverside will now pass its budget within the context of a five-year financial plan.

This approach to municipal budgeting is bound to find more potential issues that demand attention.

As we hold ourselves to a higher budgetary standard, The real challenge John and Marianna is to wean the general fund off the RPU gravy train.

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. It’s amazing to me that we are labeled critics when all we ask for is the truth. When you make truthful statement like “Fiscal Reckoning, and while the projected deficit numbers may seem scary, they are not surprising,” these statements scare the folks. Even though you are in the driver seat Mr. Russo we will still demand the truth.

Let us state unequivocally that the city of Riverside is not going bankrupt; in fact, the city could have continued on its prior path for many years without suffering financial doom. But we believe that our standard should be higher than the very “low bar” of “just don’t go bankrupt.” We are committed to a rational budget in which ongoing revenue meets ongoing expenses, and long-term capital needs, like road repair and tree trimming, are properly covered.  Mr. Russo you cannot unequivocally state that the city is not going bankrupt. When you say the city need to be propped up. That sounds as dumb as Mike Gardner saying there were pots of gold.  We could not exist without the propping up of public utilities.

pot-of-gold

You also state very clearly in this editorial that, budgeting practices are no longer sustainable, We are experiencing a Fiscal Reckoning of this magnitude, projected deficit numbers may seem scary, and Residents and business owners may hear things that make them uncomfortable, and perhaps even a bit nervous about Riverside’s financial health. You can lay it out any way you like but what the critics are absolutely sure about 100% is that the life line to the General Fund is Public Utilities. The General Fund needs to be propped up. This is a scary situation to be in. We are one legal challenge away from a disaster….. BANKRUPT! That’s the truth.

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.  Mr. Russo you can make your case to the public any way you like, but there will be no new rate increases or new taxes. I can assure you of that. BRING IT ON!

We encourage everyone in Riverside to attend the council’s budget hearings or go to EngageRiverside.com to let us know what you think and be a part of that solution. Together, we will ensure that our city’s great past will be honored by an even greater future built upon sound and secure finances. What a joke! sound and secure finances were built on the backs of the RATE payers, overcharging and bilking Riverside Public Utilities has been going on for over a decade. The City Council is responsible for this entire fiasco. THEY OWN IT! The Perennial Critics encourage everyone to attend.

John A. Russo is Riverside city manager; Marianna Marysheva-Martinez is assistant city manager.

NOW FOR A LITTLE MUSIC TO SOOTHE THE SAVAGE BEAST…

VOTE VIVIAN MORENO MAYOR 2016, DON’T FORGET THE DEBATE TOMORROW NIGHT APRIL 28TH AT THE STRATTON CENTER (7:00PM TO 8:30PM), BORDWELL PARK, 2008 MARTIN LUTHER KING BLVD., RIVERSIDE.

According to RivPublic, anonymous contributor to Thirty Miles of Corruption, “And about Russo, the man rocks! Can play the electric guitar and keyboard (and kinda sing??). Maybe he could pull a rabbit out of his hat and find some $$$$ too!”

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

jones_RUSSO-copy-620x465      manager-lee-mcdougal2

                          ROCK STAR RUSSO                                REAR VIEW MCDOUGAL

I’m going to go with the notion that these two can’t get enough of each others egos or maybe because they will be starting a new private gentlemen’s club in Riverside. Never the less it will be great material for Thirty Miles.

This is my problem, Mr Lee McDougal doesn’t need the job! He has a pension of 211,000.00 each and every year for the rest of his life. The City of Riverside Just paid him an additional 145,000.00 for 6 months of service. And now we want to pay him an additional 37,000.00 per year. Thats approx $400,000,00 he will be paid this year.This is nothing more than Mr Russo taking care of his buddy… I thought this kind of management was over. He may be qualified for the job but I’m sure there are a lot of people qualified for the job that live in Riverside, who actually need the job like Jason Hunter,.Jason is way more qualified for this job than McDougal.

Mr McDougal we thank-you for your service to our city but we are over it now. Its time for you to move on. Stop being GREEDY!

According to a posting on Next Door Wood Streets Neigborhood site, the City of Riverside’s Intergovernmental and Communications Officer (AKA City Spokes Hole), Phil Pitchford released the following posting indicating newly hired Riverside City Manager John Russo will be contracting the services of former interim Riverside City Manager Lee McDougal.  Rock Star Russo is proposing to systematically audit all city departments on a rotating basis as part of a program headed to the City Council for its endorsement on Tuesday (7/28). Russo proposes to start with the city’s largest department – Riverside Public Utilities – and two others, Finance and Human Resources, which interact with all other city departments.  McDougal will be contracted out at $37,000.00 per year to manage the audit program, plus will be paid expenses and mileage, and would be paid out of the City Manager’s existing budget.  Another good example of ‘recycled executive trash?”

The tentative rotation for audits would be:
Fiscal year 2015/16 – Riverside Public Utilities, Finance, Human Resources
Fiscal year 2016/17 – Riverside Police Department, Community and Economic Development, City Manager’s Office
Fiscal year 2017/18 – Riverside Fire Department; Public Works; Parks, Recreation and Community Services
Fiscal year 2018/19 – General Services Department, Innovation and Technology, Museum and Cultural Affairs
Fiscal year 2019/20 – Riverside Public Libraries, City Clerk, City Attorney

SITEONE      SITETWO

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

What seems to be unclear about the Next Door Wood Street Neighborhood site is why the City of Riverside is a participant.  The site is for homeowners of the wood street and surrounding Riverside neighbors, and one of the criteria is that you are a “homeowner.”  Residential taxpayers are asking the question if this is a City of Riverside monitoring site, to actually see what residents may not be “team players.”  Was it started by the City of Riverside, some even mentioned former Mayor Ron Loveridge’s name.  You know those conspiracy theorist in our neighborhood. No one has since “denied” or “acknowledged” that this may or may not be true.

According to the Legislative Counsel’s Digest, AB 194, Campos. Open Meetings: Public Criticism and Comment states under SECTION 1. Section 54954.3 of the Government Code is amended to read: 54954.3.

public comment

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT ON public criticism, which McDougal may not have agreed with…
(c) (1) Subject to reasonable regulations promulgated pursuant to subdivision (b), the legislative body of a local agency, or its presiding officer or staff, acting in their official capacity on behalf of the legislative body, shall not prohibit, limit, or otherwise prevent any of the following: (A) Public criticism of the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the agency, or of the acts or omissions of the legislative body or its officers or employees acting in their official capacity.

McDougal who is remembered by the residents of the City by how he attempted to control public speakers at the podium by changing the camera view.  The new camera position viewed public speakers from the rear end at a far distance.  This didn’t allow viewers to see speakers mannerisms and facial expression.  What came about was that this was reversed by Russo.  People still couldn’t figure out why McDougal did this.  Some residents felt he attempted to treat them as small children, which was taken as a personal insult.  A second layer of this rear view action, was he actually attempting to control the message and our 1st Amendment right to free speech in a public arena?  The overall picture the community saw, was that he was just attempting to punishing the community if they didn’t act right.  Well TMC found that McDougal didn’t morally act right in the City of Montclair according to sources, which now changes the perspective of behavior to contradiction.  Regardless, this is how taxpaying residents are viewing him.

THINKING FROM BEHIND IS WHY MANY CANNOT THINK FORWARD: AS IS THE CASE WITH INTERIM CITY MANAGER LEE MCDOUGAL:  HERE YOU GO LEE, THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES.. HORSES ASS IS TOO GOOD FOR YOU, WILL STICK TO A DONKEY’S ASS..

8SadieRearCLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE, IF YOU DARE…

UPDATE: RPOA (RIVERSIDE POLICE OFFICER’S ASSOCIATION) EMBEZZLEMENT SCAM CONTINUES TO EMBARRASS BOARD OF DIRECTORS.  Questions have arose if RPD or individuals in law enforcement who are their to serve and protect the public, can they “competently handle money?”  In this case it was a whole lot of money to the tune of $337,017.07!  Again, this was all under the nose of President Brian Smith and Vice President Aurelio Melendrez (Council Andy’s son), and wasn’t until RPD Detective Money (real name) figured it out.  At the time of her arrest, Detective Brian Money, of the Riverside Police Department economic crimes unit, said Archibeque was highly trusted and had access to and most of the control over financial records – a mistake he said is common among small businesses and nonprofit organizations that are victimized by embezzlers.  I don’t think so Det. Money Bags, the majority of all non-profits and businesses have the two check process, implemented to avoid such embarrassing situations. Again 300K, that is shear incompetence to leave one individual in charge, with no secondary oversight in order to verify outgoing payments.

But the thing to remember this happened through a slew of highly tax paid law enforcement officers.  The good officers of RPD should be asking for their resignation, if you need help contact TMC.  It only stands to reason why they, RPOA, debacled the Councilman Soubirous character assassination, and abused the very integrity of their association, therefore placing a “black eye” against the “troops” and the community of Riverside.

weloveourceleryAs in this pic, Smith and Melendrez were just simply distracted by the size of the salary celery…  Was this why they didn’t catch that measly $337, 017.07 of RPD Officers money?

JUST FOR LAUGHS! NO PUN ON RPOA…

image1

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN….

large

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