Posts Tagged ‘city of riverside’

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PUBLIC WORKS FOSTER’S & BOYD’S THE BID PROCESS!

Posted: June 25, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
8

It never ends, Sewer Bid Contracts again in the News, is City Hall in turmoil once again at the wheel of damage control working feverishly to sort a believable story for the public?  Do we now hire our trump card Best, Best & Krieger for Public Relations, or are we just a bit beyond that?  With City Councilman Paul Davis up for Mayor Pro Temp coming this week and City Attorney Greg Priamos hiding behind the comforting doors of his office, is City Manager Brad Hudson conveniently leaving the scene of the crime just in time?  Is his remaining posse working hard to answer all the abounding questions that remain?  And are City Hall employees celebrating Brad Hudson leaving, as they did when Assistant City Manager Tom DeSantis left?

Well, the spotlight is now on Riverside Public Works, that would be Tom Boyd’s department.  Did his department preferentially award a contract to Camp, Dresser & McKee?  A contract according to the standard scoring process should have went to Hill, known as CH2M Hill,  of who scored higher.  Incidently, CH2M Hill for the third year has been rated Worlds Most Ethical Companies, I understand ethics just doesn’t sit well in Riverside.  Regardless, there are two employees at the forefront of the allegations, City Engineer Warren Huang and Sewer Treatment Plant Manager Craig Justice, who stated to Deputy City Attorney Raychele Sterling that they were called into Public Works Director Siobhan Foster’s office, where “they were told that ‘she did not like the results of the scoring,’ and that the scoring needed to be ‘fixed’ so that CDM was selected” because Albert A. Webb Associates was to be a subcontractor on the job, according to the email.  Was there creative math occurring in this bid process?   Now we have the subcontractor Albert A. Webb and Associates at the forefront of the questionable bid process.   Matthew A. Webb, president of Albert A. Webb Associates, has acknowledged a friendship with Hudson, but has said the firm gained work based on merit and that jobs for the city are only a small portion of its business, but twelve payouts on a single day?  There lies the questionable appearance of bid splitting, and no one at City Hall has been able to explain it.  The following is City Memorandum from last month by Webb requesting a change order for an additional appropiation of $308,495.00.  Now the question, what is the purpose of the scoring process when no one follows the rules?  Does it then become just a city formality?   TMC has asked for a an independent forensic audit, who will answer to a community finance commitee.  Or a request by the City Council for State Controller John Chiang, would also be in order.

What does Chief Financial Officer, Paul Sundeen say about this.   According to Mary Shelton, who writes the River City Cop Watch Blog, Sundeen believes an independent audit is too expensive and wouldn’t be necessary in his opinion. He claims no bid splitting has ever taken place ever but if it happens, he should be notified to investigate it.  We have this bit of info for Paul to investigate thirteen payments in one day. Bid splitting or coincidence? as coincidental as our emails being blocked Paul’s office.

Cihigoyenetche, Grossberg & Clouse, Rancho Cucamonga based law firm Hudson requested to investigate allegations of favoritism of himself to the tune of $100,000.00, presented their findings.  According to Cihigoyenetche’s report, the employees Sterling says told her of favoritism denied making those comments when questioned by an investigator and they did not find that Hudson’s friendships influenced who got  contracts or that Hudson pressured anyone to award contracts to someone specific.  Good work Cihigoyenetche, Grossberg & Clouse!  I’m sure there was also no conflict of interest between the firm and Hudson…..and by the way, did the taxpayer pay your bill alright?  Did anybody know that Scott Grossberg performed magic! …and wrote books such as  “The Vitruvian Square: A Handbook of  Divination Discoveries,” “The Masks of Tarot,” and “Bauta: Betraying  the Face of Illusion,” in addition to his  oracle/divination cards, “The Deck of Shadows.”     But in all fairness, in report notes of the hired law firm requested by the Press Enterprise via the public records request act,  Cihigoyenetche’s reports, “To the extent that any public works managers pressured staff to award the contract to the firm with (Hudson’s) alleged friend as a subcontractor, such pressure emanated from a pervasive desire within the city to award contracts to capable local business to stimulate the local economy,” rather than to reward Hudson’s friends.  Ahhh, thats it!…it was all about “stimulating the local economy”, that was worth a $100,000.00 of taxpayer money to find out, wouldn’t you say?  Or a bit of magic sleight of hand with taxpayer money, now you see it, now you don’t!  Further, Deputy City Attorney Raychele Sterling, who was fired last month in May, stated that the employees were badgered and berated with threats of losing their job.  In a March 23 email to the City Council, Sterling wrote that public works employees told her they were directed by their superiors to assign projects to a particular firm because its head “is a personal friend of the city manager, and the city manager wants him to receive as many projects as possible.” This at around the same time fired employee Sean Gill, Construction Contracts Administrator for the City, claimed that city officials gave millions in contracts without the contracts going out to bid. The lawsuit also alleges Gill was ordered by Deputy Public Works Director Tom Boyd to sign off on projects that didn’t meet handicap-accessible standards or city requirements, and that Boyd “even instructed Gill not to inspect the work.”  The suit claims city officials — with the knowledge of council members — awarded contracts “in an effort to increase their political allies” and ordered work without public bidding, which cost the city more money than necessary.  There you go Mr. Sundeen, sounds like something to investigate, also sounds as both Raychele and Sean fall into the whistleblower category.

Last year, June 2010 at City Council, that Dvonne Pitruzello, City Council Candidate Ward 1, requested to see documents in regards to City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary fund spending.  Since then, numerous questions of indiscretions came to the forefront at City Council Meetings, such as the Connie Leach Contracts and questions of favoritism in contracts awarded to Albert Webb and Assoiciates.  Will the City of Riverside experience another mass exodus due to the next erruption of the Toba Caldera?  Keep connected with TMC…

UPDATE: 06/29/2011: HUDSON’S RESPONSE TO FORMER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RAYCHELE STERLING, “ABSOLUTELY SILLY.”   HE MAY BE SAYING THAT BECAUSE HE’S LEAVING, BUT RAYCHELE HAS ONE HELL OF A LAW SUIT AGAINST THE CITY (TAXPAYER) WHICH WILL DEVULGE A BOMBSHELL OF IMPROPRIETIES.

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: AT WILL VS. VESTED EMPLOYEES AND THE WHISTLEBLOWER LAW

Posted: June 3, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
1

The question that many employees that work for the City of Riverside are having is why are their vested employees and at-will employees.  Ordinarily, the Private Sector in California is an at-will state, once you go to the Public Sector, it doesn’t apply.  The standard in the Public Sector is that executive positions are usually at-will, and the rest are vested positions.  But we are finding a mix of vested and at-will employees within middle and upper management positions, and of course there are the rank and file still continue to remain vested per union contract.  Vested positions cannot be changed to at-will positions by the City council or the City Manager, it must take a vote of the  people. The city could be enthralled into a serious class action lawsuit if this is true. The question is, were mid and upper management positions which were originally vested changed to at-will without a vote of the people?  This then becomes the legal question.

Sources are asking,for example, if the position was vested before the City Manager Brad Hudson came to the city, would be illegal of him to have changed the position to at-will without a vote of the people,  Therefore the at-will position advertised would be an illegal and fraudulent offer to that employee.  This would also violate Skelly Rights.  The purpose of the Skelly rule is to allow employees an opportunity to respond to the charges and to request a reduction or elimination of the discipline. It also allows for an opportunity to check out the evidence that management has against the employee.

Therefore, this offer would be contrary to public policy. Usually a city charter can override only if it states “at-will”, but it appears that the City of Riverside Charter does  not.  If the city manager came in and declared that vested positions are now at-will, this would be illegal.  Legally, a vested position will remain a vested position, even if an employee came in and was told at-will was the position. You may have agreed to it, which would be a fraudulent offer, and if you were terminated, the position would legally return back to vested.  Remember only “you” can waive your right of being vested if you wanted to change to “at-will.”  A city manager cannot state “vested” positions are now “at-will”, or even the city council cannot change this.  If this was what you were told, a Labor Relations Attorney would be in order to sue the city.  The city cannot vote out rights given by the voters. Rank and file employees, for example, are vested, and their mid management positions vested.

If your contract is terminated, when you are hired there is an implied contract, the contract states that you are at-will, one can still sue the city council civily, because they allowed the city manger to make this illegal decision. Remember, the City Council and the Mayor are ultimately responsible since the City Manager serves at their pleasure.  Look at the history of the city for laws regards at-will and vested.  January 2007 the city became a Charter City, and this change could by some become questionable. Since City Charter process could be abused, and be used more like a weapon than a tool.  Therefore, the at-will classification can give the city the license to steal and avoid transparency, if anything is said, an employee can be fired and a gag order placed.  That’s why the whistleblower act is important.  The first US law adopted specifically to protect whistleblowers was the 1863 United States called the False Claims Act (revised in 1986), which tried to combat fraud by suppliers of the United States government during the Civil War.  The act encourages whistleblowers by promising them a percentage of the money recovered or damages won by the government and protects them from wrongful dismissal.  A whistleblower is now defined as  a person who tells the public or someone in authority about alleged misconduct, dishonest or illegal activities occurring in a government department, a public or private organization, or a company. The alleged misconduct may be classified in many ways; for example, a violation of a law, rule, regulation and/or a directthreat to public interest, such as fraud  health/safety violations, and corruption.  Therefore, if you were fired based on the whistleblower law, you may have been unlawfully terminated and have grounds for a lawsuit.

FOR CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S, OPEN LINK IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: WHISTLEBLOWER’S DISCLOSURE GUIDE

RIVERSIDE: SEXUAL FAVORITISM IN THE WORKPLACE

Posted: May 29, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , ,
3


The Boss’s favorable treatment of lovers can be harassment for others.   According to 996 respondents to an on-line poll by Vaultreports,  59% said they have had a workplace romance at some point in their careers, 17% said they had never dated a co-worker but they would, 24% said they had no interest in an office romance.   It’s a common scenario for romance to spark between co-workers in the workplace.  Is it happening in River City, City Hall or is it just my imagination?

The new rules of engagement for an office affair is the “LOVE CONTRACT.”  The “Love Contract” was designed to limit liability in case of an office romance spinning out of control.  Does Riverside have one? A dating policy or an office romance policy . Gary Matheason and Jeff Tanambaum employment attorneys at Littler Mendelson in San Francisco are Co-Creators of the “Love Contract”.  Designed to help ward off sexual harassment claims filed by a jilted lover.  The risks to the taxpayer and employees are great.  Not having the policies in place is like the proverbial ostrich with its head in the sand, ignores the risk instead of managing them.  We will give Riverside the benefit of the doubt, so we emailed the City Clerk a request:

To: city_clerk@riversideca.gov

Subject: Love Contract

Date: May 30, 2011 9:45 AM

As per public records act: I am requesting all policy and procedure guidelines relating to “a romance policy”, “a dating policy”, or “a Love Contract”.

A Relationship between a supervisor and a subordinate can be troublesome. Favoritism arising out of a personal relationship is damaging to the whole department. Two major issues could arise Conflict of Interest between the two and not enough time being spent on doing work assigned.  Not to mention the target of office gossip in the blogosphere or elsewhere consuming the office dialog.  Wide spread favoritism, and nasty rumors can create a sexually hostile work environment. Employers face greater risk from a workplace romance.  California Supreme Court rules that office affairs may give rise to sexual favoritism claims.  {Miller v California Department of corrections} Employees in California may now sue their employers for sexual harassment if the sexual affair between a superior and a subordinate results in sexual favoritism.  It is a Violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

“Sleeping her way to the top” was the basis of this lawsuit. Numerous women were romantically and sexually involved with their boss.  Women got ahead and were promoted if they performed sexual favors for their supervisor. Preferential treatment, raises, promotions, company perks were all part of the repeated incidence of sexual favoritism. The outcome was a hostile work environment where women got ahead and were promoted if they performed sexual favors for their superior.  Sexual Favoritism sends a message to female employees that they must demean themselves by becoming sexual playthings in order to get ahead at work. In this particular case it was proven that “Boss’s favorable treatment of lovers can be harassment to others.”

Now tell me again why Tom DeSantis left?

UPDATE: 06/01/2011: Still No Response To Our Request From The City Clerks Office.  Keep Connected, TMC investigates.

UPDATE: 06/06/2011: We received a response from Sherry Morton-Ellis, CMC Assistant City Clerk as follows: Pursuant to California Government Code Section 6253, the City of Riverside submits this response to your request received on May 30, 2011.  In your request, you seek: •  All policies and procedure guidelines relating to a “romance policy”, “dating policy”, or “love contract”. We have searched our records and found that are no records responsive to your request.

RIVERSIDE: DUCK TAPING A MOUTH HAS A PRICE: A CITY GONE ROGUE

Posted: May 26, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , ,
2

In my opinion it’s always been the nature of government to propose the proposition if there is no trail to an incident or event,  it didn’t occur.  In a free society we expect accountability and transparency, not some semantical play on words leading us further from the truth.  What is really disturbing is the fruition of a culture which has become unrepresentative of the needs of the community and has  become increasingly detached from mainstream economic theory, that its interference with the free market takes precedence.  What is best for the community is simply to do the right thing.   If that was done at all, we would not have so many employees fired at will.  But in retrospect, couldn’t this in essence,  be construed as a reflection of leadership?  And leadership can inadvertently distort the truth as a mechanism of defense.  Whereby an initial account of truth once disseminated, is followed by a transfiguration there of,  eventually becoming a subterfuge leading the community with a distorted perception of the truth.  For these reasons people are angry, people are frustrated, economically stressed and foremost, people are now asking questions.  Having questions is one thing, asking them is another.  People are feeling intimidated and afraid of government, and for good reason for which it has been quietly expressed in the community.  What has happened to our government, our protector and fervent leader?  What has propagated an entitled culture to developed independently of  the needs of surrounding community?  We have seen this within cities such as Bell.  People shouldn’t  have to feel that they are wrong  or be  intimidated by asking questions of public servants, or to feel they may be retaliated against.  Remember, elected and appointed officials are there to work at the pleasure of the people.

“Fear is the foundation of most Governments…”       

– John Adams, 2nd President of the United States of America,  January 1776

City Attorney Greg Priamos states he is there to protect the mayor and the council.  Is this an aberration of duty?  Or a momentary lapse of clarity?  …such as when an inquiry is initiated, and the assertion of attorney-client privilege is spawned.   Attorney-client privilege?…. lets analytically conceptualize the relationship.  In our tangible world it simply means the relationship between attorney and client, whereby the client hires the attorney for a fee.  Elected and appointed officials work at the pleasure of the people, taxpayers, and the community etc.,  therefore are we not their employers?  In essence, is the City Attorney present to protect the people and serve at the pleasure there of?  Therefore, would we not be his client?   An employee is still considered to be an employee, and we the people are technically their employer.  Such as the case of Best, Best & Krieger representing the Chief of Police via the tax payer,  we the employer/the CEO, do we not have the right to know what he may have done wrong and how it damages us as the employer?   Furthermore, is it the taxpayer/employer which must then hire a third party entity such as BB&K to actually tell us, again the taxpayer/employer, not the truth?  Led of course, by former Riverside DA Grover Trask, now with BB&K.  The City Manager, serves at the pleasure of the Mayor and the Council,  and therefore the responsibility of his actions reflects upon the mayor and council, it would be considered a breach of trust and of their fiduciary duty to the community  if they did otherwise.  It should also be assumed that the city council and mayor if necessary, could conduct themselves as city manager.  This would imply, a mastery of the appointed position, and this should be a requirement to becoming mayor or a member of the city council.  Understanding the work of the City manager is not only necessary but pertinent to the understanding the intricacies of the general fund.  Therefore there would be no justification to an aberrational abuse as seen with City Manager Robert Rizzo of the city of Bell.

Those that have been there longest have attained institutional memory, of which could be detrimental to a leaders agenda.  Ridding the work force of this intangible phenomenon insures the likelihood of implementing ones agenda without question, regardless if it is right or wrong.   Of course, those with institutional memory know right from wrong.  Is it a benefit to leadership to control and to rid their immediate arena of institutional memory?  And when expelled from the work arena,  does it have a corresponding price?  Duck taping a mouth always has a price within a city gone rogue. (Note: This Original Link Dissapeared From The Press Enterprise Site).  Without integrity there ultimately would be no need to question the actions of representative leadership.  Say what you don’t mean and mean what you don’t say.  Thank-you Sean Gill and Raychele Sterling for doing the rightful work of the people and with the integrity, and thank-you for asking the questions which help us, the taxpaying community,  to protect us from the abuse of public funds.  You have not been forgotten….

RIVERSIDE: IT’S ALL ABOUT THE TALENT WHEN IT COMES TO PARKING

Posted: May 23, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,
3

The CITY always seems to amaze me, I think Mike Gardner said it best responding to a question regarding high salaries of appointed officials at one of the campaign debates, “We have to pay for talent”.   Regency Tower was bought first with too much money from $126.5 million to $131.5 million.  Now the Orange Street Garage is in the news again, thats the one that looks like the Bellagio in Las Vegas and was built on Redevelopment money.   The sale of the Regency Tower to the County of Riverside included 400 parking stalls from the Orange Street garage.  Zellerbach now states we don’t need all of them anymore and we can sell the city back the rights in the form of a lease for 150 stalls, for a mere $90,000.00.  According to the City Council Memorandum for Tuesday May 24, 2011, the city will pay the county $25.00 a month per stall, that comes to a total of $3750.00 for 150 stalls per month, therefore $90,000.00 for a two year period. It seems quite nominal for a city employee to pay $25.00, where others are paying$35.00 and upwards to $65.00 in some cases and save the taxpayers $90K.   As I’m understanding it, County employees are paying for their parking, as opposed to City employees who don’t.  Regardless, the city states that this mere $90,000 will loosen up parking around the city for the public at large.   Well, anyway, this whole mess originally started before the Regency Towers were built, where city officials thought with new construction, the developer would be bringing in new business to the city and city tax revenues would be boosted.   So they reduced the parking requirement by one-fourth to the developer as an encentive, and agreed to sell him 400 parking stalls from the Orange Street garage for $4 million, that’s $10,000 per stall.   But in January 2007,  the city figured out that it actually cost you and me, the taxpayer,  $7 million for the 400 parking stalls.  That’s $17.500 for each stall, Ouchh!  But it gets better, by October 2008 that number became $8 million and $20,000 per stall.  So the $3 million faux pas become $4 million.  Now what?  Well it appears, that’s why government created Fuzzy Math, Creative Financing and the word “Subsidize”.

Leasing parking spots for government workers is just totally asinine!  If they are incapable of finding a place to park on their own – just like the rest of us manage to do  every day – then let them take public transportation to work. Government workers need to pay for their own parking, just like everybody else.  

 -Comment from PE by Dave’s Not Here

So at the time, Councilman Schiavone knew if the Regency Tower was sold to the County, their would be no intended benefit to the city.  No new business’s or no new workers would be coming to Riverside, and the subsidy would be waisted.  Schiavone said, “I don’t care if it is in writing or not”.  “Make us whole. Give us back the incentive that wasn’t meant to be used like this”.    By then is was just to late, nothing could be done, the city didn’t even think of placing this clause in writing. Now when the county of Riverside bought the Regency, this additional $4 million faux pas then became a convenient  subsidy for the county, the other $4 million was probably added by the developer to the total sale price of the Regency Towers.   Of, course Mike Gardner said this would not happen again, but that’s talent for you.   Parking has always been an issue in Downtown Riverside with merchants and their customers, as with Arts Bar and Grill, which their parking was displaced by city construction.  The city’s less compassionate attitude toward struggling merchants doesn’t help either.  Why doesn’t the city care for merchants?  They suffer the most, having their life saving tied up in their business’s and their future income.  Many around town have been damaged by city redevelopment construction, and many merchants have left with no support effort by the city.  For many of the merchants parking meters were an issue which fell upon deaf ears of city officials.  Now the  issue of parking meters comes up again, shall we now remove them, maybe it was a bad idea to begin with?  First, Smart Park by Dom Betro, then removed and replaced with Parking Meters by Mike Gardner, all at taxpayer expense.  And I understand the parking fund is still running at a deficit which I’m beginning to believe is the standard for city run business’s.  I realize talent can be a good thing.  Bell had their talent in City Manager Robert Rizzo with his benefit and salary package of $1,500,000.00 per year,  but we won’t go into the falsifying public records part.  Regardless, I’m not sure if the city knows what talent is, or what their persception of it is, but I’m still optimistic that my City of Riverside will one day become what it should be, but I believe it will be done without the great talent and expense we now have in city hall.

UPDATE: 05/24/2011: COUNCIL PASSES $90,000.00 FOR CITY EMPLOYEE PARKING, IN LIEU OF PASSING OF $50,000 FOR A CONSULTING FEE FOR A CITY WIDE MASTER BICYCLING PLAN.

RIVERSIDE RENAISSANCE: BROUGHT TO YOU BY CITY HALL VISIONARIES

Posted: May 22, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: ,
0

The Metamorphosis of Marcy Library…Enthralled in the Hands of Fuzzy Math, what is it’s value, $505,000.00? $339,000.00?  Now a great place to pick up a couple of hamburgers!

UPDATE: 06/22/2011:  The development committee is going to rehear the Marcy library issue June 23 at 3:00 pm on the 7th floor of Riverside City Hall.

UPDATE: 06/23/2011:  The Development Committee votes 2-1 to sell Marcy Branch Library to the Lucky Greek Restaurant with Councilman Mike Gardner disscenting.

UPDATE: 05/29/2012: Lucky Greek owner sues the City of Riverside for $750,000.00

RIVERSIDE: THE PRESS BINDERY: A BREACH OF TRUST

Posted: May 16, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,
5

Legally we can do whatever we want there,” Hudson said. “The city wasn’t required to preserve any of it.”

It’s a sad day when each day the integrity and history of our once beautiful and fare city falls .  The Ol Press Bindery was on life support until the death rattle was heard by the final falling of what was left of the frontal façade.  And down it went biting the dirt of progress by the iron fist of City Manager Brad Hudson, while the council below him were none the wiser.  Every time an element of historical significance is demolished, the city loses a little bit of who we are as a community.  People travel to cities because of their history, and it would be in the City of Riverside best interest to stop this practice, and in this situation a case of incompetance.   This ultimately is reflected in a lack of leadership and a breach of trust toward the community by sworn elected officials.  The Stalder Building may be next, with a stipulation that if the cost to repair escalates over 350K, it can be torn down.  What do you think will ultimately be the result?  Well its on paper folks!  True shenanigans going on? My opinion it just can’t be anything else, the good ol’ boys will be boys.  As Dave Leonard stated, Chief of the Old Riverside Foundation, “Knocking down a concrete building is not a mistake, this is a major problem for the city”.  And he fears it will get worse, “The Stalder Building is next”.   I guess, now we will rebuild the facade of the Press Bindery with plaster and fiberglass like some movie set prop, and onward, tear down the Stalder Building, will just rebuild the facade.  This will become our city, facades of what was and maybe just a little bit of Disneyland and Moreno Valley?

UPDATE: MAY 29, 2011: The Press Bindery was designed by Henry L.A. Jekel and constructed in 1925 in the Spanish Revival style.  Someone told me that it even housed the Press Enterprise at one point.  There is no doubt there was incompetancy all around, from City Hall to the construction company.  “Legally we can do whatever we want there,” Hudson said. “The city wasn’t required to preserve any of it.”  What should be bothersome and disturbing to Riversidian’s is the arrogance of that statement.  According to the Certificate of Appropriateness, page 3, the city was to preserve the “ENTIRE Spanish Revival portion of the Press Bindery”, not just the frontal wall facade.  It goes on to say on page 4, that “the Press Bindery consist of the original Spanish Revival front portion of the building AND the poured concrete rear work area of the building. This plan will preserve the highly stylized Spanish Revival front portion of the building.” This gives validity to the argument that instructions were not followed.  No mistake here!  It’s part of the cities agenda or Hudson’s agenda.  It’s obvious the City Manager is responsible.  The Mayor and the council members, who also play a part in state redevelopment decisions, are equally responsible as well.  Another play on the community with use of semantics?  These are people who do not care about our city.   We can place new policies in as Councilman Mike Gardner indicated, but what is worth when current policies are not followed or honored.  When someone turns their head for a second, we find ourselves asking, “What happened to this wall, and hey, and what happened to that wall, it was there yesterday”?  Mike, you cannot tell us, “The city made a very serious mistake by tearing down that building the way they did”.  The chain of events that led to the press bindery demolition should be investigated and responsible parties terminated, afterall, it appears employees at City Hall have been fired for lesser offenses.  You carry two positions of responsibility,  City Councilman and as as an agent of Redevelopment, you are the City.  The investigation should be initiated by Ward 1 Councilman, Mike Gardner, this was on his watch and it went right by him.  Or we can hire at outside law firm as Brad Hudson did to investigate the allegations of favoritism by himself.  We all know where that will lead.  The more that the community understands the truth through documentation, Brad Hudson’s arguments simply begins to become more disingenuous, revealing himself, as just a paper tiger.  If you Like Mike call him, and Especially if you Don’t Like Mike, ask him to investigate Brad Hudson’s actions and recommend he vote for his termination, let him know how you feel, 951-826-5991 (office) or 951-941-7084 (cell) or by e-mail at mgardner@riversideca.gov     Let the City Manager, Bradley Hudson know how you feel directly at 951-826-5771 (office) or by e-mail at bhudson@riversideca.gov    There is the story you read, then their is the real story you don’t read, but is yet to come.  Keep in tune, TMC investigates, check for updates. Please give your comments!

UPDATE: 03/12/2012: WHAT REMAINS OF THE PRESS BINDERY REMAINS IN LIMBO ACCORDING THE PRESS ENTERPRISE.

JURUPA AVENUE EXTENSION: CAN SEWER FUNDS LEGALLY FINANCE A NEW PROJECT?

Posted: May 14, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , ,
2

Second phase extension of the Jurupa Avenue extension was unanimously passed by City Council at Tuesday’s council meeting.   According to Riverside Municipal Code, the monies from those funds can be used solely for the maintenance, operation, construction and reconstruction of existing sewer lines, and cannot be used for the construction of new local street sewers.  Is this project actually legal?  Or a misuse of taxpayer funds and a violation of Riverside Municipal Code?  That is the question.

UPDATE:  It’s hard to grasp how someone can rationalize violating laws enacted to protect the sanctity of taxpayer monies and their potential abuse by elected and appointed officials sworn to protect the interest of the taxpayer.  It appears it all started in 2003, whereby developer Chuck Cox gave the city a parcel of land next to the golf course by Riverside Municipal Airport in exchange for a piece of land called simply the Old Agricultural Park.  The Old Agricultural Park had evidently been contaminated from and old city sewer plant on or adjacent to the parcel.  In the real world, it would have been up to Chuck Cox, the developer, to pursue an environmental study to test for soil contamination during the negotiations. Regardless, Cox then planned to build homes on the Agricultural site.  It was then that city officials decided to tell Chuck Cox the land had been contaminated by an old city sewer plant.  Why would the city knowingly not tell the developer this bit of info prior to the original parcel swap.  It seems to me this would be a violation of the law to sell a parcel of land with foresight of it being contaminated?  As City Manager Brad Hudson explained the deal, the city and Cox agreed to swap responsibilities — Cox would handle cleanup at the agricultural park if the city would build part of the Jurupa Avenue extension.  See, if you built your own house, connecting your house to new utilities such as water, sewage and electricity would be at cost to you.  Smell the sewage yet?  Well it gets better. Councilman Steve Adams who’s has an extensive background and knowledge of the city, based on his comprehensive level of experience in public service as a career politician and police officer, must know municipal code and law.  Adams said the sewer funds to be used for the road extension would otherwise have gone toward the site cleanup.  How can that be, the clean-up is not the cities problem anymore, it is the developer!  Further, sewer funds cannot be used for road extension construction or cleanup, but the developer may have a case for fraud against the city, since the city admitted having prior knowledge of land contamination.  The real issue is the location and existence of the old city sewer plant, what kind of contamination occurred and did it really happen at all.  Regardless, Councilman Steve Adams may need a refresher on municipal code for the city of riverside.  But again, no one can use Sewer Funds for new sewer construction. 

UPDATE: 06/07/2011: Sources state that due to the Jurupa Avenue Extension, the Sewer Fund has been depleted.  In an inter-agency transfer, monies from Public Utilities Fund will replenish monies lost in the Sewer Fund.  But at some point, your utility bill will increase to replenish the Public Utilities monies lost.  Comments Welcomed!  Give Us Your Insight.  TMC investigates, stay connected, watch for updates.

COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS CLEARED: A CORRUPTIBLE SURPRISE

Posted: May 14, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: ,
2

Friday was a good day in River City as Mayor Loveridge’s special panel cleared Riverside Councilman Steve Adam’s alleged ethics violations.  Yes, that’s right, the celebratory smile and giddiness goes along with the pic!  In response to the special panel make-up, Mayor Ron Loveridge states, “These were not personal choices, we chose from the pool that applied”.   Well, I can understand that, but what about City Manager Brad Hudson’s reply to the City’s settlement of Lts. Darryl Hunt and Tim Bacon law suite, well, it was surprisingly as follows,  “…the city would be better off  without those two around, so we paid them to retire”.  Sounds like another law suit Brad, how much money has the taxpayer paid out just in settlements and law suits just because of what you may have said to somebody?  Come to find out the city is not insured, they were dropped back in 2008.  Currently, we are as they call it, “self insured”, that means settlements are paid out using taxpayer money.  The question is, Does Mayor Love’s special panel serve any real purpose, or are they as the English Royalty are viewed, an instrument of perception.   And is it almost possible to say, that we may be able to predict the outcome of any complaint made against City Hall by this special panel?  The city charter says council members should not be involved in personnel matters such as promotions. Rumored allegations are that their was interference by Councilman Steve Adams, who incidently is a fomer RPD Police Officer.

Earlier in the meeting, Melsh indicated and noted that Hudson said in his deposition that he couldn’t recall details of events surrounding the promotions at issue.  That’s a good one Hudson.. Sorry Hudson, no one believes that one! Especially with your track record.

MT. RUBIDOUX: THE PULSE OF THE COMMUNITY

Posted: May 12, 2011 in City of Riverside
Tags: , , , , , ,
2

Tuesday’s City Council meeting ended with Riverside City Council passing permit parking within the vicinity of the park entrance way of Mt. Rubidoux.  Councilman Mike Gardner listened to the opinions of community residents, then himself speaking of the pros and cons, then passing permit parking with a review in  6 months.  Whats the solution, sometimes you have to pave a little bit of paradise and just build a parking lot.  There is no doubt that  Mt. Rubidoux will continue to be a destination point for many who live outside of the Riverside vincinity, but it is also our gem to the  community.  A parking lot would be the only solution, instead of having visitors park further away from the entrance.  But another hidden issue regards to the passing of restricted parking is the increase in Latino people who have been utilizing the park withing the last two years.  To some residents this has been the real issue, and to others within that community, it has eluded to the issue and tone of racism, which has allegedly been relayed to Councilman Mike Gardner.   But I digress, ever read city parking signs?  You read them, but still somehow get a ticket because you missed something.  My solution, is taking the properties as shown from 9th Sreet to 10th Street by eminent domain or by purchasing, would allow the city to acquire the land to give to the community and its visitors a place to park so they can enjoy the park, and not scaring them away and making people angry with ridiculous tickets.  We saw this phenomenon with the installation of parking meters into the downtown Riverside area in early 2000 by then Councilman Dom Betro, and currently merchants in Ventura, CA who are also experiencing lower customer visits with newly installed city parking meters.

UPDATE: 06/19/2011: Sunday:

We all pay for the streets, yet only SOME people are allowed to park on them.  That’s just totally asinine!      -Daves Not Here, comment from the PE

MT. RUBIDOUX- The parking conundrum has always been a firey issue.  Public parking already paid for by taxpayers, taken back by government for the benefit of a few?  Or does the city need the parking fine money to pay for the mounting debt that will come due, July 1, 2012.  Therefore the question is, do we hit residents and visitors with $41.00 tickets?  Further, why would one move to the country and complain about the roosters?  The parking issue continues all over the city,  but now the city is nickeling and diming visitors, not to mention residents, with parking tickets and code enforcement violations.  For example,  the issue in the Woodstreets regarding street cleaning signs, and residents being hit with $41 dollar tickets.  Now , if you pay for a landscaper by the month, and you tell him not to show, he still gets paid, but he doesn’t penalize you for not utilizing him.  Well the city does.  As taxpayers we pay for street cleaning, if we decide to park our car in front of home, shouldn’t we not get ticketed for using that service that day?  People maintain the front curb in front of the sidewalk without thinking that the city owns it, should we in turn send part of landscaping bill to the city to be reimbursed for  maintaining it?  Or after a windy day, should we charge the city for not picking up the broken tree and palm branches left on the street?  Left for the Residents to do the job themselves?  These are issues Councilman Mike Gardner will have to deal with appropriately in his new term.  Of course one of the suggestions regarding the Mt. Rubidoux parking was to take the properties closest to the entry way to the main entrance, this may not be a very popular suggestion, but in the long term would provide a solution to the parking problem we experience.  As Mt. Rubidoux continues to be drawing attraction when people visit our city, this would allow them a good experience.

Older Entries
Newer Entries