Posts Tagged ‘councilman mike gardner’

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: GARY G GEUSS WILL YOU PLEASE GO NOW!

Posted: October 22, 2020 in City of Riverside
Tags: , , , , , ,
9

The time has come,
The time is now.
Just go, go, go!
I don’t care how.

You can go by foot.
You can go by cow.
Gary G. Geuss,
will you please go now!

June 11, 2019: Hunter catches City Attorney Geuss red-handed.  Our Council’s response?  He might be a crook, but he’s our crook!

While we appreciate his tenacity and optimism, we at TMC are often amused at the efforts of City watchdog Jason Hunter over the past decade.  In this instance, our guess is he thought he would bring overwhelming evidence that our City Attorney committed forgery in the execution of the John Russo contract back in February of 2018, leading to the Council summarily investigating the allegation, and then firing Geuss within months.  After all, they fired his comrade, the Talented Mr. Russo, seven weeks into a seven-year contract in April of 2018 based upon the evidence he brought forward at the time of misappropriation of funds and other hanky-panky…or at least that’s the cover story for why former Ward 1 City Councilman Mike Gardner and former Ward 7 City Councilman Steve Adams flipped their votes on “I can’t believe they just fired me” Russo.  But instead, the taxpayers are still paying Mr. Geuss’ salary and benefits (and his accumulating pension) while he’s been out on administrative leave for what seems to have been an eternity now.

Alas, we at TMC have no such misconceptions as to why a majority of our ethically-challenged Old City Council – Gardner (lost miserably in his re-election bid), Melendrez, Soubirous (ran for the hills), Conder, MacArthur (hiding out in the Greenbelt), Perry, and Adams (hopefully retired forever in 2 weeks) – never moved a finger to bring accountability to crooked executives: the fear of being exposed themselves.  Even Mayor Bailey – hightailing it off the dais in a couple weeks to build his dreams of a homeless industrial complex right here in Riverside – didn’t really care about the contents of the Russo contract when he vetoed it: it was a power struggle detailed in high definition here on TMC (another huge event the Press Enterprise was scooped on and never really understood).  Once you fall down the rabbit hole of Riverside County, you can rest assure that all previous concepts of reality cease to exist: the illusion of legitimacy is what we’re left with…kind of like a Dr. Seuss children’s book.

 

Bosom buddies Melendrez and Soubirous seen high-fiving over costing the taxpayers nearly a million dollars in legal fees over the Russo contract, which was later determined to be invalid.  Good job Thing 1 and Thing 2!

Exhibit 1A and 1B of Hunter’s argument (see if you can spot the difference):

Oh where or where did our little Mayor Bailey go?  Oh where oh where can he be?

Hunter astutely points out that the contract the City Council passed on February 6, 2018, is not the same contract that was executed on February 7th.  How?  The Mayor’s signature block was erased in the interim.  He next quotes from the City Charter regarding contracts and how only the Mayor (attested to by the Clerk) can sign them on behalf of the City, unless otherwise specifically designated by the Council.  He then presents the vote of the Council from February 6th.

          

click above to enlarge – City Charter on contracts & official minutes from February 6, 2018

Now we at TMC didn’t do much higher learnin’, but it seems kind of obvious to us that the City Council designated both the Mayor (Bailey) and Mayor Pro Tem (MacArthur) at the time to both sign Russo’s contract in order for it to be considered executed and payable from the City treasury.  The motion passed 5-2  (as seen in the image above) with Gardner and Adams later justifying their vote by saying they only jumped on board the Russo bandwagon because they wanted to discourage the Mayor from vetoing it.  Good strategy boys!

Mike Gardner, as the Grinch.  Would you vote for the Grinch for Western Municipal Water Board this November? 

TMC: History Channel buffs already know Russo began cashing out the extra provisions of his new contract within hours of it being signed, including his subsidized mortgage (waaaay below market interest rates) and a one-time $50,000 bonus, taken in the form of a vacation cash-out, etc.  Using our keen powers of logical thinking (and watching Hunter’s presentation 13 times) we’re pretty certain that when the Council voted specifically that TWO signatures were needed and the contract was funded with only one, hanky-panky [cough: fraud] has occurred.

It pays to the the Riverside City Manager: 2-day turnaround time between contract “execution” and money in-the-bank! Someone call the Guinness Book of Records!

WHODUNIT!?  Well, Hunter sinks the knife with the next documents he shares with the Council: transmittal sheets between the City Attorney’s Office and the Clerk Office.

Three Little Pigs?  $675,000 buys a lot of straw for a house, doesn’t it Mr. Russo?  Geuss’ house purportedly is made of sticks.

These transmittal sheets show the legal opinion of our City Attorney’s office during the approval process of the three Charter Officers contracts, the last time they had been extended.  Hunter notes, out of the three transmittal sheets, only Russo’s has two timestamps, one of them the day AFTER the contract had already been approved.  He points out what was changed: the word “Mayor” is scrawled out in the comments section as to who HAS to execute the contract.  And whose name is on this transmittal sheet?  Yes, dear readers, our current City Attorney’s, Gary G. Geuss.  In fact, checking the video from the night of the contract’s passage (and subsequent veto attempt), Geuss lets us know exactly what he’s going to do as far as changing his legal opinion after-the-fact:

I would indicate that the contract signed by myself and by Mr. Russo be forwarded to the [Mayor] Pro Tem for his signature and the City Clerk for her attestation.  And that is the only thing that is required to make this contract a legal and binding contract.”

Veto limited to legislature matters?  Well let’s remove the appropriations resolutions then!

 

The Cat-in-the-Hat Knows a Lot About That: Russo and MacArthur coordinating their possible criminal defense via text message.  TMC’s bet: Co-Conspirators Geuss, Russo, and MacArthur are going to see the “light”.

So where are we now and where do we go from here?  According to Geuss’ whine/complaint against the City (see below), almost A YEAR after Hunter brought damning evidence of forgery and named Geuss as the perpetrator, the new City Council (sworn in last December) finally put Geuss on administrative leave to investigate his claims.  In the interim, Riverside Superior Court ruled against the City in determining the Russo contract was invalid, as Mayor Bailey had the right to veto the extra provisions in the new contract, even though the resolution appropriating those provisions was never brought forward as it should’ve been.

Geuss’ complaint against the City after being put on administrative leave over 4 months ago.  Who withheld that necessary resolution we’ve circled?  Why it was none other than Geuss (and chief crony Kristi Smith) himself!!!  Funny he doesn’t mention that part!

Legal Malpractice?  Proof of intent to defraud the public?

As Russo informs us in his text above, the District Attorney’s Office, led by Mike Hestrin already reviewed the evidence once…and did nothing.  Would a referral for criminal prosecution this time by the full City Council lead to charges finally being filed?  Our prediction?  Not likely.

     

We need Superman, not Clark Kent: will the real Mike Hestrin please stand up?

From the Judicial Council of California … “To prove that the defendant is guilty of [forgery], the People must prove that: 1) the defendant falsely made/altered/forged/counterfeited a document (e.g. contract) AND 2) when the defendant did that act, he intended to defraud.”  So Geuss alters a contract, knowing he doesn’t have the authority to do so; and in doing so, it’s relied upon to be funded from the public treasury?  Sure seems like forgery to us…and every other human being we’ve asked (granted, TMC only has 4 friends  associates colleagues ok, we admit we called 4 random people from the phone book – yes, we are so old we still use the phone book).

Former Councilman MacArthur arriving at City Hall to sign Russo’s contract in the wee hours of the morning on February 7, 2018.  TMC says: at least he had the dignity to put on a suit when he was sleeping on the dais for 12 years.

 

Looks like prison food to us.

How the Grinch Stole Our Water Starring Mike Gardner? (a teaser for another day’s story)

 

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST EVERYTHING, A.K.A “THIRTY MILES OF CR-P,” “LATINO WHITE SUPREMACIST SITE,” “SITE IS A JOKE,” “RACIST,” “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,” HORRIFFIC,” “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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: THE DRUG DEALERS NEXT DOOR: PART I

Posted: October 4, 2017 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
7

When I first read the story written by David Silva below, I thought to myself, someone in the Wood Streets is having the same problem.  Then I looked at the date the story was actually written – October 4, 2007, 10 years to this day.  Looks like we’ve come full circle (and gone nowhere).  I found out that David has since passed away, but I can only guess that the drug dealing in his neighborhood continues.  Why you may ask?  Because my neighbors and I have exhausted all government resources to deal with this issue (houses of ill-repute) for over three years, and nothing has been done.  From the City Council, to the Mayor, to the County of Riverside – Social Services, Riverside Police Department, Code Enforcement, Animal Control, etc.  Well, David’s story is our story.  The story ends with good homeowners and renters giving up and moving on.  Giving up really, on the City of Riverside: the City of Arts and Innovation, and Crime and Homelessness.

But it is not only drugs in our neighborhood, it’s prostitution.  Sex, Drugs and Rock N’ Roll: I guess if you buy the drugs and sex, the rock n roll, or rap music, is comped.  Yep folks, it’s happening in one of the most sought after, historic neighborhood places to live in Riverside, the Wood Streets.  Where’s law enforcement?  They are ghosts and their cars are ghost cars, except for their taxpayer paid take-home vehicles.  What we have is a nuisance folks, a quality of life issue, and maybe something more one day.  We couldn’t take it anymore, so we filed a $10,000 small claims nuisance suit against the owner of the property…. and we won.  At least maybe we can profit too now.

We have children in our neighborhood who cannot come out, women who are harassed and intimidated, and neighbors who have been threatened.   My next door neighbor yelled at a vehicle running a stop sign in front of their house; when the vehicle did finally stop, they displayed a revolver.  Neighbor called RPD …..RPD simply said, “file a report.”  Most neighbors are now protecting themselves.   So up go the security cameras, it’s time to adopt a guard dog, and carry a club while walking at night.  It’s the return of the Wild West.

 

Chief Sergio Diaz said the following when he first began his employment with the City of Riverside:

“Respect for the community, respect for other officers, respect for ourselves is going to be the byword by which I will attempt to lead the city of Riverside over the next few years”  – Chief Sergio Diaz  

Sorry Diaz, you have lost the respect of our community.  They won’t say it, but I will.  They won’t say it because they are afraid to do so.  Why is that?  These homeowners actually feel they will be retaliated against somehow. Is it because we have seen Sergio retaliate against the community and city leadership before?  Maybe that’s the reason you were not promoted to higher ground in the LAPD.

We have a home business: everyone who knows us, knows our story.  As a home business, we are required to have a business license; but if you are running an illegal business in drugs and prostitution, you don’t.  We’re told it’s not worth the time and effort by RPD to investigate those – they’ll just be back at doing business the following week.  Law-abiding homeowners however are a different story: easy pickings for the City, and ensures those fat cat pensions are paid through fines and liens on your property.  So what is the resolution?  What do we do as a community?  We’ve increased the City payload for, “public safety and vital services,” with Measure A and Measure Z, so what gives?  Just what the heck did we create those Ward Action Teams for?

We’ve had two honey oil explosions and two fentanyl bust in our neighborhood, one with no arrest according to the PE within the past year.  Our friends in the extended Wood Streets tell us of other, “houses of ill-repute,” next to them.  Between the criminals and the homeless, it’s beginning to resemble, “Zombieland,” ’round these parts, only without Bill Murray for comedic relief.

Why has RPD failed us, and is that failure due to leadership of our Chief of Police, Sergio Diaz?

And so we thought, law enforcement and the City doesn’t care if you are selling drugs and pimping … as long as you are doing it quietly.  That is the message they are sending the community: ‘if you can’t beat them, join them.’  We are facetiously suggesting to all our neighbors to sell ‘drugs,’ because it’s easy,  profitable, and the City seemingly cannot do anything about it.  The Wood Streets can become the City’s new Red Light District – now there’s Innovation for you!  One neighbor told me they can only depend on three people in Wood Streets these days: themselves, Smith & Wesson.  Hello San Bernardino, and thank you Councilman Mike Gardner, Mayor Rusty Bailey and Chief Sergio Diaz!  Hell, it seems that the Feds are doing a better job of drug enforcement in the City of Riverside than RPD.

And so we offer you the tale of Riverside resident, David Silva, and remind you that the more things change in the ‘Ole River City, the more they stay the same…because we keep re-electing the same dopes and their protege.

THE FOLLOWING STORY WAS WRITTEN BY AUTHOR DAVID SILVA, FIRST PUBLISHED IN THE INLAND EMPIRE WEEKLY, CORONA, CA, ON OCTOBER 4, 2007, I THOUGHT IT BE FITTING TO RELEASE THIS STORY TODAY, OCTOBER 4, 2017:

Open drug dealing in a quiet Riverside neighborhood is perfectly ignorable if you’re the police–but if you’re a resident?

The neighbors to the right of us are moving, which bothers me like you wouldn’t believe. Good neighbors are hard to come by, and these folks–a couple and their three small children–were good neighbors. My wife talked to the husband, who confirmed what we already knew: The family was moving to get away from the drug dealers.

If it were just he and his wife, they’d try to stick it out, he said. But they had kids to think about, and the dealers were a problem that wouldn’t go away. They’d tried getting the city to do something, but nothing had been done and there was every reason to believe nothing would continue being done. For all practical purposes, our little corner of central Riverside had been ceded to the drug trade. No one at City Hall seemed to care, and the Riverside cops were invisible.

Was the husband bitter about any of this?

“I’m selling to the worst buyer I can find,” he said. “For every car the buyer agrees to park on the grass, I’m dropping the price $10,000.”

From what we could tell, the plight of the neighbors to the right of us affected the neighbors to the left of us not at all. Those neighbors, who we refer to as “the dealers next door” to distinguish them from our other neighbors, don’t care about quality of life or property values, and they sure as hell don’t care about who lives next to them. These neighbors–a constantly shifting assortment of parents, adult siblings, aunts, uncles and assorted nephews and nieces–appear to care about only one thing: making money as fast as they can by selling drugs to anyone who wants them.

With an invisible police department and a city hall that can’t be bothered, business is booming.

Like casinos and 7-Elevens, drug houses are a 24-hour enterprise, and the enterprise next door is no exception. Every hour of every day, the local tweakers beat a path to our neighbors’ door. My wife and I hear them as we climb into bed at night and we hear them when we get up in the morning, and if you’re wondering how we can tell it’s them with the windows closed and the curtains drawn, then you’ve never lived next door to speed dealers. Let me describe it for you: First you hear the shuffling shoes of the sleep deprived and calcium depleted, followed by the nervous whistle from the sidewalk, then the murmured hand-off of cash and poison ( “mumble-mumble-thanks, dude” ), and then a more hurried shuffle away from the scene of the crime. From start to finish, it sounds like this: shuffle-shuffle-whistle-mumble-mumble-“thanks, dude”-shuffle-shuffle. Twenty-four hours a day. Seven days a week.

Sometimes I’ll take my dog out for a late-night piddle on the front lawn, and find I’ve stepped right into the middle of a drug score. A dealer neighbor and his tweaker client look up startled, cash and baggie disappear in a flurry into pockets, and then they mill about looking at their shoes while my dog finishes his business so I can go back inside. Once, I stepped out with the dog and found myself in the middle of what appeared to be a skinhead reunion–six or seven muscular shitheels with Iron Cross tattoos who didn’t startle or mill, but, instead, stared at me with dead eyes until I scooped up my still-peeing dog and stepped back into the house.

It hasn’t always been thus. When my wife first told me she suspected something amiss next door, my reaction was disbelief. The street we live on is–was–fairly tight-knit, with neighbors looking out for one another’s property and most of us fairly aware of one another’s business. We know, for example, that the old man across the street, two doors down, is a contractor whose daughter died in a terrible car accident 10 years back, and that the neighbor on our side of the street, three doors to the right, is a former gang banger who renounced his ways when his child was born and now lives the straight life driving a tow truck–if driving a tow truck can be called a straight existence. Someone would have had to be insane to deal on this block, I reasoned. The neighbor across the street, two doors to the left, was a Riverside cop who frequently parked her squad car in her driveway, for Christ’s sake.

More than that, the dealers next door were a part of this blue-collar community; they’ve lived here longer than we have. The older kids went to the same school as my stepson. We know them by name.

“You’re paranoid,” I told my wife. “They couldn’t possibly be selling drugs next door.”

But, of course, they were.

As much as I wanted to hope for the best, that our neighbors were just incredibly popular people whose friends happened to be jittery insomniacs, it soon became impossible to deny the obvious. The dealers next door were simply too blatant about it. I could ignore the round-the-clock comings and goings and the neighbors’ increasingly odd behavior, such as washing their cars and mowing the lawn at four in the morning. But I couldn’t ignore the cash and the baggies and the skinhead conventions and the 16-year-old girls passed out on the lawn.

Finally, I did what any Riverside police or city official could have done had they cared enough to bother: I walked outside, grabbed the first medium-sized tweaker I saw, and asked him where I could score some speed. He immediately pointed to my neighbor’s front door.

“Don’t tell anyone I told you, OK?”

Of course, I wouldn’t, I told him. And the truth is, at the time, I wasn’t sure what I was going to do next. I hated the notion of reporting my neighbors to the cops. It just went against my blood. I come from a large family whose sons and daughters are geniuses at getting in trouble. My uncle was a pallbearer at John Gotti’s funeral; my father spent two years on the run from the FBI for a botched store robbery. When I was a kid, running to my mom when my brother hit me meant getting punished for being a rat.

“I’m not a rat,” I told my wife, who sighed and pointed out that I was, in fact, a journalist, meaning that I ratted for a living. Still, I advised caution.

“Just let it play itself out,” I said. “We’ve got a cop living across the street, and these idiots are dealing in the open. They’ll get busted without any help from us.”

Three months and about a kilo’s worth of drug deals later, I began to see the flaw in my logic. With a cop living on our block, the Riverside PD apparently feels we’re already covered. No one– no one – –patrols our street. Sure, the dealers next door do their business in the open. But so does the guy who goes up and down the block selling corn out of a stolen shopping cart. No one busts him either.

This new awareness, that a cargo plane full of Afghan heroin could land on our lawn and the cops wouldn’t notice, came right at the same time one of the dealers’ regular tweaker clients was spotted marching up and down our block with a butcher knife in his hand. It was time to get serious. Back in the day, none of my people would have ever dreamt of running to the police. But I had to accept that, back in the day, my people would have simply thrown the dealers in the back of a van and taken them for a long drive in the woods. I’m not the woodsy type, so I dropped a dime instead.

The call was routed to what the police receptionist described as an undisclosed location ( where, presumably, Riverside’s crack narcotics unit discusses drug policy with Vice President Cheney ), and answered by a sergeant, who promised me he’d look into the matter. When a month passed and nothing happened, my wife placed several calls to Riverside Mayor Ron Loveridge, who returned none of them until she left the following message: “Yeah, I’m calling again about the drug dealers next door. You might also be getting a call from my husband, who, by the way, is a journalist whose friends include reporters from the L.A. Times and KFWB and a producer for Fox News.”

That call was returned in five minutes, and resulted in Loveridge sending one of his aides to meet with us. The aide, a diminutive young fellow who wisecracked that he’d seen it all in Riverside but whose baby fat caused us to doubt that sincerely, listened carefully to our complaints and took notes and promised he’d look into the matter.

Days turned into weeks and weeks turned into months, and if the narcotics sergeant and the mayor’s aide were looking into the matter, they weren’t looking next door. We called several times to check on the status of the case, and, depending on who we spoke with, were told that police had raided the house and found nothing, that the matter was still “being looked into,” or to call back on Monday because Riverside’s crack narcotics unit didn’t work weekends.

I work from home, and if the home next door had been raided, it was a masterwork of stealth. To be fair, though, I suppose the raid could have taken place while I was in the bathroom.

Months passed. The seasons came and went. Downtown, City Hall proudly unveiled its ( now ) $1.3 billion Riverside Renaissance Initiative, in which 30 years worth of public improvements would be built in five years. Next door, the dealers put in a drive-through, clearing out their garage so their customers could breezily pull in and out for fast and friendly service. Instead of “shuffle-shuffle-whistle,” we now heard “vroom-vroom-honk-honk.”

Here at home, I began pushing my wife for permission to buy a shotgun.

The city of Riverside is, as you read this, flinging itself headlong into massive debt in a balls-out effort to transform itself into an upscale shopping and high-end residential paradise. Meanwhile, the mayor and the Riverside Police Department are flummoxed on what to do about a single family committing class-E felonies on the sidewalk in broad daylight. This doesn’t inspire confidence in the city’s ability to get a job done.

In fact, my wife and I lost so much confidence that we’ve also decided to move. We’re looking around, and when we find a place that cares enough to enforce the law, we’re taking our dogs, our cats, and our taxable income, and leaving.

Are we bitter about this? All I’ll say is that when we sell, we’re giving the dealers next door first right of refusal.   – DAVID SILVA, AUTHOR

Part II to come…

IS COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS UP FOR A RECALL BY THE DEMOCRATS OF GREATER RIVERSIDE?

HUGH HEFNER ON FREE SPEECH:

1926-2017

“I want to live in a society that people can voice unpopular opinions because I know as result of that a society grows and matures,”   – Hugh Hefner

MISSING JERRY:

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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE: WILL GRESHAM SAVAGELY COVER THE GRAY AREAS OF A BAD DEAL, WITH NO HIGHLIGHTS?

Posted: November 12, 2015 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1

Two men making a deal isolated at the white background

THE GRESHAM SAVAGE DEAL: A WIN, WIN FOR GRESHAM SAVAGE, AGAIN AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE!

The taxpayers just bought a $40 million dollar building, how do we help maintain it?  Sublease some space from a partner in crime know as the legal outfit of Gresham Savage?  With that in mind, the City Attorneys office who gets paid by the taxpayer will be paying rent in their new taxpayer paid building.

gscityleaseagreement

CLICK THIS TO VIEW FULL COUNCIL MEMORANDUM ON THIS ISSUE

So how does all this benefit the taxpayer?  It won’t, the fact of the matter is that it will cost an additional $411.035.00 from the taxpayer!  Currently, the City Attorneys occupation of the 5th Floor of City Hall has a yearly cost of $208,039.00.  The total annual cost in rent the City would pay to Grease-Them-Savagley would be $548,046.00.  Bad deal at a cost to the taxpayer.  Of course the other side are emphasizing that we need the space!  We are hiring more attorneys and the cubicles at City Hall do not allow for privacy for sensitive legal issues.  But why is the City Attorney’s Office anticipating hiring more lawyers?  The City of Riverside already has approximately about 13 (not sure)? But we want to hire more, not to include all the other outside legal firms we may have contracted and on retainer.  City of Moreno Valley with a population of 200K has two attorney’s.  The City of Murreta with a population of 100K has one. The question, is how many laws suits against the City are we receiving?  If that is what is happening, why is it happening?  Why is the City receiving so much liability?

This completely smells of Deja Vu with the bad deal made with Developer Mark Rubin’s building Citrus Towers.  We initially assumed Best, Best & Krieger’s lease so that they could move to his new building.  RPU taking over this lease to move into this gold plated building, cost the taxpayers a pretty penny which shouldn’t have happened, because we had plenty of taxpayer properties that could have been occupied at low  expense.  But is this culture of elitism whereby the real interest of the taxpayers doesn’t really matter?  What happened to public service and public servants?

TMC did a story on this very issue back in July 2011 called: I’LL TAKE A DOUBLE RUBIN ON A BB&K WITH RPU ON THE SIDE!

At this time the City Attorney’s Office, along with Riverside Public Utilities will now reside in the $40 million dollar Wells Fargo building.  With that in mind, the best part is that the City, in the best of interest of the taxpayer was able to negotiate a rate of $2.50 per rentable square foot to $2.25 per square foot. Along with this there will also be a one time cost of a $125, 000.00 to cover the cost of moving, new furniture, fixtures and equipment.  This at a time when City Manager John Russo is going around town to public meetings stating that we don’t have money and need tighten our belts.

Untitled-2

According to local residents, the City refuses to give a tour to them on this Gold Plated building.  You paid for a $40 million dollar building, but you can’t see what you bought!  Is the America you want to live in?  One was told that City Manager John Russo and even Councilman Mike Gardner said “no!”  As a result, following records request was sent by Attorney Raychele Sterling.

To: Nicole Roa <droa@riversideca.gov>, jrusso@riversideca.gov, ggeuss@riversideca.gov, Sherry Morton-Ellis <SMorton@riversideca.gov>, “Nicol, Colleen” <cnicol@riversideca.gov>, “Allen, Susan” <sallen@riversideca.gov>
Cc: Alicia Robinson <arobinson@pe.com>, cmacduff@pe.com, “Davis, Paul” <pdavis@riversideca.gov>

In light of the Public Utilities Director’s and Councilman Mike Gardner’s (with the alleged concurrence of the City Manager) refusal to permit a tour of the recently remodeled PU facility located on University Avenue by members of the community who are critical of PU’s extravagant expenditures (while allowing other  non-critical members of the public to observe the facility), please make the following available for my review:

1) Entire project file for the PU Board Room/Multi Purpose Room remodel (including all photographs).

2) All Purchase Orders and Purchase Requisitions for the past 5 years for the procurement of any furniture (module or stationary), electronics (excluding PCs, Printers, Photocopiers), art, photography or sculptures, appliances (including refrigerators, dishwashers, microwaves etc.) flooring, tile and carpet for Riverside Public Utilities.

3) A list of all participants (including the Chamber of Commerce members) in ANY tour of ANY City Facility and all accompanying releases of liability for the past 5 years. I personally have observed and participated in tours of the Sewer Treatment Plant, RERC, Orange Square and Utilities Plaza, as well as witnessed the execution of releases of liability by members of the public for such tours.

4) Any current policies and procedures regarding touring of City facilities by members of the public. 5) All releases for PU’s “Bring Your Daughter to Work Day”, as well as a list of the facilities where these individuals were permitted to be for the past five years.

6) All releases for any “Bring your Child to Work Day”, “Shadow the Mayor Day” or “Shadow a Council Member Day”, Grade School tours, or the like, and a list of any and all facilities these individuals were permitted to be in for the past five years.

7) List of any currently scheduled or proposed tours of ANY City Facility by any individuals or group. Please identify the facilities intended to be toured.

8) A List of all PU facilities (please identify specific rooms as well) that were open to the public to attend City and/or Utility meetings within the past 5 years.

9) A list of all City employees who have provided tours of ANY City facility to members of the public.

Upon review, I will determine what documents I would like to duplicated. Thank you

Raychele Sterling, Esq.

WHAT IS THE STORY ON THIS SMALL PIECE OF CITY LAND THAT A BASKETBALL COURT AND TENNIS COURT WERE BUILT ON?

No one seems to know how a Tennis Court and Basketball Court was built on City Land!  Even Development Director Emilio Ramirez didn’t have an answer for Council.  The issue (Item #14) was removed from the Consent Calender by Council.  According to Ramirez, City documents could not be found which showed a timeline of permits for building etc.

Untitled-2

CLICK ON PIC TO ENLARGE

  pic    1    2

CLICK ABOVE IMAGES TO ENLARGE 

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

FUN AND GAMES WITH ENDORSEMENTS, FEATURING COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER AND THE SEIU

Posted: May 12, 2015 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,
8

iloveny

 

MATCH THESE FAMOUS SLOGANS:

“I love __________.”                                                                                          Texas

“Don’t mess with _________!”                                                                             Riverside

“What happens in _______ stays in _______.”                                                       New York

“________: There’s simply no conflict-of-interest we can’t ignore.”                           Vegas

 

Ok, well maybe the last one isn’t quite famous yet, but our City leaders sure are trying their best. Whether it be the Chamber/Riverside Public Utilities insider dealing, the systemic rigging of quasi-judicial hearings, or the longstanding practice of City execs hiring investigators to clear themselves of allegations with your money, the City is the paragon of duplicity when it comes to conflicts-of-interests.  In fact, we hear the City recently received the Platinum Prime Select Ace A-1 Lifetime Achievement Award for Bestest, Transcendent, and Outstanding Illusion of Transparency and Fairness demonstrated by local government.

This award, chosen by the preeminent body judging such matters that no one has ever heard of – Twenty Kilometers of Crraption (not affiliated with this site…nudge, wink) – was in fact, bought and paid for, by the City itself.  It’s that dedication to underhandedness, which demonstrates the City’s deservedness (a word we just created) of this distinction.  Cities of Bell, Vernon, City of Industry?  Morons!  They’ve got nothing on our dear River City; and secondly, they all got caught!

As it’s election season, we figured we’d offer another interesting (or not) anecdote about how the endorsement game works in our dear municipal corporation (aka, city).  The players: Ward 1 Councilman Mike Gardner, SEIU Political Coordinator Becky Whatley, the SEIU (Service Employee International Union), and a cameo by Ward 1 Challenger, Tom Podgorski.

SEIU Town Hall

CLICK ABOVE IMAGE TO VIAGRA-IZE

 

Both Ward 1 candidates were invited to a SEIU “endorsement” Town Hall meeting on February 26, 2015 by SEIU Political Coordinator, Becky Whatley.  The SEIU routinely holds these events before elections and gives not just their atta-boy endorsement, but also a fair amount of cold hard cash to the person it sees as most sympathetic to its cause.  Seems innocent enough.  We’ve learned the hard way though that nothing is ever what it seems here in Riverside, and so we decided to start digging.

Turns out, Ms. Whatley wears several hats in town: one of them happens to be Councilman Gardner’s former campaign manager.  We hear that she’s been telling folks, including publicly at a recent Latino Network event, that she’s Gardner’s CURRENT campaign manager!

whatley service

THE NOT-SO-SECRET LIFE OF BECKY WHATLEY

 

Another hat Ms. Whatley adorns is that of small business owner, running a local printing company: Quality Printing. [Sarcasm alert] Surprise, surprise, Whatley has been getting paid by Councilman Gardner to do his mailings, invitations, and response envelopes!  She was also instrumental on setting up Gardner’s fundraiser on February 11, 2015, being reimbursed for drinks and desserts.

quality printing

 

gardner 460       gardnerb 460

A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, BUSINESS AS USUAL, OR BOTH? 

 

So….Ms. Whatley was Councilman Gardner’s campaign manager during his last election.  She was cavorting about town telling folks she is currently his campaign manager.  She is organizing his fundraisers and getting paid thousands to print his campaign materials.  Meanwhile, she was presenting herself to newbie challenger Tom Podgorski as the non-biased, Political Coordinator of the local SEIU, hoping he would never catch on….well, at least until it was too late.

Rumor has it Mr. Podgorski was given the run-around in the days leading up to this Town Hall meeting.  Dates were changed, questionnaires required at the last second, etc., etc., eventually leading him to cancel his participation in the event all-together and forgo the SEIU’s endorsement.  Too bad, because we bet the SEIU’s membership would’ve liked his message…but that’s exactly what the other side didn’t want.  So, Podgorski was given a Hobson’s choice: waste his time participating in a rigged scheme, or drop out.  To his credit, he chose the latter.

We hope Mr. Podgorski is familiar with Aesop’s Fables.  This lesson is entitled The Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing.

wolf   gardner endorsements

DID THE SEIU GET USED?  OR WAS IT “IN” ON THE GAME FROM THE ONSET?

As you can also see from the above image, Mike Gardner is supported by Ward 7 Candidate, John Burnard, and vice versa.  It’s just how the game works: you scratch my back with donations and endorsements, I’ll scratch yours with votes and appointments (Ms. Whatley serves as Gardner’s choice for the Parks & Recreation Commission).  It’s the dirty pool that’s been played in Riverside for quite a long time now…we’re just shining a light on it in all it’s despicable glory.  If you want change, vote for Tom Podgorski in Ward 1 and Alysia Webb in Ward 7.  Unless you’ve been dealt “in” on the fixed game, we don’t see how you can afford not to.

It almost goes without saying whom the SEIU eventually ended up endorsing, but we figured we’d show you anyway, on the slick mailer Ms. Whatley most likely put together for him:

gardner mailer

RIVERSIDE’S MOST WANTED, GARDNER ENDORSERS, OR BOTH?

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST, “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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: RUSH TO JUDGEMENT BY THE THREE STOOGES?…..HOLY CONSPIRACY BATMAN!

Posted: August 22, 2014 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
2

TTstoogessoubirouspicturescorporation

RIVERSIDE’S OWN THREE STOOGES: SHEMP BAILEY, LARRY BARBER AND THE INCOMPARABLE AND GOD LIKE (ACCORDING TO RPOA PRESIDENT BRIAN SMITH) MOE DIAZ!  ANOTHER EPISODE OF MALICE IN THE PALACE AT CITY HALL?

THE JULY 22, 2014 COUNCILMAN MIKE SOUBIROUS HEARING INVESTIGATING CHARTER VIOLATIONS AND A HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT BY CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER AND CHIEF OF POLICE SERGIO DIAZ RESORTING TO PREFIDIOUS THIRD PARTY INFORMATION. (CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW ON YOUTUBE).  ALSO NONE OF THE INTERVIEWEES WERE SWORN OATH.  SECONDLY, GUMPORT MASTAN FAILED TO UPHOLD SOUBIROUS “DUE PROCESS” BY OUR US CONSTITUTION’S FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.  IT APPEARS THAT THIS LAW FIRM ATTEMPTED TO “WING” IT.

WE SAW THE RUSH TO JUDGEMENT BY THE THREE…THE THREE STOOGES IN THE COUNCILMAN MIKE SOUBIROUS INVESTIGATIONAL DEBACLE, BUT WHAT ABOUT COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS?  WAS THERE A PROBLEM REGARDING THE PAUL DAVIS INVESTIGATION?  The City of Riverside’s contract with the law firm Gumport Mastan was signed and dated a day before it should have been voted on it in closed session by council for the following day.  This opens up the question, have there been other instances of criminal activity such as this with reference to Brown Act violations.  Is this conspiratorial behavior a pattern with certain council members and staff?  Is signing a contract before council approving a contract a commong practice?  The April 14, 2014 document below displays City Manager Scott Barbers thanks to Councilmember/Mayor ProTemp Steve Adams and Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey.  I find this rather eGREGious in the fact that the very next day City Attorney Greg Priamos placed the issue to be heard on April 22, 2014 in a Closed Session conference.

SCOTTMEMOONE    SCOTTMEMOTWO    SCOTTMEMOTHREEthanks

EMAIL MEMORANDUM BY THE WHINER HIMSELF, CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER (click image to enlarge above)

TWENTYSECOND

PRIAMOS PLACES ISSUE TO BE HEARD IN CLOSED SESSIONS(click image to enlarge above)

Now remember the Closed Session meeting of which the Councilman Paul Davis is to be heard is on April 22, 2014.  What happens next, is again eGREGious is that the contract with the Los Angeles Law Firm of Gumport Mastan is signed April 21, 2014, the day before the hearing!  Of course it was eGREGiously solidified by our City Attorney Greg Priamos.  Should he be disbarred?

SIGNING

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL CONTRACT SIGNED BY COUNCILMAN & MAYOR PRO-TEMP STEVE ADAMS AGAINST COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS FOR THE ATTORNEY SERVICES OF GUMPORT MASTAN…THE SAME FIRM HIRED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE TO DEFEND DAVIS IN A DIFFERENT CASE!

On April 22, 2014, one of these two closed session items below were to discuss Councilman Paul Davis’s Investigation.

frntpageagendaprill22

 CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL AGENDA

We believe that this investigation was hatched, plotted and conducted totally behind closed doors.  There were “Secret Meetings” at hand.  There are generally three topics that keep public official’s discussion of any topic behind closed doors – and even those sessions are audio recorded in case of lawsuit or other court order.  They are union bargaining, discussing employee performance/adverse action such as punishment for wrong-doing and potential/pending lawsuits against the City.  That’s about it.  Conduct of elected officials IS NOT on that list.  And employees that file complaints are not on that list – only THEIR job performance, not anything or everything related to there employment such as filing against their boss or elected officials.
The City conducted “Secret Meetings” all at taxpayer expense to ensure that Diaz’ and Barber’s job positions were secure.  That’s the bottom line here.  Quite remarkable!  Diaz is already receiving a pension from LAPD for almost a quarter million!  The unfortunate double dipping continues with the new hiring of the Fire Chief Michael D. Moore!  Is this a continuing saga in how the unions can allow retirement pensions at an early term, then most employees, of course are not really ready to retire, so they go for another position somewhere else!  Is Double Dipping a new blood sport for public employees, because of unions?  This is another aspect of the abuse of taxpayer monies, which of course, doesn’t occur in the private sector!  I have nothing against the guy, but if you are going to retire, retire… most don’t, it only appears as another opportunity to start all over again, to take more taxpayer money.  Shame on him if this is the case.  My point is, that the retirement system is broken and open to abuse by public employees!
images-8
So if acceptable to discuss and plot behind “Closed Doors,” then why was it suddenly okay to bring it before the public (The Soubirous’ “Hearing”)?  And, if it something that can be discussed in open session (which it was on July 22nd) then why was it even discussed at all behind closed doors?  Can’t have it both ways.  RPOA President, Sergeant Brian Smith says in his first Council appearance that he met with City Manager Scott Barber and Chief of Police Sergio Diaz,  and they decided to investigate.  In Barber’s memo in the Davis’ investigation, he closes with his memo to Beetle Bailey and the Mr. Liability himself, Adams – “Thank you for investigating” this.  Wow, all these were decided BEHIND CLOSED DOORS – “Secret Meetings” before it went to Council – who heard this behind closed doors  “Secret Meetings.”  Cover Up at City Hall.  Or maybe Monte “City” Hall – what’s behind Door #1?  Let’s Make A Deal Show… SICK!  Folks we have something more egregious than Bell.  Eat your heart out Cindy Roth, no more taxpayer hand outs!
So what we have is the Clowns on the Cowncil bought into a plan that was hatched behind closed doors.  Scott, Sergio, Steve and Rusty all collaborated in Illegal Secret Meetings to craft, orchestrate and design how they would each file – they went to their respective (disrespective) offices and crafted “complaint” memos, after knowing what each other had just discussed – Holy Conspiracy Batman!
 
THE DOUBLE HIGH BALL AT MARIO’S PLACE, DID IT CURE THE RESIDENTS PAIN OF THEIR EXCESSIVE TAXES AND FAUX DROUGHT RESTRICTIONS?  NO, NO, NO CHIEF DIAZ! WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT MENS BALLS…IT’S “HIGH BALL”, IT’S A DRINK..
mgmarios
Councilman Mike Gardner came into a high-falutin bar known as Mario’s Place Restaurant on University Avenue, with what was reported as an “angry” or “agitated” demeanor and ordered up a “High Ball.”   He sucked it down in a one gulp, placed his glass firmly on the bar, and quickly and asked the bartender to get him another…  He drank that one down in a quick gulp sitting again, paid his bill and left….  With two high balls under the Councilman’s belt, did he leave to do the work of the people driving off into the sunset DUI’ing on his Segway?
train2014
By the way, this is what we call hearsay, TMC received this by first party information, but sometimes the city would like to deal with third party information, as in the Soubirous investigation, as if it was first party information.  Was he sober on this train?  Council member’s, be very careful of about what bar you’re patronizing and who is sitting next to you, it could be a good friend of Vivian’s.

COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER’S DRINK RECIPE FOR A “HIGH BALL” IS AS FOLLOWS:

Instructions

Simple as the highball may be, it’s not without principles:

Use a tall — at least 12 ounces — narrow-mouthed glass (which preserves the bubbles). Put in the ice — 2 or 3 cubes are plenty. Some Brits prefer theirs without ice. Let ’em go it on their own hook.

Next, pour your chosen liquor — the highball began as a whiskey drink, but soon became less exclusive — over the ice. Don’t slug it: it’s better to have two pleasant belts than one knuckle-duster (although if the drink’s potency is the result of a bartender’s kindness, it would of course be churlish to kick about it). For normal use, 2 or 3 ounces should do nicely.

Finally, pour in the sparkling water (club soda or seltzer). If at all possible, this should be refrigerated in order to keep the ice from melting prematurely and drowning the bubbles. How much fizz? Less than twice the amount of hooch is too strong, more than three times too weak.

No need to stir — if the water’s got any life left in it, the bubbles will take care of that. In any case, avoid stirring with metal, which is supposed to “squelch” the bubbles. “If one of your guests is stir-crazy,” our 1949 Handbook for Hosts advises, “give him a plastic or glass swizzle stick.” In any case, serve it up immediately.

A TRIBUTE TO RIVERSIDE’S OWN WRITER FOR THE PRESS ENTERPRISE…DAN BERSTEIN.  SOMEONE WHO COULD TAKE THE CITY’S SPIN ON PERCEPTION AND GIVE RIVERSIDE RESIDENTS PERSPECTIVE!
bersteinANOTHER FINE RENDITION BY ARTIST DONALD HERMAN COLLINS GALLEGOS (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)  THANKS AGAIN DON!
WHAT WOULD THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE DO IF OUR VERY OWN INCOMPARABLE CHIEF OF POLICE DIDN’T HAVE A FEMININE SIDE…
diaztoutou
AND OF COURSE, WE AS A COMMUNITY EMBRACE THAT…
AS A TMC REPORTER, I WOULDN’T SEE IT PASS MY DISCRETION THAT THE TWO (BARBER AND DIAZ) WERE REALLY OUT FOR THEMSELVES, AS OPPOSED TO THEIR LOYALTY TO THE TAXPAYER.
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED 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, WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: D.A. FILES NO CHARGES DAY AFTER APRIL FOOLS ON WRIGHT! WILL CHARGES BE FILED AGAINST PEPPER ON CLAPPING?

Posted: July 8, 2013 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
17

wrightpepper3

DA FILES NO CHARGES DAY AFTER APRIL FOOLS, BUT IT’S NO PISSING CONTEST EITHER!

Karen Wright, Was her actions Illegal or Just Bad Business? Or just an April Fools day prank by the D.A.’s Office?  The Day after April Fool’s Day Community Activist, Karen Wright received this letter from the Office of the District Attorney, Paul Zellerbach.  What’s foolish about the whole thing is that April Fools Day was the 160th day without the DA filing charges.  The day Ms. Wright showed up to court in December 2012 could have been the first April Fools experience!  The DA never showed because they never filed charges.  Many in the community are asking if this is why scrutiny is now being placed on D.A Zellerbach’s office after a series of questionable actions.  In Ms. Wright’s case, she even had to call to find out what the DA’s plans were, since they didn’t have the common courtesy to call her and postone the court day.  Now according to the below letter, she appears to be tried and convicted by the DA’s office.  The DA states, “You are advised that your actions on that occasion were criminal, and are punishable by a fine of up to the amount of $1,000.00 and /six months in the county jail.”  It certainly seems a bit wreckless to create that assumption, being the very actions could have been challenged in the court of law, of course, her civil rights being infringed.  If this ever happened or was the case, I’d suggest anyone to take case out of Riverside.  But the bottom line if this was criminal and punishable, why no charges?

KWDALetter

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW ZELLERBACH’S LETTER TO KAREN WRIGHT

Now, we know according to Zellerbach letter, talking 16.8 seconds after the bell, it is a crime.  So why wasn’t Mike Fine arrested when he past the bell beyond the 16 second rule?  It’s quite possible that maybe it’s just important to cover your bases with campaign contributions.  Possibly according to public records Zellerbach has.  But I guess when citizens have true concerns they all appear to be dismissed as not applicable, or in Zellerbach’s famous words, “Is it illegal, or just bad business?” when it comes to the antics of elected officials.

Citizens participating in government are not called patriots; they are called gadflies. Newspapers perpetuate this idea that involved citizens are pests of the public process. This is a government of, by and for the elite — not we, the people!  -Commenter Paul Jacobs from Temecula

More information continues to come out regarding Zellerbach office, according to The Rusted Bell (No relation to the Mayor), there’s a Federal Complaint to filed against his office.  This in a case involving a Temecula Sheriff’s Deputy intentionally and deliberately leaving drugs in home where a 14 year child resided.  The victims of a home based laptop business alleged they were searched in a series of three occasions, robbed at gun point.  Allegedly Temecula Sheriff’s Department even used Walmart loss prevention agents to storm house.   A complaint issued to the DA’s office by the small business has fallen on deaf ears by the D.A.’s office.  Family alleges that the DA’S office handled by Paul Zellerbach is deliberately and intentionally stalling time to allow for limitations to run out on these Officers and Civilians (Walmart Loss Prevention Agents..) Victims intend to have ALL past Search Warrants involving this Team of Officers Reviewed.

Something which is interesting, word is coming down the pipeline from an anonymous source that Zellerbach in his younger days may have crossed the line.  Did Zellerbach have a stalking issue with a former girlfriend years ago?  What would this mean now if anything, about Zellerbach’s current disposition?

zellerbach

WHAT DID YOU EXPECT ME TO DO?

In response to the accusations that there may be a strained relaltions between his DA’s office and Riverside Police Department, Zellerbach fired back according to statement from the City News Service, “This shouldn’t be a pissing contest where one calls out the other for not doing something,” he said, “We work hand-in-hand.”  Ahh.. the visual on that last statement by Paul just didn’t sit right..  Who uses phrases as this in a news conference?  This news conference was in reference to the allegation that some domestic violence cases take a back seat in Riverside County.  Well whatever the case may be, Zellerbach may be up for the competition.  “Any takers?”

A question for City News, “Are you on file with the DA’s Office for this reporting, as TMC is?”

In an incident that made national news, Public Speaker Karen Wright appeared at her December 27th court date regarding her charge of disrupting a public meeting.  Later found through a public request act of the police report, City Attorney Gregory Priamos had given instruction to RPD Officer Sahagun to stop Wright from going past the three minute allotted time by sixteen seconds.

Staff Photographer                           zellerbach22

Riverside City Attorney Greg Priamos               Riverside DA Paul Zellerbach

It also appears that City Attorney Greg Primos made an important journal, the American Bar Association Journal, which states, “City Attorney Blaimed for Arrest of Woman, 60, Who Exceeded the 3 minute Speech Limit at Council Meeting.”  One commenter on the journal stated, Nothing says: “We really do value citizens’ opinions on Council business!” like armed police ready to cuff speakers for exceeding the three-minute limit.

The fun simply never seems to stop with the Priamos’s, it must be it the blood.  Take a gander at this L.A. Times Article where no one seems to know who paid the sports players at USC, but Greg’s name keeps coming up!  First, the wife then the twins… sound like a skit of “Who’s on first!”

The situation became increasingly incomprehensible when Priamos would not comment do to “attorney-client privilege.”  Attorney client privilege?  That’s what we said…  In lieu things continued to take a strange turn when the filing by the Paul Zellerbach’s District Attorney’s office was never issued.  Karen was told by the court to call the DA’s office to find out if the DA intends to file or not.  Attorney Letitia Pepper attempted to request the issue be addressed in court so she could ask for a dismissal.  The court would not allow this.  The waiting game continues, since the DA did not have the courtesy to follow through, the justice system leaves Ms. Wright in the dark at this point, and she herself must make the effort to contact and find out their intentions.  How many DA departments be connected to and placed on hold to ask the question, “Mr. DA, do you plan to file charges against me?”  Could this inaction by the DA’s office be construed as a continued form of harassment toward Ms. Wright?  Or to continue the confusion so a warrant for her arrest is issued?  That’s so Riverside.  Most Riversidian’s agree, the Council and Mayor should have dropped the charges rather than enduring more city embarrassment, but currently the DA appears to be dancing around the issue..  So what is DA Paul Zellerbach’s relationship with the City of Riverside?  Possibly with BB&K?  The Riverside Grand Jury?  Local Superior Court Judges?  The Attorney General Office of the State of California?  and of course local cronies?  Well…

zellerback

Outdance the DA on the current issues?  Tough competition, any takers?

One of the first items for new Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey would have been to drop charges.  Currently, Chief Sergio Diaz has yet to publicly apologize to Ms. Wright for his behavior and unrestrained verbality toward her earlier this year at a City Council Meeting.  No complaints were issued against Chief Diaz by Wright.  Chief Diaz was not arrested at this incident for his disturbance at Council Chambers.  So it appears that there may two sets of rules, one for officials and one for residents, which seems to go against the very fabric of what this nation was built on.

So the citation issued by the police lists a court date. You check the docket the day before and can’t find your name, you call the DA and they say they are still consulting. You are then in a position where you still have to go to court because you don’t want to have the DA file at the last minute, you not show and the judge issue a bench warrant. You also don’t want to appear in court without an attorney, so you have that exspence. I’m sorry but it looks like they are unfairly jerking Ms. Wright around. This case should have been dismissed. Shame on the city of Riverside and shame on the DA. – Kevin Dawson, Commenter on the PE

Just wait until the trial and CA Greg Priamos takes the stand under oath and has to testify who ordered him to order the officer to “stop” her. I don’t think his “apology” will quite cut it here.  – Mary Shelton, Commenter on the PE

Acording to the Press Enterprise, John Hall, Spokesman for the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office, state they didn’t have enough time to investigate.

Judge_Hall

John Hall, Spokeshole Spokesperson for the Riverside City DA’s Office

Okay John! this can expressly be construed as the DA does not have a case.  Hall went on to say, “There’s nothing that we have to do by law to notify anyone that nothing’s going to be done on that particular day.”  Okay John, I get it, you have the power but you had over 8 weeks to figure this out!  What goes?  By the way do you take dance lessons, because it appears you are dancing around the issue as well as the Big Kahuna, Zellerbach.  He further stated according to the Press Enterprise, that in the past six years, only one other case has come in under penal code section § 403 — disturbing a public meeting — and the district attorney ended up filing different charges against the suspect.  Penal Code § 403 states every person who, without authority of law, willfully disturbs or breaks up any assembly or meeting that is not unlawful in its character, other than an assembly or meeting referred to in Section 302 of the Penal Code or Section 18340 of the Elections Code, is guilty of a misdemeanor.  So they couldn’t charge someone with the original arrest charge of penal code § 403 and had to concoct subsequent charge or unlterior trumped up charge?  So why would the DA have to do this? Would it be because of the embarrassment of the whole charge to begin with?  As of January 4, 2013, Wright’s case remains “under review” and remains unlisted on the courts databases.  “Under review?”  Is this code word for “no case?”  It’s only common courtesy that the DA’s office show on a court date, it’s only common courtesy that the DA’s office collaborate with the defendent, otherwise can this be construed by the DA’s office of a pronounce expression of arrogance?  Information for the DA’s Office only.. we have included a printable icon for ease of printability in order for the DA’s office to file TMC articles..

According to a Press Release, Councilman Paul Davis says that City Attorney Gregory Priamos was soley responsible for the directive to arrest Public Speaker Karen Wright if she spoke beyond the three minute rule, completely disregarding the authority of the Council and Mayor.  Again a secondary example was seen when City Attorney Scott Barber spent $2 million dollars without Council approval.  The question many are asking is “Who’s running the store?”, “Who’s in charge?”  According to Columist Dan Bernstein of the Press Enterprise, it really appears that Riverside’s City Attorney Greg Priamos is running the show.  Probably not without the help of the infamous Best, Best & Krieger, which have been siphoning hundred’s of thousands of dollars in legal fees without a contract!  How should we explain this to the taxpayer?  Possibly “attorney client privelidge?”

What about our concerns with Connie Leach, former wife of Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach.  The Grand Jury report was thrown out without a thorough interview process, therefore and incomplete investigation.

Why did Paul Zellerbach’s office not jump on and investigate the illegal transfer of money from the citizens water fund to the General Fund?  You must understand why we had to go to outside Federal agencies.  We couldn’t have him ponder if it was “illegal or just bad business?”

THE CLAPPING GAME, THE MAYOR  AND LETITIA PEPPER…

James Roberts, reporter for the News Caller, covering the High Desert News, gives his play by play analysis of the events that fateful day when a citizen decided to approval clap.  Roberts analyzes the First Amendment, the proper role of government and the nanny state; whereby no ones feeling can be hurt.  Roberts also mentions that there were others clapping while Letitia was clapping.   The question then arises is to why was Ms. Pepper targeted by Mayor Bailey?  According to a statement given to the Press Enterprise, Mayor Bailey stated, ” I felt like she came down there with a purpose to get arrested and to provoke me into that response and she gave me no choice.”

00330 004

CLICK THIS LINK TO GO TO JAMES ROBERTS POSTING AND VIEW VIDEO

PepperExclusive

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW & HEAR AUDIO OF AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW BETWEEN JAMES ROBERTS & LETITIA PEPPER

Letitia Pepper, Esq. sent this letter in a form of an email to the Council and Mayor, July 2, 2013 to reiterate her position on clapping.  Currently the City of Riverside has no rule on clapping, according to Ms. Pepper if would illegal to adopt a clapping rule after the fact.  Mayor Rusty Bailey carries a Political Science Degree from West Point and was also a government teacher at Poly High.

LETLET1          LETLET2

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THIS LETTER IN PDF FORMAT

Currently, according to the Letitia Pepper, Esq., she has attained an actual copy of the citizen arrest complaint against her by Mayor Rusty Bailey.  It appears that Mr. Independent Voice himself, Mayor Rusty Bailey, crossed out the section where it discloses it’s a misdemeanor to make a false arrest.  Who is able to do that?  Again, this appears to always come up time and time again, are there two sets of rules?  One for City Officials and one for the Citizens?  With the city’s track record it certainly appears so.  Regardless, Ms. Letitia Pepper went back to the RPD Station and filed a false arrest complaint against the Mayor Rusty Bailey.  What will happen now, will his pop, Judge Bailey gather his network of friends together to help his son?  Will Councilman Mike Gardner state again this time that she deserved it, as in Karen Wright’s case?

BF

WONDER HOW MANY TIME MAYOR BAILEY PASSES THIS STATEMENT NEXT TO CITY HALL?

OOPS, THE GRAND JURY JUST RELEASED THERE FINDINGS BUT PRESS ENTERPRISE FORGOT TO MENTION THIS LITTLE TIDBIT OF INFO ABOUT CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS!

b901c3c063264c9045316fe74af81136

According to the Grand Jury report below and the full document to follow, they found that Priamos spilled the beans after he was admonished by the Grand Jury not to discuss any of the details of the Dunbar case.  The City Attorney appears to have thumbed his nose at them and decided to do whatever he pleased, thus violating PC 939.22.  Further,  when Priamos asked for a postponement of the initial interview, the Grand Jury asked an alternate in his office could take his place.  He answered he was the only ‘qualified’ person..  That’s has to be a slap in the face to those who work under him.

The Grand Jury found that the City of Riverside, Office of the City Attorney, did not recognize the responsibilities of the Grand Jury and did not honor the secrecy of the Grand Jury.  On April 12, 16, and 18, 2013, the Grand Jury received correspondence signed by the City Attorney with the subject line “Civil Grand Jury Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, File No. CA 13-0765.”  According to sworn and recorded testimony, the City Attorney stated that after speaking with the Riverside Police Department, he “surmised” the Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, was the subject matter being investigated by the Grand Jury. Had the Grand Jury been investigating this subject matter, all confidentiality on
the part of the Grand Jury would have been compromised, as this document was copied to the following:
The Hon. Mark Cope, Presiding Judge Creg G. Datig, Assistant District Attorney Pamela Wall County Counsel
Scott C. Barber, City Manager
Belinda J. Graham, Assistant City Manager
James E. Brown, Supervising Deputy City Attorney
Frank Hauptmann, Community Police Review Manager4
When asked why he copied these individuals, his response was, “to make them aware of what the Grand Jury was doing”. After being admonished regarding secrecy, on April 22, 2013, the City Attorney filed a Motion and Motion to Modify with the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside that contained Exhibits B and C with the subject, “Civil Grand Jury Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, File No. CA 13-0765,” which is in violation of Penal Code §939.22. On May 20, 2013, the Office of the Riverside County Counsel sent a letter
of admonishment to the City Attorney on behalf of the Grand Jury.
gjpriamos

EMAIL REGARDING MARY SHELTON IN REFERENCE TO THE GRAND JURY FINDINGS AGAINST THE CITY ATTORNEY.

Thank you for your quick response! I do sincerely hope you’re correct and that his interpretation of the grand jury process and its findings is more accurate than his interpretation of Prop 218 and the issue of utility money transfers proved to be.  I’m not the only city resident who’s been watching his performance over time and not become very concerned by a trend rather than an isolated incident.
All my best,

From: “Gardner, Mike” <MGardner@riversideca.gov> To: Mary Shelton Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 6:11 PM Subject: Re: Riverside County GJ reports

I appreciate your concern Mary. However the mere fact a Grand Jury makes findings and recommendations does not make their conclusions accurate. Please read the newspaper story when it runs. I think you will find the findings to be in error in this case. Best regards, Mike Sent from my iPhone On Jul 3, 2013, at 6:07 PM, “mary shelton” wrote: Greetings, I was perusing the Riverside County GJ site the past several days and found reports issued on both the RPD and the Riverside City Attorney’s office.  I am very concerned about the findings issued by the Grand Jury in connection with City Attorney Greg Priamos and his office. I’m especially concerned by the following excerpt which alleges that a violation of PC 939.22 was committed: The Grand Jury found that the City of Riverside, Office of the City Attorney, did not recognize the responsibilities of the Grand Jury and did not honor the secrecy of the Grand Jury. On April 12, 16, and 18, 2013, the Grand Jury received correspondence signed by the City Attorney with the subject line “Civil Grand Jury Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, File No. CA 13-0765.” According to sworn and recorded testimony, the City Attorney stated that after speaking with the Riverside Police Department, he “surmised” the Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, was the subject matter being investigated by the Grand Jury. Had the Grand Jury been investigating this subject matter, all confidentiality on the part of the Grand Jury would have been compromised, as this document was copied to the following: The Hon. Mark Cope, Presiding Judge Creg G. Datig, Assistant District Attorney Pamela Wall County Counsel Scott C. Barber, City Manager Belinda J. Graham, Assistant City Manager James E. Brown, Supervising Deputy City Attorney Frank Hauptmann, Community Police Review Manager4 When asked why he copied these individuals, his response was, “to make them aware of what the Grand Jury was doing”. After being admonished regarding secrecy, on April 22, 2013, the City Attorney filed a Motion and Motion to Modify with the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside that contained Exhibits B and C with the subject, “Civil Grand Jury Investigation of Officer Involved Death of Brandon Dunbar on March 1, 2012, File No. CA 13-0765,” which is in violation of Penal Code §939.22. On May 20, 2013, the Office of the Riverside County Counsel sent a letter of admonishment to the City Attorney on behalf of the Grand Jury. He admitted that he was disseminating information about the GJ doing an investigation in connection with the RPD which is doubly clear by the individuals carbon copied.  Even though as an experienced municipal attorney who’s a sworn officer of the court he should be well aware of the legalities of GJ proceedings including secrecy. After all, he’s witnessed at least several GJ reports involving the City of Riverside. The fact that he may or may have erred in what the GJ was actually investigating and the RPD GJ report doesn’t make that clear in the area of audio recording devices, the intent was still the same or he did it ‘surmising” that he was divulging information he was privy to about a civil GJ investigation. We the public including those who the CA has enforced laws and code violations against are expected to know and obey the law but the CA doesn’t have that same expectation being in a more educated position?  This is just hard to fathom or would be if I was completely in the dark about other related problems in this same area. I can’t believe that an environment exists at City Hall where a city attorney would behave in such a fashion under the belief that it was appropriate. I asked the PE if they were writing about it. Apparently a story’s being done for publication. Best regards,
THE NEW BOOK THAT’S ON THE NUMBER ONE SPOT IN RIVERSIDE…

Why’ll a new book is becoming the rage in Riverside, called the “Shyster’s Daughter”, written by Paula Priamos, a relation to our City Attorney Gregory Priamos, which takes an intricate view of the family environment in which she grew up in.

Does Greg Priamos have a family history of unscrupulous legal work?  Cousin Paula Priamos wrote a book the Shyster’s Daughter which give insight to the family dysfunctionality and immoral legal dealings.  When contacted by Dvonne Pritruzzello, Paula Priamos assertained to remain distanced from cousin City Attorney Gregory Priamos..

Excerpts:  “Your lucky he didn’t kill you,” I say.  If death didn’t get him in the form of an actual bullet, it could’ve gotten him from shock.  Primos men are known for strong minds and weak hearts.

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

shystersdaughter

CLICK THIS LINK TO PURCHASE THE BOOK ON AMAZON

sexsalon23_priamos_3002                             7099642-L

Riverside City Attorney Gregory Priamos               Cousin and Writer Paula Priamos

WHAT’S GOING ON WITH HIGHGROVE?

Highgrove residents having been paying into the 11.5% general fund transfer through their utility bill, but the clincher is that they do not recieve City services in return.  They are now questioning the legal application of Measure A toward their water rates.  The folowing article was taken from the June 2013 issue of the Highgrove Happenings Newspaper which also appears on-line at: www.highgrovehappenings.net   CLICK THIS LINK TO READ THE EXTENDED VERSION BY R.A. “BARNEY” BARNETT OF THE ARTICLE IN THE JULY 2013 SIXTEEN PAGE RELEASE, INCLUDED IS A WATER HISTORY BY LOCAL RESIDENT SCOTT SIMPSON

Highgrove Happenings Newspaper

Riverside’s Measure A and how it relates to Highgrove resident’s water bill payments

From the desk of R.A. “Barney” Barnett

If you pay your water bill to the city of Riverside do you know that a portion of your water bill is not going for water related services?

I learned recently via a phone call from the Press Enterprise that residents of Highgrove who pay their water bill to the City of Riverside have 11.5 % of their water bill going to the City of Riverside’s General Fund that can be used for Riverside City Police protection, Riverside Library, or Riverside City Street repairs and other expenses not related to water service.

As you know, Highgrove receives protection from the Riverside County Sheriff Department, not the City of Riverside Police Department and we have our own library in Highgrove. And the streets are maintained by Riverside County since we are in the un-incorporated part of Riverside County.

Some Highgrove residents receive water service from the Riverside/Highland Water Co. that has offices in Grand Terrace. The newer homes in Highgrove have Riverside/Highland water service whereas most of the homes west of the Union Pacific Railroad track and portions of the older neighborhoods north of Center St. by Michigan Ave. have City of Riverside water service.

Alicia Robinson, the Press Enterprise reporter, said that since Highgrove is outside the city limits of Riverside, Highgrove residents do not get to vote on whether or not 11.5 % of their water bill payments should go to the City of Riverside’s General Fund. But these funds can be used for city services other than water related expenses. To make matters worse, some residents within the city limits of Riverside have Municipal Water and do not pay their water bill to the City of Riverside but these residents will get to vote on Measure A because they reside within the city limit boundaries of Riverside.

This all may seem a little confusing but when you add it up, it amounts to $6.7 million dollars per year that is being transferred from revenues received for water bill payments to the City of Riverside’s General Fund for purposes other than water related issues.

Here are the facts as I understand them:

If Measure A passes, this amendment will allow the City of Riverside to continue taking 11.5 % of Highgrove resident’s water bill payments and putting the money directly into Riverside’s General Fund. A lawsuit has been filed based on the transfer being an illegal maneuver.

I recently received a mail-out addressed to: “Postal Customer” which appears to be a sample of the ballot that has the City of Riverside’s logo as the return address. It states: “Official Measure A Ballot Question” which is a 4 page mailer that lists some of the services that would be cut if Measure
A fails. This list includes cutting 9 police officers and 12 firefighters and other city programs. Critics of Measure A say the city is pointing to public safety and youth program cuts as a scare tactic to get public support to help pass Measure A.

Also, in a half page Advertisement in the Press Enterprise of May 26, 2013, the supporters of Measure A (Riverside Public Utilities) stated the following in the second paragraph of their advertisement:

“But for Riverside Public Utilities (RPU), our role is also defined by what is in our name-“Public Utilities”. That means that we are owned by the community that we serve, and that each and every user who is expecting those energy and water services to be there at the flip of a switch or the turn of a tap is a shareholder in our company”. 

So if Highgrove residents are “shareholders” in this public utility, the Highgrove residents who pay the City of Riverside for their water should get to vote. Aren’t we part of the “each and every user” who is expecting water to come out of the tap if we pay our water bill?

If we do not get a vote on Measure A, then our water bills should be reduced by 11.5 % so we are not paying for services that we do not receive. The money diverted into the general fund is totally unrelated to paying our water bill and opponents say it is a violation of proposition 218 which was approved back in 1996.

Measure A is on the June 4, 2013 ballot. If you received a 4 page flyer addressed to “Postal Customer” and you live outside the city limits, you will not get to vote about your 11.5 % of your payment going to other uses in the City of Riverside. But if you do not pay the entire amount of your water bill, you will be considered delinquent and subject to having your water shut off. Even if Measure A passes you may see more lawsuits about the legality of this vote and how revenue is being collected for water service and used for other purposes.

ETHIC’S COMPLAINT: JUST A FORMALITY? COUNCIL NO SHOW, BUT LAWYERED UP FOR ETHICS SHOWDOWN: PANEL FINDS NO ETHICS VIOLATIONS BY COUNCIL..SHOULD WE BE SURPRISED?

I guess the question becomes what is the purpose of a ethics panel but a visual formality designed to fail for the residents, and each time based on criteria, fall in favor of the complainnant by an orchestrated series of line items.

Holley Whatley, a outside Prop 218 attorney, hired by council in care of you the taxpayer to represent them, stated it is not up to the council to decide whether the language in Measure A was improper, it is up to the courts to decide.

Originally Measure A language was criticized, because it remained a violation of Prop. 218, the very reason the City was sued in the first place.  The Measure was sold to the public as a charter amendment, rather than a tax.  This was brought to council attention early on.  Later during the campaign the City and its staff were changing their tune and had to admit it was a general tax.  Certainly the ballot Measure states one thing, but it

Justin Scott Coe, “I feel people fully understood what they were voting on.”

Norman Powel,  Chair, “I have some problem with the wording, but I’m not a constitutional attorney.”

But does the council have a duty to research and investigate the correctness of an issue before a decision is made in the best interest of the taxpayer?  Does the same apply to the Ethics Panel?  If so why does the criteria to elude to a finding contradict it’s design?  Is it simply constructed to always resolve in an appropriate and desired conclusion?  So far there has never been a conclusive finding when a complaint has been filed.  Why is that, well when you look at the overally construction, it appears that the criteria in order to reach a finding, is orchestrated and designed to reach a conclusion of a favorable resolve for the City, not for the residents.  Each and every time, therefore, is the Ethics Panel only a formality? A distraction? A concerted formula designed by a legal eagle to resolve in a favorable conclusion each and every time?  Well, to many in the community it appears so.

THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE CONTINUES TO REFER TO MEASURE-A AS A  “GENERAL TAX!”
measurea             MeasureAPriamos
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
In both these documents the City of Riverside initially referred to Measure A as a ‘Charter Amendment.”  Even City Attorney Gregory Priamos in his impartial analysis as indicated in this ballot insert, he states this is a ‘Charter Amendment.’  It was a different story on June 4, 2013 at City Council whereby City Attorney Priamos made the following public statement:

On June 4, 2013 a General Municipal Election was held for the purpose of submitting a “general tax” to the qualified electors pursuant to Article 13C of the California Constitution.

This General tax was submitted to the qualified electors and Designated as Measure A on the ballot,  The Riverside Local Services and Clean Water Measure proposed to add 1201.4 to the city charter, to authorize a “general tax” pursuant to Article 13 c of the California Constitution.

The No on Measure A committee has repeatedly stated that Measure A violates Prop 218 and that voters cannot approve a charge on a water bill which will be used for anything other than water purposes.  This is inaccurate.

Article 13 c expressly provides that the voters can approve a general purpose tax, such as Measure A.

Article 13 d applies to property related fees, and is not, or has ever been at issue here.

To hold that voters cannot vote to decide upon Measure A, would take away the power of the voters under the CA Constitution to vote on taxes. The city manager and I have repeatedly responded to this inaccurate assertion on an almost weekly basis at City Council Meetings in April, May and June, leading up to the election.

Moreover, the City Manager specifically noted during his presentation on May 7 discussion calendar, that Measure A is a “general purpose tax”.  The City Manager detailed the financial support that Measure A would provide to the General Fund.

Deputy District Attorney Susan Wilson further reinterated during City Council Discussion on May 7, 2013 that this was a “general purpose tax” under Article 13 c of the California Constitution.

Most importantly the city met its legal obligation under the expressed terms of the settlement agreement, that the revenue transfer, which is how it is defined in the settlement, be submitted to the voters for approval at the June election.  On June 4, 2013 the voters approved this general tax by an overwhelming majority in accord with Proposition 218.  The voters have now spoken and the city will act in accord with the will of the voters.

What Priamos forgot to mention was that the majority of voters read it as a Charter Amendment; except Justin Scott Coe of the Ethics Panel who saw general tax somewhere in there… Initially the City was parading around the City Council Members, City Manager Scott Barber, Chief of Police Sergion Diaz and Fire Chief Steve Earley on a City wide Measure A informational tour.  Chief Earley at the Goeske Center was pinned by one resident, who he then admitted to the public that Measure A was a general tax.  City Manager Scott Barber had to follow shortly and admit the same.  In the following document, the city is already working, it states that they are ‘not increasing water rates’ but are planning to ‘consider modifications’ to it’s water rates… Okay does anybody smell something fishy, or is it just me?  Further it states they want to ‘amend water rate schedules.’

waterrateschedules

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE COMPLETE DOCUMENT

Don’t forget to show to question these activities on Friday July 19, 2013, Public Utilities Board Room at 8:30 am, 3901 Orange Street, Riverside, CA

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU.  NOW TAGGED LOCAL BLOGGERS OR LOCAL MEDIA?  RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: STRONG-ARMING SENIORS FOR A YES VOTE ON MEASURE A? ISN’T THAT ELDER ABUSE?

Posted: June 2, 2013 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
6

Stop Elder Abuse Sign

UPDATE:06.03.2013: IT WASN’T ENOUGH THAT BB&K ATTORNEY JACK CLARK ATTEMPTED TO PUSH THROUGH THE NAMING OF CITY HALL IN RECOGNITION OF RON LOVERIDGE..  NOW WE FIND JAMES ERICKSON, VICE CHANCELLOR EMERITUS, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE, ATTEMPTING TO PUSH THROUGH THE NAMING OF MAIN STREET UNDER THE NAME OF RON LOVERIDGE.  IN WHAT CAPACITY WE DO NOT KNOW.. LOVERIDGE LANE, RONNY’S STREET OR EVEN RONALD BOULEVARD.. 

Untitled-2 copy                       Untitled-3

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

STRONG-ARMING SENIORS FOR A YES VOTE:  ISN’T THAT ELDER ABUSE?

There is nothing more despicable than taking advantage and misinforming seniors.  Where is Ofelia Yeager on this issue, the Chairperson on the Yes on Measure A Campaign?  Why was she chosen to spearhead this issue?  Why was Mathew Webb of Webb Engineering, the Co-Chairperson christen to participate in this elusive endeavor?  Why would Webb Engineering have a master engineering contract with Municipal Water?  How does this affect Mathew Webb’s relationship with Councilman Chris Mac Arthur, are they cousins or just doing the Hanky Panky?    Or Mathew Webb’s association with now Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey, stating he has known him for decades.  Is this all about keeping it in the family?  Does it dispute the fact that Webb Engineering recieved 13 Checks on the same day under former City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary account?  Where is the Council on this one, the Mayor and especially Steve Adams who has asspirations aspirations of being a Congressman?  This is only a reflection of how our City operates.  Every month the amount transferred goes up, it was $6.1 million now it is $6.7 million, probably because they are not allowed to transfer just yet.   But, what now appears to be covered by this transfer is everything that property taxes are suppose to cover.  In City Manager Scott Barber’s analysis of possible cuts if Measure A doesn’t pass could very well be considered a scheme, artiface or fabrication since it was simply based on projections.  Was this orchestrated and designed to attempt to mislead the voters?  The projections have no basis because they never had any accounting track record of expenditures to refer to, they don’t exist.  If no prior allocation records exist how does one extrapolate a true analytical projection?  According to the City’s October General Fund Forecast, the Mayor Bailey’s Office is overbudgeted by $116,100.00.  Instead of cutting his budget, he would rather cut Police and Fire?  Further, as indicate City Manager Scott Barber used the number of the adopted budget for the Mayor’s office to apply his 3.0% cut, which comes out to $22,000.00, therefore this amount would be cost applied to the 11.5% transfer.  The funny thing is that the number cannot be legitimatel verified because no accounting records of that number exist!  Every account that Barber utilizes applies the 3.0% in the same manner.  This is an example of how they are misinforming the public.

mayorsbudget             mayors budget

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

The question to be asking the City, and many are asking the question by the way, “why do they appear to be strong arming the community into a Yes vote on Measure A?”  From candidates, community groups, community services, city employees etc.  Is it that the City is threatening funding to these programs if a Yes vote is not supported?  Money always seems to talk, especially when it is not your own money to spend.

This is a flyer that was dispersed at the Janet Goeske Center which states what will happen to senior funding if they do not vote Yes on Measure A.  Is the City of Riverside strong arming residents with an iron fist of reason?  Or is it extorsion?  Afterall isn’t the Hyatt suing the City of Riverside on this issue?  Yes they are.  Demand answers!  Demand Transperancy! Demand Leadership!  Well…at least the first two, and the only way to do this is to show up at City Council and voice your opinions.

JGFLYER

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FLYER DISPERSED AT THE JANET GOESKE CENTER

In the last two utility bills you received;  you as a taxpayer have paid for the few rogue City Officials who felt it was necessary to spend your tax money to misinform you, further, to deny your constitutional right of reaching a balanced voting decision.  City Tax money was used to favor a “Yes” vote on Measure A.  This flyer states to go to the City of Riverside’s web site for more information. If you go the City of Riverside’s web site, what we have can be construed as a Yes on Measure A bonanza!    Another FPPC (Fair Political Practices Commission) violation?

PUMEASUREAOFUTILITYBILL

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW WHAT YOU PAID FOR, EVEN IF YOU DON’T AGREE!

According to Letitia Pepper, Riverside Attorney, the City is using city funds to promote Measure A, and to promote it with lies and propaganda — propaganda is “half-truths.”  She says to look at your May Riverside Public Utility bill, on the back ( the above image).  There’s a full page promoting the passage of Measure A.  This page includes the biggest of all lies:  “By re-affirming these previous voter actions, Measure A continues this funding [allegedly and impliedly only for for clean water programs], WITHOUT RAISING TAXES.” The real reason this issue MUST be submitted to the voters is not the self-serving settlement into which the City entered with the Moreno’s that required the City to submit the issue of the excess charges to the voters. The REAL reason the City is doing this is that since 1996, it has been illegal, under Prop. 218, for cities, incuding charter cities like Riverside, to charge more for water than the actual cost of providing it. To make such chares, cities had two years after Prop. 218 passed to submit them for a vote as taxes — and the City never did that until it got caught last year.

Another aspect of this measure is that it appears to be paying for alot of services!  The amount the City has indicated has gone from $6.1 million to $6.7 million.  If you are a taxpayer as I am, this transfer appears to be doing a better job of covering all expenses of city services than our property taxes.  Potholes, Storm Drains (we doubled the tax in 2012), Police, Fire, 911 dispatch, Childrens Lunch Programs, Clean Water (Covered by your water rates), Gang Control (Covered by Federal Police Asset Forfeiture Funds), Library, Crossing Guards, Tree Triming, Disabled Services, Senior Services, SRO’s (School Resource Officers), Maintaining Fairmont Park Lake, Low Income Lunch Programs, Powerwashing Downtown Streets, Installing Curbs and Gutters, Summer Camp Programs, Dealing with Abandoned Vehicles, Using Code Enforcement if your Landscaping doesn’t conform to the Politically Correct criteria of the City, Code Enforcement citations if you Overwater your landscaping, Code Enforcement citations if you have Trash exposed, Code Enforcement citations if it appears that you have Outdoor Storage, Code Enforcement citations if it appears that your property is contributing to storm drain contaminants and it goes on and on.  The storm drain fees don’t really help Riverside residents, but it contributes to Orange County Clean Water.  Property Taxes pay for City Services, the User Utility Tax on your utility bill pays for services and Proposition 172 allocates 1/2 cent from the sales tax to city services.  Government should live within their means, afterall you and I have to.  The new advertisement on Measure A on your utility bill states cleaning storm drain catch basins and storm drains.  But what! We had an increase from $2.83 to $5.22?  Yes folks, last year we had an increase in our Storm Drain Tax ( also know as Storm Sewer System), documents as follows:

STORMDRAIN           PAGE4

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE DOCUMENT

Is the City contemplating a triple tax by this above action?  Is the truth of the matter that the City is in need of paying upcoming bond obligations?  Would this be the real issue?

As indicated by Dan Berstein’s of the Press Enterprise new article, is this another Sleazy Campaign Mailer?  Rather than making cuts in their own back yard, the City of Riverside would like to punish residents that already have made cuts in their household with the fear of higher taxes, as indicated a couple of weeks ago by Councilman Steve Adams where he stated, “if Measure-A doesn’t pass, we have a change in the status quo, and we will have to raise your rates (referring to water) and increase your taxes.”

flash_1886

WELL LET’S DO A DRUM ROLL TO INCREASE TAXES; SHALL WE COUNCILMAN ADAMS?

The mailers that the Yes on Measure A campaign have been distributing have been reflective of their talking points, but this new mailer just received is from the City of Riverside, and it has the City of Riverside star of approval with endorsing names such as our Chief of Police Sergio Diaz, Fire Chief Steve Earley and City Manager Scott Barber.  It cannot get any more blatant than this.  Legally the City of Riverside has had to take a position of neutrality, while over the past few months the City has stated it was on a Measure A informational tour.  This four page City mailer shows that the language can be ultimately construed as a campaign publication endorsing a Yes vote on Measure A.  This can be seen by the language and pictorial used, the tone, tenor and timing is there. Further this mailer was paid for by you and me the “Taxpayer.”  Therefore is the City of Riverside on the verge of violating FPPC (Fair Political Practices Commission) rules and regulations and misappropriation of taxpayer funds?  Elections Code § 8314(d) and Gov’t Code § 8314(d).

Gov’t Code § 8314 (a) It is unlawful for any elected state or local officer, including any state or local appointee, employee, or consultant, to use or permit others to use public resources for a campaign activity, or personal or other purposes which are not authorized by law.

Gov’t Code § 8314(d) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the use of public resources for providing information to the public about the possible effects of any bond issue or other ballot measure on state activities, operations, or policies, provided that (1) the informational activities are otherwise authorized by the constitution or laws of this state, and (2) the information provided constitutes a fair and impartial presentation of relevant facts to aid the electorate in reaching an informed judgment regarding the bond issue or ballot measure.

mailer

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL MAILER

According to a new article by Dan Berstein of the Press Enterprise, the Council knew of this piece, according to Councilman Mike Gardner, but didn’t discuss the content.  So who were the individuals or individual that approved and designed this mailer?  Well it appears it was within the City Attorney’s Office.  So, who approved the $23,777.00 for the cost of printing and mailing at taxpayer expense?  You would think if there was any inkling or sugestion of misappropriation of taxpayer funds that the council would have the descency to ask those obvious tough questions. This I say in lieu of City Attorney Gregory Priamos not returning Berstein’s calls. If it was approved by Priamos, it must be legal, right Greg?

Another editorial in the Press Enterprise, “Don’t use taxpayers’ monies for election fliers.”   Is the City of Riverside really a “Muni Mafia?”  How do they compare to San Bernardino? Or Moreno Valley?

The City continues to claim that these transfer monies are used for everything under the sun, and every week we have something new that it covers.  The reality is the City has no bonafide track record of accounting of any of these fund at anytime, this we see as Bernstein undercovered in reference to “library books.”  Remember folks, only tax money can be deposited into the General Fund.

I guess in the real realm of things why won’t District Attorney Paul Zellerbach act on this? Possibly, because of this rhetorical question: “Is it illegal or just bad business?”  Possibly all the above, but we won’t expect this office to react in reference to the oath of office you sworn to uphold….regardless, your track record indicates clearly, your answers and responses to local community inquiries.  What kind of message does this send to the community when the City itself doesn’t follow the letter of the law?  Our we a Banana Republic or an American City based on constitutional rights?

zellerbach

SO WHAT IS A D.A. TO DO?

As of May 28, 2013 as indicated in the Press Enterprise, the “Yes on Measure A” campaign has contribution commitments which are in the neigborhood of $46,000.00, and the “No on Measure A” campaign has continues to maintain steady monetary commitments of $0.00

Vote No on Measure A,  www.noonmeasureariverside.com

For more information on this June 4th, 2013 Measure A, contact us noonmeasureariverside@hotmail.com

WETTWOPSD233

GOVERNMENT SHOULD LIVE WITHIN THEIR MEANS, AFTERALL, WE THE TAXPAYER HAVE TO..

JUST FOR LAUGHS…

539110_506054042765037_303798518_n

COUNCILMAN ADAMS BRINGS HIS CITY VEHICLE IN FOR THE USUAL REPAIRS…

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU.  NOW TAGGED LOCAL BLOGGERS OR LOCAL MEDIA?  RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PUBLIC WORKS: THE CHECK’S IN THE DESK..

Posted: September 7, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
3

The Greenpoint Avenue and Lake Street Sidewalk Construction was a Federal HUD (Housing and Urban Development) Funded Project or known as a CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) Project.  If these funds are not spent before a certain amount of time, they must be given back to the Federal Government.  Checks were allegedly cut before the expiration date of funds, held in someones desk, then issued to the contractor or vendor at a later time.  To do otherwise would be considered illegal.  Any business person who receives a check, especially for the amount of close to a half a million dollars, does not wait 30 days to cash it.  In this case, the check issued to Grand Pacific Contractor’s did.  The contractor usually has employees to pay and vendors to pay.  At the time Tom Boyd was Assistant Public Works Director.  Was it possible he did not want to do the work?  Did Siobhan Foster know of these discrepancies in the Public Works Department and the details of the CDBG funds?  And did she leave the City of Riverside to the City of Pasadena for this reason?  How about Former Assistant City Manager Michael Beck, Public Works Director Tom Boyd, Former City Manager Brad Hudson or even City Attorney Gregory Priamos?  The question, is this an act of falsification of records?

01/05/2007 – IN AN INTEROFFICE MEMO DIRECTED TOWARD PURCHASING MANAGER ART TORRES REQUESTING TO PLEASE ADVERTISE ONLINE FOR BIDS ON THIS PROJECT JANUARY 8, 2007 FOR THE BID SUMISSION DATE OF FEBRUARY 7, 2007.  BUT A PURCHASE ORDER & REQUISITION WERE ORDERED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE FOR VENDOR: GRAND PACIFIC CONTRACTORS INC. JANUARY 5, 2007 ACCORDING TO DOCUMENT.

                           

CLICK DOCUMENT IMAGE TO VIEW

01/08/2007 – THE BIDING INFORMATION ON THIS PROJECT IS RELEASED TO BE ADVERTISED ON LINE THIS DAY.  BIDS WILL BE ACCEPTED FOR CONSIDERATION FEBRUARY 7, 2007.

01/19/2007 – THIS IS GRAND PACIFIC CONTRACTORS BID, THOUGH DATED JANUARY 19, 2007.  IN ADDITION THERE IS NO RECEIVED DATE STAMP BY THE CITY ON THIS DOCUMENT TO SHOW ACTUAL DATE, IF ANY.

CLICK TO VIEW COMPLETE DOCUMENT

02/07/2007 – ACTUAL DATE BID OPENS AND CAN BE SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION.  THIS DOCUMENT SHOW A COVER SHEET WITH CITY COUNCIL AWARD DATE OF FEBRUARY 20, 2007 AND A CONTRACT SIGN DATE OF MARCH 13, 2007 BUT THE DATE ON THE COVER SHEET IS FEBRUARY 7, 2007.  WAS THIS BACKDATED?

CLICK DOCUMENT IMAGE TO VIEW

02/20/2007 – CITY COUNCIL AWARDS BID TO GRAND PACIFIC CONTRACTORS

03/12/2007 – A LETTER EMAILED BY FORMER PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTOR SEAN GILL, DESCRIBES THAT THE PROJECT HAS THIRTY (30) WORKING DAYS AND COMMENCE MARCH 12, 2007, THEREFORE PROJECT SHOULD BE COMPLETED IN AND AROUND APRIL 12, 2007.

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DOCUMENT

03/13/2007 – GRAND PACIFIC CONTRACTORS AGREEMENT SIGNED

03/30/2007 – PURCHASE ORDER  BY ART TORRES, IN THE PROCESSING OF ACTIVITY SECTION, IT SHOWS A REQUESTED DATE AND ENTRY DATE OF 01/05/2007, PRIOR TO THE JANUARY 8, 2007 BID RELEASING DATE.

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DOCUMENT

04/13/2007 – CHECK ISSUED TO GRAND PACIFIC CONTRACTORS IN THE AMOUNT OF $485,545.50 BUT CASHED 5/17/2012, ALMOST 30 DAYS LATER.  THE AGREEMENT STATES THAT “MONTHLY PROGRESS PAYMENTS SHALL BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 9-3.2 OF THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS”.

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DOCUMENT

05/17/2007 – AFTER OVER THIRTY DAYS CHECK IS CASHED

06/05/2007 – ACTUAL WORK COMPLETION DATE, APPROXIMATELY 60 DAYS POST AGREEMENT. CITY MUST NOW RECEIVE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FROM CONTRACTOR WITHIN 35 DAYS.

07/13/2007 – NOTICE OF COMPLETION (NO INITIATION DATE INDICATED ON DOCUMENT-ASSUME 30DAYS BEFORE COMPLETION DATE)

08/17/2007 – REQUEST FOR FINAL PAYMENT

08/21/2007 – FINAL PAYMENT ISSUED FOR $53,945.50  FROM FUND 230 SPECIAL GAS TAX FUND.

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DOCUMENT

Inconsistencies arrise when viewing document four.  Document states that the City Council Awarded the bid to Grand Pacific Contractors 02/20/2007 and that the contract was signed 03/13/2007.  Yet the document date is 02/07/2007 at 2:00pm.  Was the document manipulated or imputed at that date with predetermined information?

              

DOCUMENT ONE        DOCUMENT TWO       DOCUMENT THREE     DOCUMENT FOUR          DOCUMENT FIVE

DOCUMENT SIX

The initial processing activity was that it was requested by Philip Hannawi 01/05/2007 and entered 01/05/2007.  What is also noticeable is that Grand Pacific Contractors has a vendor number assigned as of this same date.  The cost was approved 03/20/2007 and the last printing was 03/20/2007.  The terms of the vendor is Net 30 days.  What’s compelling is that the acceptance of this bid by the city 01/05/2007, is in contradiction to the initial and formal bid advertisement date of 01/08/2007 and bid opening date of 02/07/2007.

“Thirty-five (35) days after City accepts the Work and files a Notice of Completion, City shall pay Contractor the amounts City deducted and retained from its progress payments, except such sums thereof which are required by law or authorized by the Contract to be further retained”.   Progress payments are incremental payments made to the contractor at each level of completion.  For example, the contractor can say after a week this portion of the project will be completed.  Then an incremental payment will be made to the contractor to pay employees and their vendors etc.  What occurred was that the vendor was paid 90% ($485,545.50) in one lump sum prior to the job initiation, with the remaining 10% ($53,945.50) at job completion as indicated by vendor.  The records attained were the result of a public records act request.  Agreement also states that “Monthly progress payments shall be made in accordance with Section 9-3.2 of the Standard Specifications”.

The following are current pictures of the job evidently done for sidewalks and curbs.  The constituents of the City of Riverside hope that our new Public Works Director Thomas Boyd can shed some light on the above discrepencies.  Since Former Public Works Director Siobhan Foster skipped town to become Public Works Director of the City of Pasadena, under City Manager Michael Beck (Former Assistant City Manager of the City of Riverside).

                                            

UPDATE: 09/11/2012: CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY:  SHE’S BACK!  Public Speaker Karen Wright and Coordinator of the Janet Goeske Center Friday Morning Club is back!  And City Council wasted no time embracing this welcome with two of Riverside’s finest, also known as ‘Ronny’s Bouncers.’  After Council Meeting was adjourned, Ms. Wright gave the Council and Mayor a lesson in government transparency.  Not to be undone, Ronny’s Bouncer’s were sent to the Mayor and Council’s rescue to cease this act of afterhours public speaking..

         

To this day, Chief Sergio Diaz has not apologize to Ms. Wright after accosting her on the city council floor on her public speaking position on Tequesquite Park.  What gives with the Chief?  Does he continue to think that Riversidian’s remain in their homes in their underwear eating cheetos?  Yes, of course, I admit this is what we all do in Riverside, but what about the apology?  I mean that Councilman Paul Davis made a public apology a couple of weeks ago to a fire inspector, and that didn’t appear to be at all that painful..

      

The hot item of the night was Item #9 a resolution to adopt Temporary Economic Development Rates (TED), or in other words, let’s give discounted electric rates to new start up businesses over the next three years that we choose.  This would work as a sliding scale decrease beginning with a 30% discount ending in 12/13, decreasing to 20% ending in 12/14, decreasing to 10% ending in 12/15, and decreasing to 0% discount thereafter.  The whole idea is to attract new businesses to Riverside, since many now our moving to states such as Arizona and Nevada.  The contradiction of this plan is that the residents of the City of Riverside own their own electric utilities, unlike other municipalities. If you own a home in Riverside, you own a part of the electric utility company, why should we pay more?  Therefore, shouldn’t the discount be spread across the board to residents and small business owners in order to stimulate more economic growth?    If the discount was spread across the board to all, there would be more money available for businesses to reinvest in their companies and hire more people, for residents there would be more money left in their budget to spend in town at small businesses etc., it would therefore be a win, win situation.  Many are asking, “How does this resolution pan out to the electric contract engaged with the Press Enterprise?”  Yes, what you read can possibly and certainly make a difference.  Even Riverside’s Chamber President, Cindy Roth got into the act submitting a letter in favor of this resolution.  And we all know by now, the Council and Mayor listen to Cindy over their constituents..  In actuallity, is this resolution a Proposition 26 violation and can be considered a gift of public funds when it is only reserved for a few?

It also appears there are miscellaneous fees and charges that these businesses will still be responsible for such as Energy Users Tax, Utility Users Tax and good ol’ Cap and Trade Premiums (Which is a Charge on Industrial CO2 emissions).  Which many legitimate scientist state it is a scam to pad local municipalities.  We haven’t even mentioned property taxes.  So is it still a good idea? or is Arizona or Nevada still a better choice?

         

From the Mayor’s Ball on the 6th floor of the new Citrus Towers, also know as BB&K Central, A possible new Multi-Modal Transportation Hub, are Electric Bonds actually ‘Hedge Funds’?  What happened to the monies written off and not paid for by the Department of Finance, is the taxpayer still responsible?  Is the Priamos Tape and example of Pension Spiking?  Local Blogger Mary Shelton, of Five Before Midnight,  has conflicting words with the Mayor….. And public speaking, leading to public sleeping…stay tuned….more to come….   and more to come…THE FORMER CHIEF OF POLICE RUSSELL LEACH DEPOSITIONS COMING SOON!  WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED WITH COUNCILMAN WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY AND THEN SGT. VALMONT GRAHAM?  YOU BE THE JUDGE! THE WHOLE DEPOSITION IN PRINT!

UPDATE: 09/12/2012: THREE CITY COUNCILMAN BEFUDDLED BY THE DECISION OF CITY MANAGEMENT TO KEEP THE RED LIGHT CAMERA’S ALTHOUGH IN EXCESS OF 80% OF RESIDENTS FEEL THEY SHOULD BE REMOVED.  According to the Press Enterprise Councilmen Paul Davis, Chris Mac Arthur and Mike Gardner were surprise when news reached them that the decision to keep the red light cameras would remain until the contract ends in 2016.  Regardless of the fact the majority of cities all over the nation has removes them as a result of not only a safety issue, but because of cost deficits they were causing municipalities.  In Riverside the cost deficit is $611,000.00 so far.  The other issue with red light cameras is that receiving a citation by mail is considered not properly served, therefore not enforceable.

Others are asking the question of why city management made this decision, over council? And if they actually can do this, or if they were only excercising section 407 of the City Charter, which states that “Neither the Mayor nor the City Council nor any of it’s members shall interfere with execution by the City Manager (now Scott Barber) of his/her powers and duties, or order.”  TMC posted an article on this subject, “The Red Light Scam, Council Mayhem on the Streets of Riverside?”  Even now, others are questioning the activities of Councilman Steve Adams, if there was any alleged intervention with City Management.  He may call it political.  But his name continues to come up time after time whereby his alleged actions have costed city taxpayers a mint.  Some are now coining him “Mr. Liability”, after statement allegedly made in staff meetings by City Attorney Greg Priamos.

Many of the decisions Adams makes are in lieu of his brother Ron Adams working in the red light screening for the City.  Is this a conflict of interest?  Possibly, but again he may call it “a political tactic”, as reported in the PE.  Even to the extent of inferring there is a conspiracy involved, because there are certain people associated with a certain councilman.  We all know Adams is referring to Councilman Paul Davis, but we can assure Adams that these community residents he may be referring don’t make friends easily, of which is the case.  Adams went on to state that the issue of his brother, the attempt to create an issue of a non issue is “absolute harrassment”.

In addition, Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey was also a supporter of the the red light cameras and voted on their continuance.  Why continue with this endeavor when red light camera’s are currently runnning at lossess in excess of $600,000.00 to the taxpayer?  Why continue when many cities all over the country are dropping them, even Redlands, CA.  So why continue?  A good question to ask Mayoral Candidate Rusty Bailey.

UPDATE: 09/05/2012: EL TEQUESQUITE PARK NEEDS MORE DIRT?  ACCORDING TO THE PRESS ENTERPRISE EL TEQUESQUITE PARK NEEDS APPROXIMATELY 1,800 TRUCKLOADS OF DIRT (20,000 CUBIC YARDS) IN ORDER TO REPLACE WHAT WAS REMOVED. 

    

THIS IS NOT SMALL POTATOES, WAS THE DIRT REMOVED CONTAMINATED?  THE FACTS ARE THAT THE ENGINEER’S CALCULATIONS WERE OFF BY 1,800 TRUCKLOADS (20,000 CUBIC YARDS OF SOIL).  QUITE SIGNIFICANT FOR JUST AN ERROR.  ACCORDINGLY, THE CITY OR THE TAXPAYER WILL HAVE TO DISH OUT NOT MORE THAN $200,000 TO SPREAD IT AROUND, THE NEW DIRT THAT IS.

THIS IS A TIME FOR THE COMMUNITY TO COME TOGETHER…PLEASE SEND YOU’RE “PACKAGED DIRT” TO CITY HALL TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY FINISH THE PARK!

JUST FOR LAUGHS..

A PAST INSCRIPTION OF THE FUTURE OF WHAT THE CITY NEEDS MOST ON A CRATE OF ORANGES?

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…

RIVERSIDE CITRUS GROVES, CIRCA 1930, MT. RUBIDOUX CAN BE SEEN IN THE DISTANCE AT THE UPPER LEFT CORNER AND PACHAPPA HILL TOWARD THE UPPER CENTER.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU.  RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: THE ISSUE OF REDISTRICTING: CHESS GAME, SLAMDUNK OR LANDGRAB?

Posted: July 24, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
8

NO PROPERTY SHOULD BENEFIT, AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS..

Last weeks lively debate in one instant went as follows.

I believe that’s the way it needs to be handled again, Councilman Melendrez said.  It should be referred to Governmental Affairs, that three council members should participate plus the community.  Gardner is not part of the Governmental Affairs but I would invite him to participate.. and be an active participant.

After Melendrez stated his position he received a standing ovation…TMC believes that if Counilman Melendrez had shown this type of leadership before, he could have been in the Mayor’s runoff, now the constituents have no choice.

OTHER COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS…

Mayor Ron: I must repeat that the need for Conflict resolution is best done as a committee as a whole.

Councilman Melendrez:  Mayor, it didn’t work the last time, that’s why I am here.

Councilman Davis:  I have to openly admit that it was a mistake!   It’s about process, and the process was not followed properly.  This is not about businesses but about residential desires. You look at the business desires compared to the residential desires. It’s hard to weigh.  In this case it’s about the residential desires.  I would like to make a motion, I respectfully disagree with you Mayor.  Things are not done the same way they were 20 to 30 years ago (making these comment toward the mayor) things are done differently, we are wired in a wireless world and we need to respect that…that we move forward, rather than do things the old way, because a lot of the times they just don’t work anymore.  If the Governmental Committee would allow a substitution of Councilman Gardner.  That would be my motion that we take no action and postpone 60 days..and I hoping to see a second ( a motion which Melendrez solidifies later, but the Mayor thinks it already happened).

It should be vetted between Gardner (Ward 1) and Melendrez (Ward 2).  The rest of us five have no dog in the show here.  This is about ward 1 and ward 2 they should get together.  In other words  it’s about Melendrez and Gardner.

Davis offered stepping down from his Governmental Affairs position and allowing Ward 1 Mike Gardner to take his position in order that he can work with Melendrez at that level.  We need to see what the residents would like to see, and taking into consideration the businesses as well.  Taking the item 20 to the full council for a vote.  Basically the two can come back with their findings and bring them to council so that council can make a better decision.

Councilman Gardner: This has been a much bigger issue than I thought it was. And for that I apologize..  There were things here that I did not see.  I thought this would be relatively simple ( the issue of redistricting) and relatively not controversial.   There were things here that I did not see, but incidently agrees with the mayor about dealing it as a whole…and…and…and..(continues to ramble).. an interruption by Councilman Melendrez while Gardner speaks and Melendrez says,  I will second Pauls motion..Mayor replies..I thought you did, but Melendrez actually did not.

Gardner says he wouldn’t offer a second but proposes to put this off for 60days..council to hold more meetings to talk…I think the community has spoken in more than one way.

Councilman Melendrez: Remember I’m a member of the Downtown Partnership, a committee member, the downtown partnership said they had it in the works since 2002, They didn’t invite the councilman member until 2010.. I’m also a member of the Chamber Commerce, and get along with both the downtown partnership and the chamber, and supportive of the chamber,  except when I think they are inaccurate.  I think redistricting is here about community, not business.   I strongly believe that.  And when I look at what we as council, here to propose.   We have ten items listed,  I’m going to read four of them.  We have ten items listed, I’m going to read four.  Maintain Continutiy of existing wards to the extent possible, draw wards that are compact and continuous , use natural geographical boundaries to the extent possible, maintain cohesive neighborhood and community interest to the extent possible.   I went through all ten and it said nothing about business.  There is nothing here that says listen to what businesses have to say and route business around them.. So TMC ask,  how does Cindy Roth by pass these guidelines and convince the Council to break them?

TMC’s research came up with a interesting article on redistricting and a little know term called “gerrymandering”.  The article is called, Redistricting Now, Analysis of Ways to Prevent Gerrymandering.  But a question to ponder, is ‘gerrymandering’ actually occurring in the City Riverside?  Gerrymandering is a process and practice that attempts to establish a poltical advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating geographic boundries to create partisan or incumbent protected districts.  Another reference point would be Article 21 of the California State Constitution regarding Redistricting.

Also the following talks about the masterplan for the Riverside Market Place, never mentions the East Side, talks about the area as being the Downtown Market Place.

It’s always good to hear from Councilman Adams. When he talks to the people..I want to thank everybody here to night, it’s a great demonstration of democracy.   I work for the people of ward 7, and looking toward the crowd..says ”you are our bosses”.   he went on to say…and this is why Riverside is the greatest city in the state.  Finally and emphatically said..  I started to think, is this one of those “say what you mean and mean what you say moment”?

Brian Hawley, Vice Chair of the Greater Riverside Chamber.  The chamber represents the interest of its members, this includes of several members in the Market Place who pay dues as if they already were. We believe a unified downtown benefits the entire city.

Self Appointed Citizen Auditor, Vivian Moreno:  As I looked at redistricting, I went and read the information on your web site and the first thing that popped out to me was ‘equalizing the population count for each ward’.  How do you get into a controversy over a business division line out of that statement? What a waste of time.  I stand before some intelligent people, I’m sure, and I  don’t understand the difference between population and business?  This vote should have been a “slam dunk”, and for what purpose are we here?  Synergy for business?  Thats what you all said last week.  What happens to synergy for the people?  That’s your argument

Just because the chamber queen comes before you with her letter in hand, and her lovely little speech, you change the direction and the ultimate purpose of redistricting.  Really? Let’s just change ward one into Cindy Land.  Andy Melendrez made a good argument that the Arlington Business District is in two wards.  So your argument about making it one program, doesn’t fly.   The actual natural boundaries is the freeway (91 freeway) , not the railroad tracks Councilman Gardner… Just because the Downtown area is not very successful and their business district is (Market Place), you want to take it over.  Insignificant?  Well if it is so insignificant, than why are we doing it?

David Mudge said we market our offices and area as if it is Downtown.  Leasing office space in Downtown is doing extremely well for us.  If I marketed office space to someone in Orange County, as it was not Downtown, it wouldn’t get much attraction. One of the big attractions is feeling that they are downtown.

Tom Schultz said, one of Webster’s definitions of ‘rape’ is an outrageous violation.  I consider this a rape of the East Side by the Chamber of Commerce.

Item #7:  In 2003 the City issues a series of COP’s (Certificates Of Participation) bonds to fund a succession of municipal projects.  In doing so the central piece of city government was placed as collateral, City Hall, along with the new Lincoln Avenue Police Station, The Airport Fire station, Parking Garages 1,2 and 3 and some land known as The Corporation Yard.

         

It also appears that The Convention Center, The Downtown Library and some land called The Airport Clear Zone were also released from the 2003 COP’s when financing was being assembled for the new Convention Center.

         

In the new transaction, the financing involved will still require the property known as Riverside City Hall and the new Lincoln Avenue Police Station to remain as collateral.  As TMC understands public buildings used as collateral, the structure is not what is considered, it is the value of the land.  This is item #7 being brought to City Council this Tuesday July 24, 2012, Be There!  Don’t forget to comment on our blog site.

    

Item #13, another $100,000.00 to Entrepreneurial Hospitality Corporation (EHC) to include a New Riverside Sport Commission for Public Relations and Advertising within the Riverside Convention and Visitors Bureau?  And who are they?  Opps, related to The Mission Inn’s only Duane Roberts?  In these trying economic times, do we really need to spend money we don’t have?  What about our City bill board which struts above the 91 freeway?  Have we forgotten to be innovative and frugal?

    

 What am hearing about the Mission Inn Museum?  How about being taxpayer paid rent to Mr. Robert’s, or is it Mrs. Robert’s these days?  The Redevelopment Agency of The City Of Riverside entered into lease agreement with Duane Roberts Historic Mission Inn for a pre-paid amount of $1,255,873.00 to December 23,2022.  The Redevelopment Agency of The City Of Riverside also has the optional subleasing right, which it used to sublease to the Mission Inn Foundation, a non-profit organization, initiated by the City of Riverside.

                                                   

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL FIRST CONTRACT     CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL SECOND CONTRACT

In this sublease, the Mission Inn Foundation pays no rent to the Redevelopment Agency of The City of Riverside.  The argument in the lease is that it has already been paid for by The Redevelopment Agency. Is this a gift of public funds to the ‘burrito king’ Duane Roberts?  Well the 100K voted through by City Council.  Mayor Pre-Temp William “Rusty” Bailey even appeared to be giddy on the dais.  Was he feeling the illusional power of the Mayor?

Item #23, Marcy Library now considered surplus property and to be sold as such?  Fair market value in these times would be considered close to a ‘fire sale’, a few years back.  But not long ago it was in negotiations to be transformed into the new “Lucky Geek Greek Restaurant”.  TMC artist rendering of what could have been…you can just smell the burgers cooking in the new kitchen situated in what was the government section of the library.

Item#12 July 10, 2012 city council approves what I call a tax by voter neglect without voter approval. The City of Riverside will assess a levy on property owners for Landscaping and Maintenance for Riverswalk in the La Sierra area.  Each property owner will have to pay $225.73 in the 2012/2013 year.

         

By the way, the cities favorite son Albert A. Webb and Associates were appointed to assess the district, of course.

UPDATE: 08/01/2012: SAN BERNARDINO, CA FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY WITH OVER $1 BILLION IN DEBT.  THIS IS A CITY OF 210,000 OWING A $1 BILLION, THAT’S APPROXIMATELY $4,761.91 PER PERSON.  WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE TOTAL AGGREGATE DEBT $4.4 BILLION AND A CITY OF 300,000 THAT’S APPROXIAMATELY $14,677.00 PER INDIVIDUAL.  ANOTHER ARTICLE STATES THE THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO WAS PUSHED INTO AN EARLY BANKRUPTCY DUE TO THE NON PAYMENT OF THREE SEPARATE JUDGEMENTS AGAINST POLICE OFFICERS.

UPDATE: 08/06/2012:  WHAT IS IT WITH THE CITY’S NEW BUZZ WORD “THE FAB FIVE” THAT HAS LABELED A PARTICULAR GROUP OF PUBLIC SPEAKERS AT WEEKLY CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS?  MORE TO COME..

UPDATE: 08/09/2012: REUTERS SAYS SAN BERNARDINO’S BANKRUPTCY MAY START A TREND FOR CALIFORNIA CITIES.  THE UPSWING IN BANKRUPTCY FILINGS COULD SIGNIFY A LACK OF ABILITY, BUT A LACK OF WILLINGNESS TO PAY DEBT SERVICE AT THE EXPENSE OF OF OTHER FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS.  YES, “YOU HAVE TO PAY THE RENT”! AS ONE COUNCILMAN RUSTY BAILEY TOLD ONE DOWNTOWN MERCHANT.  YES INDEED…OTHERS ARE BLAMING UNSUSTAINABLE PENSIONS.  AS MANY FEEL THESE UNION PENSION CONTRACTS WERE NEGOTIATED NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE TAXPAYER.  THEREFORE A BREACH OF TRUST AND CONSEQUENTLY SHOULD LEGALLY BE DEEMED NULL AND VOID.  ONE INTERESTING CONCEPT.. 

WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE 1977 ALL AMERICAN CITY RECIPIENT KNOWN AS THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO? WHO’S NEXT? RUMOUR IS THE CITY OF COMPTON CALIFORNIA.  BUT JUST AS BELL, MONTEBELLO, HERCULES, STOCKTON AND CITY OF RIVERSIDE…

THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ALSO WAS THE RECEPIENT OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVMENT FOR EXCELLENCE IN FINANCIAL REPORTING IN 2010 BY THE GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSICIATION.  I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, DO THESE AWARDS ACTUALLY MEAN ANYTHING?  WE RECENTLY AS A CITY WERE AWARDED MOST “INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY OF THE YEAR 2012”, BY AN ORGANIZATION THAT CALLS THEMSELVES THE INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY FORUM.  I WONDER WHAT WAS THE DECIDING POINT WAS?  RUMOR IS WE HAD THEM WITH RESIDENTS EATING CHEETOS IN THEIR UNDERWEAR..

UPDATE: 08/10/2012: COUNCILMAN/MAYORAL CANDIDATE RUSTY BAILEY, COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS, FORMER ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER TOM DESANTIS AND FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON INTERFERED WITH THE POLICE PROMOTION PROCESS?  ACCORDING TO THE PE, “BAILEY WAS FURIOUS”!  WAS RUSTY BAILEY IN ANY WAY INSTRUMENTAL IN INTERFERING WITH THE PROMOTION PROCESS OF LT. VALMONT GRAHAM?  HOW LONG CAN COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS DEFLECT THE INEVITABLE?

UPDATE:08/15/2012: OUR SOURCES HAVE STATED THAT COUNCILMAN ANDY MELENDREZ HAS EXPERIENCED A HEART ATTACK, AND IS IN INTENSIVE CARE.  TO WHAT SEVERITY, WE DO NOT KNOW. 

WHATEVER THE CONDITION, WE WISH COUNCILMAN ANDY MELENDREZ A SPEEDY RECOVERY.

JUST FOR LAUGHS…

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN..MAGNOLIA AVENUE, RIVERSIDE, CA (CIRCA 1903)

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU.  PROUDLY RATED ONE STAR (POSSIBLY DOWN TO ZERO FROM OUR LAST ACCOUNTS) OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR GOOD REASON, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST, FOR GOOD REASON… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPHALL SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR CONTACT US BY THE FOLLOWING EMAIL ADDRESS! CONTRIBUTORS WILL ALWAYS BE PROTECTED… YES, WE EXPECT THE JAIL TIME FOR THAT ONE…  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

BOMBSHELL! FORMER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RAYCHELE STERLING: CALL ME, I WILL REPRESENT YOU NO CHARGE! AND REDISTRICTING HYJNX FOR CINDY’S MARKETPLACE?

Posted: July 9, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

At the June 26th City Council Meeting former deputy city attorney Raychele Sterling gave kudos to Councilman Paul Davis for calling City Attorney Gregory Priamos “out on his lies”  the prior week…it was nice to see that somebody would actually do that.

She went on to say that I’m here to talk about Employee issues, which appear to be on going.  People seem to be completely out of their minds, creating so much liability for you (referring to city management).  As I have said, over and over again, this stems not from personnel issue, but is a policy issue.  You continue to have employees sue you, you continue to have employees file claims, then your management comes back and says, geee.. maybe we should continue to retaliate against them because this will be great for our law suit and I’m sure the jury would really appreciate that. Well you might as well just add a couple more zeros to the check we have to pay out!  Well it not changing..and you have to change because the law suits will continue to come..

She went on to say, that if Tom Boyd, Public Works Director, calls any special meetings, or you believe he is harassing you, or retaliating against you, or if he writes a work performance evaluation that you don’t agree with..I want you to give me call, my number is 951-203-9952.  I will be happy to represent you pro bono, no charge!  Because this is going to stop!  TMC learned that a city employee who filed a civil lawsuit against the city a little more than a month ago was being set up for an administrative hearing with one day notice.  This was with Public Works Director Tom Boyd along with the usual suspects.  When Sterling contacted them, and said she would be representing this employee, the administrative hearing was called off, and business as usual was stopped for the moment.

She went on to talk about her grandparents who are absolutely disgusted with the council, with respect to her 87 year old grandmother who she said, “I never heard a cuss word come out of her mouth”.  Her grandmother said, ” you go there (to city council meetings) and they might as well give you the finger”.

“We have no government here”, Sterling said,  “you give all your power to Scott, your city manager, and you don’t monitor anything that he is doing, and he makes you end up looking like asses a lot of the times, and that’s really unfortunate, especially for people running for mayor.  You don’t want to be associated with that Rusty.  You said Jesus Christ is your inspiration.  I can’t ever think of an situation where Jesus Christ would ever under any circumstances permit employees to be just tortured the way that they are here at the City, and you have an obligation, not only as a Councilman and a Christian to make sure that stops immediately”

Public speaker Paul Chavez spoke prior to Sterling regarding an issue that occurred the prior week concerning workshop highlighting redistricting.  Mr. Chavez was surprised and disappointed in what the council did.  He said, “usually when you have a workshop, you don’t take a vote, because it is a workshop……you don’t make that type of a decision, you can have a concept of which way you want to go, or a direction of where you want to go, but you don’t make a decision”.  He went on to say that a vote was taken.. “I don’t know if it is legal or not… that’s why you have a city attorney”, (referencing City Attorney Gregory Priamos).   “The point that was very disturbing, was that the chamber (referencing the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce presided by CEO/ President Cindy Roth), came in and made a proposal.  I attended some of the other meetings for redistricting and nothing was mentioned.  Up to the last minute it was a ‘workshop’, you were all here (referencing the council), and you heard everybody talking about different things of what they like and disliked.”

“The chamber came in and told you that they wanted the ‘Market Place’”, (a district located in Councilman Andy Melendrez’s Ward).  And you said (the present council without Concilman Andy Melendrez present) “that’s a good idea, let’s all take it”!  Chavez said “the one that wasn’t spoken to was Mr. Melendrez (Councilman Melendrez), he was taken off guard.  That was very good planning for the chamber, and you guys all went for it.  It makes me very disappointed in all of you.  Also, it shows that those who are running for mayor, what kind of person are you? (I’d imagine Chavez was referring to Councilman “Rusty” Bailey who claims to be an independent voice for Riverside).   Is that what we want as citizens,  you don’t listen to us.. that’s the way I say.  I had a friend that was there and I asked him if you were going to the city council, he said no , what for?  They just look at you,  they let you talk but they don’t really hear you or acknowledge what you saying . So if this continues on you may have a lawsuit on your bench again, just as it has happened before and they have won, and we as taxpayer have to pay for that.  I wish you would reconsider when this comes up again, and stand for the people, not for the chamber, or our you guys bought out”?

While others in the community are calling this a “land grab” or “underhanded”, Dan Berstein explained this bit of shenanigans in the following blog posting, Eastside to Riverside: We Wuz Robbed!  Even PE’s Alicia Robinson had something to say in her blog posting Redistricting Riverside: Carving Up The Eastside.  TMC has spoken about this time and time again about what appears to be an incestuous relationship between the Chamber and the City of Riverside.  Cindy Roth who is president/CEO of the Greater Riverside Chamber, incidently her husband Richard Roth who has a position on the chamber, who also does work legal work for the City of Riverside and is runnig for State Senate and has the endorsement of the Mayor Ron Loveridge..  The residents and constituents of Riverside are disgusted and apathetic, and feel they have no recourse to make change as should appropriately be done by elected officials who flip flop on issues and do not listen to the real needs of the community.  Some have even used religion as a backdrop, and throwing citizen concerns through the back door..

I guess the question is for Councilpeople, anything Cindy wants, Cindy gets?  What would give Cindy Roth that much prominence?  Is it such a big deal to take the Marketplace and integrate it with the Downtown?  Why would they consider doing this in the first place?  Is it because it’s technically part of the East Side, and that has a negative connotation with many?  If we christened the East Side Marketplace as now part of Downtown, would the perceived visual perceptions change and now not be associated with the current perceptions of that nasty East Side?  Will the “East Side” now be just known as “the other side of the tracks”?  But Riverside Chamber’s, President/CEO, Cindy Roth wanted it that way, and the council thought it was a good idea.  Anything Cindy wants, Cindy gets?  For whatever reason it was done, what can I say, even independent voice of the people Rusty Bailey thought it was a good idea.  But Roth’s connections with the cities who’s who are appearing to be very clear.

Even her husband Richard Roth currently running for State Senate has clear ties with the City of Riverside by doing legal work for them.  Not to mention, he is part of the Board of Directors for the Riverside Chamber.  But now presented as the new improved and patriotic General Richard Roth for Senate.  Roth in conjunction with former Riverside Councilman Dom Betro had at a luncheon meeting with Democratic Senate Candidate Steve Clute, who was asked to step down from his running position….something for the community to think about regarding the generalisimo hardballing the Senate position…

Voilà, Now a Marketable Item for the Political Marketplace…

Richard Roth’s endorsements for senate are compelling, beginning with our Mayor Ron Loveridge and Jack Clark of Best,Best & Krieger, (doesn’t the City just hand over treasure chests of money for overpriced legal work to the Krieger)?   The Press Enterprise endorses Richard Roth!  Now let’s look at Cindy Roth’s Riverside Chamber Board of Directors.  Ahh, Peter Hubbard of American Medical Response, this is getting interesting…and it also appears that The Press Enterprise’s very own Ron Redfern is on Cindy’s Board of Directors for the Greater Riverside Chamber.   Richard Roth who had his ties to Republicans, now running as a Democrat, is all of sudden the next best thing to sliced smoked ham.  But can the smoke flavor of this latest innovation lose its taste over time?  Any way you slice it everyone appears to be incestuously connected in more ways than one?

But what is the big deal?  there only businesses?  Well, you already know how business friendly the City of Riverside can be, just take a stroll down the Main Street Mall.

TMC ARTIST RENDERING OF WHAT THE NEW MARKETPLACE MAY LOOK LIKE.

UPDATE: 07/10/2012: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION.  HOW WILL THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S FINANCIAL ISSUES PLAY OUT?  MAMMOTH LAKES, CA JUST FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY LAST WEEK BECAUSE IT COULD NOT AFFORD TO PAY OUT $43 MILLION DOLLAR JUDGEMENT WON BY A DEVELOPER.  IS THE CITY OF  CUDAHY NEXT?

THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE NAMED THE ‘MOST INTELLIGENT CITY’, PRIMARILY DUE TO TECHNOLOGY.  HIGH TECH SURADO SOFTWARE COMPANY NOW DEFUNCT, AFTER RECEIVING $350,000.00 OF PUBLIC FUNDS (THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE GAVE $300,000.00 AND THE COUNTY’S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY GAVE THEM $50,000.00), BUT OWING EMPLOYEES IN EXCESS OF $250,000.00.   CITY OF RIVERSIDE NOT SO INTELLIGENT? WILL THIS BE THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S SOLYNDRA?

IT WAS TO LATE FOR SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STAFF TO HIT THE TOWN DRINKING AT THE USUAL WATERING HOLES AS THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WENT ON BEYOND THE 12 MIDNIGHT HOUR.

THE REDISTRICTING ISSUE VOTED BY CITY COUNCIL 6-0 TO TAKE THIS ISSUE TO GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS.  CRITICISM OF THE COUNCIL CAME UNDERFIRE WEEKS AGO WHEN RIVERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CEO/PRESIDENT CINDY ROTH MADE THE SUGGESTION THAT ‘THE MARKETPLACE’ (PART OF COUNCILMAN ANDY MELENDREZ’S WARD 2) BE PART OF DOWNTOWN (WARD 1 COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER’S DISTRICT).  WHILE A PACKED HOUSE OF RESIDENT AND BUSINESS OWNERS FILLED COUNCIL CHAMBER, THE MAJORITY SPOKE AGAINST THE MOVE.  PUBLIC SPEAKER, CHRISTINA DURAN EVEN SUBMITTED AND PLACED COUNCIL ON NOTICE WITH AN OBJECTION LETTER.  THOSE IN FAVOR WERE THE DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP AND OF COURSE, THE GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, BOTH WHO RECEIVE CITY TAXPAYER MONIES FOR THEIR ENDEAVORS.  COUNCILMAN MELENDREZ COMMENTED ON THE TRUE PURPOSE OF RESDRICTING.  REDISTRICTING IS ABOUT POPULATION, AND NOWHERE IT IS TO BE USED TO FAVOR BUSINESSES.  FOR THE MOMENT, ‘THE CINDY LAND’ DEBACLE REMAINS ON HOLD.

THE ISSUE OF FUNDING FOR THE PURPLE PIPE REMAINS IN LIMBO FOR THE MOMENT, WHILE A PACKED HOUSE SPOKE AGAINST IT.  PUBLIC SPEAKER SCOTT SIMPSON PROVIDED AND PLACED THE CITY ON NOTICE WITH AN OBJECTION LETTER.  SIMPSON WENT BEYOND THE 3 MINUTES WHICH TRIGGERED RONNY’S BOUNCERS (RPD) TO ESCORT HIM FROM THE PODIUM.  AS SIMPSON MOVED AWAY FROM THE PODIUM AND BACK TO HIS SEAT, HE CONTINUED TO READ HIS OBJECTION.  THAT WAS A SIGHT TO SEE.. FOR THAT, TMC SHOUTS OUT, A ‘THAT A BOY’!  THE CITIZENS ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE…

TMC HAS OBTAINED SCOTT SIMPSON’S OBJECTION LETTER TO THE PURPLE PIPE WHICH WAS PRESENTED AT CITY COUNCIL.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL OBJECTION LETTER

QUESTIONS AROSE IF RECLAIMED WATER IS SAFE FOR PLANTS, AND IF PEOPLE AND CHILDREN ARE SAFE ON THE GROUNDS WHERE IT IS USED.  RIVERSIDE CITRUS GROWERS ALREADY MADE THEIR CASE THAT IT CANNOT BE USED FOR CITRUS.  ON SAFETY AND CEQA GUIDELINES (CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT), THE CITY SAID THEY WERE ABLE TO ‘BY PASS’ CEQA.  LEAVING QUESTIONS OF HOW CAN THE ISSUE OF THE SAFETY OF RECLAIMED WATER BYPASS CEQA?

THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE RED LIGHT CAMERA STAY, AFTER MAYOR BREAKS 3-3 COUNCIL TIE (COUNCILMAN MELENDREZ, MAC ARTHUR AND DAVIS VOTE AGAINST THEIR CONTINUED USE) WITH MAYOR LOVERIDGE BRINGING IN THE DECIDING VOTE TO FURTHER STUDY THE ISSUE OF MAKING IT COST EFFECTIVE.  COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS LOBBIES IN FAVOR OF CAMERAS, AND USES EXAMPLES OF SAFETY AND DEATHS, AND AS ADAMS SAYS..’BODIES’.  MANY CITIES ALTOGETHER HAVE DISMANTLED RED LIGHT CAMERAS DUE TO COST, SAFETY  ISSUES AND THE USE OF COMPANY PSUEDO STATISTICS DEMONSTRATING THAT THEY MAKE A DIFFERENCE.  COUNCILMAN ADAMS HAS BEEN AT THE BRUNT OF CRITICISM REGARDING ISSUES OF NEPOTISM DUE HIS BROTHER RON ADAMS HIRED AS A RED LIGHT CAMERA PHOTO EXPERT.

WATER RESPONSES FROM CITY COUNCIL COMING SOON!

UPDATE: 07/13/2012: CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION LAUNCHED AGAINST THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF FALSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS.  OUR THE RAINCROSS BELLS RINGING? THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT AND THE DA’S OFFICE ARE INVESTIGATING THE ALLEGATIONS OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.  SAN BERNARDINO CITY ATTORNEY JAME PENMAN SAID HE HAD BEEN PRESENTED DOCUMENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN ALLEGEDLY BEEN FALSIFIED WHICH MASKED THE CITY’S DEFICIT FOR 13 (LUCKY NUMBER) OF THE PAST 16 YEARS.

FACEBOOK ONLY? THE PRESS ENTERPRISE HAS EXPRESSED THEIR DESIRE TO THE COMMENT SECTION TO PRIMARILY USE FACEBOOK.  WORKING TO CURVE UNDESIRABLE COMMENTS AND PREVENT ANONYMOUS COMMENTERS SPEAKING  WHILE EATING CHEETOS IN THEIR UNDERWEAR, WELL, AGAIN, AS MANY HAVE SAID, THIS IS RIVERSIDE..  BUT MANY ARE ASKING, IS THIS A PLOY FROM THE DOUBLE DIPPING CHIEF OF POLICE?  ARE WE TO NOW EXPECT PERFECTLY EXPRESSED OPINIONS AS EXPECTED IN A PERFECTLY POLITICALLY CORRECT NEWSPAPER?  BUT NOW THE CHIEF CAN MONITOR AND PERFECTLY SEE THE FACES..  BUT I GUESS FOR POLICE WORK, ‘WE TIP’ ANONYMOUS HOTLINE IS ACCEPTABLE?

“I want to live in a society that people can voice unpopular opinions because I know as result of that a society grows and matures,”   – Hugh Hefner

THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO: BID RIGGING?  POLICE INVESTIGATE..  WEREN’T CLAIMS OF BID FAVORITISM BROUGHT UP IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE?

UPDATE: 07/17/2012:  WILL RON BRING THE LOVE ON HOME TO BILL BAILEY?  THE MAYOR’S ENDORSEMENT FOR THE MAYOR’S CANDIDANCY..WHO WILL IT BE?  THE GIGGLES OF EXCITEMENT ARE APPEARING TO OCCUR ON MAYOR CANDIDATE’S BAILEY’S FACEBOOK PAGE, AS HE EXPRESSES A SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT TO BE RELEASED IN THE NEXT 48 HOURS REGARDING A SIGNIFICANT ENDORSEMENT…

UPDATE: 07/17/2012: 12 NOON: MAYOR RON SENDS THE LOVE HOME BY ENDORSING WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY FOR MAYOR…

UPDATE: 07/19/2012: WHAT ISSUE WILL MAYORAL CANDIDATE ED ADKISON CALL  HIS OPPONENT WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY ON?  ADKISON PLANS TO PRESENT THESE ISSUES IN A PRESS CONFERENCE THURSDAY 07/19/2012 AT 11:00AM IN FRONT OF CITY HALL.

     

AT TODAYS PRESS CONFERENCE, ADKISON PRESENTED HIS BANCRUPTCY PREVENTION PLAN AND SIGNED A PLEDGE TO DO SO.  HE CHALLENGED RUSTY TO DO THE SAME.  THIS PLAN IS NEEDED, WITH A REJECTIONS FROM THE STATE FINANCE DEPARTMENT IN EXCESS OF $90 MILLION AND A NEW 218 LAW SUIT, THE GENERAL FUND WILL BE HIT HARD, CUTS NEED TO BE MADE STARTING WITH THE MAYOR’S OFFICE!  IS THERE MORE SALICIOUS INFORMATION COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE WITH REGARDS TO OPPONENT WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY?

WAS ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND GENERALISIMO RICHARD ROTH’S OFFER TO SERGENT VALMONT GRAHAM OF A PROMOTION TO LIEUTENANT AND $25,000.00 TURNED DOWN?  LOW BALLING IS A COMMON PRACTICE THE CITY TAKES ON TO MESS WITH THE OTHER ATTORNEY. 

THE GAMES ARE ON AND THE NEGOTIATIONS HAVE YET TO BE SETTLED.

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTEN…MAIN STREET, LOOKING FROM CURRENT CITY HALL (CIRCA 1930)

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU.  PROUDLY RATED ONE STAR (POSSIBLY DOWN TO ZERO FROM OUR LAST ACCOUNTS) OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR GOOD REASON, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST, FOR GOOD REASON… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPHALL SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR CONTACT US BY THE FOLLOWING EMAIL ADDRESS! CONTRIBUTORS WILL ALWAYS BE PROTECTED… YES, WE EXPECT THE JAIL TIME FOR THAT ONE…  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

Older Entries