Posts Tagged ‘john russo’

ACCORDING TO THE ALAMEDA MAGAZINE, THE PHOTO WAS COURTESY OF JOHN RUSSO (Wow, thanks John!)

TMC Figured Russo out way before the City of Riverside did.  We had the all laid out for the City of Riverside, but they relied on their staff.  Thanks John for your Riverside legacy, Partnership Compensation Model, Measure Z, 50 year loan lease, Contracts without a Resolution.

Alameda’s city manager counts development progress at Alameda Point and smoothing over employee relations as his main achievements.

Alameda City Manager John Russo, a former Oakland city councilman and city attorney, is headed to Riverside.

Outgoing Alameda City Manager John Russo likes to use sports metaphors. So, when news broke in February that Russo, along with his oversize personality, was leaving the Island for a new opportunity and greater compensation in Riverside, the response from city officials was akin to what small-market baseball teams admit when they land a high-priced slugger in the last year of his rookie contract. “Frankly, we were lucky to have him,” Councilmember Jim Oddie said in the days after the announcement.

Following stints in Oakland, first as a council member and then as city attorney, Russo’s thoughtful wit and razor-like barbs made his hiring as city manager in 2011 as curious as a big fish swimming in a small pond.

By most accounts, Russo’s four years in Alameda were a success. In an understated, yet frank interview, Russo said his greatest accomplishment is not moving along development at Alameda Point, but repositioning the city and public employee unions away from constant back-biting to an atmosphere of shared values and greater economic certainty. There were rumors that Russo’s departure was exacerbated by the surprise results of the fall election, but Russo said the rumors are untrue and that he merely landed an opportunity to fast-track existing plans for moving himself and his family to Southern California. “To the surprise of many,” he said, “I’m not an important person. I am just city manager of a small California city, and later I’ll be a city manager of a bigger city in California.”

However, under Russo’s stewardship, decades of uncertainty over the direction of development at the former Alameda Naval Air Station was resolved following an agreement with the U.S. Navy for the city to limit housing at Alameda Point in exchange for reconveying the land at no cost to Alameda taxpayers. But, Russo said credit does not lie with his actions. “I don’t think I have a legacy,” he said, noting his viewpoint is deeply rooted in his Southern Italian ancestry. “I have a fairly fatalistic view of the world,” he added. “I know no one ever believes this applies to me, but I think I have a fairly modest view of what my role is. This community was ready to make progress at Alameda Point.”

The infrastructure of support preceded him, he said, when the community rallied around an ultimately unsuccessful pitch to lure a new campus for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to Alameda Point. “I didn’t make that happen. That feeling of ‘at long last, we need to do something about the base’ is what drove the process. The public itself was exhausted by plan after plan. Once you get that mandate from the people and the council, it makes it easier to get something done.”

Yet, negotiating the no-cost reconveyance is one of his proudest moments, Russo said, but even then, he believes luck was involved. The Navy’s previous $108.5 million asking price was never going to pencil out for the city, Russo said. Instead, he urged the Navy to erase the uncertainty of the last decade and return to the original offer of a no-cost transfer of the property. “I just wanted to start a dialogue by getting that number down, but they surprised me by saying yes,” Russo said. “With economic development, sometimes you have to throw the line in the water dozens of times to get a bite. We got a bite on the first throw. That was just luck.”

Next, Russo needed to dissuade some councilmembers from being starstruck by large-scale development at Alameda Point, which incidentally, provided an easy stab at legacy-building to a more balanced piecemeal approach. “The city kept swinging for the fences and trying to hit a grand slam by seeking a single entity to develop the entire point all at once,” Russo said. “What I told them is we need a rally of singles, and I will submit that we scored, and we will continue to score.”

Although he said more needs to be done to put Alameda on solid financial footing, Russo said a thawing of animosity between City Hall and public employee groups over salaries and benefits will greatly aid the city over the next decade. City employees now contribute a higher percentage of their salary to pensions and split the additional costs of medical benefits, Russo said. But they also enjoy pay raises when the city’s revenues increase. (Partnership Compensation Plan, whereby salary increases are tied to City revenue, did it in Alameda, he did it in Riverside.  Was Measure-Z just another Employee Profit Sharing Scheme?)

“What we’ve done here is created a true partnership for good times and bad times,” he said. “That’s a very foundational change in the relationship that had sort of veered from ‘Let’s do whatever labor wants,’ to ‘Let’s go to war with the people who work for us.’”

On the horizon for Alameda, Russo said, is increasingly higher premiums from the state’s largest pension group, the California Public Employee Retirement System, or CalPERS, and greater demand in coming years for post-employee benefits, both of which he said the city is ready to confront. “Alameda has made tremendous strides that will be very important in the coming five to 10 years in dealing with the two big challenges the city faces,” he said. “We’re on a path culturally to being able to have those discussions about those bigger issues in a way that is very businesslike and partnership-based rather than a bunch of symbols and blame and nonsense.”

Despite the accomplishment, Alameda’s fiscally conservative residents, including many who favor pension reform, rarely view Russo as a crusader for their cause. Russo said he relied on the professional opinions of the city treasurer and auditor and “not those taking positions that are founded in emotion or ideology,” he said. “I don’t use Tea Party-type people as my litmus test of my success, not nationally, and not locally. When I was in Oakland, I used to say, ‘I’m sick and tired of people who are sick and tired.’ That path leads nowhere.”   (Russo was not a crusader for the taxpayers of Riverside, remember Russo is part of the Blue Blood Liberal Elite… I’m exceptional due to my background, all others are an impediment.  Case in point whereby public comment is seen by Russo as a formality, not part of the Democratic process of community involvement..)

Some of these same people were often outraged by Russo’s in-your-face style during public meetings over the years. “I make no apologies,” Russo said. Instead, he was defending his employees from unfair attacks from the public and, in some occasions, members of the City Council. “When you stand publicly and accuse good, professional people on my staff of being either stupid, lazy, or corrupt, I think you should expect an answer. If you want to play above the rim, then expect to be rejected from time to time.”  (More revealing examples of the dark mind set of Russo. Did he simply display the classic case of a sociopath?).

Regrets? Russo has had a few. “I’m wrong all the time,” he said. “I just try to be right consistently more often than I’m wrong.” Specifically, Russo said he overreached on Measure C, the 2012 sales tax increase to fund a disparate wish list of city projects. “I just kind of threw it all in together, saying if you’re going to go to the public to ask for money, it should be a meaningful set of projects,” Russo said. Furthermore, elected officials sought additional projects as a strategy for cobbling together the needed two-thirds majority for passage. A more single-minded approach may have been more successful, he said. “I regret that my judgment there wasn’t as good as it should have been. Then again, maybe it isn’t a regret, because the public just didn’t want it.”

Contrary to popular opinion, the reason for his leaving Alameda has nothing to do with Mayor Trish Herrera Spencer’s slow-growth stance for Alameda. Instead, he said, they quickly forged a good working relationship and keep in daily contact. “This is not about whether Trish and I get along. We get along fine. It’s a very friendly relationship. We don’t agree on everything, but it’s not my job to agree. My job is to implement the council’s direction.”

However, he acknowledged conflict exists among the new city council. “There are clearly issues between the mayor and other council members, and there’s dissension there. That’s politics, and it’s not for staff to talk about. They have to work that out amongst themselves whether I’m here or not,” he said. “But that’s not why I’m leaving.”

Before accepting the job of Alameda city manager, Russo and the-Mayor Marie Gilmore had a “personal pledge,” he said, that if he took the job, he would agree to stay for the duration of her tenure. “When she left office, that pledge was gone,” Russo said, and the opportunity in Riverside arose around the same time. Russo and his family already had plans to eventually move to Southern California upon the end of his time in Alameda, he said. “It just moved forward what the family’s plan was by a couple of years.”

Russo’s bump in pay starting in May as Riverside’s new city manager will definitely help the college fund of his twins who will both be attending college starting in the fall, he said. His $296,000 annual salary in Riverside, compared with his $215,000 base salary in Alameda, is basically the difference between taking out a loan for their education and paying for it himself, he said. “I paid my way through college, and I didn’t pay off my school loans until age 43,” said Russo. “And I’ll be damned if I’m going to be paying loans until I’m 80.”

(Before Russo was fired he cashed out over $100K of taxpayer monies.  The traveling snake oil salesman caught the attention of our City, and the taxpayers caught the bite of higher taxes while he skipped town to greener pastures.  But still, the issue of both Russo and Guess’s contract have not been resolved.  Both current contracts violate City Charter as to not having a resolution passed by Council.  If Andy doesn’t put forward an investigation maybe District Attorney Mike Hestrin’s office will.)

From Johnny’s Facebook Page, was his wife holding a premonition of what was yet to come?

Should we now be more aware of Snakes in Suits?

JOHN RUSSO STATES HE LEFT JOB AT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, I GUESS HE CONVENIENTLY FORGOT HE WAS FIRED…

BLOCK BY BLOCK: RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITY INCREASES: TAXPAYER ADVOCATE JASON HUNTER INTERVIEWED:  On a side note, the City of Riverside has made it clear to community groups and local radio stations, they will not participate it Hunter is part of the debate.  In fact TMC has been told, Councilman Jim Perry, former City Manager John Russo and former RPU General Manager Girish Balanchandran apparently stated they will not to appear even if they were the only participant.

 

MVGORDIE BLOG SITE: CITY OF MORENO VALLEY CAUGHT MISUSING ITS CODE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH HUD REQUIREMENT!  Good read with supporting back up documents.  City Hall can call it an oversight, but the Office of Inspector General states “This condition occurred because the City did not have adequate written procedures or controls to ensure that it met HUD requirements and City staff was not sufficiently knowledgeable of the program requirements.” (Click on the Red Link).

 

FROM THE DESK OF COMMUNITY TAXPAYER ADVOCATE JASON HUNTER: Poll given on Next Door neighborhood web site:  Do you think Riverside Public Utilities staff should get automatic raises if our rates are hiked (without a vote of the public I might add)?  Accordingly in this poll, the Residents of the City of Riverside do not want their representatives to pass this.  If they do, it will be political suicide.  People in Ward 1 keep on wondering why the so called advocate neighborhood group, NOWS (Neighbors of the Wood Streets) continues to be an ineffective voice within the community.

Jason Hunter wrote this to the entire City Council and Mayor, as he believed the unethical/illegal behavior in this City needs to end, and the ratepayers/owners need to be aware of this conflict-of-interest… apparently the whole scenario seems like a lot of racketeering to me quite frankly.  Also, did you know 18% of the proposed rate hike is just plain ole’ new taxes?  Please write your Councilmember or show up next Tuesday at 7pm at City Hall to voice your opinion on a measure that is actually greater dollar-wise than Measure Z (2016 $50+ million sales tax).  Remember the Riverside City Council will decide Tuesday, May 22, whether to start charging residents more for water and electricity.  Get your asses out to City Council on this date!

Gentlemen, (I’m sure no pun intended)

RPU employees that put together this rate increase have a direct, material, financial conflict-of-interest in presenting this rate increase. I would urge you, for their sake (if not your own), to vote ‘no’ on the proposed utility rate increases. As you are probably aware, the Partnership Compensation Model (PCM) includes Utility Users Tax within the Balanced Revenue Index, which is used to calculate Executive, Senior Management, Management, Professional, Supervisory, Para-professional and Confidential Units automatic annual raises. The Utility Users Tax is currently 6.5% of all electric and water utility rates/charges. Ergo, the higher the rates, the higher the UUT, the higher the BRI change…the higher salaries go. I warned you guys prior to the passage of Measure Z that the PCM was terrible policy, essentially a bribe to get all employees to back certain revenue enhancements…but 6 of you (including the Mayor) were blinded by your need for instant gratification. The cows are now returning to the barn. I intend to allow the law of unintended consequences to fully play out if these ludicrous rate increases are passed next Tuesday. The PCM needs to be restructured or thrown out all-together to remove these perverse incentives.

Sincerely, Jason Hunter

CALL AND SEIZE CITY HALL, BE IT YOUR DESTINY TO MAKE THEM HONEST:

CITY OF RIVERSIDE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

MAYORS OFFICE:

Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey     951-826-5551 (office), 951-801-8439 (cell), email:   3mayor@riversideca.gov

CITY COUNCIL:

Ward 1 – Mike Gardner     951-826-5991 (office), 951-941-7084 (cell), email:  mgardner@riversideca.gov

Ward 2 – Andy Melendrez  951-826-5991 (office), email: asmelendrez@riversideca.gov

Ward 3 – Mike Soubirous 951- 826-5991(office), 951-515-1663 (cell), email: msoubirous@riversideca.gov

Ward 4 – Chuck Condor 951-990-9819 (office), email: cconder@riversideca.gov

Ward 5 – Chris Mac Arthur  951-826-5991 (office), 951-990-9719 (cell), email: cmacarthur@riversideca.gov

Ward 6 – Jim Perry 951-826-5991 (office),  email: jperry@riversideca.gov

Ward 7 – Steve Adams  951-826-5991 (office), or 951-826-5024, email: sadams@riversideca.gov

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

thumbnail_canstockphoto16393754%20female%20with%20axe%20cutting%20taxes%20no%20on%20z

DON’T GET HOSED AND TASED BY THOSE BEHIND THE TAX…VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z

Let’s all remember that the City is out of money, or they want us to believe they are out of money, right!  Well here we go again, the City of Riverside sent out this mailer to all of its residents, which would be well over 100,000 households.  How much do you think you the taxpayer paid for this?  I’m sure most of us just threw it in the trash.  If the City can afford to send each household this information, then you would think that the City is doing okay.  We saw this exact same thing with Measure-A  pamphlets back in 2013, the City uses taxpayer monies to send these “informational pamphlets,” but in essence, are psychologically designed for a vote in their favor.   Don’t be fooled, as you were last time, these informational pamphlet were structured, written and fashioned to have you vote Yes on Measure-Z.

Why are we receiving this informational pamphlet?  THE CITY NEEDS TO ASK US FOR MORE MONEY BECAUSE THEY SCREWED UP!

Unbeknownst to the taxpayer is the claim that if you Vote No on Measure-Z, you will lose important City services.  Let me make this perfectly clear, we lost City services a long time ago, and we will NEVER get them back.  The City chose to invest and squander our money on such things as “Government Entertainment,” as in the Fox Theater,  instead of taking care of basic services for its citizens.

img041               img043

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

This “informational pamphlet” strategically shows a playground full of kids (because its all about the kids, isn’t it?), along with Public Works Employees, a Police Officer and a Fire Fighter.  The title is “Measure-Z, What’s It’s All About.”  Again, the City is going to tell the taxpayer how to vote, as they did with the water measure in 2013 known as Measure-A.  When you foolishly passed this measure in 2013, you voted to tax yourself 11.5%!  What the City promised us then never materialized, and what they promise us now will never happen.  What is really egregious, is that the City and their cohorts really do believe you will fall for this and vote YES on Measure-Z.  They are going to trick the unsuspecting taxpayer into showering them with billions of dollars.

Instead of holding staff and leadership accountable, our Council decided to concoct a “Spending Pledge” a few weeks ago.  REALLY?  How stupid and foolish this makes the Council looks.  So rather then taking responsibility and accountability they’ve resorted to “pinky promises” in order to sway public opinion.  Five of the eight electeds’ on the Council Chamber have held there positions for 7 years or longer.  They own this fiscal mess.  Measure-Z (Sales Tax Increase) is their attempt to remove accountability for running this ship aground….sort of a “You can trust us this time, we even placed our names on it!”  These men are spending addicts.  So what do they really need this money for?  More Government Entertainment, Pensions and Raises.

You have to be a fool to give spending addicts more money!  Vote “No on Measure-Z!”

img044                 img045

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

The above pamphlet tells you, the taxpayer, why the City needs the additional money.  For years the City leadership Has been boasting about our City being financially sound, you can all remember them saying “We have 40 million in reserves” they are now telling us that the City never fully recovered from the economic recession that started in 2008.  Even Police Chief Sergio came out in the Summer of 2015 to tell City Council the Police Budget was sound.  The City is lying.  The City will never recover because they have misspent, over spent, passed special interest projects and new employee contracts without any funding sources.  They were irresponsible with taxpayer monies and NOW THEY WANT MORE!

This November 2016, you will also be voting on another tax, Measure-O (Riverside Unified School Bond).  If it passes, this will increase your property taxes $100.00 per every $100,000.00 your house is worth.  So if you have a $400,000.00 home, your new additional property tax will be $400.00, and then add your new sales tax (Measure Z), which can be an additional $100.00 or more per year.  You now have a total approximation of $500.00 per year additional tax. Then I’m sure all of you do remember there will be a sewer increase this year, and don’t forget Public Utilities  will also have their hand out soon.  You will also need to look at the State and the Federal Government, they may need more money as well.

How much more can you afford ? And who will be most impacted by this?  The Most obvious is the poor, disabled, seniors and the retiree.  TMC predicts this will also have a HUGE impact on Churches, a 10% tithe at the very minimum will be difficult if we have an additional 5 to 10% tax each year.  Taking $40 to $400.00 out of your packer each month for additional taxes will be devastating for many.

img046                img053

CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE

This pamphlet was done by design to touch emotional center, voting with your heart, as opposed to voting with your head.  Did the City purposely use two black police officer to show how diverse they are? With a small child to show they are connected to the community?   This informational Pamphlet is simply just a bunch of BS and about the financial mess the city is in.  They will not cut anything they will make the taxpayer go without the basics. Some say this is all about the increases to Police and Fire and   Some  state that Police and Fire make less than Teachers, I personally find that an insult to Teachers, but Transparent California tells a different picture on Fire and Police.  It seems that they are making more than Corporate Execs and Doctors!  The Riverside Police Department have incredible amounts of OT (Remember that’s how they pad their pensions), Other Pay and Benefits before finally tallying up the final total.  If you come from the Corporate Private Sector as I do, OT as this is never seen.  Overtime as this would lead a corporation to Bankruptcy, and that may be where the City is going.

tcrpdone              tcrpdtwo          tcrpdthree

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Well how about Fire, it appears they Need more Money also, check the incredible amounts of OT, Other Pay and Benefits before the final tally is totaled.  What this tells me is that Union Contract Negotiations must be Public.  We have the right to know and be engage, after all the taxpayer is the Employer.  What we see here is that City Leadership has not been looking out for the best interest of the taxpayer, but for other interest.

tcfireone           tcfiretwo            tcfirethree

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Back in 2013, the City sent out at taxpayers expense, and informational flyer, known as the Water Measure, or Measure-A.  In this taxpayer paid pamphlet, the City of Riverside threatened the taxpayer, that if this Measure-A didn’t pass the following would occur:  the City would be forced to cut $6.7 million in local services, there may actually as residents faced with more gangs, graffiti and rundown streets.  They actually stated that 79 City positions would be eliminated which included Police Officers, Firefighters, School Crossing Guards (we know what happened there), youth recreation programs (we know what happened there), senior services (they actually threatened the Goeske Center Seniors they needed to vote for this or we won’t fund you).

pgone     measureajpg     pgthree     pgfour

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

In the above 2013 Measure-A informational pamphlet, the first page also shows children, police officers with a child and public work employees. Quite the same formula as the current.  In 2013 Mayor Rusty Bailey lied about Measure A, he has lied again today about Measure-Z.  What else has Bailey Lied about? TMC HAS THE STORY! COMING SOON..

rustysletterpgone     rustysletterpgtwo

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

CONTRIBUTIONS SUPPORTING YES ON MEASURE-Z HAVE BEEN POURING IN, you may ask “Who are they?”  All the elitist bastards that will benefit handsomely, one in particular, Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey.  But also the usual suspects such as the so called Non-Profits and Unions.

Bottom line folks, the City of Riverside never had a revenue problem, they have a spending problem, and spent they did.   As with the Renaissance Project, with then City Manager Brad Hudson, who spent, over spent and misspent your monies like a drunken sailor. TMC wrote about this in detail.  Most importantly we told council about that as well, and we predicted the City would be out of money and in trouble in 2015.  WE WERE RIGHT.   Now current leadership City Manager John Russo continues to lie and spin the truth on how all this happened.  He now wants to continue the reckless spending practices.  They just can’t help themselves.

Councilman Paul Davis, Andy Melendrez, Rusty Bailey, Mike Gardner and Chris McArthur were the responsible parties for getting us in this mess,   This is how it works: Police and Fire Unions  work to benefit themselves by laundering member dues, paid for by taxpayers, to return in campaign funds for the benefit and control of elected official.  You may ask why Tim Strack, from the Fire Union, is giving over a $100,000.00 to the Yes on Measure-Z campaign.  Why? Because its all about money and their own personal gain, its never been about you and the basic services of the city.  Public Safety has found a way to hose and tase the taxpayer into submission, and this is wrong!  Ultimately, sounds like strong arm tactics, when referencing the importance of their jobs to the community.  This is a no, no, and could also be inferred as ‘coercion.’  But when you have no leadership to effectively protect the taxpayer, you have nothing.

In 2014, the Riverside Police Union President, Brian Smith and the Chief of Police Sergio Diaz conspired to railroad and politically remove Councilman Mike Soubirous.  Unions in any capacity should never be involved in Public Sector Politics without our input for this reason.  It our money not theirs, and we should be protected.

FORMER PRESS ENTERPRISE COMMENTATOR, DAN BERSTEIN, HIS TAKE ON WHY TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z!

CONTRIBUTORS SUPPORTING YES ON MEASURE-Z THAT YOU AS A TAXPAYER SHOULD BE AWARE OF, BECAUSE THEY ALL BENEFIT SUBSTANTIALLY:

SEIU

seiuone

FIRE

fireone     firetwo

RPD

rpoaone

MAYOR BAILEY: BUT ALSO RECEIVED PLENTY FROM FIRE AS TO HAVE HIM IN THEIR BACK POCKET!

baileyone    firebaileyone     firebaileytwo

THE RAINCROSS GROUP

trgone

THE RIVERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

grccone

ARTICLE LINKS:

TMC: 04.10.2013: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: WHISKEY IS FOR DRINKING, WATER IS FOR FIGHTING OVER..AND EVERYBODY WANTS A PIECE OF THAT ACTION.

TMC: 05.10.2013: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: MEASURING UP TO MEASURE A.

PRESS ENTERPRISE: 01.20.2015: RIVERSIDE: FIREFIGHTERS GET RAISES IN NEW CONTRACT.

PRESS ENTERPRISE: 09.16.2015: RIVERSIDE: POLICE CONTRACT INCLUDES RAISES.

PRESS ENTERPRISE: 09.23.2015: RIVERSIDE: POLICE CONTRACT APPROVED.

PRESS ENTERPRISE: 06.13.2016: RIVERSIDE: DEAL WITH FIREFIGHTERS KEEPS ALL STATIONS OPEN.

PRESS ENTERPRISE: 09.21.2016: WHAT KIND OF CONTRACT DEAL MADE WITH POLICE ASSOCIATION.

PRESS ENTERPRISE: 09.23.2016: OPINION: CITIES BAILING OUT PENSIONS WITH TAX HIKES.

REMEMBER FOLKS DON’T BELIEVE FOR A MINUTE THAT THESE PARASITES ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE TAXPAYER!   THE MONIES ALLOCATED TO PASS MEASURE-Z ARE HUGE!  THESE PEOPLE ARE IN IT FOR PERSONAL GAIN, OUR LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY SPECIAL INTEREST. VOTE NO ON MEASURE Z

REMEMBER MY FELLOW TAXPAYERS DON’T GET HOSED!

dtg-cap-dread-scott-fire-hose-2014-10-10-bk01_z

VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z

THIS TAX ONLY SERVES, AND CONTINUES TO SERVE THE PUBLIC SERVANT ELITES AND ESTABLISHMENT ELITES OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.

DONATE: Come On Folks, Help and Support No On Measure-Z by donating to the following links:

GO FUND ME: NO ON MEASURE-Z RIVERSIDE

CONTACT LIST:

  1. noonmeasurez@yahoo.com
  2. NO ON MEASURE-Z WEBSITE RIVERSIDE
  3. FACEBOOK NO ON MEASURE-Z RIVERSIDE

Or simply make checks payable to and mail to:

NO ON MEASURE-Z COMMITTEE I.D.# 1389248

BOB BUSTER, TREASURER, 7401 DUFFERIN AVENUE, RIVERSIDE, CA, 92504, 951-780-4749

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

nozsword

IS THE SWORD OF DEMOCLES HANGING OVER THE CITY’S HEAD?

Vote No on Measure-Z folks!  Have you always believed that local Riverside Police and Fire had your back, and had your best interest at heart?  Not so, think again..  They have always thought of themselves before the taxpayer and TMC will prove that these so called Heroes, are really imposters of deception, disguised in sheep clothing, making you believe, you the taxpayer are of the utmost importance.  But not so, they will deceive to attain what they believe they are entitled to.  Your money, your hard earned money, and will continue to make you believe that it is well spent.  Not so folks, the reality is that your public servants are charlatan and  masters of deception when it comes to tax monies, and these opportunist should be exposed.  It is a sad case when your public servants care more about their entitlement pay, then servicing the public!

page1initial               page2initial

CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE

Example One: Tim Strack, President of the Riverside City Firefighters Association (Fire Union) has set aside $100,000.00 to the campaign on Yes on Measure Z, to get this tax through so his firefighters will continue receive their high pensions.  But Strack is singing the same tune he did a couple of years ago when they lied about the No on Measure A campaign, and said we would lose important services in the community, and if Measure A didn’t pass we would have problems in service.  Well folks he lied, lying Tim continues to lie about Measure-Z.  This $100K started out as taxpayer monies when given as salaries to the firefighters, then give to the unions as dues, then the unions utilized it on issues that benefit themselves.  This is the “laundering” system in action.

strack

TIM STRACK

Example Two: Brian Smith, President of the Riverside Police Officers Association ( Police Union), attempted to ensure the audience at the Goeske Senior Center that “monies wouldn’t be squandered because the Police Association would be watching.”  Sure Brian, you weren’t watching when you were embezzled out of $350,000.00 of member dues as this CBS report explains.  Brian, are you going to tell the taxpayers that no officer in your association could read the books?  So guys, if you can’t protect your own back yard, how can you confidently protect the publics?

president

BRIAN SMITH

Example Three: All non-profits that can’t make it on their own, and depend on “taxpayer welfare,” of course, are for Yes On Measure-Z.  This would be the notorious Raincross Group and the boldly infamous Riverside Chamber of Commerce.

THE FOLLOWING IS INFORMATION FROM THE “NO ON MEASURE-Z” CAMPAIGN:

By passing Measure-Z, the City of Riverside’s tax will double from the current 8% to 9%, becoming the biggest tax increase in our City’s history.  Also, remember as some of friends have told me, If I bought a high price item, as a new car, I’ll just buy it somewhere else where the sales tax is lower.  Not so, if you buy a car anywhere, you will still have to pay the Riverside tax, because the tax is tied to you home property address.

Secondly, the new tax gouges Riverside Taxpayers by inadvertently raising “five times” the amount needed to “balance the 2016 City budget.”  Measure-Z fleeces the taxpayer for $2 billion over 20 years.  We find this excess is purposely done, that continues to encourage the City of Riverside’s bad behavior of “wasteful spending.”  Measure-Z is a “regressive general tax.”  What this means is that your tax dollars will be spent on anything the elected officials dream up in the next two decades….without voter approval.

The best part for the City Establishment is that there is no specific taxpayer accountability written into Measure-Z.  This means that the City is not “obligated” to tell you how your money is spent!

Thirdly, Fine Print, Measure-Z tax monies can be “diverted” from “vital services” to:

  • Build a new City Hall, Trolley System (Remember the Brockton Bike Lane Bug-A-Boo) or expand the Riverside Convention Center.
  • Raise “salaries and benefits.”  Don’t you see Fire and Police salivating like Pavlov’s Dog?  Google “Salaries Riverside 2015 Transparent California.”
  • Pay down predominantly soaring Fire and Police Pension Debt. The City of Riverside are ‘horrible’ negotiators for the taxpayers.  Currently, for example, the City of Riverside has been paying the entire cost of employee pensions, $71,811.00.  Police and Fire pension average $108,173.00  Pretty incredible!  I have a Doctorate in Clinical Pharmacy from USC, a B.S. in Pre-Medical Sciences from Loyola Marymount, and an emphasis in Medical Bacteriology from California State University Los Angeles, and currently receive $12K in a pension per year…. go figure!

Again beware of “scare tactics” from the City of Riverside.  TMC has been told that the “financial condition” in the City of Riverside is “dire,”  but the City is “lying” again, as they did with Measure-A.  How are they lying?  Through their teeth, because “official budget documents” state there is “absolutely no financial trouble,” and the City Manager reports that “prudent belt-tightening” is enough to balance budgets and restore services.  Don’t Be Misled!

TMC has been dealing with this issue since we battled with the City with our Downtown Business in 2011.  What we have with the City is a “failure to communicate.”  What TMC has been stating for years is that “we do not have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.”  Realistically, the City of Riverside is “rolling in doe,” therefore Measure-Z is not needed!  Tax Revenues are at an all time high and expected to keep on growing.  For example, Riverside Public Utilities provides a huge revenue source other cities don’t have …… $45 million from your Surplus Utility Rates which goes directly to the City of Riverside General Fund!

Fourthly, City Unions, which unfairly positions City Employees against the taxpayer.  The Fire Union under Tim Strack, pledges $100,000.00 to the Yes on Measure-Z campaign, in the hopes that Measure-Z passes, thus ensuring, bigger pay increases and higher pensions to the “rat bastards!”  Remember, these ‘public servants’ have betrayed us!  Back on August 16, 1937 President Franklin D. Roosevelt state this on “public sector unions.”

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that “under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government.”

Fifthly, a “Yes on Measure-Z” vote will absolutely hurt families and seniors on fixed incomes.  The City of Riverside’s median household income is $56,000.00  This amount has yet to recover from “pre-recessions highs,” thus causing financial uncertainty for families.  Taking it a step further, Retirees Social Security household income averages $16,000.00

Sixthly, If Measure-Z passes, a single consumer will pay $250.00 dollars more in addition to the $2000.00 in taxes for the cost of a $25,000.00 vehicle!

Seventhly, Verify the Facts, go to the City of Riverside website  www.riversideca.gov/measurez    You will find two videos that should be watched on why the City would like to vote Yes on Measure-Z, there is also a Q & A on Yes on Measure-Z, a report on Budget Facts, City Manager John Russo’s letter in For Year 2016-2018 Biennial Budget.  Is Russo thinking that he should have retired and just have bought that pizza joint in the Bronx?

o

In that same area we have the impartial analysis of Measure-Z and City Council Agenda Item #37.

MEASURE-Z NEWS LINKS:

09.16.2016: PRESS ENTERPRISE: RIVERSIDE LEADERS, RESIDENTS TAKE SIDES ON TAX ISSUE.

09.23.2016: PRESS ENTERPRISE: CITIES BAILING OUT PENSIONS WITH TAX HIKES.

09.26.2016: PRESS ENTERPRISE: RIVERSIDE HOLDS MEETINGS ON MEASURE Z.

No on Measure-Z endorsed by former Riverside County District Attorney, Grover Trask.  Former City of Riverside Chief Financial Officer Paul Sundeen, Former Council Member and County Supervisor Bob Buster.  Dr. Sharon B. Mateja, Dentist; Kevin Dawson, homeowner/taxapayer; Susana Hernandez, Alford School District Retired; The Lincoln Club of Riverside County.

DONATE: Come On Folks, Help and Support No On Measure-Z by donating to the following links:

GO FUND ME: NO ON MEASURE-Z RIVERSIDE

CONTACT LIST:

  1. noonmeasurez@yahoo.com
  2. NO ON MEASURE-Z WEBSITE RIVERSIDE
  3. FACEBOOK NO ON MEASURE-Z RIVERSIDE

Or simply make checks payable to and mail to:

NO ON MEASURE-Z COMMITTEE I.D.# 1389248

BOB BUSTER, TREASURER, 7401 DUFFERIN AVENUE, RIVERSIDE, CA, 92504, 951-780-4749

VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z

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

Hissom_Russ

RUSS HISSOM, PARTNER AT BAKER TILLY VIRCHOW KRAUSE LLP, THE AUDITOR THAT DID THE AUDIT WITHIN THE AUDIT, OF THE ALREADY AUDITED NORTHSIDE PROPERTIES, THAT I HAVE A FEELING, WILL BE AUDITED AGAIN…

Bringing the truth to the North Side…….Vote Vivian Moreno Mayor 2016…..

Riverside hires Russ Hissom, Partner at Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLP, to perform an audit (another outside auditor paid for by the ratepayer) of the Northside properties that the City, the Redevelopment Agency, and Public Utilities made a mess of.

This blog post examines the 5th or 6th audit (we think) conducted on the Northside properties that were once owned by our Water Fund; that were sold to the Redevelopment Agency, General Fund and Electric Funds; a portion of which were subsequently given to the General Fund; all financed by the Sewer and Electric Funds; and with one property sold back to the Water Fund.  Did you get all that?  We may have missed a transaction or 2.  These deals are to transparency what Miley Cyrus is to propriety…and both smell fishy.

About 2005, the City needed money and property to get into the full swing of Redevelopment and they had their eyes set on the Northside of Ward 1.  This was easy pickings:  apathetic Northside residents, surplus utility property, outsized utility reserves, and a staff all-too-ready to violate the law and City policy in the name of advancing their careers.  The endgame was simple: special interests and the City wins and the average taxpayer and ratepayer would be left looking for the license plate of the vehicle that hit them.

Today, we look at one piece of the Northside goulash: the former Riverside Golf Course.  The dialog starts in 2010 around the water cooler that we need a soccer stadium and it should be in the Northside, and the City just happens to have the “perfect” piece of property. Council Member Andy Melendrez started selling it to the community. Then, we get a new Community Development Director (CDD), Al Zalinka, who starts planning for a beautiful new soccer stadium with all the bells and whistles. The CDD spends about a year and a half putting this project together. Hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, goes into planning, designing and developing this stadium.

Let’s set the stage: the City has selected 2 main development teams to bid for this project. The Council is ready to hear the proposals from both teams.  The Council Chamber is full that afternoon with developers, architects, contractors, money men, and probably a couple of other scoundrels. Every one of them is dressed in their Sunday Best. The “Big” names of Riverside elitists were sitting there: Yeager, Tavaglione, Rubin, Singletary, Hunt… all ready, willing, and able to cash in on the taxpayer, as in this PE Article on the Soccer Complex back in September 2012.

We had repeatedly advised the Council and the City that this deal could not and should not go forward. But nobody wanted to listen as our electeds were salivating over each other and their proposed plans for futbol-for-all was within arms reach. THEN……….EVERYTHING FELL APART RIGHT BEFORE THEIR EYES.  WE WERE RIGHT, THEY WERE WRONG! (neener-neener)  The charade was turning into a legal liability nightmare for the City,  the integrity of Al Zelinka was in question, and the Council looked foolish.  In the end, nothing was ever done with the property UNTIL….2013/14

So what happened?  We were at the meeting that afternoon because we knew the dirty little deal that was planned to go down and we were dialed in to the State Controller and Department of Finance if it did pass. Everyone in those Chambers that day were all blindsided when they found out that no deal could be made. NONE, NADA, NO-WAY, NO-HOW……The land, at that point, was not owned by the City and was tied up in the dissolution of Redevelopment. Everyone was upset. The selected teams of developers had huge money invested in drawings and plans for the development to present to the Council. The soccer stadium died a slow, painful, very public death that day. . . and now we have another audit.

BACK…TO THE FUTURE: the City hires Baker Tilly to do another audit of the Northside. An audit within an audit — that is what the accountants call it. Mr. Hissom from Baker Tilley starts his comments by saying this site has already been audited by many financial firms and they had been done appropriately by some very highly quality firms. BUT… They were more than happy to take this task on again and perform another audit. Their scope would be looking at 5 issues.
1. Was the property properly recorded under accounting principals and were the rules followed?
2. Were the transactions all approved by council?
3. Was the purchase price appropriately supported by documentation?
4. Did the deed stay with the city?
5 Were the transactions approved by the policy of the City?
The Three main points that I got out of this audit were that:
1. Maybe we need 10 more audits until someone is willing to just tell the citizens the truth and the real reason we got into this fine mess.
2. Riverside Public Utilities recorded this property under OPTIMAL accounting principals instead of Best Practices. So what does that mean? If you grade Optimal vs. Best, Best is an A grade and Optimal is barely passing with a C-.
3. There was no formal appraisal performed on some of the transactions – it was all done by comparing properties in close proximity, if they were done at all.

So did the highly paid, well trained accounting firm of Baker Tilly tell the truth and get to the bottom of this mess? Lets go back and answer their 5 questions as they did:
1. Was the property properly recorded under accounting principals and were the rules followed?
BARELY: These principles were followed under OPTIMAL practices as stated by Ms. Susan Cash, Chairwoman of Riverside Public Utilities Board and the auditing firm.
2. Were the transactions all approved by council?
YES
3. Was the purchase price appropriately supported by documentations?
NO, there were no appraisals in some cases as stated with great concern by Susan Cash, Chairwoman and Andrew Walker, Board Member.  In one instance an $8.5 million property sold from the Water Fund to the General Fund in 2005, was re-purchased for over $9 million by Water in 2009…as if the great real estate crash never occurred.
4. Did the deed stay with the City?
YES
5. Were the transactions approved by the policy of the City?

What’s very interesting here is that this transaction was not a City issue, it was a Public Utilities issue between Water, Sewer, and Electric. So to answer the question its Yes and No. It all depends on what Administrative Manual you are reading, the City’s or Public Utilities’? Auditor, Russ Hissom, stated he was hired by the City and the Administrative Manual appraisal information came from the City’s manual. Board Member Andrew Walcker had no idea that RPU had its own Admin. Manual, and Chair Cash was a little concerned about what she read about appraisals in the RPU manual.  We know one thing: the City did not follow the laws or policy of the Redevelopment Agency.

The question should have been stated like this: Were the transactions approved by the policy of the Riverside Public Utilities and the former Redevelopment agency? The answer to my question would be NO and NO. An audit is only as good as the information provided and in this case the information or the scope had no strength or substance and didn’t address the real issues of this property.
Based on the very weak questions posed to the auditor we end up with three Yes’s, two No’s and a one Barely, or a C-.  At the end of this very short presentation Russ Hissom couldn’t stop praising the City using the City Hall and California League of Cities talking points. He closed his comments by presenting Riverside Public Utilities with glowing praises, so as to deflect from the real problems with this property.

So, what did this audit accomplish? NOTHING!! After all the hoopla, this property is still in the hands of RDA or the Department of Finance and tied up in the City vs. Dept of Finance on appeal. Undoing this property may take years and more audits. As of today, the note on this property is NOT getting paid. So, the ratepayers are getting the shaft AGAIN. Also, the City Council has approved 1.5 million square feet of warehouse space in the North Side which, by the way, was the original plan. It was the vote of Mike Soubrious and Paul Davis that stopped the planned moratorium until a strategic plan was completed. Once Paul and Mike shut down the moratorium, the City couldn’t move fast enough to get those warehouses approved. The Vote passed unanimously. The Northside Saga Continues…….

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!  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!

 

NLCOakland-620x426

RIVERSIDE CITY MANAGER JOHN RUSSO (CENTER WITH HANDS FOLDED), WHAT WILL THIS MEAN FOR RIVERSIDE? A CITY MANAGER FULL OF EGO, DRAMA QUEEN OR JUST LIKES GREAT SUNGLASSES? OR SHOULD WE JUST “FORGET ABOUT IT?”  Are public workers just out of control at the expense of the taxpayer?

forgetSHOULD WE AS RIVERSIDIAN’S OVERLOOK BROOKLYN BORN RUSSO’S PAST AND “JUST FORGET ABOUT IT?  (CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW VIDEO)

FGAIT

OR MAYBE AL PACINO’S VERSION..MAYBE IT JUST MEANS “I’M KNOWN, FORGET ABOUT IT, I’M KNOWN ALL OVER THE FUCKING WORLD,  OR ARE WE AS RESIDENTS “JUST PISSING UP THE WRONG TREE.”  IN OTHER WORDS IS RUSSO REALLY GOOD FOR RIVERSIDE?

jones_RUSSO-copy-620x465He has been quoted in the PE as saying, “Riverside has an excellent reputation around the state because of its ability to blend a reverence for its unique local history with an aggressive and groundbreaking public improvement program like the Riverside Renaissance.”   Well is he in for a big surprise…  John Russon (56)will also be the highest paid City Manager in the City’s history at a whopping $295,000.00, will have to check if the benefit package is included in this deal or is in addition to.  Prior to taking the position of City Manager with the City of Alameda, he was a Councilman and then an elected City Attorney for the City of Oakland.  What people also need to know is that Riverside’s Utility’s General Manager Girish Balachandran was also from the City of Alameda.  Is Riverside just getting more recycled employees?

You have to ask your self why Mr Russo left abruptly at the city of Alameda. Story is he was unhappy with the direction of the City Council, I should remind him that the last City Manager in the City of Riverside, Scott Barber was forced to resign over issues with City Council members Mike Soubirous and Paul Davis.  Also it is public knowledge that Mr. Russo was in a feud with Mayor Jane Quan, good luck with Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey.  One more thing, Mr. Russo need to know that the City of Riverside has the best public speakers that will keep him fully informed. One of the The Oakland A”s owner says he is full of “empty rhetoric” and he wanted to be MAYOR!  Be careful Bailey you may have competition. Hopefully he (Russo) won’t get to bored in Riverside.  I’m sure we can keep him entertained.  I give him two years.  Can’t wait to meet.  WELCOME MR. RUSSO.

prone   prtwo

ORIGINAL PRESS RELEASE (CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE).

According to the Mercury News Russo is disrespectful to public speakers…is the City of Riverside just getting a hybrid of former City Attorney Gregory Priamos and former City Manager Brad Hudson with a little asshole on the side?  Also mentioned, was that Russo has developed a reputation as someone who cannot let criticism or even minor points go by without a defensive response, and frequently an aggressive one.

In an interview with KQED News, Russo states that the reason he left the City of Oakland to the City Manager position in Alameda, was the following: “I believe this a morally corrupt government and I just didn’t want to serve anymore in that capacity.

Untitled-2

GETTING TO KNOW YOUR NEW CITY MANAGER: CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW YOUTUBE VIDEO INTERVIEW OF A VERY APPROACHABLE MR. JOHN RUSSO

russo

SOME SAID HE WAS ANGRY, ABRASIVE, DISRESPECTFUL AND RUDE IN THIS VIDEO (CLICK LINK TO VIEW YOU TUBE)

A’S CO-OWNER BITCH SLAPS JOHN RUSSO: Guy T. Saperstein, a co-owner of the Oakland A’s, went after Oakland City Attorney John Russo today in an op-ed published in the Tribune. Saperstein accuses Russo of “empty rhetoric” for his op-ed published last week and of being a “grandstanding” politician who simply wants “to be the next mayor.”

xvolincali, commenter on the PE  “Worst City Manager in Alameda history. Good luck with this snake. Good riddance.”  –An Alameda resident

That’s okay Alameda resident, some city’s deal with field snakes, here in Riverside we are use to dealing with Cobras…we are snake trainers.
I’m from the City of Alameda CA. It was just announced here today, that our City Manager John Russo has been hired, by the City of Riverside. All that i can advise the Citizens of Riverside is to GET READY. More than likely Mr. Russo will need to hire an Assistant City Manager along with who know’s what else. At our city council meetings he would interrupt speakers and belittle them, should they say something that he didn’t like. Lately he has kept his mouth shut since the election of a new Mayor, who wasn’t going to let Mr. Russo’s mouth run amok. All I can say in closing is (in my opinion) you’ve been had, good luck, your’e going to need it!   Dennis Laine, Alameda, CA, Commenter on the Press Enterprise
“I think he’s going to be a high-octane city manager who likes to get things done,” Councilman Jim Perry said. Well alrighty now Mr. Perry, maybe that’s why he is being recalled.  Sort of like the 2 Billion dollar mess former City Manager Brad Hudson left us with.
RECALL

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “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