Posts Tagged ‘justin scott coe’

Part One: Jason Hunter, former City of Riverside Public Utilities employee gives you the real story RPU won’t tell the public..

Part Two: Jason Hunter on the RPU reserves that were hidden from the ratepayers, and redirected so they wouldn’t have to give it back!

Part Three:  More on the antics of RPU from one who knew RPU from the inside.

Part Four: Jason Hunter converses with audience in a question and answer session.

So why does RPU need a rate increase? According to management, if we don’t get our antiquated infrastructure upgraded, trouble lies down the road. With this in mind, we can’t help but ask why management understaffed it’s operational dispatch department so that certain utility dispatchers could  receive overtime in the six-figures range … and there’s still been no management accountability.

Another narrative RPU is using with the public, is that they didn’t increase the rates during the Great Recession so as to compassionately give relief to the ratepayer. The truth of the matter is that they were increasing the amount of their reserves by overcharging their ratepayers to the tune of hundreds of millions.

RPU EXPLAINING TO THE RATEPAYER HOW $325 MILLION SHOWED UP IN RESERVES MIRACULOUSLY AFTER THEIR LAST RATE INCREASE

To explain a bit about the RPU Reserves…back in 2015 RPU was the focus of a Grand Jury Complaint, for just that, the excessive collection of ratepayer monies leading to excessive reserve funds.

We don’t know if we have an infrastructure emergency, but we here at TMC are sure we have an executive management problem.  A problem that began with former Utilities General Manager Dave Wright, and now continues with Girish Balachandran, a.k.a. Drunk Daddy.

RPU….the rest of the story the public ratepayer who owns its utility should know.

“I OWN IT!” – RPU has been customer-owned since 1895; City-operated. You, the ratepayer, ultimately call the shots.

The City of Riverside Public Utilities Department is committed to the highest quality water and electric services at the lowest possible rates to benefit the community. – RPU Mission Statement

Proposed RPU Rate Increase: 60%+ increase for low-use water customers; 25%+ increase for electricity customers over 5 years.

Why? To protect our health & safety by ensuring reliable electric and water service. Satisfy State mandates for clean energy. Aka, “the company line”.

The strategic narrative you will hear from RPU:

1) “Our rates are lower than our neighbors.”
Answer: “So what? I own it; they don’t. When you purchase a property in the City of Riverside, you also become part owner of the utilities. Remember, those in RPU work and our employed by us to maintain, secure and protect our utilities. They can’t make profits, unless we, the profits from that, as we should. Therefore, if utility rates are imposed in a manner that deviates from “cost of service” requirements, those rates are in violation of Proposition 218. Wouldn’t you fire those employees that are caused imposition toward you the owner and damages? Absolutely, those involved would be shown the door, if not be criminally responsible. We, at this time, are now allowing the insane to run the insane asylum.

Further, as public owners, through our properties, we therefore should be receiving dividends! If not dividends, substantially lower rates. Why? Because we are owners of our utilities! When you look at comparable utilities with the same scenario, our rates are higher than average. Don’t get confused with privately owned utility companies such as Edison.

2) “Infrastructure…infrastructure…infrastructure. The sky is falling.” Answer: “Over last 13 years, we’ve spent near $40 million/year on infrastructure. We have $800 million of infrastructure bond outstanding. Where did this money go? What are our true NEEDS?”

3) “We haven’t increased rates in 7 years.”
Answer: “Yes, but since 2003, water bills have already increased 130% and electric 50%. Shouldn’t prices in an evolving market like energy be coming down like computer and tv’s have?”

4) “Our reserves are dwindling.”
Answer: “Why did you pay for infrastructure with reserves instead of using our best-in-class credit rating to bond against? Don’t we still have many multiples more reserves stashed away than similar utilities? Where are my refunds?”

5) “The drought made us do it!”
Answer: “Yes, but we sued the State and got out from under their restrictions. Conservation is great, but it should’ve been voluntary. Your financial wounds are self-inflicted.”

6) “Sacramento made us do it!”
Answer: “Yes, but we got $5 million/year in cap & trade money from the State to ‘go green’…which you proceeded to give away to the general fund for street lighting.”

7) “Don’t worry, we’ll expand low income assistance.”
Answer: “Wouldn’t that violate California law to give away my money to other people without letting me vote on it?”

The above ‘hot buttons’…how were they chosen?
• Incredibly, RPU took $84,000.00 of your money to hire a select PR (Public Relations) firm and pollster…to collude and figure out how to get you to part with your money in higher utility rates.  In the real world such as the private sector, honest managers that you employ tell you their real needs, instead of trying to “manage” their owners.  Something to think about!

What Rate Payers Need To Know:

1) Rates probably do need restructuring to better reflect fixed costs, but the proposed increases are obscene, and would take almost $130 million a year out of the community at the end of year 5, 20% of which would be for new taxes and not provide us with any additional utility service.

2) RPU needs to tighten its belt for the first time in many years, and stop the abuses occurring in overtime, six-figure pensions, gold plated conference rooms etc., instead of just asking for money.

3) Trust is important when dealing with subordinates, and RPU management tells half-truths, omits vital information, and creates false equivalencies in order to separate you from your money. It might be time to clean house.

WHO KNEW THEIR WAS A PARTY GOING ON AT RPU? FOR THE RECORD, TMC KNEW ALL ALONG…

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

Yep, Back at You Ratepayer!

What the hell is an ‘Utilities Integration Manager’?  We at TMC are still attempting to figure it out.  This job title is what government does best: six-figure patronage jobs awarded not on merit, but on loyalty to “the program”.  And exactly what is “the program”?  Well, if you haven’t figure it out yet…after the new library tax, the increased hotel tax, the continuation of the water tax, the new sales tax, the new school bonds, the new gas tax, and the slew of lawsuits lining up to sue Riverside back into the Stone Age for illegal taxation…”the program” is: taking your money.

But we have have a sense of humor.  Justin Scott-Coe is what we refer to in these parts as big government RECYCLED TRASH!  First at Monte Vista Water District and now he’s ours…

               

CLICK ON ABOVE IMAGE TO ENLARGE

…except there’s no 5 cent return fee.  Above is the employment letter from his new boss, Drunk Daddy, a.k.a. RPU General Manager Girish Balachandrin.  Mr. Coe sat on the Riverside Public Utility Board for 8 years while employed as a public affairs specialist for the Monte Vista Water District in Montclair, CA.  His responsibilities include creating and implementing water conservation and water education programs, customer communications, community outreach and special administrative projects most recently related to the recycled water program, development of budget-based tiered rates, and a landscaping design project for District facilities.  During his time on Riverside’s Board of Public Utilities, he was the ultimate Kiss Ass on that panel of so called “ratepayer advocates,” and would say or do anything to look impressive, good, or worthy in his quest for higher status…all while you payed for it!

He left his position with the Board of Public Utilities after 8 years of service, at the end of February 2017.  And voila!  A position was opened up in June, less than 4 months later, he would uniquely qualify for.  In reality, he served 8 years as an “advocate” to the executive staff at RPU, when he was suppose to protect the interest of the public…who just happen to own RPU.   He sold us – the absentee owners – out and advocated himself into a nice $132,000 a year job.  Bravo Justin!  Mr. Scott-Coe’s new job is to convince the public as to why Riverside Public Utility needs a rate increase (60% at that for low-use water users!  Merry Christmas!).  You see, Drunk Daddy needs new reliable and loyal troops to pander the old narrative (infrastructure!!!!!!!!!!!!) to get the Riverside community on board to give them more of our money (gotta pay them public pensions after all).  And it also seems that those employees who have actually seen Drunk Daddy’s dark underbelly have disappeared from employment, leaving some room in the budget for “Utilities Integration Managers”.

So why does RPU need a rate increase? Well this is what they are telling the public. It’s all doom and gloom, it’s all about the infrastructure, and if we don’t get our antiquated infrastructure upgraded, trouble lies on the road ahead.  If you believe their bullshit I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.  The problem began with lousy, inept management by former Utilities Manager Dave Wright and the skullduggery continues today with Girish Balachandran, a.k.a. Drunk Daddy.  The customer-owners have inferior infrastructure because RPU has a spending problem.  The executive staff at RPU recently purchased a new $40 million dollar building, complete with a $600,000 board, errr multi-purpose room, not to mention nearly 1/2 of the employees make over $100,000.00 a year.  For many years, RPU thought nothing of spending exorbitant and insane amounts of money on their employees overtime – as in the case of a utilities dispatcher receiving $257,719 last year, with a total take home pay of $373,235.  This is behavior never seen in the private sector: a phenomenon of the public sector, and like always, no one is ever held accountable…so it will happen again.

Another narrative to sell the rate increase we heard directly out of the mouth of Mr. Scott-Coe, is that they didn’t increase the rates in the aftermath of the 2008 recession as to give relief to the pitiful fools, us taxpayers. They did it for our benefit! The truth of the matter is that they were overcharging us the whole time and were able to increase the amount of their unrestricted slush fund, errr reserves, to the tune of over $300 million, which should have been returned to the ratepayer or could’ve actually lowered our rates years ago…because we, the public, own it!

Trust and loyalty is always important when dealing with subordinates at RPU, and Justin Scott-Coe embodies that very philosophy. He will do or say anything to play the game and climb the ladder of success. He is willing to tells half-truths, omits vital information, and create false equivalencies in order to separate you from your money with his soft monotone voice that puts most people to sleep.  Of course, this is not the first run-in we’ve had with our Wood Streets neighbor.  Questions arose back about his judgement and insider dealings in 2014, when former city employee Jason Hunter filed an ethics complaint against Mr. Scott-Coe.

In the end, TMC has to hand it to Justin though for selling out the public for his own personal gain…it’s the California way these days after all.  We’d also like to send a message to RPU Deputy General Manager Kevin Milligan: watch your back, because Mayor “Choo Choo” Bailey’s buddy Justin, “just” may take over your plush corner office before you know it!

Did Drunk Daddy and Kevin Milligan high-five the hiring of Scott-Coe, as they did with when they sent their nasty, extortion letter to our neighbor, the City of Norco?

 

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

pgfour
DID THIS EMAIL FROM CHIEF OF STAFF MAUREEN KANE INFER THAT THE MAYOR’S OFFICE WAS INTERFERING WITH THE CODE OF ETHICS & CONDUCT REVIEW PROCESS?(CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)
pgone   pgtwo   pgthree
Council members admittedly stated that the Code of Ethics & Conduct hearing process is broken.  A meeting to address this very problem is scheduled for next month.  Though in todays hearing, the adjudicating body admitted a broken system which needs repairs, they still decided not to postpone the process as suggested by public commentators. They decided to continue regardless of the process being broken or flawed.  Therefore, was this panel also guilty of violating the code of ethics, knowingly deciding to progress through this broken process anyway?  Keith Nelson, who was chosen to hear Hunter’s first case admitted the system is broken.  What we are now hearing is that the hearing process was more than flawed, it appears to have been designed to reach a favorable outcome.
The basis of this Code of Ethics & Conduct complaint filed by former and fired City employee, Jason Hunter, against the adjudicating chair, Justin Scott Coe was based on five points:
1) Scott-Coe says he was just following orders: he recieved a protocol and followed it. He is therefore excused from independent thought I guess, according to him.  The fact that the Adjudicating Body never received Jason Hunter’s pre-hearing objections and motions that were previously filed with the Clerk.  When Mr. Hunter took notice of this deviation by the City Clerks Office, he personally gave him copies at the first hearing.  Just this process described didn’t appear to provoke any questioning by Mr. Coe.
2) As described in Hunter’s complaint, the City Clerk, contrary to what was agreed to in the first hearing, supplied the Adjudicating Body with the city’s version of the evidence requested by the Adjudicating Body, not what was actually submitted by him!  Hunter was supposed to supply this information and did prior to 2nd hearing to the Clerk.  Scott-Coe then quashed all Hunter’s attempts to introduce this evidence at the 2nd hearing.
3) At the end of the Hunter hearing, Scott-Coe mentioned in front of several witnesses, that he met with City Attorney Gregory Priamos prior to the hearing!  Keith Nelson, former deputy City Attorney Raychele Sterling and Hunter all heard him mention Priamos’ name.  What motive does Nelson have to lie?  Regardless, all these communications should’ve been made public, or at the very least shared with the other Adjudicating Body members, prior to the hearing.
4) Perhaps the most damning thing revealed in Coe’s letter (email above): What is the Mayor doing coordinating the adjudicating body’s activities after-the-fact?  It seems from the Kane letter, Bailey was involved in: a) The decision to not rescheduled the appeal (thus ensuring Councilman Davis could not be present for deliberations) despite Hunter’s request to do so, b) The decision to separate the Adjudicating Body’s presentation from Hunter’s appeal (totally inappropriate), and c) The fact that this proposed meeting with the Adjudicating Body never took place, and hence the presentation to Council never took place.
5) Lastly, you gotta love the irony that Coe would be involved in a decision whereby he questions the training qualifications of the Human Resource Board in conducting quasi-judicial hearings, but Coe doesn’t admit he had no training to do exactly the same….despite the fact that the City Attorney’s office offers this precise training to commissions as the CPRC (Community Police Review Commission).
Again, the City of Riverside, at taxpayer expense, hired the impeccable, local favorite attorney, Doug Smith to represent Justin Scott-Coe.  Again at Friday’s 23rd, 2014 hearing, stated that Hunters willingness to resolve this issue with Coe gave the impression through Hunter’s emails that the request were “threatening!”  Nice Dougy Baby!  When Smith attempted to bad mouth Keith J. Nelson, PhD at the hearing, he interrupted and stated to Smith, “don’t put words in my mouth.”  Again a list of inaccuracies continue by this outside legal taxpayer hired gun.  In a letter, Nelson actually called Smith a “liar” in how he explained, or should I say, didn’t explain to Council, that the Code of Ethics and Complaint process was flawed.  As with former City Attorney Greg Priamos, furnishing “bad” legal advice, we ask the same question with Attorney Doug Smith!  He is just milking the taxpayers again for the benefit of City Hierarchy?  As with most law firms hired by the City of Riverside, the biggest, BB&K, have questionable and nefarious ethical track records.
Did the City of Riverside violate the Brown Act by not posting the hearing on the City’s within a 72 hours?  According to Jason Hunter they did according to the following email, not once but possibly twicel..
baone
TINA ENGLISH REVISITED: IS SHE QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB OF DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/ENGINEER?
tina english
CHRISTINA AKA TINA ENGLISH
According to the City of Riverside’s description of the requirement for this position, did she skew the system?  How did this happen?  Through the grapevine one qualified engineer is leaving the City of Riverside as a result of this.  Tina English has be purported to be the “god daughter” of Former Riverside City Manager Brad Hudson, who inadvertently skipped town when he was asked if he was having an affair with..
Untitled-2
 Assistant City Manager Belinda Graham.
AuditRiv2
The following is quite remarkable..
Untitled-2
So is the City of Riverside in violation of the “Nepotism” clause of the City Charter by hiring family members as Tina English?  A position we believe is only held with a “Dance Degree?”  She started with the position of Assistant Development Director for Redevelopment under Hudson, then became a engineering genius when she moved on over to Public Works.
The requirements for this position are as follows:
1. Must Review and Sign Engineering Drawings.
2. Must Supervise, coordinate , the surveying, mapping, plan check, contract, administration, construction inspection, and industrial waste inspection activities.
3. Make complex engineering calculations and to prepare engineering plans and specifications.
4. In terms of Education, must have the equivalency of Bachelor’s Degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in Civil Engineering.
5. In terms of the Experience Level:  A range of seven to ten years of progressively responsible supervisory and administrative public works engineering experience.
6. The necessary special requirement was the possession of a Certificate as a Professional Civil Engineer in the State of California.
licenseone          licensetwo          tomboydlicense
CLICK THESE IMAGES TO ENLARGE.
Of course, we find Tom Boyd’s..but Tina English..she doesn’t have a Certificate as a Professional Civil Engineer in the State of California.  Unfortunately this is the problem, we have unqualified people placed in the positions of which should be qualified.  Don’t you as tax payers think that there is something wrong?   If so, you should display your dissent?  Isn’t time that you begin to listen to those that the city has labeled as haters?
 52378ad64e0ac.image
DADDY MAYOR              SON JEREMY
nepotism-300x180
 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

Pu1T0UfvSGJyBBMf-r3kE2dJ-d6fbR2ktzstZ2nkWjkh1QUhkDIc0xkOsbm-1VNCfVrccqA5V7pcE74BVoRrQo

PDone     PDtwo     PDthree

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL LETTER SENT TO ATTORNEY MARK MAYERHOFF, OF LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE

MARKMEYEROFF

MARK MAYERHOFF (CLICK TO ENLARGE)

What should be brought to the forefront is that Liebert Cassidy Whitmore is actually representing Councilman Paul Davis in the current case of Raychele Sterling vs. City of Riverside et al.  Liebert Cassidy Whitemore is also the law firm that is doing the investigation for the City of Riverside against, of course, Councilman Paul Davis.  So the firm is defending him but at the same time crucifying him and sticking the knife into him!  Those in Riverside who keep up with the politics see this time and time again.  Those in Riverside who are sleep, need to wake up and see what is happening in your City.

Additionally, I will be filing a bar complaint against you and your firm for violations of conflicts of interest rules, since your firm is my direct representation in the active case Sterling v City of Riverside et al. I have never waived my conflict rights in this case and neither can the council. Regards,
Paul Davis
Council Member –

This according to Councilman Paul Davis’s personal statement as indicated below, under “Full Davis Personal Statement on this Investigation”.

The letter is directed toward Mark Mayerhoff, which Davis states he is “shocked” that his firm has released an incomplete investigation, as a result of the following:

Meyerhoffletterredactionsone copy     Meyerhoffletterredactionstwo

In the letter Attorney Mark Mayerhoff states the Investigation that will be release to Press Enterprise reporter Alicia Robinson will be redacted (to obscure or remove from a document prior to publication or release).  Of course we asked the question of Why?  Especially in the name of transparency.  Mayerhoff also states that he attached an unredacted copy of the investigation to Councilman Davis.  We have the unredacted investigation as follows, all 417 pages.  Alicia, if you need the full unredacted copy just download from our site!

invest417

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL UNREDACTED INVESTIGATION AGAINST COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS

The following is a personal statement made by Councilman Paul Davis in reference to his investigation and submitted to Thirty Miles.

PSDAVISone     PSDAVIStwo     PSDAVISthree

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL DAVIS PERSONAL STATEMENT ON THIS INVESTIGATION

Some telling excerpts are as follows:

These issues that Soubirous and I have been charged with is misappropriations of Public Funds for Political Gain and it is about exacting retaliation for our not being the “Go along to get along” guys, like many of the rest. The funds issue will be handled in another venue, as Adams and Bailey appropriated the funds without authority of the council. Evidence will be produced to prove this up. What happened is Barber files the complaint then funds the investigation under his 50K expense authority and they split up the contracts into four separate ones to equate to $200k authorization.
Interestingly enough the hired gun law firm and investigator failed to insert my interview “Eratta”, correction sheet into the investigation materials and even failed to incorporate the right statements in to Gumpart’s statements, where I said “Surely Not” and the stenographer records “Sure”.  Gumport does this so that he can make a point in his opinion on his questions as to the effect of my statements on CM Barber being able to do his job. However, I have attached is separately.
More to come.
Paul Davis
Councilmember – Ward 4
City of Riverside

And of course it is not over yet!  There is “MORE TO COME” according to Councilman Paul Davis!  We will sit back and wait because it will be sooner than you think.  Paul Davis’s Interview “Eratta” is as follows:

erratta

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL PAUL DAVIS TRANSCRIPT WITH ERRATA SHEET

We did a story on Ol’Scotty back when he intended to “Ferret” out a problem

We asked the question if Scott Barber should have been fired a long time ago.  First is he qualified for the job of City Manager?  Having a Thespian Degree?   Just back in September of 2012, City Manager Scott Barber decided to take his City Manager hat off and play Council by authorizing a change order of $2.5 million without council authority for the Fox Performance Plaza.

06clapper-articleInline           sb

      CM Scott Barber                              Sorry, CM Scott Barber

He brought the issue to Council and basically appeared they would rubber stamp the idea, after-the-fact.  Had this type of shenanigans been done before by the prior City Manager?  The City Manager’s discretionary spending cap is at $50,000.00, anything over that amount must go to council.  Certainly violated the Charter Amendment.  What made Barber think that he had the authority to act as an elect and ferret it out without them?  A complaint should have been filed against him with Human Resources, and Council should have fired him immediately.

What is now remarkable is the fact that Scotty is creating more liability as what appears to be personality problems at the expense of the taxpayer! It is now becoming evident he doesn’t care about the residents of Riverside, if not, only for himself.  Will Scotty sue the City of Riverside?  Or I should say, the taxpayer because of his perception of in house politics?  Remember Scotty is a remnant of the Hudson legacy; he, Brad Hudson was convicted of credit card fraud.  But our current Mayor Rusty Bailey considers him a moral compass, go figure..

Some things never change as this is common in Riverside. Brad Hudson ran the city and the Council as the Mayor was just a figure head madding back room deals, traveling, giving speeches and breaking a tie vote. Well a city attorney made the law up as he went but talked his way out. As the Mayor left and the hopes of an honest Mayor we saw a candidate who had powerful friends of the former Mayor. yes false fliers were sent out but the candidate got caught and apologized, using illegal Fed agent license plates and more corruption, as he was the choice of the people. To start his term he made national news by having a citizen arrested for speaking over 3 minutes, a lawyer arrested for clapping and big money was made with the help of the city Attorney in red lining homes for illegal foreclosure. People were in place to defend and protect the criminal acts. Brad Hudson skipped out along with the Deputy Attorney after illegally buying Glock Hand guns as the Feds closed in but the council did nothing. A replacement who would follow orders was needed and the Code Enforcement Director was picked. Things went for bad to worse as all violations by the council insiders were ignored but the firing of a Deputy attorney who reported illegal action was done as Mrs. Sterling was out. HR answered to Hudson and that was well known. Loveridge was funny as his old time lies did not work on a new generation. Just think Adams history of assaulting his girl friend, messing in a police promotion and as a veteran police officer taking illegal plates still got elected to council again and now running for Congress. Wow we have enough corrupt Congressmen in DC but at lease Riverside has an Honest Congressman in Mark. Well Davis and Mike know their honesty and loyalty to their Wards is not what the Bailey team wants. Most people know a misdemeanor is a violation that gets you jail time and a fine. But it seems Priamos missed that class in law school. Mike charged with hear say that failed even paying to LA lawyers 200,000 dollars which a law student would know. Then Davis with documents as evidence and wow the filing of complaints done wrong but no problem as even the Brown Act was violated twice and no due process in either case. Conflict of interest even paid Attorneys were clue less. The Mayor is spending allot to get two council out in the next election and put Bailey team members in their seats. What is clear is Riverside no longer wants citizens to elect their representatives but will let the Mayor do it. The way things are going Bailey wont need an election to continue as Mayor he will appoint himself. Scott Barber is a good worker and did a great job giving out tickets in Code Enforcement rather legal or illegal and really wanted the city managers job to do as he was told. Anyone who lives in the city of Riverside knows how things are done and employees/appointees take orders and follow them. I remember when we were asked for bond for the Library to help the children well after the money was given oops the council and mayor used it for something else only to come back again to ask for money for the Library. Using citizens and wasting money while making back room deals will continue until the voters clean out the corrupt elected officials and the Bailey Team. The Feds and the State are likely to come in and then the blame game but it will be great to see Brad Hudson and Greg Priamos finally answer to their crimes over the years.  – AirJackie, Commenter to TMC

CODE OF ETHICS AND CONDUCT COMPLAINT HEARING BETWEEN FORMER EMPLOYEE JASON HUNTER AND JUSTIN SCOTT COE CANCELED FOR FRIDAY JULY 25TH, 2014 FOR FLAWS IN THE PROCESS!  MORE TO COME.  DOES THIS MEAN ALL PRIOR COMPLAINTS NEED TO BE REHEARD?  TMC THINKS SO!

337062249

JUSTIN SCOTT COE

WAS THIS CANCELATION ALL BECAUSE OF WHAT KEITH NELSON HAD TO SAY? AND CALLING THE HIRED ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY A LIAR?

letterone

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE LETTER FROM KEITH J. NELSON TO SOUBIROIUS

Board Member, Keith J. Nelson, Ph.D., Inland Regional Board of Trustees, who also served a member of the City’s Adjudicating Body whenever an alleged violation of the City’s Code of Ethics, responded in this letter to Councilman Mike Soubirous regarding his concerns with the behavior and involvement of City Attorney Greg Priamos and outside legal, hired by the city, local Riverside attorney Doug Smith.  In fact, Doctor Keith J. Nelson calls Attorney Douglas Smith a “Liar” in the above letter.  This is the kind of corruption we have come to in the underbelly of the City of Riverside, and it is being taking notice locally, but world wide.  Thirty Miles of Corruption has being receiving hits from all over the world as you can see from it’s data banks.

1493020-327972687

RIVERSIDE ATTORNEY HIRED BY CITY OF RIVERSIDE, DOUGLAS  SMITH

WATER CONSERVATION: THE FAUX DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.  We don’t have a drought in the City of Riverside, but it seems the City will create one in order take advantage of fines and maintain the current water rates.  The clincher is that the City passed an ordinance to comply with State Law.  They didn’t have to because we are exempt because we own our water supply.  We as a City are also under a court order, if we don’t use the water we lose it!  Since we own our own water in no position to declare a water shortage!  Large educational institutions such as RCC and UCR are exempt.

memo                     ordinan

   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM                            WATER RESTRICTION ORDINANCE

This is how contradictary this ordinance is, if you are a recipient of Gage Canal water, there are no restrictions, you can use as much as appropriated yearly to you depending on your shares.  That means you can run the water into the street if you want.  Of course, I’m not advocating that, but the point is that we have a unfair application of the laws, maybe because the City can always depend on squeezing a little more from the residents.  The City didn’t have to pass the ordinance, but they did, they did because there is a monetary MO behind it. Education institutions such as UCR and RCC are exempt. One of the absolute benefits of living in Riverside is ownership of water.  You can maintain you pool and jacuzzi as long as you don’t “overfill.”  Did you get that one?  Who overfills their pool?   The San Bernardino Water Basin holds about 5 Million acre feet of water. Only about a million acre feet are available to the existing wells. So about 4 millions acre feet remains to be tapped by deeper wells. There is plenty of water. This is focused on an income source, and that income source is us.  This political move also seems another way that the City can put one neighbor against the other by the snitch call to code enforcement, the other police force.  It’s time to see what is occurring in the City of Riverside and remove your Councilperson.  In my ward it is Councilman Mike Gardner.

Remember, approximately 20% of our water is sold to Western Municipal.   Are we to conserve more water so that the City can sell more off to other communities for a higher profit.  Cite the citizens on water violations to increase profits.  Then they will then ask us to use less water then they will raise water rates to increase profits. You will use less and pay more. Then they will manipulate the tier pricing seasonally or at will to increase even more profits.  The more money in the water fund, the more that 11.5% water transfer to the General Fund will have.

The Faux Drought continues with more City propaganda regarding  water usage!  New article by Alicia Robinson in the Press Enterprise addressing the city’s position regarding water conservation.

FROM THE DESK OF SCOTT SIMPSON: SCOTT RESPONDS TO RIVERSIDE’S FAUX DROUGHT AND THE DATA AND ARTICLE IN THE PRESS ENTERPRISE: REFERRING TO PE ARTICLE: DROUGHT GROUNDWATER AT RECORD LOW:

waterSplash

Scott Simpson was former Chief of Enforcement for the California EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control, and also worked for the Department of Food and Agriculture in their Environmental Hazards Assessment Program specializing in ground water contamination:

Interesting yet, manipulating the data. They first mentioned that ground water levels have dropped due to increased use/demand from consumers but, the graph displays only gw available in acre feet. The data that should have been shown in the graph in order to keep consistent with the written conversation is depth to ground water in the wells (1934-today). They have the data. The graph displays how much water was available every 2 yrs from 1934 on. This is the amount legally available to harvest annually. It is close to displaying how much water(rainfall) went into the basin each season. 1960-64 was the driest period on record but historical references are available of other dry and wet periods back to the early 1800’s. What the graph really shows is that Riverside takes about 10% of the annual harvest of water supplied by normal rainfall. The other water agencies share in the other 90%. The San Bernardino Water Basin holds about 5 Million acre feet of water. Only about a million acre feet are available to the existing wells. So about 4 millions acre feet remains to be tapped by deeper wells.

Of course in the current dry spell (notice there were several dry and wet periods 10 yrs apart) the available gw has decreased some due to demand but mostly due to low rainfall in the local mountains. Look at the wet years; almost instant recharge of the gw basin occurs as soon as we get the first normal or above normal rainfall. This shows the amount available to the various water harvesters is the amount of water that recharges the basin each year or about 500,000 acre feet on average. (this is detailed in the Court settlement order of 1980 settling the big water rights lawsuit filed in 1964.) There is plenty of water available in the gw basin. The Court has limited access to most of it.

Currently, Riverside uses about 84,000 acre feet of gw per year. Half or 44,000 acre feet is harvested from the San Bernardino Basin. The other 40,000 comes mostly from the North Riverside Basin from a well field near the soccer complex and old dead golf course. The North Riverside Basin is geologically and hydraulically connected to the San Bernardino Basin. Ground water flows from the San Bernardino Basin into the North Riverside Basin continuously via a narrow under ground channel beneath the Santa Ana River in Colton.

Now, lets get back to water rights. A Water Right is a legal claim to a fixed amount of water harvested annually from a defined source such as, a river. Your claim can be legally challenged at any time by another water harvester from the same water source. There are pre-1914 water rights and post-1914 water rights. The difference is the date of first lawful claim to the water. Post-1914 water rights claims are granted, processed, regulated and disputed through or by the Calif. Dept. of Water Resources. This legal status encompasses all of the state’s water resources unused or in its natural state post-1914 water law. This is about 62% of the states total water resources during average rainfall periods. The UlS. Constitution prohibits congress from passing retroactive law so, we get old law still in effect for many and the new law applying only to those engaging in the regulated activity as of the date of new law. Two systems of legal claims to water co-existing at the same time.

The other pre-1914 water sources comprising 38% of the states water resources pre-existed the 1914 change in state law toward state regulation of water harvesting and the creation of the Dept. of Water Resources. So if you held a legal water right prior to 1914 it was formed under old law dating back to the founding of the state circa 1849 and before John North et al started up the land development scheme (the Southern California Colony Assn) that became the city of Riverside circa 1885.

From 1850-1914 the primary concern of Californians and incoming settlers was the availability of water and the price! People were experiencing the tyranny of corporate monopolies with the railroad. Railroads arbitrarily raised freight prices after settlers moved in. Cheep rates to draw in settlers and raise them later to extract profits from them when they financially can’t leave. The basic lack of competition in a natural monopoly like a railroad sucked the money out of the local farmers. It was feared that the same monopolistic behavior would (and was) occur with water providers. The state legislature of 1850-1905 was very serious about curbing monopolistic water providers. 1852 saw the first laws regulating the formation of water companies and pricing. Our state Senator of the day, John Satterwaite, authored several laws including one passed in 1862, the Satterwaite Act or Civil Code 552. John North incorporated the So. Calif. Colony Assn. under this law to make profits from the sale of land with a guarantee of water delivery in perpetuity. In part it says, “The corporation is formed to build a water distribution (canal) system to make the land livable and profitable. The corporation making its’ profits from the sale of the land and the water sold at cost.”
This is further elaborated on in Superior Court, Appellate Court and Supreme Court decisions leading to Cal. Supreme, Price v. the Riverside Land & Irrigation Co., 1880. Where the law and lower court rulings were placed in context justifying the Supreme Courts decision. In part saying, ” The corporation having formed under the law of 1862 (civil code 552) may not make profits from the sale and delivery of water. The water belongs to the land and is fixed to it permenently. The price set for delivery of water is based only upon the cost of operating and maintaining the canal, pipes, pumps or other infrastructure annually, Water is not sold as a comodity the lawful price to only recover the cost of providing water to the land.” Including that this was a contractual obligation of the original sale of Colony land(s) to settlers. So, the So. Calif. Colony Assn. contractually sold parcels of land with the advertised and promissed guarantee of water delivery in perpetuity to the land, a contractual obligation that continues forever to pass with the land ownership and successive owners of the water company including a future municipality. This is published case law stating that state water law of the time is still in effect and contractural obligation both pass to successive owners. The water right is fixed to the land receiving water permanently and cannot be altered. State constitutional law upholding and the U.S. Constitution, fourteenth amendment protection of lawful contracts upholding. Land owners served by the city of Riverside water dept. as successor owner of the Riverside land &Irrigation Co. cannot be denied the water they have always received in the same amount and quality as originally delivered to the land and in perpetuity at not more than the cost to deliver the water.

So we are in a period of drought. The law and the Cal. Sup. 1880 says, “The (city of Riverside) water company must declare a water supply emergency to deviate from it otherwise lawful supplying of water to the land, in order to initiate any form of reducing water supply or consumption during the emergency period. It must also stop connecting new land/customers to the distribution system until the emergency is canceled.”

Hence, Riverside cannot charge us fees for conservation programs because that is not a cost of operating and maintaining the infrastructure/service. Riverside cannot do anything other than request Volunteer water conservation. Riverside cannot raise prices to force consumers to use less water. Riverside cannot use tiered punitive pricing to force less water consumption. You have a lawful right to water in the same amount as was originally delivered to your land. My parcel was originally planted in citrus pre-1890 and irrigated with about 8 acre feet of water per acre, the water also being of drinking water quality and used to supply the house. So my water allotment for our .84 acre parcel is about 6 acre feet of water per year. After that, Riverside can require conservation and maybe raise prices.

RUSTY’S RED TROLLEY! DOES HE THINK IT CAN?  MEETING PLANNED FOR JULY 30ST, 2014 TO EXAMIN THE FEASABILITY STUDY!  The City of Riverside received a Cal Trans Grant of $237,000.00 to do a feasibility study, and you better believe with this money the focus is on a reason to have it!

Train_around_the_Christmas_tree FOUR          streetcar5 copy6

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

TMC will have a rebuttle of the pro’s and con’s of a trolley system in the City of Riverside, and will be able to do it for no cost to the taxpayer!

meetingtrollyjuly2014

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DETAILS OF THE MEETING

TROLLEY UPDATE:  TMC WAS TOLD THAT AT THE MEETING, THE TABLES HAD NAME CARDS OF ALL THE COUNCIL AND MAYOR WITH THE TROLLEY STUDY PACKETS.  NOT ONE MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL SHOWED, EVEN THE MAYOR DIDN’T SHOW AND IT’S HIS PROJECT!  IT APPEARS ANOTHER $237K IN STATE GRANT MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN..

THE RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE WILL TAKE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ON THE UPCOMING SPECIAL AUDIT OF THE SEWER FUNDS.  THIS WILL BE THIS TUESDAY JULY 29TH AT 6:00PM IN THE MAYOR’S CEREMONIAL ROOM ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL.  

photo

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY NEIL OKAZAKI LEAVES CITY OF RIVERSIDE.  Sources have said that Neil Okazaki would be leaving his position, possible going to the County.  This occurred the day of the Soubirious hearing.  Was this hearing the turning point for Okazaki?  Weeks before, City Attorney Greg Priamos said he was leaving for a position with the County as well.  What seems evident is that no one wants to go down with the ship!

 FUROR ENGULFS CHICAGO’S RED LIGHT SCAMERA CAMERA SYSTEM!  You’ll thank those that voted to remove our cameras here in Riversider sooner or later.

SORRY EVERYBODY! WE STILL HAVE MORE ON COUNCILMAN SOUBIROUS’S INVESTIGATION THAT WILL BE A COMPLETE SHOCKER! STAY TUNED FOR MORE AS RIVER CITY TURNS!

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED 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